What's new
By:
Filters
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!

WAS THE LAW FULFILLED OR ABOLISHED?

JLB said:
However, we must understand that Abraham obeyed His Commandments and laws 430 years before the law was added.

Abraham learned from the Lord directly, by faith, the way He desired to teach Adam and Eve.


The way He desires to teach us today, which is the promise of the New Covenant. See Jeremiah 31

Abraham walked with Him, in His presence, obeying His voice, which enabled him through grace and faith to obey the Lord.


Abraham was the pattern for us to follow.


And I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws. Genesis 26:4-5



JLB
Click to expand...
Yes, we are to follow Abraham's pattern of faithful obedience to God's will. Abraham had different laws/commands to obey than us. But a faithful obedience is the common denominator throughout the Bible in those who received grace versus those who did not. Romans 4:12 Paul says we are to immulate Abahram by walking in the steps, having the same kind of faith as Abraham had.

One important point as to why my initial post is that Christ did away with ALL the OT law:
Romans 7:1-4

Paul in this context is not giving a discourse on marriage but is using the marriage institution to make his point.

If a woman already has a husband but married another man she is an adulteress for having two husbands at the same time. But if her first husband is dead she is free from the law and can marry another without being an adulteress.

Paul's point is this: a person who is a Christian is married to Christ and His NT gospel. If that Christian also tries to keep the law of Moses also then he is committing spiritual adultery against Christ in keeping two law at the same time, trying to follow both Christ and Moses at the same time.

The reason it is important that Christ took ALL the OT out of the way is He made us dead to that law, freeing us from that law so we can be married to Him and his NT gospel and not be spiritual adulterers...." ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. " Paul said "dead to the law", not dead to just parts of it, but dead to all of it.

The analogy of the woman's two husbands is the first husband represents Moses and His law. The second husband represents Christ and His NT gospel. If married to both men at the same time the woman will be an adulteress. Likewise following Moses and Christ at the same time makes one a spiritual adulterer.

But if her first husband be dead she is free from the law to be married to another man. Likewise since the first husband is dead (Moses and His law) we are free to marry another man (Christ) without committing spiritual adultery.

THis is why people need to be careful about going back to the OT law to try and justify something that they are doing.
 
Ernest T. Bass said:
I do not agree with this part. When Christ took the OT law out of the way, He removed ALL of it making ALL of it inactive, ineffective today including the 10 commandments. Therefore remembering the Sabbath day is not part of NT Christianity. (I would say Sabbath keeping would be 'ceremonial/civil' law rather than a 'moral' law. Is the OT laws against eating blood, writing of divorcement, etc, categorized as ceremonial or moral laws? How is such determined among the dozens and dozens of OT laws? And who has been given authority to correctly determine this distinction for everyone else so we can all correctly distinguish between ceremonial and moral laws?).
Click to expand...
Hi Ernest,,,
we're not really discussing the Sabbath here but what it means when we say that Jesus fulfilled the law.

The 10 commandments. or Moral Law, was NEVER removed .... we are to keep the moral law today, just as we were to keep it in the O.T. laws.

You're correct that keeping the Sabbath is a ceremonial law....I said this in a post of mine that I can't look for right now. However, some (including myself) have a difficult time with this because it iS included in the 10 commandmens and because God said it was a sign FOREVER in the Mosaic Covenant. However, I do agree that we are no longer under the Mosaic Covenant.

The different laws HAVE been categorized.
I'll look for my post and repost it right after this.
There is no need to wonder.
We can say that the 10 commandments (or should we say 9) are the Moral Law.
The others are either civil or ceremonial.

--In Matthew 5:17 Jesus fulfilled the law and prophets. Jesus did not fulfill SOME of the OT Prophets about Him but all of them. Jesus did not fulfill just SOME of the OT law but all of it. The verse (context) does not make distinctions between ceremonial and moral laws. Continuing in Matthew 5:21 to the end of the chapter Jesus talks of murder, lusting, anger, divorce, telling the truth, lawsuits, loving your enemies, etc. He made no distinction between moral or civil laws.
Click to expand...
Correct again.
No distinction in ceremonial laws....
So have YOU sacrificed any goats or birds lately?


