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

[chessman]

First, I should prolly take a moment and point out how all this back/forth between you and me on 1 John 2:14,17 and Perfect Tense IS within the topic of this Thread. It might not be as obvious, but it is on topic. The topic of 1 John Chapter 2 is “Keeping the New Commandment” and truth. And who better to explain it to us than a Jew, turned Christ disciple, turned New Commandment believer.

1 John 2:8 (LEB) Again, I am writing a new commandment to you, which is true in him and in you,…​

Notice how John says the new commandment was written to you AND IS TRUE in Him and in you. [emphasis mine because that's what I'm asking you to address. How can what John said be true, given your hypothesis that someone can stop having saving faith.]

In general WRT 1 John 2:14, 17, I’m simply asking you to reconcile how what John actually wrote can be true given your hypothesis, your doctrine) given the circumstance that a member of his intended audience hypothetically 'stops having saving faith' (your hypothesis). (Edit: A&T Guidelines state in part: "You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer." Obadiah) we’ve made some progress in your last post. You say:

Now what has to be true in order for someone in the Greek language to use the Perfect Tense to describe the lighting of the candle is that the candle is still lit up to this moment in time.

I agree with your summary of the implication of Perfect Tense applied to a verb/action above. Except of course your using the lighting of a candle as the verb/action is not in the text nor really instructive in any way. In fact, I never disagreed with this definition of what Perfect Tense indicates in the first place (it was a strawman when you first brought it up and still is). In fact the link I originally provided to what Perfect Tense means/implies defines it the same way as your (Edit, ToS 2.4, belittling comment. Obadiah) study site does too. And I never used verse 14 to say anything (one way or the other) about the future. I used verse 17 for that.

Your doctrine automatically thinks 'conquering the evil one' means forever, therefore, conquering the evil one proves OSAS.

Your reply above is not an answer, much less accurate. I never said the Perfect Tense used for you have conquered the evil one means forever in the future. But I do say it means from the time John wrote the verse right up to the point in the present when his reader reads it. Don’t you agree?

Your summary above is/was my point specifically concerning John choosing to use the Perfect Tense for what he communicated in his letter (you have conquered the evil one). Except of course John wasn't talking about lighting a candle but rather conquering evil.

Though I will point out again that John did discuss their future in verse 17 (remains forever). But just for simplification sake, please just address and reconcile your doctrinal view with what John says in verse 14. That is, with what we both agree to with WRT the Perfect Tense implication for the action/verb you have conquered the evil one (not the lighting of a candle).

My point/question (Edit: A&T Guidelines state in part: "You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer." This obviously includes attempts to shame a person into answering. Obadiah) is simple:

I'm asking you how John can be telling these young, living, saved men that they have conquered the evil one and remain forever, given your anti-OSAS idea. What if they do as you suggest "stops having faith". Wouldn't that mean John was wrong and they hadn't really conquered the evil one?

(Edit: A&T Guidelines state in part: "You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer." This obviously includes attempts to shame a person into answering. Obadiah) But here’s my point:

In order for what John did say to his readers (led by God to say it) to be Truth and without error in the present time (you have conquered the evil one) it has to be true in the present moment for the people he wrote his letter to (his audience, so-to-speak, see v7). (Edit: A&T Guidelines state in part: "You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer." Obadiah)

Remember, what just agreed with was/is my original point about the Present Tense. Then just simply test your hypothesis, your doctrine, as follows: What if in-between the time John wrote his letter to his intended audience (young, saved men/friends) and the time his intended audience reads it, one or more of these men have 'stopped having saving faith' as you hypothesize can happen???

Has this person truthfully conquered the evil one (or is it the other way around in that the evil one has conquered them)? Get it? I see a problem with your doctrine here. How can someone conquer the evil one in the past, then still have completed that action in the present time (if they've stopped having saving faith). Your doctrine makes no sense to me, for that reason.

Given this situation, on your view/doctrine but not on mine, John and the Holy Spirit just wrote error. That is, if the friend and young man under the New Commandment 'stops having saving faith' and is thus conquered by the evil one (even though John just told him it’s the other way around for him). That is John says he completed the action of conquering the evil one and does so right up till the present time (via the Perfect Tense of the verb).

I have just simply replaced the candle with the evil one and lighting with conquering in your reply (since John isn’t talking about the action/verb of lighting a candle in his text): Oh, and I replaced "someone" with the Holy Spirit:

Now what has to be true in order for The Holy Spirit in the Greek language to use the Perfect Tense to describe the conquering of the evil one is that the evil one is still conquered to this moment in time.​

Given the above stipulation (with which we both agree), how can what John wrote be true (inerrant) of a young man that had conquered the evil one when John wrote his letter then hypothetically ‘stops having saving faith’ within your doctrine. Then along comes John’s letter and this young man (previously saved) reads it? John just told this young man he’d conquered the evil one (completed that action) in the past and has still completed that action right up to this moment in time. This makes no sense given your doctrine, unless you allow for error(s) in the Text. That’s my point.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

WHEN a person obeys the Gospel.

