Teaching Obedience to the Law Unmasked: Neo-Judaism in the Church

[Aaron56]

Galatians, Ephesians, and Hebrews in the New Testament unequivocally teach that the law makes you a slave, the law was what men received as a result of disobedience, refusal to come into the presence of God; they ended up under the law. But there are those who would say, “Well I have a lot of questions then. Number one, how then would the Bible say, quoting David in the Psalms, ‘I delight in your law O Lord, and I meditate on it day and night.’” and, moreover, ‘The law is righteous.’” (“But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night.” Psalm 1:2)

If you say that the law made slaves out of people, how could you also say that the law was righteous? That’s one question. And I have several others from both the Old and the New Testaments.
In addition to that, people say, “But this was the law of God. He wrote it with his own fingers on tablets of stone and Jesus said that He didn’t come to do away with it.” (‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.’” Matthew 5:17)
Let’s begin there. What about the righteousness that is in the law, or for that matter the glory that was in the law?

Whose law was it?

It was the law that God gave.

Why did God give the law?
God gave the law until the Seed should come:
(What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator.” Galatians 3:19)

So then the question is: What was the purpose of the law?

The purpose of the law was to preserve the Jews as a people because the enemy, beginning in the ancient reaches of the Old Testament, was the accuser of the brethren. It meant that if the enemy had any chance to bring an accusation against anyone, his name, Ha-Sataan is that of the prosecutor, the one who brings the charge like he did in the book of Job. What is his intention when he brings a charge against someone? To call down the judgment of God upon a person hopefully for their destruction.

Now were the Jews deserving of this? Of course they were. When God brought them to Mount Sinai and invited them to come up into his presence and they refused, what alternative did that leave God except to destroy them? In fact, God told Moses, he said, “I am going to send the angel of the Lord with you but don’t disobey him because he won’t be tolerant of you. (Exodus 23:20,21) The law was God’s way of protecting Israel from the accuser by setting up punishments, consequences for the infractions of the law, before the infraction occurred. So, once God had spoken, even the enemy was obligated to abide by the rules.

The law then, ironically, though it enslaved Israel, saved Israel… saved Israel from annihilation. This is not about saving people from going to hell; it’s to save them from the consequences, the punishments associated with wrongdoing. It’s like the law may keep you out of prison. If a person is inclined to misbehave, the law may in fact restrain their character and conduct to keep them out of prison. So, the purpose of the law: it was God who gave it, so surely it was God’s law, but why God gave it, and the character of God revealed in and through it are just as important considerations. The character of God was to show mercy, as much mercy as could be shown under the law. That mercy did not include the grace of salvation but it did include the mercy that stayed the hand of God, preventing annihilation.

This served the purpose of God because God was looking forward to the time when the Seed would come because the plan of God was to make humans into his heirs and therefore that they would be preserved until that eventuality, that certainly was consistent with the plan of God. When Israel was unfaithful, God yet showed his mercy. On that day when He brought them out of Egypt and they were assembled at Mount Sinai, except for the fact that it was by the hand of God that they were Egyptian slavery, they were slaves. God had set them free but they were still thinking and acting as slaves. So what did they need? They needed to be made into a nation. They needed to be protected from their enemies. They needed some guarantees for their economy and for their health. And all these things God gave them. What did they do to deserve these things? Nothing. These were the benevolent gestures of God. Did they need these things? Of course they did.
God knew what they needed. Yes they had been freed from Egyptian slavery but beyond that what did they need? Well they needed these things: they needed to be made into a nation. So, the law arranged their relationships to each other and to God, establishing them as a nation. What if God hadn’t given them the law? Then it would have been okay for a man to covet his neighbor’s wife. And if he wanted his neighbor’s wife badly enough there would be nothing wrong with him killing his neighbor to obtain his wife. Well is this anything like what God would have them be? No, of course not.

