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

I am amazed that people post all these bible passages,

Yet they do not refute the perosn they are trying to refute. They just think they do, because they refuse to sit and listen to the person.

Makes me laugh!!

I know. It's a problem. Those pesky passages. We should instead listen to men, not the scriptures, right? And yet when one tries to talk with persons about the scriptures they suddenly have to leave.

Thats not the problem

Posting passages is USELESS if you take them out of context. Or the person your discussing with is not saying what you are arguing against to begin with.

The pharisees could quote the entire of the OT prety much verbatim, What good did it do them?

Excellent post!

I think the difference would be what different people mean when they say commandments, especially in the New testament.

I look at what Moses wrote down in the wilderness, and I look at the world around me. I see that there is no way to physically do many of The commandments because there is no Temple or known levitical priesthood.

I look in the New testament, and I don't see any place where it says stop keeping this part of the law but keep the rest. When Jesus talks about the law in The sermon on the Mount, he presents it as a single unit, no part of it passing away until either heaven and Earth pass away or all is accomplished or fulfilled.

What then? I do see something in the New testament that talks about the entire law is fulfilled.

And I also see that the children of God are led by the spirit.

So I expect that one person will be led to follow a particular commandment from the wilderness while another person will not. The person who follows the commandment will not be following it, hopefully, to obtain salvation, but simply as a result of the leading of the spirit.

I would not agree that all of The food commandments that we can physically perform today ought to be done for health reasons. For example I was reading last night about how if the dead body of certain animals touch your eating utensils you have to break them. I like to buy my utensils at the thrift store as part of living simply. There is no way to know what has touched them in the past. But, some bleach or high temperature is enough to sterilize them. I can't see a health benefit to breaking the dishes.

Agreed. Thankfully, when passages aren't cherrypicked and actually read from the beginning to end, they give us exactly what the writer meant, instead of some nonsense that can only be produced by bouncing everywhere, which is indeed pretty pharisaic.

Then why are they so hard for you to understand?

All it takes is a little effort to read everything to understand the writers. When I place cherrypicked passages back into the context of the full writing it will always look strange to those who are already upside-down in their thinking.

So what does this say about those who REJECT Gods word which says even you even break one command your guilty as if you broke them all?

But thats not what you do. You just think you do.

No, I just hope you'd read what's actually written over the error of what you're explaining. Peter doesn't contradict Paul. Peter & Paul actually contradict you, sad to say. All we have to do is go back into Peter's letter and he explains what he meant by the error of lawless.


2 Peter 1:4-7
Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, now that you have escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

5 For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith virtue; and to virtue, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love.


First, no matter which version you read, Peter tells the reader to put forth every effort to be godly. This directly contradicts your teaching of "no human effort" required or allowed. But what is "godliness" vs. "ungodliness"?


2 Peter 2:4-8
For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them deep into hell, placing them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment; if He did not spare the ancient world when He brought the flood on its ungodly people, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, among the eight; if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction, reducing them to ashes as an example of what is coming on the ungodly;
7 and if He rescued Lot, a righteous man distressed by the depraved conduct of the lawless (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard).


Next, no matter which version you read, Peter shares examples of ungodly people being judged over and over again by Yah. He then defines who the ungodly are. They are the LAWLESS. Peter says ungodly people commit lawless deeds. Elder Peter says the ungodly are not law-keepers. He says lawless conduct = depraved conduct, like the people at Sodom and Gomorrah. Sins are lawless deeds.


2 Peter 2:12-17
These men are like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be captured and destroyed. They blaspheme in matters they do not understand, and like such creatures, they too will be destroyed. The harm they will suffer is the wages of their wickedness.
They consider it a pleasure to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their deception as they feast with you. 14Their eyes are full of adultery; their desire for sin is never satisfied; they seduce the unstable. They are accursed children with hearts trained in greed.

15They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Beor, who loved the wages of wickedness. 16 But he was rebuked for his transgression by a donkey, otherwise without speech, that spoke with a man’s voice and restrained the prophet’s madness. These men are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them. 18 With lofty but empty words, they appeal to the sensual passions of the flesh and entice those who are just escaping from others who live in error.


Again, no matter which version you read, Peter ties lawlessness with wickedness. He also compares walking "the straight way" against those who "live in error". Peter says the lawless have left the straight way and live in error of wickedness, and entice those just escaping (i.e. new converts) to also live in error. Peter says these lawless ones blaspheme in matters they don't understand. So far, it would seem Peter is talking against folks who believe what you teach about the law.


2 Peter 3:11-12 & 14
Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to conduct yourselves in holiness and godliness as you anticipate and hasten the coming of the day of God, when the heavens will be destroyed by fire and the elements will melt in the heat.
Therefore, dear friends, while you wait for these things, make every effort to be found without spot or blemish in his sight, at peace.


