The Law: Fulfilled or Abolished?

[Jethro Bodine]

And as far is an act of love, will those being thrown into the lake of fire show God's love as well?

It is important to distinguish between national and personal justice in the matter of taking aim at the enemies of right.

Jesus is focusing on interpersonal relationships, IMO.

And I personally am convinced the saying Jesus addresses is based on this:

"“Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord?" (2 Chronicles 19:2 NIV)

In interpersonal relationships the answer is 'yes'. But in the overall view of the kingdom and the work of satan in the world, the answer is 'no'!

 

[JLB]

But aren't you making the case that to keep any of the (ceremonial and illustrative) law is equivalent to turning back to another gospel?

You know my position.

I believe that we are to walk with God in righteousness, holiness and the fear of the lord, as abraham did.

I believe we are to keep the Laws that Abraham kept.

I keep waiting on a list of laws that Abraham walked in.

Do you know them?

Could it be that Abraham learned directly from God, the way Adam was supposed to?

Could it be that John the baptist really was a righteous man who learned from God directly.

Could it be that the New Covenant is just what God said, -not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt,

and again

No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more. [Knowing God is the very definition of Eternal life.]

and again -

I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Who will write His Laws in our mind and on our heart? You or God?

Could it be that John taught us that we would know God and learn directly from Him.

But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.1 John 2:27

This is exactly what the Church is supposed to walk in, as Jesus said -

15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. Matthew 16:15-17

Walking with God and learning from Him is the foundation of the Church.

Peter is not the foundation.

Knowing God and learning from Him directly, walking in Faith, which comes from hearing God, is the foundation.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

But aren't you making the case that to keep any of the (ceremonial and illustrative) law is equivalent to turning back to another gospel?

You know my position.

I believe that we are to walk with God in righteousness, holiness and the fear of the lord, as abraham did.

I believe we are to keep the Laws that Abraham kept.

I keep waiting on a list of laws that Abraham walked in.

Do you know them?

Could it be that Abraham learned directly from God, the way Adam was supposed to?

Could it be that John the baptist really was a righteous man who learned from God directly.

Could it be that the New Covenant is just what God said, -not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt,

and again

No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more. [Knowing God is the very definition of Eternal life.]

and again -

I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Who will write His Laws in our mind and on our heart? You or God?

Could it be that John taught us that we would know God and learn directly from Him.

But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.1 John 2:27

This is exactly what the Church is supposed to walk in, as Jesus said -

15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. Matthew 16:15-17

Walking with God and learning from Him is the foundation of the Church.

Peter is not the foundation.

Knowing God and learning from Him directly, walking in Faith, which comes from hearing God, is the foundation.


JLB

But none of this negates the ministry of 'for it is written...'.

Just because we also learn from the written word doesn't mean we're turning back to another gospel. That is only true if you are relying on ANYTHING, written or unwritten, to justify you outside of the blood of Christ.

 

[JLB]

But aren't you making the case that to keep any of the (ceremonial and illustrative) law is equivalent to turning back to another gospel?

You know my position.

I believe that we are to walk with God in righteousness, holiness and the fear of the lord, as abraham did.

I believe we are to keep the Laws that Abraham kept.

I keep waiting on a list of laws that Abraham walked in.

Do you know them?

Could it be that Abraham learned directly from God, the way Adam was supposed to?

Could it be that John the baptist really was a righteous man who learned from God directly.

Could it be that the New Covenant is just what God said, -not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt,

and again

No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more. [Knowing God is the very definition of Eternal life.]

and again -

I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Who will write His Laws in our mind and on our heart? You or God?

Could it be that John taught us that we would know God and learn directly from Him.

But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.1 John 2:27

This is exactly what the Church is supposed to walk in, as Jesus said -

15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. Matthew 16:15-17

Walking with God and learning from Him is the foundation of the Church.

Peter is not the foundation.

Knowing God and learning from Him directly, walking in Faith, which comes from hearing God, is the foundation.


JLB

But none of this negates the ministry of 'for it is written...'.

Just because we also learn from the written word doesn't mean we're turning back to another gospel. That is only true if you are relying on ANYTHING, written or unwritten, to justify you outside of the blood of Christ.

