The Law, works and keeping his comandments

[JLB]

But you're showing me that, like so many others in the church, that you are sure I'm advocating a return to literal Mosaic worship. Hardly! But how can I communicate that if you're simply not getting it no matter how hard I try to break this down?

I am with you on many things, as I agree with you on most. I don't at all think you are advocating a return to Mosaic worship. I think your central message is to show the Church that loving your neighbor fulfills the Law.

Also, that we are just as guilty as the "law Keepers" when we exalt our external rituals of attending church, and reading the bible, worship service, praying, teaching, as well as "church duties" over God's command to love our neighbor.

You also teach that by loving our neighbor, we are upholding to requirements or principles found in the law.

Finally, I believe your message conveys the idea that they way we are to keep the principles and standards of the law, today, is to Love God and Love our neighbor.

With this I agree.

My only disagreement is that the Law of Moses has been fulfilled and has vanished away.

I believe that the law of Moses, "showcased" many of God's Laws that are eternal, that were in existence from the beginning.

In addition I believe that we are to walk with God and to learn from Him, as Adam was called to do, and as Abraham did.

My heart is to put as much emphasis on seeking God, to hear from Him and be led by Him, as studying the scriptures.

So, I believe that whatever the law says, it says to those under the law.

and again -

13 In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. Hebrews 8:13

I believe we have been given a new nature that desires to please God and walk with God and has a capacity to led by the Spirit.

We would do well to invest our effort in edifying and developing our inner man, and to be filled with the Spirit, as much or more than endless studying and "learning".


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

But you're showing me that, like so many others in the church, that you are sure I'm advocating a return to literal Mosaic worship. Hardly! But how can I communicate that if you're simply not getting it no matter how hard I try to break this down?

I am with you on many things, as I agree with you on most. I don't at all think you are advocating a return to Mosaic worship. I think your central message is to show the Church that loving your neighbor fulfills the Law.

Also, that we are just as guilty as the "law Keepers" when we exalt our external rituals of attending church, and reading the bible, worship service, praying, teaching, as well as "church duties" over God's command to love our neighbor.

You also teach that by loving our neighbor, we are upholding to requirements or principles found in the law.

Finally, I believe your message conveys the idea that they way we are to keep the principles and standards of the law, today, is to Love God and Love our neighbor.

With this I agree.

My only disagreement is that the Law of Moses has been fulfilled and has vanished away.

I believe that the law of Moses, "showcased" many of God's Laws that are eternal, that were in existence from the beginning.

In addition I believe that we are to walk with God and to learn from Him, as Adam was called to do, and as Abraham did.

My heart is to put as much emphasis on seeking God, to hear from Him and be led by Him, as studying the scriptures.

So, I believe that whatever the law says, it says to those under the law.

and again -

13 In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. Hebrews 8:13

I believe we have been given a new nature that desires to please God and walk with God and has a capacity to led by the Spirit.

We would do well to invest our effort in edifying and developing our inner man, and to be filled with the Spirit, as much or more than endless studying and "learning".


JLB

I don't know how you can think 'do not murder', 'do not steal' is only speaking to just Jews. That passage in Romans says God will hold the 'whole world' accountable by the law that you say was only given to the Jews. The giving of the law, as you mean that, was given to the people of God. That included/ includes any and everyone who joins themselves to the people of God.

Hebrews is where I got enlightened about this matter of the first covenant. The first covenant is the literal temple, priesthood, and sacrifices, and time table and place to offer those sacrifices up. THAT is what got laid aside, not the requirements themselves for a Temple, a Priesthood, and sacrifice for sin, and even a 'time' and 'place' to offer that up.

The first, or old, covenant is the old WAY to fulfill the eternal requirements of God, not the requirements themselves. The New Covenant is the new WAY that we fulfill the requirements of God. It's the difference between keeping the requirements of God through written words vs. keeping the requirements of God through the Spirit of God and faith in Christ.

