The Law of Moses Has Not Been Abolished

[Jason1]

The verse you reference proves the distinction I just made (unless you are suggesting the demons trust in Jesus for their salvation). Don't you see that in James words?

What you seem to be missing is the claim that Jesus made regarding not only Torah but the entire Old Testament. Jesus' claim was/is that it is about Him (not, as you have it, the other way around and in part).

Do you believe we follow the Mosaic Law in order to merit our salvation? Or do you believe that if we love God we will obey His commands? It's quite an easy distinction to see, but sometimes a more difficult choice to make. It's repentance and belief.

Actually no distinction needs to be made because both are true as they always have been from the beginning.

The righteous live by both faith and obedience. (Gen 15:6, 18:19, Deu 6:25, Rev 14:12). It all comes down to covenant which is a deal between two or more parties. The terms are: Obey YHVH and we will be His people and He will be our Mighty One.

 

[Alcott]

Did you not understand the statement I made? You would not have asked this if you had understood. Reread it.

Yes, I understand it. But you did not answer my question.Again, Yes or No: have you stoned any sabbath wood gatherers, as in Numbers 15:32-36?

 

[JonC]

Actually no distinction needs to be made because both are true as they always have been from the beginning.

The righteous live by both faith and obedience. (Gen 15:6, 18:19, Deu 6:25, Rev 14:12). It all comes down to covenant which is a deal between two or more parties. The terms are: Obey YHVH and we will be His people and He will be our Mighty One.

Why do you think Paul's epistles so often employ making a distinction between obedience to the Law and faith in Christ? Why do you believe Jesus presented the New Covenant as distinct from the Old? Why do you think James highlighted a dichotomy between cognitive belief and s belief that results in obedience? What does it mean that Christ rendered the Law obsolete?

The Old Covenant does say to Israel "obey God and you will be His people, and He will be your God". But the New Covenant says Jesus fulfilled the Law where you could not. The Old Covenant points to Christ. It says to repent and believe the gospel and you will be made a new creature as God will live in you resulting in obedience. This is called "Christianity".

The blessings of the Old Covenant do not belong to us, they belong to Christ. The curses of the Old Covenant do not belong to Christ, they belong to us. The Law was never a means to obtain salvation, but instead it pointed to Jesus and to Him substantiated the promise of life and inheritance as the Son was perfectly obedient to the Father. Our salvation, therefore, is not of the Law or the Old Covenant, but of Christ.

It is in this way a heresy, and anti-Christian, to deny a distinction between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant and I am unaware of any Christian denomination that seeks to do so.

 

[Jason1]

Why do you think Paul's epistles so often employ making a distinction between obedience to the Law and faith in Christ? Why do you believe Jesus presented the New Covenant as distinct from the Old? Why do you think James highlighted a dichotomy between cognitive belief and s belief that results in obedience? What does it mean that Christ rendered the Law obsolete?

The Old Covenant does say to Israel "obey God and you will be His people, and He will be your God". But the New Covenant says Jesus fulfilled the Law where you could not. The Old Covenant points to Christ. It says to repent and believe the gospel and you will be made a new creature as God will live in you resulting in obedience. This is called "Christianity".

This is the big christian misunderstanding. Jesus did not make the law obsolete at all. Jesus came as a redeemer (buys something back) and a restorer. The old covenant had been broken, the northern kingdom cut off, and the southern kingdom trapped in a man made religion. Jesus came to set us free from two things: The curse of sin and the trappings of religion (man made law). The Jews thought they could attain righteousness by following the myriads of laws the pharisees and saducees created. Why did Jesus say we have to be more righteous than they? Its because theirs was a false system of self piety. True righteousness comes only in obeying the pure word of YHVH. Even the Jew's priesthood system had been corrupted at that time.

When you read galations, it is all about oral law. Both Jesus and Paul combat this over and over. Do you not even believe Jesus's own words here:

Mat 5:17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Torah or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to complete.
Mat 5:18 “For truly, I say to you, till the heaven and the earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall by no means pass from the Torah till all be done.