--In many places Paul refers the OT law simply as "the law" and made no distinctions between ceremonial or moral laws. For example, Gal 3:17-19 Paul says 'the law' was given 430 years before the promise and was to last till the seed should come. John says this law was given through Moses (John 1:17). This does not mean just the ceremonial law was given to Moses before the seed should come. Nor does it mean just the moral law was given to Moses before the seed should come. It means ALL the law given till the seed should come.
Romans 2:12-17 does Paul mean by 'the law' ALL the law or just some (ceremonial parts) of the law?
Romans 3:1-2 was it just the ceremonial law that gave the Jews adavantage over the Gentile?
Galatians 2:19 Paul die just to the ceremonial law? Just the moral law?
Hebrews 10:28 did this apply to those that despised just the ceremonial law? Or the moral law? Again, many many verses in the NT refer to just "the law" making no distinction between ceremonial or moral laws.
Click to expand...
I understand your point.
But my question stands:
Have you sacrificed any lambs lately?
This is a ceremonial law.
Are you keeping all the ceremonial laws or civil laws?
Why not?
Because Jesus fulfilled them or because YOU CANNOT?

And if all if THE LAW to you,,,then has Jesus also abolished the MORAL LAW?

[/QUOTE]--Matthew 22:40 on these two commandments hangs ALL the law and Prophets not just some of the law nor just some of the Prophets.
[/QUOTE]
HOW do Jesus' two great commandments cover the civil and ceremonial law?
They do NOT.
 
Ernest T. Bass

Please see post no. 19 and 20 for more information:





Civil- Deals with disputes between individuals. Expired with the demise of the Jewish civil government
  1. Be just with the poor, (Lev. 19:15)
  2. Cattle, of neighbor (Deut. 22:1-4)
  3. Children, rebellious (Deut. 21:18-21)
  4. Debt (Lev. 23:34-43; Deut. 31:10)
  5. Divorce (Deut. 22:19)
  6. Dress, attire (Deut. 22:5)
  7. Do not hate in your heart (Lev. 19:17)
  8. Inheritance (Num. 18:26; 26:53-56; 36:8-12)
  9. Justice practices (Lev. 24:17-23)
  10. Kidnapping (Exodus 21:16)
  11. Landmarks (Deuteronomy 19:14)
  12. Property redemption (Lev. 25)
  13. Murder and killing (Deut. 21:1-4)
  14. Retain just scales in commerce (Lev. 19:35f)
  15. Robbery, extortion, false witness, and restitution (Lev. 6:1-7)
  16. Sabbath breaking punishment (Num. 15:32-36)
  17. Theft (Deut. 5:19; Lev. 19:11)
  18. Warfare (Deut. 20:1-20)
 
XNYHCX said:
Great post. It sparks a lot of thought.

I'd like tonote that moral laws are not restricted to the big ten. For example:

To imitate God's good and upright ways
To pray to God
Not to stand by idly when a human life is in danger
Not to cherish hatred in one's heart
Not to take revenge
Not to bear a grudge
To relieve a neighbor of his burden
Not to afflict an orphan or a widow
To love the stranger
Not to wrong the stranger in speech
Not to wrong the stranger in buying or selling
Not to smite a father or a mother
Not to curse a father or mother
Not to have intercourse with another man's wife
Not to commit fraud in measuring
To ensure that scales and weights are correct
Not to violate an oath or swear falsely
Not to rob by violence
Not to indulge in evil thoughts and sights
To heed the call of every prophet in each generation
Not to prophesy falsely
Not to commit incest with one's mother
Not to commit incest with one's daughter
And so on.

It is the belief and custom of many that the Law was freedom in the first place, not bondage. David calls it a light unto his feet. It provides instruction for what to do even when you sin -- meaning rather than demand perfection, it accounts for imperfection . Jesus says that to love GOD above all else and to love your neighbor as yourself is the foundation of all the Law and the Prophets, and that Heaven and Earth will pass away before the Law does.
Click to expand...
Right.
Jesus' two Great Commandments encompass a lot, as you have noted above.
We say that love covers a multitude of sins...again, you've covered this above.

