No I don't think I have this concept wrong. Here is how it works....EVERYTHING Christ and the Apostles taught can be traced back to the Old Testament Law. That is where their teachings came from. If the so called Jewish law was so easy to follow then why did Christ have to come?? They are not "that easy". Once again, I never said the whole law is obligatory, what I said was Christ did not ABOLISH IT and we can learn what sin is in the eyes of God if we read and meditate over those laws! VERY EASY CONCEPT TO GRASP..... And if we follow them to the BEST OF OUR ABILITY...IT WILL PLEASE GOD! END OF STORY!!
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Who says Christ did away with the Law??
- Thread starter compvett
- Start date
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
I seem to have heard you argument and style before.
Were you a member here under a different name?
No sir absolutely not. Must be an important topic though.
Oh by the way, if it was a topic could you refer me to the thread, I would like to see some of the responses. Thanks!
dmgdnooc
Active Member
The problem was not that 'some Jews were not putting their faith in Christ'.
The problem was that some Jewish Christians were obliging the Gentile Christians to observe the Law.
They were Judaisers, 'the party of the circumcision', those who said 'except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved', and they, 'by good words and fair speeches' were causing divisions and deceiving the hearts of the simple.
　
The problem was not that Christ was being rejected by them, but that they insisted that both Christ AND the Law were necessary for salvation.
　
The fact is that (for a Gentile) observing the Law is not significant to salvation.
　
It is incumbent upon a Jew (Christian or not) to observe the Law, no such obligation is laid on the Gentiles.
God does treat individuals differently, one from another (think on David, his adultery with Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah, or Naaman the Aramite Captain, his dispensation to enter an idolatrous temple, or others) and also Jews are treated differently to Gentiles (the Jew FIRST, and also the Gentile, is the constant refrain).
　
Of all the Gentiles with whom Jesus had dealings not one was told to observe the Law.
Jesus' only concern was with their faith, not their standing in the Law of Moses; but when he spoke with Jews it was a very different matter, a Jew had to have faith AND be observant of the Law.
　
Paul had much more to do with the Gentiles than Jesus.
Much of Romans, Galatians and Colossians is concerned with examining the differences between Jewish and Gentile Christians and three chapters of Acts could be added to the list.
Paul fought, with every breath, against the idea that a Gentile should observe the Law and he paid heavily for his stand. Not once did he back down, not even from Peter or James.
He was so rock solid on this because he recognised the danger from the self-satisfaction and self-righteousness that a 'shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body' can generate in the mind of the flesh.
　
If what I (and others) have said makes no sense to you, then stop and think about it, because what has been said has mostly just quoted Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles.
When he spoke to Jews he upheld the Law, because the Law is essential to a Jew's salvation.
When he spoke to Gentiles he required nothing more from them than was necessary for fellowship with the Jewish Christians because Gentile salvation is without the Law.
　
Our viewpoints do differ on the Law.
I have the advantage of having been where you are now, or so it seems to me.
I came to Christ through the OT; the NT had little appeal, didn't make much sense, to me until I had a grounding in the OT; and I struggled long with the notion of doing the Law as a non-Jew.
So I have an empathy, not merely a sympathy, for the things that you say and seek to do.
I can even see that some advantages (in understanding the 'why') accrued to me from my mis-guided endeavour; but, I have come to agree entirely with Paul on this and think myself most unlikely to change back to my previous thinking. He makes his case far too well.
　
Christ did not completly destroy the Law.
For Jews (whether Christian or not) the Law is as significant as it was in the 1st century.
The ordinances of the Law that kept Gentiles from approaching near to the Holy place were completely destroyed. We can all enter in with Christ.
The sacrifices for sin were completely destroyed. There is no more a sacrifice for sin, save the sacrifices of our lips and the sacrifice of tears.
The traditions that grew out of the Law were completely destroyed. If they ever carried the significance that men attach to such things.
I don't think much else passed away, maybe someone can help me out a little (or a lot) here.
　
In Leviticus 1.2 God says to Moses 'Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man bring an offering .....' and He proceeds to define, by a series of commands, what is an acceptable offering and the manner in which it is to be offered.
First point being, the commandments (of the Law) are specifically directed to the children of Israel, not to Gentiles.
