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

From the NAS Greek Lexicon for pleroo:
"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"

After Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law, he then proceeded to fulfill it six times throughout the rest of the chapter by teaching how to correctly obey it as it should be. Moreover, he did not mention anything about his death in the Sermon on the. Mount. It is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so preaching repentance and remission of sins in his name to all nations is calling for the nations to obey the Mosaic Law.

Indeed, in Romans 10:5-8 references Deuteronomy 30:11-16 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to saying that the Mosaic Law is not too difficult to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing. In Deuteronomy 32:46-47, it is our very life. In Proverbs 3:18, it is a Tree of Life for all who take hold of it. In Proverbs 6:23, for the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus said that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying the greatest two commandments of the Mosaic Law. In Matthew 19:17, Jesus said that the way to enter eternal life is by obeying God's commandments. In Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has become a source of eternal salvation for those who obey him. In Revelation 22:14, those who obeyed God's commandments are given the right to eat from the Tree of Life. In Romans 2:6-7, those who persist in doing good will be given eternal life. In Romans 6:19-23, no longer presenting ourselves as slaves to impurity, lawlessness, and sin is contrasted with now presenting ourselves as slaves to God and to righteousness leading to sanctification, and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so obedience to God's law is the content of His gift of eternal life.

Moreover, in Jeremiah 31:33 and Ezekiel 36:26-27, the New Covenant involves God putting the Mosaic Law in our minds and writing it on our hearts and sending the Spirit to lead us to obey it, so 2 Corinthians 3:6 should be interpreted in a way that is in agreement with these verses rather than a way that is contrary to them. If following the letter referred to correctly following God's instructions and that leads to death, then God should not be trusted to guide us and we should not be His followers.
The fact that God's law is a ministry of life for those who obey it and a ministry of death for those who refuse to obey it is not a very good reason to refuse to obey it. The veil was preventing people from seeing that the goal of everything in Scripture is to testify about how to know Jesus, which is eternal life (John 17:3), but that veil also prevents those who reject the Mosaic Law from seeing the same thing.

All throughout the Bible, God wanted His people to repent and to return to obedience to His law and even Christ began his ministry with that message, so it would be absurd to interpret Galatians 5:2-4 as warning us against doing that and saying that we will be cut off from Christ if we follow Christ. 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, and it is what it means to be under grace, not the way to fall from it. It would again be absurd to interpret that as him wanting God to be gracious to him by teaching him how to fall from grace.

In Acts 5:32, the Spirit has been given to those who obey God, so obedience to God is part of the way to receive the Spirit, however, Galatians 3:1-2 denies that "works of the law" are part of the way to receive the Spirit, therefore that phrase does not refer to obedience to God. In Romans 3:27-31, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, so works of the law are of works while he said that our faith upholds God's law, so it is of faith, and a law that our faith upholds can't be referring to the same thing as the works of the law that are not of faith in Galatians 3:10-12. So you are not correctly identify what Paul was speaking against in Galatians and are interpreting him as though it makes perfect sense to you for a servant of God to be promoting rebellion against Him.

In James 2:1-11, he was speaking to people who had already sinned by showing favoritism, so he was not telling them that they needed to have prefect obedience because that would have already been too late and he was not discouraging them from trying to keep the law, but rather he was encouraging them to repent and keep the law more consistently. It we break any law and become a lawbreaker, then we need to repent, which again was what he was encouraging them to do. In Deuteronomy 11:26-32, the difference between being under God's blessing or His curse is not based on whether or not we have perfect obedience, but about whether are choose to serve God or to chase after other gods.If God's law cursed everyone who does not have perfect obedience, then everyone in the OT would be under God's curse, however, that does not reflect the reality of what is recorded about those who served God, just those who chased after other gods.

According to Galatians 3:10, the only way to avoid being cursed is by continuing to rely on the Book of the Law, which is in accordance with Deuteronomy 27-28, where relying on the Book of the Law is the way to be blessed while not relying on it is the way to be cursed. So those who rely on works of the law instead come under the curse for not relying on the Book of the Law.

In Galatians 3:10-12, Paul connected a quote from Habakkuk 2:4 saying that the righteous shall live by faith with a quote from Leviticus 18:5 that the one who obeys God's law will live by it, so the righteous who are living by faith are are the same as those who are living in obedience to God's law. Moreover, the context of Habakkuk 2 contrasts the righteous who are living by faith with those who are living in disobedience to the Mosaic Law, and Isaiah 51:7 says that the righteous are those on whose heart is the Mosaic Law, so the righteous living by faith does not refer to a manner of living that is not in obedience to it. God is trustworthy, therefore His instructions are also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7), so the way to trust God is by obediently trusting in His instructions, it is contradictory to think that we should trust in God, but not in His instructions, and the position that it is the Law of God that is untrustworthy/not of faith rather than works of the law is a position that denies the trustworthiness/faithfulness of God.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, and the Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message. In other words, obeying God's word is the way to look to God's word made flesh.

