Did Jesus ever tell us that we no longer need to keep the law of Moses?

[Leastamongmany]

Proverbs 15:21-Folly is joy to him that is destitute of wisdom: but a man of understanding walks uprightly.
Proverbs 26: 4/5-Answer NOT a fool according to HIS folly,lest thou also be like unto him.
Answer a fool according to his folly,lest he be WISE IN HIS OWN CONCEITS.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Good morning SG!

Agreed, received has multiple meanings as you have shown but the question is which meaning did God intend. I believe it's received as in they heard the word and rejected. I do see your point though, although I disagree.

I will tell you from experience that I have willfully sinned since becoming a Christian and I can tell that I never have considered the blood of the covenant an unholy thing.

Let's take a look at the last two verses of that chapter. Who do you think the "we" in Hebrews 10:39 is talking about? Who is the other group, those who draw back unto perdition?

Heb 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
Heb 10:39 But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

Excellent point. The question is.Who are “We” and who are “they” And will th eperson you spoke to even respond to this aspect of the passage?

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Greetings and Welcome,

I am going to check out the 1689 Federalism thanks.

I am one of those they call "LawKeepers" but only because I say the law is:

1. The Law is beautiful in that is shows us our need for our Savior!
2. The Law is beautiful in that is serves to maintain Civil Order so we may live in peace!
3. The Law is beautiful in that it is a lamp unto the feet of those who have been saved by Grace!

For this men attack and slander. This is reasonable, but to them any mention of Do not murder is heretical. Interesting how vile they are when it comes to even the slightest mention of what is reasonable! Careful!

SG

This is a distortion of my remarks. I believe Torah serves the porposes you indicated, too. My point is that no one keeps the Mosaic Law now because it is impossible without the Temple and animal sacrifices.

Additionally, I indicated in my remarks that the Mosaic Law, at some level, reflects the moral nature of God, in some cases accomodated to a specific culture. A believer is being conformed to the image of Christ, so he will be reflecting this image through the transforming power of the Holy Spirit as it works within him. He will not want to be immoral but will be pursuing holiness.

What holiness means to a believer, versus an ancient Israelite, reflects the internal rather than the external. He is concerned with inner transformation rather than external transformation, as the clean/unclean laws were focused upon.

By the way, the term "law" goes beyond the Mosaic Law and reflects the entirety of God's instructions. A believer will want to follow those commandments that are applicable to HIM but not ancient Israel.

This is a very complex issue, especially for newer Christians.

 

[Marcelo]

The issue is that you are ignoring Romans 4. Part of Paul's argument is that justification has ALWAYS been by grace through faith alone. Both Abraham and David are portrayed as being saved by grace through faith alone. There are not two ways of salvation.

How were they justified by faith before Jesus? They were justified by faith before Jesus because they depended on God's gracious provision so that their sins would not be accounted to them. Again, read Romans 4.

By the way you might check out a view called 1689 Federalism which teaches that the Mosaic Covenant was typological of the New Covenant, and never promised eternal life, but promised long life in the land. I believe this view is more coherent than either normal covenant theology or dispensationalism (which I consider to be absurd too ).

I encourage anyone to read Tim Keller's two-volume commentary called Romans for You. Understanding Romans is very helpful in regards to this matter.

However, some of the commandments in the Mosaic Law reflect God's image as reflected in human beings. Therefore, those who are being transformed into the image of God/Christ are reflecting this nature, and would not want to be involved in immorality.

Sorry if I misunderstood your assertion. I have a great deal of suspicion toward "lawkeepers" due to personal experience with this theology. Often they are obsessed with issues of days, diet, and the condition of one's sexual organs.

You’re right! Abraham and David were justified by grace through faith. Well, I don’t claim to have a perfect understanding of Scripture – I’m here to learn, not to teach.

I think the term “salvation by grace” is quite confusing, so let me put my statement another way: Salvation by the blood of Jesus was not available before the crucifixion.

It is evident in the Gospels that the physical Jesus never preached redemption by his blood. When the rich young ruler asked about eternal life, the Lord answer: “Keep the commandments”.

Throughout the four gospels we see the Lord Jesus expounding the Law of Moses and not once did he tell his disciples to stop keeping it.

So, my question is: Who told us to stop keeping the Law of Moses? I would like to hear your opinion about this.

 

[gb9]

This is a distortion of my remarks. I believe Torah serves the porposes you indicated, too. My point is that no one keeps the Mosaic Law now because it is impossible without the Temple and animal sacrifices.

