Under Law or Under Grace

[romans113336]

For anyone being harassed by "Torah observant" Christians, or who has legitimate questions about whether to serve by the Torah:

1. The Law has jurisdiction only over the living Jew (Gentiles never were under Law but were "without the Law")--and, since believers share in Christ's death and resurrection, the Law, Itself, commands the release of the Jewish believers from their obligation to serve God by the means of the Law (the Rabbis agree with Paul--both came from the Pharisaic tradition.)

2. Gentile Christians who do not have the Law can qualify as doers of the Law.
For this reason, for Christians to distinguish themselves from other Christians with the label "Torah observant" can infer a false accusation that everyone else is "lawless": God Himself teaches us how to love one another, writing His Laws on our hearts and minds, which love fulfills the Law, so, Gentiles who walk after the Spirit, not after the flesh, bear the fruit of the Spirit against which there can be no Law.
Therefore, it is an error to accuse those who do not serve by the Law, but by Grace, of "lawlessness".

3. "Why, in Acts, did Paul prove he walked orderly and kept the Law?"
i. He did keep the Law:
a. His dying to the Law, not going back to It, was his living by the Law, since the Law, Itself, commands his freedom from the Law (to return to the Law would have been "illegal")
b. By the Spirit writing God's Law on his heart, he kept the righteous requirement of the Law
ii. Paul became a Jew to win Jewish souls to God--it would've been inopportune to explain his doctrine to the Jewish audience in Jerusalem, since there were undoubtedly countless false Jewish brothers, and plenty of Jewish onlookers.
iii. Jesus said taking vows was of the evil one, so when Paul takes vows, it must be artificial, for the sake of his Jewish audience, not something being done in seriousness before God, since vows are an affront to God. Jesus said to be shrewd as serpents and harmless as doves--Paul was being deceptive, but not harming anyone, just trying to do his best to not cause anyone to stumble at the Gospel.
iv. If it was not true that he taught Jewish believers they weren't obligated to serve by Torah, how did the Jews in Jerusalem get that impression?

 

[evyaniy]

No one can be fully Torah observant because it required animal sacrifice for sins up to the time the true Lamb of YAH offered Himself as the Sacrifice for sin, once and for all. The Law is awesome and led the Son to the cross to save us. It was His path to Life and being raised from the dead for His obedience in giving His Life to save us. There is still much we can learn from the Law especially in how it relates to the Son. The sacrifices and Feasts point to Him and He was following the greatest commandments to love YAH with all His heart, soul, mind and strength and His neighbor as Himself which He did by saving us as the Law and His Father required of Him.

 

[romans113336]

No one can be fully Torah observant because it required animal sacrifice for sins up to the time the true Lamb of YAH offered Himself as the Sacrifice for sin, once and for all. The Law is awesome and led the Son to the cross to save us. It was His path to Life and being raised from the dead for His obedience in giving His Life to save us. There is still much we can learn from the Law especially in how it relates to the Son. The sacrifices and Feasts point to Him and He was following the greatest commandments to love YAH with all His heart, soul, mind and strength and His neighbor as Himself which He did by saving us as the Law and His Father required of Him.

I shared the information to help anyone who is confused about the doctrine "not under Law but under Grace", or who is being bullied by "Torah observant" Christians, suss the details out.

"Partial" or "full" "Torah observance" sounds like it won't help resolve the point for anyone confused, since it doesn't get to the heart of the issue that the Law applies only to a living Jew.

All arguments about the issue are ended by Paul's doctrine, and the prisoners of the lies can go free.

That is my hope in sharing the information--that anyone caught in the lie will be helped to be set free.

I agree with you that reading the Torah can be edifying, if done with the help of the Spirit, and that may be an important element to touch on, so I'm glad you brought that point up.

 

[JacobMartinMertens]

For anyone being harassed by "Torah observant" Christians, or who has legitimate questions about whether to serve by the Torah:

1. The Law has jurisdiction only over the living Jew (Gentiles never were under Law but were "without the Law")--and, since believers share in Christ's death and resurrection, the Law, Itself, commands the release of the Jewish believers from their obligation to serve God by the means of the Law (the Rabbis agree with Paul--both came from the Pharisaic tradition.)

