Christ Did Indeed Fulfill The Torah/Law

[Drew]

You know something Wavy, in your past few posts its become very clear to me why you have so weak an understanding of reality, you are so consumed with this false idea of "torah" that you have absolutely replaced God with it.

You are like that Israelite king who made two altars for his people to worship at instead of encouraging them to go to Jerusalem, the place of the true altar of God

Basically, what you've done is set up a false altar to worship at. Unfortunately the only thing that is worshipped at false altars is the self, the ego of the one who built the altar.

This is not helpful - this material does not engage the matter at issue and only serves to be divisive. There is nothing wrong with arguing against the content of someone's position, but to claim that they have a "weak understanding of reality" or that they "worship their ego" is over the top. Besides, it gives readers the impression that you have to resort to such tactics to defend your position.

 

[cj]

Drew,

I appreciate your concern and will take it into consideration.

Yet, in your offence you missed the point.

The point being that misguided knowledge leads to blindness, and blindness to dead actions; which are most definitely both matters that are dealt with in scripture time and time again, and as such are most definitely matters that should be considered in this discussion.

If you are here to reason away the time, fine.

But don't think to impose your frivolity on others who might not be so inclined.

In love,
cj

 

[cj]

Drew,

Jesus said that Moses' take on the law focused on the outward action, and then He said that His take on the law was more acute, and that it focused on the inward.

At no time did He say anything about one being "human behavior" and the other being some other kind of behavior.

Really, in your above post you simply attempted to impress your personal thoughts, wayward as they are, upon a matter that is already very clear.


And so again I can say, from your speaking it becomes obvious that you, like Wavy, lack a clear view of what you're trying to speak on.

Your words expose your inability to even grasp the simpliest of scriptural understanding.

Take this however you want, but they are your own words that serve to expose you. I'm just pointing it out.


In love,
cj

 

[Drew]

But don't think to impose your frivolity on others who might not be so inclined.

Frivolous:
1 a : of little weight or importance b : having no sound basis (as in fact or law) <a frivolous lawsuit>
2 a : lacking in seriousness b : marked by unbecoming levity

Impose:
1 a : to establish or apply by authority <impose a tax> <impose new restrictions> <impose penalties> b : to establish or bring about as if by force <those limits imposed by our own inadequacies

OK cj, you have made a statement. Care to defend it with actual evidence? Where is your evidence that my post have "no sound basis". Where is your evidence that I have attempted anything akin to "using force" to establish my case.

If you cannot back up your statement with evidence, I might suggest that your claim is, shall I say, "frivolous"?

 

[Drew]

Hey wavy old pal:

cj claims we "just don't understand" and that we apparently have other deep systemic defects in the way we think. Since he has such a strong track record of never resorting to character attacks, I think we need to take his rebuke seriously and abandon our silly attempts to actually use sound reasoning and analysis to pursue this debate.

What were we thinking?

 

[cj]

May I humbly suggest that before you go galloping away on your high offended-feeling horse,... that you read somewhat more slowly.

Perhaps if you did you would have noticed that I used The word "If" at the beginning of what you seem upset about.


Drew, this is my last post on this matter. I'm not going down that road with you.


In love,
cj

 

[Drew]

Drew, this is my last post on this matter. I'm not going down that road with you.

Well this much we agree on - our interaction has become unproductive.

 

[Windozer]

None on these boards can honestly say that they adequately love God and love their neighbor, and yet so many want to lay claim to being able to take action.

Good point...That is why Grace is needed.

And so you admit that you have not been fulfilling the torah? I thought you said that the torah was for those who can't truly love their neighbor. By your agreement to cj's statement here, you are saying you need the torah (which of course, I believe we all do)

As expected you have attempted to put words in my mouth that are not there. You are quite the dreamer. You have told me that you once thought as I did and that you know what I believe. You don't have the slightest clue son.

Nether you or I can fulfill the Torah law. The Torah law demands that one be put to death for many of the sins committed. Care to fulfill that part of it Wavy?

I am saying that I don't need no stinking law to know what I should and should not do. Apparently you do. and if that is the situation you are saying that you are not capable making sound judgements.

The very fact that Jesus took our place on the cross (there-by fulfilling the the requirement of the law) is a demonstration of the Grace he has provided for us. But according to you he did that in vain as it is useless to you.

What ever you like Wavy (for yourself and those who agree with you) but don't expect me to buy your crap.

 

[Drew]

Greetings All:

Here is a summary of how I understand all this.

1. Jesus is fairly clear that since heaven and earth have indeed not passed away, we are still to strive to keep the "Law and the Prophets" - "I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished".

