Christ kept the Law of Moses, so....
- Thread starter ServantoftheMostHigh
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The new covenant that Jesus estabished with His blood.
But what was the old and what is the new?
People are quick to agree that we are under the new covenant but there are many distorted ideas about what the old and new covenants are.
The agreement made by God and Israel at siani failed in the first week (golden calf), but the new didn't start until Jesus's death.
The fault was not in the laws that God established.
The fault was in the attitude of the people.
Exo 19:8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.
We will do it ourselves, we will save ourselves, we will do it. = the old covenant.
Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Jesus did it for us and we can have the law fulfilled in us by letting Jesus walk in us.. Not by might but by the power of Christ within. = the new covenant.
Zec 4:6 ....saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts.
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.....
Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
But what was the old and what is the new?
People are quick to agree that we are under the new covenant but there are many distorted ideas about what the old and new covenants are.
The agreement made by God and Israel at siani failed in the first week (golden calf), but the new didn't start until Jesus's death.
The fault was not in the laws that God established.
The fault was in the attitude of the people.
Exo 19:8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.
We will do it ourselves, we will save ourselves, we will do it. = the old covenant.
Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Jesus did it for us and we can have the law fulfilled in us by letting Jesus walk in us.. Not by might but by the power of Christ within. = the new covenant.
Zec 4:6 ....saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts.
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.....
Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
-
1
- Show all
1 Corinthians 6 is Paul criticizing believers who take each other to court with lawsuits (to be judged by the unrighteous based on THEIR law) instead of settling the matter internally. Again, lawsuits under secular law.
He then speaks to the issue at hand; why are they continuing to commit sin against each other and against God to even have lawsuits, saying the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of heaven (he then lists several major sins, particularly sexual sins). He tells them they have been washed from doing those things.
Paul then begins listing counter-statements that HIS READERS may say, while answered them (remember these are new gentile converts coming from a pagan background still committing sins).
- all things are lawful unto me (i.e. I am allowed to do anything), but all things arent beneficial
- all things are lawful for me, but I will not let it rule over me
- food is for the belly and the belly for food, but God will destroy both
Notice that these statements not only challenge what Paul just wrote, but also challenge the ruling the council gave to gentiles to avoid fornication, eating meat with blood, eating strangled meat, and avoiding idolatry. This is why Paul answered right back.
"Your body is meant for the lord, not for sexual immorality"
----
But let's consider for a moment whether Paul was making statements about himself. Would Paul cut into his criticism of them to say he's personally allowed to do all the things they were doing? Does that fit? Let's see...
"Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God...but all things are lawful for me to do just not beneficial."
It's lawful for Paul to have homosexual relations??
Why would Paul criticize them but then throw it in their face that he's exempt? It would create a situation where God is playing favorites, which is exactly what the pharisees would do.
----
Next, let's address when Paul speaks about eating whatever is placed in front of you. Chapter 10 follows the same pattern: Paul criticizes, then he speaks for the reader (almost mockingly), only to answer it.
1 Cor 10:1-22 - Paul criticizes their idolatry.
1 Cor 10:23-24 - "all things are lawful/allowed...all things are lawful/allowed."
1 Cor 10:25-33 - Paul answers the challenge saying "no one should seek their own good but the good of others", and then gives examples.
1 Cor 10:27
If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you choose to go, eat what's placed in front of you if you dont know where it came from. Why? Because you don't want to put a stumbling block in front of someone you're trying to save. However, if it's revealed the food was offered to idols don't eat it because you can't commune with the lord and with devils.
----
The law is maintained, but it is covered by mercy for the unbeliever and for the new convert who was a former pagan. We are saved first while we are yet sinners, and then begins the process of sanctification afterward, when we learn to walk righteously in obedience more and more.
Paul wasn't himself declaring all things are lawful to do.
He then speaks to the issue at hand; why are they continuing to commit sin against each other and against God to even have lawsuits, saying the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of heaven (he then lists several major sins, particularly sexual sins). He tells them they have been washed from doing those things.
Paul then begins listing counter-statements that HIS READERS may say, while answered them (remember these are new gentile converts coming from a pagan background still committing sins).
- all things are lawful unto me (i.e. I am allowed to do anything), but all things arent beneficial
- all things are lawful for me, but I will not let it rule over me
- food is for the belly and the belly for food, but God will destroy both
Notice that these statements not only challenge what Paul just wrote, but also challenge the ruling the council gave to gentiles to avoid fornication, eating meat with blood, eating strangled meat, and avoiding idolatry. This is why Paul answered right back.