3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? Galatians 3:3

This word is not justified.

This word means complete.

They were being compelled by the Jews to add the Law to the Christian faith for the purpose of being complete.

Not Justified. Not made righteous. Not saved.

Perverting the Gospel is adding elements of the Law of Moses to it, so that you have something more than what you have.

Paul says they were given the Spirit by grace, not because they adhered to special food laws and the such.

Paul says faith working by love is all that matters.

Again, there is liberty, to observe special days or not.

Eat special foods or not.

Paul also says that the one who has the special diet or needs special days to observe is weak in faith.

Paul teaches that anything not of faith is sin.

There should be grace for those who need special things to prop up their faith, however the very opposite would be to spend a lifetime selling teachings and books that teach Gentile Christians they "need" to do these things if they want to be obedient to God.

That Gentile Christians "need" to do these things to be complete.

I find it alarming, that you are resisting me on this.

Do you think a Gentile Christian needs any of the Law of Moses to be complete?


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

JLB,

The context is justification--being declared perfect in righteousness before God in heaven. Judaism taught that you attain that by keeping the law--circumcisions, Sabbaths, etc. The gospel of Christ says you attain that the way Abraham attained it--through faith in the promise of a son.

I don't defend in any way shape or form the law keepers argument (those who have that argument) that somehow keeping the ceremonial and separation laws in the law of Moses is how a person grows in sanctification. I do defend their freedom to keep any law of Moses their conscience says is part of the expected and obligatory expression of their faith in Christ...just as we are sure 'do not murder', 'do not steal', etc. is part of the expected and obligatory expression of faith in Christ and insist must be followed.

The problem is, we in the church try to make this about justification when the law keepers (most of them anyway) know very well that one is NOT declared righteous by keeping the law of Moses. That's not why they're doing it. They do it because their conscience says they are to do it. I'm not at liberty to take that away from them. My obligation to them is to not be a stumbling block to them by causing them to violate their conscience. If I did that then I would be the one who is not acting correctly.

So, as long as it isn't about justification we should just leave them alone. God will take care of the law keeper who knows Christ's blood is the only thing that can make a person righteous but who doesn't know that the ceremonial and separation laws do not need to be literally fulfilled anymore this side of Christ.

So don't misunderstand. I'm not resisting the point that you can't be made perfect by keeping the law. I'm resisting the suggestion that the 'perfection' Paul speaks about is limited to the perfection of sanctification, and is not about the perfection of justification. The context makes it abundantly clear that the issue in dispute is the matter of justification, not sanctification.

 

[JLB]

If I did that then I would be the one who is not acting correctly.

As typified by the oxygen bottle ministry.

The context is justification--being declared perfect in righteousness before God in heaven.

I don't want to go round and round with you Brother, as you know I agree with 99 % of what you say.

Where I don't agree is, that we know what each person believes and understands in there heart as to the motive, that is to say WHY they keep the Law.

Messianic Judaism by and large teaches that in order to be in Covenant, you must be circumcised.

In order to be obedient to God, you must keep the law of Moses.

That we are grafted into the Covenant at Sinai.

That the New Covenant is just for Jews, not Gentiles, which TOG himself has stated.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If I did that then I would be the one who is not acting correctly.

As typified by the oxygen bottle ministry.

Hey, it works, right? Lol!

The context is justification--being declared perfect in righteousness before God in heaven.

I don't want to go round and round with you Brother, as you know I agree with 99 % of what you say.

Actually, I think if you were more careful about making the distinction between ceremonial and moral law we'd be in virtually complete agreement.

Where I don't agree is, that we know what each person believes and understands in there heart as to the motive, that is to say WHY they keep the Law.

Right. We can't know motives. I just go by what people say. And most Messianic believers will tell you plainly that the only way to have sin guilt removed and be declared righteous before God is through faith in the blood of Christ to do that for you.

Messianic Judaism by and large teaches that in order to be in Covenant, you must be circumcised.

In order to be obedient to God, you must keep the law of Moses.