So the law was righteous in the sense that although they didn’t know what they needed and didn’t know what to ask for, God set it up to protect them and to care for them, but in the sum and substance of the law, in all that the law is, it didn’t touch the transcendent nature of man. It didn’t save anybody’s soul; it didn’t teach them the character of God; it just acted for their best interest. And so when David would see, as debauched as David was—one who would kill another man in order to get his wife, that’s the case of Bath- Sheba and Uriah—when David would see the goodness of God, to himself and to the nation, he, like others before him and like others after him in the New Testament, would comment on the goodness of God.

 

[Aaron56]

What would these people have thought if they could truly experience and see the grace of God that appeared through the Lord Jesus Christ? They would hold opinion with Paul, and they would say, “The administration that brought death and condemnation,” this is 2nd Corinthians 3, “…was glorious, but not glorious when compared to the Spirit of God and the administration of his Spirit.”
So, it was a comparative thing. So, is the law glorious? Was the law righteous? Of course it was glorious because it reflected the goodness of God. And was it righteous? Yes, it showed the benevolent nature of God’s character to people who were rejecting him. So, the law is about God, albeit dim reflections. It says, in fact, that the law was a shadow of good things to come, but the substance is Christ. (“Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” And no one can fail to see that point.

So in these questions about the law someone may ask: Was the law righteous? Yes, because it showed the character of God. Was the law good? Yes, it was good in that it showed the goodness of God. But was the law complete in what man needed and what the law purported to do? The answer is: no. The law was weak in that it did not contain any provision for salvation and indeed it couldn’t.

What about the statement of Jesus in Matthew 5, when He speaks about the law not being done away?

Matthew 5:17-20 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”

And then He goes on to say,

“Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the Kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.”

So is this passage teaching that the law will not, even in the smallest stroke of the pen, disappear? Is that what it is saying? No, of course not.

This is what it is saying: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets…” The first thing you must note is that He is not only speaking about the Law; He is also speaking about the prophets. Now, when a prophecy has been fulfilled, is it any longer standing? No. Can we understand that a prophecy might be fulfilled? Are there any prophecies that were fulfilled? Because he says, “…the Law and the Prophets.” What is an example of a prophecy that was fulfilled?

Consider Isaiah 53, “All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” referencing the scapegoat. all, like sheep, have gone stray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.”

Or you may even choose from that to reference the Passover Lamb. The prophecy of the Lamb was fulfilled, was it not? Is not Jesus the Lamb, according to John the Baptist, “Behold the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world.”?

Did Jesus come and did He die for us? The answer is: Yes, He came and yes, He died for us. Are we then still waiting for this event to occur? No.

John 6:53-54 Jesus said to them, ‘I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”

That is not speaking of cannibalism, it is saying that if you appropriate for yourselves the remedies that I have accomplished for you on the cross, like if you ate the flesh of the lamb then you would have the life that I have promised you.

 

[Aaron56]

So when the Scriptures say, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law and the Prophets. I didn’t come to abolish them, I came to fulfill them.”…Has He fulfilled the Law and has He fulfilled the writings of the Prophets? That is the question, because if He has, here is the applicable Scripture: it says, “…not the least stroke of the pen will in any way disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”

Has everything been accomplished? Well according to Paul’s letter to the Colossians, in Colossians 2:14, he says that Jesus fulfilled the law of ordinances that were against us, that was contrary to us, and He took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.
“Having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.”

The cross then represents the fulfillment of everything that was spoken in type and shadow by the Law and the Prophets that Jesus is referring to here.

Now of course since that time, and in the New Testament, you have had other prophecies and other prophets. The prophecies of that, for example the prophecies of John in the book of Revelation have not all been fulfilled so those prophecies have not yet been fulfilled and Jesus was not referring to them. But the prophecies of the Old Testament that have been fulfilled, and the majority of those prophecies have been fulfilled. There are some, like from the book of Daniel and the 70 weeks of Daniel, or some from Ezekiel that speaks of the dispersion of the Jews and their return, some prophecies like that have not yet been fulfilled. But Jesus will fulfill all of the prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled and has fulfilled the majority of other prophecies, especially the prophecies relating to the Messiah. But all of the Law, He has fulfilled. Therefore, the statement, “Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets… it will never pass away.” That’s simply not true;

He did fulfill the Law and, having fulfilled it, according to Colossians, He took it out of the way and He nailed it to the cross.

