When did the Law pass or has it passed away?

[Jethro Bodine]

Not that I want to rehash with JLB; but between you and I -- I would still, as I did earlier in the thread, point out that Genesis is Torah, but not "THE" law of Moses. ( John 7:22 is one example of the distinction ).

Genesis is Law, according to how God created Adam, and which laid the foundation of what eg:Adultery is; The Law of Moses, then, is clearly an addition meant as a stop gap once the promise was formally made to Abraham while Jesus (the seed) had not yet come. It is NOT clear to me, for example, that the 613 statutes would have been added in the specific way they were if the Israelites had not sinned at the golden calf.
For example, Jesus refers to divorce being given by "Moses" rather than God, on account of hardness of heart (definition of sin!). So that, the Law of Moses is a mixture of laws, some added on account of sin -- some codifications of law which pre-existed the sin of the Golden calf.

It's not until the Golden calf that the whole of israel is implicated in sinning a "great" sin; and the ban of God would fall on all of them. It is after this point where Moses intercedes as a mediator to prevent their total annihilation -- and at which point the specific laws (613+) were laid out.

The ten commandments were first written before the "great" sin; and then re-written after they were broken at that "sin"; SO it's clear to me that they were intended before and after the calf incident. ( and yes, there were sins before the calf -- the stone if not originally a sign of sin, Revelation 2:17, Peter's name, the ephod, etc. definitely became one later with respect to the law; Matthew 3:9, Matthew 4:3 bread=two in one flesh, devil perverts it. )

But back to the 10 words (Decalogue).
10 is a number signifying divinity -- it's not really the number of sentences in the commandments (Go ahead and count them).

So that what Moses was really signifying, by calling them 10, is that God himself wrote them (one fingered even) as his own eternal law; And I am emphasizing this as contrary to the mediated law of Moses which happened after the Golden calf incident.

It is upon the noachide laws in Genesis (with additions), that the Church chose to lay burdens on the Gentiles eg: Acts 15:29; and it is definitely where the laws of husband and wife are always drawn; (Referring to Christ and the church as well) 1Peter 3:5, 1Corinthians 11:7-10; 1Timothy 2:13-14; Eve was deceived by an "angel" who fell. etc.

The early church appears to have mostly avoided using the laws specifically named by Moses (or even circumcision which had become SOOOO identified with Moses, though it wasn't his.); but the Apostles were not adverse to binding laws upon the early church which have their roots in Genesis. Including that man should love his wife so as to be ready to sacrifice himself for her; which Adam sort of did, but mostly did not.

Originally Posted by JLB View Post d. All of the above Hmm...maybe I don't know what you were doing here. Multiple choice, or multiple answers? Quote Originally Posted by JLB View Post If Satan tempts you, you fight with the written word and the prophetic word.

But you were defending the popular thinking in the church that we don't need the Law for guidance purposes.

I think you hit it on the head; There is a disconnect between "we don't need laws to tell us anything" and "we don't need a man to tell us to know the Lord" -- and the fact that they read Paul (a MAN) to learn these things; and that (at least superficially) there is ONE law remaining -- don't you dare do any of the laws Moses gave.

Which would include divorce, by the way....!!!! :D

Notice: No permission or mention of divorce happens in Genesis.
Death came before divorce.

It's hard for me to see how these things are reconcilable.
Paul clearly makes a law of fear for those who demand that the law of Moses is a curse.

The best guess I have is that their grammar (3rd grade or above) and their statements, do not really convey the message they think it does.
Plain reading of their statements generally leads to inferences that they will deny but only when cornered; and one poster after another makes the same plain inferences when discussing these issues with them.

Interesting thoughts for discussion here.

I'll chime in as I can.

JLB has me busy cutting and pasting laws to keep.

 

[Mitspa]

Boy! so we just pick out the ones we like! Man this keeping the law stuff is easy!
I dont really like "thou shalt not covent" because us" word of faith" folks love that money!
Can I get rid of that one and just add like a feast day or something to make up for that?

How about remembering the sabbath? I like mondays better becuase I can get off work.

