What laws given in the OT should be tossed out?

[Grandpa]

As for the passage from Mat 15. Though it seems clear you wish to insult my intelligence, I will still give a reply. This come from my 12 years getting a PHD in Biblical theology just so you know. Yeshua was letting it be known that the teachings of the religious leaders of that time were nothing more than the teachings they wanted. Much as many today teach what they have been told, with out any true study of their own to find the truth of Scripture. In so doing they pass down what man thinks, and hold no understanding of the true teachings of Scripture. I once made a play on that word to make a point, think I will once more. Scriptrue. Scripture is the only Script you find to always be true. To rightly divide it, one must first make sure that their division in way places one part in contrast with another. In other words, be it the OT, or the NT, it must remain in complete harmony with the other.
I thank you now for your insults, the lovly way you twist the words of others, and for your attempts at belittlement. I found a lot of humor in them.

The only one insulting your intelligence is you.

I have said nothing about your intelligence.

I guess the Pharisees before you all had 12 year phd's in biblical theology as well. Probably even more than 12 yr phd's. Yet, they didn't have understanding of scripture, either. Were they stupid? No, far from it. They were the smartest of their culture. They were just lacking one thing.

There's other legalists here at CC that try to make it seem that an attack on their wrong philosophies is a direct attack on their personal feelings and themselves. I don't really understand that. Only a person who has placed themselves in the place of God should be hurt by someone questioning their interpretation of scripture. Are you people infallible? Did God give you that PHD??? I guess I'm less than impressed. Someone with a PHD in biblical theology doesn't understand scripture and quotes from corrupt versions of the bible to support their own WRONG philosophy. I would think someone with so much understanding would be more honest.

We need to get back to talking about obedience and righteousness and quit pretending our feelings are hurt.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

As for the passage from Mat 15. Though it seems clear you wish to insult my intelligence, I will still give a reply. This come from my 12 years getting a PHD in Biblical theology just so you know. Yeshua was letting it be known that the teachings of the religious leaders of that time were nothing more than the teachings they wanted. Much as many today teach what they have been told, with out any true study of their own to find the truth of Scripture. In so doing they pass down what man thinks, and hold no understanding of the true teachings of Scripture. I once made a play on that word to make a point, think I will once more. Scriptrue. Scripture is the only Script you find to always be true. To rightly divide it, one must first make sure that their division in way places one part in contrast with another. In other words, be it the OT, or the NT, it must remain in complete harmony with the other.
I thank you now for your insults, the lovly way you twist the words of others, and for your attempts at belittlement. I found a lot of humor in them.

Lol,, Wow, I hope this makes you feel better. College and degrees mean pretty much nothing in theology, So many colleges and so many degrees in theology come from differeing views. All these people with major degrees yet they all believe different things, Of course, that is because each college is set to each preffered belief system, and will train people to believe the way they want you to believe. Or you want to believe (you would not see a student from a baptist leading theology attend a catholic theological school)

Not to mention, The pharisees were the most schooled and intelligent people in jewish theology, no one understood it better, yet they through all of their shooling and many years of deep study could not realise Jesus was their messiah.

People who use these excuses as a means to discuss an apposing view are pretty much telling the world they can not respond to the other person. So they have to bring this strawman up. They are not thinkers. They are thinkees (they teach doctrines of men that they have been taught)

I give grandpa high fives for putting up with you for so long.. If you want to ruin what you have in peacefull discussion, this is a good way to do it.

 

[Rainrider]

Good idea. Now go back into the post you are responding to and see where it mentions anything about salvation.

Your first hint of Salvation came in post 143, from there out though you never used the wrod, you had it in almost every post. Not big deal really.

 

[Rainrider]

The only one insulting your intelligence is you.

I have said nothing about your intelligence.

I guess the Pharisees before you all had 12 year phd's in biblical theology as well. Probably even more than 12 yr phd's. Yet, they didn't have understanding of scripture, either. Were they stupid? No, far from it. They were the smartest of their culture. They were just lacking one thing.

