When did the Law pass or has it passed away?

[Drew]

Drew I look at your number of posts written and wonder a few things. How many times have you said the same thing over and over? What do you think it is you've said over the most? Do you say it better now then before? What is the most important topic needed to be discussed in your opinion? After so much back and forth, what is the one thing or few things that have been strengthened unto condfidence in your faith?

It is indeed true that I make the same arguments over and over again. If you ask me what is the "most important topic", I would say that it is the need to understand the Bilble in terms of the cutural setting in which it was written. In other words, I believe we make mistakes when we read the Bible through "21st century western spectacles", when we should instead, to the largest extent possible, read it through the eyes of the culture in which it was written. I am not sure how to answer your other questions.

 

[Drew]

Hello JLB + francisdesales: Thanks for your kind words. To be entirely fair, I want to make it clear that the basic idea behind the post is not original to me. I am a huge fan of theologian NT Wright, and the general idea from my post comes from his views.

 

[Drew]

so then why do we need goverments then if we don't need laws?

Because not everyone has the Spirit to guide them. I know this may sound controversial, but I believe that Paul believes that "systems of rules" essentially enslave.

Christians don't sin? we don't lie , steal and murder, and cheat etc?

I never said that. But I think Paul is quite clear - we now serve in the newness of the Spirit and we leave "the letter of the law" behind.

how on the earth does one know the SPIRIT that is talking to you if you don't have the word in you to test it?

To me, the posing of this question essentially discounts the reality of the Spirit. It seems to me that you are not really certain of the presence of the Spirit, and need law as a kind of "backup". Well, I empathize with that, but think we all need to take Paul seriously and recognize that the time of law has passed, and the time of the Spirit is here.

 

[Ryan]

If this is still a hair split, then we can let it drop.
More later.... Good night for now.

I really don't see how it's relevant to this discussion? Difference between "work" and "works" I haven't poured much thought into it other then "works of the law" are those trying to achieve salvation through works apart from saving faith.

 

[Ryan]

Has it really though? What was the promise of the New Covenant? The sending of the Helper.

Ezekiel 36:27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.

Can you find anywhere in the New Covenant an abolition of the Laws. The problem was never the laws, it was the people. So change the people, why change the laws when it was already deemed to be perpetual, eternal and perfect?

So you will assert me and my family observing Passover, which ended today, is wrong? Is that what you mean? Or do you mean something else?

The Law of The Lord is perfect and existed before the Law of Moses. You keep mixing these two together.

Abraham walked in the Law of the Lord which is founded upon walking with Him, hearing and obeying His Voice. Genesis 26:5

That is the walk of faith. Faith comes by hearing the Voice of God. Walking with God and learning from Him "what is Good and what is evil" was established from the beginning.

Trying to know good from evil by learning from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which is learning from Scripture without relationship with God.

The Pharisees ans Sadducees who murdered Christ, which it doesn't get anymore antichrist than that, learned all the good from evil from the tree of knowledge, and ended up crucifying The Messiah whom they were waiting for.

The Law was added because of transgressions...

What was transgressed? The law of the Lord.

The Law of Moses which includes the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices and ordinances and feasts and sabbaths... was taken away. Hebrews 10:9

Does that mean there is no Law of the Lord? NO!

. 31 "Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah-- 32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more."


not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt...

The law of Mose made no provision for, their sin I will remember no more.

By saying - My covenant which they broke, -

The Holy Spirit is indicating that God remembered their sin.

The Law of Moses was temporary.

The Law of God is Eternal.


JLB

The Law of The Lord, Law of Moses, Moses seat, Torah, are all the same.

...it shall be a statute forever to their generations.... (Exodus 27:21) ...it shall be a statute forever to him and his seed after him. (Exodus 28:43) ...a statute forever... (Exodus 29:28) ...it shall be a statute forever to them, to him and to his se throughout their generations. (Exodus 30:21) It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever. (Exodus 31:17) There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. Leviticus 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Numbers 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deuteronomy 5:29

Moreover the Psalmist writes:

Psalm 119:160 Your word is truth from the beginning: and every one of your righteous judgments endures forever.

Furthermore the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from: You shall not add to the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish a thing from it, that you may keep the commandments of YHWH your God which I command you. (Deut 4:2) Whatever thing I command you, observe to do it: you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it. (Deut. 12:32)

9 then He said, "Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God." He takes away the first that He may establish the second. Hebrews 10:9

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. Hebrews 7:12

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

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

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

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. 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.