There is only one item I cannot agree with and it's this:
To heed the call of every prophet in each generation
Not to prophesy falsely

I don't know that we have prophets as in the bible anymore.
If you mean those that proclaim the word of God...then I could agree.
And how would we know who is a false prophet? This could be problematic.

Otherwise, I agree with all you've said.
 
wondering said:
Hi Ernest,,,
we're not really discussing the Sabbath here but what it means when we say that Jesus fulfilled the law.

The 10 commandments. or Moral Law, was NEVER removed .... we are to keep the moral law today, just as we were to keep it in the O.T. laws.

You're correct that keeping the Sabbath is a ceremonial law....I said this in a post of mine that I can't look for right now. However, some (including myself) have a difficult time with this because it iS included in the 10 commandmens and because God said it was a sign FOREVER in the Mosaic Covenant. However, I do agree that we are no longer under the Mosaic Covenant.

The different laws HAVE been categorized.
I'll look for my post and repost it right after this.
There is no need to wonder.
We can say that the 10 commandments (or should we say 9) are the Moral Law.
The others are either civil or ceremonial.


Correct again.
No distinction in ceremonial laws....
So have YOU sacrificed any goats or birds lately?



I understand your point.
But my question stands:
Have you sacrificed any lambs lately?
This is a ceremonial law.
Are you keeping all the ceremonial laws or civil laws?
Why not?
Because Jesus fulfilled them or because YOU CANNOT?

And if all if THE LAW to you,,,then has Jesus also abolished the MORAL LAW?

--Matthew 22:40 on these two commandments hangs ALL the law and Prophets not just some of the law nor just some of the Prophets.

HOW do Jesus' two great commandments cover the civil and ceremonial law?
They do NOT.
Click to expand...

The contrast is made between the words "abolish" and "fulfill".

The word fulfill means to bring to an end, complete.

The word abolish in the text means to destroy, throw down.

Christ was not an enemy to the OT law, He did not come to destroy the law to prevent its fulfillment. Instead He loved the law, obeyed it perfectly and fulfilled all it had to say about Him. By Christ fulfilling it, then the OT law accomplished its purpose for God giving it.

Therefore Christ brought the OT law to an end not by destruction of it, but by fulfilling it. If you buy a car and sign an agreement with the bank to make 60 monthly payments, then when you make the final 60th monthly payment then you have fulfilled the agreement and that agreement has ended, ceased, it does not continue on perpetuity. You did not end the agreement by destroying it and ripping it to shreds ignoring, disregarding what the agreement required of you.

Therefore Christ brought the OT to an end, cease by fulfillment in obedience to it and not by destroying it, disregarding it.

The implication if Christ did not bring the OT law to an end by fulfilling it, then every jot and tittle would still be in place right now and Jesus would have failed to do what He came to earth to do. But since He did bring it to an end by fulfilling it then He did do away with it and all its laws including animal sacrifices.
 
wondering said:
So you're saying that Jesus abolished the Moral Law?

This means we are no longer bound by it and not required to obey it.
Click to expand...


Jesus abolished the law of Moses that was added to the Abrahamic Covenant, until the Seed should come.


I don’t find such phrases as “moral law” or “ceremonial law” in the Bible.

Ernest T. Bass

Just as true, is that fact that Jesus did not abolish the Covenant with Abraham, that was “renewed” and is now called the
New Covenant, of which we are grafted into in Christ.


The Abrahamic Covenant that was renewed and is now called the New Covenant is governed by the law of Christ, which Abraham obeyed 430 years before the law.


The New Covenant is a better covenant based on better promises, of which is the baptism with the Holy Spirit, which empowers us to walk in Covenant with the Lord, the same Lord Abraham walked with.


Murder is still murder.
Lying is still lying.
Stealing is still stealing.
Adultery is still adultery.
Covetousness is still covetousness.