"Your body is meant for the lord, not for sexual immorality"
----
But let's consider for a moment whether Paul was making statements about himself. Would Paul cut into his criticism of them to say he's personally allowed to do all the things they were doing? Does that fit? Let's see...
"Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God...but all things are lawful for me to do just not beneficial."
It's lawful for Paul to have homosexual relations??
Why would Paul criticize them but then throw it in their face that he's exempt? It would create a situation where God is playing favorites, which is exactly what the pharisees would do.
----
Next, let's address when Paul speaks about eating whatever is placed in front of you. Chapter 10 follows the same pattern: Paul criticizes, then he speaks for the reader (almost mockingly), only to answer it.
1 Cor 10:1-22 - Paul criticizes their idolatry.
1 Cor 10:23-24 - "all things are lawful/allowed...all things are lawful/allowed."
1 Cor 10:25-33 - Paul answers the challenge saying "no one should seek their own good but the good of others", and then gives examples.
1 Cor 10:27
If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you choose to go, eat what's placed in front of you if you dont know where it came from. Why? Because you don't want to put a stumbling block in front of someone you're trying to save. However, if it's revealed the food was offered to idols don't eat it because you can't commune with the lord and with devils.
----
The law is maintained, but it is covered by mercy for the unbeliever and for the new convert who was a former pagan. We are saved first while we are yet sinners, and then begins the process of sanctification afterward, when we learn to walk righteously in obedience more and more.
Paul wasn't himself declaring all things are lawful to do.
first you have to know what righteousness is… notice I’m going to the Bible because what I think doesn’t mean anything!
Deuteronomy 6:25 And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the LORD our God, as he hath commanded us.q
You said your righteousness came through Jesus Christ now let see what the Bible says!
Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Deuteronomy 6:25 And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the LORD our God, as he hath commanded us.q
You said your righteousness came through Jesus Christ now let see what the Bible says!
Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
My last two sentences summarized what I was saying overall. But below is what I'm saying about Corinthians 10...
"If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you choose to go..."
[Q: why would one choose to go? A: Not for fun or for pleasure...not to hang out...but to witness to the unbeliever for their salvation. This premise is important because it establishes that Paul's instructions were to Melchizedek priests of God, i.e. the believer, for the purpose of preparing them for our mission.]
"...eat what's placed in front of you if you don't know where it came from."
[Meaning, whether or not it was sacrificed to idols, maintaining the context established in the chapter. Any food that's not allowed is not up for debate, such as food with blood in it (rare). One can clearly see that there is blood in it. No, Paul is speaking about food that seems fine to eat without any additional information to disqualify it.]
"...Why? Because you don't want to put a stumbling block in front of someone you're trying to save."
[Meaning, don't sit down and start interrogating the unbeliever as to how it was prepared and whether they prayed over the food in the name of "mithra" to "zeus" or "satan". You are their guest. You accepted their offer to eat with them so eat the otherwise normal-looking food. Because interrogating them could come across as condemning when you're trying to save them.]
"However, if it's revealed the food was offered to idols don't eat it because you can't commune with the lord and with devils."
[Meaning, if they volunteer that information to you, then establish your boundary and say you can not eat it out of respect for your Master who you pray to for your meal. Why? Because then YOU KNOW where it came from and THEY KNOW where it came from. You thank the Living God for all your meals so, of course, you're not sacrificing to idols, but it could send the wrong message to the unbeliever that what they are doing is ok.].
---
It's a fair question so thanks.
I imagine Paul had to constantly deal with the same kinds of extremist thinking that we still deal with today. Say the law still applies after Christ and folks go to the extreme thinking all 613 as if every law has ever applied to every single person even before Christ's work. Say we must stop sinning and folks go to the extreme thinking that means one must be perfect from day one. Say that "Leviticus" - as it was given - is no longer necessary after Christ and extreme thinking leads us to toss out all of the law.
We must remain reasonable and remain within the context of the truth as it is revealed, in the order it is revealed.
"If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you choose to go..."
[Q: why would one choose to go? A: Not for fun or for pleasure...not to hang out...but to witness to the unbeliever for their salvation. This premise is important because it establishes that Paul's instructions were to Melchizedek priests of God, i.e. the believer, for the purpose of preparing them for our mission.]