I am the way, the Truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except by Me.

Where is that statement in the Law of Moses.


JLB

I'm sorry you haven't read my previous posts the word "covenant" was an insertion by the translators.

And I take it you haven't read any of About Son of God research on Galatians 3 earlier in this post? Refute that first please.

 

[Ryan]

Jesus could not contradict his Father, or go against his will. Deuteronomy 4:2 You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

This text only indicates that human beings are not to "amend" the Law. However, as God-in-the-flesh, Jesus indeed has the right to put an end to the Law. And He clearly does so, not least when he over-rules the kosher purity laws when He declares all food to be clean.

The scripture is an evolving narrative, not a set of timeless truths.

You have not read any of the scriptures that if Jesus was to over-rule any of the Law of Moses, he was to be declared a false prophet. This will require to back track a page or two, but this is redundant, and I do not want to sound redundant. Or do I want to sound redundant? Reduncancy is sometimes effective to hammer home a point though.

 

[Drew]

You have not read any of the scriptures that if Jesus was to over-rule any of the Law of Moses, he was to be declared a false prophet. This will require to back track a page or two, but this is redundant, and I do not want to sound redundant. Or do I want to sound redundant? Reduncancy is sometimes effective to hammer home a point though.

I will have a look, but I would be willing to bet that there are no Biblical texts that require us to understand that the author's intent was to say "Jesus can never over-rule the Law of Moses".

Because He clearly does over-rule the Law: In Mark 7, and parallels, Jesus declares all foods clean. This is in direct contradiction to the Law of Moses.

And He also declares Himself, and not the Temple, as the place where one goes for forgiveness. Again, a rather clear (in my view, anyway) challenge to the Law of Moses in which the Temple was the place where sins were taken care of.

 

[Drew]

I'll match every single one of your Paul has declared the end of the Law verses, to one verse Paul saying the opposite or living in accordance with the Law of Moses. Are you ready? Go.

Ok, you're on. I will start with Ephesians 2:15.

From Ephesians 2:

11Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision" by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands-- 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit

Paul tells us that the Gentiles were "excluded from Israel and foreigners to the covenants". Up to this point in the Biblical narrative, it is the Jews - those circumcised in the flesh - who appear to be heirs to the covenant promises. So there was at least the appearance of two classes of people. Paul then springs his argument: Jew and Gentile have been “made one†through….what? Answer “abolition of the lawâ€.

How can this not be the Law of Moses? It is precisely the Law of Moses that was given to Jews and Jews only and which, by God’s own words (Leviticus 20) established the Jews as a “special people set apart from the nationsâ€! If one abolished the Law of Moses, one would be effectively saying: the distinction between Jew and Gentile has been dissolved.

Which is clearly what the author of Ephesians is saying. Conclusion: Although the text does not explicitly say “the Law of Moses†has been abolished, the hypothesis that it is indeed the Law of Moses is obviously the hypothesis that makes sense in context: the abolition of the Law of Moses, not the abolition of some other law, takes aways the Jew-Gentile distinction.

 

[JLB]

The Law of The Lord, Law of Moses, Moses seat, Torah, are all the same.

...it shall be a statute forever to their generations.... (Exodus 27:21) ...it shall be a statute forever to him and his seed after him. (Exodus 28:43) ...a statute forever... (Exodus 29:28) ...it shall be a statute forever to them, to him and to his se throughout their generations. (Exodus 30:21) It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever. (Exodus 31:17) There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. Leviticus 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Numbers 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deuteronomy 5:29

Moreover the Psalmist writes:

Psalm 119:160 Your word is truth from the beginning: and every one of your righteous judgments endures forever.

Furthermore the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from: You shall not add to the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish a thing from it, that you may keep the commandments of YHWH your God which I command you. (Deut 4:2) Whatever thing I command you, observe to do it: you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it. (Deut. 12:32)

9 then He said, "Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God." He takes away the first that He may establish the second. Hebrews 10:9

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. Hebrews 7:12

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

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

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

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. 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.

I am the way, the Truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except by Me.

Where is that statement in the Law of Moses.


JLB

I'm sorry you haven't read my previous posts the word "covenant" was an insertion by the translators.

