Is the Law of God dead? And if yes, how?

[jaybo]

Then not all the laws are dead to us that you presume in us being dead to the laws.

Me not understand...

 

[jaybo]

Yep, the days of go there, don't go there, do this, don't do that, eat that, abstain from this, wear that, avoid this, are over.
Now it is...love God above all else and love your neighbor as you love yourself.

Thanks for participating.

Since I'm in my late 70s I don't worry too much about what I wear and only some reasonable concern for what I eat.

It really does come down to .loving God above all else and loving your neighbor as you love yourself, doesn't it? I wish I came across that way more often than I do...

I am so blessed to have lived most of my life as a Christian.

 

[for_his_glory]

Me not understand...

I know you do not understand as for some reason you do not see the moral parts of the law that I have listed and how we obey them by the first greatest commandment of love and the second one to love your neighbor as yourself. It's how we are to deal with people in this world unto the coming of the Lord.

 

[jaybo]

I know you do not understand as for some reason you do not see the moral parts of the law that I have listed and how we obey them by the first greatest commandment of love and the second one to love your neighbor as yourself. It's how we are to deal with people in this world unto the coming of the Lord.

What I "see" is summarized in this verse, "For Christ is the end of the law, with the result that there is righteousness for everyone who believes."

a) Christ is the end of the law.
b) there is righteousness for everyone who believes.

What is it about part a) that is such a mystery? Christ is the end of the law. or "For Christ is the fulfillment of the Law for the justification of all who believe." or "Christ ended the law so that everyone who believes in him may be right with God." or "For Christ has put an end to the Law, so everyone who has put his trust in Christ is made right with God." or "For Christ has already accomplished the purpose for which the law was given. As a result, all who believe in him are made right with God." or "For the end of the law is Christ, to rightwiseness to each man that believeth." or (pick your translation)...

You can choose what you want to believe regarding the law but to me the meaning is absolutely clear. If you are in Christ, born again, or however you want to put it, you are not under the law.

Finally, the Amplified Bible amplifies the meaning: "For Christ is the end of the law [it leads to Him and its purpose is fulfilled in Him], for [granting] righteousness to everyone who believes [in Him as Savior]." or from the Amplified Bible Classic Edition, " For Christ is the end of the Law [the limit at which it ceases to be, for the Law leads up to Him Who is the fulfillment of its types, and in Him the purpose which it was designed to accomplish is fulfilled. That is, the purpose of the Law is fulfilled in Him] as the means of righteousness (right relationship to God) for everyone who trusts in and adheres to and relies on Him."

You can interpret the Bible in any manner that you choose but to me the meaning is absolutely clear; Christ is the end of the Law. I will not debate this any longer...

 

[PeterJens]

Jesus said to forgive those who sin against us, and pray for our enemies.
Society is going to hell.

There is a difference between individual justice, how we feel about another individual and penal or civil justice.
Penal and civil justice is about how you run a society, where punishment for evil is needed to keep the society running.
There is a confusion between the two, in interpreting Jesus and his meaning.
If you take individual justice to the society level, there is no property or stopping evil people from doing whatever they want and exploiting the weak and defenceless. This is not truth love and support.
So I can forgive people there actions towards me, but society still has to go through the levels of justice.

To make this simple, a madman who will kill anyone they get their hands on needs restraining and confining so they can do no harm. The right of society to do this is for the love of others, restrained by respect the the madmans right to life.
It is why christians as a whole have supported defensive wars, which bring a just resolution to evil tyranny.

God supported Israel in its wars with its neighbours, and God never changes.
So one needs to put Jesus in this context and not extrapolate the individual emotional response to a just social response in my view.

God bless you

 

[PeterJens]

Perhaps we can stop with the false premise that we only have wicked thoughts when we get caught exercising them where they can be seen.