 

[Aaron56]

Finally, someone may ask, “Well, should we not learn about our Jewish roots? Should we not learn the Jewish heritage of the Christian faith?” I am definitely not one against learning about various things, but when you lump things together they need to be pulled apart for you to properly see what it is that you have. The Christian faith did not come out of Judaism. Jesus was born of Jewish heritage, in the flesh.

But the Scriptures say in 2nd Corinthians 5: “So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!”

Jesus was a Jew in the flesh, but He was the Son of God. And He did not come to redeem us through the law; he came to redeem us from the law.

The tree, into which we have been grafted in, is not Judaism.

Romans 11: “If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you.”

But the tree is not Jewish, the tree is the Living God, and to be grafted in… we are not grafted into Judaism, we are grafted into a heavenly existence in time. This is the kingdom of God.

You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say that, on one hand, God’s people are lawful Jews and, on another, say that God’s people are people of promise. If salvation was of the law then Christ would not have come. The history of God’s people is not the history of the Jews. Now if you want to learn about the Jews, if you want to learn about Jewish customs and practices, that’s fine. I don’t have anything against that, but do not import those practices into the Christian faith because they do not belong. Jesus, in fact, fulfilled the requirements that the law set up.

You were not saved to become a Jew. You were not saved to be grafted into Judaism. Jesus said, “I am the vine and you are the branches…

“I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.”

The vine is the Living God; the branches are humans. The fruit that is meant to be born on the branch is what is already in the vine. We are heavenly beings, we are born again from heaven and we are living on the earth as heavenly beings in time… the children of God. We are not Jewish, we are not descended from twelve tribes unless indeed we are by the flesh, but that means nothing. If you are a Jew you still need to be saved; you need to be saved through Jesus Christ.

The practice of going back and learning about the Torah, if it is educational, I don’t have anything against it, but for most people it isn’t educational, they are wanting to learn about how to practice Judaism.

If you are involved in that: you have fallen from grace. And if you are involved in teaching people to go back to it then you have become a deceiver because you are deceiving people who did not have to bear the yoke of the law because they were free in Christ, and if you have gone back to teach them that you are participating in a deception.

Now, it may be that you haven’t been warned before, but now you are warned. God is not mocked and God will begin to call to attention and to address this thing, this matter, firmly and directly. So, this is as much of a warning to abandon that because it does not in any way belong in the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ.

You are sons of God; you are not slaves as under the law. Your righteousness is in Christ; it is not in the keeping of the law.

 

[Cameron143]

Finally, someone may ask, “Well, should we not learn about our Jewish roots? Should we not learn the Jewish heritage of the Christian faith?” I am definitely not one against learning about various things, but when you lump things together they need to be pulled apart for you to properly see what it is that you have. The Christian faith did not come out of Judaism. Jesus was born of Jewish heritage, in the flesh.

But the Scriptures say in 2nd Corinthians 5: “So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!”

Jesus was a Jew in the flesh, but He was the Son of God. And He did not come to redeem us through the law; he came to redeem us from the law.

The tree, into which we have been grafted in, is not Judaism.

Romans 11: “If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you.”

But the tree is not Jewish, the tree is the Living God, and to be grafted in… we are not grafted into Judaism, we are grafted into a heavenly existence in time. This is the kingdom of God.

You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say that, on one hand, God’s people are lawful Jews and, on another, say that God’s people are people of promise. If salvation was of the law then Christ would not have come. The history of God’s people is not the history of the Jews. Now if you want to learn about the Jews, if you want to learn about Jewish customs and practices, that’s fine. I don’t have anything against that, but do not import those practices into the Christian faith because they do not belong. Jesus, in fact, fulfilled the requirements that the law set up.

You were not saved to become a Jew. You were not saved to be grafted into Judaism. Jesus said, “I am the vine and you are the branches…

“I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.”

