(Moved) The law. Is it done away with? Is it, really?

[Devin P]

As one who is in the Lord Jesus I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean then for him it is unclean
Rom14:14

Do not destroy the work if God for the sake of food. ALL food is clean but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes another to stumble
Verse20

Paul's writings are confusing, as Peter mentions later in the bible, but do not be mistaken, Paul observed the food laws.

Later in the chapter he says that the kingdom isn't meat and drink, but righteousness, peace and joy in the spirit. The bible describes righteousness as faith in God. Peace, as the observance to the law, and joy as a long-lasting, persistent and unchanging, unshakable hope in the things to come.

Faith, hope, and love. The most important, is love however. And the bible (Jesus especially) tells us that we will show that we love Him, in our obedience to the commands of God. This is why He says "they confess me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me". This is why their hearts are far from Him. Because they say they believe, and love Him, but their actions and their walk say otherwise.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Paul's writings are confusing, as Peter mentions later in the bible, but do not be mistaken, Paul observed the food laws.

Later in the chapter he says that the kingdom isn't meat and drink, but righteousness, peace and joy in the spirit. The bible describes righteousness as faith in God. Peace, as the observance to the law, and joy as a long-lasting, persistent and unchanging, unshakable hope in the things to come.

Faith, hope, and love. The most important, is love however. And the bible (Jesus especially) tells us that we will show that we love Him, in our obedience to the commands of God. This is why He says "they confess me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me". This is why their hearts are far from Him. Because they say they believe, and love Him, but their actions and their walk say otherwise.

I'm sorry, but I joined this website to discuss the Bible. You won't accept what is plainly written in it, so we cannot have a debate.
Paul twice plainly states in rom ch14 ALL food is clean.
The leaders of the Christian church only asked gentiles to follow four Jewish laws, three of which it is believed were given to appease Jewish legalists who had become Christians. So it is an unarguable fact, if you are correct, the leaders of the church gave gentiles a licence to sin.
I really do not mean to be offensive, but how can we debate the bible if you refuse to accept what is written in it by the people who wrote the NT

 

[Soyeong]

This is saying that, the righteousness of the Pharisees, was by the letter, and not of faith. So, in order to have more righteousness than a Pharisee, one must only believe, and trust in God. But, we are to still keep the laws as the Pharisees said to, as stated by Jesus here: Matthew 23:1-3 - 1Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

He is saying that the Pharisees teach the law of Moses, and that His disciples are to obey and to keep that law. To listen to them, because they preach the law of Moses, but only not to do as they do, because they place their faith in justification in themselves, and in man, not in God.

You can take this for what it's worth, but in Hebrew Matthew 23 says that they sit in Moses' seat so do what he said, but do not do what the Pharisees do. Frankly, it takes a passage that is confusingly worded and turn it into one that makes perfect sense and goes along with the point he was making, so I am inclined to think that is the correct translation.

The law was never done away with, because it's displaying the Character of God. God cannot change. What is sin against Him yesterday, is sin against Him today and forever. Satan has infiltrated us, and caused us to view the law as sinful, which it is not. Jesus literally tells us that it isn't to pass until after judgement. We are to keep the law, but out of faith. I don't mean, out of faith the way the world says out of faith, I mean, that by having faith that God will justify you when you fail at it. Because you will. This knowing of your impossibility to keep the law shouldn't deter you from desiring to keep it. Romans 7 is a testament to that. The whole chapter is about him struggling to keep the laws of God, because his flesh and spirit are constantly warring one against the other. As we do toda

In Deuteronomy 30:11-14, God said that what he commanded is not too difficult, but that it is near us, in our mouth and in our heart so that we will do it, and according to Romans 10:5-10, our faith says the same thing, so it is completely false that it is impossible to keep it. However, keeping the Law has never been about trying to become justified or about having faith that God will justify us in spite of not obeying it perfectly, but about having faith in God to guide us in how to rightly live. The one and only way that there has been to become justified is by faith, and by the same faith we are required to be careful to obey all of God's commands, so we are not to obey them in order to become justified, but because we have been justified.

