The Torah is Still Binding and We Must Obey It

[LeeLoving]

Romans 6:14
“For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.”

Romans 10:4
“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”

These verses seem to be saying that believers are not under the law and do not have to follow it (though some of its laws we may have to follow in spirit because they are telling us not to do things that are explicitly sinful).

 

[Soyeong]

What do you think the meaning of this verse is?

[Rom 5:19 KJV] 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

The only way to become righteous is through faith and what it means to become righteous through faith is to become a doer of righteous works through the same faith. To say that God is righteous means that He is a doer of righteous works, so it is contradictory for someone to be made righteous apart from being made into someone who is a doer of righteous works, and it is a misunderstanding of Paul to think that he was suggesting this. In Romans 3:27-31, the same faith by which we are made righteous does not abolish our need to be a doer of righteous works in obedience to God's law, but rather our faith upholds it. It's like wanting the gift of righteousness apart from it contents.

 

[Soyeong]

Romans 6:14
“For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.”

Paul spoke about multiple different categories of law other than the Law of God, such as the law of sin and works of the law, so it is important to correctly identify which law he was referring to us as not being under. For example, in Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contrasted the Law of the Spirit with the law of and death. In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, and in Romans 3:31 and Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted the Law of God that our faith upholds with works of the law that are not of faith. The Law of God leads us to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), so it is a law that holiness, righteousness, and goodness have dominion over us, while the law of sin stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5), so it is the law where sin had dominion over us, and Romans 6:14 describes the law that we are not under as being the law where sin had dominion over us, so it is referring to the law of sin, not the Law of God. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in 1 John 3:4, sin is the transgression of God's law, so we are still under it. Moreover, everything else in Romans 6 speaks in favor of serving God and against serving sin.

Romans 10:4
“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”

These verses seem to be saying that believers are not under the law and do not have to follow them (though there may be some we have to follow in spirit because they are telling us not to do things that are explicitly sinful).

While the Greek word "telos" can mean "end", it can also mean "purpose" or "goal" depending upon the context of how it is used, such as in 1 Timothy 1:5, Romans 6:21-22, and James 5:11, though even "end" can also mean "intention" or "aim". In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israelite might know Him, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the goal of the law is to know God and Jesus, which is eternal life (John 17:3), which is also why Jesus said that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying God's commandments (Luke 10:25-28, Matthew 19:17).

In Romans 9:30-10:4, they had a zeal for God, but it was not based on knowing Him, so they failed to attain righteousness because they misunderstood the goal of the law by pursuing it as though righteousness were earned as the result of their works in order to establish their own instead of pursuing the law as thought righteousness were by faith in Christ, for knowing Christ is the goal of the law for righteousness for everyone who has faith. In Romans 10:5-8, this faith references Deuteronomy 30:11-16 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard saying that the Law of God is not too difficult for us to obey, in regard to saying that the one who obeys it will attain life by it, in regard to what we are agreeing to obey by confessing that Jesus is Lord, and in regard to the way to believe that God raise him from the dead. So nothing in this passage as anything to do with Jesus ending God's law, but just the opposite.

The verses that you quoted are great examples of how there is room to interpret God's word as promoting rebellion against Him by those who are determined to do that, but it doesn't have to be interpreted that way.

 

[LeeLoving]

Paul spoke about multiple different categories of law other than the Law of God, such as the law of sin and works of the law, so it is important to correctly identify which law he was referring to us as not being under. For example, in Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contrasted the Law of the Spirit with the law of and death. In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, and in Romans 3:31 and Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted the Law of God that our faith upholds with works of the law that are not of faith. The Law of God leads us to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), so it is a law that holiness, righteousness, and goodness have dominion over us, while the law of sin stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5), so it is the law where sin had dominion over us, and Romans 6:14 describes the law that we are not under as being the law where sin had dominion over us, so it is referring to the law of sin, not the Law of God. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in 1 John 3:4, sin is the transgression of God's law, so we are still under it. Moreover, everything else in Romans 6 speaks in favor of serving God and against serving sin.