Right. But we confuse that to mean 'keeping the law in order to be justified', instead of what they really mean (most of them anyway) that the ceremonial law is the expected obedience of saving faith, just as we all agree that 'do not steal', 'do not covet', etc. are the expected obediences of the faith that justifies all by itself. I hope people are understanding this. I hope they're able to understand the difference between being obedient because you're trying to be justified, and being obedient because you are justified. Law keepers just think that the ceremonial law is included in the obediences that you seek to keep because you have been justified by faith in Christ all by that faith itself.

That we are grafted into the Covenant at Sinai.

Yes, it seems the majority of them do not understand that the system, the covenant, the WAY of relating to God has been set aside and replaced with a new system and Covenant and WAY of relating to God. One that resembles the old but is clearly taught in the scriptures as a NEW Covenant and way of relating to God. But, still, this is not a matter of justification to most of them. But we in the church seem to only be able to understand matters of 'law' and 'old covenant' in that vein. Centuries of poor, misguided indoctrination is to blame for that.

That the New Covenant is just for Jews, not Gentiles, which TOG himself has stated.

True. But, again, not a matter of justification. Just some of the details of our denominational differences.

The fact that the New Covenant is already in place, just not fully yet, and includes us homely gentiles, is seen right in our NT scriptures.

 

[JLB]

Actually, I think if you were more careful about making the distinction between ceremonial and moral law we'd be in virtually complete agreement.

I do agree with the distinction between ceremonial Law and Moral Law.

What I don't agree with is that the moral law that you read in the Law of Moses, originated with Moses.

It is the Law of God.

Probably Abraham walked in some or most of them, as taught to him by The Lord personally, which is eating from the tree of life, or by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.

The other way is learning to do good from evil as taught by man, which is ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of truth.

The New Covenant has provision to know God, to walk by a Law that is written in your mind by God.

The anointing teaches you all things, not that anyone needs to teach you.

Did you get the revelation of what you now teach from learning from a man, or from God?

Don't get me wrong, the ministry of Teacher is supposed to be someone with Christ formed in them, teaching the Church by the unction of the Spirit and making a divine deposit of the life of Jesus Christ in an individual.

Any truth that is conveyed without the life and anointing of Jesus Christ will not produce life.



JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Actually, I think if you were more careful about making the distinction between ceremonial and moral law we'd be in virtually complete agreement.

I do agree with the distinction between ceremonial Law and Moral Law.

What I don't agree with is that the moral law that you read in the Law of Moses, originated with Moses.

It is the Law of God.

Since they are the same there is no reason to fear making reference to the law of Moses.

Bad teaching in the church has made the 'law' (as in 'law of Moses') a four letter word. But it's plain to see in our NT's that it was not that then.

Even though some Messianic teachings go way too far the other way they do help those of us indoctrinated by centuries of incorrect teaching about the law of Moses to know the historical truth about how we got this way.

Probably Abraham walked in some or most of them, as taught to him by The Lord personally, which is eating from the tree of life, or by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.

The other way is learning to do good from evil as taught by man, which is ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of truth.

The New Covenant has provision to know God, to walk by a Law that is written in your mind by God.

The anointing teaches you all things, not that anyone needs to teach you.

Read the passage carefully. John is not teaching us that we don't need to be taught by anyone (see how contradictory that is?). He's teaching us that in this New Covenant we each have the power of discernment--the ability to know for ourselves, through the ministry of the Spirit, what teachings we hear are the truth and which are not. Read it. His anointing (not mine) will confirm this.

Did you get the revelation of what you now teach from learning from a man, or from God?

Answer: By God through man...especially the authors of the NT. In all the things I've heard from men, I know what is truth and what is not because I have the anointing of the Spirit. IOW, the power of discernment. No longer are the people of God at the mercy of wicked shepherds, blindly led to their destruction.

Don't get me wrong, the ministry of Teacher is supposed to be someone with Christ formed in them, teaching the Church by the unction of the Spirit and making a divine deposit of the life of Jesus Christ in an individual.

Any truth that is conveyed without the life and anointing of Jesus Christ will not produce life.