They will desire to be teachers of the law and not know what they are saying or trying to affirm.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Boy! so we just pick out the ones we like! Man this keeping the law stuff is easy!
I dont really like "thou shalt not covent" because us" word of faith" folks love that money!
Can I get rid of that one and just add like a feast day or something to make up for that?

How about remembering the sabbath? I like mondays better becuase I can get off work.

They will desire to be teachers of the law and not know what they are saying or trying to affirm.

Lol! Didn't take as long as I thought it would for someone to start throwing stones. Too funny!

Hang around, Mitspa (preferably silently) and you will gain understanding.

 

[Mitspa]

Boy! so we just pick out the ones we like! Man this keeping the law stuff is easy!
I dont really like "thou shalt not covent" because us" word of faith" folks love that money!
Can I get rid of that one and just add like a feast day or something to make up for that?

How about remembering the sabbath? I like mondays better becuase I can get off work.

They will desire to be teachers of the law and not know what they are saying or trying to affirm.

Lol! Didn't take as long as I thought it would for someone to start throwing stones. Too funny!

Hang around, Mitspa (preferably silently) and you will gain understanding.

Yea hypocricy is something that is so amazing to watch that I always learn something about how the law blinds men to their own sin.

I would not throw a stone at you jethro, I would see the stone rolled away, and liberty be granted to you my friend.

 

[About the Son of God]

Deuteronomy 4:5 “See, I have taught you statutes and judgments just as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do thus in the land where you are entering to possess it. 6 So keep and do them, for that is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes and say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ 7 For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as is the Lord our God whenever we call on Him? 8 Or what great nation is there that has statutes and judgments as righteous as this whole law which I am setting before you today?

All true, but this in no way implies that God gave the Law of Moses to anyone other than the Jews. Further, it does not challenge my assertion that, as the Leviticus text clearly asserts - the Law of Moses functions to set the nation of Israel apart from other nations.

You have not addressed the essence of my argument. The Leviticus text, if not others, clearly indicates that the Law of Moses functions, at least in part, to set the Jew apart from the Gentile.

And that is precisely why the writer of Ephesians certainly refers to the Law of Moses when he refers to the abolition of an unnamed law as effecting the unification of Jew and Gentile.

The Law of Moses was a barrier - we know this from words put in the mouth of God in Leviticus 20, if not elsewhere.

Drew, In this post -- I think you have phrased each of your points well.
It's a post I can entirely agree with.

In part, the Mosaic law did distinguish between Jew and Gentile; and only the Jew *had* the promise, based on a covenant, that guaranteed their blessing (and salvation/justification/bosom of Abraham) if they persisted in *faith*. The Gentile had no such guarantee before Jesus.

However, one caveat:
Ruth the Moabitess, was not a Jew, but she married a man -- becoming his flesh; by the name of Boos (Boaz); and thus became a Jew (Specifically a Judah-ite; Israelite through Judah); (albeit restricted for 10 generations in temple worship.)

Women had this one major advantage, circumcision was not required for them to become Jews; either marriage or birth automatically included them into Israel. This is why the Geneology of the Messiah notes so specifically sinner "women"; Rahab the Harlot (Jesus' greatxxx grandmother), Ruth the Moabitess; of Bathsheba, and so forth. Cf. Matthew 1:5 ff.

So this is not surprising:
Ephes 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Eve was made out of the side of Adam; The church from the side of Christ Jesus ; a "JEW" not just Israelite.
And Jesus says to a woman: John 4:22.
Immediately after the double entendre: John 4:16-18

"And the man you have here, is not your husband."

 

[WIP]

totopic
Not necessarily aimed at the last poster.

 

[JLB]

Oy vey, haven't you read even a few of my posts about the law? You don't have to, that's not what I'm saying, but I thought maybe you'd have seen the references to the law that even the NT writers make that I have pointed out in more than one post.

But anyway, assuming you mean literally keep, we can start here in Deuteronomy 5:

7 ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.

8 ‘You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. 9 You shall not worship them or serve them...

11 ‘You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.

16 ‘Honor your father and your mother...

17 ‘You shall not murder.

18 ‘You shall not commit adultery.

19 ‘You shall not steal.

