Christ kept the Law of Moses, so....

And yet the verses you posted support my position and refute yours.

Exactly; the Law was given within the context of the covenant.

Correct. The law is within the covenant, as I stated earlier.

Wrong. The Law is part of the word.

Yes, He will (does) put the Law in our hearts; He doesn't put the covenant in our hearts though.

I'm sorry, "The stony heart GOD replaces with a heart of flesh."

Yes: context is critical, and you aren't looking broadly enough. Paul was specifically addressing the issue of being justified before God (Gal. 2:16-17). The discussion of sin is within that context. His words through 3:14 are about justification generally, not just redemption for sin.

There isn't such a passage, but you will know from any study of relevant history that the Temple (and with it, the Levitical order) has been destroyed. There is no temple, and no tabernacle, and no Levites, and no priesthood, so much of the Law is simply impossible to fulfill.

Acts 15:10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of
Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear?

Romans 3:10 As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one."

Are you sure? Here's the passage again.

Exodus 19:3-8
3 And Moses went up unto God, and the Lord called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;

4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.

5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the Lord commanded him.

8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the Lord.

Was the agreement to obey the Living God's voice indeed?

So then such is your determination and hasn't been stated in scripture? There IS a temple, there IS a tabernacle, and there IS a priesthood.

Hi, magenta,

The issue brought to the council in Acts 15 was "is circumcision necessary to be saved".

----

Regarding Romans 3: 10; the entire chapter is about justification (i.e. making one right again after sin has been committed). Paul goes through saying all have broken the law and there is nothing in the law that can make one right again. The only way to make one right again in the eyes of the law is through faith in Messiah. He then concludes that after being made right through faith we establish/stand on the law not void it out (i.e., "go and sin no more").


Romans 3:31
Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

"God forbid we void the law after faith in Christ". There must've been this prevailing notion back then - that is evident now - that after faith in Christ one no longer needs to obey God's law. But the truth is even posted in Revelation 14:12 - the very last book of scripture - that the patience of the saints is to keep the commandments and have faith in Christ.

Romans 3 is not a chapter saying it's impossible to adhere to the law but suggests the opposite in the very last verse. It is possible after faith in Christ.

The Law is within the covenant. Your out-of-context verses aren't going to convince me otherwise.

Don't be ridiculous; it's got nothing to do with me. The temple was destroyed in 70 AD. You can't bring take your offering there anymore, and you can't find a priest to make an offering for you, so you can't fulfill the Law.

But that's not what is said, Magenta. Peter made an argument specifically about circumcision, but James made the following pronouncement which was distributed:


Acts 15:19
Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.


James' judgment was to "not to trouble them" with circumcision but to tell them specifically to obey a few of the more important laws while they are taught the law each sabbath day.


Now, here is a rhetorical question that's just food for thought:

If it is the case that breaking one law is the same as breaking all the laws and that attempting to in any way is not having faith in Christ, why did James pronounce to the gentiles to obey a few?

Why not take the opportunity to say - to gentiles who lived previous pagan lives, never exposed to God's law - that the entire law was a yolk, and all that is necessary was faith in Christ? Why take them "backward into bondage" as it were?

Clearly full passages untouched won't convince you either. I asked a question which was an attempt to get you to acknowledge what was literally written.

We do have a temple and a Priest who makes offering for us...and we bring offering every day (well at least I do). If it were a snake it would bite you. You even posted the Hebrews passage some time ago.

even as He gave them those commandments, did God not know they would not heed?


Deuteronomy 31:21
Then it shall be, when many evils and troubles have come upon them, that this song will testify against them as a witness; for it will not be forgotten in the mouths of their descendants, for I know the inclination of their behavior today, even before I have brought them to the land of which I swore.

i recall Hebrews testifying with specificity that because this change in priesthood from one which could never succeed to the One Who can never fail, there has necessarily also been a change in law.

there are marked distinctions that aren't limited to temple services.

we have a priest who not only presented a single sacrifice that was sufficient forever, but He lived for us, died for us and rose for us too - just as He will return for us.

((yay!))

Romans 11:32

The Almighty knows all. Amen. Are you using the fact that He knows all as proof that He gave the law to teach us that it was impossible to obey it?

There is a copyright law in The USA that was created to protect the original creators of works. Part of that law involved the copying and distributing of VHS and cassette recordings. The law was relevant for a while as it was until the world changed with the emergence of the internet and digital media (compact discs, dvs, mp4s, mp3s, etc)

With the change in technology came a necessity to change the copyright law.

The copyright law wasn't voided just because things changed, it was updated to cover the change. People are still required to obey the copyright law.

Does this example make sense?

the priesthood was not "amended"

the priesthood was changed

Yes, that's what Hebrews says.

So speaking to the thread title, no, we are not under the law of Moses to keep it. it is a shadow of the true commandment, a new commandment that dwells in us, even the Word of God saying 'love one another' and 'believe'

Christ kept the Law of Moses, (perfectly) so....
.....that we don't have to. You cannot prosecute a dead man for crimes committed.

Rom 6:11
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Rom 7:4
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.

Rom 7:6
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.

There is nothing whatsoever like YHVH Himself dictating the law here bro. Not even close.
Just some homespun solid Jewish advice about clean living is all.....