There's other legalists here at CC that try to make it seem that an attack on their wrong philosophies is a direct attack on their personal feelings and themselves. I don't really understand that. Only a person who has placed themselves in the place of God should be hurt by someone questioning their interpretation of scripture. Are you people infallible? Did God give you that PHD??? I guess I'm less than impressed. Someone with a PHD in biblical theology doesn't understand scripture and quotes from corrupt versions of the bible to support their own WRONG philosophy. I would think someone with so much understanding would be more honest.

We need to get back to talking about obedience and righteousness and quit pretending our feelings are hurt.

Though you may never have said it, the implication has remained a part of your post from some time now. Just as your sad attempt to belittle my years of study remain in this post. My feels are not hurt in the lest, so you can get that off your mind. My point was that when a person turns to fable and not fact, it leaves others to wonder their intent.
Now you wish to back to the true topic, keep in mind that it has nothing to do if a person can attain righteousness by keeping the law, we both agree that will never come about. Also, this has nothing to with what what some people in Israel did, or didn't do. So lets be nice and leave them out of it.
Now back to a passage that seems to be a main point of contention. One that if understood from the use of the full passage answers this debate.
Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
To brake this down as we are talking to someone that has just began their walk, and asked us about this one passage.
When we are, "Think not that I have came to destroy" We must understand what this part means or we willl get the whole thing wrong, so what does it mean to destroy something?
verb (used with object) 1to reduce (an object) to useless fragments, a useless form, or remains, as by rending, burning, or dissolving; injure beyond repair or renewal; demolish; ruin; annihilate. 2 to put an end to; extinguish. 3 to kill; slay.
If we are not think He came to put an end to the Law when He clear tells not think that, why would it become a question? Also He told us in a way that makes it as clear as can be, "I am not come to destroy," that makes it clear that the last part has to fit with the first part, or we simply don't understand what we are reading. So lets look at that. "but to fulfil." So what is it to fulfill something? Are there more than one way to do this, with out removing something?
verb (used with object) 1 to carry out, or bring to realization, as a prophecy or promise. 2 to perform or do, as duty; obey or follow, as commands. 3 to satisfy (requirements, obligations, etc.):
Now one can say He satisfied the Law, that would be correct. Yet that doesn't show it being removed. It also doesn't fit with when takes into account Paul telling us,
1Co 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
Even if you see it as a corrupt translation, all other translations use the word imitate. or the phrase be imitators, SO lets not say this this is wrong or that is wrong, lets look to the Greek from Strong's.
The Greek, μιμητής mimētḗs, mim-ay-tace'; from G3401; an imitator:—follower.
NOw we know that Yeshua Lived out the Law in perfection, We also agree that man has no hope of doing so. That doesn't mean we should just remove it so we can live how ever we wish. After all in Mat. 5:17 it becomes clear that Yeshua didn't remove it, rather He obeyed it. If we are to imitate Him, then that means we should also OBEY the Law.
Now before we say Paul tough against the Law, we must keep in mind that if we find Paul ever saying He didn't then we are at fault to say he did, or Paul lied. Now if Paul lied, He should be removed from scripture. As I don't see Paul ever telling anyone any thing that was not true, I vote we leave his writings in there.
Act 21:24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
As we all know, Paul followed through on this. Not saying, showing that He didn't teach against the Law.