The letter of the written code--the way of the written code--is what got laid aside, not what the written code sought to do. But so many in the church are blinded by this indoctrination about the law presently saddled on the church that says the law was utterly and completely abolished, instead of what the Bible says faith in Christ does--fulfills it. I showed you the scriptures that teach this.

No need to reinterpret Jesus' meaning to defend a doctrine of fulfillment. He did indeed mean that he did not come to abolish the law of Moses, but to fulfill it...sacrifice for sin being the premier example and illustration of this. He did not come to abolish that law. He fulfilled it. In fact, he fulfilled it so well that the literal first covenant way of how to do that is no longer needed. Not abolished, simply not needed anymore.

These are not my words. The author of Hebrews penned this truth. The first covenant (animal sacrifice, and the time table to offer those up) is what got laid aside, NOT THE REQUIREMENT FOR SACRIFICE FOR SIN. That requirement continues into this New Covenant (Christ now being the required sacrifice for sin God demands) along with the other requirements of God that the literal, first covenant sought to fulfill in the way of a literal, written code (a.k.a. the 'old' way), but which got replaced by the 'new' way, faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[JLB]

I don't know how you can think 'do not murder', 'do not steal' is only speaking to just Jews

Thank you for making my point.

These are the very laws that God would teach to Adam.

These are the laws that Abraham walked in 430 years before the law of Moses.

The conclusion is, even though the law of Moses has vanished away, these laws that Abraham walked before the law of Moses are still valid and applicable for the body of Christ today.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I don't know how you can think 'do not murder', 'do not steal' is only speaking to just Jews

Thank you for making my point.

These are the very laws that God would teach to Adam.

These are the laws that Abraham walked in 430 years before the law of Moses.

The conclusion is, even though the law of Moses has vanished away, these laws that Abraham walked before the law of Moses are still valid and applicable for the body of Christ today.


JLB

IOW, the requirements of the law continue in this New Covenant, contrary to what many churches teach. They have not been abolished.

What got laid aside, because it's simply no longer needed, is the WAY those requirements were to be upheld in that old covenant way of priesthood, temple, and sacrifice. Those requirements still get upheld in this New Covenant, but in the new WAY of the Spirit, and faith in Christ, and that covenant of Priesthood, Temple, and Sacrifice.


How do you explain the Bible saying in Romans 3:19 that the 'whole world' was brought into account, and 'every mouth silenced', by the law of Moses? Paul has the law 'speaking' to many more people than just the Jews. That's how we know what being 'under the law' means. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and are therefore 'under the law'. He goes on to say later that it those who have and walk by the Spirit of God that are no longer under the condemnation of the law.

Death--death in Christ--is what removes a person from 'under' the law. That does not mean removes them from the requirements of the law as many teach. Hardly! Faith in Christ upholds the requirements of the law. What believers are no longer under in regard to the law is the condemnation of the law, because old man 'flesh' has died.

 

[JLB]

IOW, the requirements of the law continue in this New Covenant, contrary to what many churches teach. They have not been abolished.

The law of Moses has vanished away.

We can learn many wonderful truths from all of the Old Testament.

Here is one of them that I will ask as a question.

What do you think was more important to God concerning Abraham:

"Get out of your country, From your family And from your father's house, To a land that I will show you.

Or

Keep the Sabbath


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

IOW, the requirements of the law continue in this New Covenant, contrary to what many churches teach. They have not been abolished.

The law of Moses has vanished away.

Read Hebrews and you see that the Day of Atonement, a requirement of Mosaic law, was fulfilled by the work of Christ, not abolished by the work of Christ. And that is exactly what Christ said he came to do--fulfill the law, not abolish it. Hebrews provides that illustration for us.

Hebrews shows us how the old way of temple, priesthood, and sacrifice for fulfilling that obligation of Mosaic law is what was made obsolete, not the requirement itself. Christ fulfilled that requirement. He did not abolish it. He made the way that requirement was fulfilled in the law of Moses obsolete.