Evil thoughts defile us, period. The statements from Jesus about having them are NOT optional and believers are NOT an exception

I might also add that internal deceit to the extent that our minds are blinded to the fact of having evil/tempting thoughts are actually the most extreme forms of deception in such bearers

It's also why Jesus hated religious rulers, because they were your basic lying hypocrite posers in the pulpits

Lying hyporcrites did not seem to be Jesus' favorties, that's for sure.

But what they represent is the reality of the LAW, that where the Word is sown, Satan does enter the heart...to work his black magic, exactly as Jesus advised us all in Mark 4:15 and in other such statements

When we say were are sinless, when we let the tempter off the hook by "excusing" our evil thoughts, we are walking a well worn path of lying hypocrisy, that's for certain

Thoughts about a subject are just that.
Thoughts that intend actions that are evil are wrong.

There is a simple mistake that can be made, that in discussing evil actions we ourselves become guilty of them.
To put this simply, in a trial of a murderer you think about their actions and deeds and why they felt and did what they did. In the process you can have the feeling of anger and revenge to kill the murderer, but that is a true expression of a feeling we can all have. The debate is whether having this response defiles us, or acting on it, and encouraging this approach which defiles us.

I know I am capable of all the sins of man, and if I sow and emphasis the applicable emotions and attitudes I will justify terrible behaviour. This potential and ability to empathise, is not the problem, because it is part of what we are as humans who are aware of good and evil. But knowing these seeds of evil intent, can corrupt us and has done to many in life, especially when linked to hatred and bitterness.

If you put it in another context. We are built to be attracted to the opposite sex, especially if they are at their most vibrant and available. It is a good thing which leads to marriage and families, but if not bounded by restraint and love, can be totally destructive and evil. The naive respond if they feel it, it defines them, so they act upon the feelings no matter the consequences. To be able to separate what we are a humans and situation, and put it into bounded context bring truth and love. Jesus brought us into the Kingdom to be overcomers who transcend our responses and see what is appropriate and when.

God bless you

 

[Hopeful]

There is a difference between individual justice, how we feel about another individual and penal or civil justice.
Penal and civil justice is about how you run a society, where punishment for evil is needed to keep the society running.
There is a confusion between the two, in interpreting Jesus and his meaning.
If you take individual justice to the society level, there is no property or stopping evil people from doing whatever they want and exploiting the weak and defenceless. This is not truth love and support.
So I can forgive people there actions towards me, but society still has to go through the levels of justice.

To make this simple, a madman who will kill anyone they get their hands on needs restraining and confining so they can do no harm. The right of society to do this is for the love of others, restrained by respect the the madmans right to life.
It is why christians as a whole have supported defensive wars, which bring a just resolution to evil tyranny.

God supported Israel in its wars with its neighbours, and God never changes.
So one needs to put Jesus in this context and not extrapolate the individual emotional response to a just social response in my view.

God bless you

Thanks for your POV.
It really makes clear how separate the church...and those in it, are, from the "world" you cite.
We are not of this world, so have no part in their wars or so-called justice.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Yet Paul says the eternal, imperishable Law of God lies written on human hearts and minds by none other than the Finger of Father God Himself "was nailed to the cross" ( check Colossians 2:14). I consider this a most audacious attack on the eternal Law of God ( which lies etched on our minds and hearts at this very moment) , and we can imagine the utter Fury of Father God for destroying/crucifying His eternal, imperishable Law.

Greetings, Rajesh.

I'm not sure I understand this argument. In Romans, Paul chastised the Jews for not keeping the law yet commended the Spirit-filled Gentiles for keeping it (which I will get to in a moment). But about your contention that Paul somehow said the law had been "nailed to the cross," this is incorrect. Paul said He wiped away the punishments of the law that were to be carried out against those who broke it (the punishment of death for committing adultery, for instance).

13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped away the handwriting in the decrees that was against us, and which was contrary to us, and has taken it out of the midst, having nailed it to the cross. (Colossians 2:13-14)

The handwriting he was referring to here was not the law itself but the judgments and curses attached to it, that brought judgments upon His people for disobeying them.