God decides when a message about him is heard with the accompanying voice of the Spirit. The anointed message is not dependent on an anointed vessel. We'd be in bad shape if that were true. That's why God gave each of us the power of discernment.

 

[JLB]

Since they are the same there is no reason to fear making reference to the law of Moses.

I don't fear in making a reference to the truth.

The Law of God is seen in the [moral] law of Moses, which was added until the Seed...

To understand what I am saying, is to understand that Gods moral Laws as seen before the Law of Moses, and witnessed by the law of Moses, are still intact today, even though the law of Moses was added until, and became obsolete and have vanished away, and have been replace by the New Covenant which contains new [fresh] laws and new priesthood.

This way people get the idea of keeping laws, that Abraham walked in, even though they "see" language in the new Testament writings that indicate the Law is no longer.

By saying the Law of Moses was added until, and has vanished away, we do away with all the foolishness of those that are taught to keep the law of Moses.

By showing that Abraham walked in laws and statutes and precepts of God, and that was a walk of faith, we encourage a righteous walk of faith.

Lets look at the hall of Faith, and examine the truth -

Which one one these exploits of Moses came from "keeping the law of Moses".

23 By faith Moses, when he was born, was hidden three months by his parents, because they saw he was a beautiful child; and they were not afraid of the king's command. 24 By faith Moses, when he became of age, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter,

This is what God directly told Moses to do, whereby Moses obeyed showing his faith to be alive, before the Law of Moses was given.

25 choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin,

This is what God directly told Moses to do, whereby Moses obeyed showing his faith to be alive, before the Law of Moses was given.

26 esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked to the reward.

This is what God directly told Moses to do, whereby Moses obeyed showing his faith to be alive, before the Law of Moses was given.

27 By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king; for he endured as seeing Him who is invisible.

This is what God directly told Moses to do, whereby Moses obeyed showing his faith to be alive, before the Law of Moses was given.

28 By faith he kept the Passover and the sprinkling of blood, lest he who destroyed the firstborn should touch them.

This is what God directly told Moses to do, whereby Moses obeyed showing his faith to be alive, before the Law of Moses was given.

29 By faith they passed through the Red Sea as by dry land, whereas the Egyptians, attempting to do so, were drowned.

This is what God directly told Moses to do, whereby Moses obeyed showing his faith to be alive, before the Law of Moses was given.

This is the operation of faith working by obedience.

This is what the Church is to walk in today.

One more time.

Do we need anything in Moses Law to be complete?


JLB

 

[JLB]

Read the passage carefully. John is not teaching us that we don't need to be taught by anyone (see how contradictory that is?). He's teaching us that in this New Covenant we each have the power of discernment--the ability to know for ourselves, through the ministry of the Spirit, what teachings we hear are the truth and which are not. Read it. His anointing (not mine) will confirm this.

Thank you for your "explanation" of what you think John means.

27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit--just as it has taught you, remain in him. 1 John 2:27

This is a reference to the provision of the New Covenant as spoken of by Jeremiah the prophet, which says -


But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds,and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more." Jeremiah 31:33-34


John is confirming a New Covenant provision, which Jesus also taught, which says The Spirit will lead you and guide you into all truth.

They will all be taught of God is another way to say this.

Knowing God and being taught of Him is what Abraham walked in.


The covenant that the children of Israel were under was not like this.

Only the High Priest could enter the Holy of Holies, and then only once a year.


Now we all can know Him, from the least to the greatest and can be taught of Him.

We can be taught of Him directly.

Again, the ministry of the Teacher is an expression of the Ministry of Jesus Christ for the work of the ministry, that we can all grow up into Him and become the fulness of the stature of a perfect man, whereby we do the works that He did, even greater works.

Casting out devils, healing the sick, raising the dead.

Destroying the works of the devil.

The five fold ministry is to reproduce Jesus Christ in others.

This is the work of being fruitful and multiplying.


JLB

 

[JLB]

Answer: By God through man...especially the authors of the NT. In all the things I've heard from men, I know what is truth and what is not because I have the anointing of the Spirit.

You learned the Truth, because The Spirit led you to this Truth that the New Testament writers penned under the anointing.

