Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
The Law of God. OT. Applicable Today?
- Thread starter Edward
- Start date
TOG
Member
If that's what you think, then you haven't understood my logic. There is only one law. It is not divided into "major" and "minor" laws as you imply. If you think it is, I would like to see some scriptural support for it. Since, as James says, the same God gave all the commandments, if one of them has been done away with, then so have the rest of them. But if even one of the commandments can be shown to be still valid, then all of them are still valid.
The TOG
Jethro Bodine
Member
You and me both, then, I guess, lol.
A friend of mine once told me that I think like a computer. I guess I can be overly logical at times.
The TOG
While I don't agree with the ultimate conclusion that the Messianic's come to, I have learned to read the Bible for what it actually says and to stop toeing the line on the traditional, but erroneous, teachings in the church today by what Messianics have shared. My hat is off to the observant people of faith who have been courageous enough to challenge false teaching and have been willing to help others see the value of the law in the life of the NT believer.
Contrary to what so many insist in this forum, it is the knowledge of the Mosaic tithe that helped produce in me an abundant, cheerful, overflowing generosity by the Spirit of God that has brought great joy into my life.
Jethro Bodine
Member
(Post removed, response to deleted post. Obadiah)
Last edited by a moderator:
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.
Matthew 23:23
There were some laws that if broken were punishable by death, such as the Sabbath.
The primary requirement was Circumcision.
If physical Circumcision has ceased
to be a requirement, for Covenant relationship with The Lord, then how much more the minor requirements such as food laws.
JLB
TOG
Member
Tithing according the the Bible was only of grain, herds and flocks. Thithing mint, anise and cumin was a Pharisaic addition to the law. What Jesus is saying is that you can go ahead and do more than you are actually required to do, and that doing so is a good thing and to be encouraged, but it is more important to do the things that God actually tells us to do. It's about God's law being more important than man-made rules, not about different parts of God's law having different importance. Try again.
Who says it has ceased? In fact, who said it was ever a "requirement for Covenant relationship with the Lord"? Circumcision is the sign of the covenant with Abraham.
The TOG
I'm referring to the law of Moses.
The law of Moses required physical fleshly circumcision.
Do you understand this?
JLB
This is My covenant which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you shall be circumcised; 11 and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you. 12 He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised, every male child in your generations, he who is born in your house or bought with money from any foreigner who is not your descendant. 13 He who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money must be circumcised, and My covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14 And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant."
Genesis 17:10-14
14 And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant."
Genesis 17:10-14
And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, "This is the ordinance of the Passover: No foreigner shall eat it. 44 But every man's servant who is bought for money, when you have circumcised him, then he may eat it. 45 A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat it. 46 In one house it shall be eaten; you shall not carry any of the flesh outside the house, nor shall you break one of its bones. 47All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. 48 And when a stranger dwells with you and wants to keep the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it. 49 One law shall be for the native-born and for the stranger who dwells among you." Exodus 12:43-48
Amen!
Deborah13
Member
Messianic Jewish evangelist and scholar, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum. A change in the covenants.
"I received my first driver's license in the state of California. As long as I drove in California, I was subject to the traffic laws of that state. But two years later I moved to New York.
Once I left California, I ceased to be under California's traffic laws. The traffic laws of that state were rendered inoperative in my case. Now my driving was subject to a new law — the traffic laws of the state of New York.
There were many laws that were different. In California I was permitted to make a right turn at a red light after stopping and yielding the right-of-way. But in New York this was not permitted.
On the other hand, there were many similar laws between the two states, such as the edict to stop at red lights. However, when I stopped for a red light in New York, I did not do so in obedience to the state of California as I once had, but in obedience to the state of New York. Likewise, if I went through a red light without stopping, I was not guilty of breaking California law but New York law. Many laws were similar, but they were, nevertheless, under two distinctly different systems."
http://www.hadavar.org/wordpress/wp...ent-I-Give-To-You-final-version-9-2012-lg.pdf
"I received my first driver's license in the state of California. As long as I drove in California, I was subject to the traffic laws of that state. But two years later I moved to New York.