 

[Grandpa]

Though you may never have said it, the implication has remained a part of your post from some time now. Just as your sad attempt to belittle my years of study remain in this post. My feels are not hurt in the lest, so you can get that off your mind. My point was that when a person turns to fable and not fact, it leaves others to wonder their intent.
Now you wish to back to the true topic, keep in mind that it has nothing to do if a person can attain righteousness by keeping the law, we both agree that will never come about. Also, this has nothing to with what what some people in Israel did, or didn't do. So lets be nice and leave them out of it.
Now back to a passage that seems to be a main point of contention. One that if understood from the use of the full passage answers this debate.
Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
To brake this down as we are talking to someone that has just began their walk, and asked us about this one passage.
When we are, "Think not that I have came to destroy" We must understand what this part means or we willl get the whole thing wrong, so what does it mean to destroy something?
verb (used with object) 1to reduce (an object) to useless fragments, a useless form, or remains, as by rending, burning, or dissolving; injure beyond repair or renewal; demolish; ruin; annihilate. 2 to put an end to; extinguish. 3 to kill; slay.
If we are not think He came to put an end to the Law when He clear tells not think that, why would it become a question? Also He told us in a way that makes it as clear as can be, "I am not come to destroy," that makes it clear that the last part has to fit with the first part, or we simply don't understand what we are reading. So lets look at that. "but to fulfil." So what is it to fulfill something? Are there more than one way to do this, with out removing something?
verb (used with object) 1 to carry out, or bring to realization, as a prophecy or promise. 2 to perform or do, as duty; obey or follow, as commands. 3 to satisfy (requirements, obligations, etc.):
Now one can say He satisfied the Law, that would be correct. Yet that doesn't show it being removed. It also doesn't fit with when takes into account Paul telling us,
1Co 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
Even if you see it as a corrupt translation, all other translations use the word imitate. or the phrase be imitators, SO lets not say this this is wrong or that is wrong, lets look to the Greek from Strong's.
The Greek, μιμητής mimētḗs, mim-ay-tace'; from G3401; an imitator:—follower.
NOw we know that Yeshua Lived out the Law in perfection, We also agree that man has no hope of doing so. That doesn't mean we should just remove it so we can live how ever we wish. After all in Mat. 5:17 it becomes clear that Yeshua didn't remove it, rather He obeyed it. If we are to imitate Him, then that means we should also OBEY the Law.
Now before we say Paul tough against the Law, we must keep in mind that if we find Paul ever saying He didn't then we are at fault to say he did, or Paul lied. Now if Paul lied, He should be removed from scripture. As I don't see Paul ever telling anyone any thing that was not true, I vote we leave his writings in there.
Act 21:24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
As we all know, Paul followed through on this. Not saying, showing that He didn't teach against the Law.

Matthew 5:17 is a brilliant passage to look at.

The Lord didn't come to destroy but to fulfill. So did the Lord succeed or did He fail?

He succeeded, of course. Let's not even let the silliness of thinking the Lord didn't do what He said He would do come into this conversation.

The Law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Do people still need to come to Christ? Of course they do. So EVERY jot and tittle of the law stands for them. UNTIL they come to Christ and are given the REVELATION that the Lord Jesus Christ has fulfilled every jot and every tittle of the law and can INDEED give Rest to the weary.

So if you are a Christian and you have been given the knowledge that the Lord Jesus Christ has fulfilled SOME part of the law, you can rest assured that He has fulfilled all of it.

Matthew 5:18 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.

So, are you placing yourself under every jot and every tittle of the law? That is a very hard road to travel. You'll probably eventually want a break.

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Or have you decided that you are not under some parts of the law because the Lord Jesus has fulfilled it?

If that is the case then let's go back and really study Matthew 5:18. One jot and one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law UNTIL ALL BE FULFILLED.

So if you are not under ALL THE JOTS AND TITTLES then you are under none of them. Or are you saying "Not so Lord" and you will fulfill the laws that He left unfulfilled????

You must realize there is no middle road. There is either full on Judaism or there is full on Christianity.

Revelation 3:16-18
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

 

[Rainrider]

Matthew 5:17 is a brilliant passage to look at.

The Lord didn't come to destroy but to fulfill. So did the Lord succeed or did He fail?

He succeeded, of course. Let's not even let the silliness of thinking the Lord didn't do what He said He would do come into this conversation.