The law was in fact a shadow, but only because through it, a lot of men thought that they were justified, when in fact, God is the only one who can justify. All of the bible is written about Israel. Israel, are God's children. They are those that have faith in God to justify, and be merciful, while they keep and uphold His laws. That is quite literally, every single great man ever written about in the bible. They struggled to keep the laws, while being strengthened by a sound faith in God. Moses was subject to the law, but saw and talked with God because of faith. David was to keep the law, but was justified by faith. Abraham was to keep it, but was justified by faith, Noah was to keep it, but was justified by faith. The prophets were to keep it, but were justified by faith. Jesus, was to keep it, and did. He was justified by the law, because He is the law. He is the word made flesh

Jesus kept the Law perfectly, but was not justified by the Law, but by faith. It has always been a fundamental misunderstanding of the Law and of God's character that we can become justified through obeying it perfectly because it makes it out to be that what God primarily wants from us is perfect obedience when since the beginning with God walking with Adam in the Garden, what He has always wanted with us is an intimate relationship with us, and His Law is His instructions for how to grow in that relationship by faith and love.

 

[Devin P]

You can take this for what it's worth, but in Hebrew Matthew 23 says that they sit in Moses' seat so do what he said, but do not do what the Pharisees do. Frankly, it takes a passage that is confusingly worded and turn it into one that makes perfect sense and goes along with the point he was making, so I am inclined to think that is the correct translation.



In Deuteronomy 30:11-14, God said that what he commanded is not too difficult, but that it is near us, in our mouth and in our heart so that we will do it, and according to Romans 10:5-10, our faith says the same thing, so it is completely false that it is impossible to keep it. However, keeping the Law has never been about trying to become justified or about having faith that God will justify us in spite of not obeying it perfectly, but about having faith in God to guide us in how to rightly live. The one and only way that there has been to become justified is by faith, and by the same faith we are required to be careful to obey all of God's commands, so we are not to obey them in order to become justified, but because we have been justified.



Jesus kept the Law perfectly, but was not justified by the Law, but by faith. It has always been a fundamental misunderstanding of the Law and of God's character that we can become justified through obeying it perfectly because it makes it out to be that what God primarily wants from us is perfect obedience when since the beginning with God walking with Adam in the Garden, what He has always wanted with us is an intimate relationship with us, and His Law is His instructions for how to grow in that relationship by faith and love.

I agree wholeheartedly, I over emphasised the inevitable breaking of the law to get my point across that we aren't justified by the law, because constantly I get hit with posts claiming I'm saying the contrary.

 

[Soyeong]

Some points about the Mosaic Covenant:

1. If you place yourself under the Mosaic Covenant on any point, you are under the Mosaic Covenant on every point. Nowhere in scripture is the Mosaic Covenant ever divided, nowhere is anyone considered under only one part of the Mosaic Covenant or another part of the Mosaic Covenant.

2. The only forgiveness of sin under the Mosaic Covenant was by animal sacrifice at the temple on the altar. There is no other way to be forgiven under the Mosaic Covenant. If you are not making animal sacrifices at the temple, there is no forgiveness of your sins under the Mosaic Covenant. Because the temple has been destroyed, everyone who continues to cling to the Mosaic Covenant will die in his sin.

That's why scripture tells us:

But Jesus has now obtained a superior ministry, and to that degree He is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been legally enacted on better promises.
...
By saying, a new covenant, He has declared that the first is old. And what is old and aging is about to disappear. -- Hebrews 8

The reason it says "about to disappear" is because at the time of the writing of Hebrews, the temple had not yet been destroyed. With the destruction of the temple, there is now no other forgiveness of sins except by the covenant of Jesus.

According to Psalms 119:142, God's righteousness is eternal and therefore according to Psalms 119:160, all of God's righteous laws are eternal. So from the beginning that has always been a way to act in accordance with God's eternal righteousness, which existed before God made any covenants with man, so the way to act in accordance with God's righteousness is not dependent on any particular covenant, though it has been revealed through them. For example, helping the poor has always been and will always be in accordance with God's righteousness regardless of which covenant, if any, someone is under, but as part of the New Covenant, we are still required to practice righteousness (1 John 3:10). So there is a distinction between a set of instructions for how to practice righteousness and a covenant agreement to live by those instructions. A covenant agreement can come an go, but it will always be righteous to help the poor. Devin P spoke about obeying God's Law, but said nothing about placing himself back under the Mosaic Covenant.