Once I left California, I ceased to be under California's traffic laws. The traffic laws of that state were rendered inoperative in my case. Now my driving was subject to a new law — the traffic laws of the state of New York.
There were many laws that were different. In California I was permitted to make a right turn at a red light after stopping and yielding the right-of-way. But in New York this was not permitted.
On the other hand, there were many similar laws between the two states, such as the edict to stop at red lights. However, when I stopped for a red light in New York, I did not do so in obedience to the state of California as I once had, but in obedience to the state of New York. Likewise, if I went through a red light without stopping, I was not guilty of breaking California law but New York law. Many laws were similar, but they were, nevertheless, under two distinctly different systems."
http://www.hadavar.org/wordpress/wp...ent-I-Give-To-You-final-version-9-2012-lg.pdf
GrannyJ
Member
Just come across this thread, and I'd like to add my 2 cents worth!
Looking at the title of the thread: The law of God: OT applicable today? - This could be taken in more than one way. It depends what's meant by the law of God and by the Old Testament being applicable today.
If we're talking about the law of Moses, this very point was discussed and disputed extensively in the early church. Some said Gentiles should obey the law of Moses, some said it was not necessary, so that the apostles actually had to meet in order to discuss and pray about this issue. All of this is recorded in Acts 15v1-36. The outcome was that Gentiles are NOT under the law of Moses; however, they were advised to refrain from certain things that were considered offensive:
Quoting from verse 28:
28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.
Most of the book of Galatians was written because some people were teaching the Galatians that they must obey the law of Moses, and Paul refutes this most effectively. I would recommend reading the entire book, rather than picking a few verses here and there. It is very clear, and Paul has strong words of condemnation for those who teach this doctrine.
On the other hand, the Law of Moses is only a small portion of the Old Testament; it is documented in parts of the first 5 books of the Bible. So to my mind the question of whether the Old Testament is applicable today is a different matter altogether.
We are not under the Law of Moses, but we can still benefit from the wisdom of the writer of Proverbs; we can still be inspired by the faith of the psalmists, we can benefit by knowing something of Jewish history as documented in the Old Testament, and we can learn more about God's plans by reading the prophets. So we cannot say that it is not applicable; it is a valuable tool for understanding the way God has worked in the past and His plan that was fulfilled in the coming of Jesus.
Looking at the title of the thread: The law of God: OT applicable today? - This could be taken in more than one way. It depends what's meant by the law of God and by the Old Testament being applicable today.
If we're talking about the law of Moses, this very point was discussed and disputed extensively in the early church. Some said Gentiles should obey the law of Moses, some said it was not necessary, so that the apostles actually had to meet in order to discuss and pray about this issue. All of this is recorded in Acts 15v1-36. The outcome was that Gentiles are NOT under the law of Moses; however, they were advised to refrain from certain things that were considered offensive:
Quoting from verse 28:
28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.
Most of the book of Galatians was written because some people were teaching the Galatians that they must obey the law of Moses, and Paul refutes this most effectively. I would recommend reading the entire book, rather than picking a few verses here and there. It is very clear, and Paul has strong words of condemnation for those who teach this doctrine.
On the other hand, the Law of Moses is only a small portion of the Old Testament; it is documented in parts of the first 5 books of the Bible. So to my mind the question of whether the Old Testament is applicable today is a different matter altogether.
We are not under the Law of Moses, but we can still benefit from the wisdom of the writer of Proverbs; we can still be inspired by the faith of the psalmists, we can benefit by knowing something of Jewish history as documented in the Old Testament, and we can learn more about God's plans by reading the prophets. So we cannot say that it is not applicable; it is a valuable tool for understanding the way God has worked in the past and His plan that was fulfilled in the coming of Jesus.
Jethro Bodine
Member
Yes, the question boils down to, "HOW is the law of the OT applicable today". I think we know the answer to that question by how it is used in the NT.