But let me show you in Romans that Paul still upheld the Jewish laws you yourself defend. In Romans 1, Paul first described the Gentiles as follows:

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. (Romans 1:28-32)

Then he addressed his Jewish readers as follows:

12 As many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

17 Indeed you are called a Jew, and rest on the law, and make your boast in God, 18 and know His will, and approve the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law, 19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and truth in the law. 21 You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal? 22 You who say, “Do not commit adultery,” do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law? 24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” as it is written.

25 For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision? 27 And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God. (Romans 2:12-29)

I truly don't understand your argument. Paul was upholding the righteousness of the law here. What was no longer binding were the punishments of the law associated with breaking it, not because we were now free to break the law in Christ, but because Christ had paid the penalty for it already, leaving us effectively dead to sin but alive unto Christ.

 

[Hopeful]

Greetings, Rajesh.

I'm not sure I understand this argument. In Romans, Paul chastised the Jews for not keeping the law yet commended the Spirit-filled Gentiles for keeping it (which I will get to in a moment). But about your contention that Paul somehow said the law had been "nailed to the cross," this is incorrect. Paul said He wiped away the punishments of the law that were to be carried out against those who broke it (the punishment of death for committing adultery, for instance).
13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped away the handwriting in the decrees that was against us, and which was contrary to us, and has taken it out of the midst, having nailed it to the cross. (Colossians 2:13-14)

The handwriting he was referring to here was not the law itself but the judgments and curses attached to it, that brought judgments upon His people for disobeying them.

I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that the "handwriting of ordinances" (KJV) only meant the punishments for breaking such ordinances.

 

[Truthfrees]

Greetings, Rajesh.

I'm not sure I understand this argument. In Romans, Paul chastised the Jews for not keeping the law yet commended the Spirit-filled Gentiles for keeping it (which I will get to in a moment). But about your contention that Paul somehow said the law had been "nailed to the cross," this is incorrect. Paul said He wiped away the punishments of the law that were to be carried out against those who broke it (the punishment of death for committing adultery, for instance).

13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped away the handwriting in the decrees that was against us, and which was contrary to us, and has taken it out of the midst, having nailed it to the cross. (Colossians 2:13-14)

The handwriting he was referring to here was not the law itself but the judgments and curses attached to it, that brought judgments upon His people for disobeying them.

But let me show you in Romans that Paul still upheld the Jewish laws you yourself defend. In Romans 1, Paul first described the Gentiles as follows:

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. (Romans 1:28-32)

Then he addressed his Jewish readers as follows:

12 As many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

17 Indeed you are called a Jew, and rest on the law, and make your boast in God, 18 and know His will, and approve the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law, 19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and truth in the law. 21 You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal? 22 You who say, “Do not commit adultery,” do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law? 24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” as it is written.

25 For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision? 27 And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God. (Romans 2:12-29)

I truly don't understand your argument. Paul was upholding the righteousness of the law here. What was no longer binding were the punishments of the law associated with breaking it, not because we were now free to break the law in Christ, but because Christ had paid the penalty for it already, leaving us effectively dead to sin but alive unto Christ.

amen - flesh vs Spirit - law of sin and death vs law of the Spirit of Life - self ability vs Spirit ability - God's laws on the outside vs God's laws written on the heart and mind - the weak point always being the flesh aka law of sin and death

you have articulated a principle that corrects the confusion created by people makimg it Spirit vs God's Holy Laws - thank you for that

 

[Hidden In Him]

I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that the "handwriting of ordinances" (KJV) only meant the punishments for breaking such ordinances.