Second point, God defines what is an acceptable expression of worship, not man.
It appears to me that a Gentile intruding his/her worship into that private arrangement (covenant) between God and Israel is like someone taking a seat at a higher table at the feast than has been apportioned to him/her.
It is not the form of acceptable worship that God has commanded for Gentiles.
　
Jesus repeats 9 of the 10 Commandments and adds others, John adds 1 and with Paul et al many more are added by strong implication and example. Try a google of the 'Commandments of Christ' and see for yourself.
My interest is more inclined to keeping the New Covenant than the Old (and essentially private) Covenant between God and Israel.
　
I don't think that eating dogs or cats (or anything other than blood and things sacrificed to idols) is excluded to a Gentile. Though you would be hardpressed to get me to eat either, and may I never be so hungry as to consider it. OTOH, it might just be a matter of the right sauce.
You may note that the OT dietary laws do not say that the food is detestable to God.
Eating the food makes only an Israelite (someone under the Law) unclean.
Not eating it is a sign of Israel's Covenant with God, and that Covenant is not so easily entered into.
　
You say things like 'it shows God that I really do care' , 'it will please God' and other such things, but do not see that same thinking is exactly what Paul warns against when opposing the keeping of the Law by Gentiles.
You can't show God anything; and your not eating a crab salad does not please Him, it is not His will for you as a Gentile.
　
Last edited:
Love your neighbour means loving all of creation if you do, you will not rape it, you will not do ugly things etc, yes I have studied Matthew, I have read the bible from Genesis throughout to Revelations and re read it and made notes and cross referances for the past thirty years, I also made notes of John chapter 8 and ten in relation to most of the content in the bible, in this process I came to realise that Jesus in my opinion told the jews that they have since the beginning worshipped a Devil, that all who came before him (all who told this world that they were god, were thieves, murderers, and liars) that this world did not know his Father, that only now 2000 years ago when Jesus was here, did his Father got to know us through him, and we his Father also through him, if we have not known his father, then who did this world worship since the beginning, have you never thought about the words in John chapter 10? Nobody knew the Father or Jesus before he came. He did sent prophets though, like Abel, Moses, Elijah, and Zechariah, Abel were killed by Cain, according to the bible out of jealousy, according to Jesus he was a prophet, and Cain were given a mark by God in order for the people not to kill him, that God send him into a new land and blessed him, he became a rich man, don't you find that interesting?
Moses was glad that Jesus was to come, funny that Moses made a pact with God, then a few days later God wanted to kill him because his sons were not circumcised, on the way to Egypt, but later we read that his father in law Jethru brought them to him after he came back back from Egypt, at first they went with him, then his father in law brought them to him when he was back, interesting!
Elijah, who later became John the Baptist, "reincarnation" even more interesting! Zechariah killed between the temple and the altar, by the order of God, Jesus did say all who came before were liars (the case of moses example), murderers (the case of Zecharaiah and perhaps Abel also) how many were killed whose names we do not even know who are not mentioned in the scriptures.
What did they steel? all the battles the Israelites fought, they had to put the gold and silver aside as the lords part of the loot, if they kept it they were murderered, or killed for disobedience, never thought why god would need gold, if he was the creator and wanted gold it was just a snap of the fingers away?
Do you really want to obey the laws of such a god?
walmul.
God set up Laws to rule things, including humans and angels. Ever since Adam sinned and was driven out of God's Kingdom, humans are no longer inside God's Kingdom. They need to pass the final judgment to make their return.
In human history humans are cruel. The Egyptians killed the children of the Jews on sight simply because the Jews were getting over-populated. Even as late as AD70 when the Romans took over Jerusalem, they killed the Jews (over a million) rampantly. And as late as 1940 Hitler killed the Jews even systematically.
The Jews once were no better than the Egyptians nor the Romans, or else they couldn't have survived the surrounding enemies holding the totally different religions. God chose them not because they were any better in terms of brutalty or humanity, they were chosen perhaps they are good message keepers (they can keep the Word all along with them in the 2000 years of exile without a country to belong to).
Only after receiving the Mosaic Law and after settling in Canaan, they were gradually educated to be the upholders of God's Law.