So why is the New Covenant so much better? Its all in the promises. He didn't cut all the laws away or else He would have a lawless people now and would have rewarded them for their disobedience. The better promise of giving us His spirit to help us obey the law is huge and its given to those that OBEY. (obey what?????)

Again, name one law that is bad and should not be followed anymore.

 

[JonC]

This is the big christian misunderstanding. Jesus did not make the law obsolete at all. Jesus came as a redeemer (buys something back) and a restorer. The old covenant had been broken, the northern kingdom cut off, and the southern kingdom trapped in a man made religion. Jesus came to set us free from two things: The curse of sin and the trappings of religion (man made law). The Jews thought they could attain righteousness by following the myriads of laws the pharisees and saducees created. Why did Jesus say we have to be more righteous than they? Its because theirs was a false system of self piety. True righteousness comes only in obeying the pure word of YHVH. Even the Jew's priesthood system had been corrupted at that time.

When you read galations, it is all about oral law. Both Jesus and Paul combat this over and over. Do you not even believe Jesus's own words here:

Mat 5:17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Torah or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to complete.
Mat 5:18 “For truly, I say to you, till the heaven and the earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall by no means pass from the Torah till all be done.

So why is the New Covenant so much better? Its all in the promises. He didn't cut all the laws away or else He would have a lawless people now and would have rewarded them for their disobedience. The better promise of giving us His spirit to help us obey the law is huge and its given to those that OBEY. (obey what?????)

Again, name one law that is bad and should not be followed anymore.

When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Hebrews 8:13)

 

[Jason1]

When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Hebrews 8:13)

Here is another misunderstanding. The word "covenant" is not in the text. What was made old and passed away? The levitical system. That is what the whole book of hebrews is talking about. We must keep things in context.

 

[HankD]

No one is morally or physically capable of keeping the Law, the Torah which is comprised of 613 mitsvouth (laws).

Approximately 200 of these mitsvuth cannot be kept because, as has been mentioned, there is no temple in Jerusalem, there is no Aaronic priesthood, both of which are required to fulfill these 200 or so commandments.

But go ahead and keep what you can, be sure to keep every jot and tittle.

And when you fail, which you most certainly will:

Matthew 11
28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

HankD

 

[Jason1]

No one is morally or physically capable of keeping the Law, the Torah which is comprised of 613 mitsvouth (laws).

Approximately 200 of these mitsvuth cannot be kept because, as has been mentioned, there is no temple in Jerusalem, there is no Aaronic priesthood, both of which are required to fulfill these 200 or so commandments.

But go ahead and keep what you can, be sure to keep every jot and tittle.

And when you fail, which you most certainly will:

Matthew 11
28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

HankD

Jesus's yoke is easy and light. What is his yoke? It is torah (He is the word afterall). It is easy. Here is proof:

Deu_30:11 “For this command which I am commanding you today, it is not too hard for you, nor is it far off.

Does He also say this to you?: Exo_16:28 And YHVH said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

 

[HankD]

Jesus's yoke is easy and light. What is his yoke? It is torah (He is the word afterall). It is easy. Here is proof:

Deu_30:11 “For this command which I am commanding you today, it is not too hard for you, nor is it far off.

Does He also say this to you?: Exo_16:28 And YHVH said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

Acts 15
1 And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved."
2 Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question.
...
5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses."
6 Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter.
7 And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: "Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.
8 "So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us,
9 "and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 "Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 "But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they."
12 Then all the multitude kept silent and listened to Barnabas and Paul declaring how many miracles and wonders God had worked through them among the Gentiles.
...
23 They wrote this letter by them: The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings.
24 Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law" -- to whom we gave no such commandment --
...
28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things:
29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.


"it seemed good to the Holy Spirit"

Please note if you speak ill against this "letter" sent by the apostles you speak ill against the Holy Spirit and in verse 10 you are "tempting God".

HankD

 

[Jason1]

Hank:

Lets look at the real point of the verses you quoted:

10 "Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

We already established that Jesus's yoke is light (and he is the word, aka torah). What yoke is burdensome? Its oral law. Notice who is wanting to place a burden on them --- Pharisees.

When you enter Judaism, you have to enter in a certain way. What the disciples are saying is that they enter first by belief, and then grow into the faith and learning torah.