The Law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Do people still need to come to Christ? Of course they do. So EVERY jot and tittle of the law stands for them. UNTIL they come to Christ and are given the REVELATION that the Lord Jesus Christ has fulfilled every jot and every tittle of the law and can INDEED give Rest to the weary.

What no coment on the definitions given for Mat.5:17? Just asking as theypull the fullthing together, rather devide it. You have also failed to explain how, when we are told, "Think not that I have came to destroy", can we now think that is what He did?

So if you are a Christian and you have been given the knowledge that the Lord Jesus Christ has fulfilled SOME part of the law, you can rest assured that He has fulfilled all of it.

As the phrase christain has such a negative undertone for so many in this world, I use the phrase Believer. Yes it does mean somewhat the same thing. I am Believer yes, Though our understanding of some text may differ, (hens the reason for this conversation) our basic understanding of many things remain the same.

Matthew 5:18

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.

So, are you placing yourself under every jot and every tittle of the law? That is a very hard road to travel. You'll probably eventually want a break.

As anyone that has taken the time to study the Law can tell you, the Torah holds 613 commandments. A person can find what of the 613 pertain to them with a simple reading of the Torah in full. We have no need to pick what we like, and discard the rest. As I am not a Jewish priest, nor do I work in the Temple, any Laws that pertain to that gruop of peoples have nothing to with me. Then if we look at the Laws for women, Being a man that have nothing to do with me, and so on. Thouse divitions are there for a reason, that being so that everyone can find what they should and should not do.
As to the sacrificial system, HaShem has told us He didn't want them, also even if one over looks that, the Temple isn't standing. That would make sacrifice a sin at this point in time.
Hos 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
Jer 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
I say this to make clear that if one wishes to question what part of the Law should by Biblical teachings apply, they should first have some understanding of the topic.
Now to answer your Question, no as not all 613 apply to gentiles.
Do you follow the 1065 comandments of the NT?

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Or have you decided that you are not under some parts of the law because the Lord Jesus has fulfilled it?

As stated, they do not all apply, not by my say so, as the Word of HaShem tells us.

If that is the case then let's go back and really study Matthew 5:18. One jot and one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law UNTIL ALL BE FULFILLED.

So if you are not under ALL THE JOTS AND TITTLES then you are under none of them. Or are you saying "Not so Lord" and you will fulfill the laws that He left unfulfilled????

You must realize there is no middle road. There is either full on Judaism or there is full on Christianity.

Only one part of this needs a reply as the rest has been answered above. As (to use your phrase) christianity comes from Judaism, they should walk hand in hand. Now as for the way christianity is to day, there are many sects that use this phrase. Yet even though they follow the same Bible, they don't follow the same doctrine.
Also, as this is not about if a person believes that is once more off topic. Just keep in mind that you do take this road often, so please don't place it on my plait next time it comes up.

Revelation 3:16-18

16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

All though this goes to the spiritual well being of the church of Laodicea, it does once more go back to a question of salvation, (That you never bring up). It was intended to bring about repentance, for their fales claim of spiritual well being. i.e. I am rich. They componded this by adding a sence of pride in self made man, i.e. i have gotten right.
in 18 they are given the advice Just as we can not buy money, a person can also not buy their way into heaven. Yet Yeshua seems to be catering to the idea of people that measure everything in monetary terms.
As we have already established that salvaition doesn't come by the works of the Law, lets back to the topic. IS THE LAW VALID.

 

[Grandpa]

What no coment on the definitions given for Mat.5:17? Just asking as theypull the fullthing together, rather devide it. You have also failed to explain how, when we are told, "Think not that I have came to destroy", can we now think that is what He did?


As the phrase christain has such a negative undertone for so many in this world, I use the phrase Believer. Yes it does mean somewhat the same thing. I am Believer yes, Though our understanding of some text may differ, (hens the reason for this conversation) our basic understanding of many things remain the same.


