What does the Word say about the Law of YHWH which, in reality, is the Law of Moses?

[JLB]

Every single one of these remains a requirement for the Covenant people of God. Now we serve these requirements according to the true tabernacle in heaven, not according to the copies (Hebrews 9:11,24 NASB).

We can come boldly before the Throne of Grace with confidence.

Gentiles now serve and worship God as priest's, part of a holy nation and a Royal Priesthood.

All because the law of Moses, with its law of commandments contained in ordinances have been abolished, and the middle wall torn down, so that Jew and Gentile serve as one new man, according to true righteousness and holiness, and not according to the law of Moses.

and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness. Ephesians 2:4

JLB

 

[JLB]

It would be grand if we could just say 'law of Moses' only means the parts that got laid aside and this discussion would be over, but even you acknowledge that laws like 'love your neighbor as yourself' are the law of Moses.

It's my belief that what was added in the first place, is the "ordinances" that are referred to by some as "ceremonial law", as the "moral laws and commandments", such as the 10 commandments, were already existing and being "transgressed" by the natural children of Abraham.

What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions... Galatians 3:19


This was the purpose of the law of Moses being added, to identify to the "covenant people" what God's Kingdom laws and commandments were, and to set up a legal system for dealing with covenant breakers.

8 But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully,
9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,
11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.
1 Timothy 1:8-11


The law of Moses was God's grace in so many ways to the children of Israel.

It showed His love and compassion for His special people, in that He gave them a substitute, [animals] to pay for their sins, which allowed Him to continue to bless them with the blessings of Abraham, of which: I will be an enemy to your enemies, and I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you.

This blessing would enable the children of Israel to conquer the giants and drive them out, fulfilling God's promise to Abraham, that his children would inherit the promised land.

Without God's blessing, the children of Israel could not have taken the promised land.

The ceremonial laws and statutes pointed to Christ...

It was this law of commandments contained in ordinances that were "added", until the Seed, the One in Whom these ordinances pointed too had come.

Once the Seed had come, there was no need for the law of commandments contained in ordinances to be a part of the Abrahamic Covenant any longer.

The righteous laws and commandments [moral laws] were already and part of the covenant, and were not added. Galatians 3:19


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The righteous laws and commandments [moral laws] were already and part of the covenant, and were not added. Galatians 3:19

No, the Abrahamic covenant was a covenant of promise, not law:

"18 For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it (the inheritance) to Abraham by means of a promise." (Galatians 3:18 NASB)

So we know the law was not already a part of the covenant with Abraham. That would invalidate that covenant as being a covenant of promise.

Once the Seed had come, there was no need for the law of commandments contained in ordinances to be a part of the Abrahamic Covenant any longer.

As I've shown, the law--any law--was never a part of the Abrahamic covenant to begin with. And, Paul says you can not add to an existing covenant:

"15 Brethren, I speak in terms of human relations: even though it is only a man's covenant, yet when it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it. (Galatians 3:15 NASB).

You would have to make another covenant to add to an existing covenant, which the old covenant that came after the Abrahamic covenant was--another covenant, a covenant of law added to, but not interfering with, the existing covenant of promise.

So your two reasons why we keep the moral law of the law of Moses are wrong: 1) the Abrahamic covenant was NOT a covenant of law that we should be simply returning to the condition of law in the Abrahamic covenant now that the Mosaic covenant has been laid aside. And 2) the ceremonial laws of Moses were not added to the existing covenant with Abraham and thus simply removed from the Abrahamic covenant now that Christ has appeared. That's impossible because you can not add to an existing covenant. You have to make another covenant altogether. Which the first covenant--the covenant of law--was.

We just have to accept what Paul plainly says: The law of Moses has not been obliterated. The obedience of faith, which is itself a law of Moses, fulfills ALL the law:

"14 For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." (Galatians 5:14 NASB)

Not part of it, but ALL of it. Now the WAY we keep the law, and what governed who could approach God in worship, 'yes', that has changed. That is what got laid aside as useless and unneeded now. The law as a covenant is no more. But faith does indeed uphold and fulfill, not violate, the law of Moses, the law of God.

