Mosaic Legalism and the Law of Moses

[ralliann]

Indeed, Passover involved eating unleavened bread. Leaven represents sin, as seen by Paul referring to the leaven of malice and wickedness in opposition to sincerity and truth. Nothing in his statements suggest that he was encouraging the Corinthians to do anything other than continue to celebrate the annual festival of Passover in obedience to God's command. Do you think that the correct interpretation of that verse is that Paul was teaching the Corinthians against obeying what God has commanded?

Leaven is doctrine, instruction, teaching.
Mt 16:11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.


When we partake of communion as a church we are indeed partaking of a memorial of the new covenant in his blood.

This is what Christ instructed us.

19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.




Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath

 

[SwordmanJr]

I said nothing about being a victim or about being judged or about accusing you of anything. You claimed:

So I quoted Colossians 2:16 to demonstrate you were wrong. So please take your own advise and read what I actually said, then maybe we can converse.

Oh, man. You really have mastered the art of bait-n-switch. Not being judged on the basis of feasts/holidays. That goes both ways. I was not judging you for wanting to observe them. Col 2 is not a command for the continuance of those things among Gentiles. If Jews and others want to practice them, then great. Go for it. I personally will not because they do not apply to me nor have they any meaning to me in relation to the Law God has written in my heart.

Nuf said.

Jr

 

[SwordmanJr]

The Mosaic Law is what defines virtue. Saying things like some of God's laws have been revoked is the corruption of virtue and is misapplying and inventing reasons to reject God's laws.

Not at all. I said nothing about rejecting God's Law. I said that it does not apply to me in relation to what that same God has written in my heart.

Col 2:14 KJV - Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

THAT is what you are missing. Christ Jesus himself BLOTTED OUT the Law and its curse upon us because it was CONTRARY to us and our salvation and very lives. The written Law still stands as a condemnation against those who are not in Christ Jesus. It is what will show the sins of unbelievers in that last day of judgement before they are cast into the lake of fire.

So, no. The Law has not be completely done away with. The Law simply has no power over us, for it is blotted out, and replaced by the SUPERIOR Law the Most High has written in our hearts. I love you too much to not tell you that, because the liberation and freedom in Christ Jesus is just that. You are free from the "...handwriting of ordinances..." They are what will stand as judge against the unrighteous, whose names are not written in the Book of Life.

God did not leave any room for His people to follow anyone who claims that any of His laws have been revoked, but rather that is how God specifically instructed His people recognize that someone was a false prophet who was not speaking for Him. The New Covenant still involves following God's Law (Jeremiah 31:33), which Jesus spent his ministry teaching by word and by example. The law against murder written on stone is the same as the law against murder written our hearts. The reason why the New Covenant involves God writing His law on our hearts is so that we will follow it, not so that we will consider it to be inferior.

It is your own lack of understanding and acceptance of what ALL God's word has to say on the subject. That's on your, my friend.

Jr

 

[ralliann]

I love you too much to not tell you that, because the liberation and freedom in Christ Jesus is just that. You are free from the "...handwriting of ordinances..."

I think the concept of freedom is significant in the Lord's supper as a passover sacrifice.
The passover and the feast of unleavened bread bread belong to the covenant made with Abraham. The Memorial of God's fulfillment to keep his promise made to Abraham. These things were given to Heirs of the promised inheritance. This was promised 430 before the law from Sinai.
Ex 6:5 And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage; and I have remembered my covenant.

It has never been an inheritance based upon righteousness by the Levitical law.

4 Speak not thou in thine heart, after that the LORD thy God hath cast them out from before thee, saying, but for the wickedness of these nations For my righteousness the LORD hath brought me in to possess this land:the LORD doth drive them out from before thee.
5 Not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thine heart, dost thou go to possess their land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform the word which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

These things were given then for a shadow and pattern of the eternal inheritance we have in Christ. The reality is in him.

Ga 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Ga 3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Ga 3:29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Our Passover and unleavened bread memorialize God's faithfulness, his righteousness to keep his oath of covenant to our Father Abraham in Christ Jesus.

 

[Soyeong]

Not at all. I said nothing about rejecting God's Law. I said that it does not apply to me in relation to what that same God has written in my heart.

Col 2:14 KJV - Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

THAT is what you are missing. Christ Jesus himself BLOTTED OUT the Law and its curse upon us because it was CONTRARY to us and our salvation and very lives. The written Law still stands as a condemnation against those who are not in Christ Jesus. It is what will show the sins of unbelievers in that last day of judgement before they are cast into the lake of fire.

So, no. The Law has not be completely done away with. The Law simply has no power over us, for it is blotted out, and replaced by the SUPERIOR Law the Most High has written in our hearts. I love you too much to not tell you that, because the liberation and freedom in Christ Jesus is just that. You are free from the "...handwriting of ordinances..." They are what will stand as judge against the unrighteous, whose names are not written in the Book of Life.