What do you think was more important to God concerning Abraham:

"Get out of your country, From your family And from your father's house, To a land that I will show you.

Or

Keep the Sabbath


JLB

The question is confusing because his obedience in "not going your own way and not doing as you please" is his Sabbath obedience (Isaiah 58:13 NIV). When we do that, through our faith in God (the new way of serving God), we fulfill the lawful requirement for Sabbath rest found in the law, not abolish it.

 

[JLB]

not abolished by the work of Christ. And that is exactly what Christ said he came to do--fulfill the law, not abolish it.

I don't use the word abolish. I use what Hebrews 8:13 says.

However, Jesus said -

17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Matthew 5:17-18

By your own words you say he fulfilled the law, so that the things that were intended might pass from the Law, or vanish away as Hebrews says.

More that a jot or tittle has passed from the law, so what was intended for Him to fulfill was fulfilled, so the law has vanished away.

The question is confusing because his obedience in "not going your own way and not doing as you please" is his Sabbath obedience (Isaiah 58:13 NIV). When we do that, through our faith in God (the new way of serving God), we fulfill the lawful requirement for Sabbath rest found in the law, not abolish it.

Brother the Law is not of faith!

The scripture says -

8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. Hebrews 11:8

So Abraham was not fulfilling any Sabbath Law requirement as you would insinuate by your statement.

Righteousness is not of the Law!

Abraham was declared righteous by His faith!


Sorry Brother, you are not going to get away with twisting the scriptures or adding your own phrases to the word to make it say what you want.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

not abolished by the work of Christ. And that is exactly what Christ said he came to do--fulfill the law, not abolish it.

I don't use the word abolish. I use what Hebrews 8:13 says.

So then, you agree that the law of Moses was not abolished. This being true, how is it that you can not see that what the law of Moses required did not 'go away', but is fulfilled by the work of Christ? The very law of Moses, not another law distinct from the law of Moses.

The first covenant--that system and way of priesthood, temple, and sacrifice for fulfilling the requirements of God--is what was made obsolete (laid aside--Hebrews 10:9 NIV, not abolished as is popularly taught), because it is no longer needed to sanctify a people who are already forever sanctified (Hebrews 10:10 NIV). The old WAY to sanctification (as if it could do that anyway) was what got laid aside, NOT THE LAWFUL REQUIREMENT FOR SANCTIFICATION BY BLOOD.

However, Jesus said -

17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Matthew 5:17-18

By your own words you say he fulfilled the law, so that the things that were intended might pass from the Law, or vanish away as Hebrews says.

More that a jot or tittle has passed from the law, so what was intended for Him to fulfill was fulfilled, so the law has vanished away.

How does this mean that ALL the law has vanished away? Christ died on the cross, so that means 'do not steal', and 'do not covet', and not just 'sacrifice an animal for sin through a literal system of worship' vanished too? Really? Shouldn't you be arguing that the WAY we keep the law of Moses' requirements vanished away, not the requirements themselves?

Christ fulfilled the Mosaic requirements for various sacrifices, rest, festival gatherings, high Priest, etc.. The Mosaic WAY of fulfilling those is what has been laid aside, not 'do not murder', 'do not steal', etc. But even those are fulfilled by us in the new WAY of the Spirit and faith in Christ, not in the old WAY of mere written words (Romans 7:6 NIV). The point being, the requirements of law did not go anywhere. They remain in this New Covenant. Just fulfilled in the new way of the Spirit and faith in Christ, just as 'blood sacrifice for atonement' is. I'm amazed that you're contending with this.

The question is confusing because his obedience in "not going your own way and not doing as you please" is his Sabbath obedience (Isaiah 58:13 NIV). When we do that, through our faith in God (the new way of serving God), we fulfill the lawful requirement for Sabbath rest found in the law, not abolish it.

Brother the Law is not of faith!