While the Greek word "telos" can mean "end", it can also mean "purpose" or "goal" depending upon the context of how it is used, such as in 1 Timothy 1:5, Romans 6:21-22, and James 5:11, though even "end" can also mean "intention" or "aim". In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israelite might know Him, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the goal of the law is to know God and Jesus, which is eternal life (John 17:3), which is also why Jesus said that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying God's commandments (Luke 10:25-28, Matthew 19:17).

In Romans 9:30-10:4, they had a zeal for God, but it was not based on knowing Him, so they failed to attain righteousness because they misunderstood the goal of the law by pursuing it as though righteousness were earned as the result of their works in order to establish their own instead of pursuing the law as thought righteousness were by faith in Christ, for knowing Christ is the goal of the law for righteousness for everyone who has faith. In Romans 10:5-8, this faith references Deuteronomy 30:11-16 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard saying that the Law of God is not too difficult for us to obey, in regard to saying that the one who obeys it will attain life by it, in regard to what we are agreeing to obey by confessing that Jesus is Lord, and in regard to the way to believe that God raise him from the dead. So nothing in this passage as anything to do with Jesus ending God's law, but just the opposite.

The verses that you quoted are great examples of how there is room to interpret God's word as promoting rebellion against Him by those who are determined to do that, but it doesn't have to be interpreted that way.

Romans 10:4
“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”

No distinction is being made about any law that is being followed whatsoever, it just says "the law", why wouldn't someone just assume that it was the law that was meant? The KJV translators translated it to be end, is there any reason it shouldn't be translated that way?

 

[Soyeong]

Romans 10:4
“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”

No distinction is being made about any law that is being followed whatsoever, it just says "the law", why wouldn't someone just assume that it was the law that was meant? The KJV translators translated it to be end, is there any reason it shouldn't be translated that way?

I agree that Romans 10:4 is referring to the Law of God. Moreover, "end" can be a correct translation in the sense that it is referring to knowing Christ being the intention or aim of the law, but it is not the best word choice because it can easily be misunderstood as referring to abolishing it. Nothing in the surrounding context is speaking about God's law being abolished, but rather the it is speaking about knowing Christ being the goal of the law.

Furthermore, interpreting Romans 10:4 as Christ abolishing God's law is contrary to the broader context other verses, such as in Romans 3:31, where Paul said that our faith does not abolish God's law, bur rather our faith upholds. Likewise, in Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said that he came not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it and warned against relaxing the least part of it or teaching others to relax to least part of it. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and God's law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which is in accordance with Jesus being sent in fulfillment of the promise to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26). Furthermore, Jesus set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to God's law and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6). In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20). In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. God's law is God's word (Deuteronomy 5:31-33) and Jesus is God's word made flesh (John 1:4).

So interpreting Romans 10:4 as saying that Jesus abolished God's law is interpreting Paul as contradicting himself, it is saying that Jesus lied when he came not to abolish the law, he is disregarding his warning, it is saying that Jesus abolished everything he spent his ministry teaching by word and by example, it is saying that he abolished what he accomplished through the cross, it is saying that he he abolished grace, faith, and our salvation, and it is saying that he abolished himself. Instructions for how to testify about God's nature can't be abolished without first abolishing God. Suffice to say there are many major problems with interpreting Romans 10:4 as saying that Jesus abolished God's law when in reality all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160).

 

[rogerg]

The only way to become righteous is through faith and what it means to become righteous through faith is to become a doer of righteous works through the same faith. To say that God is righteous means that He is a doer of righteous works, so it is contradictory for someone to be made righteous apart from being made into someone who is a doer of righteous works, and it is a misunderstanding of Paul to think that he was suggesting this. In Romans 3:27-31, the same faith by which we are made righteous does not abolish our need to be a doer of righteous works in obedience to God's law, but rather our faith upholds it. It's like wanting the gift of righteousness apart from it contents.

The faith by which anyone is made righteous is not their faith but Christ's faith. It is His faith alone that is righteous, and which faith, is freely imputed unto those whom He has chosen to salvation - it is a gift given to them as a gift and is not of them.
This, however, is not to say that those saved shouldn't engage in the good work of sharing the true gospel with others, because they should do so, and is made clear by the Bible, but, neither does doing so assist in, nor bring unto anyone salvation, but rather is done out of a good heart from having been saved. Only those saved know the true gospel and can communicate it. To do so from a love of the gospel is one thing but believing it will assist in becoming saved, quite another.