Well, now for starters, those words translated in the KJV are not in the genitive, which makes the KJV translation of "handwriting of ordinances" a little misleading. It's in dative, so the proper translation would be "handwriting in the ordinances." Thus, it is referring to something contained in the ordinances that no longer applies. The rest is simple deduction. Do we still have the command from God not to commit adultery? Of course we do. But does it carry the death penalty, where Christians take the adulterer and adulteress out in the parking lot and stone them to death? No.

amen - flesh vs Spirit - law of sin and death vs law of the Spirit of Life - self ability vs Spirit ability - God's laws on the outside vs God's laws written on the heart and mind - the weak point always being the flesh aka law of sin and death

you have articulated a principle that corrects the confusion created by people makimg it Spirit vs God's Holy Laws - thank you for that

You are so welcome, and it's great seeing you again. I know you are active in moderation, we just hadn't run into each other much in a few years, so God bless, and hopefully we can have some good conversations down the road here.

Your friend,
Hidden

 

[Rajesh Sahu]

I truly don't understand your argument. Paul was upholding the righteousness of the law here. What was no longer binding were the punishments of the law associated with breaking it, not because we were now free to break the law in Christ, but because Christ had paid the penalty for it already, leaving us effectively dead to sin but alive unto Christ.

Thank you for taking out time to reply

Can I quote Jesus on Law-breaking :
You said ( sorry I'm not able to select texts and answer-- I'm not tech savvy--so I paste what you said)
"I truly don't understand your argument. Paul was upholding the righteousness of the law here. What was no longer binding were the punishments of the law associated with breaking it, not because we were now free to break the law in Christ, but because Christ had paid the penalty for it already, leaving us effectively dead to sin but alive unto Christ."

Now let us juxtapose that statement with what Christ says ( warns) in Matthew 7:21-23, especially 23)
But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’ ( Matt 7:23 NLT)
To me the words of Christ are words of condemnation for anyone and everyone who breaks God's Law. No exceptions there.
So the question is how do you reconcile your words with the condemnation warning of Christ to all lawbreakers in Matthew 7:23?

Paul was clearly referring to the Law itself being crucified on Cross where the son of God was crucified
Let’s examine couple of other translations which do not use " certificate of debt" rather they talk about the handwritten Decrees of father god now lies crucified on Cross of Christ is what these following versions are saying in Colossians 2: 20

Having blotted out the handwriting in the decrees against us, which was adverse to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. (Berean Literal Bible)

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; (King James Version)

Contemporary English Version
God wiped out the charges that were against us for disobeying the Law of Moses. He took them away and nailed them to the cross.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Blotting out the handwriting of the decree that was against us, which was contrary to us. And he hath taken the same out of the way, fastening it to the cross:

English Revised Version
having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross;

In case you still have a doubt what Paul was saying in Colossians 2:20 let us examine what this 13th apostle is saying in Ephesians 2:15

Ephesians 2:15
by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. Jesus did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace

Paul is clearly stating in Ephesians 2:15 that Jesus abolished the ETERNAL ( Psalms 19:9-11, Luke 16:17, Jeremiah 31:33) , PERFECT (Psalms 19:7) JUST and PURE ( Psalm 19:9-11)Law of God

Let us now compare what this apostle is saying with what Christ declares in Matthew 5:17-18

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
For truly I tell you, 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.”

( Jesus taught us HOW to obey/fulfill the demand and requirement of the entire Law and teachings of the Prophet in Matthew 22:37-40 and repeats the same message in Matthew 7:12 and Luke 10:25-36. It was so, so basic and simple yet for 2000 years it was ignored/ overlooked.
Anyway, I look forward to your reply.
Repeating my question:

How do you reconcile your words with the condemnation warning of Christ to all lawbreakers in Matthew 7:23?
Look forward

 

[Hopeful]

Well, now for starters, those words translated in the KJV are not in the genitive, which makes the KJV translation of "handwriting of ordinances" a little misleading. It's in dative, so the proper translation would be "handwriting in the ordinances." Thus, it is referring to something contained in the ordinances that no longer applies.