However, according to John 8:56, Abraham saw Messiah's day and was glad, and Abraham is the father of our faith, so this is how people in the OT were forgiven. The blood of bulls and goats never took away sin, but rather the only way to forgive sin has always been through faith in Messiah.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Maybe explaining spiritual truth in a theological debating forum isn't the done thing.
However, under the NC the law God desires you to follow is written in your mind and placed in your heart. God himself puts it there.
What is in your mind you in your mind must know and the law in your heart MUST bring heartfelt conviction you sin when you wilfully transgress it, for:
Through the law we become conscious of sin rom3:20

So I really don't see how, those who say we must all follow the law of Moses can consider people as Christians who have no consciousness of sin by failing to follow it.
I'm sorry, but it shows a lack of spiritual discernment concerning the outworking of the NC at its core

 

[A_Thinker]

This is because up until Jesus came, the law was not for gentiles, only for Israelites.

Ah ... a change.

So ... what God does never changes ?

And ... from the New Testament ... "do not be a stumbling-block to your brother " ... otherwise, eat as you will ...

Another change.

And this from Jesus Himself ... "A NEW commandment I give unto you ... that you love one another, ... as I have loved you."

Another change.

At another point, Jesus says that He was bringing NEW WINE, ... which could not be put into OLD WINE-SKINS.

Do you still hold to your point that God's works don't change from point to point ?

Finally, ... and I want you to know that I do not consider us to be very far off in beliefs, ... for surely I do believe that we should honour God in our doings and works. We MAY simply disagree on how BEST to achieve such a goal.

And ... I believe that obeying the Law ... and following the Spirit ... may, many times, be very similar.

To me, I see observing the Law ... as a first step ... to realizing the will of God in our lives.

For instance, it occurs to me ... that there is nothing in the Law (I think) ... that would have prompted Philip to find his way to evangelizing the Ethiopian.

So ... I ask the question ?

Do you believe that it is better to OBEY the LAW ... than to FOLLOW the SPIRIT ?

 

[stuart lawrence]

The wineskins is a good point to raise here:

And many after drinking the old wine don't want the new, for they say: the old is better
Luke5:39

 

[JIMINZ]

Jesus says in Matthew chapter 5:

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

In verse 18, He says that not until heaven and earth pass, shall the law have to be removed. Heaven and earth are still here, so not only does this mean that the law is still meant to be obeyed. In verse 19, He says that whoever shall refrain from the law, and teach others to do the same will be called the least in the kingdom, but whoever keeps the law, and teaches others to do the same, will be called great. Then in verse 20:

20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

This is saying that, the righteousness of the Pharisees, was by the letter, and not of faith. So, in order to have more righteousness than a Pharisee, one must only believe, and trust in God. But, we are to still keep the laws as the Pharisees said to, as stated by Jesus here: Matthew 23:1-3 - 1Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

He is saying that the Pharisees teach the law of Moses, and that His disciples are to obey and to keep that law. To listen to them, because they preach the law of Moses, but only not to do as they do, because they place their faith in justification in themselves, and in man, not in God.

The law was never done away with, because it's displaying the Character of God. God cannot change. What is sin against Him yesterday, is sin against Him today and forever. Satan has infiltrated us, and caused us to view the law as sinful, which it is not. Jesus literally tells us that it isn't to pass until after judgement. We are to keep the law, but out of faith. I don't mean, out of faith the way the world says out of faith, I mean, that by having faith that God will justify you when you fail at it. Because you will. This knowing of your impossibility to keep the law shouldn't deter you from desiring to keep it. Romans 7 is a testament to that. The whole chapter is about him struggling to keep the laws of God, because his flesh and spirit are constantly warring one against the other. As we do today.

The doctrinal teaching of all grace and no law, isn't biblical. Abraham was justified by faith, but still kept the law. Genesis 26:5

Noah knew about clean and unclean animals Genesis 7:2
He even sacrificed a burnt offering on an altar, and only used clean animals to offer up: Genesis 8:20

Abraham also sacrificed a clean animal for a burnt offering to God, Genesis 22:13. It's not the law of Moses, it's the law of God, and it is never changing, because God is never changing. Abraham, although he was justified by faith, still kept the law of God. Genesis 26:5

The law was in fact a shadow, but only because through it, a lot of men thought that they were justified, when in fact, God is the only one who can justify. All of the bible is written about Israel. Israel, are God's children. They are those that have faith in God to justify, and be merciful, while they keep and uphold His laws. That is quite literally, every single great man ever written about in the bible. They struggled to keep the laws, while being strengthened by a sound faith in God. Moses was subject to the law, but saw and talked with God because of faith. David was to keep the law, but was justified by faith. Abraham was to keep it, but was justified by faith, Noah was to keep it, but was justified by faith. The prophets were to keep it, but were justified by faith. Jesus, was to keep it, and did. He was justified by the law, because He is the law. He is the word made flesh.