Your conclusion, relative to the verse, is not able to withstand logical scrutiny. And you did not address the verse itself in your reply. Therefore, I will do so now.
First, observe in Rom 5:19, that all who come into this world come into it are already deemed sinners - a result of Adam's transgression in the garden, not theirs, which transgression occurred LONG BEFORE the Torah and the Mosaic Law ever came into existence. Therefore, it simply is not possible that violation of the Torah has an effect upon anyone's salvation. Based upon the verse, everyone, beginning from the womb, has already been judged by God, found guilty, and declared sinners. Second, if you read the verse closely, you will see in it that those whom Christ saves are "made righteous" simply and solely because Christ makes them so, and not because they are a "doer of righteous works". There just is no wiggle room in that verse to permit your interpretation to be correctly drawn from it.

[Rom 5:19 KJV] 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.


Based upon the following verse, we can see that only through being placed under the "perfect law of liberty", does someone become a true "doer of the work", which work had been solely and successfully performed and completed by Christ, by whom, those saved are placed under it. The perfect law of liberty given by Christ, is God's true law of salvation - the law of sin and death (the law of works) - which law you follow and preach, is Satan's law, not God's.

[Jas 1:23, 25 KJV]
23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: ...
25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth [therein], he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

[Jas 2:10, 12 KJV]
10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all. ...
12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

 

[LeeLoving]

I agree that Romans 10:4 is referring to the Law of God. Moreover, "end" can be a correct translation in the sense that it is referring to knowing Christ being the intention or aim of the law, but it is not the best word choice because it can easily be misunderstood as referring to abolishing it. Nothing in the surrounding context is speaking about God's law being abolished, but rather the it is speaking about knowing Christ being the goal of the law.

Furthermore, interpreting Romans 10:4 as Christ abolishing God's law is contrary to the broader context other verses, such as in Romans 3:31, where Paul said that our faith does not abolish God's law, bur rather our faith upholds. Likewise, in Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said that he came not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it and warned against relaxing the least part of it or teaching others to relax to least part of it. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and God's law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which is in accordance with Jesus being sent in fulfillment of the promise to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26). Furthermore, Jesus set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to God's law and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6). In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20). In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. God's law is God's word (Deuteronomy 5:31-33) and Jesus is God's word made flesh (John 1:4).

So interpreting Romans 10:4 as saying that Jesus abolished God's law is interpreting Paul as contradicting himself, it is saying that Jesus lied when he came not to abolish the law, he is disregarding his warning, it is saying that Jesus abolished everything he spent his ministry teaching by word and by example, it is saying that he abolished what he accomplished through the cross, it is saying that he he abolished grace, faith, and our salvation, and it is saying that he abolished himself. Instructions for how to testify about God's nature can't be abolished without first abolishing God. Suffice to say there are many major problems with interpreting Romans 10:4 as saying that Jesus abolished God's law when in reality all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160).

Well, if my understanding is correct Jesus followed the law to every tittle of it and didn't teach anyone to disobey it, so he did not come to abolish it... but like he said to fulfill it. I'm not sure lawlessness refers to disobedience to the law, but perhaps sinfulness in general.

 

[rogerg]

I agree that Romans 10:4 is referring to the Law of God. Moreover, "end" can be a correct translation in the sense that it is referring to knowing Christ being the intention or aim of the law, but it is not the best word choice because it can easily be misunderstood as referring to abolishing it. Nothing in the surrounding context is speaking about God's law being abolished, but rather the it is speaking about knowing Christ being the goal of the law.

Furthermore, interpreting Romans 10:4 as Christ abolishing God's law is contrary to the broader context other verses, such as in Romans 3:31, where Paul said that our faith does not abolish God's law, bur rather our faith upholds. Likewise, in Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said that he came not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it and warned against relaxing the least part of it or teaching others to relax to least part of it. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and God's law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which is in accordance with Jesus being sent in fulfillment of the promise to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26). Furthermore, Jesus set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to God's law and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6). In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20). In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. God's law is God's word (Deuteronomy 5:31-33) and Jesus is God's word made flesh (John 1:4).