20 ‘You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

21 ‘You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife...

...you shall not desire your neighbor’s house, his field or his male servant or his female servant, his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.’




You can keep whatever law you want that accords with mercy and love. So I'd prolly skip the 'eye for an eye' thing...unless you think you're good enough to be judged that way yourself.



Why just the feasts? I thought you would ask should we just keep the laws of love for others.

You are free to observe the feasts...as long as it's not for the purpose of trying to be justified by that observance. And it's meaningless to keep just the feasts and not the moral laws of how to treat one another. That's actually one of the problems the Jews had with their law keeping.

Or is it the thou shall not's in the law of Moses that a Christian should keep?

The 'Thou shalts' are okay, too.

Lots and lots of choices.

But not to hard to discern when you see the law through New Covenant eyes and understand what the guiding principle and summation of the law is.

How about this from the original Apostles and Elders in Jerusalem, together with the Holy Spirit -

Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law"--to whom we gave no such commandment-- 25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell. Acts 15:24-29

Why don't you just say what they said, if I asked you.

Do you believe what they said here in Acts.

Why all the drama.

I'm okay with this judgment passed down, with the approval of the Holy Spirit, for the purpose it was given.

[/B]Why not answer my question about which part of Moses Law should i keep with a simple cut and paste from scripture -

JLB here is the part of Mose Law I believe you should keep -

28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.

Simple.

JLB

Simple for the purpose they were given. But of course there is much more that love upholds in the law. It obviously is not the sum total of laws that were to be kept. I doubt the Holy Spirit would approve of leaving 'do not murder', and 'do not covet' out of a complete list of commandments.

Do you honestly think that the 10 Commandments originated with Moses?

JLB

 

[Mitspa]

Rom 2:28-29

So now we know that, as in all things the law was JUST a shadow "type" but Christ is the substance.

The circumcision was a physical requirement that only represented what was to come and is the TRUE.

a "seperated" (holy) people was only a shadow and type of the Chruch. Seperated unto God in the Spirit. FOR THOSE WHO WORSHIP GOD, MUST WORSHIP HIM IN SPIRIT.

All this jewish tradition and such is just error built upon more error! If one looks into the law and does not see Christ? They are yet in darkness.

 

[francisdesales]

Rom 2:28-29

So now we know that, as in all things the law was JUST a shadow "type" but Christ is the substance.

The circumcision was a physical requirement that only represented what was to come and is the TRUE.

a "seperated" (holy) people was only a shadow and type of the Chruch. Seperated unto God in the Spirit. FOR THOSE WHO WORSHIP GOD, MUST WORSHIP HIM IN SPIRIT.

All this jewish tradition and such is just error built upon more error! If one looks into the law and does not see Christ? They are yet in darkness.

God has always had a remnant people who seeked Him out and worshiped Him in Spirit through faith. It is pasted all over the Psalms. God told this to Elijah and Paul remembers this in Romans 11.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

JLB,

6 ‘None of you shall approach any blood relative of his to uncover nakedness; I am the Lord. 7 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, that is, the nakedness of your mother. She is your mother; you are not to uncover her nakedness. 8 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is your father’s nakedness. 9 The nakedness of your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether born at home or born outside, their nakedness you shall not uncover. 10 The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for their nakedness is yours. 11 The nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, born to your father, she is your sister, you shall not uncover her nakedness. 12 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is your father’s blood relative. 13 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is your mother’s blood relative. 14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother; you shall not approach his wife, she is your aunt. 15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she is your son’s wife, you shall not uncover her nakedness. 16 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness. 17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and of her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness; they are blood relatives. It is lewdness. 18 You shall not marry a woman in addition to her sister as a rival while she is alive, to uncover her nakedness.

19 ‘Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness during her menstrual impurity. 20 You shall not have intercourse with your neighbor’s wife, to be defiled with her. 21 You shall not give any of your offspring to offer them to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God; I am the Lord. 22 You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. 23 Also you shall not have intercourse with any animal to be defiled with it, nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it; it is a perversion.

(Leviticus 18:6-23 NASB)


Passed away, or not passed away?

If so, when?

