A conversation I just had stricken me back.

[YosefHayim]

So I was on a chat website, and I had a converstation that just shook me terribly. I need some healing prayer.

I am labeled as you
who I am talking to is stranger.

Stranger: A friend of mine came to me recently and asked me about sin. He asked if i had sinned? I said of course i had. Do you sin?

You: Who hasn't?

Stranger: true.

Stranger: Jesus

You: Yes

You: He said you are deceived to think you are without sin

Stranger: Amen that is 1 John 1 9

Stranger: 1:9

Stranger: sorry 8

Stranger: 1Jn 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

You: I can never remember verse numbers. Except for a few.

Stranger: My friend went on to ask if i had ever sinned after coming to know Jesus and knew it was wrong but went ahead and did it anyway? I thought about this. I didn't really want to answer but I knew God already knows the heart. I answered him and said I had. He asked if I could give examples. I wasn't too thrilled about the idea of revealing what I had done to him but I did. I said I had masturbated, had sex out of wedlock as God says if you've thought about it you've already committed it in your heart, I have lied saying i was sick to get out of going to work, coveted the bodies of the beautiful women i have seen that I wish I was like, I have lusted after handsome men, gluttony at the Thanksgiving and all you can get buffets, coveted all the new techno toys out on the market, wished i had a better job, drove over the speed limit which is a lie because I had signed a paper at the dmv saying i would always abide by the laws of the road,
Have you ever done anything like i had done? Sinned after you have come to know jesus knew the sin was wrong but went ahead and did it anyway?

You: Yes.

You: I actually battle lust as well.

You: I've also done drugs, and made a ouija board

You: and I've lied, and have treated people poorly

Stranger: good job admitting your sins. Not many people are willing to do so

Stranger: God loves humility and honesty

You: And the thing that I hate most is the time I said hate to him after failing to win the heart of some girl who was nothing more than a satanic harlot.

Stranger: that is hard to loose someone when you stand for your faith

Stranger: these were things you committed after you had come to know Jesus yes? I just want to make sure we are on the same page

You: And now I admit that sometimes I had foolishly idolized her, when she was of no good and a pathway to separation.

Stranger: that is easy to do idolize a potential mate

Stranger: you want them to be more than they are

You: I envied I couldn't get past a fate with her, but now I couldn't care less for being in a relationship with woman in such a divorced nation.

You: a date*

Stranger: do you know the definition of the word willful?

You: I'm thinking. I know what it means but Im trying to think of the right word

Stranger: I don't mind take your time

You: I wanna say cause but its not quite the same

Stranger: I didn't know the answer when i was asked either

Stranger: willful means knowingly or knowing

You: I see

Stranger: so knowing something is wrong but doing it anyway is doing it willfully wrong

Stranger: have you ever seen in the scriptures where God talks about willful sins?

You: No I don't recall. I guess the closest thing I could think of though is romans 8

Stranger: I hadn't either until I was shown this:
Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

Stranger: Who do you think the we is referring to?

You: Everyone?

You: Am I wrong?

Stranger: I wondered personally who it was

Stranger: No because God is no respecter of person then all scripture is for everyone

Stranger: Act 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

Stranger: also in this case i wondered who Hebrews was speaking to

Stranger: Heb 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Stranger: So the we would be the partakers of the heavenly calling or holy brethern right?

You: Can you give me just one second

Stranger: sure

You: I got to fix the wire on my charger

You: its a pain

You: it broke a while ago

You: and
I had to cut it open

You: and savaged wires from an old pair of headphones to fix it

You: and the wires come undone sometimes

Stranger: that happens

Stranger: well if we do get cut off

You: most conveniently they come undone when the battery is close to dting

Stranger: XXXXXXXX@gmail.com

Stranger: is my email address and you are welcom to email me

You: thanks

You: I may have to if this doesn't work.