The vine is the Living God; the branches are humans. The fruit that is meant to be born on the branch is what is already in the vine. We are heavenly beings, we are born again from heaven and we are living on the earth as heavenly beings in time… the children of God. We are not Jewish, we are not descended from twelve tribes unless indeed we are by the flesh, but that means nothing. If you are a Jew you still need to be saved; you need to be saved through Jesus Christ.

The practice of going back and learning about the Torah, if it is educational, I don’t have anything against it, but for most people it isn’t educational, they are wanting to learn about how to practice Judaism.

If you are involved in that: you have fallen from grace. And if you are involved in teaching people to go back to it then you have become a deceiver because you are deceiving people who did not have to bear the yoke of the law because they were free in Christ, and if you have gone back to teach them that you are participating in a deception.

Now, it may be that you haven’t been warned before, but now you are warned. God is not mocked and God will begin to call to attention and to address this thing, this matter, firmly and directly. So, this is as much of a warning to abandon that because it does not in any way belong in the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ.

You are sons of God; you are not slaves as under the law. Your righteousness is in Christ; it is not in the keeping of the law.

This is good. You should tape it and put it up on YouTube.

 

[Nehemiah6]

If you say that the law made slaves out of people, how could you also say that the law was righteous?

As paradoxical as it may sound the Law is BOTH righteous and also puts people into bondage. Regarding the Law Paul said this in 1 Timothy 1:
8 But we know that the Law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the Law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

So those who are lawless must understand that there is a Law against lawlessness. But Paul also said that the Law was our "schoolmaster" to bring us to Christ. So this is not an either/or situation. The Law is good as long as it is used lawfully.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

As paradoxical as it may sound the Law is BOTH righteous and also puts people into bondage. Regarding the Law Paul said this in 1 Timothy 1:
8 But we know that the Law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the Law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

So those who are lawless must understand that there is a Law against lawlessness. But Paul also said that the Law was our "schoolmaster" to bring us to Christ. So this is not an either/or situation. The Law is good as long as it is used lawfully.

“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.

But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3:10-12‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:19-20‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭7:4-6‬ ‭

“The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭15:56‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons,

the one by a bondmaid,

the other by a freewoman.

Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants;

the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman ( old covenant from Mount Sinai ) and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, ( covenant made at Sinai when the law was given ) but of the free.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭4:21-22, 24-26, 30-31‬ ‭

this is nOt our word

“These are the words of the covenant, which the LORD commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭29:1‬ ‭KJV‬‬

This is our covenant word

“Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭1:14-15‬ ‭KJV‬‬


“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭24:14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭16:15-16‬ ‭KJV‬‬

we aren’t ancient isreals descendants were part of the ll nations and every creature we want the word that was actually sent to us from God and don’t want the one the apostles explained isnt our word

“But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.


( long debate ) ………forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭15:5-6, 24‬ ‭KJV‬‬

the law being used correctly is to find the witness of Jesus and the gospel foretold within it not to join the group it’s given to the killers and liars and thieves and idolaters …..if we’re in that group we just need to repent and hear the gospel and believe what Jesus taught when he came thats his law

 

[Aaron56]

As paradoxical as it may sound the Law is BOTH righteous and also puts people into bondage. Regarding the Law Paul said this in 1 Timothy 1:
8 But we know that the Law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the Law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

So those who are lawless must understand that there is a Law against lawlessness. But Paul also said that the Law was our "schoolmaster" to bring us to Christ. So this is not an either/or situation. The Law is good as long as it is used lawfully.

Of course. But once we are brought to Christ there is no more need for the school master. This is my point: once we are in Him do not go back to the law. Doing so denies the work of the cross.

Like Passover. The lamb was eaten to remind them of the coming Messiah. Why would we celebrate Passover today if we are in Christ and have benefitted from His death on the cross? We shouldn’t. Doing so declares Christ has not yet come and we are waiting for Him. When we are a new creation we have no use of the old practices that were mere shadows of the reality of His appearing and our redemption.