Just exactly like James teaches, in the example of Abraham.

A person can hear the Gospel message, but until they obey it, then what was paid for on the cross by Jesus Christ will not benefit the hearer.

Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand.

Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord,
Acts 3:19

that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
For "whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." Romans 10:9-20,13

A person is required to repent, and confess Jesus as Lord.

Baptism in water is also the act of repentance, in response to the Gospel.

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. Matthew 3:11

and again -

Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance... Matthew 3:8

When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, "Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life." Acts 11:18

This act of obedience shows they believe.

Jesus comes to take vengeance on those who do not obey the Gospel... 2 Thessalonians 1:9

Then there is continuing steadfast unto the end, after initial salvation... OSAS or Not?




JLB

James says Abraham was justified when he offered Isaac up on the altar, making a direct reference to when Abraham believed God in Genesis 15 (not in Genesis 12 when Abraham ventured to the Promised Land).

"21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;
23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS..." (James 2:21-23 NASB)

But in the actual account in the scriptures that James is referring to, Abraham was justified when he believed God after receiving the promise of a son:

"5 And He took him outside and said, "Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be."
6 Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.
7 And He said to him, "I am the LORD who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess it."
(Genesis 15:5-7 NASB)

Why would James directly contradict the sacred scriptures? Unless, of course, he is talking about a different justification distinct from the justification of believing, which is what my doctrine says. My doctrine says one must be both, justified by faith, and, also, justified by works in order to validate the justification by faith that occurred first as being the faith that, all by itself, makes a person righteous. "I will show you my faith by my works."" (James 2:18 NASB). The faith that justifies is the faith that works. That's all he's saying. Which is what Paul says, too, when he says the only thing that counts in justification is "faith working through love" (Galatians 5:6 NASB). IOW, the faith that justifies is the faith that works the work of the law (love--Romans 13:8-10 NASB).

So, how does your doctrine defuse this apparent contradiction? Was Abraham justified when he believed the promise about Isaac, or when James says he was justified,--when he offered Isaac up on the altar....or both? Explain how your doctrine doesn't make James a liar.

 

[JLB]

James says Abraham was justified when he offered Isaac up on the altar, making a direct reference to when Abraham believed God in Genesis 15 (not in Genesis 12 when Abraham ventured to the Promised Land).

I never said otherwise.

Abraham lived a life of faith, that is to say, the obedience of faith, as he walked before God.

Genesis 12, as Hebrews states, is just one example of this.

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

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 11:9

My point, like the example of Noah, is to show that faith involves the work of obedience, which honestly I thought you agreed with.

7 By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. Hebrews 11:7

The example of James, is another example of the work of obedience of faith, in the life of Abraham.

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

Abraham's faith was tested by God, and he was found to be justified before God by his obedience.


JLB

 

[JLB]

But in the actual account in the scriptures that James is referring to, Abraham was justified when he believed God after receiving the promise of a son:

"5 And He took him outside and said, "Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be."
6 Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.
7 And He said to him, "I am the LORD who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess it."
(Genesis 15:5-7 NASB)

Why would James directly contradict the sacred scriptures? Unless, of course, he is talking about a different justification distinct from the justification of believing, which is what my doctrine says. My doctrine says one must be both, justified by faith, and, also, justified by works in order to validate the justification by faith that occurred first as being the faith that, all by itself, makes a person righteous. "I will show you my faith by my works."" (James 2:18 NASB). The faith that justifies is the faith that works. That's all he's saying. Which is what Paul says, too, when he says the only thing that counts in justification is "faith working through love" (Galatians 5:6 NASB). IOW, the faith that justifies is the faith that works the work of the law (love--Romans 13:8-10 NASB).

So, how does your doctrine defuse this apparent contradiction? Was Abraham justified when he believed the promise about Isaac, or when James says he was justified,--when he offered Isaac up on the altar....or both? Explain how your doctrine doesn't make James a liar.

There is no contradiction in the scriptures concerning this matter.

There is the justification that is a result of obedience, which is to be declared righteous before God.

We are justified when we obey the Gospel.

We will continue to be right with Gos as we continue to express the Righteous life of Jesus Christ, as we are led by the Spirit.

When we stumble, we can ask Him to forgive us and cleanse us of this unrighteousness.


JLB

 

[JLB]

James says Abraham was justified when he offered Isaac up on the altar, making a direct reference to when Abraham believed God in Genesis 15 (not in Genesis 12 when Abraham ventured to the Promised Land).