2. Gentile Christians who do not have the Law can qualify as doers of the Law.
For this reason, for Christians to distinguish themselves from other Christians with the label "Torah observant" can infer a false accusation that everyone else is "lawless": God Himself teaches us how to love one another, writing His Laws on our hearts and minds, which love fulfills the Law, so, Gentiles who walk after the Spirit, not after the flesh, bear the fruit of the Spirit against which there can be no Law.
Therefore, it is an error to accuse those who do not serve by the Law, but by Grace, of "lawlessness".

3. "Why, in Acts, did Paul prove he walked orderly and kept the Law?"
i. He did keep the Law:
a. His dying to the Law, not going back to It, was his living by the Law, since the Law, Itself, commands his freedom from the Law (to return to the Law would have been "illegal")
b. By the Spirit writing God's Law on his heart, he kept the righteous requirement of the Law
ii. Paul became a Jew to win Jewish souls to God--it would've been inopportune to explain his doctrine to the Jewish audience in Jerusalem, since there were undoubtedly countless false Jewish brothers, and plenty of Jewish onlookers.
iii. Jesus said taking vows was of the evil one, so when Paul takes vows, it must be artificial, for the sake of his Jewish audience, not something being done in seriousness before God, since vows are an affront to God. Jesus said to be shrewd as serpents and harmless as doves--Paul was being deceptive, but not harming anyone, just trying to do his best to not cause anyone to stumble at the Gospel.
iv. If it was not true that he taught Jewish believers they weren't obligated to serve by Torah, how did the Jews in Jerusalem get that impression?

God gave the new covenant to Israel because they had become disobedient to the Law. Having broken the Law, God had to bring Israel back to Himself.

Jeremiah 31:31-34 NASB20 - "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers on the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD. "For this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares the LORD: "I will put My law within them and write it on their heart; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. "They will not teach again, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," declares the LORD, "for I will forgive their wrongdoing, and their sin I will no longer remember."

 

[romans113336]

God gave the new covenant to Israel because they had become disobedient to the Law. Having broken the Law, God had to bring Israel back to Himself.

Jeremiah 31:31-34 NASB20 - "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers on the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD. "For this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares the LORD: "I will put My law within them and write it on their heart; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. "They will not teach again, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," declares the LORD, "for I will forgive their wrongdoing, and their sin I will no longer remember."

Thank you.

 

[romans113336]

God gave the new covenant to Israel because they had become disobedient to the Law. Having broken the Law, God had to bring Israel back to Himself.

Jeremiah 31:31-34 NASB20 - "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers on the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD. "For this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares the LORD: "I will put My law within them and write it on their heart; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. "They will not teach again, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," declares the LORD, "for I will forgive their wrongdoing, and their sin I will no longer remember."

You also recognize Gentile believers are part of the "commonwealth" of Israel correct--"grafted in"?

 

[JacobMartinMertens]

You also recognize Gentile believers are part of the "commonwealth" of Israel correct--"grafted in"?

I have looked at different translations. But I realize that I am a Gentile believer. I don't know that I am a part of the commonwealth of Israel, but that has been a consideration of mine. In Ephesians Paul appears to continue writing to Gentiles, for example in the third and fourth chapter.

Thank you. If you have any further questions for me or a need for clarification from me, I am much obliged.

I do believe that I am a Gentile branch grafted into the vine. But I don't know what the vine is. I was not born Jewish and I am not an Israelite, in spite of my life confusion and delusion about it, saying that I am.

 

[romans113336]

I have looked at different translations. But I realize that I am a Gentile believer. I don't know that I am a part of the commonwealth of Israel, but that has been a consideration of mine. In Ephesians Paul appears to continue writing to Gentiles, for example in the third and fourth chapter.

Thank you. If you have any further questions for me or a need for clarification from me, I am much obliged.

I do believe that I am a Gentile branch grafted into the vine. But I don't know what the vine is. I was not born Jewish and I am not an Israelite, in spite of my life confusion and delusion about it, saying that I am.