"...eat what's placed in front of you if you don't know where it came from."
[Meaning, whether or not it was sacrificed to idols, maintaining the context established in the chapter. Any food that's not allowed is not up for debate, such as food with blood in it (rare). One can clearly see that there is blood in it. No, Paul is speaking about food that seems fine to eat without any additional information to disqualify it.]
"...Why? Because you don't want to put a stumbling block in front of someone you're trying to save."
[Meaning, don't sit down and start interrogating the unbeliever as to how it was prepared and whether they prayed over the food in the name of "mithra" to "zeus" or "satan". You are their guest. You accepted their offer to eat with them so eat the otherwise normal-looking food. Because interrogating them could come across as condemning when you're trying to save them.]
"However, if it's revealed the food was offered to idols don't eat it because you can't commune with the lord and with devils."
[Meaning, if they volunteer that information to you, then establish your boundary and say you can not eat it out of respect for your Master who you pray to for your meal. Why? Because then YOU KNOW where it came from and THEY KNOW where it came from. You thank the Living God for all your meals so, of course, you're not sacrificing to idols, but it could send the wrong message to the unbeliever that what they are doing is ok.].
---
It's a fair question so thanks.
I imagine Paul had to constantly deal with the same kinds of extremist thinking that we still deal with today. Say the law still applies after Christ and folks go to the extreme thinking all 613 as if every law has ever applied to every single person even before Christ's work. Say we must stop sinning and folks go to the extreme thinking that means one must be perfect from day one. Say that "Leviticus" - as it was given - is no longer necessary after Christ and extreme thinking leads us to toss out all of the law.
We must remain reasonable and remain within the context of the truth as it is revealed, in the order it is revealed.
-
1
- Show all
The Law is the issue that has to be dealt with in order to bring us into a right relationship with God. "Know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified"
(Galatians 2:16). Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
This passage reveals that the Law cannot justify or make righteous any man in God’s sight, which is why God sent His Son to completely fulfill the requirements of the Law for all those who would ever believe in Him.
Christ Jesus redeemed us from the curse that has been brought through the law by becoming a curse for us (Galatians 3:13) Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
. He substituted Himself in our place and upon the cross took the punishment that is justly ours so that we are no longer under the curse of the Law. In doing so, He fulfilled and upheld the requirements of the Law. This does not mean that Christians are to be lawless, as some advocate today—a teaching called antinomianism. Rather, it means that we are free from the Mosaic Law and instead under the law of Christ, which is to love God with all of our being and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.
Christ became the end of the Law by virtue of what He did on earth through His sinless life and His sacrifice on the cross. So, the Law no longer has any bearing over us because its demands have been fully met in the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith in Christ who satisfied the righteous demands of the Law restores us into a pleasing relationship with God and keeps us there. No longer under the penalty of the Law, we now live under the law of grace in the love of God.
(Galatians 2:16). Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
This passage reveals that the Law cannot justify or make righteous any man in God’s sight, which is why God sent His Son to completely fulfill the requirements of the Law for all those who would ever believe in Him.
Christ Jesus redeemed us from the curse that has been brought through the law by becoming a curse for us (Galatians 3:13) Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
. He substituted Himself in our place and upon the cross took the punishment that is justly ours so that we are no longer under the curse of the Law. In doing so, He fulfilled and upheld the requirements of the Law. This does not mean that Christians are to be lawless, as some advocate today—a teaching called antinomianism. Rather, it means that we are free from the Mosaic Law and instead under the law of Christ, which is to love God with all of our being and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.
Christ became the end of the Law by virtue of what He did on earth through His sinless life and His sacrifice on the cross. So, the Law no longer has any bearing over us because its demands have been fully met in the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith in Christ who satisfied the righteous demands of the Law restores us into a pleasing relationship with God and keeps us there. No longer under the penalty of the Law, we now live under the law of grace in the love of God.
He fulfilled the law of Sacrifice, because he was the perfect sacrifice
Hebrews 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Hebrews 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Hebrews 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
Hebrews 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Hebrews 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Hebrews 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
The law of Sacrifice could not be justified because they would willfully sin and offer up a sacrifice but having faith in Christ we stay obedient the the law. 1 Samuel 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
Let see what Paul said:
Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
Romans 7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
Romans 7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.