And I take it you haven't read any of About Son of God research on Galatians 3 earlier in this post? Refute that first please.

I don't know what your referring to.

My statements are clear, directly from the scripture and can not be refuted by anyone.

Again, show me in the Law of Moses where it says - I am the way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

Only the Levites, specifically the high Priest could enter the Holy of Holies.

Now the veil is rent and we [Jew and Gentile] enter in by a NEW and living way. Jesus is that Way.

The old has vanished away.

JLB

 

[Drew]

You have not read any of the scriptures that if Jesus was to over-rule any of the Law of Moses, he was to be declared a false prophet.

Could you point me to specific texts, please - I am not sure what posts you are talking about. But I suspect I know how this will go:

1. You will find Old Testament texts that warn people not to change the Law of Moses;
2. You will assume that Jesus, the specific person, is subject to this prohibition;
3. You will therefore conclude that Jesus could not have challenged the Law of Moses.

Well you would have a huge problem if that is your argument - Jesus clearly does challenge the Law of Moses, not least the kosher food laws. Not to mention the Temple as the designated place to be cleansed. And a whole host of other things.

And you have Paul to deal with as well. Whereas Jesus challenges the Law of Moses through symbolic actions and sometimes cryptic statement, Pauls comes out and explicitly declares its abolition, not least as per the Ephesians 2 text I presented (assuming that Paul wrote Ephesians, but that's beside the point anyway).

For my part, I suggest I can clearly argue that it is precisely because Jesus is God in the flesh, He (unlike you and me) does indeed have the "right" to set aside the Law of Moses. So I can argue that the prohibitions you refer to about "not changing the Law" do not apply to Jesus inasmuch as He is the very author of this Law.

 

[Drew]

Now the veil is rent and we [Jew and Gentile] enter in by a NEW and living way. Jesus is that Way.

Agree. The Law of Moses was given to Jews and Jews only and functioned to mark them out as a special people. One theme that I suggest cannot be swept aside is that, at the Cross, this special status has been set aside. Hence Paul can say "there is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ Jesus". So it would exceedingly odd if the Jews were to continue following this complex set of laws which largely functioned to mark them as a people distinct from all nations. Granted, one could try to argue that now all Christians - both Jew and Gentile are to follow the Law of Moses. But that is, fortunately, not what Paul and Jesus are telling us.

Which is, of course, very fortunate since obeying the Law of Moses would land each of us in jail for a very long time, what with the stoning of adulterers and the sacrifice of animals. The law enforcement communities in our modern world take a very dim view of such practices.....

 

[Ryan]

...it shall be a statute forever to their generations.... (Exodus 27:21) ...it shall be a statute forever to him and his seed after him. (Exodus 28:43) ...a statute forever... (Exodus 29:28) ...it shall be a statute forever to them, to him and to his se throughout their generations. (Exodus 30:21) It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever. (Exodus 31:17) There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever.

I will bet that when we look at the original Hebrew, we will find that the word translated as "forever" really means "for an age", and that the translators have taken liberties.

While the following argument is not made in relation to the texts you have cited, it demonstrates that we need to be careful when we read the word "forever", or its cognates, in the Scriptures:

The following text from Genesis 17 is often used to argue that God promised the land of Canaan to the Jews forever:

I will give the whole land of Canaan – the land where you are now residing – to you and your descendants after you as a permanent possession. I will be their God.â€

The Hebrew word that is translated as “permanent†is the word “owlamâ€. Note how the definition of this word is fluid – embracing the eternality that would support the common reading of this text (that Canaan has been promised to the Jews forever), but also allowing for a reading that does not denote eternality:

Definition (from Net Bible): 1) long duration, antiquity, futurity, for ever, ever, everlasting,
evermore, perpetual, old, ancient, world

And here we have an example from Isaiah 42 of this same word used in a context where eternality is certainly not intended:

The LORD emerges like a hero,
like a warrior he inspires himself for battle;
he shouts, yes, he yells,
he shows his enemies his power.
I have been inactive for a long time;
I kept quiet and held back.
Like a woman in labor I groan;
I pant and gasp.
I will make the trees on the mountains and hills wither up;
I will dry up all their vegetation.
I will turn streams into islands,
and dry up pools of water.

Clearly God is talking about talking action after a long period of “inactivityâ€. So here, the word “owlam†does not denote an everlasting period of time – it denotes a limited duration of time.