 

[JLB]

JLB,

6 ‘None of you shall approach any blood relative of his to uncover nakedness; I am the Lord. 7 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, that is, the nakedness of your mother. She is your mother; you are not to uncover her nakedness. 8 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is your father’s nakedness. 9 The nakedness of your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether born at home or born outside, their nakedness you shall not uncover. 10 The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for their nakedness is yours. 11 The nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, born to your father, she is your sister, you shall not uncover her nakedness. 12 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is your father’s blood relative. 13 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is your mother’s blood relative. 14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother; you shall not approach his wife, she is your aunt. 15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she is your son’s wife, you shall not uncover her nakedness. 16 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness. 17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and of her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness; they are blood relatives. It is lewdness. 18 You shall not marry a woman in addition to her sister as a rival while she is alive, to uncover her nakedness.

19 ‘Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness during her menstrual impurity. 20 You shall not have intercourse with your neighbor’s wife, to be defiled with her. 21 You shall not give any of your offspring to offer them to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God; I am the Lord. 22 You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. 23 Also you shall not have intercourse with any animal to be defiled with it, nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it; it is a perversion.

(Leviticus 18:6-23 NASB)


Passed away, or not passed away?

If so, when?

Did this Law originate from Moses or was the Law from God before Moses.

Hint -

21 Then he drank of the wine and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father's nakedness. 24 So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. 25 Then he said: "Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants He shall be to his brethren." 26 And he said: "Blessed be the Lord, The God of Shem, And may Canaan be his servant. 27 May God enlarge Japheth, And may he dwell in the tents of Shem; And may Canaan be his servant." 28 And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. 29 So all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died.Genesis 9:21-29

We must understand that God gave His Laws to those that walked with Him. Abraham for one kept His Laws.

Enoch walked with God. You don't walk with God and live in sin. Did Enoch keep God's laws or the Law of Moses?

What has God told you to do? That is His Law.

What does it mean to not have any gods before Him? As He intended?

What is idolatry, from Gods' perspective.

He may have a different perspective of what Idolatry is than you have.

You may read in Moses Law "thou shall have no other gods before me", but do you understand the fullness of what that means?


JLB

 

[childeye]

I assumed since you supplied those scriptures, it is what you believed. If I may say, I think you misunderstand me. God uses scripture to teach, but not without the Holy Spirit's revealing guidance. The holy Spirit is also the voice of God, since he testifies to both the Father and the Son..

It is my belief that the Anointing is the teacher.

It is my belief the The Lord is the Teacher, as in the beginning.

It is my belief that Abraham,was taught and walked in, and therefore kept God's Laws and precepts and statutes because he learned them from the Lord, not the law of Moses which was 430 years later.

I believe that we need Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists ,Pastors and Teachers who have come to the fullness and the stature of a perfect Man, who then can equip us to do the same.

This is the work of "being fruitful and multiplying" as it was commanded in the beginning.

However, the problem we have today is, The Church is multiplying "un-fruitfulness".

What that means is in short is: Nobody is reproducing Christ in disciples.

A bad tree can not produce good fruit.

God wants to see His Son reproduced in us.

So that the knowledge of the glory of The Lord will cover the Earth as the waters covers the sea.

JLB

I'm there with you on God being able to teach without teachers and also with teachers, Pastors, etc... He used an ass to rebuke Balam. John the baptist said God could raise children unto Himself out of stones. I don't spend much time in churches. I've had bad experiences in them for some reason. So I think I can somewhat relate to what you're saying. As far as I know, God taught me everything I needed to know and will continue to do so. As far as I know, He may have even caused me to seek Him through Christ.

 

[Ryan]

We do not believe one has to convert to being a Jew. Jew and Gentile one in Messiah, one in the Olive Tree. We do believe God in his infinite wisdom and love, gave us the Torah as the path to walk AFTER receiving salvation. So this includes the commandments that can be observed today. A cultural marker you said, just adds a wall of division that these are solely for the Jews. These are God's commandments, not the Jews. It's the path God called us out from our own spiritual Egypt to walk in. That in a nutshell is what we believe.

Thanks for clarifying.