Stranger: that is fine

You: Gotta get around to actually getting a new charger

You: It's been a few months

You: I can put a death grip on the electrical tape and it comes undone

You: Sometimes I think its giving me the finger

Stranger: LOL

Stranger: machines can be that way

(cont below)

 

[YosefHayim]

(cont from above post)
You: I saw a machine someone made that smoked cigarettes

You: it was on youtube

You: someone commented that since robots are taking all our jobs, they need a smoke break too

Stranger: lol

Stranger: so what does this say to you? Heb 10:26-27 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, (27) But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

You: It makes me think of Isaiah

You: They start to burn sacrifices so religiously

You: that the sacrifices become vain

You: and the LORD tells them that they have become disgusting, the incenses were making him gag and stuff like that

You: and he didn't want their sacrifices

You: He wanted them to repent

You: and to reason with them

You: your sins are as scarlet but can be made white as wool

You: isaiah 1:8 I think

Stranger: Isa 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Stranger: I thought it had to be the sacrifices of old when I first looked at this verse

Stranger: Then I looked at the context of the passage here

Stranger: Hebrews 10 is discussing the differences between the old and new convenants in the beginning of the verse then it changes to a word of warning for those under the new covenant in verse 25

Stranger: Heb 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

Stranger: So the old covenant is a shadow of the new convenant

Stranger: then it goes on to warn: Heb 10:23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
Heb 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
Heb 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

Stranger: So since this is talking about the new who would that sacrifice be?

You: I would have to read the whole book

Stranger: i did when i was first shown this.

Stranger: it doesn't change the meaning. The context is the same

You: Hold on one sec.

You: I need to look for my bible

Stranger: ok

You: I think it's saying that sin leads to separation

Stranger: Ok sin willfully we've defined as sin knowing better. what is the knoweldge ofthe truth?

You: Knowing the truth of salvation

Stranger: Do you believe you know the truth of salvation?

You: Well, I believe that salvation is by faith alone in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and then you will be reshaped and produce good fruits and follow his ways as a result.

Stranger: Jesus calls himself the truth. So knoweldge of the truth is also defined as Knowing jesus

Stranger: Joh_14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Stranger: which is salvation

You: I see

You: And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and then, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke around the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers bir we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved even as they.

You: acts 15:8-12

You: few words are off ther

You: e*

Stranger: Thus salvation is Jesus and the knowledge of salvation is the knowledge of Jesus. that looks like that agrees there

You: then should be them, bir should be nor

You: I'm typing one handed bible in other. lol

Stranger: Act 15:8-11 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; (9) And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (10) Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon 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, even as they.

Stranger: no problem

Stranger: So do you agree with this statement: Thus salvation is Jesus and the knowledge of salvation is the knowledge of Jesus

You: I don't know why I don't feel like looking up the verse on google to copy and paste

You: But anyways.

Stranger: I use a copy i already have on my computer

You: Usually I use Bible.cc or Biblegateway.com

Stranger: I have used those before

Stranger: either way: So do you agree with this statement: Thus salvation is Jesus and the knowledge of salvation is the knowledge of Jesus

You: The only thing I don't like about bible.cc is that they don't have the TR on interlinearbible

You: I do believe it's knowing Jesus. It's knowing what he did and why he did it.

Stranger: So we agree here good

You: John 1:1-3,14

You: In the beginning was the word, which was god and with god and became flesh

Stranger: yes jesus is the word of God i agree with you there

You: In the beginning we had the prophets

You: In the beginning we had the creation and the fall

You: And the plan was there for that

Stranger: Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Stranger: Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

You: Knowing Jesus is knowing God

Stranger: ok

Stranger: so who was the sacrifice for sins?

You: Jesus

Stranger: Amen Joh 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

You: And without controversy great as the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into Glory

You: 1 Timothy 3:16

You: So wouldn't you say that God was the sacrifice?

Stranger: 1Jn_5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

You: Bueno

Stranger: What did that sacrifice do?

You: Everything. He died for our sins on the cross, rose again, and triumphed death and satan.

Stranger: He paid the wage or payment for sin yes?

You: Verily

Stranger: Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

You: Case dismissed

Stranger: if he did not pay that payment then who would have to?

You: I would say we would have to

Stranger: i would agree

Stranger: what is that payment that we would have to pay?

You: being thrown into the fire

Stranger: hell yes?

You: Verily

You: This is another thing I saved in a document

Stranger: so let's put all this together to define this passage yes? Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

If we (anyone that is saved) sin willfully (sin knowing it is wrong but going ahead and doing it anyway) after that we have recieved the knoweldge of the truth (Know God/Jesus/Salvation) there remains no more sacrifice for sin (Jesus the sacrifice won't cover that, so you have to) But a certain (for sure going to happen) fearful looking for of Judgement and firey indignation (anger/wrath) which shall devour the adversaries




Stranger: which doesn't sound good

Stranger: so let's put all this together to define this passage yes? Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

If we (anyone that is saved) sin willfully (sin knowing it is wrong but going ahead and doing it anyway) after that we have recieved the knoweldge of the truth (Know God/Jesus/Salvation) there remains no more sacrifice for sin (Jesus the sacrifice won't cover that, so you have to) But a certain (for sure going to happen) fearful looking for of Judgement and firey indignation (anger/wrath) which shall devour the adversaries

You: So have you willfully sinned knowing Jesus?

Stranger: you have already admitted to this. So where does that put you based on this passage?

You: I guess hell

Stranger: good job looking at the passage for what it says

Stranger: I saw that too when I was shown this

You: So I have no chance of salvation?

Stranger: Do you see any based on this passage?

You: ]\=0i[ This is where I was struck


You: Yes This is me taking a grip back on faith.



Please tell me what's wrong with this conversation.

 

[George Muller]

First lets understand that no Christain could ever withstand this scripture if that is the context? That if we willfully sin? Well everytime we fail to act in love or faith, every covetous thought, every lust all envy or strife, every half-truth is willful, for it came from our own will. Lets look at the context of the book of Hebrews?
From the beginning to the end it is a warning against those who are turning from the righteousness of faith in Christ, back into the works of the law. The "sin" mentioned over and over in this book is the "sin" of unbelief.

Heb 3:17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

Now we know that according to Pauls epistles the "strength of sin is the law" That freedom from sin comes from being set free from the law and being under the power of Gods grace.

Ro 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Now lets look at the context of Hebs 10?
Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
19 ¶ Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

THIS WILLFUL SIN, IS TURNING FROM GRACE BACK TO THE "STRENGTH OF SIN" THE LAW, AND ACCOUNTING THE BLOOD OF JESUS AS NO BETTER THAN THAT OFFERED IN THE LAW, AND RESISTING AND REJECTING THE GRACE THAT OVERCOMES SIN.

THIS IS THE CLEAR CONTEXT, AND PAULS MOST COMMON WARNING TO ALL.

 

[George Muller]

Ro 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
7 ¶ What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

here is the "wilful" sin in Heb 10

1Co 15:56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

Those who "willfully" turn from the grace of god, back to the law are turning back to sin.

 

[tim-from-pa]

This conversation is a classic case of someone twisting scripture to fit their ideas, as when the "stranger" spoke, he defined "sin" as all sin when in fact, the passage in Hebrews is talking about a specific sin --- the answer to that is found in verse 29.

The problem is most people see the entire Law as one --- I sort of like the way the Adventists to it by specifying moral law and ceremonial law in the OT. The Law (ceremonial) was the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, and thus are no longer under that law (ceremonial) as these were types and shadows, I call it a Godly play-acting, fulfilled in Christ. So if the law is "done away with", that's not speaking of the moral standard, but the Levitical Priesthood now in Christ. The 10 commandments are not done away with.

So the person in Hebrews who sins willingly is a person who was made aware that the (ceremonial) Law pointed to Christ, and that Christ fulfilled it by being the Passover, and then the person sins by rejecting that offering, there is no more forgiveness of sins since that's the only way God forgives sins is thru Christ's atoning work.

Just look at the context. Like I just mentioned on another Christian forum just today, I hate when Paul is quoted out of context to support a certain ideological view. And if we look at the context, we know it's speaking of the sacrificial death of Christ --- that's what a person sins against by rejecting it. And if one also takes note, that's the whole purpose of Christ's death to begin with. He became a curse for us. If we found out about all sin, had the grace to be forgiven just once, and then thereafter we cannot blow it, then that's only covering past sins and makes Christ's death to no effect for future sins and thus self-works. Ironically, such a person who then lives perfectly (or thinks they do) are guilty of the very thing your stranger friends is accusing us all! Until we die, the flesh nature will always war with the Spirit. Read Paul's dilemma in Romans 7, unless this stranger dude thinks Paul is in hell, too!