So one cannot simply assume that Genesis 17:8 entails a promise of Canaan to the Israelites forever. That is one reading that needs to be considered, but there are others as well.

So...when speaking of the covenant with Noah, and that pretty, beautiful half circle thing we find in the sky during showers, is that temporary to? Are we awaiting another massive flood by God as you say that word is not eternal.
12 H430 And God H559 said [H8799] H226 , This is the token H1285 of the covenant H589 which I H5414 make [H8802] H2416 between me and you and every living H5315 creature H5769 that is with you, for perpetual H1755 generations:

I best start building an ark I reckon as the same word "olam" is used here as well.

 

[Ryan]

Consider the healings of those who, by nature of their malady, were considered “unclean†and thereby excluded from membership in the covenant family, at least temporarily. Healings of lepers and the woman with the menstrual problem are pointed examples.

Such healings are often understood to constitute “evidence†of Jesus’ supernatural powers. They mean a lot more than this. By healing such people, Jesus sends a powerful symbolic message – the old markers for membership in the true people of God are being done away with. Those who were on the outside are now on the inside. And the parable of wedding feast demonstrates that the reverse is also the case – Jews can find themselves outside the true family of God.

Both Jesus and Paul, each in their own way, re-draw the boundary markers that demarcate the true people of God.

And this amounts to abolishing at least large chunks of the Law of Moses. It is this law that marks certain people out as unclean and sets them outside the people of God (at least temporarily). So when Jesus renders them clean, He effectively bypasses the Temple route for purification.

I am not sure how this can be interpreted as anything other than a setting aside of the Law of Moses (or at least a large part of it).

Wrong.

Matthew 8:1-4 When Jesus came down from the mountain, large crowds followed Him. 2 And a leper came to Him and bowed down before Him, and said, “Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean.†3 Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, saying, “I am willing; be cleansed.†And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. 4 And Jesus *said to him, “See that you tell no one; but go, show yourself to the priest and present the]offering that Moses commanded, as a testimony o them.â€

 

[Ryan]

I'll match every single one of your Paul has declared the end of the Law verses, to one verse Paul saying the opposite or living in accordance with the Law of Moses. Are you ready? Go.

Ok, you're on. I will start with Ephesians 2:15.

From Ephesians 2:

11Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision" by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands-- 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit

Paul tells us that the Gentiles were "excluded from Israel and foreigners to the covenants". Up to this point in the Biblical narrative, it is the Jews - those circumcised in the flesh - who appear to be heirs to the covenant promises. So there was at least the appearance of two classes of people. Paul then springs his argument: Jew and Gentile have been “made one” through….what? Answer “abolition of the law”.

How can this not be the Law of Moses? It is precisely the Law of Moses that was given to Jews and Jews only and which, by God’s own words (Leviticus 20) established the Jews as a “special people set apart from the nations”! If one abolished the Law of Moses, one would be effectively saying: the distinction between Jew and Gentile has been dissolved.

Which is clearly what the author of Ephesians is saying. Conclusion: Although the text does not explicitly say “the Law of Moses” has been abolished, the hypothesis that it is indeed the Law of Moses is obviously the hypothesis that makes sense in context: the abolition of the Law of Moses, not the abolition of some other law, takes aways the Jew-Gentile distinction.

Another perspective on these verses, is to remember aliens, foreigners were always welcomed into the greater commonwealth of Israel, Ruth, Jethro, Rahab. And multiple passages in the Torah indicating that as well (Numbers 15:16).

The language and tone of the verses if you interpret it the way you do, points to the Torah as being the commandments and ordinances as being the dividing wall. But that one passage, and many others indicates otherwise. The dividing wall was the man-made traditions and ordinances excluding Gentiles from things such as Temple worship. What Jesus came down to was to take down that barrier of separation that men, not the Law, set up denying them, or saying they cannot have salvation with God unless they convert to being a Jew. Even some of this still resonated with Peter that Saul admonished him for. I've asked this before, and I'll ask it again, how can God be at enmity with his own laws and commandments?

My turn

Acts 21:20 And when they heard it they began glorifying God; and they said to him, “You see, brother, how many]thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law;

 

[Drew]

So...when speaking of the covenant with Noah, and that pretty, beautiful half circle thing we find in the sky during showers, is that temporary to? Are we awaiting another massive flood by God as you say that word is not eternal.