Read the context of that phrase. The way of obeying the law to be justified is NOT the way of believing in Christ to be justified. That's the distinction he's trying to make:

11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” 12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.” (Galatians 3:11-12 NIV)

But you and the church understand it to mean "the law is not of faith so I don't have to keep it anymore." As if satisfying the requirements of the law itself is the 'law' that is 'not of faith'. How silly.

So we can see from the context that Paul is saying that it is the attempt to be justified by works of the law that is opposed to (being justified by) faith in Christ. Upholding the requirements of the law of Moses out of obedience to God is not what Paul is contrasting faith in Christ with. That's absurd. For as he and others say, faith in Christ upholds the law, not violates it, so it's impossible that he is saying simply obeying the law is contrary to faith in Christ. Again I say, how absurd to think that. What is prohibited, and opposed to faith, is trying to be justified by obeying the law.

Trying to be justified by law, and trying to be justified by faith are two entirely different things. But the church has come to understand this Biblical teaching as, "I don't have to do what the law commands anymore, because we're not 'under' the law anymore" (For all that means when they say that). No. What that means is the WAY of the law to be justified is in no way the same as, or similar to, being justified in the WAY of faith in Christ. It is not a teaching for the laying aside of the obediences of the law. It is a teaching about the end of the way of the law for justification, not an end to what the law requires of us.

[The scripture says -

8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. Hebrews 11:8

So Abraham was not fulfilling any Sabbath Law requirement as you would insinuate by your statement.

I thought you understood the true, spiritual reality and fulfillment of the Sabbath requirement.

When we believe in, and obey God's words we enter into his appointed Sabbath Rest. A Rest ordained for the people of God from the beginning of creation. The literal Mosaic fulfillment of that rest was but a shadow and illustration of that. It is the literal Mosaic WAY of fulfilling the reality that got 'laid aside', not the requirement for Sabbath rest itself. And we fulfill, not set aside or abolish, that requirement when we obey.

Just another example of how Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses, not violate and abolish it. Now his work did lay aside the literal Mosaic fulfillment of that rest. His work on the cross is the 'until all is accomplished' (Matthew 5:18 NASB) that had to happen before the literal WAY of the law of Moses could be laid aside (because he fulfilled what it sought to do one time, for all time). But to say his work on the cross ended the requirements of the law of Sabbath Rest altogether would be to say he did exactly what he said he did NOT come to do, abolish it.

Righteousness is not of the Law!

Abraham was declared righteous by His faith!

We all know justification (being declared righteous) is by faith, not by doing righteous things. What we all don't know in the church is that the faith that justifies then acts righteously and does not violate the law (Galatians 5:18 NIV).

James even goes so far as to say if your faith does not act in accordance with 'love your neighbor as yourself' (Leviticus 19:18 NIV), and other expressions of that royal command found in the law of Moses (do not show favoritism, etc.), you have a faith that can not save you.


Somehow justification (being declared righteous) by faith instead of works of the law came to mean "I don't have to uphold the requirements of the law anymore." This all plays into the great deceit in the church at this present time that says grace through faith means I don't have to live righteously according to the law, the standard of righteousness, because the law 'went away'. That is NOT what justification by faith means. As I'm showing, the Bible tells us that the righteousness that comes by faith apart from the works of the law UPHOLDS the requirements of the law, not does away with them or violates them! Unless you can show me which laws get broken by our faith in Christ.

Sorry Brother, you are not going to get away with twisting the scriptures or adding your own phrases to the word to make it say what you want.


JLB

No twisting here. This comes right out of the Bible. What I can't find in the Bible is the teaching that the requirements of the law of Moses (blood for atonement, 'do not steal', etc.), and not just the WAY of the law of Moses, 'went away'. It's interesting that you can not show me the passages that say this.

It is so plainly taught in the Bible that faith fulfills the requirements of the law of Moses, not removes them, that I'm amazed that this indoctrination over the church that blinds the eyes of so many to this plain truth right under our noses in black and white in our Bibles is so strong that it can do that. It's downright scary.