So interpreting Romans 10:4 as saying that Jesus abolished God's law is interpreting Paul as contradicting himself, it is saying that Jesus lied when he came not to abolish the law, he is disregarding his warning, it is saying that Jesus abolished everything he spent his ministry teaching by word and by example, it is saying that he abolished what he accomplished through the cross, it is saying that he he abolished grace, faith, and our salvation, and it is saying that he abolished himself. Instructions for how to testify about God's nature can't be abolished without first abolishing God. Suffice to say there are many major problems with interpreting Romans 10:4 as saying that Jesus abolished God's law when in reality all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160).

You apply those verses apply to the wrong law. The Mosaic Law was done away with in Christ, nor it was never able to grant forgiveness of spiritual sin. Through Christ and His changing of the priesthood, a new law came into effect which superseded all law, and which, for those under it, forgives all sin to the uttermost. For those whom Christ came to save, it was the law of sin and death that He, by His offering, had completely satisfied and abolished - which law was originally made manifest by Adam's transgression in the garden.
The book of Hebrews is a central part of the Bible. You should not ignore it but read it carefully and try to grasp it as it contains
a lot of very critical spiritual information.

 

[Soyeong]

The only way for anyone to have a right relationship with God is exclusively through/by the Saviour, Jesus Christ, and not in any manner by the keeping of law. A marriage relationship between God and Israel the nation was terminated by God as He divorced it due to spiritual adultery.

[Jer 3:8 KJV] 8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

[/quote]
It is contradictory to think that the way to have a right relationship with God is through God's word made flesh, but not through obeying Gods word. Moreover, showed with Scripture that Moses was taught how to know God through His law. The fact that God divorced the Northern Kingdom because they were not following His law does not establish that God's law does not teach how to have a right relationship with God, but just the opposite. Moreover, God continued to call for the Northern Kingdom to return to Him throughout the rest of the chapter, which makes the basis for the New Covenant (Deuteronomy 30, Exodus 36:26-27, Jeremiah 31:33). We should use Israel's disobedience to God's law as being an example for what we should avoid doing, not as an example for us to copy (1 Corinthians 10:1-13).

 

[Soyeong]

Well, if my understanding is correct Jesus followed the law to every tittle of it and didn't teach anyone to disobey it, so he did not come to abolish it... but like he said to fulfill it.

If you agree that Jesus did not come to abolish it, then that is contrary to interpreting Romans 6:14 and 10:4 as speaking against obeying it. "To fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so after Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, he then proceeded to fulfill it six times throughout the rest of Matthew 5 by teaching how to correctly obey it as it should be.

I'm not sure lawlessness refers to disobedience to the law, but perhaps sinfulness in general.

Sin is lawlessness and sinfulness in general is disobedience to God's law is general, so I'm not seeing the distinction ghat you are marking.

 

[Soyeong]

You apply those verses apply to the wrong law. The Mosaic Law was done away with in Christ, nor it was never able to grant forgiveness of spiritual sin. Through Christ and His changing of the priesthood, a new law came into effect which superseded all law, and which, for those under it, forgives all sin to the uttermost. For those whom Christ came to save, it was the law of sin and death that He, by His offering, had completely satisfied and abolished - which law was originally made manifest by Adam's transgression in the garden.
The book of Hebrews is a central part of the Bible. You should not ignore it but read it carefully and try to grasp it as it contains
a lot of very critical spiritual information.

Christ walked in obedience to the Mosaic Law and in 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked, so only those who are walking in obedience to the Mosaic Law are in Christ. Christ did not teach anything about superseding the Mosaic Law, but the sum of everything that he taught by word and by example was in regard to how to correctly obey the Mosaic Law. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so the position that we do not need to obey the Mosaic Law is the position that we do not need salvation. In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul equated the Mosaic Law with the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ by contrasting them both with the law of sin and death, so the Mosaic Law is not the law of sin and death. After all, the Mosaic Law was given by God and the Spirit and Christ are God. In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said that he came not to abolish the Mosaic Law and warned against relaxing the least part of it or teaching others to relax the least part of it, so you are calling him a liar and are disregarding his warning. I do not ignore the book of Hebrews, but rather I disagree with your interpretation of it for reasons previously stated.