I believe you are going beyond what I wrote. I am saying that in at least some cases, translators have made a particular decision that may not have reflected the intent of the original writer.

Are you denying that there are indeed some cases where a Hebrew word has been translated as "forever" or "eternal" and where that same word can, in some settings, denote a limited time?

 

[JLB]

...it shall be a statute forever to their generations.... (Exodus 27:21) ...it shall be a statute forever to him and his seed after him. (Exodus 28:43) ...a statute forever... (Exodus 29:28) ...it shall be a statute forever to them, to him and to his se throughout their generations. (Exodus 30:21) It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever. (Exodus 31:17) There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever.

I will bet that when we look at the original Hebrew, we will find that the word translated as "forever" really means "for an age", and that the translators have taken liberties.

While the following argument is not made in relation to the texts you have cited, it demonstrates that we need to be careful when we read the word "forever", or its cognates, in the Scriptures:

The following text from Genesis 17 is often used to argue that God promised the land of Canaan to the Jews forever:

I will give the whole land of Canaan – the land where you are now residing – to you and your descendants after you as a permanent possession. I will be their God.”

The Hebrew word that is translated as “permanent” is the word “owlam”. Note how the definition of this word is fluid – embracing the eternality that would support the common reading of this text (that Canaan has been promised to the Jews forever), but also allowing for a reading that does not denote eternality:

Definition (from Net Bible): 1) long duration, antiquity, futurity, for ever, ever, everlasting,
evermore, perpetual, old, ancient, world

And here we have an example from Isaiah 42 of this same word used in a context where eternality is certainly not intended:

The LORD emerges like a hero,
like a warrior he inspires himself for battle;
he shouts, yes, he yells,
he shows his enemies his power.
I have been inactive for a long time;
I kept quiet and held back.
Like a woman in labor I groan;
I pant and gasp.
I will make the trees on the mountains and hills wither up;
I will dry up all their vegetation.
I will turn streams into islands,
and dry up pools of water.

Clearly God is talking about talking action after a long period of “inactivity”. So here, the word “owlam” does not denote an everlasting period of time – it denotes a limited duration of time.

So one cannot simply assume that Genesis 17:8 entails a promise of Canaan to the Israelites forever. That is one reading that needs to be considered, but there are others as well.

So...when speaking of the covenant with Noah, and that pretty, beautiful half circle thing we find in the sky during showers, is that temporary to? Are we awaiting another massive flood by God as you say that word is not eternal.
12 H430 And God H559 said [H8799] H226 , This is the token H1285 of the covenant H589 which I H5414 make [H8802] H2416 between me and you and every living H5315 creature H5769 that is with you, for perpetual H1755 generations:

I best start building an ark I reckon as the same word "olam" is used here as well.

If you still see a rainbow then it is still in effect.

Paul was gracious enough through the Holy Spirit to write a specific verse that tells us explicitly -

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; Galatians 3:19

How long was the Law added for... till the Seed should come!

The Law of Moses had to be "taken ou of the way" in order to include Gentiles, as this was always the original intent.

as it is written -

"As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you, and you shall be a father of many nations.


JLB

 

[Ryan]

The Law of The Lord, Law of Moses, Moses seat, Torah, are all the same.

...it shall be a statute forever to their generations.... (Exodus 27:21) ...it shall be a statute forever to him and his seed after him. (Exodus 28:43) ...a statute forever... (Exodus 29:28) ...it shall be a statute forever to them, to him and to his se throughout their generations. (Exodus 30:21) It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever. (Exodus 31:17) There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. Leviticus 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Numbers 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deuteronomy 5:29

Moreover the Psalmist writes:

Psalm 119:160 Your word is truth from the beginning: and every one of your righteous judgments endures forever.

Furthermore the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from: You shall not add to the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish a thing from it, that you may keep the commandments of YHWH your God which I command you. (Deut 4:2) Whatever thing I command you, observe to do it: you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it. (Deut. 12:32)

9 then He said, "Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God." He takes away the first that He may establish the second. Hebrews 10:9

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. Hebrews 7:12

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

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

• This statement was written to Hebrew folk, not Gentiles.

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. 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.

I am the way, the Truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except by Me.

Where is that statement in the Law of Moses.


JLB

I'm sorry you haven't read my previous posts the word "covenant" was an insertion by the translators.

And I take it you haven't read any of About Son of God research on Galatians 3 earlier in this post? Refute that first please.

I don't know what your referring to.

My statements are clear, directly from the scripture and can not be refuted by anyone.

Again, show me in the Law of Moses where it says - I am the way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

Only the Levites, specifically the high Priest could enter the Holy of Holies.

Now the veil is rent and we [Jew and Gentile] enter in by a NEW and living way. Jesus is that Way.

The old has vanished away.

JLB

Jesus is God. There was always only one ways to have a saving relationship with him. For those strong in the faith as Anna was, they knew the time was upon them for the Messiah to be born. It was an easy transition filled with great joy the Messiah had arrived. Those who were walking in the light, had no problems accepting Jesus. You are saying everybody born before Jesus then were not saved then? Just his very name "Yeshua" meaning salvation was spoken of in the Torah. So was nobody saved before Yeshua then because your argument implies so?

 

[Ryan]

You have not read any of the scriptures that if Jesus was to over-rule any of the Law of Moses, he was to be declared a false prophet.

Could you point me to specific texts, please - I am not sure what posts you are talking about. But I suspect I know how this will go:

1. You will find Old Testament texts that warn people not to change the Law of Moses;
2. You will assume that Jesus, the specific person, is subject to this prohibition;
3. You will therefore conclude that Jesus could not have challenged the Law of Moses.

Well you would have a huge problem if that is your argument - Jesus clearly does challenge the Law of Moses, not least the kosher food laws. Not to mention the Temple as the designated place to be cleansed. And a whole host of other things.

And you have Paul to deal with as well. Whereas Jesus challenges the Law of Moses through symbolic actions and sometimes cryptic statement, Pauls comes out and explicitly declares its abolition, not least as per the Ephesians 2 text I presented (assuming that Paul wrote Ephesians, but that's beside the point anyway).

For my part, I suggest I can clearly argue that it is precisely because Jesus is God in the flesh, He (unlike you and me) does indeed have the "right" to set aside the Law of Moses. So I can argue that the prohibitions you refer to about "not changing the Law" do not apply to Jesus inasmuch as He is the very author of this Law.

How could he challenge himself then and be at enmity with himself?

If I cannot cite scriptures to support what I am saying, nothing will convict you, sorry.

 

[Drew]

Matthew 8:1-4 When Jesus came down from the mountain, large crowds followed Him. 2 And a leper came to Him and bowed down before Him, and said, “Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean.” 3 Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, saying, “I am willing; be cleansed.” And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. 4 And Jesus *said to him, “See that you tell no one; but go, show yourself to the priest and present the]offering that Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.”

I suggest this text supports my position, and does not refute it, as you appear to believe. Jesus knows very well that He is "side-stepping" the Law of Moses and how this will elicit huge reaction from the religious authorities. So he orders to person not to tell anyone what has happened and, for the moment, to keep up the pretense that the Law is still in force, as it always has been.

Jesus is being appropriately careful and shrewd. As He does many other times, He chooses to "hide" some elements of His message from the authorities since He knows that if too much is divulged too soon, He will be sent to the Cross, or otherwise stopped earlier than He needs to.

But, at other times Jesus clearly does challenge the Law publically - the challenge to the kosher purity laws in Mark 7 is a clear example.

I suspect you may challenge me on my casting Jesus in this light - you may suggest that such behaviour on His part constitutes deception. Well, we can have that discussion, but I suggest there are other cases where Jesus is intentionally quite evasive.

So I do not see how the text you quote undermines the general argument that Jesus is challenging the Law of Moses. He is in a difficult position - He needs to announce that the "old" system is coming to an end, but He also needs to delay the springing of the trap that is being set for Him.

 

[Ryan]

So...when speaking of the covenant with Noah, and that pretty, beautiful half circle thing we find in the sky during showers, is that temporary to? Are we awaiting another massive flood by God as you say that word is not eternal.

I believe you are going beyond what I wrote. I am saying that in at least some cases, translators have made a particular decision that may not have reflected the intent of the original writer.

Are you denying that there are indeed some cases where a Hebrew word has been translated as "forever" or "eternal" and where that same word can, in some settings, denote a limited time?

You are going beyond what the Bible wrote. If there is some areas where "olam" didn't mean eternal, you have to start then with Noah and the Noachide Covenant. You opened up this can, not me.