 

[JLB]

So then, you agree that the law of Moses was not abolished. This being true, how is it that you can not see that what the law of Moses required did not 'go away', but is fulfilled by the work of Christ? The very law of Moses, not another law distinct from the law of Moses.

I believe the law was added until the Seed should come, since the Seed has come, the law has vanished away in the light of the One who has cast the shadow.

How does this mean that ALL the law has vanished away? Christ died on the cross, so that means 'do not steal', and 'do not covet', and not just 'sacrifice an animal for sin through a literal system of worship' vanished too? Really? Shouldn't you be arguing that the WAY we keep the law of Moses' requirements vanished away, not the requirements themselves? Christ fulfilled the Mosaic requirements for various sacrifices, rest, festival gatherings, high Priest, etc.. The Mosaic WAY of fulfilling those is what has been laid aside, not 'do not murder', 'do not steal', etc. But even those are fulfilled by us in the new WAY of the Spirit and faith in Christ, not in the old WAY of mere written words (Romans 7:6 NIV). The point being, the requirements of law did not go anywhere. They remain in this New Covenant. Just fulfilled in the new way of the Spirit and faith in Christ, just as 'blood sacrifice for atonement' is. I'm amazed that you're contending with this.

Do not Murder, do not steal was around as a law of God before the law of Moses.

We all know justification (being declared righteous) is by faith, not by doing righteous things. What we all don't know in the church is that the faith that justifies then acts righteously and does not violate the law (Galatians 5:18 NIV). James even goes so far as to say if your faith does not act in accordance with 'love your neighbor as yourself' (Leviticus 19:18 NIV), and other expressions of that royal command found in the law of Moses (do not show favoritism, etc.), you have a faith that can not save you. Somehow justification (being declared righteous) by faith instead of works of the law came to mean "I don't have to uphold the requirements of the law anymore." This all plays into the great deceit in the church at this present time that says grace through faith means I don't have to live righteously according to the law, the standard of righteousness, because the law 'went away'. That is NOT what justification by faith means. As I'm showing, the Bible tells us that the righteousness that comes by faith apart from the works of the law UPHOLDS the requirements of the law, not does away with them or violates them! Unless you can show me which laws get broken by our faith in Christ.

These are the statutes and judgments and laws which the Lord made between Himself and the children of Israel on Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses. Leviticus 26:46

The law of Moses was never meant for gentiles.

The law of Moses does not justify.

The law of Moses does not make a person righteous.

The law of Moses does not save.

The law of Moses is not of faith.

What then does the Law of Moses do for us today?

You are trying to apply the Law of Moses to Gentiles, when the word says -

Whatever the law says, it says to those under the law.

Please answer.

No twisting here. This comes right out of the Bible. What I can't find in the Bible is the teaching that the requirements of the law of Moses (blood for atonement, 'do not steal', etc.), and not just the WAY of the law of Moses, 'went away'. It's interesting that you can not show me the passages that say this. It is so plainly taught in the Bible that faith fulfills the requirements of the law of Moses, not removes them, that I'm amazed that this indoctrination over the church that blinds the eyes of so many to this plain truth right under our noses in black and white in our Bibles is so strong that it can do that. It's downright scary.

The Blood of Jesus does not atone, it cleanses and justifies.


What is down right scary is the fact that you would try to convince us that the law of Moses, that was made between the Lord and the children of Israel, specifically for the land of Israel, is somehow applicable to Gentile Christians living in America.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

What is down right scary is the fact that you would try to convince us that the law of Moses, that was made between the Lord and the children of Israel, specifically for the land of Israel, is somehow applicable to Gentile Christians living in America.


JLB

Which requirement of law is not applicable to gentile Christians not living in the Land? Which one's do NOT get fulfilled, and do not have to be fulfilled, by gentile Christians through their faith in Christ? List them.


