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

You can read Galatians 2:16 for evidence.

So what all did Jesus come to do? What did His crucifixion and resurrection accomplish?
ok on the rest

I was asked this once before and my answer created a bunch of hysterics. Seems to be the norm around here. I`ll give you the same answer anyway.

Jesus said he came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. That was His stated primary purpose for everything He did. He ascended without finishing the task. He will not return until Israel is ready for Him to finish His task. When He does return His purpose will be to fulfill the Prophets and keep God`s word.

The New Covenant cannot be implemented until He returns because Jeremiah chapter 31 must be fulfilled.

Romans 11

17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.

19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.

20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:

21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.

23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Jeremiah 31 was fulfilled when the people returned from Babylonian exile. We are now living under the New Covenant. The prophesy has been fulfilled and now we are waiting for the return of the Messiah. Make sure you are ready.

Hey Rick.
Actually it is a work in progress, that's progress is solely dependent upon the receiver's reception.

Here check this out.

But now He has gotten a more excellent ministry, also by so much as He is a Mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.
(Heb 8:6 LITV)

But now hath he obtained a ministry the more excellent, by so much as he is also the mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises.
(Heb 8:6 ASV)
However, Jesus has now obtained a more superior ministry, since the covenant he mediates is founded on better promises.
(Heb 8:6 ISV)
But now He has gotten a more excellent ministry, also by so much as He is a Mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.
(Heb 8:6 LITV)
But now hath he obtained a ministry the more excellent, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises.
(Heb 8:6 RV)

(Heb 8:6 MLV)But now he has obtained a more excellent ministry*, by so much as he is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been instituted upon better promises.

(Heb 8:6 GUV) But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry by so much as also He is Mediator of a better covenant which has been established (upon) better promises.

He is Mediator of a better covenant which has been established (upon) better promises.
A work in progress, that's progress is solely dependent upon the receiver's reception.

Here in verse 8:10 in the repeating of the covenant the writer does something interesting. The giving of the laws into the mind is in present tense and the writing of the Laws on the heart is future.

Because this is the covenant which I will covenant with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord, giving My Laws into their mind, and I will write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people."
(Heb 8:10 LITV)

Then when the writer repeats the covenant again he places the entire Covenant in the presence tense through the surrounding context.

For by one offering He has perfected in perpetuity the ones being sanctified. And the Holy Spirit witnesses to us also. For after having said before, "This is the covenant which I will covenant to them after those days, says the Lord: Giving My Laws on their hearts, and I will write them on their minds;"
(Heb 10:14-16 LITV)

The ones being sanctified. In that respect the grammar of the text dictates the Holy Ghost is a witness us also.

How? Having said before, "Giving My Laws on their hearts, and I will write them on their minds;"

In this instance however it should also be noted the writer of Hebrews through the Holy Spirit switched things around a little compared to how he cited the covenant in 8:10. This time the Giving of the Laws in the hearts is present tense and the writing of the Laws on the minds is in the future.

Here is something else. The New Covenant was spoken to the children of Israel from the beginning in Deut. 30:14. Just worded differently. It was actually suppose to be part of the Old but due to our stiff necks and hard hearts it was not received by the majority hence Jeremiah giving it as a New.

Please take a look.

If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul. For this commandment which I command thee this day, ( hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.) it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But the word ( hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.) is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.
(Deu 30:10-14)

Please elaborate.

A law is given for the sinner, so they can be prosecuted and judged,

How can what you said above support what you said below?

The world stood for around 2000 years with no law, and they seemed to be ok.

Do you mean that for 2000 years with no law, there were no sinners and so none of them will be judged and persecuted? Sorry but it seems quite absurd.

my point proves you wrong on your nit-picking belief on testament and covenant being very different words,

you can fight against language , I choose to be sane and rational .

"He ascended without finishing the task."

Maybe that's where you and I would really differ in our interpretation, then.

I think that your interpretation would require Jesus to have said something more like
I came to start the process of fulfilling the law and the process, and I will come again to complete the process.