In human history humans are cruel. The Egyptians killed the children of the Jews on sight simply because the Jews were getting over-populated. Even as late as AD70 when the Romans took over Jerusalem, they killed the Jews (over a million) rampantly. And as late as 1940 Hitler killed the Jews even systematically.
The Jews once were no better than the Egyptians nor the Romans, or else they couldn't have survived the surrounding enemies holding the totally different religions. God chose them not because they were any better in terms of brutalty or humanity, they were chosen perhaps they are good message keepers (they can keep the Word all along with them in the 2000 years of exile without a country to belong to).
Only after receiving the Mosaic Law and after settling in Canaan, they were gradually educated to be the upholders of God's Law.
Pal I hate to even tackle this one because you are so far off.. With all do respect sir this is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Jesus was with GOD at the beginning, the God of the Old Testament is the SAME God of the New Testament. What do you think God means when he says he is the Alpha and the Omega??? What do you think God means when he says he never changes?? What laws do you think Christ and the Apostles were pulling from??? Do you not see signs of Christ all throughout the whole Old Testament?? Who do you think the prophets were prophesying about. Why does God call the Jewish people the apple of his eye??? God Bless you Brother, I hope you can re-access your thinking on this one.
OK I do agree that there were some Jews, (Judiasers) that were telling new Gentile believers that Salvation required them to follow the law. That is wrong. Also the fact that you believe Jews are obligated to follow the law as part of their salvation is also wrong. Christ never said that. At this point scripture CLEARLY tells us that all men are now one in Christ. No more Jew or Gentile....we are all one, (brothers) in Christ. One God, and only one God...not a God of the Jews and a God of the Gentiles. That is dead wrong to say Jew are still "obligated"...NO ONE IS OBLIGATED OR BOUND TO.
And you are right Christ never said to anyone that we HAD to uphold the law. As I mentioned before he encourages ALL BELIEVERS in Matthew 5:17-19 to follow the law as there is a REWARD in the Kingdom for WHOEVER does so. Until you can grasp that, this debate is going nowhere......Again in Romans 3:31 Paul CLEARLY tells us how to address the law. And he is talking to US, TODAY, WITHOUT A DOUBT.
And yes I already told you that I agree Christ did do away with all animal sacrifices as well as the stonings and death penalties that the law initially required. And listen to what you are saying about when scripture says Speak to the children of Isreal. The whole Old Testament is basically addressed to the children of Isreal, so when you say such a thing then you are basically saying MOST of the Bible is for only Jews.
Now onto your comment about God not thinking food is detestable. You indeed are correct, he doesn't think FOOD is detestable. What you might consider food actually is NOT food. Look at Levitucus 11. All of Leviticus 11......He calls many of the things that we Americans consider food DETESTABLE. He calls it unclean for us and detestable. I certainly don't think he would condemn certain animals to eat and then all of the sudden decide they are now clean to eat. NOT SO. He says they are detestable and unclean TO US.
Anyways the bottom line is that I don't see you trying to comprehend Matthew 5:17-19 and Romans 3:31. These are clear scriptures that tell all believers how to address the law. And like I said it is not out of obligation to follow Gods rules, it is because we want to. And I am sure we can both agree that Loving the Lord with all our hearts and Loving our neighbors as ourselves will cover most of what God requires of us. But I can't agree that all other laws are just for Jews or done away with. Blessings!!
Hi compvett.
Thank you for the reply, and the blessing. Yes Jesus was there at the beginning Paul confirmed it, Is God of the Old Tetament the alpha and the omega, is he always the same? He gave the commandments and laws in Exodus, then in Isaiah he asked who told the people to do the altar offerings! Then in Jeremiah he denies having given it and told the people they could just as well eat it themselves! Yes I see signs in the old testament like when Zechariah was killed and god scattered the sheep; about this incident Jesus said in John 10 "The wolf came to scatter the sheep" and in Zechariah chapter 13 the wolf did exactly that, go read it.
The Jewish people the apple of Jesus's eye! No my friend, the apple of the old testaments eye; yes, in John chapter 8 verse 44 you will read that Jesus told them they were worshipping the Devil since the beginning, that is the words written there, and Jesus was fair, even towards Judas he knew he was going to get him killed yet he let him, God in the old testament were not that forgiving he killed people just because they listened to what the prophets like Zechariah had to say, go read Zecharaiah chapter 13.