As anyone that has taken the time to study the Law can tell you, the Torah holds 613 commandments. A person can find what of the 613 pertain to them with a simple reading of the Torah in full. We have no need to pick what we like, and discard the rest. As I am not a Jewish priest, nor do I work in the Temple, any Laws that pertain to that gruop of peoples have nothing to with me. Then if we look at the Laws for women, Being a man that have nothing to do with me, and so on. Thouse divitions are there for a reason, that being so that everyone can find what they should and should not do.
As to the sacrificial system, HaShem has told us He didn't want them, also even if one over looks that, the Temple isn't standing. That would make sacrifice a sin at this point in time.
Hos 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
Jer 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
I say this to make clear that if one wishes to question what part of the Law should by Biblical teachings apply, they should first have some understanding of the topic.
Now to answer your Question, no as not all 613 apply to gentiles.
Do you follow the 1065 comandments of the NT?

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.


As stated, they do not all apply, not by my say so, as the Word of HaShem tells us.


Only one part of this needs a reply as the rest has been answered above. As (to use your phrase) christianity comes from Judaism, they should walk hand in hand. Now as for the way christianity is to day, there are many sects that use this phrase. Yet even though they follow the same Bible, they don't follow the same doctrine.
Also, as this is not about if a person believes that is once more off topic. Just keep in mind that you do take this road often, so please don't place it on my plait next time it comes up.


All though this goes to the spiritual well being of the church of Laodicea, it does once more go back to a question of salvation, (That you never bring up). It was intended to bring about repentance, for their fales claim of spiritual well being. i.e. I am rich. They componded this by adding a sence of pride in self made man, i.e. i have gotten right.
in 18 they are given the advice Just as we can not buy money, a person can also not buy their way into heaven. Yet Yeshua seems to be catering to the idea of people that measure everything in monetary terms.
As we have already established that salvaition doesn't come by the works of the Law, lets back to the topic. IS THE LAW VALID.

So you are saying that the Lord Jesus mis-spoke?

Some jots and tittles of the law DID pass away from the law. A person just either needs to study really hard to see that the Lord Jesus was wrong, or follow what you say.

That doesn't sound like the conclusion a believer would come to.

A believer would believe the Lord and come to the conclusion that if some jots and tittles have fallen from the law then that must mean ALL was fulfilled.

If the Lord Jesus Christ didn't fulfill the law then He can't give people Rest from it. The whole New Testament would be meaningless in this philosophy.

I guess it makes more sense now why you wouldn't call yourself Christian. If you make a mockery of Christ and the New Testament you would have to call yourself something different.

This should be glaringly obvious. Even with the vail over your heart and mind you should be able to see that the law is all or nothing. If some of the jots and tittles have fallen then all MUST be fulfilled. Or you are not really a believer, you are a Pharisee. Deciding for yourself, through study of the scriptures, which are the important laws and which can be disregarded.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Matthew 5:17 is a brilliant passage to look at.

The Lord didn't come to destroy but to fulfill. So did the Lord succeed or did He fail?

He succeeded, of course. Let's not even let the silliness of thinking the Lord didn't do what He said He would do come into this conversation.

The Law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Do people still need to come to Christ? Of course they do. So EVERY jot and tittle of the law stands for them. UNTIL they come to Christ and are given the REVELATION that the Lord Jesus Christ has fulfilled every jot and every tittle of the law and can INDEED give Rest to the weary.

So if you are a Christian and you have been given the knowledge that the Lord Jesus Christ has fulfilled SOME part of the law, you can rest assured that He has fulfilled all of it.

Matthew 5:18 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.

So, are you placing yourself under every jot and every tittle of the law? That is a very hard road to travel. You'll probably eventually want a break.

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Or have you decided that you are not under some parts of the law because the Lord Jesus has fulfilled it?

If that is the case then let's go back and really study Matthew 5:18. One jot and one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law UNTIL ALL BE FULFILLED.