Its funny how others can read the same New Testament and all the get is, we are to keep the law of Moses. Some read it and say Paul was a false teacher.

As I recall, it was when you were debating with the Sabbath Keepers about their legalistic approach to keeping the sabbath, and specifically how they thought that keeping the sabbath was more important that loving their neighbor.

Then, by that same standard of measure, you began to evaluate then same approach to those that place the external Church activities such as, reading the bible, singing on the worship team, preaching from the pulpit, cleaning the Church... above the requirement of loving your neighbor.

I don't find the writers of the New testament saying those things, you probably just heard your Pastor teach that to the congregation one Sunday morning.

If that is so easily seen in the New testament, why don't we hear everyone teaching this message.

I'm sure Paul probably saw in the law of Moses, something similar when He went to Jerusalem to confront Peter and James about their hypocrisy. :help


JLB

 

[JLB]

The anointed message is not dependent on an anointed vessel. We'd be in bad shape if that were true.

You just made my point!


JLB

 

[stovebolts]

JLB,

Before I ask you to concede, you will have to find a place of understanding. So far, you don't seem to want to understand and as such, I'm not forcing you to understand. Actually, I can't force you.

What I can say is that I believe scriptures when scriptures say what occurred was because of the sins of those who committed them. God told Abraham that day would come some 400 years after him, and it did. God also told him the why. If we take that as God teaching his children to hate their enemies, then it gives excuse to hate ones neighbor. You see, the passages you provided say nothing of hating ones enemy, yet you interpret it that way.

I on the other hand have shown the passage in Leviticus Jesus was referencing. And how do I know Jesus was referencing it? Because the dead sea scrolls bear this out as does the teachings of Shammai which was one of the leaders in the school of thought of the day. What have you given me? You have given me your opinion on how a passage should be interpreted giving no thought to God's why when he told Abraham of these things. From that perspective, I'll stand where I'm at while on the same token give you some homework. If the passages you quoted are to teach people to hate their enemies, then it should be easy to find the Sages teaching to hate their enemies from these passages. I can guarantee you that you won't find a Sage teaching what your suggesting. And if this is true, why do you insist that the Jews teach hatred of their enemies from this verse when you can't find a Sage to teach this? It's time for a reality check and the proof's in the pudding. If you want to have some creedence to your claim, then you need to produce a teaching from the Sages that teach what your suggesting from those verses.

How is it you can draw a reference from how the Law should be interpreted from a source outside of scripture, but when I use a source from the Law itself to draw a conclusion then I am not "understanding" you.

I am still waiting on the perspective of your son of whether utterly destroying their enemies as commanded by God was an act of Love or Hate.


JLB

[MENTION=90220]JLB[/MENTION]
What I found by studying the Torah from a Jewish perspective is this. They actually have to live by it where we stand from a far and comment on it. It is at this point I want to be very, very clear. I am not advocating we be judged by the law. What I do advocate is understanding the Torah from a Jewish perspective for the wisdom they bring to the table, which gives us a clearer understanding of the NT writings.

Now then, we started this conversation with the words of Jesus.''You have heard it said, love your neighbor and hate your enemy" and he says this right after stating that he did not come to abolish the law but rather to fulfill the law. As I and others have stated earlier, this it to be taken as Jesus giving the correct interpretation of scriptures.

You are interpreting Deuteronomy 7:1-2 to say "Hate your enemies" since the text does not say to "Hate your enemies". Thus, that is how you interpret the passage. It is at this point I would remind you that Torah was to be lived out, it was never meant to be just spiritual or head knowledge. A proper exegesis of the passage you interpret to mean "Hate your enemies" finds it's first big issue in that the passage is directed at a particular peoples. But we don't need to go there.

But lets stay focused on what Jesus said. "You have heard it said" Again I ask, who is the authority that is interpreting Torah to say "Hate your enemies". We need to look at who were the lead teachers.

We know that the Pharisees and Sadducees held sway among the people, but they fell under the guidance of the Sanhedrin. As such, if any passage in Torah was to be upheld as "Hate your enemy", it would be found within in the writings of the Sanhedrin which are readily available online. I happen to know by reading this book http://www.amazon.com/Hillel-Not-When-Jewish-Encounters/dp/B00BR3U770 that according to this author, there is no such writing by the Sanhedrin since he takes on this very verse in his book.