Neither. Jesus set a sinless example for us to follow of how to practice Judaism in obedience to the Mosaic Law, which we are told to follow (1 Peter 2:21-22, 1 John 2:6). The way to follow Jesus is not by refusing to follow what he taught.

This is incorrect. There were others not descended from Jacob who traveled with the Israelites. These few were required to follow the Law. Christians don't "sojourn" with ancient Israel and we are not under the Mosaic Law.

I addressed this error in my post #17. Repeating your error after being corrected is stubborn and foolish.

I addressed this too.

Also addressed.

Wrong; the veil has nothing to do with rejecting the Law, but rather with not receiving the Lord. Here is 2 Corinthians 3:13-18 where it is explained fully:

13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate[a] the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

Where did I say Christians obey the Law? It appears you assume much or read into nothing and make it become something it never was intended to be.

Jesus said a few phrases in Aramaic yeah the apostles preached the gospel in many different languages however

if you take an English speaking person and then tell then a message in Chinese ……ancient Hebrew …..Greek …..Aramaic ect it’s going to be like jibberish they won’t hear or anything your saying you have to tell them in thier language so

“And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilæans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:4-8‬ ‭KJV‬‬

An ancient Hebrew person would have woken a certain language a modern English person is going to speak a different language Gods word transcends language barriers he created then to begin with they were always a construct because of mens transgression with the towel of Babel

No, a promise that has been ratified remains true under the New Covenant.

God's law defines what wickedness is, so if someone isn't under it, then they have no obligations to refrain from doing what it reveals to be wickedness, so that is motivation for not wanting to be under it. It remains the case that Jesus was sent in fulfillment of the promise to bless us by turning us from our wickedness.

God's law is His instructions for how to act in accordance with His character, not for how to act like a Jew. The reason why God gave the law to Jews was to equip Jews to be a light and a blessing to the nations by turning them from their wickedness and teaching them to obey it in accordance with the promise and with spreading the Gospel of the Kingdom,.


Do you deny the truth of Romans 10:5-8 and Deuteronomy 30:11-20?

God is sovereign, so we are all under His law are obligated to refrain from doing what it reveals to be sin. The position that we aren't under God's law is the position that we don't need to repent from sin, that we don't need salvation from sin, that we don't need grace, that we don't need Jesus to have given himself to redeem us from all lawlessness, and the position that we don't need the Gospel.

Indeed, Paul was encouraging the Colossians not to let anyone judge them for keeping God's holy days and prevent them from obeying God, so it is ironic when people try to use that verse to justify their refusal to obey God.

I cited the NAS Greek Lexicon, so I understand what the word means. If you want to say that Jesus completed or filled up out understanding of how to correctly obey the Mosaic Law, then that works too.

The definition I gave fits with what Jesus immediately proceeded to do next throughout the rest of the chapter, it fits with how other verses like Galatians 5:14 and 6:2 use the phrase, and it also fits with how other Jewish writings use the phrase, however, Jesus said nothing in Matthew 5 about his death on the cross, so the context does not support your view.

I cited Acts 21:20 as an example of Jews correctly responding what Jesus accomplish through the cross in accordance with Titus 2:14. The way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross is not by refusing to obey God's laws for how to do good works. Gentiles are obligated to refrain from sin, so Gentiles are under God's law.

The way to to remain in Christ by continuing to believe in Him and His finished work is by follow his example of how he practice Judaism, not by refusing to follow his example.

Stating that I am wrong is not addressing why the definition that I used is wrong or showing it to be in error.

No, I hold to the truth of those verses and you have not shown that they are wrong.

Where?

God's is what we are agreeing to obey by confessing that Jesus is Lord. In other words obeying God's word is the way to submit to God's word made flesh as Lord while you refusing to obey God word is the way to refuse to receive him as Lord.

Thank you Aaron for all of that I do agree on part. Now it could be just be me, to that I say forgive me. Well how do you talk to a wall? I quote just one "You don’t understand these things because you are an unbeliever." Just another reason I stop debating. Your told the truth. A thanks

LOL!

I have no idea what you're trying to say when you write something like this: "An ancient Hebrew person would have woken a certain language a modern English person is going to speak a different language Gods word transcends language barriers he created then to begin with they were always a construct because of mens transgression with the towel of Babel"

What is "woken a certain language"?
Have you ever heard of punctuation?
"He created then [language barriers?]
what were "were always a construct"

Romans 6:14, "For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace."

1 Corinthians 9:20, "To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to gain Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though I myself am not under the law) so that I might gain those under the law."

Galatians 3:10, "For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the things written in the book of the law.” [which is impossible]

Our brother has to go to great pains to communicate. His hands don't function like yours and mine. It is a small task for us to type words. It is a concerted effort for him. Be pleased to exercise grace.

You said this:

"'49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.'