 

[Mem]

Like Passover. The lamb was eaten to remind them of the coming Messiah. Why would we celebrate Passover today if we are in Christ and have benefitted from His death on the cross? We shouldn’t. Doing so declares Christ has not yet come and we are waiting for Him. When we are a new creation we have no use of the old practices that were mere shadows of the reality of His appearing and our redemption.

1 Corinthians 11 has always befuddled me so, to the point of worry, that I gave up trying to understand it, that is, as I've been told to understand it. I am told, just read it as it is written but, as it is written is exactly why I have difficulty reading it so, I'm left befuddled...and this view provides me an opportunity to consider if I might actually arrive at a clear picture of it, if I can pinpoint the contextual atmosphere of the meaning of v.26 "For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes." Having been told this is what, and how, we are to do this. The suggestion that this verse is given as reason for refraining from it certainly seems to me to fit more tightly within the context that precedes it. As well as explains why so "many among you are weak and sick....and a number of you have fallen asleep (v. 30)"!

Only, I would more readily accept, or reject, this view if I could clarify whether the meaning of "proclaim" is meant as either "declare" or "announce"...

 

[Pilgrimshope]

So when the Scriptures say, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law and the Prophets. I didn’t come to abolish them, I came to fulfill them.”…Has He fulfilled the Law and has He fulfilled the writings of the Prophets? That is the question, because if He has, here is the applicable Scripture: it says, “…not the least stroke of the pen will in any way disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”

Has everything been accomplished? Well according to Paul’s letter to the Colossians, in Colossians 2:14, he says that Jesus fulfilled the law of ordinances that were against us, that was contrary to us, and He took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.
“Having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.”

The cross then represents the fulfillment of everything that was spoken in type and shadow by the Law and the Prophets that Jesus is referring to here.

Now of course since that time, and in the New Testament, you have had other prophecies and other prophets. The prophecies of that, for example the prophecies of John in the book of Revelation have not all been fulfilled so those prophecies have not yet been fulfilled and Jesus was not referring to them. But the prophecies of the Old Testament that have been fulfilled, and the majority of those prophecies have been fulfilled. There are some, like from the book of Daniel and the 70 weeks of Daniel, or some from Ezekiel that speaks of the dispersion of the Jews and their return, some prophecies like that have not yet been fulfilled. But Jesus will fulfill all of the prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled and has fulfilled the majority of other prophecies, especially the prophecies relating to the Messiah. But all of the Law, He has fulfilled. Therefore, the statement, “Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets… it will never pass away.” That’s simply not true;

He did fulfill the Law and, having fulfilled it, according to Colossians, He took it out of the way and He nailed it to the cross.

before he died and rose he said

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5:17-18‬ ‭KJV‬‬

after he died and rose he interpreted

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

Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

And ye are witnesses of these things.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:44-48‬ ‭KJV‬‬

 

[Aaron56]

1 Corinthians 11 has always befuddled me so, to the point of worry, that I gave up trying to understand it, that is, as I've been told to understand it. I am told, just read it as it is written but, as it is written is exactly why I have difficulty reading it so, I'm left befuddled...and this view provides me an opportunity to consider if I might actually arrive at a clear picture of it, if I can pinpoint the contextual atmosphere of the meaning of v.26 "For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes." Having been told this is what, and how, we are to do this. The suggestion that this verse is given as reason for refraining from it certainly seems to me to fit more tightly within the context that precedes it. As well as explains why so "many among you are weak and sick....and a number of you have fallen asleep (v. 30)"!

Only, I would more readily accept, or reject, this view if I could clarify whether the meaning of "proclaim" is meant as either "declare" or "announce"...

Very thoughtful.

The way I see it: since Paul's emphasis is on the unity of the body of Christ, and entrance into the body (and therefore into the presence of God) was by His death alone, the eating of the bread is a corporate act intended to remind each one of the necessity of all members of the body. The wine, to follow up, is the symbol of the covenant that secures our place within Him: the fact that He shed His blood for us and not by anything we did.

If we are in the presence of God then we obtained that place only by Hid shed blood. We cannot say "I have done this, oh God, and therefore I can come into your presence!" People think this way: "I cannot talk to God because I have been too bad" or worse "I CAN talk with God because I have kept the sabbath or obeyed His commandments!" No. Our place with God is only in Christ and the work He has completed on our behalf.

 

[jamessb]

before he died and rose he said

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5:17-18‬ ‭KJV‬‬

after he died and rose he interpreted

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

Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

And ye are witnesses of these things.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:44-48‬ ‭KJV‬‬

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN IN ENGLISH???

 

[Mem]

Very thoughtful.

The way I see it: since Paul's emphasis is on the unity of the body of Christ, and entrance into the body (and therefore into the presence of God) was by His death alone, the eating of the bread is a corporate act intended to remind each one of the necessity of all members of the body. The wine, to follow up, is the symbol of the covenant that secures our place within Him: the fact that He shed His blood for us and not by anything we did.

If we are in the presence of God then we obtained that place only by Hid shed blood. We cannot say "I have done this, oh God, and therefore I can come into your presence!" People think this way: "I cannot talk to God because I have been too bad" or worse "I CAN talk with God because I have kept the sabbath or obeyed His commandments!" No. Our place with God is only in Christ and the work He has completed on our behalf.

I think we agree even if we've come to it differently. Jesus' directive was to remember Him when they partook, and Paul's statement, "for you (noting that he doesn't say 'we') proclaim Christ's death until He comes" made me wonder if this is offering in an accusative tone rather than a matter of significant fact. That is, although it had been eaten up to then in order to proclaim His coming, He had come and so, then, what need would there be to 'foreshadow' the reality...

I don't mean to lead anyone away from it as much as considering whether it is acceptable that I can 'rest' in this instance also.

 

[Aaron56]

I think we agree even if we've come to it differently. Jesus' directive was to remember Him when they partook, and Paul's statement, "for you (noting that he doesn't say 'we') proclaim Christ's death until He comes" made me wonder if this is offering in an accusative tone rather than a matter of significant fact. That is, although it had been eaten up to then in order to proclaim His coming, He had come and so, then, what need would there be to 'foreshadow' the reality...

I don't mean to lead anyone away from it as much as considering whether it is acceptable that I can 'rest' in this instance also.

I see.

I read it as a corrective word, reminding them of their connection in one body. It was a word against sectarianism and division.

"For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it. 19For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you. 20Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper. 21For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk. "

He is saying that they way they eat the Lord's supper is in an unworthy manner. He warns them of the consequences of eating it in an unworthy manner;

"Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. 30For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep."

In short: the cup and bread mean nothing if you are divided in your lifestyle.

 

[Soyeong]

Galatians, Ephesians, and Hebrews in the New Testament unequivocally teach that the law makes you a slave

If God saved the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt in order to put them under slavery to His law, then it would be for slavery that God sets us free, however, Galatians 5:1 says that it is for freedom that God sets us free, so you are not correctly identifying what makes you a slave. In Psalms 119:142, God's law is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is the transgression of God's law that puts us in slavery while it is the truth that sets us free. God gave His law to teach the Israelites how to live as people who have been freed from slavery.

” (“But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night.” Psalm 1:2)

David said repeatedly throughout the Psalms that he loved God's law and delighted in obeying it, which is incompatible with viewing it as being slavery.

Why did God give the law?
God gave the law until the Seed should come:
(What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator.” Galatians 3:19)

In Galatians 3:16-19, a new covenant does not nullify the promise of a covenant that has already been ratified, so it is also true that the New Covenant does not nullify our need to obey God's law in accordance with the promise. Jesus did not go around telling people to stop repenting because God's law has ended, but rather he called for people to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand. In Acts 3:25-26, Jesus was sent as the promised seed to bless us by turning us from our wickedness, not by causing us to be free to be wicked.

So then the question is: What was the purpose of the law?