Again, we are focusing on Jesus words, "You have heard it said". Again, we ask... by whom? Did they hear this from the Pharisees? How about the Sadducee?

As I've stated earlier, we find within the dead sea scrolls and within the writing from the school of Shammia that "Hate your enemies" is interpreted from Leviticus 19:18 . Have you ever asked yourself the question, "Why did the teacher of the Law ask Jesus, "Who is my neighbor"? Or didn't you know that the woman at the well would have been considered an enemy of Israel...

I think were the disconnect comes from JLB is that when Jesus said, "You have heard it said", I am looking to where those he was speaking to would have heard it from and where they derived their interpretation from. With a little historical footwork, we find where "Hate your enemies" was coming from. It was coming from the School of Shammia. The next step to solve the question of "You have heard it said" is, "What passage did the School of Shammia interpret as meaning to hate your enemies". The answer is Leviticus 19:18

Nobody is asking you to agree with their interpretation and I would hope that you and others wouldn't because Jesus properly interpets that passage how it should be lived out.... "Love your enemies" is the proper interpretation of that passage.

If you want to support your idea that Jesus is talking about Deuteronomy 7:1-2, then again, you should be able to find supporting documentation from Jewish sources. As it sits, you incorrectly interpret Deuteronomy 7:1-2 to mean "Hate your enemies" and then ask us to accept your interpretation as a valid Jewish interpretation since Jesus clearly said, "You have heard it said".

As far as my son, he derived his own opinion by reading your comments. Weather you hate the Jews or not is not my concern but from an outside perspective, that is how some read what you write.

As far as asking my son what he thinks about God commanding Israel to kill everyone in a town, including women and children along with all of their pets and livestock... Most Christians can't deal with that and reconcile it with "God is Love". With that, I have discussed this very topic with him in the past and he fully understands that our God is a just God and what that means. In short, it's all about perspective and one could ask how Jeremiah could watch Jerusalem fall to ruins with starving children and mothers eating their babies and yet he says, "I will rejoice in the Lord". So before we ask the question, "How could God command an army to utterly destroy another nation, women, children and all we ought to first understand how Jeremiah can say, "I will rejoice in the Lord".

 

[Elijah674]

Answer: By God through man...especially the authors of the NT. In all the things I've heard from men, I know what is truth and what is not because I have the anointing of the Spirit.

You learned the Truth, because The Spirit led you to this Truth that the New Testament writers penned under the anointing.

Its funny how others can read the same New Testament and all the get is, we are to keep the law of Moses. Some read it and say Paul was a false teacher.

As I recall, it was when you were debating with the Sabbath Keepers about their legalistic approach to keeping the sabbath, and specifically how they thought that keeping the sabbath was more important that loving their neighbor.

Then, by that same standard of measure, you began to evaluate then same approach to those that place the external Church activities such as, reading the bible, singing on the worship team, preaching from the pulpit, cleaning the Church... above the requirement of loving your neighbor.

I don't find the writers of the New testament saying those things, you probably just heard your Pastor teach that to the congregation one Sunday morning.

If that is so easily seen in the New testament, why don't we hear everyone teaching this message.

I'm sure Paul probably saw in the law of Moses, something similar when He went to Jerusalem to confront Peter and James about their hypocrisy. :help


JLB

Just who has the Anointing of the Spirit?? We should check to see if it is the right spirit??? And about 7 Day Sabbath Keepers [all being legalist?] The suggestion from this end is that that remark has no truth in it. I believe in keeping the Lords 7 Day Sabbath because of LOVEING HIM! Who in their right mind that LOVES CHRIST would not obey him??????

And just a verse because I reject this as seen in Mark vain worship... [7] Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctines the commandments of men.
[8] For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
(Moses laws + Sunday keeping)

+ what is still Inspired Truth that is documented in Isa. about the NEW Heaven & the New earth!