So if you are not under ALL THE JOTS AND TITTLES then you are under none of them. Or are you saying "Not so Lord" and you will fulfill the laws that He left unfulfilled????

You must realize there is no middle road. There is either full on Judaism or there is full on Christianity.

Revelation 3:16-18
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

So much for rest. How can we enter rest, if we are continually trying to fulfill th law and obey every jot and tittle.

As scriture says, that is a burden not even the jews could handle. What would make us think we could?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What no coment on the definitions given for Mat.5:17? Just asking as theypull the fullthing together, rather devide it. You have also failed to explain how, when we are told, "Think not that I have came to destroy", can we now think that is what He did?.

Did you read anything he said? You could not have and then come up with this conclusion

 

[gb9]

So you are saying that the Lord Jesus mis-spoke?

Some jots and tittles of the law DID pass away from the law. A person just either needs to study really hard to see that the Lord Jesus was wrong, or follow what you say.

That doesn't sound like the conclusion a believer would come to.

A believer would believe the Lord and come to the conclusion that if some jots and tittles have fallen from the law then that must mean ALL was fulfilled.

If the Lord Jesus Christ didn't fulfill the law then He can't give people Rest from it. The whole New Testament would be meaningless in this philosophy.

I guess it makes more sense now why you wouldn't call yourself Christian. If you make a mockery of Christ and the New Testament you would have to call yourself something different.

This should be glaringly obvious. Even with the vail over your heart and mind you should be able to see that the law is all or nothing. If some of the jots and tittles have fallen then all MUST be fulfilled. Or you are not really a believer, you are a Pharisee. Deciding for yourself, through study of the scriptures, which are the important laws and which can be disregarded.

you nailed it. some of these people , who yammer on about the Law / Sabbath all the time, are not Christians.

by definition, if one thinks there is salvation by any other way than faith and trust in Christ, then one is not a Christian.

one way. one way only. through Him. He is the door. He said so.

 

[Grandpa]

So much for rest. How can we enter rest, if we are continually trying to fulfill th law and obey every jot and tittle.

As scriture says, that is a burden not even the jews could handle. What would make us think we could?

The whole New Testament and Christianity itself hinges on this FACT.

 

[Grandpa]

you nailed it. some of these people , who yammer on about the Law / Sabbath all the time, are not Christians.

by definition, if one thinks there is salvation by any other way than faith and trust in Christ, then one is not a Christian.

one way. one way only. through Him. He is the door. He said so.

They are REALLY REALLY careful to say that salvation is not by the law.

But they get a little vague when a person asks what if the law is not followed, are they still saved?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

The whole New Testament and Christianity itself hinges on this FACT.

I sometimes wonder if even OT peole saw this fact. As David said, sacrifice and burnt offering you did not desire..Did some of them know?

 

[notuptome]

If we would read Malachi we would get over this constant argument about the law. Formalism is not acceptable worship to God. Gentiles are not nor have ever been under the law. All who name the name of Christ are to give of their best to the Master every day.

We are not saved from our sin to live again in our sin. In this imperfect body we will never be totally without sin but we can become conformed to the image of our Savior Christ while we await our being united with Him in glory forever.

Mal 1:6 ¶ A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name?
7 Ye offer polluted bread upon mine altar; and ye say, Wherein have we polluted thee? In that ye say, The table of the LORD is contemptible.
8 And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts.
9 And now, I pray you, beseech God that he will be gracious unto us: this hath been by your means: will he regard your persons? saith the LORD of hosts.
10 Who is there even among you that would shut the doors for nought? neither do ye kindle fire on mine altar for nought. I have no pleasure in you, saith the LORD of hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand.
11 For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.
12 But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, The table of the LORD is polluted; and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible.
13 Ye said also, Behold, what a weariness is it! and ye have snuffed at it, saith the LORD of hosts; and ye brought that which was torn, and the lame, and the sick; thus ye brought an offering: should I accept this of your hand? saith the LORD.
14 But cursed be the deceiver, which hath in his flock a male, and voweth, and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing: for I am a great King, saith the LORD of hosts, and my name is dreadful among the heathen.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[glf1]

If we would read Malachi we would get over this constant argument about the law. Formalism is not acceptable worship to God. Gentiles are not nor have ever been under the law. All who name the name of Christ are to give of their best to the Master every day.