It seems you are saying that the Mosaic Law is still legally binding on Jews - that since it is from God, that is why you follow it. I understand you do not follow it out of earning righteousness - but I presume you no longer stone adulterers, etc.? If these are from God and the Law is still in effect (which I believe Messianics teach), then at what point did such rules go away?

Thanks for your explanation.

Regards

We follow it because God said if you do, it will go well for you.

Deuteronomy 12:28 “Be careful to listen to all these words which I command you, so that it may be well with you and your sons after you forever, for you will be doing what is good and right in the sight of the Lord your God.

I ask you, if God said it once, why would it pass away?

Yes there are many things we cannot do or practice. But because of no Temple, Sanhedrin, King, Israel, etc. and no, we don't stone adulterers.

Deuteronomy 6:24-25. 24 So the Lord commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God for our good always and for our survival, as it is today. 25 It will be righteousness for us if we [h]are careful to observe all this commandment before the Lord our God, just as He commanded us.

I see arguments over righteousness. What do you think it means. Nd has righteousness changed between in OT times nd NT times?

I agree that we follow it because things will go well for you. But is it legally binding upon us? It would appear that with Christ, the meaning of the Mosaic Law has changed. Has righteousness changed? Not in essence, it REMAINS faithful following of God's Will as revealed to man. It utterly depends upon God's mercy. Righteous Jews were aware of this, that was not something first discovered by Paul.

It will be how we will be judged and weighted on. Lets use the CJB.

Romans 2:12-13 All who have sinned outside the framework of Torah will die outside the framework of Torah; and all who have sinned within the framework of Torah will be judged by Torah. 13 For it is not merely the hearers of Torah whom God considers righteous; rather, it is the doers of what Torah says who will be made righteous in God’s sight.

James 2:12 Keep speaking and acting like people who will be judged by a Torah which gives freedom.

James 1:25 But if a person looks closely into the perfect Torah, which gives freedom, and continues, becoming not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work it requires, then he will be blessed in what he does.

The meaning of the Torah could not have changed with Christ. Or why would Paul and James always refer back to it and its works?

Now, if one codifies rules and regulations, one can see how this COULD lead to a mentality of observing the externals without the internal conviction. The Minor Prophets like Amos are often calling the people to change the manner that they follow God: "I (God) desire mercy, not sacrifice". The Psalms also speak of God who does not desire blood - but conversion. Sacrifice is of little use if the inner self is not converted.

Hosea 6:6 For what I desire is mercy, not sacrifices, knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

This is exactly what the Epistles are largely about in the above verse. Salvation apart from having a saving relationship with God. Salvation by works was not a NT idea. But God never said to disregard the sacrifices. Love and mercy took precedence over sacrifices.

Matthew 5:23-24 So if you are offering your gift at the Temple altar and you remember there that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift where it is by the altar, and go, make peace with your brother. Then come back and offer your gift.

Now, in Christ, the ministrial priesthood has changed, the externals have changed, abrogated. As you mentioned, the Temple cult is done. The externals and the juridicial value of the Mosaic Law. But the inner sense, the essence of the law, remains. The just walk by faith.

And this is another question for this thread, why did Ezekiel spend 9 chapters speaking about the temple system again in the millennium? Will the Torah have passed, or be observed in the millennium?

By the way, I would highly recommend David Stern's "Jewish NT Commentary", if you don't already have it. Although i am Catholic and disagree with some of his interpretations on a few verses, he offers a valuable commentary on the NT from the Messianic point of view, I found it most useful.

http://www.amazon.com/Jewish-New-Te...F8&qid=1365513044&sr=1-3&keywords=david+stern

Regards

I have heard it's a good resource. I am still stuck on the non inspired version. It's the book I was reading when I became saved ironically.

 

[Ryan]

The Torah was given so Israel would be distinct amongst the nations, but in a manner glorifying God and driving the nations to worship the God of Israel. I showed you numerous passages where foreigners were welcomed into the commonwealth of Israel. Nineveh is another example of revival and repentance of a foreign nation.

hmmm.... some thoughts....

Romans 2:14 ;
When they do by *nature* the things CONTAINED in the law.... (but they aren't a law if they do otherwise.... )
So that agrees with you.