[22] For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
[23] And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

So the New Heavens & the New Earth will only have Loving 7th Day Sabbath in it!

--Elijah

 

[JLB]

They actually have to live by it where we stand from a far and comment on it.

The problem is they don't live by it.

They talk about living by it, the study about living by it, but the truth is, without a born again Spirit filled nature, they will be ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of the truth.

The Truth is, they reject Jesus as Messiah.


JLB

 

[stovebolts]

They actually have to live by it where we stand from a far and comment on it.

The problem is they don't live by it.

They talk about living by it, the study about living by it, but the truth is, without a born again Spirit filled nature, they will be ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of the truth.

The Truth is, they reject Jesus as Messiah.


JLB

Your missing the point all together.

A good Jew will try to interpret Torah properly to live out Torah the way God intended it to be lived out. Trying to live out the Torah calls for a great deal of discernment because not every event in your life is as black and white as we might try and think it is. In short, life is complicated and to do something right, might be to violation of something else. Is is against the Bible to lie? How about if it saves a life? How about circumcising on the sabbath? Have you ever looked at the discussion that Jesus had with the devil while being tested? At the very least it teaches us discernment for scriptures where on passage pulls rank over another passage without invalidating the other passage.

Very little of the Law had to do with ceremony, rites or rituals. Most had to do with how you treated your neighbor etc and how you treated God. 613 laws are a lot of laws to be properly interpreted and the point to Matthew 5-7 is that nobody can live them out... you're going to fail and when you do, this is how you come to your brother for reconciliation and this is how you come to God for reconciliation. The point of the Law was to show us what sin IS and it shows us how to atone for it.

What is truth? Pilate asked the very same question. The truth is, even "Spirit filled Christians" sin. But sin isn't the focus here. What's in focus is that we are covered under grace and we should be spending more time understanding that God's got our backs when we sin and that gives us more energy to focus on getting it right the next time. Not to earn salvation, but to live better lives because we understand the benefit of living a Godly life.

The Truth is, they reject Jesus as Messiah.

But that does not invalidate every interpretation of scripture that they hold. Many of their interpretations enhance our NT writings and brings depth into the words of Jesus and Paul.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Since they are the same there is no reason to fear making reference to the law of Moses.

I don't fear in making a reference to the truth.

The Law of God is seen in the [moral] law of Moses, which was added until the Seed...

You're confusing me. How can moral laws be added that you say were already known through oral transmission before Mt. Sinai? And then how can they be taken away if they were before the law of Moses?

What you say is ONLY true of the specific stipulations for temple, priesthood, and sacrifice. IOW, the ceremonial law, not the moral law. This is why it's so very important that one distinguish between the two. Hebrews says the covenant of law that became obsolete and no longer needed is the covenant of temple, priesthood, and sacrifice.

 

[JLB]

A good Jew will try to interpret Torah properly to live out Torah the way God intended it to be lived out.

A good Jew is one who has died to the Law.

One inwardly.

One who is born of God.

One who has the Spirit of Christ.


JLB

 

[JLB]

Since they are the same there is no reason to fear making reference to the law of Moses.

I don't fear in making a reference to the truth.

The Law of God is seen in the [moral] law of Moses, which was added until the Seed...

You're confusing me. How can moral laws be added that you say were already known through oral transmission before Mt. Sinai? And then how can they be taken away if they were before the law of Moses?

What you say is ONLY true of the specific stipulations for temple, priesthood, and sacrifice. IOW, the ceremonial law, not the moral law. This is why it's so very important that one distinguish between the two. Hebrews says the covenant of law that became obsolete and no longer needed is the covenant of temple, priesthood, and sacrifice.

19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. Galatians 3:19

Let's stay with this verse in the phase of our discussion.

Here are some points that I would like to show from this verse.

• The Law was added to the Covenant of Abraham.
• There were "transgressions" [sin] before the Law.
• It was added until the Seed should come.

If we can agree on these points, then we can discuss these things without going round and around about "doubtful things". We agree on much so this should be easy.

By saying added, The Holy Spirit is indicating the Law was a part of something else.

By saying until, The Holy Spirit is indicating the Law was temporary.


JLB