Additionally, I indicated in my remarks that the Mosaic Law, at some level, reflects the moral nature of God, in some cases accomodated to a specific culture. A believer is being conformed to the image of Christ, so he will be reflecting this image through the transforming power of the Holy Spirit as it works within him. He will not want to be immoral but will be pursuing holiness.

What holiness means to a believer, versus an ancient Israelite, reflects the internal rather than the external. He is concerned with inner transformation rather than external transformation, as the clean/unclean laws were focused upon.

By the way, the term "law" goes beyond the Mosaic Law and reflects the entirety of God's instructions. A believer will want to follow those commandments that are applicable to HIM but not ancient Israel.

This is a very complex issue, especially for newer Christians.

hi, welcome.

let me tell you this- what simplegardener is teaching is this theology basically called Hebrew roots.

it teaches that the Pharisees had corrupted the Torah, and Jesus came to correct it back, and Christ followers are to keep the Torah and Sabbath to properly be in obedience and maintain salvation.

I had never heard of it when I first came here, so it made 0 sense to me.

so, do some research on it to understand the lie they try to push.

 

[SimpleGardner]

This is a distortion of my remarks. I believe Torah serves the porposes you indicated, too. My point is that no one keeps the Mosaic Law now because it is impossible without the Temple and animal sacrifices.

Additionally, I indicated in my remarks that the Mosaic Law, at some level, reflects the moral nature of God, in some cases accomodated to a specific culture. A believer is being conformed to the image of Christ, so he will be reflecting this image through the transforming power of the Holy Spirit as it works within him. He will not want to be immoral but will be pursuing holiness.

What holiness means to a believer, versus an ancient Israelite, reflects the internal rather than the external. He is concerned with inner transformation rather than external transformation, as the clean/unclean laws were focused upon.

By the way, the term "law" goes beyond the Mosaic Law and reflects the entirety of God's instructions. A believer will want to follow those commandments that are applicable to HIM but not ancient Israel.

This is a very complex issue, especially for newer Christians.

Nicely said,

Just passing by computer,

Many good points in your reply, glad to hear the clarification. Looking forward to posting back with you later.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

You’re right! Abraham and David were justified by grace through faith. Well, I don’t claim to have a perfect understanding of Scripture – I’m here to learn, not to teach.

I think the term “salvation by grace” is quite confusing, so let me put my statement another way: Salvation by the blood of Jesus was not available before the crucifixion.

It is evident in the Gospels that the physical Jesus never preached redemption by his blood. When the rich young ruler asked about eternal life, the Lord answer: “Keep the commandments”.

Throughout the four gospels we see the Lord Jesus expounding the Law of Moses and not once did he tell his disciples to stop keeping it.

So, my question is: Who told us to stop keeping the Law of Moses? I would like to hear your opinion about this.

Cool..well, firstly, the law does serve the purpose of condemning the sinner of his sinfulness. It exposes the heart of the person. In fact, my position, based on Romans 7-8, is that the law entices the unsaved person to sin.

The person is born with a corrupt, fallen nature that is in rebellion against God. The law shows the person what it means to be in obedience to God, at a certain level. Since he is a rebel at heart, he will sin simply by being exposed to the law. He doesn't want to be in submission to God, so the law exposes is fallen nature. In the case of the young ruler, he was an idolater who worshipped his riches more than he wanted a relationship with God.

Regarding who told us the Mosaic Law was no longer in effect, I would refer to these verses:

Acts 15
Eph 2:13-15
Rom 7:1-6
I Cor 3
Heb 7, 8, 10:1-4
Col 2:16-17
Gal 3, 4

There are other references but these are the ones that come to mind.

Paul and other Jewish Christians continued to observe calendar and dietary laws, as well as physical circumcision, but they were free to observe these shadows and types, without requiring them of other believers, if they wanted. See Acts 21.

Regarding Jesus, he didn't tell us that the Law was no longer in effect, explicitly, but he prophesied the elimination of the Temple in AD 70. The geneologies of the priesthood were destroyed in the fire as well, since they were stored in the Temple complex. Therefore, no one can claim to be a Levitical priest because the ancestry is not provable.

I believe that God intentionally destroyed the Temple, not only as a sign of judgment against Israel, but because, in reality, the whole Mosaic system became idolatrous when the Substance, Jesus, came on the scene. God was simply destroying all possibility of the Mosaic Law being used as a claim of righteousness. It is only to Jesus that the believer can go to, as a source of righteousness, and to claim that one is righteous through the Law is actually blasphemous.