Act_15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

The 4 prohibitions that they instructed the new converters where basics on enter: All summed up in "No Idolatry". Those 4 things pertained to how the pagans worshiped their gods.

Now do you really think they are saying it is okay to: murder, steal, lie, be homos, etc?

 

[JonC]

Here is another misunderstanding. The word "covenant" is not in the text. What was made old and passed away? The levitical system. That is what the whole book of hebrews is talking about. We must keep things in context.

That certainly is a misunderstanding. We have to take verse 13 in context with the whole. The chapter and verse annotations were a later addition to the text. What is being discussed is a διαθήκη.

"Behoild days are coming, says the Lord, when I will effect a New Covenant (καινός διαθήκη) with the House of Israel and the House of Judah; not like the covenant (διαθήκη) which I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; for they did not continue in my Covenant (διαθήκη), and I did not care for them, says the Lord, for this is the covenant (διαθήκη) that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My Laws into their minds, and I will write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people, and they shall not teach everyone his fellow citizen, and everyone his brother, saying 'know the Lord,' for all will know Me, from the least to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." When He sayd, "A καινός (new, fresh)," he has made the first obsolete."

Your disassociation of διαθήκη from καινός in this passage is unfortunate as it denies the text its meaning.

 

[Jason1]

Your disassociation of διαθήκη from καινός in this passage is unfortunate as it denies the text its meaning.

If I could read the funky words you posted maybe we could have a conversation about it. Otherwise it is writing in tongues.

 

[JonC]

If I could read the funky words you posted maybe we could have a conversation about it. Otherwise it is writing in tongues.

No, you don't have to read the "funky words" as they are already defined for you in the post. They are the "New Covenant" of which the passage speaks (the same "New Covenant" you deny as being the topic of the passage). I provided the Greek because you seemed to think that the word "covenant" in English was an addition when in fact it was exactly what the "new" was of which God had spoke.

 

[JonC]

Here is another misunderstanding. The word "covenant" is not in the text. What was made old and passed away? The levitical system. That is what the whole book of hebrews is talking about. We must keep things in context.

Here is the passage minus the two times "new" is translated by what it is pointing to in the text:

But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises. For if that first had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second.
For finding fault with them, He says, "BEHOLD, DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL EFFECT A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH; NOT LIKE THE COVENANT WHICH I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS ON THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; FOR THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DID NOT CARE FOR THEM, SAYS THE LORD. "FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS, AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS. AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. "AND THEY SHALL NOT TEACH EVERYONE HIS FELLOW CITIZEN, AND EVERYONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, 'KNOW THE LORD,' FOR ALL WILL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST TO THE GREATEST OF THEM. "FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE."

When He said, "new"" He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

The result it the same. What is new is a "New Covenant" which is NOT LIKE "the covenant which [God] made with their fathers" which they disobeyed. That is why your idea that only a part of the Old Covenant has passed away is so opposed to Scripture and Christianity itself. Yes, the Levitical priesthood has passed, but the author of Hebrews states it is because Christ is Mediator of "a better covenant" a "New Covenant", not the same old covenant.

 

[Jason1]

The result it the same. What is new is a "New Covenant" which is NOT LIKE "the covenant which [God] made with their fathers" which they disobeyed. That is why your idea that only a part of the Old Covenant has passed away is so opposed to Scripture and Christianity itself. Yes, the Levitical priesthood has passed, but the author of Hebrews states it is because Christ is Mediator of "a better covenant" a "New Covenant", not the same old covenant.

I agree what I am saying is opposed to Christianity but it is in line with scripture. Christianity worships a lawless Jesus who came to do away with the Father's words and instructions. Me, on the other hand, believe that Jesus came only speaking His Father's words, only doing His Father's words, and only promoting His Father's words. Radical concept I know! Dare I say he even spoke of repentance! Yikes...

Each covenant builds upon a previous one starting from the beginning. What's so new about the new covenant? Its the promises. Same laws as before unless you are advocating for murdering, stealing, and destroying like satan does.