 

[JLB]

No, the Abrahamic covenant was a covenant of promise, not law:

"18 For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it (the inheritance) to Abraham by means of a promise." (Galatians 3:18 NASB)

17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it [the law of Moses] should make the promise of no effect.
18 For if the inheritance is of the law,[of Moses] it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. Galatians 3:17-19

Because there is a promise in the Covenant, doesn't mean there are no covenant requirements [laws and commandments].

The reason the law of Moses was added, was because of transgressions to the Covenant laws and commandments...
It was added because of transgressions.


First of all, it is the law [of Moses] that does not stop the promise of God to Abraham, as the promise was made before the law was added, and the law that came later does not annul the promise.

Secondly, The Abrahamic Covenant, is a covenant that God made with Abraham and his descendants, that has laws [requirements] in it.
Walk before Me and be blameless, 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." Covenant breakers are not promised anything, except to be cut off.

Thirdly, we see that THE REASON, Isaac and his descendants continued to receive the promise of the Covenant, to receive the promised land and to be multiplied as the stars, was BECAUSE ABRAHAM, obeyed the laws and commandments of the Covenant.

...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


The scripture says -
if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise;

The scripture does not say -
if the covenant is of the law, it is no longer of promise.


11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh--who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands--
12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation,
15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,
16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. Ephesians 2:11-16



JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Because there is a promise in the Covenant, doesn't mean there are no covenant requirements [laws and commandments].

The reason the law of Moses was added, was because of transgressions to the Covenant laws and commandments...
It was added because of transgressions.

Remember? We talked about this. You chose to go with your own interpretation of what this meant and reject what Paul said.

But anyway, you've got a pretty big mass of misunderstanding in this last post of yours. I think we can wade through it though and get right to your fundamental problem. What you are failing to recognize, and which Paul addresses the Romans about, is that Abraham's obedience is the result of him first being righteous by his faith all by itself. And it is that righteousness, the righteousness of faith apart from his work, that qualified him for the promised inheritance. The obedience of his circumcision is only the sign of the righteousness he already had by his faith all by itself.

"FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them" (Romans 4:9-11 NASB capitals in original)

But you seem to have his obedience being the actual agent that secures the promise of the inheritance. And to keep from losing sight of the actual point we're discussing here, it is this misunderstanding of law/works that you are using to explain why we keep the law of Moses, yet at the same time (in your doctrine) you have the law of Moses completely obliterated.

 

[JLB]

Remember? We talked about this. You chose to go with your own interpretation of what this meant and reject what Paul said.

But anyway, you've got a pretty big mass of misunderstanding in this last post of yours. I think we can wade through it though and get right to your fundamental problem. What you are failing to recognize, and which Paul addresses the Romans about, is that Abraham's obedience is the result of him first being righteous by his faith all by itself. And it is that righteousness, the righteousness of faith apart from his work, that qualified him for the promised inheritance. The obedience of his circumcision is only the sign of the righteousness he already had by his faith all by itself.

"FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them" (Romans 4:9-11 NASB capitals in original)

But you seem to have his obedience being the actual agent that secures the promise of the inheritance. And to keep from losing sight of the actual point we're discussing here, it is this misunderstanding of law/works that you are using to explain why we keep the law of Moses, yet at the same time (in your doctrine) you have the law of Moses completely obliterated.

The last post of mine is post # 724

Would you point out the line in this last post of mine that speaks about the subject of righteousness?

Would you point out the line in this last post of mine, whereby the word righteousness is mentioned?


JLB

 

[JLB]

But anyway, you've got a pretty big mass of misunderstanding in this last post of yours. I think we can wade through it though and get right to your fundamental problem. What you are failing to recognize, and which Paul addresses the Romans about, is that Abraham's obedience is the result of him first being righteous by his faith all by itself. And it is that righteousness, the righteousness of faith apart from his work, that qualified him for the promised inheritance.

17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2:17


The works that James refers to is obedience.

The work, or action of obedience.

Abraham walked in the obedience of faith when He obeyed God, and left his home to the land that God showed him He would give his descendants.


Without Abraham's obedience to get out from his country, from his family and from his father's house, then there would be no righteousness according to the obedience of faith.