Lucifer was cast out of heaven for “coveting a position of authority that was not his to have”.

He wanted to be seated on God’s throne and be worshiped.


This was before Mankind.

Before Adam and Eve.

Before Moses.


The Point -

God’s laws are eternal.
The law of Moses was temporary.


JLB
 
wondering said:
Ernest T. Bass

Please see post no. 19 and 20 for more information:





Civil- Deals with disputes between individuals. Expired with the demise of the Jewish civil government
  1. Be just with the poor, (Lev. 19:15)
  2. Cattle, of neighbor (Deut. 22:1-4)
  3. Children, rebellious (Deut. 21:18-21)
  4. Debt (Lev. 23:34-43; Deut. 31:10)
  5. Divorce (Deut. 22:19)
  6. Dress, attire (Deut. 22:5)
  7. Do not hate in your heart (Lev. 19:17)
  8. Inheritance (Num. 18:26; 26:53-56; 36:8-12)
  9. Justice practices (Lev. 24:17-23)
  10. Kidnapping (Exodus 21:16)
  11. Landmarks (Deuteronomy 19:14)
  12. Property redemption (Lev. 25)
  13. Murder and killing (Deut. 21:1-4)
  14. Retain just scales in commerce (Lev. 19:35f)
  15. Robbery, extortion, false witness, and restitution (Lev. 6:1-7)
  16. Sabbath breaking punishment (Num. 15:32-36)
  17. Theft (Deut. 5:19; Lev. 19:11)
  18. Warfare (Deut. 20:1-20)
Click to expand...

My point was that the BIble, Christ, Paul did not make such distinctions within the OT law. When they referred to the OT law, they simply called it "law" or "the law" referring to all of it.
 
wondering said:
So you're saying that Jesus abolished the Moral Law?

This means we are no longer bound by it and not required to obey it.
Click to expand...
Christ brought the OT to an end NOT by destruction of it but by fulfillment of it There is a difference.

We are not bound by any of the OT law. Therefore adultery is wrong for us today NOT because the OT law says it is wrong but because Christ, His NT says it is wrong. Matthew 5:27-28. Christ went even further than the OT law forbidding not just the physcial act of adultery as the OT law did but condemned lust in the heart as adultery.
 
Last edited:
Ernest T. Bass said:
The contrast is made between the words "abolish" and "fulfill".

The word fulfill means to bring to an end, complete.

The word abolish in the text means to destroy, throw down.

Christ was not an enemy to the OT law, He did not come to destroy the law to prevent its fulfillment. Instead He loved the law, obeyed it perfectly and fulfilled all it had to say about Him. By Christ fulfilling it, then the OT law accomplished its purpose for God giving it.

Therefore Christ brought the OT law to an end not by destruction of it, but by fulfilling it. If you buy a car and sign an agreement with the bank to make 60 monthly payments, then when you make the final 60th monthly payment then you have fulfilled the agreement and that agreement has ended, ceased, it does not continue on perpetuity. You did not end the agreement by destroying it and ripping it to shreds ignoring, disregarding what the agreement required of you.

Therefore Christ brought the OT to an end, cease by fulfillment in obedience to it and not by destroying it, disregarding it.

The implication if Christ did not bring the OT law to an end by fulfilling it, then every jot and tittle would still be in place right now and Jesus would have failed to do what He came to earth to do. But since He did bring it to an end by fulfilling it then He did do away with it and all its laws including animal sacrifices.
Click to expand...
I agree.
But I'm still not sure if you also mean the Moral Law.
I posted the Ceremonial and Civil laws that have been abolished...

There are 3 ways in which Jesus fulfilled the law:

1. Jesus fulfilled the law because He obeyed it totally.

2. If the Law was not fulfilled, death was required of that person.
Jesus died ON OUR BEHALF for not being able to live in perfect obedience. This is also a fulfillment of the law.

3. Jesus died so we could rest in our spirit, and not also in the flesh.
We are no longer tied to any Law as to what we should eat or what day we should worship,,,
Colossians 2:16-17
 
JLB said:
Jesus abolished the law of Moses that was added to the Abrahamic Covenant, until the Seed should come.