Ask yourself this: if you have ten children, and you order the nine younger ones to listen to the oldest and they don't, will you go and kill them? Will you tell your children to offer their firstborn to you, and if they feel bad about it suggest that a perfect lamb will do in your first borns place, but leave the order of the firstborn in your scriture with the choice still there?
walmul.
Again with all do respect.....I have no problem having a disagreement, but it seems to me that you can't or won't address the scriptures I gave you because they go against what you currently believe. I just ask you really ask yourself deep down inside why you would reject something God says to do. Hopefully he will allow you to see the truth. Blessings to you and have a great day!!
God is definetely the same. He is the same God from the beginning to the end. Now that being said, he has dealt with mankind differently over the ages. Some things have passed away and the way he has dealt with punishment has obviously changed from time to time. So God's ways can change and have according to scripture, BUT like I said this is the same God.
Now you are right in saying that Christ accused people of following the Devil vs truly following God. He was addressing a Jew at the time but certainly he didn't mean every single Jew. He meant the ones who were rejecting HIM, but still thinking that they were rightous by observing the law. Observance of the law is USELESS without Christ!!!
And as far as God of the Old Testament wiping people out and telling others to elimate other Nations etc.....Do you not think when Christ comes back again all who reject him will not be held accoutable and also have an eternal punishment. He will clean house again, just like he did in Noah's time and the time of Sodom and Gomorah. He says he will. All men will be subject to God's wrath and recieve what they deserve. The rightous will recieve the blessing of entrance to the Kingdom and the evil will recieve their reward of eternal damnation. Blessing to you and hope we can learn from each other. Praise God!
There are three kinds of law in the OT:
1) the ceremonial law - which was a picture (revelation) of Christ's nature (pure, perfect) and work (propitiation),
2) the moral law - which are the principles which reflect (reveal) God's character and nature (righteous, holy) and His relationship to (the basis on which He must deal with) His creation (ruler, lawgiver, judge),
3) the judicial (civil) law - which was for the purpose of governing Israel in accordance with the moral law.
The NT teaches that the ceremonial law is abolished.
1) the ceremonial law - which was a picture (revelation) of Christ's nature (pure, perfect) and work (propitiation),
2) the moral law - which are the principles which reflect (reveal) God's character and nature (righteous, holy) and His relationship to (the basis on which He must deal with) His creation (ruler, lawgiver, judge),
3) the judicial (civil) law - which was for the purpose of governing Israel in accordance with the moral law.
The NT teaches that the ceremonial law is abolished.
Not so sure that the scripture actually divides these laws into 3 categories. I believe that is something man did. That being said if anything is done away with it is the laws that you refer to as ceremonial. That would be anything to do with sacrificing and things pertaining to the temple and of course any stonings. Thanks for the input!
Nadia Faiazova
Member
Hi! Jesus himself said :"Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill; 18*for truly I say to YOU that sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one particle of a letter to pass away from the Law by any means and not all things take place" (Matthew 5:17). Jesus "fulfilled the Law" in that meaning that he brought himself as the best sacrifice, giving up his life as a ransom. No one before Jesus and no one after can fulfill the Law in that way. In fact, now we are not under obligation of Law, so as to bring animal sacrifices. We are under new commandment- John 13:34
Yes, it does make sense.
The examples you give are the moral law, which was not set aside.
Only the ceremonial laws were set aside--sacrifices, cleansings for defilements, food laws, purification laws, etc.
See http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2355110-post262.html
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
you should go with your instinct on that because it would be correct. Jesus was obedient to all of Gods laws because he loved Gods law. Those mosaic laws show us how God views things, what his standards of morality are... they havnt changed.
What Jesus changed was the 'focus' from a written law code to obedience from the heart. To be a follower of Christ one would have to focus on Christ, rather then the law, as the way to God.
If we do that and imitate his example, we dont need a set of written laws because Jesus example is all we need.
Actually, Pegg, the NT reveals that the ceremonial (not moral) laws (Leviticus) have been set aside because the Levitical priesthood which was their basis has been set aside, and all has been fulfilled in Christ. (Heb 7:11-12; Ro 10:4)