God's Law was intended for all humans "

Are Christians humans? Yes. Every single one of us. I drew a conclusion consistent with your assertion.

A promise that God made in the OT is true in Christ, but that still does not obligate Christians to follow the Law.

So you misattribute this possibility as a motivation to every Christian who knows he or she is free from the Law? That is slander.

Scripture clearly tells us the reason for the Law:

Galatians 3:19 Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come.

What was true in the time of Moses is not true today, and Moses was speaking to ancient Israel, not to modern Christians (or any Christians, for that matter). Today, there is no tabernacle, no temple, no Levites, no priests, and no more sacrifice for those in Jesus Christ. As for Paul, he stated clearly, "The person who does the commandments shall live by them." The problem is that you can't follow the commandments today. You can't even keep the Sabbath as Moses prescribed, let alone all the others that apply to you.

His Law for Christians is to believe in the One He has sent.

Those are your words, not mine.

Prove it.

I don't want to say that, because I don't agree with it.

However, it does not fit the context of the whole of God's word. Jesus didn't fulfill the Law merely by teaching. Not even close.

Wrong. Gentiles were given only four straightforward instructions, not the entire law. Period.

Fixed it for you.

I do not know him. Clearly anyone who writes "Jesus said a few phrases in Aramaic yeah the apostles preached the gospel in many different languages however if you take an English speaking person and then tell then a message in Chinese ……ancient Hebrew …..Greek …..Aramaic ect it’s going to be like jibberish they won’t hear or anything your saying you have to tell them in thier language so “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" doesn't seem to have any trouble communicating. There are a few "typos", as there are in many posts, but the message is clear.

If I hear from him directly, I will respond to what he has to say.

I didn't say your definition was wrong; your assertion is wrong.

I didn't claim that the verses are wrong.

Same post, 17.

Word salad.

Philippians 2:3.

Paul spoke about multiple different categories of law other than the Law of God, such as the law of sin and works of the law, so it should at least be worth investigating the issue of which law he was referring to us as not being under out of all of the categories of law that he spoke about. For example, in Romans 7:25-8:2, he contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contrasted the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death. In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, and in Romans 3:31 and Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted a law that our faith upholds with works of the law that are not of faith.

In Romans 7:7, Paul said that the Law of God is not sinful, but is how we know what sin is, and when our sin is revealed, then that leads us to repent and causes sin to decrease. Furthermore, in Romans 7:12, he said the it is holy, righteous, and good, so it is a law where holiness, righteousness, and goodness have dominion over us. In contrast, the law of sin stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, so it is sinful, it causes sin to increase, and it is a law where sin has dominion over us. In Romans 6:14, Paul described the law that we are not under as being a law were sin had dominion over us, so he was speaking about the law of sin, not about the Law of God. Moreover, in Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in Romans 3:20, it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is, so we are still under it. In addition, everything else in Romans 6 speaks in favor of obedience to God and against sin.

In regard to Galatians 3:10-12, God is trustworthy, therefore His law is also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7), so the way to rely on God is by obedient relying on His instructions, it is contradictory to think that we should rely on God, but not on His instructions, and the position that God's instructions are untrustworthy/not of faith is the position that denies the trustworthiness/faithfulness of God. According to Galatians 3:10, the only way to avoid coming under the curse of the Law of God is by continuing to obey it, which is in accordance with what the passage that it is quoting from of Deuteronomy 27-28, where relying on God's law is the way to be blessed while not relying on it is the way to be cursed. So if someone were to rely on works of the law instead of relying on the Law of God, then they would thereby come under the curse for not relying on the Law of God. It would be absurd to interpret Galatians 3:10 as Paul quoting from a passage to support a point that is arguing against it by saying that relying on God's law is the way to be cursed and not relying on it is the way to be blessed.

In Galatians 3:10-12, Paul associated a quote from Habakkuk 2:4 saying that the righteous shall live by faith with a quote from Leviticus 18:5 that the one who obeys the Law of God will live by it, so the righteous who are living by faith are the same as those who are living in obedience to the Law of God. Moreover, the context of Habakkuk 2 contrasts the righteous who are living by faith with those who are not living in obedience to the Law of God and in Isaiah 51:7, the righteous are those on whose heart is the Law of God, so the righteous living by faith does not refer to a manner of living that is not in obedience to it.

In 1 Corinthians 9:21, Paul said in a parallel statement that he was not outside the Law of God, but under the Law of Christ, so he equated the Law of God with the Law of Christ, after all Christ is God, so Paul was denying that he was under the Law of God. Paul was speaking about giving up his rights in order to meet people where they were at, not speaking about doing what God's law reveals to be sin in order to reach sinners for Christ because that would have completely undermined his message.

In Psalms 119:142, it the Mosaic Law is truth, and in John 14:6, Jesus is the embodiment of that truth expressed through setting a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Mosaic Law. So do you really think that the position that followers of God should follow what God has commanded in accordance Christ's example is the position of an unbeliever?