It's sort of tangential to the topic, so I'll leave it as is.

 

[Magenta]

I have looked at different translations. But I realize that I am a Gentile believer. I don't know that I am a part of the commonwealth of Israel, but that has been a consideration of mine. In Ephesians Paul appears to continue writing to Gentiles, for example in the third and fourth chapter.

Thank you. If you have any further questions for me or a need for clarification from me, I am much obliged.

I do believe that I am a Gentile branch grafted into the vine. But I don't know what the vine is. I was not born Jewish and I am not an Israelite, in spite of my life confusion and delusion about it, saying that I am.

Jesus is the Vine.

 

[JacobMartinMertens]

Jesus is the Vine.

You are correct. Thank you.

John 15:1, 4-5 NASB20 - "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. ... "Remain in Me, and I in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit of itself but must remain in the vine, so neither [can] you unless you remain in Me. "I am the vine, you are the branches; the one who remains in Me, and I in him bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.

It is the root that I was thinking, but I have known about the true vine before.

Romans 11:16-18 NASB20 - If the first piece [of dough] is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are as well. But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, [remember that] it is not you who supports the root, but the root [supports] you.

I suppose that this does not say that I am a Gentile branch.

 

[evyaniy]

It's sort of tangential to the topic, so I'll leave it as is.

Maybe not a part of the commonwealth of Israel, but a part of the Israel of YAH.

Galatians 6

14 But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Adonai Yeshua the Messiah, through Whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 For in Messiah Yeshua neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. 16 As many as walk by this rule, peace and mercy be on them, and on the Israel of EL(Theos, Elohim, YAH, God).

 

[JacobMartinMertens]

Maybe not a part of the commonwealth of Israel, but a part of the Israel of YAH.

Galatians 6

14 But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Adonai Yeshua the Messiah, through Whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 For in Messiah Yeshua neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. 16 As many as walk by this rule, peace and mercy be on them, and on the Israel of EL(Theos, Elohim, YAH, God).

Was this a remnant (of Israel) or were Gentiles included as a part of the Israel of God?

Galatians 6:16 NASB20 - And all who will follow this rule, peace and mercy [be] upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

 

[Mem]

The root is the extension of the vine, Rev 5:5 the Root of David and Romans 15:12 the Root of Jesse, both speak of Jesus in relationship to the natural branches, David and his father Jesus. The wild branches are not of the same root yet are genetically compatible that it is possible that they be grafted in, although it will still produce 'wild' fruit. Like a Meyer lemon, which is not a lemon but cross between a citron and a mandarin/pomelo hybrid (native to China) whose young branches can be grafted into a mature native lemon stalk which will nourish it to produce more fruit, since a characteristic is that it fruits prolifically, sooner... so, yes, you're still a Meyer lemon although you live because of the root of the natural branches, supports you. However, you are also, now, a son of God, whereas no gentile qualified to be so-called, but I'm not exactly confident in that assumption. At any rate, Christ revealed the Father's love toward the world; for God so loved the world...

to the natural branches
Deuteronomy 14:
1 You are sons of the LORD your God; do not cut yourselves or shave your foreheads on behalf of the dead,

to the wild branches also
1 John 3:
1 Behold what manner of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God. And that is what we are!

Everyone
1 John 5
1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God,

 

[romans113336]

Maybe not a part of the commonwealth of Israel, but a part of the Israel of YAH.

Galatians 6

14 But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Adonai Yeshua the Messiah, through Whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 For in Messiah Yeshua neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. 16 As many as walk by this rule, peace and mercy be on them, and on the Israel of EL(Theos, Elohim, YAH, God).

I think the topic deserves its own Thread, so someone should start that up, that way things can stay on topic here.

 

[romans113336]

For anyone being harassed by "Torah observant" Christians, or who has legitimate questions about whether to serve by the Torah:

1. The Law has jurisdiction only over the living Jew (Gentiles never were under Law but were "without the Law")--and, since believers share in Christ's death and resurrection, the Law, Itself, commands the release of the Jewish believers from their obligation to serve God by the means of the Law (the Rabbis agree with Paul--both came from the Pharisaic tradition.)