"21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;
23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS..." (James 2:21-23 NASB)

But in the actual account in the scriptures that James is referring to, Abraham was justified when he believed God after receiving the promise of a son:

"5 And He took him outside and said, "Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be."
6 Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.
7 And He said to him, "I am the LORD who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess it."
(Genesis 15:5-7 NASB)

Why would James directly contradict the sacred scriptures? Unless, of course, he is talking about a different justification distinct from the justification of believing, which is what my doctrine says. My doctrine says one must be both, justified by faith, and, also, justified by works in order to validate the justification by faith that occurred first as being the faith that, all by itself, makes a person righteous. "I will show you my faith by my works."" (James 2:18 NASB). The faith that justifies is the faith that works. That's all he's saying. Which is what Paul says, too, when he says the only thing that counts in justification is "faith working through love" (Galatians 5:6 NASB). IOW, the faith that justifies is the faith that works the work of the law (love--Romans 13:8-10 NASB).

So, how does your doctrine defuse this apparent contradiction? Was Abraham justified when he believed the promise about Isaac, or when James says he was justified,--when he offered Isaac up on the altar....or both? Explain how your doctrine doesn't make James a liar.

Do you believe a person can be saved by disobeying the Gospel?


JLB

 

[Ruthy]

test post Ruthy is reba

 

[JLB]

test post Ruthy is reba

 

[Jethro Bodine]

http://ntgreek.net/lesson23.htm#perfect

Chessman, your argument is that by using the Perfect Tense in Greek the author does that in order to convey the intention that the action being completed will continue forever and forever. But it's so easy to see in the clip above, that you yourself posted, that simply is not true.

We can see in those examples that it is not implicit in the Greek Perfect Tense that the action completed not only continues to the present, but will, and must, continue on forever. We see that's not true at all in the examples you yourself posted: 'I have learned the material', 'she has made a cake', and 'the grass has grown tall'. Cakes don't stay made forever. Material learned is sometimes forgotten. Grass that has grown tall does not stay that way forever. These examples you yourself posted in no way defend your contention that Perfect Tense means the results of the action continue forever and ever. They continue to the present. That's all. There is no suggestion or guarantee implied by the use of the Greek Perfect Tense that the results of the completed action will continue forever and ever and can not end.

For the purpose of this law thread, it is popularly believed that in the moment of believing in Christ a person is forever justified without the possibility of not being justified in the future. James and Paul both teach us that the faith that is alone, being absent of works, is NOT the faith that justifies. They both teach that the faith that justifies is the faith that works the work of the law--that is, it works love. But so many in the church today are convinced that they can have a faith that does not lead them into the work of the law and it remains the faith that justifies. And it all goes back to this horribly misguided understanding of Paul's law/grace teaching that presently grips much of the Protestant Church. They think that not being under the law anymore means we do have to fulfill and uphold the law anymore, because salvation is so utterly not of works. Not knowing that the footprint of the faith that justifies all by itself is the work it leaves behind--footprints that validate one's faith as the faith that justifies all by itself apart from works, just as Abraham's footprints validated his faith apart from works as the faith that justifies.

 

[chessman]

Chessman, your argument is that by using the Perfect Tense in Greek the author does that in order to convey the intention that the action being completed will continue forever and forever.

That is incorrect. That is not my argument, nor what I stated. (Edited, ToS 2.4, Rudeness. Obadiah)

 

[Sinthesis]

Do you believe a person can be saved by disobeying the Gospel?


JLB

How does one disobey Good News?

 

[JLB]

How does one disobey Good News?

They refuse to repent.

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
1 Corinthians 1:18

7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2 Thessalonians 1:7-8

those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

JLB

 

[JLB]

James says Abraham was justified when he offered Isaac up on the altar, making a direct reference to when Abraham believed God in Genesis 15 (not in Genesis 12 when Abraham ventured to the Promised Land).

"21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;
23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS..." (James 2:21-23 NASB)

But in the actual account in the scriptures that James is referring to, Abraham was justified when he believed God after receiving the promise of a son:

"5 And He took him outside and said, "Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be."
6 Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.
7 And He said to him, "I am the LORD who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess it."
(Genesis 15:5-7 NASB)

Why would James directly contradict the sacred scriptures? Unless, of course, he is talking about a different justification distinct from the justification of believing, which is what my doctrine says. My doctrine says one must be both, justified by faith, and, also, justified by works in order to validate the justification by faith that occurred first as being the faith that, all by itself, makes a person righteous. "I will show you my faith by my works."" (James 2:18 NASB). The faith that justifies is the faith that works. That's all he's saying. Which is what Paul says, too, when he says the only thing that counts in justification is "faith working through love" (Galatians 5:6 NASB). IOW, the faith that justifies is the faith that works the work of the law (love--Romans 13:8-10 NASB).