...for justification.
...for justification. Just as the Jews themselves were not under the law of Moses as a way to be justified either.
These things they were required to obey. The NAS calls them 'essentials'. And they are clearly referred to as being the law of Moses, not a different or new law. But again, not essential in regard to justification, but for which I agree is mainly for the sake of peace between Jew and gentile congregants. (Obviously, no sexual immorality is 'essential').
...that is obey the law of Moses for justification. That is what Paul is refuting. He is not teaching that any and all law keeping is forbidden. That would contradict the edict of the church elders at Jerusalem, not to mention Paul's own tradition of law keeping. But that seems to be the only way the church can understand law--in regard to justification.
I suggest to people that they take special note that Paul makes it clear that what he is against is exactly what the Jerusalem council determined--that no one is 'under the law' in regard to justification. He is not teaching the church that it is anathema (to be accursed) to keep the law for any and all reasons. But that is what the church decided and made official church law ('law', lol, how ironic) somewhere in the 3rd or 4th century. Which, if I remember correctly, was a political move, not a religious one designed to retain congregants (some things never change, lol).
The interesting point I picked up along the way over the years of reading the Bible is that the prophets taught the law and were sent to turn the people of God back to the obedience of the law of Moses.
Blasphemy! Lol.
But we also see that Jesus and faith in him is actually a fulfillment of the law of Moses, not an abolishing of the law of Moses. Jesus himself said he did not come to abolish, or destroy, the law, but to fulfill it. This is the scripture that made me question the church's teachings about the law. I heard so much teaching that--even though they deny it--in actuality abolishes the law of Moses. But Christ plainly said he did not come to do that.
This side of the cross we can now see that what Christ was pointing to was that when we have faith in Christ's work on the cross (the cross being the accomplishment he spoke of) we apply the results of his work on the cross as the satisfactory payment of the debt of law the people of God had to various worship stipulations upon which their place and status in the kingdom depended (feasts, circumcision, etc.) and satisfied the penalties for not keeping those stipulations. A fulfilling of the law of Moses (not an abolishing of the law of Moses) that makes the fulfillment of those various worship stipulations by us no longer necessary but now obsolete and unneeded (not forbidden, just not required as a matter of legislated law).
The results of his work on the cross also include God sending the Holy Spirit into the world to move the people of God to obedience to what remains to be fulfilled in the law of Moses by the people of God. Fulfilled in the new way of that Spirit--with power and conviction--instead of in the old way of mere written words that have little to no power to bring God's people to the obedience of the law.
While it's clear that 'under the law' has a negative connotation in the Bible and means at least four specific things that the people of God are no longer 'under' concerning the law of Moses, faith in Christ does satisfy, not abolishes all the requirements of the law that the people of God are 'under'. The confusion is in understanding fulfillment regarding the things that were fulfilled by Christ himself (the ceremonial laws), and fulfillment in regard to the things that remain to be fulfilled by the people of God in the power of the Spirit summarized in 'love your neighbor as yourself'.
Some say all of it remains to be fulfilled by us. Others insist none of it has to be fulfilled by us (because salvation is by faith alone, and/or, we 'keep' a new law). I'm convinced the truth is somewhere in between 'all' and 'nothing'. Christ fulfilled the worship cycle so that it doesn't have to be literally done anymore by those who now believe in Christ (worthy of it's own thread altogether). While we ourselves fulfill the continuing debt of the moral aspects of the law of Moses (Romans 13:8 NAS) through the crucifying of the flesh by the power of the Holy Spirit--the new way to serve God.
The bottom line being, God did not abolish the law of Moses (only the Rabbinical add on's). He fulfills it through the new way of Christ, and faith in him. Christ's body fulfills the worship requirements, and the penalties for disobedience in the law of Moses. The Holy Spirit sent into the world as the result of Christ's acceptable sacrifice in the true Tabernacle in heaven and our faith in that sacrifice is the power through which we fulfill the remaining debt of law the people of God have regarding the law of Moses.
Last edited: