A closer look at Mt.5:17-18

  • 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.
T

Tim416

Guest
#21
If law exists, but you have a saviour from breaking it/sin, you can then be conscious of sin, but it cannot bring condemnation to you.

The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:


16 ‘This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.
I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds
.’[b]

17 Then he adds:

Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more
.
Heb10:15-17
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#22
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
We need to take time to see exactly what was said before we can determine what was meant.

1. First of all why did Jesus make this comment? We know from the New Testament that the scribes, Pharisees, and lawyers -- who were well-versed in the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible, which is our Old Testament, which is summed up by Christ as the Law and the Prophets, and sometimes just as *the Law*) -- had a different concept of what God expected, and therefore they had made the oral traditions of men (now found in the Talmud) higher than the Word of God.

They had also been denounced by Christ for their hypocrisy. They had also noted that Jesus healed on the sabbath days, and they claimed that he was breaking the Law. They also criticized His disciples for not completing the ritual washing of hands before meals, and that Christ and His disciples ate and drank with publicans and sinners. So they had wrongly concluded that Jesus of Nazareth had come to destroy the the Law and the Prophets. Therefore this statement was not simply about the Old Covenant or the Torah, but about the entire Hebrew Bible.

2. In order to refute their false allegations, Christ publicly proclaimed that He had not come to destroy the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfil [πληρῶσαι (plērōsai)], which means to make full or to complete. We know that Christ obeyed the Law of Moses perfectly, and then died on the Cross as the Lamb of God. Thus He did indeed fulfill all the demands of the Old Covenant, and rendered it null and void.

3. But the Tanakh is far more than the Old Covenant. All the prophecies regarding the Second Coming of Christ, and the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth, with universal peace and righteousness, have not been fulfilled as yet. Neither have the terrible judgments which come with the Day of the LORD. So there is much that still remains to be fulfilled. Therefore v 18 declares that not even the smallest Hebrew markings (the jots and the tittles) will pass away (or be rendered void) until everything is fulfilled. And that will only happen when the New Heavens and the New Earth (mentioned in Isaiah) have come into existence.
 

TMS

Senior Member
Mar 21, 2015
4,052
1,327
113
Australia
#23
Actually I think a clearer analogy between non-imputation of sin and law is this.

In a country with no speed limit, if you drive at a speed of, say 150 km/hour, can you be charged in the courts for speeding? The answer is no, because there is no law against speeding.

Paul himself stated in Romans 5:13, sin is not imputed when there is no law. Is that what you are also saying?
Yer
No law for about speed limit means you can't be charged for speeding.
Take away the laws for stealing and i am free to steal, stealing is no longer a sin.
 

TMS

Senior Member
Mar 21, 2015
4,052
1,327
113
Australia
#24
We need to take time to see exactly what was said before we can determine what was meant.

1. First of all why did Jesus make this comment? We know from the New Testament that the scribes, Pharisees, and lawyers -- who were well-versed in the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible, which is our Old Testament, which is summed up by Christ as the Law and the Prophets, and sometimes just as *the Law*) -- had a different concept of what God expected, and therefore they had made the oral traditions of men (now found in the Talmud) higher than the Word of God.

They had also been denounced by Christ for their hypocrisy. They had also noted that Jesus healed on the sabbath days, and they claimed that he was breaking the Law. They also criticized His disciples for not completing the ritual washing of hands before meals, and that Christ and His disciples ate and drank with publicans and sinners. So they had wrongly concluded that Jesus of Nazareth had come to destroy the the Law and the Prophets. Therefore this statement was not simply about the Old Covenant or the Torah, but about the entire Hebrew Bible.

2. In order to refute their false allegations, Christ publicly proclaimed that He had not come to destroy the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfil [πληρῶσαι (plērōsai)], which means to make full or to complete. We know that Christ obeyed the Law of Moses perfectly, and then died on the Cross as the Lamb of God. Thus He did indeed fulfill all the demands of the Old Covenant, and rendered it null and void.

3. But the Tanakh is far more than the Old Covenant. All the prophecies regarding the Second Coming of Christ, and the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth, with universal peace and righteousness, have not been fulfilled as yet. Neither have the terrible judgments which come with the Day of the LORD. So there is much that still remains to be fulfilled. Therefore v 18 declares that not even the smallest Hebrew markings (the jots and the tittles) will pass away (or be rendered void) until everything is fulfilled. And that will only happen when the New Heavens and the New Earth (mentioned in Isaiah) have come into existence.
Where does the bible say all of the old covanant is made void. The old was replaced by the new, but the moral law can still be part of the new.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
#25
We need to take time to see exactly what was said before we can determine what was meant.

2. In order to refute their false allegations, Christ publicly proclaimed that He had not come to destroy the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfil [πληρῶσαι (plērōsai)], which means to make full or to complete. We know that Christ obeyed the Law of Moses perfectly, and then died on the Cross as the Lamb of God. Thus He did indeed fulfill all the demands of the Old Covenant, and rendered it null and void.

3. But the Tanakh is far more than the Old Covenant. All the prophecies regarding the Second Coming of Christ, and the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth, with universal peace and righteousness, have not been fulfilled as yet. Neither have the terrible judgments which come with the Day of the LORD. So there is much that still remains to be fulfilled. Therefore v 18 declares that not even the smallest Hebrew markings (the jots and the tittles) will pass away (or be rendered void) until everything is fulfilled. And that will only happen when the New Heavens and the New Earth (mentioned in Isaiah) have come into existence.
Okay, so you are saying the Law has been rendered null and void, but the prophecies has not since they have not been fulfilled yet. Thanks, that makes sense.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
#26
Yer
No law for about speed limit means you can't be charged for speeding.
Take away the laws for stealing and i am free to steal, stealing is no longer a sin.
Stealing is no longer a sin between you and God. You are free to steal but it does not mean you will choose to steal.

You also value the following

1) You trust God as your source of blessings and prosperity, so there is no need for you to steal.
2) Stealing has natural consequences on earth as well as with your fellow men, and you will be wise to avoid those
 

TMS

Senior Member
Mar 21, 2015
4,052
1,327
113
Australia
#27
Stealing is no longer a sin between you and God. You are free to steal but it does not mean you will choose to steal.

You also value the following

1) You trust God as your source of blessings and prosperity, so there is no need for you to steal.
2) Stealing has natural consequences on earth as well as with your fellow men, and you will be wise to avoid those
If i walk in the Spirit i will not steal and have no consequences with God.
If i am not a Christian and steal will there be consequences with God?
 
T

Tim416

Guest
#28
Stealing is no longer a sin between you and God. You are free to steal but it does not mean you will choose to steal.

You also value the following

1) You trust God as your source of blessings and prosperity, so there is no need for you to steal.
2) Stealing has natural consequences on earth as well as with your fellow men, and you will be wise to avoid those
So are Christians free to commit adultery, murder, have other gods before their Father in heaven? None of those would be sin either for a believer, they are free to do them?
 

TMS

Senior Member
Mar 21, 2015
4,052
1,327
113
Australia
#29
If stealing (and other laws) is not a sin than satan has no charge against keeping me out of heaven. I don't need Jesus to cover me.
 
T

Tim416

Guest
#30
If stealing (and other laws) is not a sin than satan has no charge against keeping me out of heaven. I don't need Jesus to cover me.
I have to say, post26 is one of the worst posts I have ever read on the internet. Believers are under grace, but.....
 

TMS

Senior Member
Mar 21, 2015
4,052
1,327
113
Australia
#31
I have to say, post26 is one of the worst posts I have ever read on the internet. Believers are under grace, but.....
Yer
Grace is given to sinners, we don't need grace if there is no sin.
 
Dec 28, 2016
9,171
2,719
113
#32
Stealing is no longer a sin between you and God. You are free to steal but it does not mean you will choose to steal.

You also value the following

1) You trust God as your source of blessings and prosperity, so there is no need for you to steal.
2) Stealing has natural consequences on earth as well as with your fellow men, and you will be wise to avoid those
Soooo, when Paul told us that thieves will not inherit the kingdom of heaven, as a warning to not be deceived, he got it wrong? It's really OK to be a thief, we are "free to steal."

Gotcha!

And all this time I thought sin was bondage, not something we are "free" to be doing. Can we throw in a little fornication too? Sounds like that should be alright too. Just asking for a friend. :geek:
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
#33
I have to say, post26 is one of the worst posts I have ever read on the internet. Believers are under grace, but.....
One clear indication that you are preaching the true Gospel of Grace that the Apostle Paul preach is that people misunderstand what you are saying and exclaim "What? Shall we sin more so that grace may increase?" :) If that question never pop up, you know you are preaching a mixture of law and grace.

Sin has consequences on earth, sin can cause you to lose your job, go to jail etc etc. But sin is not an issue between God and you. You must be very confident of that to truly understand what Paul is saying.