By seeing the justness of the law of Moses, compared to their own, it was expected that the Gentiles would emulate the Law. But the Jewish disobedience to that law had the opposite effect that God desired; the Israelites were often considered just "on par" with other nations.

Romans 2:24, ( Can you find the exact O.T. quote from the Hebrew KJV, I can't... )
2Samuel 12:14, Isaiah 52:5, Ezekiel 36:20

But, I would like to recall to your mind, that the period from Noah to Abraham is shared by all nations; so only part of the Torah makes Israel distinct.

Also... a small perspective issue that may/not apply; depending on your exact point.
Nineveh, the prophet said, in 40 days would be destroyed; and in roughly 40 days of years after the prophecy -- it was destroyed. That was the prophetic point of the plant given to Jonah, for God sent a worm to destroy it after the plant had brought Jonah comfort; Nineveh was pleasing to God for a day, but the repentance did not last.
God was patient with them for some 39 years more...

But even more acutely felt/shaming, though, is that Jonah ran away from prophesying to Nineveh -- for he detested them and didn't want God to show them mercy ....

In more ways than one, it wasn't the Torah which guided Jonas to Nineveh.

In the Jewish writings, extrabiblical; they suppose that the child whom Elijah brought back to life, was the same Jonah who was sent to Nineveh; So, again, Jonas is not supposed by older rabbis to actually be a Jew under the law who is traditionally associated with the repentance of Nineveh -- it's a gentile; cf: parallel idea Luke 4:25-26;
Although the name Jonah became popular in Jewish usage, for Simon called Cephas/Peter was originally named Simon bar Jonah; and also called Simon bar John. ( Perhaps John is a variation of Jonah ?, I'm not sure. )

In any event: The character's I mentioned are all figures, like Abraham, who were saved outside the Law on account of their Faith; as was Enoch, Noah, and a few others.

It's clearly evident that God continued to work with Gentiles piecemeal, in parallel with Israel; but not under the law of Moses. ( I'm not negating your other examples ).

Genesis 4 speaks about Cain and Abel offering sacrifices. Where before was that instructed or taught. God warns Cain to control himself as sin is crouching at the door. What were all the definitions of sin before that? Can we assume God gave verbal, or a written account of what sin was passed down from generation to generation? They were all saved by their faith, but you see their righteous actions at work. They heeded and responded to God's instructions at that time and were obedient. That is what Law means. It means God's instructions, not a set of judicial and criminal terminology that puts a negative connotation to it. Maybe I'll start quoting from the CJB.

God gave Sinai at that particular time for a particular people in his infinite wisdom for a particular purpose.

 

[Ryan]

Deuteronomy 4:5 “See, I have taught you statutes and judgments just as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do thus in the land where you are entering to possess it. 6 So keep and do them, for that is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes and say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ 7 For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as is the Lord our God whenever we call on Him? 8 Or what great nation is there that has statutes and judgments as righteous as this whole law which I am setting before you today?

All true, but this in no way implies that God gave the Law of Moses to anyone other than the Jews. Further, it does not challenge my assertion that, as the Leviticus text clearly asserts - the Law of Moses functions to set the nation of Israel apart from other nations.

You have not addressed the essence of my argument. The Leviticus text, if not others, clearly indicates that the Law of Moses functions, at least in part, to set the Jew apart from the Gentile.

And that is precisely why the writer of Ephesians certainly refers to the Law of Moses when he refers to the abolition of an unnamed law as effecting the unification of Jew and Gentile.

The Law of Moses was a barrier - we know this from words put in the mouth of God in Leviticus 20, if not elsewhere.

Again I will use the point, if the Sinai Covenant was only for the Jews, what makes you think the New Covenant is for you either? Yes the Law of Moses was to set Israel above the nations. But it was to allow inclusion for foreigners to worship the God of Israel.