Remember, I'm not advocating the WAY of the law of Moses to fulfill the requirements of the law of Moses, so no need to go there (example: the Sabbath requirement--not necessary to fulfill in the old way of the law of Moses, but still a binding requirement of law on all the people of God, fulfilled through Christ and our faith in Christ).

Which of this sample list of Mosaic requirements is NOT fulfilled by gentile Christians?

Blood sacrifice for sin
Worship in the one true place
Eye for eye
The Day of Atonement
Do not muzzle the oxen
...

 

[farouk]

Romans 6.14; Galatians 5.18

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I believe the law was added until the Seed should come, since the Seed has come, the law has vanished away in the light of the One who has cast the shadow.

Correct. The WAY of fulfilling the requirements of God, boxed up in the system and way of the first covenant, was added, and was then set aside with the appearance of Christ and his work on cross.

What you are arguing for, and don't realize, is the end of the WAY of the law of Moses, not the requirements in the law of Moses that it's own way sought to uphold.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Romans 6.14; Galatians 5.18

Pretty sure I already addressed these. Now you have to show my explanation is wrong...if you don't agree with it .

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Do not Murder, do not steal was around as a law of God before the law of Moses.

Law of Moses = eternal laws of God. It's the exact same 'do not murder' in the law of Moses as the 'do not murder' established from creation and before, but somehow when it got written down in what the Bible calls the Law of Moses it ceased to be the same law and got laid aside with the coming of Christ? Really? Explain this to me.

Don't you see that what you say only makes sense in regard to the WAY we fulfill the that law? It's the exact same requirement of law, not a different law. How do you not see this?

 

[farouk]

Romans 6.14; Galatians 5.18

Pretty sure I already addressed these. Now you have to show my explanation is wrong...if you don't agree with it .

I'm sure that, in law, silence does not imply consent. Romans 6.14 and Galatians 5.18 are definitely relevant to this topic, though.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

These are the statutes and judgments and laws which the Lord made between Himself and the children of Israel on Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses. Leviticus 26:46

The law of Moses was never meant for gentiles.

Then how does God judge 'the whole world', and 'silence every mouth' by that law?

Again, what you're arguing for is the WAY of the law of Moses to serve God, not the requirements of the law, was not meant for those living outside of the Land. And even now that way, the way of the first covenant of temple, priest, and sacrifice, is not even for those living in the Land. It's not needed anymore because what it sought to do is so perfectly and forever accomplished through the new WAY of serving God--faith in Jesus Christ.

The law of Moses does not justify.

No question about it. But how does this mean that 'do not murder' got laid aside....except that the WAY we 'keep' that law is what got laid aside.

The law of Moses does not make a person righteous.

(See above answer)

The law of Moses does not save.

Technically not correct. Let me explain. (Actually, I'm surprised you'd disagree with what I'm about to say.)

James says faith in Christ MUST be seen in 'love your neighbor as yourself' (Leviticus 19:18 NIV) for that faith to be validated as able to save a person. He even cites specific Mosaic laws to illustrate the fulfillment of the 'royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,”' (James 2:8 NIV), instructing them to keep those laws.

Faith that does not uphold the law of Moses (for all that I've explained that means) is a faith that can not save you.

The law of Moses is not of faith.

The keeping of the law of Moses for the purpose of justification is not of faith. I showed you right from the context that is what he is teaching. He is not teaching that upholding the law of Moses is in itself not of faith. That is silly. The Bible clearly teaches that faith upholds and satisfies the law of Moses.

What then does the Law of Moses do for us today?

James is an example of the law being "inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16 NASB). It's impossible to argue that his letter is not an illustration of that. Impossible. It's right there in his letter in black and white under our fat noses. He uses specific laws in the law of Moses to teach the righteousness of faith, the faith that saves, to the church. Show me he does not, if that's what you believe.