 

[George Muller]

I sort of like the way the Adventists to it by specifying moral law and ceremonial law in the OT. The Law (ceremonial) was the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, and thus are no longer under that law (ceremonial) as these were types and shadows,

You mean like the sabbath? Is it not one of the Ten Commandments?

Ro 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
7 ¶ What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

THE WILLFUL SIN OF HEBREWS 10 IS RIGHT HERE.

 

[tim-from-pa]

I sort of like the way the Adventists to it by specifying moral law and ceremonial law in the OT. The Law (ceremonial) was the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, and thus are no longer under that law (ceremonial) as these were types and shadows,

You mean like the sabbath?

Sabbath and Sabbaths are part of the moral law, i.e. to separate a day to God, but I was talking about the Levitical ceremonies in the part you quoted. They had the Tabernacle (and later the temple), the garb, the sacrifices, the ceremonies on certain days, etc which pointed to the work in Christ. So there's no need to do the ceremonial stuff any longer.

The 10 commandments (and similar Laws in the OT) have to do with conduct and what is pleasing to Yahweh and as such are the standards of righteousness. When we sin (those commands) we have an Advocate willing to forgive seventy times seven times and thus took the curse of being disobedient. But the carrying out of them (which has to be done by the Spirit in us) is still applicable.

This is why Yeshua said that the sum of the law and prophets is love. For if we love Yahweh, I don't know why we would take His name in vain, or have other gods before him, of disrespect our parents, or lust after our neighbor's wife and so forth. We will automatically tend to obey the mandates of the commands.

 

[George Muller]

I sort of like the way the Adventists to it by specifying moral law and ceremonial law in the OT. The Law (ceremonial) was the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, and thus are no longer under that law (ceremonial) as these were types and shadows,

You mean like the sabbath?

Sabbath and Sabbaths are part of the moral law, i.e. to separate a day to God, but I was talking about the Levitical ceremonies in the part you quoted. They had the Tabernacle (and later the temple), the garb, the sacrifices, the ceremonies on certain days, etc which pointed to the work in Christ. So there's no need to do the ceremonial stuff any longer.

The 10 commandments (and similar Laws in the OT) have to do with conduct and what is pleasing to Yahweh and as such are the standards of righteousness. When we sin (those commands) we have an Advocate willing to forgive seventy times seven times and thus took the curse of being disobedient. But the carrying out of them (which has to be done by the Spirit in us) is still applicable.

This is why Yeshua said that the sum of the law and prophets is love. For if we love Yahweh, I don't know why we would take His name in vain, or have other gods before him, of disrespect our parents, or lust after our neighbor's wife and so forth. We will automatically tend to obey the mandates of the commands.

So the law is seperated into the "moral" and then the "ceremonial"? Now part of the law is moral and other parts are not? How is it "moral" to rest on the sabbath and not "moral" to keep a feast day?

 

[tim-from-pa]

How is it "moral" to rest on the sabbath and not "moral" to keep a feast day?

I never said that. Feast days are Sabbaths and therefore under the 4th command. I observe the times of the days, and weeks and months (today starts the 3rd Hebrew month). They were shadows of things to come, so I commemorate them as the work that Christ has done, certainly not to dress up in priestly garb and do it like they used to.

 

[George Muller]

How is it "moral" to rest on the sabbath and not "moral" to keep a feast day?

I never said that. Feast days are Sabbaths and therefore under the 4th command. I observe the times of the days, and weeks and months (today starts the 3rd Hebrew month). They were shadows of things to come, so I commemorate them as the work that Christ has done, certainly not to dress up in priestly garb and do it like they used to.

Do you observe or "keep" them? I mean alot of folks can say they observe the law, but do not "keep" the standards that is written?

 

[George Muller]

Le 23:39 Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have gathered in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days: on the first day shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath

Le 25:1 ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses in mount Sinai, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the LORD.
3 Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof;
4 But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard.
5 That which groweth of its own accord of thy harvest thou shalt not reap, neither gather the grapes of thy vine undressed: for it is a year of rest unto the land.
6 And the sabbath of the land shall be meat for you; for thee, and for thy servant, and for thy maid, and for thy hired servant, and for thy stranger that sojourneth with thee,
7 And for thy cattle, and for the beast that are in thy land, shall all the increase thereof be meat.
8 ¶ And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years.

Do you keep these "moral" days of rest also? Not observe but "keep" to obey that which is written?