 

[rogerg]

It is contradictory to think that the way to have a right relationship with God is through God's word made flesh, but not through obeying Gods word. Moreover, showed with Scripture that Moses was taught how to know God through His law. The fact that God divorced the Northern Kingdom because they were not following His law does not establish that God's law does not teach how to have a right relationship with God, but just the opposite. Moreover, God continued to call for the Northern Kingdom to return to Him throughout the rest of the chapter, which makes the basis for the New Covenant (Deuteronomy 30, Exodus 36:26-27, Jeremiah 31:33). We should use Israel's disobedience to God's law as being an example for what we should avoid doing, not as an example for us to copy (1 Corinthians 10:1-13).[/QUOTE]

It is contradictory only based upon your opinion but not by the Bible. Christ became flesh to do away with the law of sin and death for
those whom He came to save. The law God gave to Moses was not THE law but an earthly representation of it - but that which is the true is in heaven, not in the earth, which law, cannot be satisfied by the blood of bulls and goats but only by Christ. That is the
error Israel made -- that they should have realized their law was carnal, temporal, earthly, not eternal.

[Jhn 5:38-40 KJV]
38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

We are informed in the Bible that Christ alone is the Saviour. What do you think it means that He is the Saviour?

[2Pe 3:18 KJV] 18 But grow in grace, and [in] the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him [be] glory both now and for ever. Amen.

 

[LeeLoving]

If you agree that Jesus did not come to abolish it, then that is contrary to interpreting Romans 6:14 and 10:4 as speaking against obeying it. "To fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so after Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, he then proceeded to fulfill it six times throughout the rest of Matthew 5 by teaching how to correctly obey it as it should be.


Sin is lawlessness and sinfulness in general is disobedience to God's law is general, so I'm not seeing the distinction ghat you are marking.

I'm not sure if I agree with you that sinfulness in general is disobedience to God's law in general, if you're referring to "the law". Those who have sinned without law shall also perish without law is something that is written in Romans 2 (KJV), so it's possible to sin while not being under the law or being aware of it, and I think only Israel might have been under the law, though I might be wrong, perhaps only they were aware of it and we were all technically under it. I think there may be sins that exist that are technically not in "the law", I might be wrong though. Perhaps God has made clear through his laws every sin. Jesus taught people how to obey the law, right, he didn't come to abolish it. I think we understand the word fulfill differently.

 

[Soyeong]

How can you say, ' that Christians live in obedience to the Mosaic Law'. While you keep sinning, i.e., disobeying the law?

The law is very clear that the soul that sins will die.

You can't tell other folk to obey the law when you by your own admission. Are transgressing the law constantly?

I did not say that I am constantly transgressing God's law, but even if I were, then that would mean that I would need to repent and return to obedience to it, not that I was wrong about the fact that followers of God should obey what God has commanded in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow. In John 1:8, if we say that we have no sin, then we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we sin, then we need to repent and to return to obedience to God's law in accordance with the Gospel of the Kingdom.

 

[rogerg]

Christ walked in obedience to the Mosaic Law and in 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked, so only those who are walking in obedience to the Mosaic Law are in Christ. Christ did not teach anything about superseding the Mosaic Law, but the sum of everything that he taught by word and by example was in regard to how to correctly obey the Mosaic Law. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so the position that we do not need to obey the Mosaic Law is the position that we do not need salvation. In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul equated the Mosaic Law with the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ by contrasting them both with the law of sin and death, so the Mosaic Law is not the law of sin and death. After all, the Mosaic Law was given by God and the Spirit and Christ are God. In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said that he came not to abolish the Mosaic Law and warned against relaxing the least part of it or teaching others to relax the least part of it, so you are calling him a liar and are disregarding his warning. I do not ignore the book of Hebrews, but rather I disagree with your interpretation of it for reasons previously stated.

He did say that in the Book of Hebrews. The whole Bible is God's revelation to man, not just parts of it. You shouldn't just pick and choose which books you would like to believe - those which happen to represent your beliefs and ignore the others. The Bible was written by God to be ONE completely INTEGRATED book, not many unrelated books.
Mat 5:17 is NOT referring to the Mosaic Law, nor does it state that. It is referring to the law of liberty, said another way, the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. Christ came to satisfy and effectuate His law, not the Mosaic nor any other law.
Your interpretation is what happens when you don't accept all books of the Bible as being divinely inspired by God.