People try to say that people after Moses were the only ones to have known the law, but this biblically speaking, isn't so. It can be shown, over and over again throughout the pre-exodus scriptures. Even when Lot was visited by the Angels of the Lord. What type of bread did he offer up to Them? Genesis 19:3 - Unleavened bread. How would he have known to offer up to this being, unleavened bread if it weren't for the law? How about how just a chapter previously, where Abraham gave the Angel of the Lord a grain offering Genesis 18:6? These things were written about first with Moses, but they didn't originate there. The offerings, were done away with in Jesus, but not the laws themselves. The keeping of the 7th day Sabbath, the keeping of the Feast days, they are to remain until the end of time.

Besides, the feast days should be something we should want to celebrate. They all point to Jesus. All of them. Jesus has already fulfilled the first 4, and the last three He will come to fulfill as well. The very next one He has to fulfill is the feast of Trumpets. He will come during that time. No one knows exactly the day or the hour, but we know the season. It will happen in the fall, but because of Satan's influence, we don't know the exact day, or hour, only the season. Revelations says that Jesus will come when the last trumpet sounds, and the feast of trumpets, is one of the 3 feast days He hasn't yet fulfilled. The last two deal with separation of good and bad seed, and the reunion of God with His children. Both things, that Jesus will fulfill after He returns. Instead, we follow man-made tradition, and celebrate the evolution of the feast of Saturnalia (Christmas) Although, I'll save you from reading about this, as I'll make another thread about the pagan origins of modern-day holidays we observe today. This thread is long enough haha. God bless, brothers and sisters. May the work and deception of Satan not deceive you from keeping, speaking, and living in truth.

.

Hi Devin

You seem to have forgotten these.


This is what the Bible says about sin, as a matter of fact, it is God's Definition of sin.

1Jn. 3:4
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law:
for sin is the transgression of the law.

Here is where we stand because of Jesus.

Rom 8:2-4
2) For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
3) For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh,God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4) That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Gal. 2:19
For I through the law am dead to the law,
that I might live unto God.

Rom. 7:4
Wherefore, my brethren,
ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ;
that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

Where is sin then if we are Dead to the Law?
Notice I didn't say the Law is done away with.

 

[A_Thinker]

Paul's letters are quite confusing, but he states on several occasions that we are to observe the law.

Can you direct us to these occasions ... ?

 

[Soyeong]

The leaders of the Christian church, many of whom had been Christ's disciples met to discuss which Jewish laws gentile converts should follow( Acts ch15) four were mentioned, three of which are widely believed to have been given to appease Jewish legalists who had become Christians.
Did the church give gentiles converts a licence to sin by not asking them to follow more than four Jewish laws?

If your interpretation is true that Gentiles were only required to obey four laws and are free to do everything everything else that God revealed to be sin, then the church gave Gentiles a licence to sin, which I think clearly shows that your interpretation is false. God's Law are instructions for how to act in accordance with His righteousness and how to refrain from sinning against him, not instructions for how to act like and appease Jews and how to refrain from sinning against Jews.

No, Acts ch15 is about one thing only. Which Jewish laws gentile converts should be asked to observe.
I'm positive the Jerusalem Church would not have come up with an answer which would mean gentiles would be considered least in the kingdom of heaven

Then you should favor interpretations that don't involve the Jerusalem Council requiring the Gentiles to do things that would make them least in the kingdom of God. If you interpret the Jerusalem Council as speaking against Gentiles obeying what God commanded, then you have a decision to make about whether God or the Jerusalem Council has the higher authority and which to follow, but again, I would favor interpretations that don't pit the Jerusalem Council against God.

I'm off out now. I see no point in continuing this anyway. I know the Jerusalem Church did NOT give gentiles a licence to sin. You have no choice but to believe they did

It is odd you would say that, it is according to your interpretation that the Jerusalem Council gave them a licence to sin, so you have no choice but to believe that they did, whereas I do not believe that the Jerusalem Council ever spoke against Gentiles obeying any of God's commands.

 

[stuart lawrence]

If your interpretation is true that Gentiles were only required to obey four laws and are free to do everything everything else that God revealed to be sin, then the church gave Gentiles a licence to sin, which I think clearly shows that your interpretation is false. God's Law are instructions for how to act in accordance with His righteousness and how to refrain from sinning against him, not instructions for how to act like and appease Jews and how to refrain from sinning against Jews.