Yes indeed...the whole Law and customs of the Jews where "in the ordinances" that were done away with.
As it is written..."Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
(Touch not; taste not; handle not;
Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?
Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh." (Col 2:20-23)
These Col. verse don't gibe with your translation.

The rest is simple deduction. Do we still have the command from God not to commit adultery? Of course we do. But does it carry the death penalty, where Christians take the adulterer and adulteress out in the parking lot and stone them to death? No.

So you feel we can commit adultery and not suffer the wrath of God for it?
That is where your POV leads.
Those who break the Law are under the Law. (1 Tim 1:9)
Thankfully, the reborn have a divine nature that won't allow such sin.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Now let us juxtapose that statement with what Christ says ( warns) in Matthew 7:21-23, especially 23)
But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’ ( Matt 7:23 NLT)
To me the words of Christ are words of condemnation for anyone and everyone who breaks God's Law. No exceptions there.
So the question is how do you reconcile your words with the condemnation warning of Christ to all lawbreakers in Matthew 7:23?

Hello there!

Sorry for the late reply. I had to go shopping with my wife, and I'm just getting back.

Now about this passage you are citing, the NLT is a little loose with the translation there. The actual Greek simply reads, "Depart from Me, you who work lawlessness." In studying church tradition, it appears He was prophesying primarily there about the coming of the Gnostics, who practiced witchcraft and yet called themselves "Christians."

So in my opinion this is not a passage that speaks to the issue of true Christians not keeping Jewish law, but of sorcerers practicing "lawlessness" i.e. sin and witchcraft while professing to call upon the name of Jesus. In reality, they were preaching "another Jesus," similar to what Paul referred to elsewhere.

Having blotted out the handwriting in the decrees against us, which was adverse to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. (Berean Literal Bible)

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; (King James Version)

The Berean would be correct here, the KJV would not. It was a reference to some of the handwriting IN the ordinances, not the ordinances themselves.

Ephesians 2:15
by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. Jesus did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace

Now here in Ephesians 2 Paul is talking about a different thing. In the previous verses, he is talking about those laws which specifically kept the Gentiles alienated from God, especially circumcision:

11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

He is quoting here a famous passage from the Old Testament that they used to prove the gospel would be preached to the Gentiles, i.e. those who were "afar off." And the point was this: the issue of circumcision no longer divides Jew and Gentile in Christ, because the Jewish ordinances concerning it were now null and void. It was the circumcised in heart who were the true Israelites now.

Not sure if I fully answered your question or not, but let me know if I didn't. I'll try to get back to this tomorrow.

God bless, and thanks for the reply.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Yes indeed...the whole Law and customs of the Jews where "in the ordinances" that were done away with.

The whole law wasn't done away with. The two greatest commandments according to Jesus were taken straight out of the Old Testament. He quoted them as such:

34 But when the Pharisees heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. 35 Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, 36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?” 37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 22:34-40)

As it is written..."Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
(Touch not; taste not; handle not;

Ah, but you are not reading that verse in its context. He was talking there specifically about being dead from the Jewish cleanliness laws and the strict keeping of Sabbaths and Jewish festivals. Different thing.

So you feel we can commit adultery and not suffer the wrath of God for it?
That is where your POV leads.

Of course not. Judgment was still coming upon Christians for committing the sin, should they not repent of it. This is clear from passages like 1 Thessalonians 4:1-6 and 1 Corinthians 5:1-5. But the difference was that there was room for repentance if they would judge themselves and repent. In Jewish law, there was no such room. If they were caught in adultery and there were witnesses, they died whether they were repentant or not.

 

[Rajesh Sahu]

Hello there!

Sorry for the late reply. I had to go shopping with my wife, and I'm just getting back.

Now about this passage you are citing, the NLT is a little loose with the translation there. The actual Greek simply reads, "Depart from Me, you who work lawlessness." In studying church tradition, it appears He was prophesying primarily there about the coming of the Gnostics, who practiced witchcraft and yet called themselves "Christians."