We are not saved from our sin to live again in our sin. In this imperfect body we will never be totally without sin but we can become conformed to the image of our Savior Christ while we await our being united with Him in glory forever.

Mal 1:6 ¶ A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name?
7 Ye offer polluted bread upon mine altar; and ye say, Wherein have we polluted thee? In that ye say, The table of the LORD is contemptible.
8 And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts.
9 And now, I pray you, beseech God that he will be gracious unto us: this hath been by your means: will he regard your persons? saith the LORD of hosts.
10 Who is there even among you that would shut the doors for nought? neither do ye kindle fire on mine altar for nought. I have no pleasure in you, saith the LORD of hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand.
11 For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.
12 But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, The table of the LORD is polluted; and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible.
13 Ye said also, Behold, what a weariness is it! and ye have snuffed at it, saith the LORD of hosts; and ye brought that which was torn, and the lame, and the sick; thus ye brought an offering: should I accept this of your hand? saith the LORD.
14 But cursed be the deceiver, which hath in his flock a male, and voweth, and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing: for I am a great King, saith the LORD of hosts, and my name is dreadful among the heathen.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Hey! Roger... PTL!
Gal 3:23-25 "But before faith, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith that should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."

This letter was written to the church of the Galatians, and Paul tells us by the Spirit when he says we, our, and us in the above passage: that both he as a Jewish believer and they as gentile believers were under the law before faith. I suspect that that is why the OT law will not pass away until after the Great White Throne judgment; because it will be used as the standard that the lost will be judged by when the books are opened and their names are not found in the book of life. The Millennium will begin with the mortal faithful who survived the tribulation unto Jesus' return; but their children will have to, at some point in their lives, repent and turn to Jesus by faith. Until they do, they too will be under the OT law, shut up unto the faith that should afterwards be revealed. And for those children born after Jesus' return to the earth in power with his church of immortal Saints, but after faith is come, they will no longer be under a schoolmaster.
Maranatha!

 

[RDK]

It is true that God is love and we are to obey law based on love. But we must not forget that God and Christ are one and both are for justice. Both are long suffering and quick to forgive. Christ will return to give out justice, not to pat sinners on the head saying oh, that's alright.

Good idea. Now go back into the post you are responding to and see where it mentions anything about salvation.

Good idea. Now go back into the post you are responding to and see where it mentions anything about salvation.

There is a major difference between justice and grace. Justice infers that a crime has been committed and a due punishment is needed to account for the offense. Grace is something altogether different. None of us has earned it or deserve it but get it from God anyway based on love for us. A quote from the cross says it best. Jesus is speaking about his murderers hanging and torturing Him on that cross. Father forgive them since they don't know what they are doing.
Justice would bring down the legions of angels that Jesus had on hand to destroy His enemies. Unwarranted grace brought down forgiveness before these murderers even knew it. Our own guilt brings our Hell, the same as Judas felt when he betrayed Jesus. Christ came to redeem the lost souls, not to condemn or accuse them. Thank you again Jesus for your words of salvation and love.

 

[RDK]

Hey! Roger... PTL!
Gal 3:23-25 "But before faith, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith that should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."