You are trying to apply the Law of Moses to Gentiles, when the word says -

Whatever the law says, it says to those under the law.

Please answer.

I did! Are you simply not able to hear my argument? I'm not asking if you agree with it. I question whether or not you are even comprehending what I'm saying. Is this the case? Because I think if you were comprehending what I'm saying you would not be asking for an answer I already gave you. What you should be doing if you truly have been 'hearing' and comprehending my argument is refuting what I said, not asking for my answer again.

Believe me, I understand the power of the indoctrination that grips the church about this matter of law. It's so strong that even detailed, understandable explanation goes in one ear and out the other. I'm not flattering myself, but I think I have communicated the argument effectively, in an understandable way. It's the power of this indoctrination in the church that has made 'law' the forbidden four letter word of the faith that closes the eyes and the ears of the church to the truth about the fulfillment of the law of Moses, not it's removal in this New Covenant.

Again, what Paul is saying there is we are no loner under the condemnation of the law of Moses that the whole world of Jewish and gentile sinners alike are 'under'. Read it!

No twisting here. This comes right out of the Bible. What I can't find in the Bible is the teaching that the requirements of the law of Moses (blood for atonement, 'do not steal', etc.), and not just the WAY of the law of Moses, 'went away'. It's interesting that you can not show me the passages that say this. It is so plainly taught in the Bible that faith fulfills the requirements of the law of Moses, not removes them, that I'm amazed that this indoctrination over the church that blinds the eyes of so many to this plain truth right under our noses in black and white in our Bibles is so strong that it can do that. It's downright scary.

The Blood of Jesus does not atone, it cleanses and justifies.

I sense a Hebrew/Greek word game coming on, lol.

If the blood of animals made atonement for the people of God in the first covenant, does the blood of Christ do anything less? We know what it does more than the blood of animals, but does it do anything less than the atonement that animal blood secured in the first covenant that it should not bring atonement (AT-ONE-MENT) for the people of God?

I suspect you'll want to play word games, but the blood of Christ is described in the Bible as securing atonement for the people of God.

If the first covenant was the type and shadow for how blood makes atonement for the people of God, how is it that the reality that the type and shadow point to doesn't do that?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Romans 6.14; Galatians 5.18

Pretty sure I already addressed these. Now you have to show my explanation is wrong...if you don't agree with it .

I'm sure that, in law, silence does not imply consent. Romans 6.14 and Galatians 5.18 are definitely relevant to this topic, though.

Well, we won't be able to comment until you explain what those passages mean to you.

 

[farouk]

Romans 6.14; Galatians 5.18

Pretty sure I already addressed these. Now you have to show my explanation is wrong...if you don't agree with it .

I'm sure that, in law, silence does not imply consent. Romans 6.14 and Galatians 5.18 are definitely relevant to this topic, though.

Well, we won't be able to comment until you explain what those passages mean to you.

The New Testament believer is not under the law.

Self-explanatory.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I'm sure that, in law, silence does not imply consent. Romans 6.14 and Galatians 5.18 are definitely relevant to this topic, though.

Well, we won't be able to comment until you explain what those passages mean to you.

The New Testament believer is not under the law.

Self-explanatory.

Lol, I wish it was, farouk, I wish it was.

So, since I'm not under the law I don't have to 'not commit adultery', or 'not steal', or 'not show favorltism'?

See, it's not as self-explanatory as you think.

And if you want to discuss it I'll show you that even what you mean is we are not under the WAY of the law to fulfill the lawful requirements of God. For obviously we are still indeed 'under' the commands I listed above and others. So, obviously Paul does not mean we are no longer under what the law requires. So what does he mean, farouk?

I started to write more, but let's wait for your answer, first.

 

[Sinthesis]

[MENTION=88699]Jethro Bodine[/MENTION], It would be helpful if you could define the way of the law, vs the requirements of the law, vs the requirements of God. I believe most of the contention in this thread is related to differing definitions of these terms.