Law of God/Moses/Christ/the Spirit

[JLB]

In Deuteronomy 28, it lists the blessing of the law for lawfulness and the curse of the law for lawlessness. The Bible repeatedly says that obedience to the law brings a blessing, so the law itself was not given as a curse, but as a blessing. In Titus 214, it doesn't say that Jesus gave himself to redeem us from the law, but to redeem us from all lawlessness.


Those verses directly state that they are all zealous for the law, so I don't see how you can claim that there is nothing here about obedience to it. They then planned to take steps to disprove those false rumors and show that Paul continued to live in obedience to the Law of Moses.


It is important to recognize that the Bible can speak against obeying God for an incorrect reason without speaking against obeying God. If Paul had been speaking against circumcision for any reason, then according to Galatians 5:2, Paul caused Christ to be of no value to Timothy when he has him circumcised right after the Jerusalem Council and Christ is of no value to roughly 80% of the men in the US. In Acts 15:1, men from Judea were wanting to require Gentiles to become circumcised in order to become saved, however, that was never the reason for which God commanded circumcision, so the Jerusalem Council upheld the Mosaic Law by correctly ruling against requiring circumcision for an incorrect reason. In Exodus 12:48, Gentiles who want to eat of the Passover lamb were required to become circumcised, the the Jerusalem Council should not be interpreted as ruling against Gentiles correctly acting in accordance with what God has commanded as if they had the authority to countermand God.

If you desire to try and keep the law of Moses then please do so.

 

[JLB]

Was the law until Christ or until John?

The law became obsolete and growing old when the prophet Jeremiah spoke out the words…

“Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— Jeremiah 31:31

In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete… Hebrews 8:13

 

[JLB]

Was the law until Christ or until John? Neither of them went around saying that the law has been abolished now that they've come and we nee to stop repenting, but rather that came with the message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which is the Gospel of the Kingdom that Luke 16:16 says was preached since John, so he was not saying that it had ended with him. Moreover, in Luke 16:17, Jesus said that it would be easier for the heaven and earth to disappear than for the least part to disappear form the law, so he was speaking about something that he thought was permanent and not something that he thought had already been abolished. In addition, Jesus proceeded to continue to teach obedience to God's law in Luke 16:18.

There are threes ways of interpretation of the Old Testament scriptures.

Direct Interpretation - The literal things that occurred.

Example: They literally sacrificed a lamb on Passover and literally place the blood on the door posts and lintel of their house.

Prophetic Implication - The future fulfillment that the things pointed to.

Jesus was the Passover lamb that the literal Passover lamb pointed to.

The personal application - how the principles can be applied to our life.

The blood of The Passover Lamb, Jesus Christ can be applied to our life to protect us from death when we sin.


The personal application of the principles of the law can be applied to our lives daily, even though we don’t sacrifice animals or eat kosher, or observe Sabbath laws of stoning people for picking up sticks,….

 

[Soyeong]

Was the law of Moses nailed to the cross? Abolished, taken out of the way?

In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus specifically said that he came not to abolish the law and warned against relaxing the least part of it. In Romans 3:31, Paul also confirmed that our faith does not abolish the law, but rather our faith upholds it. God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore all of His righteous laws are also eternal (Psalms 119:160), and law for how to be a doer of God's righteousness can't be abolished without first abolishing God's righteousness. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's nature can't be abolished without first abolishing God.

Paul Upholds the Moral Law as Fulfilled in the Spirit but Never Abolished

Can you use the Bible to establish a list of which laws Paul considered to be part of the moral law or even that he considered that be a category of law? If not, then you have no business saying that upheld it.

Paul declares freedom from the letter of the Mosaic covenant (Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6),
  but never nullifies the moral core of God's law — rather, he affirms it is fulfilled by walking in the Spirit (Galatians 5:16),
  written in the heart (Romans 2:15),
  manifested in love (Romans 13:10),
  and upheld by conscience and faith (1 Timothy 1:5).

Nowhere does Paul treat the Ten Commandments as void or irrelevant; rather, he regards them as part of the ethical norm now fulfilled in Christ and through the Spirit.

If following the letter refers to correctly obeying the Law of Moses and that leads to death, then that would mean that God would be misleading us and shouldn't be trusted, but there are many verses that say that the New Covenant involves following the Mosaic Law, that the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it, and that obedience to it leads to life. The verses that you cited notably don't specify anything about a moral core. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to walk in God's way in obedience to Him, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws.

Was the LAW abolished?


Ephesians 2:14–15 - Christ Abolished the Law of Commandments in Ordinances
Greek:
τὸν νόμον τῶν ἐντολῶν ἐν δόγμασι καταργήσας...