I don’t find such phrases as “moral law” or “ceremonial law” in the Bible.



JLB
Click to expand...
I know you hate unbiblical terms,,,but you have to accept some.
The Laws of Moses have been divided into 3 categories, and had been even at the time of the O.T.
I posted them in no. 19 and 20.

Exodus 21, for isntance, is about Ordinances for the People
Personal Injury
Property Rights
Sundry Laws
Three National Feasts

and more are continued in the following chapters.
Some of these rules were ceremonial, some were civil, and some were moral.
 
Ernest T. Bass said:
Christ brought the OT to an end NOT by destruction of it but by fulfillment of it There is a difference.

We are not bound by any of the OT law. Therefore adultery is wrong for us today NOT because the OT law says it is wrong but because Christ, His NT says it is wrong. Matthew 5:27-28. Christ went even further than the OT law forbidding not just the physcial act of adultery as the OT law did but condemned lust in the heart as adultery.
Click to expand...
Adultery would be the Moral Law.

The Moral Law will never be abolished because God is a moral being....
The ceremonial law and the civil law have been ABOLISHED...
they are no longer required to be obeyed.

We no longer have to be stoned to death because we are under the New Covenant and Jesus has done the dying for us,,,,death which was required under the Mosaic Covenant.
We follow the Moral Law because it is good for us....
Under the New Covenant dying for adultery is no longer required.
But it is still profitable to follow the Moral Law.

1 Corinthians chapter 10 is full of mistakes Israelites made that we should not repeat.
Verse 8 says that we are not to act immorally as they did.
The Moral Law is still valid for us today as it was under the Mosaic Covenant.
 
wondering said:
The 10 commandments. or Moral Law, was NEVER removed .... we are to keep the moral law today, just as we were to keep it in the O.T. laws.
Click to expand...
I see no Biblical basis for seeing "divisions" within the Law of Moses. I think the Biblical position is that the entire Law of Moses, including the 10 commandments, is "retired" in the sense that it has been superseded by the indwelling Spirit. So, of course, it is not OK to commit murder even if we do not need the Law of Moses to tell us this.
 
Drew said:
I see no Biblical basis for seeing "divisions" within the Law of Moses. I think the Biblical position is that the entire Law of Moses, including the 10 commandments, is "retired" in the sense that it has been superseded by the indwelling Spirit. So, of course, it is not OK to commit murder even if we do not need the Law of Moses to tell us this.
Click to expand...
If the entire Law is "rested"
and we are still required to follow the commandment YOU WILL NOT KILL....
Then why are we not required to follow the law of bethrothal for a year before marriage?
Should we be stoning to death young men that do not obey their parents?

Why should we not murder
but we don't stone anyone anymore?
 
wondering said:
If the entire Law is "rested"
and we are still required to follow the commandment YOU WILL NOT KILL....
Then why are we not required to follow the law of bethrothal for a year before marriage?
Should we be stoning to death young men that do not obey their parents?

Why should we not murder
but we don't stone anyone anymore?
Click to expand...
Don`t understand why you are asking me these questions. Whether I am right or wrong, my view on this is, I think, easy to understand: the entire Law of Moses - all 613 items - is no longer in force. But that certainly does not mean it is ok to murder - we have the indwelling Spirit that tells us this. I take it as self-evident, but perhaps you will disagree, that the Spirit is not telling us to stone anyone.

I think I know where you are coming from - you are saying "if we just 'know' from the Spirit that murder is bad (as the Law also says), how do we not likewise just know that we should still stone?

Well, all I can tell you is my own experience: I am pretty sure I would know that murder is bad even if I never read the Bible. And I am equally sure that we should not be stoning people.
 
Ernest T. Bass said:
All of the OT law was taken out of the way by Christ, Colossians 2:14; Ephesians 2:15. I know of no verse that says Christ just took away some of the OT law.
Click to expand...
I agree, and politely suggest that while it may be tempting to carve up the Law into categories, I see no actual Biblical basis for so doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top