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.
9 By faith he dwelt in the land of promise as in a foreign country, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; Hebrews 11:8-9


By faith = obedience.



JLB

 

[JLB]

And it is that righteousness, the righteousness of faith apart from his work, that qualified him for the promised inheritance. The obedience of his circumcision is only the sign of the righteousness he already had by his faith all by itself.

Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness.How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. Romans 4:9-10

Abraham was declared righteous before he was circumcised.

It was Abraham's obedience to go out from his country, to a land that God would show him his descendants would inherit, because of Abraham's obedience.

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

 

[Jethro Bodine]

17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2:17


The works that James refers to is obedience.

The work, or action of obedience.

Not trying to be snarky, but isn't that kind of a 'duh' moment?
Of course obedience is works. Of course obedience is doing something.

It was Abraham's obedience to go out from his country, to a land that God would show him his descendants would inherit, because of Abraham's obedience.

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

Just so you know, when I say I've met one, maybe two people who think salvation is by works, the 'maybe' is referring to you.

Again, your doctrine simply does not agree with the Bible. In fact, you contradict your own doctrine that has said that Abraham was declared righteous when he offered up Isaac. But then you continue to say Abraham was righteous even before Paul said he was declared righteous.

Paul:
" For we say, "FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised (long before he offered up Isaac)" (Romans 4:9-10 NASB capitals in original, parenthesis mine)

James:
"21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?" (James 2:21 NASB)

JLB
Abraham was declared righteous because of his obedience to leave his father's land.


Once again, I'm going to go with the Bible on this one, not your doctrine. I personally feel it is important to be honest and stick with what the Bible says about these things.

I know you'll be tempted to hammer and hammer away at this, but we can not lose sight of the OP which says the law of God is the law of Moses. You must keep this all relative to that. I know why you feel it necessary to go into the subject of Abraham in regard to the OP, but you must do that and keep the discussion and focus on the OP. You're trying to argue that the law that we 'keep' today is not the law of Moses, but rather the law that Abraham kept in order to secure the inheritance. First off, as I'm showing, Abraham did not have a covenant of law with God. He had a covenant of promise with God, which Paul directly contrasts with, not equates with, the covenant of law that God added as an additional covenant for the people of God.

 

[JLB]

Of course obedience is works. Of course obedience is doing something.

What then must someone "do" to obey the Gospel?

17 For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?
1 Peter 4:17

My doctrine says the work of obedience that a person must do in obeying the Gospel is repenting, which is turning to God, and demonstrated by confessing with your mouth the Lord Jesus.

The work of obedience Abraham demonstrated was getting out of his country to the land God promised to give to his descendants.

This is called the obedience of faith.

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


JLB

 

[JLB]

Again, your doctrine simply does not agree with the Bible. In fact, you contradict your own doctrine that has said that Abraham was declared righteous when he offered up Isaac. But then you continue to say Abraham was righteous even before Paul said he was declared righteous.

Paul:
" For we say, "FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised (long before he offered up Isaac)" (Romans 4:9-10 NASB capitals in original, parenthesis mine)

James:
"21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?" (James 2:21 NASB)

JLB
Abraham was declared righteous because of his obedience to leave his father's land.


Once again, I'm going to go with the Bible on this one, not your doctrine. I personally feel it is important to be honest and stick with what the Bible says about these things.

Again, my doctrine completely agrees with what James says and Paul.


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. By faith he dwelt in the land of promise as in a foreign country, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; Hebrews 11:8-9

By faith he dwelt in the land of promise...

Do you understand that Abraham actually dwelt in the land of promise, by faith, which means he obeyed God to leave his own country?

1 Now the Lord had said to Abram: "Get out of your country, From your family And from your father's house, To a land that I will show you.
Genesis 12:1


Maybe you don't understand what "by faith" means?

By faith, means obedience to do what God tells you to do.

Whether it is Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand, or go offer your son Isaac on the altar.

Faith without the work of obedience is dead.

Abraham believed God that He would make Him a great nation, so he obeyed God to...Get out of your country, From your family And from your father's house, To a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation...