It is somewhat amusing that Judaizers use Matt 5:17-19 to "prove" the need to keep the commandments, as they don't keep every "jot and tittle" of the Law because it can't be done without the Temple and Levitical priesthood.

I realize this doesn't answer your question regarding to Jesus' command to stop observing the Mosaic Law. I will tell you that I believe he may have broken the Levitical law himself, because he touched lepers. Instead of making him unclean, though, he made them clean. His "cleanness" also transfers to the believers who are united with Him in faith.

But, technically, I don't think touching lepers was allowable under the Mosaic Law, even if they are cleansed in the process. Hebrew Roots people have gotten very angry with me when I've discussed this, though.

I don't believe Jesus ever sinned, but at the same time I know he touched lepers and made them clean. It was sort of a roll-back of the curse. He was showing that he has come to reverse the curse.

 

[DeighAnn]

Matthew 11:28-31
28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.


This doesn't mean that you will "stop" keeping the law. It means that when you come to Christ you stop working at the law because you have been given rest.

But, counter to what you said, you never kept the law to begin with. Maybe you thought you did, and maybe you think you still do. But without Christ you can do nothing.

Does anyone find it strange, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG?
You have been calling me a Pharisee and a Judaizer. Post after post after post. Yet, here in your own post, you 100% agree with what I have been saying. What does that make you? What kind of credibility could a person who would do such a thing ever possibly bring to anyone ever again?

I don't think it is even possible for the HOLY Spirit to dwell inside someone who would/could and does such things. Day after day, the wording of your posts constantly insinuating me to be lacking in the Holy Spirit. I am done, I need not another word from you. I ignore you.

Go ahead you and your buddies, laugh it off, blow it off, turn it back around on me because it obviously isn't about the truth. It isn't about the Lord. It is all carnal. Your very fruit screams out the truth. Post #303 Was it your first? Wow.

 

[DeighAnn]

been away for a few days, no internet access, I see nothing has changed. mr. gardener is still pushing the Law / Sabbath for salvation lie. ( which when he first came here he denied he was doing, guess being deceptive is o.k under his version of law keeping).

mr bear is continuing his non-sensical ramblings , maybe he should go back to pushing 1st Enoch, at least that was easier to follow.

and peter is still peter. has no clue.

And I would imagine you are just like Grandpa

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Cool..well, firstly, the law does serve the purpose of condemning the sinner of his sinfulness. It exposes the heart of the person. In fact, my position, based on Romans 7-8, is that the law entices the unsaved person to sin.

The person is born with a corrupt, fallen nature that is in rebellion against God. The law shows the person what it means to be in obedience to God, at a certain level. Since he is a rebel at heart, he will sin simply by being exposed to the law. He doesn't want to be in submission to God, so the law exposes is fallen nature. In the case of the young ruler, he was an idolater who worshipped his riches more than he wanted a relationship with God.

Regarding who told us the Mosaic Law was no longer in effect, I would refer to these verses:

Acts 15
Eph 2:13-15
Rom 7:1-6
I Cor 3
Heb 7, 8, 10:1-4
Col 2:16-17
Gal 3, 4

There are other references but these are the ones that come to mind.

Paul and other Jewish Christians continued to observe calendar and dietary laws, as well as physical circumcision, but they were free to observe these shadows and types, without requiring them of other believers, if they wanted. See Acts 21.

Regarding Jesus, he didn't tell us that the Law was no longer in effect, explicitly, but he prophesied the elimination of the Temple in AD 70. The geneologies of the priesthood were destroyed in the fire as well, since they were stored in the Temple complex. Therefore, no one can claim to be a Levitical priest because the ancestry is not provable.

I believe that God intentionally destroyed the Temple, not only as a sign of judgment against Israel, but because, in reality, the whole Mosaic system became idolatrous when the Substance (Reality), Jesus, came on the scene. God was simply destroying all possibility of the Mosaic Law being used as a claim of righteousness. It is only to Jesus that the believer can go to, as a source of righteousness, and to claim that one is righteous through the Law is actually blasphemous and idolatrous. It is looking to something else to meet your needs instead of Jesus.

It is somewhat amusing that Judaizers use Matt 5:17-19 to "prove" the need to keep the commandments, as they don't keep every "jot and tittle" of the Law because it can't be done without the Temple and Levitical priesthood.

I realize this doesn't answer your question regarding to Jesus' command to stop observing the Mosaic Law.

I will tell you that I believe he may have broken the Levitical law himself, because he touched lepers. Instead of making him unclean, though, he made them clean. His "cleanness" also transfers to the believers who are united with Him in faith.