 

[JonC]

I agree what I am saying is opposed to Christianity but it is in line with scripture. Christianity worships a lawless Jesus who came to do away with the Father's words and instructions. Me, on the other hand, believe that Jesus came only speaking His Father's words, only doing His Father's words, and only promoting His Father's words. Radical concept I know! Dare I say he even spoke of repentance! Yikes...

Each covenant builds upon a previous one starting from the beginning. What's so new about the new covenant? Its the promises. Same laws as before unless you are advocating for murdering, stealing, and destroying like satan does.

Your confusion is that you present Christianity as teaching the Law nullified when instead it is fulfilled in Christ. What I am advocating is salvation in Christ that results in a transformed life. AGAIN - Obedience to God is the result of salvation.
This means Christians do not murder, steal, ect. I do not understand why the distinction has proved so difficult for you.

 

[Jason1]

Your confusion is that you present Christianity as teaching the Law nullified when instead it is fulfilled in Christ. What I am advocating is salvation in Christ that results in a transformed life. AGAIN - Obedience to God is the result of salvation.
This means Christians do not murder, steal, ect. I do not understand why the distinction has proved so difficult for you.

Oh, there are many christians, including on here, that say the law is done away with, nailed to the cross, we are free from the law, etc., so the distinction I am making is not misunderstood at all.

If you, on the other hand, view the law as still valid then I agree with you. Fulfilling does not end anything in that context, when in fact it was a hebrew idiom that he was giving a proper interpretation of scripture. Jesus himself stated right after that that nothing will pass from the law and those teaching so will be called least in the kingdom.

That brings us back to your initial topic of the new covenant. If you view the law as still valid then it is still the basis of obedience in the new. The salvation part comes from Jesus restoring us back to the Father by removing our curse and making a new covenant with us since the old was broken which casted us away from the Father.

 

[JonC]

Oh, there are many christians, including on here, that say the law is done away with, nailed to the cross, we are free from the law, etc., so the distinction I am making is not misunderstood at all.

If you, on the other hand, view the law as still valid then I agree with you. Fulfilling does not end anything in that context, when in fact it was a hebrew idiom that he was giving a proper interpretation of scripture. Jesus himself stated right after that that nothing will pass from the law and those teaching so will be called least in the kingdom.

That brings us back to your initial topic of the new covenant. If you view the law as still valid then it is still the basis of obedience in the new. The salvation part comes from Jesus restoring us back to the Father by removing our curse and making a new covenant with us since the old was broken which casted us away from the Father.

If you mean God's law, then of course it is in effect because it reflects God's own nature (it is eternal). But if you mean the Covenant given to Israel and effective to them 400 years after Abraham until Christ (the Mosaic Law), then we disagree.

The difference between our views may be (let me know if I've misunderstood you) that I believe the New Covenant does not find its basis in the Old. Instead the Old looks to the New, and is fulfilled therein (in Christ). We are not to obey God in order to love Him, but we obey God because we love him. If we are saved we will obey God. If we are in Christ we will obey God. Obedience is the result, not the cause, of our salvation.

 

[Jason1]

The old covenant has been replaced by the new. Same terms, better promises. Very simple

The new does find its basis in the old and is built off of it. It is true the old did point to the new, but to define and understand the new, we have to know the old and its definitions and understandings.

Love is not an emotion, it is a dedication. So to say we have to love first or last is kind of an irrelevant argument because we must obey (love) always. Accept the gift and obey from then on (true repentance). This will include every old covenant law that is possible of being kept (Which is actually quite few).

7th day sabbath, kosher laws, sexuality laws, etc are all still valid now and forever.

 

[JonC]

The old covenant has been replaced by the new. Same terms, better promises. Very simple

The new does find its basis in the old and is built off of it. It is true the old did point to the new, but to define and understand the new, we have to know the old and its definitions and understandings.

Love is not an emotion, it is a dedication. So to say we have to love first or last is kind of an irrelevant argument because we must obey (love) always. Accept the gift and obey from then on (true repentance). This will include every old covenant law that is possible of being kept (Which is actually quite few).

7th day sabbath, kosher laws, sexuality laws, etc are all still valid now and forever.

Same Promise.