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


The reason God said to Isaac, I will give your descendants all these lands was BECAUSE because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws."


Abraham obeyed God's laws and commandments 430 years before the law of Moses was added.

These laws were not the law of Moses, because the law of Moses was not given.


JLB

 

[JLB]

So your two reasons why we keep the moral law of the law of Moses are wrong: 1) the Abrahamic covenant was NOT a covenant of law

You'll have to explain then why God told Isaac it was BECAUSE Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws, that He would give his Isaac's descendants all these lands.

Obviously there were laws and commandments associated with the Abrahamic Covenant, because Abraham kept them.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Obviously there were laws and commandments associated with the Abrahamic Covenant, because Abraham kept them.

The covenant God made with Abraham was not conditioned on any law. That was a covenant of PROMISE with Abraham, not a covenant of law.

"18 On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants I have given this land" (Genesis 15:18 NASB)

"18 For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise." (Galatians 3:18 NASB)

That is the point.

Now we know Abraham was cognizant of some kind of righteous standard of the Lord and that the concept of God's righteousness and justice was known. It's the same righteousness and justice that we see in the law of Moses. It's the same righteousness and justice upheld, not violated, by faith in this New Covenant. It's been the same law from beginning to end. Just because the righteous standard of God got boxed up in a temporary covenant for the people of God in what we know to be the law of Moses doesn't make it any less the same law of God it was before he did that. So when we uphold the righteous standard of God by our faith in Jesus Christ we are upholding the law of Moses (Romans 3:31 NASB).

You'll have to explain then why God told Isaac it was BECAUSE Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws, that He would give his Isaac's descendants all these lands.

He had faith. Abraham believed the PROMISE. That is why. Any work Abraham did was the result of his faith, not work done to earn the PROMISE.

Abraham did not earn the PROMISE as payment for righteous work completed. He was given the grace of faith to receive the PROMISE through believing. Him offering Isaac on the altar is the evidence of that faith, not a work that earned the PROMISE for him.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Abraham obeyed God's laws and commandments 430 years before the law of Moses was added.

These laws were not the law of Moses, because the law of Moses was not given.

What makes the law against murder, for example (Exodus 20:13 NASB), written down in the law of Moses somehow not the law against murder Abraham (probably) knew before it got written down? It's absolutely ludicrous to somehow make them different laws. Completely ludicrous. And because you apparently can now see how ludicrous that is you've been trying to make the law of Moses only the temple/ceremonial part of the law of Moses (oh, how you used to argue with me about dividing up the law!), apparently oblivious to the fact that some of those existed before the law was given as a covenant for the people at Mt. Sinai as well.

 

[JLB]

What makes the law against murder, for example (Exodus 20:13 NASB), written down in the law of Moses somehow not the law against murder Abraham (probably) knew before it got written down? It's absolutely ludicrous to somehow make them different laws. Completely ludicrous. And because you apparently can now see how ludicrous that is you've been trying to make the law of Moses only the temple/ceremonial part of the law of Moses (oh, how you used to argue with me about dividing up the law!), apparently oblivious to the fact that some of those existed before the law was given as a covenant for the people at Mt. Sinai as well.

God's law; thou shalt not murder was violated by Cain.

It is God's law that was actually written by God Himself on tablets of Stone.

These laws were kept by Abraham.
These laws were already a part of the Abrahamic Covenant, when the law of Moses was added.

These laws remain a part of that Covenant when the law was removed, being declared obsolete.


JLB

 

[JLB]

The covenant God made with Abraham was not conditioned on any law. That was a covenant of PROMISE with Abraham, not a covenant of law.

There were promises in the Covenant, and the were also laws and commandments involved in that Covenant as well.

Abraham obeyed God's voice.
Abraham obeyed God's commandments, and precepts and laws.

Abraham kept God's charge to get out of his country, and away from his family, and his fathers house, and go to the land of promise.

God promised to give Isaac and his descendants the land God promised to give to his father Abraham, BECAUSE, Abraham obeyed God's voice, and kept His laws and commandments.

So we see the Covenant based on God's promise, was conditional upon Abraham's obedience.

Abraham walked with God in covenant relationship.