Then you should favor interpretations that don't involve the Jerusalem Council requiring the Gentiles to do things that would make them least in the kingdom of God. If you interpret the Jerusalem Council as speaking against Gentiles obeying what God commanded, then you have a decision to make about whether God or the Jerusalem Council has the higher authority and which to follow, but again, I would favor interpretations that don't pit the Jerusalem Council against God.

The Jerusalem Church asked gentile converts to observe four Jewish laws, correct?

 

[JIMINZ]

Can you direct us to these occasions ... ?

.

No he can't, but this is what Paul said.

Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
Gal 2:12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
Gal 2:13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
Gal 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

 

[A_Thinker]

We were given the works to show, and to separate us from the nations, and these are the laws.

Didn't Jesus say it is our LOVE which distinguishes us (christians) ?

By this shall all men know that you are my disciples ... if you have LOVE one for another. John 13:35

 

[JIMINZ]

No the Law was not done away with.

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another.

 

[RDKirk]

Peter was arguably Jesus's closest disciple, and was with Him constantly. And Jesus supposedly did away with the food laws, verbally? Yet, 37 years later, when he was given a vision, still never once ate clean or unclean foods? So, 37 years after Jesus apparently preached a gospel that did away with the law, by the logic of today, he was still observing the law? This makes no sense, especially when you read later on in Acts chapter 10, that this vision (of which Peter himself states) that it had nothing to do with food, but people. Which makes much more sense, when you see that in the first century AD, they had a man-made law, professing gentiles unclean, and God had previously sent 3 gentiles to his door.

Under the understanding of the modern-day church, for 37 years apparently, the closest disciple to Jesus, didn't even understand apparently the most basic of principals of the faith he professed. No. This isn't so. He understood it entirely, which is why he still observed the levitical food laws.

Yes, Peter did get it wrong.

The fault for which Paul criticized Peter was not about food, it was about Peter kowtowing to the prejudice of Judaic Christians against gentile Christians. At that late date, Peter still got wrong the very thing the Holy Spirit Himself schooled Peter about with Cornelius.

So, yes, even Jesus' closest disciple was still getting it wrong.

 

[Soyeong]

Can you direct us to these occasions ... ?

If the Law was given to reveal what sin is, and Paul told Gentiles not to sin, then it should be fairly straightforward what he was telling Gentiles to do.

Didn't Jesus say it is our LOVE which distinguishes us (christians) ?

By this shall all men know that you are my disciples ... if you have LOVE one for another. John 13:35

Jesus summarized the Law and the Prophets as being about how to love God and our neighbor (Matthew 22:36-40) and that if we love him, then we will obey His teachings, which are not his own, but that of the Father (John 14:23-24), and Galatians 5:14 says that loving your neighbor fulfills the entire Law, so there is no distinction between God's laws distinguishing us and love distinguishing us.

 

[RDKirk]

Didn't Jesus say it is our LOVE which distinguishes us (christians) ?

By this shall all men know that you are my disciples ... if you have LOVE one for another. John 13:35

Yes. Obeying the law externally is nothing but evidence of whitewashed tombs, cups cleaned on the outside. It's nothing more than the Pharisees were doing, while ignoring the weightier matters of the law (which are all bound up in love).

When men see that Christians love unexpectedly--when we have made disciples of every nation and all love each other without respect to nationality--then they know we are disciples of Jesus.

 

[A_Thinker]

If the Law was given to reveal what sin is, and Paul told Gentiles not to sin, then it should be fairly straightforward what he was telling Gentiles to do.

I think that Paul's viewpoint is a bit deeper than that.

Paul teaches that the Law is our schoolmaster, bringing us to Christ through the recognition of our inability to perfectly keep it.

Paul then goes on to teach that Christians are DEAD to the Law, ... and that we should follow the Spirit of God which lives within us to accomplish the will of God.

I don't think that Paul ever taught in the scripture ... that Gentile christians should observe the Law, ... but that they should, rather, follow the Spirit ...