But, technically, I don't think touching lepers was allowable under the Mosaic Law, even if they are cleansed in the process. Hebrew Roots people have gotten very angry with me when I've discussed this, though.

I don't believe Jesus ever sinned, but at the same time I know he touched lepers and made them clean. It was sort of a roll-back of the curse. He was showing that he has come to reverse the curse.

I should have referred to 2 Cor 3, not 1 Cor 3. I don't guess this message board allows editing after you've posted.

 

[DeighAnn]

Being FOREKNOWN? Only occurred, in the O.T.! Con'traire! Con'traire!

I don't think that many have much of a grasp of who this group consists of. I have even heard it said that "God knows everything that is going to happen and that is how He "foreknows". How do you address that sort of ignorance? It leaves me speechless because I don't want to explain 3/4ths of Gods Plan to get to the part where it would be understood. But it really needs to be know because I find a lot of scripture that should be applied to that group is being applied to everyone which is causes more problems. I can't wait till the two witnesses arrive. That should bring a bunch of us together in the same knowledge.

 

[NayborBear]

Romans 9:30-32
30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

Isn't it the weirdest thing that the wicked following his wicked way is People who work at the Law in their own understanding and their own strength??

Not one Carnal Mind would EVER think that in a million years.

Why do you think Paul says that to this Day there remains a vail over the mind of people while reading the OT?

But that vail comes off in Christ....

Matthew 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

If you could just "lose the tradition of man", in a "rightly dividing" the book of Deuteronomy FROM "THE LAW", as it HAD BECOME, and what it was called, not only by Jesus, but, also by His Disciples and Apostles, through out the N.T.?
You would be "pressing on", to the Higher Calling of God!
You would find it's not one's own understanding, but, that which the Father reveals to one.
But, yes! It is one's own strength that one does "spiritual sacrificing/s!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I don't think that many have much of a grasp of who this group consists of. I have even heard it said that "God knows everything that is going to happen and that is how He "foreknows". How do you address that sort of ignorance? It leaves me speechless because I don't want to explain 3/4ths of Gods Plan to get to the part where it would be understood. But it really needs to be know because I find a lot of scripture that should be applied to that group is being applied to everyone which is causes more problems. I can't wait till the two witnesses arrive. That should bring a bunch of us together in the same knowledge.

How do we address the omniscience of God??

I mean really???

 

[NayborBear]

The only people who are blind are those who think they can obey the law

The law demands perfection you were shown this when you tried to say the law makes a thing for unintentional sin. Only to be shown that even unintentional sin requires blood sacrifice for forgiveness

It is one thing to desire righteous living. It is another to think righteous living comes from the law

You think you had a relationship with god BEFORE you were saved. While you were under the curse of the law. If you can not understand how impossible this is how can you expect to understand the law itself you and peter aka follow his steps are two parts of the same mold you think anyone who disagrees with you hates god. And think your experiences prove your right

He can count on the fact I refuse to acknowledge his crap anymore and your almost there you both refuse to answer questions. And when you get pushed you get angry and start attacking

You can not preach obedience when you are living in sin that just makes you hypocrites. We all just pray one day both of you see this fact




.

Tis sad, people love their lie, more then the God of Israel.

(hint: The "Holy Annointed" of Israel? Is NOT the God of Israel!)

 

[NayborBear]

I don't think that many have much of a grasp of who this group consists of. I have even heard it said that "God knows everything that is going to happen and that is how He "foreknows". How do you address that sort of ignorance? It leaves me speechless because I don't want to explain 3/4ths of Gods Plan to get to the part where it would be understood. But it really needs to be know because I find a lot of scripture that should be applied to that group is being applied to everyone which is causes more problems. I can't wait till the two witnesses arrive. That should bring a bunch of us together in the same knowledge.

Because they have a "clock?" And, don't know what time it is! YET!