In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israel might know Him, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the purpose of the law is to teach us how to know God and Jesus, which is eternal life (John 17:3).

That mercy did not include the grace of salvation but it did include the mercy that stayed the hand of God, preventing annihilation.

In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith.

What if God hadn’t given them the law? Then it would have been okay for a man to covet his neighbor’s wife.

Sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), so there was nothing that became sinful when the law was given, but rather the law revealed what has always been and will always be the way to do that.

it didn’t teach them the character of God

and the character of God revealed in and through it

You're contradicting yourself.

“The administration that brought death and condemnation,”

In Romans 10:5-8, it references Deuteronomy 30:11-20 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to saying that God's law is not too difficult to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! The fact that it is a ministry of death for those who refuse to obey God's law is not a very good reason to refuse to obey it.

(“Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” And no one can fail to see that point.

God's holy days are important foreshadows of what is to come, which is why he was encouraging the Colossians to let anyone judge them for continue observing them.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets…”

Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law in contrast with saying that he came not to abolish it, so you should not interpret fulfilling the law as meaning essentially the same thing as abolishing it. Rather, "to fulfil, i.e. to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God's promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo). After Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, he then proceeded to fulfill it six times throughout the rest of Matthew 5 by teaching how to correctly obey it as it should be. According to Galatians 5:14, anyone who has ever loved their neighbor has fulfilled the entire law, so again it refers to correctly obeying it as it should be, moreover, it does not refer to something unique that Jesus did. In Galatians 6:2, bearing one another's burdens fulfills the Law of Christ, yet you do not consistently interpret that as saying that we abolish the Law of Christ by bearing one another's burdens.

“Having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.”

The list of the sins that we have committed was nailed to Christ's cross and he died in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, which has nothing to do with nailing God's law to the cross.

The Christian faith did not come out of Judaism.

In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith who were all zealous for the Torah, so Jews coming to faith in Jesus were not ceasing to be Jews or to practice Judaism. This means that there was a period of time between the resurrection of Jesus and the inclusion of Gentiles in Acts 10 that is estimated to be around 7-15 years during which all Christians were Torah observant Jews. So Christianity at its origin was the form of Judaism that recognized Jesus as the Messiah.

Jesus was a Jew in the flesh, but He was the Son of God. And He did not come to redeem us through the law; he came to redeem us from the law.

In Titus 2:14, it doesn't say that Jesus gave himself to redeem us from God's law, but in order to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20).

This is the kingdom of God.

Judaism is a religion about the Kingdom of God.

You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say that, on one hand, God’s people are lawful Jews and, on another, say that God’s people are people of promise. If salvation was of the law then Christ would not have come.

In Genesis 18:19, Genesis 26:4-5, and Deuteronomy 30:16, the promise was made to Abraham and brought about because he walked in God's way in obedience to His law, he taught his children and those of his household to do that, and because they did that, so being lawful Jews in in accordance with being children of the promise.

Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), so Jesus leading us to live in obedience to it is the way that he saves us from not living in obedience to it.

“I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.”

The way to remain in Christ is not by rejecting the religion that he practiced.

If you are involved in that: you have fallen from grace.

God is gracious to us by teaching us to obey His law (Psalms 119:29, Exodus 33:13, Genesis 6:8-9, Romans 1:5, Titus 2:11-13) and it would be absurd to think that God is gracious to us by teaching us how to fall from grace, so you are not correctly identifying what Paul was speaking against.

And if you are involved in teaching people to go back to it then you have become a deceiver because you are deceiving people who did not have to bear the yoke of the law because they were free in Christ, and if you have gone back to teach them that you are participating in a deception.

God's law is truth (Psalms 119:142) and Jesus embodied that truth by living in sinless obedience to it (John 14:6), so it is not those who are teaching to follow God's laws who are the deceivers, but rather the deceivers are those who are leading people away from following the truth. The freedom that we have in Christ is the freedom from sin, not the freedom to do the things that God has revealed through His law to be sin.

You are sons of God; you are not slaves as under the law. Your righteousness is in Christ; it is not in the keeping of the law.