 

[claninja]

Jesus says in Matthew chapter 5:

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

In verse 18, He says that not until heaven and earth pass, shall the law have to be removed. Heaven and earth are still here, so not only does this mean that the law is still meant to be obeyed. In verse 19, He says that whoever shall refrain from the law, and teach others to do the same will be called the least in the kingdom, but whoever keeps the law, and teaches others to do the same, will be called great. Then in verse 20:

20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

This is saying that, the righteousness of the Pharisees, was by the letter, and not of faith. So, in order to have more righteousness than a Pharisee, one must only believe, and trust in God. But, we are to still keep the laws as the Pharisees said to, as stated by Jesus here: Matthew 23:1-3 - 1Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

He is saying that the Pharisees teach the law of Moses, and that His disciples are to obey and to keep that law. To listen to them, because they preach the law of Moses, but only not to do as they do, because they place their faith in justification in themselves, and in man, not in God.

The law was never done away with, because it's displaying the Character of God. God cannot change. What is sin against Him yesterday, is sin against Him today and forever. Satan has infiltrated us, and caused us to view the law as sinful, which it is not. Jesus literally tells us that it isn't to pass until after judgement. We are to keep the law, but out of faith. I don't mean, out of faith the way the world says out of faith, I mean, that by having faith that God will justify you when you fail at it. Because you will. This knowing of your impossibility to keep the law shouldn't deter you from desiring to keep it. Romans 7 is a testament to that. The whole chapter is about him struggling to keep the laws of God, because his flesh and spirit are constantly warring one against the other. As we do today.

The doctrinal teaching of all grace and no law, isn't biblical. Abraham was justified by faith, but still kept the law. Genesis 26:5

Noah knew about clean and unclean animals Genesis 7:2
He even sacrificed a burnt offering on an altar, and only used clean animals to offer up: Genesis 8:20

Abraham also sacrificed a clean animal for a burnt offering to God, Genesis 22:13. It's not the law of Moses, it's the law of God, and it is never changing, because God is never changing. Abraham, although he was justified by faith, still kept the law of God. Genesis 26:5

The law was in fact a shadow, but only because through it, a lot of men thought that they were justified, when in fact, God is the only one who can justify. All of the bible is written about Israel. Israel, are God's children. They are those that have faith in God to justify, and be merciful, while they keep and uphold His laws. That is quite literally, every single great man ever written about in the bible. They struggled to keep the laws, while being strengthened by a sound faith in God. Moses was subject to the law, but saw and talked with God because of faith. David was to keep the law, but was justified by faith. Abraham was to keep it, but was justified by faith, Noah was to keep it, but was justified by faith. The prophets were to keep it, but were justified by faith. Jesus, was to keep it, and did. He was justified by the law, because He is the law. He is the word made flesh.

People try to say that people after Moses were the only ones to have known the law, but this biblically speaking, isn't so. It can be shown, over and over again throughout the pre-exodus scriptures. Even when Lot was visited by the Angels of the Lord. What type of bread did he offer up to Them? Genesis 19:3 - Unleavened bread. How would he have known to offer up to this being, unleavened bread if it weren't for the law? How about how just a chapter previously, where Abraham gave the Angel of the Lord a grain offering Genesis 18:6? These things were written about first with Moses, but they didn't originate there. The offerings, were done away with in Jesus, but not the laws themselves. The keeping of the 7th day Sabbath, the keeping of the Feast days, they are to remain until the end of time.

Besides, the feast days should be something we should want to celebrate. They all point to Jesus. All of them. Jesus has already fulfilled the first 4, and the last three He will come to fulfill as well. The very next one He has to fulfill is the feast of Trumpets. He will come during that time. No one knows exactly the day or the hour, but we know the season. It will happen in the fall, but because of Satan's influence, we don't know the exact day, or hour, only the season. Revelations says that Jesus will come when the last trumpet sounds, and the feast of trumpets, is one of the 3 feast days He hasn't yet fulfilled. The last two deal with separation of good and bad seed, and the reunion of God with His children. Both things, that Jesus will fulfill after He returns. Instead, we follow man-made tradition, and celebrate the evolution of the feast of Saturnalia (Christmas) Although, I'll save you from reading about this, as I'll make another thread about the pagan origins of modern-day holidays we observe today. This thread is long enough haha. God bless, brothers and sisters. May the work and deception of Satan not deceive you from keeping, speaking, and living in truth.

This is a very interesting post. I appreciate your insight into this.

Starting with Matthew 5:19 19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

I highlighted a different line in this verse because Paul taught others that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything. Galatians 6:15 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation. Galatians 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. However, the law teaches that circumcision is required. Leviticus 12:3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised.

Will Paul be least in the kingdom of heaven for teaching men to break the levitical law of circumcision?

Unless, it's possible that the passing away of the old heaven and earth means the end of the old covenant?