[2Ti 3:16-17 KJV]
16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

[1Co 2:13 KJV]
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.


[1Jo 3:23 KJV] 23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

If you agree that Jesus did not come to abolish it, then that is contrary to interpreting Romans 6:14 and 10:4 as speaking against obeying it. "To fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so after Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, he then proceeded to fulfill it six times throughout the rest of Matthew 5 by teaching how to correctly obey it as it should be.


Sin is lawlessness and sinfulness in general is disobedience to God's law is general, so I'm not seeing the distinction ghat you are marking.

“If you agree that Jesus did not come to abolish it….he kept talking

” I have come to fulfill the law and prophets nothing will change until it’s fulfilled “


“For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭11:13‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Thou shalt not kill “ isn’t a prophecy it’s not something that is going to be fulfilled later jesus doent just say “ I didn’t come to destroy the law … he said I came to fulfill it nothing of the le can change until it’s fulfilled “


“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

For 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.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5:17-18‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:44-47‬ ‭KJV‬‬

When you study the law look for the parts of it that are prophetic things like this needed to be fulfilled and you’ll understand what he’s saying he explained it later

“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭18:18-19‬ ‭KJV‬‬

that’s been fulfilled it’s a prophecy about Jesus who Moses said would later come and speak Gods words that are required of his people we know that not because I think it but because Peter confirms it after he received the holy ghost

When you read the law and prophets look for this aspect of the law and prophets that was witnessing Jesus and the gospel and the authority of the words that he himself spoke

“and he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.( test that theory ) For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.( test that theory )

Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭3:20-26‬ ‭KJV‬‬

you can look at the law and prophets like a Christian should and find out what they can teach you about Jesus and the gospel of the kingdom you came hesr thier witness of Christ

“And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭28:23-24‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Or you can try to take it as your law which your bound to by animal blood , leviticle preists , a man made temple and see it this way

“But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

…..and not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: but their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.

But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.”
‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭3:7, 13-15‬ ‭

awe need to see the things about Christ in the law that he fulfilled like being the one God would send to speak his words that are required of mankind

“Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.”
‭‭John‬ ‭12:48-50‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. “

the life of Jesus from his birth to resurrection is in the Old Testament law and prophets we want that part not those laws for the ungodly and rebellious ……

 

[Soyeong]

I'm not sure if I agree with you that sinfulness in general is disobedience to God's law in general, if you're referring to "the law". Those who have sinned without law shall also perish without law is something that is written in Romans 2 (KJV), so it's possible to sin while not being under the law or being aware of it, and I think only Israel might have been under the law, though I might be wrong, perhaps only they were aware of it and we were all technically under it. I think there may be sins that exist that are technically not in "the law", I might be wrong though. Perhaps God has made clear through his laws every sin. Jesus taught people how to obey the law, right, he didn't come to abolish it. I think we understand the word fulfill differently.

The existence of sin requires the existence of something that defines what is and is not sin, which is God's character, so for example righteousness is in accordance with God's character while unrighteousness is sin. The Bible often uses the same terms to describe the character of God as it does to describe the character of God's law, such as with it being holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), or with justice, mercy, and faithfulness being weightier matters of the law (Matthew 23:23), which is because it is God's instructions for how to divide between what is in accordance with or contrary to those aspects of His character, which is why sin is what is contrary to God's law (1 John 3:4, Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7). Sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), which is because people could act in a way that was contrary to God's character before they had been given instructions to refrain from doing that, but sin did not exist before the law that defines what sin is existed. If the whole world was not under God's law, then God would have no grounds by which to justly judge the world for their sin.

When we express aspects of God's character through our obedience to His law, we are testifying about who God is, which is also expressing what we believe to be true about who God is, or in other words, we are believing in Him. For example, by doing good works in obedience to God's law, we are testifying about God's goodness, which is why our good works bring glory to Him (Matthew 5:16), and by testifying about God's goodness, we are also expressing the belief that God is good. Likewise, in 1 Peter 1:16, we are told be holy, for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, so by following those instructions we are testifying about and believing in God's holiness. The only way to do away with God's instructions for how to be holy as He is holy would be by first doing away with God's holiness, and the same is true for other aspects of God's character, so those instructions can't be done away with without first doing away with God.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

I did not say that I am constantly transgressing God's law, but even if I were, then that would mean that I would need to repent and return to obedience to it, not that I was wrong about the fact that followers of God should obey what God has commanded in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow. In John 1:8, if we say that we have no sin, then we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we sin, then we need to repent and to return to obedience to God's law in accordance with the Gospel of the Kingdom.