2. We who accept the sacrifice made by Jesus receive grace - we will not be barred from God's presence if we, at times, fail to keep the Law.

3. The Law is, in the main, a practical working out of the concept of "love". This is not an "either / or" issue. To love is to act in the world and that one can make generalized prescriptions (laws) about what behaviours are loving is no big surprise. The Law is love in action.

4. We are not "justified" or "reconciled" to God through obedience to the Law. However, this does not mean that God does not want us to keep the Law - Why would the reality of grace justify abandoning the Law?

5. While we are not released from obedience to the law, we are released from the penalties (e.g. the whole "stoning to death" thing). This release from the penalties is, in my view, another manifestation of grace

 

[wavy]

As expected you have attempted to put words in my mouth that are not there. You are quite the dreamer.

I fancied deductive reasoning. What you say sometimes can get confusing, no offense. Sorry if you thought I made you say something you did not.

Nether you or I can fulfill the Torah law. The Torah law demands that one be put to death for many of the sins committed. Care to fulfill that part of it Wavy?

I'd like you to read an excerpt on this very argument that is so popularly brought up from one of my studies:

Another argument is always brought up: "why don’t you stone people?" To briefly address this I will ask you to see Exodus 21:22 (divinely appointed judges deal out restitution), Leviticus 20:2 (people of the land stone with stones - of course, after the judges determine punishment), Numbers 25:5 (judges charged to execute death penalty), Deuteronomy 1:16 (judges charged to judge righteously between the people of the nation), Deuteronomy 16:18 (judges and officers set up to judge the people), and Deuteronomy 19:17-18 (judges and priests given the job of hearing witnesses and dealing out judgment). So it is clear that only under this system (which is not active today, and hasn't been for some time) would this be allowed.

Obeying to the letter, void of outward mistakes, is not the issue with Yahweh. What is the issue is doing his Word, and doing it with the right type of heart. Are you willing? That is the issue. So the argument that not being perfect at all times voids the purpose and establishment of torah as our duty is a vain one. It is established as a way of life and not a means of perfection. Our only perfection comes from the righteousness of Yahweh, who is the Messiah Yahshua.

What ever you like Wavy (for yourself and those who agree with you) but don't expect me to buy your crap.

So be it. No need for either of us to get angry and sound so vehement.

Peace/love in Messiah

 

[wavy]

A fair summary, Drew. I wouldn't get worked up about other opinions though. I do think you have kept your patience though. 8-) That's a struggle for me at times.

 

[Windozer]

. The Law is, in the main, a practical working out of the concept of "love". This is not an "either / or" issue. To love is to act in the world and that one can make generalized prescriptions (laws) about what behaviours are loving is no big surprise. The Law is love in action.

8Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Looks as though it is God who is love in action.

5. While we are not released from obedience to the law, we are released from the penalties (e.g. the whole "stoning to death" thing). This release from the penalties is, in my view, another manifestation of grace

But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

So....Who is lying?

Serve in the in the old way of the written code, if that is what suits you, but don't blame me if I choose to serve in the new way of the Spirit.

 

[wavy]

. The Law is, in the main, a practical working out of the concept of "love". This is not an "either / or" issue. To love is to act in the world and that one can make generalized prescriptions (laws) about what behaviours are loving is no big surprise. The Law is love in action.

8Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Looks as though it is God who is love in action.

But you can't "perform" or "act" or be the Father. The way to love him is to do his commandments (Exodus 20:6; John 14:15). The torah is love in action when you actually do it in truth.

Deuteronomy 30:14
But the Word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

Romans 10:8
But what saith it? "The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart:" that is, the word of faith, which we preach;

5. While we are not released from obedience to the law, we are released from the penalties (e.g. the whole "stoning to death" thing). This release from the penalties is, in my view, another manifestation of grace

But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

So....Who is lying?

Serve in the in the old way of the written code, if that is what suits you, but don't blame me if I choose to serve in the new way of the Spirit.

Point #1. This scripture does not say you are released from "obeying the law", as Drew stated. It says released from the law being dead wherein we were held.

The previous verse justifies what the release is:

Romans 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.

Because by the torah is the knowledge of sin, and because we are at enmity with it in our flesh, we need delieverance from this combination:

Romans 7:14
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

So I would like to ask Paul's question:

Romans 7:24
O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

Being delivered from our body to the law of sin in our body parts (7:23) so that we don't break it as a lifestyle anymore. Only a carnal (or flesh-based) person is not subject (meaning, not obedient to) to the good torah (Romans 8:7). But we are not supposed to walk after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Flesh + the torah (which is spiritual) = bondage unto death.