 

[tim-from-pa]

How is it "moral" to rest on the sabbath and not "moral" to keep a feast day?

I never said that. Feast days are Sabbaths and therefore under the 4th command. I observe the times of the days, and weeks and months (today starts the 3rd Hebrew month). They were shadows of things to come, so I commemorate them as the work that Christ has done, certainly not to dress up in priestly garb and do it like they used to.

Do you observe or "keep" them? I mean alot of folks can say they observe the law, but do not "keep" the standards that is written?

Not sure I understand your points, and really don't want to be baited into your theological conundrums or debates. Of course nobody keeps everything perfectly, and that was my forgiving point to the OP who was at a loss to answer his "stranger", so I'm not sure why you are ragging on me about keeping the Sabbath. I'm no legalist, nor does any such effort makes one more righteous in Yahweh's eyes because we all already broke at least one command in our lives. But what's the harm in setting aside the days for Yahweh, especially when he commanded them? I think the NT already answers a lot of those questions. Yahweh expects us to live by the principles of the 10 commandments, and yes, if you pointed out I'm short on anything and not following the laws of Yahweh, I thank you for that and strive to improve. And thus I will not use the excuse that nobody keeps them perfectly so that excuses us all from keeping them at all (which is no doubt is the ulterior motive of those who would say we are "no longer under the law").

 

[George Muller]

Of course nobody keeps everything perfectly,

If only the Lord could make a New Covenant, whereby His Law was upheld and was not subject to mans ability?

Ro 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Of course nobody keeps everything perfectly,

If only the Lord could make a New Covenant, whereby His Law was upheld and was not subject to mans ability?

Ro 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Right. I said that more or less in slightly different words back in post #8

But the carrying out of them (which has to be done by the Spirit in us) is still applicable.

 

[George Muller]

Of course nobody keeps everything perfectly,

If only the Lord could make a New Covenant, whereby His Law was upheld and was not subject to mans ability?

Ro 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Right. I said that more or less in slightly different words back in post #8

But the carrying out of them (which has to be done by the Spirit in us) is still applicable.

I agree!

Ro 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter

 

[Deborah13]

You: So I have no chance of salvation?

The Law of Moses is the old covenant that God made with the Hebrew children.
If you sin you die. God in His mercy and grace gave them an alternative way to be forgiven of that sin. The sinner would bring a sin offering to the priest, lamb, dove, etc. The priest would inspect the offering and make sure it was perfect (without spot or wrinkle). The sinner would repent and place their hand on the offering and their sin was (spiritually) transferred to the offering so they were free but the offering would have to die and shed it's bled for the sinner. Of coarse the priest was there doing his part in the ritual acting as an a mediator between the sinner and God.
Do you see the what was happening here? Do you see that this was a shadow of what was to come in the future. Jesus' sacrifice for us on the cross took the place of both the priest as the mediator and the place of the lamb and his blood. After awhile these rituals become just rituals with no meaning to the people and they would continue jumping back and forth in and out, it was a burden they could not bear.

One cannot pull the Law , the old covenant (contract) apart and choose to keep what the like, it all went together one part does not work without the other, it becomes therefore useless and no longer effectual.
So what we see in Hebrews is the author (probably) Paul appealing to the Jewish people in the new Church not to give up and return to the old covenant of the Law because if they did they would be saying that Jesus' death and blood shed for them was not worth anything. That His blood did not pay for their sin. Therefore, they would trampling on the blood of Christ. An those old sacrifices would no longer work with God for their payment for sin.

Earlier in Hebrews he again prove to them that Jesus is their new high Priest when he reminds them of Melchizedek. So He is the Priest (Mediator) and the sacrifice of the new covenant.

Notice that in the old covenant God made His covenant with carnal, sinful man. But the new covenant God wasn't taking any chances this time. He made His new covenant with His Son Jesus Christ, the lamb without spot or wrinkle, the Seed of Abraham. When we accept Jesus we make an agreement with Jesus that He is everything that we need and He brings us in. The new covenant of grace and faith.

 

[YosefHayim]

Notice that in the old covenant God made His covenant with carnal, sinful man. But the new covenant God wasn't taking any chances this time. He made His new covenant with His Son Jesus Christ, the lamb without spot or wrinkle, the Seed of Abraham. When we accept Jesus we make an agreement with Jesus that He is everything that we need and He brings us in. The new covenant of grace and faith.