Jr

Whenever someone was crucified, the people would write out a sign that listed the charges that were against them and nail it to their cross in order to announce why they were being executed (Matthew 27:37). This served as a perfect analogy for the list of our violations of the Torah being nailed to the cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, but has nothing to do with ending any of the laws, especially because they are all eternal (Psalms 119:160). In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Jesus gave himself to free us from any laws, but in order to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who zealous for doing good works, so if we believe in what Jesus accomplished on the cross, then we will become zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20), while saying that he went to the cross to cause his laws to not apply to us undermines what he went to the cross the accomplish.

In Deuteronomy 6:24 and 10:12-13, the Mosaic Law was given for our own good in order to bless us, so it is not contrary to us, but rather what was contrary to us were the sins that we have committed in violation of it. Our salvation is from sin and sin is the transgression of God's law, there there is no sense in someone wanting salvation from living in transgression of God's law without wanting to live in obedience to it. The reason why there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ is because he gave himself to pay the penalty for our transgressions of God's law, however, in 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked, so being in Christ does not remove our obligation to obey God's law. On the contrary, the fact that he gave himself to pay the penalty for our sins should make us want to go and sin no more by living in obedience to it.

Saying that there are part the law that have been done away with is rejecting those parts of the law, so it is not clear to me why you want to say that while denying that you are rejecting it. All of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so no parts will ever be done away with with and can't be done away with without first doing away with those aspects of God's eternal nature. In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from God's law, so it is a sin to say that there are parts that have been done away with and a sin to say that there are now superior laws. The freedom that we have in Christ is the freedom from sin, not the freedom to sin.

It is your own lack of understanding and acceptance of what ALL God's word has to say on the subject. That's on your, my friend.

I accept all of God's word, but not all interpretations of it, especially those interpretations that are contrary to it.

 

[Soyeong]

Oh, man. You really have mastered the art of bait-n-switch. Not being judged on the basis of feasts/holidays. That goes both ways. I was not judging you for wanting to observe them. Col 2 is not a command for the continuance of those things among Gentiles. If Jews and others want to practice them, then great. Go for it. I personally will not because they do not apply to me nor have they any meaning to me in relation to the Law God has written in my heart.

Nuf said.

Jr

Again, I said nothing about judging you or being judged by you. You made a claim and a cited that verse with the only motive of demonstrating that your claim was false. The Colossians were continuing to keep God's holy days in obedience to His commands in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them and keep them from obeying God. There isn't much of a point in rejecting the light of God's word because it was given to Jews to teach to you instead of being directly given to you.

 

[ralliann]

This served as a perfect analogy for the list of our violations of the Torah being nailed to the cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, while saying that he went to the cross to cause his laws to not apply to us undermines what he went to the cross the accomplish.

In Deuteronomy 6:24 and 10:12-13, the Mosaic Law was given for our own good in order to bless us, so it is not contrary to us, but rather what was contrary to us were the sins that we have committed in violation of it.

You are saying so many contradictory things IMO.

 

[Soyeong]

You are saying so many contradictory things IMO.

Please quote the things that I've said that you consider to be contradictory.

 

[SwordmanJr]

The Colossians were continuing to keep God's holy days in obedience to His commands in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them and keep them from obeying God.

You will have to show where the church in Colosae was instructed to keep and observe all the feasts, sabbaths, whatever you wish to call them. Never have I heard that the Colossians were under assault for their observance of feasts and sabbaths. Paul wrote plainly that he was speaking of “sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come...” Nowhere in the epistles, nor in the Gospels, are Gentiles told they must keep and observe the sabbaths. Not one thing is said anywhere about it. We are not told the Gentile churches anywhere were told to observe, how to observe, what it means to keep, and what is included or excluded in the feasts. Those churches were not handed a Torah in order to learn those things for observance.

What we ARE told in Paul's epistles, and in Acts, is that the Judaisers were out there trying to drag those churches back down into the bondages of the Law of Moses. They were under attack for not observing what was customary for the Jews, and was given to them as a remembrance of great things past.

So, I am left with not being able to accept what appears to be your misinterpretation. The old school master was the letter of the Law, which is no longer the writ believers are called to return to now that we have the indwelling Law Giver and Lord God.

There isn't much of a point in rejecting the light of God's word because it was given to Jews to teach to you instead of being directly given to you.

I have rejected nothing from God's word. I have quoted it, emboldened key portions that make the meaning abundantly clear, and you keep coming back with contradictions to what I can clearly see in the context for myself. You're also coming up with additions that I can't find in the text. Not being judged on the basis of holy days, in its context, says this:

Col 2:14 KJV - Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:16 KJV - Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]:
Col 2:17 KJV - Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ.