2. Gentile Christians who do not have the Law can qualify as doers of the Law.
For this reason, for Christians to distinguish themselves from other Christians with the label "Torah observant" can infer a false accusation that everyone else is "lawless": God Himself teaches us how to love one another, writing His Laws on our hearts and minds, which love fulfills the Law, so, Gentiles who walk after the Spirit, not after the flesh, bear the fruit of the Spirit against which there can be no Law.
Therefore, it is an error to accuse those who do not serve by the Law, but by Grace, of "lawlessness".

3. "Why, in Acts, did Paul prove he walked orderly and kept the Law?"
i. He did keep the Law:
a. His dying to the Law, not going back to It, was his living by the Law, since the Law, Itself, commands his freedom from the Law (to return to the Law would have been "illegal")
b. By the Spirit writing God's Law on his heart, he kept the righteous requirement of the Law
ii. Paul became a Jew to win Jewish souls to God--it would've been inopportune to explain his doctrine to the Jewish audience in Jerusalem, since there were undoubtedly countless false Jewish brothers, and plenty of Jewish onlookers.
iii. Jesus said taking vows was of the evil one, so when Paul takes vows, it must be artificial, for the sake of his Jewish audience, not something being done in seriousness before God, since vows are an affront to God. Jesus said to be shrewd as serpents and harmless as doves--Paul was being deceptive, but not harming anyone, just trying to do his best to not cause anyone to stumble at the Gospel.
iv. If it was not true that he taught Jewish believers they weren't obligated to serve by Torah, how did the Jews in Jerusalem get that impression?

I forgot the most important point! I thought I was forgetting something.

4. "Not under Law but under Grace" doesn't mean "go ahead and sin".
Law and Grace are methods of righteousness and justification and eternal life.
Being under the authority of Grace means you're "free from Sin's power to enslave, and now you can be yourself, be a 'slave' to God/righteousness", which is to be at peace with your own mind and actions (you don't have to contradict yourself anymore).

"If you're not under Law, can you commit idolatry?"
No, that's misunderstanding the issue--we do not serve by means of the Law, but by Grace, and by Grace we fulfill the righteous requirement of the Law.

 

[JacobMartinMertens]

I forgot the most important point! I thought I was forgetting something.

4. "Not under Law but under Grace" doesn't mean "go ahead and sin".
Law and Grace are methods of righteousness and justification and eternal life.
Being under the authority of Grace means you're "free from Sin's power to enslave, and now you can be yourself, be a 'slave' to God/righteousness", which is to be at peace with your own mind and actions (you don't have to contradict yourself anymore).

"If you're not under Law, can you commit idolatry?"
No, that's misunderstanding the issue--we do not serve by means of the Law, but by Grace, and by Grace we fulfill the righteous requirement of the Law.

Romans 8:1-4 NASB20 - Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God [did:] sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and [as an offering] for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

 

[JacobMartinMertens]

Would you please clarify what you are saying?

That is not a problem for me. I was trying to encourage you with the verses that talk about the requirement of the Law and how it relates to us.

 

[romans113336]

That is not a problem for me. I was trying to encourage you with the verses that talk about the requirement of the Law and how it relates to us.

I had seen some people on these forums who were dealing with this issue, so I was trying to clarify it for them, and to invite dissenters to discuss, so that they, also, could see things more clearly, and be set free from the lies of the enemy.

 

[JacobMartinMertens]

I had seen some people on these forums who were dealing with this issue, so I was trying to clarify it for them, and invite dissenters to discuss, so that they, also, could see things more clearly, and be set free from the lies of the enemy.

Perfect. It is good to hear of your motivation. I hope I have been helpful. But it may have taken away from what you were saying.

 

[romans113336]

Perfect. It is good to hear of your motivation. I hope I have been helpful. But it may have taken away from what you were saying.

The thing is, from my experience, the issue is already often muddled, so it is important to keep things on topic and concise. Without this, such a discussion is easily derailed. The arguments of the "Torah observant" need to be addressed with perfect clarity, or else the entire effort is a waste.