Again, Peter repeats his instruction to put forth every effort to be without spot or blemish (unlike the lawless). Again, this contradicts the teaching of "no human effort" required or allowed. And finally, we have the passage in question.


2 Peter 3:15-18
Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
17 Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position. 18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.


Word for word, no matter the version, Peter, who was an elder of the early church over Paul, is clear in what he means: Ignorant and unstable people distort Paul's words to teach others to live in lawlessness (i.e. "without the law"), and it is an error of wickedness and will lead to destruction, so BE ON YOUR GUARD for those "enticing" people.

This error was occurring in the first century and it's still happening today.

What I'm hearing is that the commandments in Deuteronomy are to be followed if you wish physical blessings, like increased crop yield.

But breaking those commandments does not have a spiritual effect.

Is that what you are saying?

No, I am not trying to trip you up with words at all. I had asked a question about what your views were on something, and your answer related to how I personally could find the holy spirit's views. So I asked again because I am interested in what your views are, what you feel the spirit is telling you.

So, please tell me, what has the Spirit led you to do regarding the dietary laws? And, in your view, is it possible that the spirit would tell someone else something different, possibly not to follow the dietary laws?

Yes, I realize that I called God a person. Traditionally, one talks about the Trinity as one God, three persons. Some scriptures present Jesus as God, some scriptures present the father as God, some scriptures present Jesus as distinct from the father, yet we know that there is just one God. So it's helpful to have some word when talking about their relationship.

For some reason I started a thread called "What is a Judaizer" and I cannot find it now as I think it was deleted. Anyhow I was wondering what is a Judaizer and why so many people seem to use this term. It is no where found in the scriptures but has its origin from Catholicism when they were persecuting earlier believers. Any thoughts? If you use this term or know of it's use why and how is it being applied here? Ok thanks

For some reason I started a thread called "What is a Judaizer" and I cannot find it now as I think it was deleted. Anyhow I was wondering what is a Judaizer and why so many people seem to use this term. It is no where found in the scriptures but has its origin from Catholicism when they were persecuting earlier believers. Any thoughts? If you use this term or know of it's use why and how is it being applied here? Ok thanks

Greetings NayborBear,

Good to hear from you! Well, my sharing that scripture now puts me in the hot seat. I pray I never walk that walk of looking down, BUT IF I DO Please help me!

You know when I hear the argument that if you break only one law you are guilt of all! I wonder why, if a man recognizes the Laws as good and right and just would they ever not want to keep them regardless of the terms? I mean, I have heard everyone I know of on here who they slanderously call judiazers say that they are justified by the grace of God through faith in Jesus' work on the cross. But they refuse to hear them! So the only conclusion I can make is that they hold anyone, who by the Holy Spirit has been brought to a place of loving Gods Laws in contempt! This is persecuting men for righteousness sake! Re;

Mat 5:10 KJV Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.


No matter how many times we hold out an olive branch of peace by sharing our understanding of Grace they smack it down and call us Judaizers. Rejoice at this persecution though.

Hi 3rdAngel, I hear it takes a little time nowadays to start a thread due to it having to be approved. Could be that your thread will get posted. In the mean time, here is a link to a thread I created 5 years ago. I was new here and had never heard the term before seeing it here. So I did quite a bit of research on it, hope you find it useful.
https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...re-you-one-do-you-know-anybody-that-is.83255/

For example...



Alone, James' cherrypicked statement may suggest the error some incorrectly teach. But simply add the preceding verse to the cherrypicked verse and notice what happens...

James 2:9-10
9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin, being convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever shall keep the whole Law, but shall stumble in one point, he has become guilty of all.


Like magic, the message is clear, which we can then confirm with other passages in their context.


Deuteronomy 1:17
17 Do not show partiality in judging; hear both small and great alike. Do not be afraid of anyone, for judgment belongs to God. Bring me any case too hard for you, and I will hear it.”


Malachi 2:9
9 “So I have caused you to be despised and humiliated before all the people, because you have not followed my ways but have shown partiality in matters of the law.”


Neither Yah's word nor James' instruction say "don't follow the law". Not once. They say don't be partial with it. In other words, don't obey some of it but ignore other parts of it when dealing with certain people. Don't play favorites. It's a simple message repeated from the so-called "OT" to the "NT".

Hi 3rdAngel, I hear it takes a little time nowadays to start a thread due to it having to be approved. Could be that your thread will get posted. In the mean time, here is a link to a thread I created 5 years ago. I was new here and had never heard the term before seeing it here. So I did quite a bit of research on it, hope you find it useful.
https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...re-you-one-do-you-know-anybody-that-is.83255/