In 1 John 3:4-10, those who do not practice righteousness in obedience to God's law are not born again. In Romans 8:4-14, those who are born of the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to His law. It is contradictory to say that our righteousness is in God's word made flesh, but not in obeying God's word.

 

[Aaron56]

.

Blindness for following the law was foretold.

 

[Dino246]

In Galatians 3:16-19, a new covenant does not nullify the promise of a covenant that has already been ratified, so it is also true that the New Covenant does not nullify our need to obey God's law in accordance with the promise.

That would require us to be under the old covenant in the first place, which we are not and never were.

Jesus did not go around telling people to stop repenting because God's law has ended, but rather he called for people to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand. In Acts 3:25-26, Jesus was sent as the promised seed to bless us by turning us from our wickedness, not by causing us to be free to be wicked.

This is the usual claim of the Judaizer: that just because we aren't under the Law, that we want to be wicked. It's an irrational and, frankly, insulting argument.

Sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), so there was nothing that became sinful when the law was given, but rather the law revealed what has always been and will always be the way to do that.

Wrong. God set certain requirements in the Law that were specific for the Jews and were never issues for other people. The whole system of temple worship and everything that requires the involvement of priests or Levites is specifically for Israel.

In Romans 10:5-8, it references Deuteronomy 30:11-20 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to saying that God's law is not too difficult to obey

Try finding a priest today. It's impossible.

The fact that it is a ministry of death for those who refuse to obey God's law is not a very good reason to refuse to obey it.

But the fact that we aren't under it is a perfect reason.

God's holy days are important foreshadows of what is to come, which is why he was encouraging the Colossians to let anyone judge them for continue observing them.

"Let no one judge you"... as in, "Don't let anyone judge you".

Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law in contrast with saying that he came not to abolish it, so you should not interpret fulfilling the law as meaning essentially the same thing as abolishing it.

If you understand the words themselves, you will understand that Jesus' fulfillment of the Law means that it is completed.

Rather, "to fulfil, i.e. to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be

Streeeetch (*pop*). Nope. Nothing in the text supports that view.

After Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, he then proceeded to fulfill it six times throughout the rest of Matthew 5 by teaching how to correctly obey it as it should be.

Wrong. Jesus' death on the cross fulfilled the Law completely. Teaching about it did nothing of the sort.

In Titus 2:14, it doesn't say that Jesus gave himself to redeem us from God's law, but in order to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20).

Titus 2:13ff-14 " Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

Some Jewish Christians were zealous for the Law, as noted in Acts 21:20, but you failed to read and apply the whole paragraph, which ends with verse 25:

"As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.”

We Gentile Christians are NOT under the Law, so there is no requirement (nor even a hint of direction) to be zealous for the Law.

The way to remain in Christ is not by rejecting the religion that he practiced.

Horsefeathers! The way to remain in Christ is by continuing to believe in Him and in His finished work, and to live accordingly.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN IN ENGLISH???

Lol it’s in English

 

[jamessb]

Lol it’s in English

No, it's in a form of English that is a "dead" language, i.e., it is not spoken anywhere on the planet. What does in mean in conventional, twenty-first century English?

For example, what does the word "spake" mean? What does "behoved" mean?

 

[Pilgrimshope]

No, it's in a form of English that is a "dead" language, i.e., it is not spoken anywhere on the planet. What does in mean in conventional, twenty-first century English?

For example, what does the word "spake" mean? What does "behoved" mean?

Ahhh ok I see that technically is the English Bible but I understand what you meant now

behoved means it was needed for him to do it and was his sort of “ duty “ or place only Jesus could do it and he was the one ordained from the beginning to do it

“ It behoves a father to take care of his children “ it behoves a child to obey thier parent “

“Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:45-46‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Do you see how that old English word behoved holds a lot of meaning and understanding though ?

It sort of matters and is a bit different than this

“Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day,”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:45-46‬ ‭NIV‬‬

zone holds more detailed grasp of what’s being said in the Greek there’s always dictionaries too