 

[KJV1611]

Good Morning KJV,

Heb 10:38-39 KJV+ NowG1161 theG3588 justG1342 shall liveG2198 byG1537 faith:G4102 butG2532 ifG1437 any man draw back,G5288 myG3450 soulG5590 shall have no pleasureG2106 G3756 inG1722 him.G846 (39) ButG1161 weG2249 areG2070 notG3756 of them who draw backG5289 untoG1519 perdition;G684 butG235 of them that believeG4102 to the savingG1519 G4047 of the soul.G5590

I have no problem identifying the "we" as "The Just". Just being G1342


G1342
δίκαιος
dikaios
Thayer Definition:
1) righteous, observing divine laws

It stands to reason too. When you recall the call to repentance, when we were "drawn in" to repent is was directly related to the divine laws. Yes? Yes, and this path which began with our condemnation "under the Law" is now one of a new heart, the promise of having His Laws written upon our hearts. When we do not let dogmas or incorrect doctrine stand in the way of receiving the long awaited renewing, we can find a New Creation which sees the Divine Laws as something new and beautiful. But, until then the Law is dark and condemning. But this is not the plan for us. As Christians saved by grace we are set aright with God and put on the path to establish the law by faith. Hope this helps.
SG

I agree we the we is believers. Who do you think the ones who draw back unto perdition are?

 

[NayborBear]

How do we address the omniscience of God??

I mean really???

Paul did! Peter did! Jesus did!

But you can't?

Shocking!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I agree we the we is believers. Who do you think the ones who draw back unto perdition are?

I could be wrong, But I think he said he admits the “we” are law observers

 

[KJV1611]

I could be wrong, But I think he said he admits the “we” are law observers

I'm not sure either as far as being saved/staying saved goes. My question for those of that mindset would be - how much sin is too much?

 

[Marcelo]

Cool..well, firstly, the law does serve the purpose of condemning the sinner of his sinfulness. It exposes the heart of the person. In fact, my position, based on Romans 7-8, is that the law entices the unsaved person to sin.

The person is born with a corrupt, fallen nature that is in rebellion against God. The law shows the person what it means to be in obedience to God, at a certain level. Since he is a rebel at heart, he will sin simply by being exposed to the law. He doesn't want to be in submission to God, so the law exposes is fallen nature. In the case of the young ruler, he was an idolater who worshipped his riches more than he wanted a relationship with God.

Regarding who told us the Mosaic Law was no longer in effect, I would refer to these verses:

Acts 15
Eph 2:13-15
Rom 7:1-6
I Cor 3
Heb 7, 8, 10:1-4
Col 2:16-17
Gal 3, 4

There are other references but these are the ones that come to mind.

Paul and other Jewish Christians continued to observe calendar and dietary laws, as well as physical circumcision, but they were free to observe these shadows and types, without requiring them of other believers, if they wanted. See Acts 21.

Regarding Jesus, he didn't tell us that the Law was no longer in effect, explicitly, but he prophesied the elimination of the Temple in AD 70. The geneologies of the priesthood were destroyed in the fire as well, since they were stored in the Temple complex. Therefore, no one can claim to be a Levitical priest because the ancestry is not provable.

I believe that God intentionally destroyed the Temple, not only as a sign of judgment against Israel, but because, in reality, the whole Mosaic system became idolatrous when the Substance, Jesus, came on the scene. God was simply destroying all possibility of the Mosaic Law being used as a claim of righteousness. It is only to Jesus that the believer can go to, as a source of righteousness, and to claim that one is righteous through the Law is actually blasphemous.

It is somewhat amusing that Judaizers use Matt 5:17-19 to "prove" the need to keep the commandments, as they don't keep every "jot and tittle" of the Law because it can't be done without the Temple and Levitical priesthood.

I realize this doesn't answer your question regarding to Jesus' command to stop observing the Mosaic Law. I will tell you that I believe he may have broken the Levitical law himself, because he touched lepers. Instead of making him unclean, though, he made them clean. His "cleanness" also transfers to the believers who are united with Him in faith.

But, technically, I don't think touching lepers was allowable under the Mosaic Law, even if they are cleansed in the process. Hebrew Roots people have gotten very angry with me when I've discussed this, though.

I don't believe Jesus ever sinned, but at the same time I know he touched lepers and made them clean. It was sort of a roll-back of the curse. He was showing that he has come to reverse the curse.

The two of us are of one mind that it was mainly Paul – not Jesus -- who told us to stop keeping the Law of Moses.

Yes, Paul and other Jewish Christians continued to observe some ordinances; there was a long transition period between the Old and the New Covenant

Regarding the young rich ruler, the widespread interpretation is that he was an idolater who worshiped his riches. Most theologians believe that the physical Jesus preached to all nations and naturally they have to explain away why the Lord said: “Sell all you have”. I think Jesus was simply expounding the Law because Paul said something completely different: “Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment”.

What you said about the destruction of the Temple is very interesting; I had never thought of that.

My last question is this: Do you agree that the earthly Jesus mainly preached the Law of Moses and that he used Paul and other apostles to teach us the New Covenant doctrine?