Spirit + the torah (which is spiritual) = "we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. " (your translation has "new way" but the proper Greek term means "renewal").

So the two are compatible. Walking in the "oldness of letter" is the path of disobeying (not subject to) torah to the death.

It is unscriptural to equate the meaning of "oldness of letter" here to "what I don't want to keep", which I believe you are doing. Keeping the sabbath day, for example, is something I'm sure you believe you can ignore for one reason or another. But that is not what is meant here.

If you love Yahweh and your neighbor, as the torah says, you are obeying it to the letter. That is what is written. Does this mean we must find a "new way" to love our neighbor for fear of doing what is written...in letters?

No.

Point #2. So nobody is lying.

 

[Windozer]

Ya right Wavy.

Just who are you serving by obeying the law?

You ether serve in the new way of the Spirit, or in the old way of the written code.
Guess which way you are serving by obeying the law. Which by the way is the written code.

In Romans 7:6 the apostle Paul wrote:
But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

So be it. No need for either of us to get angry and sound so vehement.

One does not need to be angry to call a spade a spade. There is a time for that. And I will get in your face any time that I can do it, especially when I can do it with scripture. And if that tests your patience so be it, I do not apologize for that.

 

[Drew]

So....Who is lying?

Rhetoric is simply not interesting to me. I am more than happy to entertain serious critiques of the content of argument. I will not respond to personal attacks.

 

[Windozer]

So....Who is lying?

Rhetoric is simply not interesting to me. I am more than happy to entertain serious critiques of the content of argument. I will not respond to personal attacks.

It is a question as opposed to an attack. Apparently you do not view the writings of the apostles as serious critiques of the content of argument. So be it.

Have a nice day Drew. (Nothing personal.)

 

[wavy]

Ya right Wavy.

Just who are you serving by obeying the law?

Yahweh. It is his torah. He did say that obeying it is serving him.

Guess which way you are serving by obeying the law. Which by the way is the written code.

This is your dogma. If you believe it is supported by scripture then, that's just you...

One does not need to be angry to call a spade a spade. There is a time for that. And I will get in your face any time that I can do it, especially when I can do it with scripture. And if that tests your patience so be it, I do not apologize for that.

Well, you haven't exactly got in my face with scripture...

But anyway, it seems this is going nowhere.

 

[Windozer]

This is your dogma. If you believe it is supported by scripture then, that's just you...

In Romans 7:6 the apostle Paul wrote:
But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

What do you call that Wavy? Whose Dogma is that Wavy? That is what I am supporting. Don't like it??? You know who to take it up with.

Have a nice Day Wavy? :-D

 

[cj]

A fair summary, Drew. I wouldn't get worked up about other opinions though. I do think you have kept your patience though. 8-) That's a struggle for me at times.

Actually, we shouldn't get worked up over any opinion,... including our own.

Opinions are nothing, truth is everything, and scripture says that we only know in part, and even then mostly through a veil.

If believers were to keep this scripturally declared "truth" before us at all times, meaning, be humbled to the reality of it each and every day, all day long, there would be far less shooting off of the mouth of erroneous opinions.


And this is why you and others will get upset at me, because, in a sense I don't give two hoots about your opinion. Truth is, I don't even give two hoots about my own opinion. But I can see, and will contend with, obvious errors in speaking regarding what is said in the scriptures.

And I can, in fact we all can, because the words are right there in black and white, and sometimes red.


Check out how caught-up we are in stating our opinions about things. Lets read the first three sentences of your above comment....

"A fair summary, Drew...."

An opinion.

"I wouldn't get worked up about other opinions though."

Another opinion.

"I do think you have kept your patience though."

And yet another opinion.


Fact is, out of an entire paragraph of four sentences you were only able to say one thing that had any credibility to it....

"That's a struggle for me at times."

75% of your above speaking was just opinion, and only 25% honest-to-goodness truth.


That's the food you just offered your good brother Drew, 75% junk food and 25% healthy food. 75% death and 25% life.


How sad is that?


In love,
cj

 

[cj]

Rhetoric is simply not interesting to me. I am more than happy to entertain serious critiques of the content of argument. I will not respond to personal attacks.

Rhetoric huh.

You run away with your tail between your legs shouting silly curses at those you're speeding away from, and you shout from your hiding place that you will entertain serious critiques?


Again then brother Drew,.... define for us human behavior as it is related to a relationship with God.

Keep in mind that it is you who used this phrase in you explanation a few posts ago.


And, just as a heads-up, my second question will require a definition of the God-man that is seated on the throne in the heavens.


You said serious, so lets get serious.


In love,
cj