1 kings 8 41 “Also concerning the foreigner who is not of Your people Israel, when he comes from a far country for Your name’s sake 42 (for they will hear of Your great name and Your mighty hand, and of Your outstretched arm); when he comes and prays toward this house,

But it was also to keep them protected from idolatry and being yoked with unbelievers. Would a righteous, fair, merciful, loving, forgiving Father give a set of instructions that put up a barrier in not allowing access to the Ruler of the Universe? Is that really what God is about. When he says he wishes nobody to perish, did that mean just for a select period of time, or for all eternity? Or olam.

 

[Ryan]

Deuteronomy 4:5 “See, I have taught you statutes and judgments just as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do thus in the land where you are entering to possess it. 6 So keep and do them, for that is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes and say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ 7 For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as is the Lord our God whenever we call on Him? 8 Or what great nation is there that has statutes and judgments as righteous as this whole law which I am setting before you today?

All true, but this in no way implies that God gave the Law of Moses to anyone other than the Jews. Further, it does not challenge my assertion that, as the Leviticus text clearly asserts - the Law of Moses functions to set the nation of Israel apart from other nations.

You have not addressed the essence of my argument. The Leviticus text, if not others, clearly indicates that the Law of Moses functions, at least in part, to set the Jew apart from the Gentile.

And that is precisely why the writer of Ephesians certainly refers to the Law of Moses when he refers to the abolition of an unnamed law as effecting the unification of Jew and Gentile.

The Law of Moses was a barrier - we know this from words put in the mouth of God in Leviticus 20, if not elsewhere.

In part, the Mosaic law did distinguish between Jew and Gentile; and only the Jew *had* the promise, based on a covenant, that guaranteed their blessing (and salvation/justification/bosom of Abraham) if they persisted in *faith*. The Gentile had no such guarantee before Jesus.

Prove it.

Daniel 4 34 “But at the end of that period, I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High and praised and honored Him who lives forever;

For His dominion is an everlasting dominion,
And His kingdom endures from generation to generation.
35 “All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,
But He does according to His will in the host of heaven
And among the inhabitants of earth;
And no one can ward off His hand
Or say to Him, ‘What have You done?’
36 At that time my reason returned to me. And my majesty and splendor were restored to me for the glory of my kingdom, and my counselors and my nobles began seeking me out; so I was reestablished in my sovereignty, and surpassing greatness was added to me. 37 Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise, exalt and honor the King of heaven, for all His works are true and His ways just, and He is able to humble those who walk in pride.â€

King Nebbie, a Gentile of Gentiles becoming saved and humbling himself before The Lord.

 

[Mitspa]

It looks like when folks start picking out what parts of the law they want to keep, they then get to go into the New Testament and change the very words of that book to match whatever nonsense they have made up about the law.

There is no fear of God before these people.
none!

Rom 2:17-23
Jude 1:5
THE LAW (TORAH) IS NOT OF FAITH!

 

[Mitspa]

JLB,

6 ‘None of you shall approach any blood relative of his to uncover nakedness; I am the Lord. 7 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, that is, the nakedness of your mother. She is your mother; you are not to uncover her nakedness. 8 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is your father’s nakedness. 9 The nakedness of your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether born at home or born outside, their nakedness you shall not uncover. 10 The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for their nakedness is yours. 11 The nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, born to your father, she is your sister, you shall not uncover her nakedness. 12 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is your father’s blood relative. 13 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is your mother’s blood relative. 14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother; you shall not approach his wife, she is your aunt. 15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she is your son’s wife, you shall not uncover her nakedness. 16 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness. 17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and of her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness; they are blood relatives. It is lewdness. 18 You shall not marry a woman in addition to her sister as a rival while she is alive, to uncover her nakedness.

19 ‘Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness during her menstrual impurity. 20 You shall not have intercourse with your neighbor’s wife, to be defiled with her. 21 You shall not give any of your offspring to offer them to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God; I am the Lord. 22 You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. 23 Also you shall not have intercourse with any animal to be defiled with it, nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it; it is a perversion.

(Leviticus 18:6-23 NASB)


Passed away, or not passed away?

If so, when?

how about Lev 19:3 Ye shall fear every man his mother and his father AND KEEP MY SABBATHS, I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD.

if the sabbath has been fulfilled in Christ and it is kept in the Spirit, then all the law! EVERY JOT AND TITTLE is fulfilled in CHRIST and kept in the Spirit.