So in my opinion this is not a passage that speaks to the issue of true Christians not keeping Jewish law, but of sorcerers practicing "lawlessness" i.e. sin and witchcraft while professing to call upon the name of Jesus. In reality, they were preaching "another Jesus," similar to what Paul referred to elsewhere.


The Berean would be correct here, the KJV would not. It was a reference to some of the handwriting IN the ordinances, not the ordinances themselves.


Now here in Ephesians 2 Paul is talking about a different thing. In the previous verses, he is talking about those laws which specifically kept the Gentiles alienated from God, especially circumcision:

11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

He is quoting here a famous passage from the Old Testament that they used to prove the gospel would be preached to the Gentiles, i.e. those who were "afar off." And the point was this: the issue of circumcision no longer divides Jew and Gentile in Christ, because the Jewish ordinances concerning it were now null and void. It was the circumcised in heart who were the true Israelites now.

Not sure if I fully answered your question or not, but let me know if I didn't. I'll try to get back to this tomorrow.

God bless, and thanks for the reply.

Thank you for your reply.
Can I have a brief reply on what laws written by finger of God (Deuteronomy 9:10 , Jeremiah 31: 33) was abolished by Christ in Ephesians 2:15? Please try to keep reply in less than 3 or 4 lines. Wish to be very objective for this deals with the Eternal Law of God . Thank you

 

[Hidden In Him]

Can I have a brief reply on what laws written by finger of God (Deuteronomy 9:10 , Jeremiah 31: 33) was abolished by Christ in Ephesians 2:15?

The Ten Commandments, you mean? None of them actually, though the Sabbaths are now supposed to be kept after a spiritual manner, not after the strictness of the Jews. But again, the breaking of those commandments now does not necessitate executing anyone anymore. We are to provide space for repentance now, such as Paul advised concerning the man practicing adultery with his father's wife in 1 Corinthians 5:1-5.

Hope that was concise enough.

 

[jaybo]

This whole discussion of the law of God being applicable to those of us in Christ can be summarized in one important verse: Romans 10:4, "Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes." (NIV) or "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth" (KJV) or "For Christ is the end of the law, with the result that there is righteousness for everyone who believes." (NET) or (pick your translation...)

That's the fundamental difference between the two covenants. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[JLB]

I'm not sure I understand this argument. In Romans, Paul chastised the Jews for not keeping the law yet commended the Spirit-filled Gentiles for keeping it (which I will get to in a moment). But about your contention that Paul somehow said the law had been "nailed to the cross," this is incorrect. Paul said He wiped away the punishments of the law that were to be carried out against those who broke it (the punishment of death for committing adultery, for instance).

The law of Moses has been abolished, nailed to the cross and taken out of the way.


“The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it.
Luke 16:16


The law of Christ, and His Commandments which are written on our heart, is what the Church is to obey.


The law of Moses is the entire system of animal sacrifices, Sabbath laws, food laws, feast days, ceremonial washings and strict requirements to return to Jerusalem at certain times of the year, all governed by the Levitical Priesthood; this is what comprised the law of Moses.


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




The “10” Commandments (much more than 10) are eternal, and have been here since the garden of Eden and before.



Many people confuse the law of Moses as being the 10 commandments.



The law of Moses was added to the Abrahamic Covenant, temporarily until the Seed, The Messiah should come and both fulfill and do away with it.






JLB

 

[jaybo]

I know you do not understand as for some reason you do not see the moral parts of the law that I have listed and how we obey them by the first greatest commandment of love and the second one to love your neighbor as yourself. It's how we are to deal with people in this world unto the coming of the Lord.

Why do you need external commandments if Jesus sent us the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth? The laws -- all of them including the so-called moral parts of the law -- are external, i.e., they are not a part of us. The Holy Spirit is internal; He is to be our guide, not some limited set of external rules.

I know you do not understand as for some reason you do not see the truth of this, so let's stop going back and forth about this issue. I am guided by the Holy Spirit internally. Period.