Why would Paul say such about the WRIT of Law? He made that clear:

2Co 3:6 KJV - Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Any one of us can go into the depths of the contexts of what I have quoted, and see that it says what I have been saying all along. I have also consistently stated that if you wish to observe the feasts, sabbaths, meat, drink, new moons, whatever, then I will defend your right to do that. The problem starts when you speak in a manner that such observances are binding upon Gentiles and/or Jews as well.

That's where you will find yourself at odds with what's written, not only in the Bible, but also what the Lord himself has written in our hearts.

Jr

 

[SwordmanJr]

I think the concept of freedom is significant in the Lord's supper as a passover sacrifice.

Oh, the breaking of bread and the passing of the wine is indeed valid for us, for it first and foremost speaks of what Jesus did not only for us, but also for those before the cross. His body was broken, and His blood shed for all mankind. This I do indeed observe in remembrance of Him, as often as I do it. It is a fulfillment of the Passover, which I do not observe, for it was the Jews who were enslaved in Egypt, not Gentiles. I will not plaster lamb's blood upon the door opening to my house, for that spirit of death will never again be sent to do as was done then, for which I am thankful.

These things were given then for a shadow and pattern of the eternal inheritance we have in Christ. The reality is in him.

Absolutely. That blood over the door post was fulfilled in Christ, and we commemorate it in the manner Jesus established just before the cross at what is called the Last Supper.

Jr

 

[ralliann]

Please quote the things that I've said that you consider to be contradictory.

I already did that by the quotes in your post i believe were contradictory

 

[ralliann]

You will have to show where the church in Colosae was instructed to keep and observe all the feasts, sabbaths, whatever you wish to call them. Never have I heard that the Colossians were under assault for their observance of feasts and sabbaths. Paul wrote plainly that he was speaking of “sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come...”

Agreed the church was keeping the Lord's supper in Christ. Uncircumcised men were not eating a Jewish passover.

Ex 12:43 And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof:
44 But every man’s servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.

Nowhere in the epistles, nor in the Gospels, are Gentiles told they must keep and observe the sabbaths. Not one thing is said anywhere about it. We are not told the Gentile churches anywhere were told to observe, how to observe, what it means to keep, and what is included or excluded in the feasts. Those churches were not handed a Torah in order to learn those things for observance.

They were not observing the feasts according to the carnal commands and outward things of Levitical law.

What we ARE told in Paul's epistles, and in Acts, is that the Judaisers were out there trying to drag those churches back down into the bondages of the Law of Moses. They were under attack for not observing what was customary for the Jews, and was given to them as a remembrance of great things past.

So, I am left with not being able to accept what appears to be your misinterpretation. The old school master was the letter of the Law, which is no longer the writ believers are called to return to now that we have the indwelling Law Giver and Lord God.

We walk Like our father Abraham
Ro 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

Ge 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.



Ro 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

 

[SwordmanJr]

Agreed the church was keeping the Lord's supper in Christ. Uncircumcised men were not eating a Jewish passover.

Good point.

Ex 12:43 And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof:
44 But every man’s servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.

They were not observing the feasts according to the carnal commands and outward things of Levitical law.

We walk Like our father Abraham
Ro 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

Ge 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

Hmm. Another good point.

Ro 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

Indeed. There is one around here who actually declared to me that he has been keeping the letter of the Law perfectly. I refrained from addressing that with him with him beyond that point once had made that declaration, for he is in the Hands of the Most High, for Him to deal with as He sees fit.

The Law of Faith is defined in only one power and authority that stands as the very grounding and foundation of all God's Law, and that is Love. Love is the lifeblood of all life, faith, hope, perseverance; it is the defining grounds for our lives in Christ Jesus as the Source.

Oh what freedom we have been offered, and that so few grasp with all their strength.

Jr

 

[SwordmanJr]

It's interesting to see the debates over the seventh day Sabbath. Entire theologies have been developed from this, much of it at the exclusion to what is actually written in the very word of God, such as it being a sign between God and His covenant people Israel, not America, not South Africa, not Europe.

In the creation, it is true that God rested on the seventh day. I have no problem with people choosing for themselves to celebrate and mimick that for themselves and their families, and yet in the days Jesus walked this earth in the flesh, He stated that the Father was WORKING even IN that very seventh day. That was many, many centuries past the seventh day of creation. The Father was in violation of only the man-made rules and regulations for the seventh calendar day of the Jews. How interesting is that?

The LAWFUL requirement for observation was placed upon Israel, and we are NOT replacements of ancient Israel, contrary to replacement theologies. All the prophecies we see being fulfilled today, it all revolves around ISRAEL, not Christianity. We have no soil on this earth. The eschatology we can see being worked in reality today revolves around Israel.

So, the Lord is glorified for His more powerful Law that He has written in our hearts.

Jr