This letter was written to the church of the Galatians, and Paul tells us by the Spirit when he says we, our, and us in the above passage: that both he as a Jewish believer and they as gentile believers were under the law before faith. I suspect that that is why the OT law will not pass away until after the Great White Throne judgment; because it will be used as the standard that the lost will be judged by when the books are opened and their names are not found in the book of life. The Millennium will begin with the mortal faithful who survived the tribulation unto Jesus' return; but their children will have to, at some point in their lives, repent and turn to Jesus by faith. Until they do, they too will be under the OT law, shut up unto the faith that should afterwards be revealed. And for those children born after Jesus' return to the earth in power with his church of immortal Saints, but after faith is come, they will no longer be under a schoolmaster.
Maranatha!

The old testament law has already been removed out of the way. Romans 10-4, Christ is the end of the law to every believer. The law is what does condemn us but doesn't have to be based upon destructive old testament commands. Romans 8-2 states that one law has been replaced by another. The old testament was never intended to be added to the works of Christ. It was intended to replace all of what was written before. This is a simple principle but the idea gets tangled up when we return to a testament which only offered conditional forgiveness and no holy spirit to validate a change.

 

[Rainrider]

So you are saying that the Lord Jesus mis-spoke?

Some jots and tittles of the law DID pass away from the law. A person just either needs to study really hard to see that the Lord Jesus was wrong, or follow what you say.

That doesn't sound like the conclusion a believer would come to.

A believer would believe the Lord and come to the conclusion that if some jots and tittles have fallen from the law then that must mean ALL was fulfilled.

If the Lord Jesus Christ didn't fulfill the law then He can't give people Rest from it. The whole New Testament would be meaningless in this philosophy.

I guess it makes more sense now why you wouldn't call yourself Christian. If you make a mockery of Christ and the New Testament you would have to call yourself something different.

This should be glaringly obvious. Even with the vail over your heart and mind you should be able to see that the law is all or nothing. If some of the jots and tittles have fallen then all MUST be fulfilled. Or you are not really a believer, you are a Pharisee. Deciding for yourself, through study of the scriptures, which are the important laws and which can be disregarded.

Now read that and show me where I said what you claim. You really should be reading what I say and not what you wish it to say.

 

[Grandpa]

Now read that and show me where I said what you claim. You really should be reading what I say and not what you wish it to say.

Did sacrifice pass away or not?

Obviously it did if people are not sacrificing anymore. For WHATEVER reason.

So then, We Know that at least SOME of the jots and tittles have passed. So what conclusion can we make because of that?

We'll take it slow and simple since you seem to think I addressed something you did not say or imply.

 

[Rainrider]

Did sacrifice pass away or not?

Obviously it did if people are not sacrificing anymore. For WHATEVER reason.

So then, We Know that at least SOME of the jots and tittles have passed. So what conclusion can we make because of that?

We'll take it slow and simple since you seem to think I addressed something you did not say or imply.

The sacrificial system has vary specific laws. Laws that hold only to that system. One being that they are only to be done on The Alter of HaShem.
Jer 6:20 To what purpose cometh there to me incense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country? your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me.
As I said the Alter isn't there, nor is the Temple. I in no way removed anything the Bible has not removed.
Deu 12:5 But unto the place which the LORD your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put his name there, even unto his habitation shall ye seek, and thither thou shalt come:
SO you see, to give any sacrifice just where ever you want is a transgreation of that Law, there for a sin. When the 3rd Temple is built, you will see them once more. Removed no, suspended for a time yes. Prophecy for told this.
Hos 3:4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
However if you will recall I pointed out that HaShem said.
Hos 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
Jer 6:20 To what purpose cometh there to me incense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country? your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me.
Jer 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
The last passage should make it clear to everyone that the sacrificial system was never a LAW to start with. Yes it is Torah, and there are Laws that govern it, however, that doesn't make it a law. Besides, as I made clear, the Word tells us what we should and shouldn't do. If He tells me He wants mercy and not sacrifices, who are we to say we know better than Him? So no I DIDN"T remove anything. Nor did HaShem.
If you wish to debate Law, would it not be wise to understand what you are debating?