Sounds about right. Also, didn't he say "It is finished" as last words? He didn't say "it is nearly finished".


" Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the Lord: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God" Isaiah 66-9.

By the way. I don't think just because don't always see eye to eye on hear means its caused "hysterics". Bit dramatic.

He offered rest, but they would not.
therefore, line on line, precept on precept.
in order that they stumble and fall and be broken.
they boasted in a covenant of death, refuge in a lie.
therefore, a cornerstone laid in Zion.

what is this talking about?
Paul, writing by the Spirit, gives us some of the interpretation here, where he quotes it:

I've told legalists before that in order to go back to their work at the law they have to say that the Lord FAILED when He said He came to fulfill the Law.

I've never heard any other legalist or judaizer actually say the words that Jesus Failed. They only implied it. And they implied it unknowingly (at least I think it was unknowingly).

At least they come up with new heresies from time to time to keep things interesting. I thought I heard all of them. I guess there's no limit to what the carnal mind will invent in order to NOT come to Christ.


This seems much more than just a difference in interpretation. To actually say that the Lord Jesus failed to do what He said He came to do is an EPIC THEOLOGICAL BLUNDER. If your theology makes you say that the Lord failed to do something He said He came to do then its time to erase EVERYTHING you think you know and start over.

Isn't that what you would do? It's definitely what I would do.


I guess this would be the logical conclusion of peoples thoughts that there are 2 covenants going on at the same time. 1 for Jews and 1 for Gentiles. This should be an even bigger red flag against it than anything I have explained.

Greetings SG!

Truly, Truly. You can feel it with the seasons. This "year" seems to be progressing much faster than usual, like we shouldn't be in September just yet.

There’s no greater oxymoron in all existence than Pharisees believing they have mastered their salvation while looking down their collective noses thinking people of FAITH are lost. It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic.

Yes, and I know that people sometimes will say that there are prophecies still to be fulfilled that Jesus will fulfill in his second coming, and that this means that Jesus didn't fulfill the law and the prophets yet.

But Jesus didn't say that he came to fulfill the law and all the prophecies. He said the law and the prophets.

I take that to mean that the law and the prophets point to something. And that something is what Jesus has already fulfilled, completely.

I understand the frustrating part man!
Just keep "putting it out there!"
Something I have learned from my time in CC, is that there are people in here reading and watching, although, they may not "participate?" That "see/feel" things "differently", then "the majority."
And, there are "believers" at different "stages" of development and growth.

Most in here that do participate believe "saved by grace through faith" and "walking in love", is enough. And, that's as much "healing" as they wish, or that they are willing to be healed. As "love" covers a multitude of sin! Even the "sin/s" of not even recognizing Mosaic Law, nor even the 10 commandments, in some cases.
Nor, any reason to!
(I could go on and on. And shall! ....But not in this post. )

Just keep "putting it out there!"

There's nothing more tragic and sad than a "Christian" who preaches to other Christians that the Lord Jesus fails to do what He says He will do.

And yet, that is what Pharisees and Judaizers must say in order to go back to their 10 commandments and work at the law.

Amen! If the law under the old covenant, as a legal system, is still binding on us today, then Jesus did not fulfill the law and His sacrifice on the cross was insufficient. God forbid!

that's poor math, mate.

if we were talking about love, then yes, our English language is insufficient, and sometimes a nuance of what the scripture is saying may be lost, because we have substituted through translation, one word 'love' for several different words in the original text.

when we are talking about {covenant, will, testament, contract} then we are in an opposite case: there is one word in the original Greek, as you have been shown, for which through translation we have substituted several different words. in this case, we have added nuance that is not in the scriptural text.

in the first instance we have a loss of information in translation. nuances are all collapsed in the projection.
in the second instance we have an introduction of information. nuances are added in the projection.

F is neither 1:1 nor onto, and the situation with 'love' is completely different than the situation with 'diatheke'
you are quite wrong to say that gb9's point is irrelevant -- it is very relevant.