Think of Abraham, when he lied twice about Sarah being his sister, how did God respond to him? That is what King David says you are blessed in Romans 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
#34
If stealing (and other laws) is not a sin than satan has no charge against keeping me out of heaven. I don't need Jesus to cover me.
When you trust in what Jesus done on the cross as your substitute, you are no longer under law.
Only when you are not under law, then sin cannot be imputed to you.

You understand how the Gospel of grace works?
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
#35
Soooo, when Paul told us that thieves will not inherit the kingdom of heaven, as a warning to not be deceived, he got it wrong? It's really OK to be a thief, we are "free to steal."

Gotcha!

And all this time I thought sin was bondage, not something we are "free" to be doing. Can we throw in a little fornication too? Sounds like that should be alright too. Just asking for a friend. :geek:
Do you understand my earlier analogy when I said,

Actually I think a clearer analogy between non-imputation of sin and law is this.

In a country with no speed limit, if you drive at a speed of, say 150 km/hour, can you be charged in the courts for speeding? The answer is no, because there is no law against speeding.
 
T

Tim416

Guest
#36
One clear indication that you are preaching the true Gospel of Grace that the Apostle Paul preach is that people misunderstand what you are saying and exclaim "What? Shall we sin more so that grace may increase?" :) If that question never pop up, you know you are preaching a mixture of law and grace.

Sin has consequences on earth, sin can cause you to lose your job, go to jail etc etc. But sin is not an issue between God and you. You must be very confident of that to truly understand what Paul is saying.

Think of Abraham, when he lied twice about Sarah being his sister, how did God respond to him? That is what King David says you are blessed in Romans 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
I don't think you understand Pauls message of grace. There seems to be a competition on this website amongst some, as to who can go to the furthest extreme where grace is concerned. At the moment, I would put you in the lead.
 
Dec 28, 2016
9,171
2,719
113
#37
Do you understand my earlier analogy when I said,

Actually I think a clearer analogy between non-imputation of sin and law is this.

In a country with no speed limit, if you drive at a speed of, say 150 km/hour, can you be charged in the courts for speeding? The answer is no, because there is no law against speeding.
Let's not pretend that your teaching is so profound that it is hard to grasp. It is nothing less than repackaged antinomianism, with half the wrapping paper torn off. That means you're in grave error.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
#38
I don't think you understand Pauls message of grace. There seems to be a competition on this website amongst some, as to who can go to the furthest extreme where grace is concerned. At the moment, I would put you in the lead.
I realized when I say Christians are free to steal, to lie, to commit adultery, everyone recoiled in horror.

Strange, before we accepted the free gift of grace thru faith, while we are sinners, are we free to "do good"?

Surely, as "sinners", we did do some "good deeds" right? Yet, as Paul explained so well in Romans 5:12-19, the best explanation about the divine exchange that only the ascended Jesus could have explained to him, all those good deeds we done could not eradicate Adam's sin.

Why do people recoil in horror when I apply the same equivalence when I stated that, after you got saved, you are free to sin? You still have free will, you can commit adultery if you choose to, God does not take away your free will once you get saved.

But because you are no longer under law, all those "evil deeds" you do, likewise, could not eradicate the finished work of Jesus in your spirit. God still sees you as righteous no matter what you do.

Is the equivalence, in Romans 5:12-19, that hard to understand?
 
T

Tim416

Guest
#39
I realized when I say Christians are free to steal, to lie, to commit adultery, everyone recoiled in horror.

Strange, before we accepted the free gift of grace thru faith, while we are sinners, are we free to "do good"?

Surely, as "sinners", we did do some "good deeds" right? Yet, as Paul explained so well in Romans 5:12-19, the best explanation about the divine exchange that only the ascended Jesus could have explained to him, all those good deeds we done could not eradicate Adam's sin.

Why do people recoil in horror when I apply the same equivalence when I stated that, after you got saved, you are free to sin? You still have free will, you can commit adultery if you choose to, God does not take away your free will once you get saved.

But because you are no longer under law, all those "evil deeds" you do, likewise, could not eradicate the finished work of Jesus in your spirit. God still sees you as righteous no matter what you do.

Is the equivalence, in Romans 5:12-19, that hard to understand?
You missed something out:
But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.


19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you(believers), as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. Gal5:18-21
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
#40
You missed something out:
But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.


19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you(believers), as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. Gal5:18-21
I guess what you are trying to say that, although salvation is by grace thru faith, you have to maintain your salvation by good works? Is that your view of what the Gospel of Grace is?