So, how does your doctrine defuse this apparent contradiction? Was Abraham justified when he believed the promise about Isaac, or when James says he was justified,--when he offered Isaac up on the altar....or both? Explain how your doctrine doesn't make James a liar.

Do you believe a person can be saved by disobeying the Gospel?


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Do you believe a person can be saved by disobeying the Gospel?


JLB

No.

Disobedience is, ultimately, a lack of faith.

 

[WalterandDebbie]

Do you believe a person can be saved by disobeying the Gospel?


JLB

No, I don't believe a person can be saved by disobeying the Gospel, what about yourself? do you believe a person can be saved by disobeying the Gospel?

13. Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Ephesians 4:13 please! read: Ephesians 4

 

[JLB]

No.

Disobedience is, ultimately, a lack of faith.

I Totally Agree!

 

[Sinthesis]

They refuse to repent.

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
1 Corinthians 1:18

7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2 Thessalonians 1:7-8

those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

JLB

Conversely, then do you believe obeying the gospel means repentance?

 

[WalterandDebbie]

Conversely, then do you believe obeying the gospel means repentance?

I would say, do you believe obeying the gospel means repentance? My answer is No, because the devil knows the scriptures as well. But thats just me, What do you say to: do you believe obeying the gospel means repentance?

Again, do you believe obeying the gospel means repentance? After a person repents, and is baptised, Acts 2:36-40,

John 8:31, 32.
31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Again, do you believe obeying the gospel means repentance? After the above scriptures, Then my answer is Yes.

 

[JLB]

Conversely, then do you believe obeying the gospel means repentance?

That is definitely part of it.

Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand.

Repent here means to turn away from the king and kingdom you are serving and serve the King of the kingdom of God, which is where the phrase "confess Jesus as Lord" comes from.

Satan is the king of the kingdom we serve before we repent, that is to say turn away from serving Satan.

When we obey the Gospel of the Kingdom, we turn from serving Satan as lord, and bow our knee to jesus and confess Him as lord.

Lord means Master.

Jesus said: why do you call me Lord, and not do what I say.

If you say you repent, and confess Jesus as Lord with your mouth, but then later, turn back and serve Satan again, then you are called a hypocrite.

From what I read in the scriptures, hypocrites do end up doing to well on the day of judgement.

To Repent, which is to turn to Jesus, and obey the laws of His kingdom is a life long commitment.

That is why the word "believe" carries the meaning of commit.

16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
John 3:16


Believe - Strong's Number: 4100

Definition

1. to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in
   1. of the thing believed
      1. to credit, have confidence
   2. in a moral or religious reference
      1. used in the NT of the conviction and trust to which a man is impelled by a certain inner and higher prerogative and law of soul
      2. to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith 1bc) mere acknowledgment of some fact or event: intellectual faith
2. to entrust a thing to one, i.e. his fidelity
   1. to be intrusted with a thing

King James Word Usage - Total: 248
believe 239, commit unto 4, commit to (one's) trust 1, be committed unto 1, be put in trust with 1, be commit to one's trust 1, believer 1


Then there is obeying the call to be baptized.

Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:38


JLB

 

[Ruthy]

test

 

[WalterandDebbie]

Psa 19:7-8 The law of YHWH is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony (Ten Commandments) of YHWH is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of YHWH are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of YHWH is pure, enlightening the eyes.

Psa 78:5-7 For he established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children: That the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born; who should arise and declare them to their children: That they might set their hope in Elohim, and not forget the works of El, but keep his commandments:

Psa 119:72 The law of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver.

Psa 119:97 O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day.

Psa 119:98-99 Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation.

Psa 119:151 Thou art near, O YHWH; and all thy commandments are truth.

Psa 119:152 Concerning thy testimonies (Ten Commandments), I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.

Psa_119:174 I have longed for thy salvation, O YHWH; and thy law is my delight.

Isa_5:24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of YHWH of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.

Ezekiel 36:26,27 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and you shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith YHWH; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Mat 5:17-19 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Psalm 119:126 It is time for thee, Yahweh, to work: for they have made void thy law.

Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

Rom_7:25 I thank God through Yeshua Messiah our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Rom_8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

1Jn 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.​

Is this how you view the Law of YHWH/God? Do you serve it with your mind or does your flesh refuse to be subject to it? Have you made the Law void through your faith or is it firmly established in your life? Do you love the Law of YHWH? Is it your delight or have you cast it away from you? Do you break the Law of YHWH and teach others to do the same or do you keep it? If you believe the Law is abolished, I hope you will reconsider your understanding of the Law of YHWH and begin to show your love for YHWH in the way He desires by keeping His laws.

Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.