HERE IS A CLUE to all you who are so attracted to animals!

KNOW YE NOT THAT THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT DWELLS WITHIN YOU?

this is the issue of you folks who look to the written code.

KNOW YE NOT?

 

[Mitspa]

Rom 2:28-29

So now we know that, as in all things the law was JUST a shadow "type" but Christ is the substance.

The circumcision was a physical requirement that only represented what was to come and is the TRUE.

a "seperated" (holy) people was only a shadow and type of the Chruch. Seperated unto God in the Spirit. FOR THOSE WHO WORSHIP GOD, MUST WORSHIP HIM IN SPIRIT.

All this jewish tradition and such is just error built upon more error! If one looks into the law and does not see Christ? They are yet in darkness.

God has always had a remnant people who seeked Him out and worshiped Him in Spirit through faith. It is pasted all over the Psalms. God told this to Elijah and Paul remembers this in Romans 11.

yea its called those who are led of the Spirit, ARE THE SONS OF GOD. there is no other.

The jew in the flesh is nothing and those who look to the written code are just in error.

 

[francisdesales]

It (Mosaic Law - FDS added) will be how we will be judged and weighted on. Lets use the CJB.

Romans 2:12-13 All who have sinned outside the framework of Torah will die outside the framework of Torah; and all who have sinned within the framework of Torah will be judged by Torah. 13 For it is not merely the hearers of Torah whom God considers righteous; rather, it is the doers of what Torah says who will be made righteous in God’s sight.

James 2:12 Keep speaking and acting like people who will be judged by a Torah which gives freedom.

James 1:25 But if a person looks closely into the perfect Torah, which gives freedom, and continues, becoming not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work it requires, then he will be blessed in what he does.

The meaning of the Torah could not have changed with Christ. Or why would Paul and James always refer back to it and its works?

I believe that "Torah" here does not mean "Mosaic Law". Torah is God's Wisdom - Judaism's interpretation at a COSMIC level. Something that has always existed. Proverbs 8, the personification of Wisdom (and John 1) is Jesus Christ. HE IS the true Torah. The Mosaic Law has been put aside as a legally binding "document", but the PRINCIPLES found within the Mosaic Law - what I am calling "Torah" - has pre-existed creation. That is the Jewish view, and I agree. I also agree that Jesus Christ has replaced this notion and clarified it, made it known. During OT times, it was ambiguous. With Christ, it has been revealed from above.

Paul and James refer back to the overriding principles found within the Mosaic Law, but these principles did not ORIGINATE with Moses. "Love your neighbor" is an idea that has no "beginning", if we consider this as the Wisdom of God personified by Jesus Christ, Whom also has no beginning.

Hosea 6:6 For what I desire is mercy, not sacrifices, knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

This is exactly what the Epistles are largely about in the above verse. Salvation apart from having a saving relationship with God. Salvation by works was not a NT idea. But God never said to disregard the sacrifices. Love and mercy took precedence over sacrifices.

Agree, God desired the Mosaic cult during OT times (a SHADOW of the good things to come - Hebrews lays all of this out) IN ADDITION to the inner conversion of the heart. THAT is the point of the sacrificial cult of Judaism before 70 AD. "Do I (God) desire blood"? Of course not, the animals and trees are all His. What God desires is a contrite heart. The sacrifice is SUPPOSED to lead to that. Now, the sacrifice has changed and there is no more need for animal sacrifices, which only was a temporary cult until the Christ came, Who is Priest AND Victim.

No, salvation is not by works. But is faith and seeking God a "work"? Does one who has this faith seek self-justification? No, "we" rely on God's mercy. The Psalms are covered with such talk.

And this is another question for this thread, why did Ezekiel spend 9 chapters speaking about the temple system again in the millennium? Will the Torah have passed, or be observed in the millennium?

I would imagine he was speaking with words that Jews would understand, but implying more a metaphorical tone.

We are in the end-times. The Temple was destroyed as a sign that its over and done.

Again, Hebrews lays out how the Aaronic priesthood has been superceded by the line of Melchezidek.

Regards