Moses commanded a different law its contrary shew no mercy no pity v forgive and always be merciful .

If your unhappy with your wife divorce her and both can remarry said Moses law

V.

When he was asked about Moses word ….no , that’s adultery said Jesus ehat God joins together ther let man not seperate . the only valid reason for divorce is fornication and to divorce and remarry is adultery.

Moses law doesn’t allow repentance friend suppose a young woman is married and her new husband finds out she’s not a virgin , Moses wrote a law for that it is t repent and you’ll be forgiven incase you never noticed lol
“But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭22:20-22‬ ‭KJV‬‬

While you were deciding to repent they would drag you out and punish you according to the words Moses wrote in his book of book of the law the “ Torah “ or maybe you needed to build a fire on a sabbath day oops

“And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.”
‭‭Numbers‬ ‭15:32, 35-36‬ ‭KJV‬‬

that’s not how Jesus is it’s how this ordination was

“Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭23:20-21‬ ‭KJV‬‬

As much as you want to apparently . You really do t want to try to have a relationship with God through that ordination or Moses judgements and mediation the the children of Israel

you want jesus who is the opposite

“And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me.”
‭‭Jeremiah‬ ‭33:8‬ ‭

You want to have the sure mercies of David and have a covenant between you and the lord

“I acknowledged my sin unto thee, And mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD; And thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah.”
‭‭Psalm‬ ‭32:5‬ ‭KJV‬‬

You can only repent and believe and be saved if the word says repent and believe and be saved not of the word says “ anyone who sins must surely be executed by you all because this angel leading you in the lords name will not pardon your sin

you want the ministration of life not the ministration of sin and death

 

[LeeLoving]

The existence of sin requires the existence of something that defines what is and is not sin, which is God's character, so for example righteousness is in accordance with God's character while unrighteousness is sin. The Bible often uses the same terms to describe the character of God as it does to describe the character of God's law, such as with it being holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), or with justice, mercy, and faithfulness being weightier matters of the law (Matthew 23:23), which is because it is God's instructions for how to divide between what is in accordance with or contrary to those aspects of His character, which is why sin is what is contrary to God's law (1 John 3:4, Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7). Sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), which is because people could act in a way that was contrary to God's character before they had been given instructions to refrain from doing that, but sin did not exist before the law that defines what sin is existed. If the whole world was not under God's law, then God would have no grounds by which to justly judge the world for their sin.

When we express aspects of God's character through our obedience to His law, we are testifying about who God is, which is also expressing what we believe to be true about who God is, or in other words, we are believing in Him. For example, by doing good works in obedience to God's law, we are testifying about God's goodness, which is why our good works bring glory to Him (Matthew 5:16), and by testifying about God's goodness, we are also expressing the belief that God is good. Likewise, in 1 Peter 1:16, we are told be holy, for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, so by following those instructions we are testifying about and believing in God's holiness. The only way to do away with God's instructions for how to be holy as He is holy would be by first doing away with God's holiness, and the same is true for other aspects of God's character, so those instructions can't be done away with without first doing away with God.

Romans 10:4
“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”

What exactly do you think this means? If we can be righteous without the law what is the point in following it?

1 John 5:17
“All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.”

Unrighteousness is still sin, so it's not like we can do whatever we want, but it seems like we do not have to follow "the law".

 

[Dino246]

If you agree that Jesus did not come to abolish it, then that is contrary to interpreting Romans 6:14 and 10:4 as speaking against obeying it. "To fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so after Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, he then proceeded to fulfill it six times throughout the rest of Matthew 5 by teaching how to correctly obey it as it should be.


Sin is lawlessness and sinfulness in general is disobedience to God's law is general, so I'm not seeing the distinction ghat you are marking.

Sin crouched at Cain's door, but the Law had not yet been given, meaning sin is not simply a violation of the Law.