Abraham believed God, therefore Abraham obeyed God, leaving us an example of those who walk in the obedience of faith.


But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment ofthe everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: Romans 16:26


JLB

 

[JLB]

He had faith. Abraham believed the PROMISE. That is why. Any work Abraham did was the result of his faith, not work done to earn the PROMISE.

Abraham did not earn the PROMISE as payment for righteous work completed

Abraham believed God when He told him to get out of his country to a land that He would show him, and that God would make him a great nation.

12 Now the Lord said to Abram,

“Go forth from your country,
And from your relatives
And from your father’s house,
To the land which I will show you;
And I will make you a great nation,
Genesis 12:1-2 NASB

The Promise: I will make you a great nation.

The Condition of obedience:
Go forth from your country,
And from your relatives
And from your father’s house,
To the land which I will show you;


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

So we see the Covenant based on God's promise, was conditional upon Abraham's obedience.

Paul said if the inheritance was based on obeying a law then it is no longer based on a promise:

"18 For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise." (Galatians 3:18 NASB)

Abraham was told to obey the 'law' of physical circumcision. He did not inherit the blessing because he obeyed the command to be circumcised. Paul explains that he had already received the promise of the blessing BEFORE he obeyed the command to be circumcised:

"9 Is this blessing then on the circumcised (those who obey the command to be circumcised), or on the uncircumcised also (those who don't obey the command to be circumcised)? For we say, "FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised (after he obeyed the command to be circumcised), or uncircumcised (before he obeyed the command to be circumcised)? Not while circumcised (after he obeyed), but while uncircumcised (BEFORE he obeyed); 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised" (Romans 4:9-11 NASB parenthesis mine)

But you say the blessing was conditioned on him obeying God's command. That's not what Paul says.

I've been waiting for the chance to weave the law of circumcision into the discussion because you need to explain in your doctrine why an eternal law of God was abolished (that is set aside, not destroyed) when it got set aside as the law of Moses. Think hard about the implications here.

 

[JLB]

Paul said if the inheritance was based on obeying a law then it is no longer based on a promise:

"18 For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise." (Galatians 3:18 NASB)

No sir. Nice try though.

The whole discourse of Galatians 3 is contrasting the law of Moses, with the Abrahamic Covenant.

Look at the context of the previous verse, as well as verse 19.

The law that Paul describes is the law of Moses, that was added to the covenant.

17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.
18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. Galatians 3:17-19

If the inheritance is based on keeping the law of Moses, it is no longer of promise.

The descendants of Abraham were promised the land of promises BECAUSE Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." Genesis 26:5


Please read what the scripture actually says...BECAUSE Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws."

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...

Here is the voice of God to Abraham, and the charge given to him by God...

Now the LORD said to Abram,
“Go forth from your country,
And from your relatives
And from your father’s house,
To the land which I will show you;
And I will make you a great nation,
And I will bless you,
And make your name great;
And so you shall be a blessing;
Genesis 12:1-2


The condition of obedience:
Go forth from your country,
And from your relatives
And from your father’s house,
To the land which I will show you;


The Promise based on the condition of obedience:
And I will make you a great nation,
And I will bless you,
And make your name great;
And so you shall be a blessing;



JLB

 

[JLB]

I've been waiting for the chance to weave the law of circumcision into the discussion because you need to explain in your doctrine why an eternal law of God was abolished (that is set aside, not destroyed) when it got set aside as the law of Moses. Think hard about the implications here.

Was Abraham accounted as righteous while circumcised or while uncircumcised?

Paul deals with this matter as an Ambassador of Christ.

The only question is, does a person consider it a sin, not to be circumcised.

I believe Paul was led by the Spirit, when he took Timothy, being the son of a Jew, and circumcised him, so as not to hinder his work among the Jews he desired to reach with the message of the Gospel.

1 Then he came to Derbe and Lystra. And behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a certain Jewish woman who believed, but his father was Greek.
2 He was well spoken of by the brethren who were at Lystra and Iconium.
3 Paul wanted to have him go on with him. And he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in that region, for they all knew that his father was Greek. Acts 16:1-3



JLB