"He [Christ] abolished in His flesh the law of commandments in ordinances [τῶν ἐντολῶν ἐν δόγμασι]."

The phrase “ἐν δόγμασι” (in ordinances) is critical. The term δόγμα refers not to God’s universal moral commands, but to decrees, prescriptions, or statutes - especially those tied to ritual and ceremonial practice (see Luke 2:1; Acts 16:4; Colossians 2:14).

Christ’s death annulled those legal distinctions that separated Jew and Gentile - dietary laws, circumcision, priesthood, purification, and sacrificial rites.
Moral law is not included in this annulment, as evidenced by the continuation of ethical imperatives in verses like Ephesians 4:25–5:6.

The Bible never uses the Greek word "dogma" to refer to the Law of Moses. In Ephesians 2:12-19, Gentiles were at one time separated from Christ, alienated from Israel and the covenants of promise, and without hope and God in this world, which is all in accordance with Gentiles at one time not being doers of the Law of Moses, but through faith in Christ all of that is no longer true in that Gentiles are no longer strangers or aliens, but are fellow citizens of Israel along with the saints in the household of God, which is all in accordance with Gentiles becoming doers of the Law of Moses. So what was being broken down was not the Law of Moses, but what was hindering Gentiles from becoming doers of it. In Titus 2:14, it doesn't say that Jesus gave himself to free us from any part of the Law of Moses, but in order to free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Law of Moses (Acts 21:20).

II. Colossians 2:14 - The Handwriting of Ordinances Was Nailed to the Cross
Greek:
ἐξαλείψας τὸ καθ’ ἡμῶν χειρόγραφον τοῖς δόγμασιν... ἤρκεν αὐτὸ ἐκ τοῦ μέσου προσηλώσας αὐτὸ τῷ σταυρῷ·


"Having blotted out the handwriting of ordinances [χειρόγραφον τοῖς δόγμασιν] that was against us... and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross." NOT THE LAW JLB

The χειρόγραφον (“certificate of debt”) refers to the written record of legal liabilities - Israel’s binding obligations under Mosaic law.

The accompanying δόγματα again point to ritual and ceremonial prescriptions (cf. Colossians 2:20–22).
Paul then warns in vv. 16–17 against being judged for food, drink, new moons, Sabbaths, which were shadows, not substance.
He never includes prohibitions against murder, adultery, idolatry - only ceremonial law.

Shalom.

Johann.

In Matthew 27:37, they nailed a handwritten ordinance to Christ's cross that announced the charge that was against him that he was the King of the Jews. This fits perfectly with the handwritten ordinance that listed the charges that were against us being nailed to Christ's cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sin, but has nothing to do with nailing any laws to the cross.

Colossians 2:16 by itself leaves room for two scenarios:

1.) The Colossians were not celebrating God's feasts, they were being judged by Jews because they were not, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them for not celebrating them.

2.) The Colossians were celebrating God's feasts, they were being judged by pagans because they were, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them for celebrating them.

In Colossians 2:16-23, Paul described the people who were judging the Colossians as promoting human precepts and traditions, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, which means that they were being judged by pagans and that the second scenario is the case. Those promoting asceticism and severity to the body would be judging people for celebrating feasts, not for refraining from doing that. God's feasts are foreshadows that testify about the truth about what is to come, so Paul was emphasizing the importance of continuing to keep them.

 

[Soyeong]

Nowhere does Paul treat the Ten Commandments as void or irrelevant...

That is true for all of God's laws, not just ten of them. In Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed His children to determine that someone was a false prophet who was not speaking for Him was if they taught against obeying the Law of Moses, so it is either incorrect to interpret Paul as doing that or he was a false prophet, but either way we should still obey the Law of Moses.

But you're conflating categories that Paul himself carefully distinguishes.

Yes... the law of Moses includes far more than the Ten Commandments - the rabbis later counted 613 commandments, spanning moral, ceremonial, and civil domains. But that doesn’t mean all of it operates the same way under the new covenant.

In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Law of Moses in our minds and writing it on our hearts. The Bible never lists which laws are part of the moral, ceremonial, and civil law and never even refers to those as being categories of law. If a group of people were to create lists of which laws they thought best fit into those categories, then they would end up with a wide variety of lists and none of those people should interpret the authors of the Bible as referring to a lists of laws that they just created without first establishing that they had in mind identical sets of laws, but there is no way to do that.

Paul consistently distinguishes between the enduring moral law - things like “you shall not murder, steal, commit adultery” - and the covenantal/legal system of Moses that functioned as a temporary guardian.

Paul never said anything along the lines that these laws ore part of the enduring moral law while these other laws are not and you can't even establish that he considered the moral law to be a category of law, so there is a difference between Paul doing that and you imposing those categories onto what Paul said.

Romans 13:8–10 proves this… Paul cites several commandments from the Decalogue and says they are fulfilled in love. That is not nullification... it's transformation under grace.

Everything in the Law of Moses is either in regard to how to love God or how to love our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, so the position that we we should obey the greatest two commandments is also the position that we should obey the commandments that hang on them, which is why love fulfills them. For example, if we love God and our neighbor, then we won't commit adultery, theft, murder, idolatry, rape, favoritism, kidnapping, and so forth for the rest of the Law of Moses.

Romans 2:14–15 further supports this... where Paul acknowledges that Gentiles who have never received the Torah can nevertheless obey what the law requires because it is written on the heart — a clear reference to moral law, not ceremonial codes.

Those verses notably don't specify anything to distinguish between moral and ceremonial laws.

As for Abraham... Genesis 26:5 says he obeyed God's commandments, statutes, and laws, yes... but that doesn't mean he kept the Torah of Moses, which came 430 years later. Paul makes that exact point in Galatians 3:17. You’re reading later legal terminology into an earlier context... Abraham obeyed what God revealed to him in his time — not what was given to Israel at Sinai.

I made the case in post #1 and #16 show the continuation between Abraham and Moses and of both of them speaking the Gospel of the Kingdom by teaching people to walk in God's way. Any two sets of instructions for how to walk in God's way are going to be very similar and are both going to be valid for anyone who wants to know God by walking in His way.

And remember... Paul says clearly in Galatians 3:19 that the law was "added because of transgressions... until the Seed should come." That time-bound covenant — the law as a guardian - was fulfilled in Christ.

We're no longer under that covenant structure (Galatians 3:25)... but that doesn’t mean lawlessness. Romans 8:4 says the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us... not by returning to Sinai, but by walking in the Spirit.

So no... Paul doesn’t treat the Ten Commandments as void, but neither does he lump them into the same category as the full Mosaic code. And no... Abraham didn’t keep the 613 commandments — the law hadn’t even been given yet. That’s Paul’s entire point in Romans 4 and Galatians 3.

Johann.

Jesus was not sense as the promised seed to curse us by freeing us to do what the Law of Moses reveals to be wickedness, but to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26). In Galatians 3:16-19, there is a principle that a newer covenant does not nullify the promises of older covenants that have already been ratified, so all of God's covenants are cumulative. In Galatians 3:26-29, every aspect of being children of God (1), through faith (2), in Christ (3), and children of Abraham and heirs of the promise (4) are all directly connected with living in obedience to the Law of Moses. In 1 John 3:4-10, those who are not doers of righteousness in obedience to the Law of Moses are not children of God (1). In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Law of Moses (2). In 1 John 2:6, those who in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (3). In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works as him (4). In Romans 8:4-7, Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of Moses.

 

[Corinth77777]

Yes the law of Moses with its sacrifices all pointed to Christ and the many wonderful things His sacrifice would do for us.

Moses was a type of Christ being the prophet.

Aaron was a type of Christ being the high priest.

The ark of the covenant as well as its contents were types of Christ.

The Sabbath was a shadow of the rest to come when Christ returns.

All the law of Moses were shadows and types that pointed to (was a school teacher) that pointed to Christ which He fulfilled.

The law of Moses is no longer needed having fulfilled its purpose.

I can see your point
But it's still the path in which the Spirit leads.
The Spirit is not contrary to the law..only by means of legalism.

In Romans 7 The Law is Spiritual
And in my own opinion our bodies should go back to the way they were before the fall?

Note to self :[Uncovering nakedness just came to me...dont know exactly why.]

Adam and Eve were not conscience of sin as a matter of fact I dont think they knew of sin at all until they broke God's command. So what is the opposite of breaking a command but to live in them.

If we live in them could we also say that Christ is our covering?
Soyeong

And that by this we have no conscience of sin?

 

[ezrider]

It is by the Law of Moses that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20)

Yes, it is by the Law of Moses that we have the knowledge of sin. It is by the Law of Moses and the words of the book that we possess the KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL. The same fruit Adam ate from the Tree.

Adam and Eve were not conscience of sin as a matter of fact I dont think they knew of sin at all until they broke God's command. So what is the opposite of breaking a command but to live in them.

If we live in them could we also say that Christ is our covering?

Possessing the knowledge of the Law, the knowledge of good and evil, the knowledge of sin and death and the knowledge of God's wrath; as Adam and Eve covered themselves with fig leaves to hide from God, so too has Christ become a fig leaf for many.