So what happens if a Christian decides to follow torah, and for example eat no ham or shellfish?

 

[tim-from-pa]

Notice that in the old covenant God made His covenant with carnal, sinful man. But the new covenant God wasn't taking any chances this time. He made His new covenant with His Son Jesus Christ, the lamb without spot or wrinkle, the Seed of Abraham. When we accept Jesus we make an agreement with Jesus that He is everything that we need and He brings us in. The new covenant of grace and faith.

So what happens if a Christian decides to follow torah, and for example eat no ham or shellfish?

A Christian can follow Torah, and should. Of course due to our flesh nature, we will constantly fall, but that does not mean the moral standard (which is righteousness) is not applicable, because that's how we learn righteousness by keeping his commandments. If we do fall, we have an Advocate, so the difference is that while the standards apply, the punishment does not since Yeshua took our sins at the cross who is willing to forgive seventy times seven. So, just take delight in the Law of Yahweh, but if you miss the mark, ask forgiveness and tell him you'll carry on. Wanting to keep his commands is repentance (the counterpart of faith).

Now, to keep the Law is done by the Spirit instead of one's flesh as with the Old Covenant. But the moral demands are just as high --- even higher. For example, the seventh commandment says not to commit adultery. Yeshua showed us that just because we did not jump into a bed with a woman does not mean the potential to sin is not there, as he expanded it to mean just looking at her with lust qualifies for breaking that command.

Likewise, one keeps the Sabbath by observing the day, but in the NT that day is depicted as a Sabbath rest of faith. So now, we not only see the day, but also observe we are resting in faith in Yeshua. The latter does not nullify the former, but expands on it. And so on and so forth. Thus, the Law is the absolute (like teaching a young child concrete concepts which is all he's capable of understanding). But as we age, we now understand the abstracts behind them, or to put it another way, the Spirit of the Law. Yeshua summed it up nicely: to Love Yahweh with all your heart and soul and mind, and your neighbor as yourself. If one really loves, they already "keep" the commandments. But just in case we are dumb, we still need to know the concrete values of the commandments and to practice them.

 

[Deborah13]

So what happens if a Christian decides to follow torah, and for example eat no ham or shellfish?

I think if they are a Christian they can eat anything the like. Seriously, if one is a Christian (their faith is in Jesus and the salvation He provided at the cross)
and they want to obey all the 613 Mosaic Laws, that do not have to do with sacrifices and rituals of coarse, then I would think that isn't a problem. Do you see it as a problem?
The only time I see Torah as a problem is when obeying it takes the place or even part of the place of 'by grace, through faith, not by works'. Eph 2:8-9

 

[Sparkey]

So what happens if a Christian decides to follow torah, and for example eat no ham or shellfish?

Nothing happens.

Except that is not exactly true either. That Christian may experience the benefit of following the law. In other words, it is possible that the Lord established the dietary law for reason other than setting His children apart from others at that time. It's possible that He does indeed know of benefits other than what may appear on the surface. What was that? Trichinosis? Shhhh... some are squeamish and would not like to hear about the life cycle of that particular parasite known to inhabit swine's flesh.

Also that Christian might face battles (not intended) from other Christians if he/she were to announce the decision. "You're placing yourself under the LAW and making the Sacrifice of Jesus to be of no effect!" But is that true? God knows.

Perhaps that Christian who submits to the possibility that God will allow his act of worship and sacrifice, not as a substitute, not as an addiction to that perfect sacrifice offered once for all, but with understanding that the Christian seeks to learn about the role of submission itself. What if the Lord could actually see hearts and know why that choice was made. Could it be that this kind of thing too will be honored at some point in time? Surely it would not necessarily mean that the Christian who refrains from eating all things is more guilty than let's say, John the Baptist who took the vow of the Nazarite, right?

There is no need for this, but what if somebody wanted to explore what they had read about a Water Sacrifice (it's called something else but I trust you know what I mean) where, when thirsty, the water is poured out onto the ground as an offering to the Lord? Would this also necessarily mean that the Christian who sought to experience part of their heritage would be damned? I think no. Nothing like that would happen.