Christians, which Old Testament Laws to obey, and which to ignore?

[MJFlores]

Yes, historical interrest etc is fine.
But you are not going to use or refer to the Old Testament Laws, are you?
If so, which ones?

'Christians, which Old Testament Laws to obey, and which to ignore?'

Maybe say in passing than ignore would be right term
These would be:

The Sabbath - no longer observed
Matthew 12:1-8New International Version (NIV)

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. When the Pharisees saw this, they said to him, “Look! Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.”

He answered, “Haven’t you read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread—which was not lawful for them to do, but only for the priests. Or haven’t you read in the Law that the priests on Sabbath duty in the temple desecrate the Sabbath and yet are innocent? I tell you that something greater than the temple is here. If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”

Tithes - no longer observed
2 Corinthians 9:7 New International Version (NIV)

Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Worship Services - very important
Hebrews 10:24-27 New International Version (NIV)

And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.

Hating brother = Murderer
1 John 3:15 New International Version (NIV)

Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

Materialistic = no eternal life
1 John 2:15-17 New International Version (NIV)

Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.

Christianize celebrations = still pagan
1 Peter 4:2-4New International Version (NIV)

As a result, they do not live the rest of their earthly lives for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God. For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. They are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living, and they heap abuse on you.

There are others could not include those here.

 

[oldbadger]

Maybe say in passing than ignore would be right term
These would be:

The Sabbath - no longer observed
Matthew 12:1-8New International Version (NIV)

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. When the Pharisees saw this, they said to him, “Look! Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.”

He answered, “Haven’t you read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread—which was not lawful for them to do, but only for the priests. Or haven’t you read in the Law that the priests on Sabbath duty in the temple desecrate the Sabbath and yet are innocent? I tell you that something greater than the temple is here. If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”

‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice'
How much the Old Testament is needed!
The above sentence was, imo, the very foundation of Jesus's whole mission. And John the Baptists'.

Tithes - no longer observed

2 Corinthians 9:7 New International Version (NIV)

Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Oh..... I'm not sure about this....
ROMANS 13:6 and 7 ?

Worship Services - very important
Hebrews 10:24-27 New International Version (NIV)

And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.

Hating brother = Murderer
1 John 3:15 New International Version (NIV)

Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

Materialistic = no eternal life
1 John 2:15-17 New International Version (NIV)

Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.

Christianize celebrations = still pagan
1 Peter 4:2-4New International Version (NIV)

As a result, they do not live the rest of their earthly lives for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God. For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. They are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living, and they heap abuse on you.

There are others could not include those here.

Yes..... how much of Christianity is drawn from its prophets.....

 

[shmogie]

Irrational and hysterical...... ummm.....
Your lesson for this morning:-
(1 PETER 5:5) (COLOSSIANS 3:12) (LUKE 14:8)
(JAMES 4:10) (1 PETER 5:6)
I have been taught very well this last 24 hours.


You are an ordained priest. Why would you need a tyro to show you anything from the New Testament?
Grannies can such eggs better than kids?

[QUOTE The key is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Do you commit rape if this is what drives your behavior, no. Do you commit rape if your life is being led by the Holy Spirit ? No. A Christian is righteous by faith, not by keeping a succession of laws.

The reason why I seek to discover your God's guidance and Commands to Christians is because some like to pick up the law and drop it as they please.
Jesus did not tell you that you can do as you please. His first mission was to have the laws reinstated because so many of them protected the peasant classes, most of Israel. There was not a middle class, by the way.


That's good. You have written it down. Christians to keep the civil laws. Excellent.


This thread is about the OT laws. The OT laws are mostly about Civil and Criminal law, with a % devoted to sacrifice, about 96 of them.


God Ordains people to be his teacher, representative, a priest.
You boasted that you are ordained. Now you tell me that you are not a priest, ergo you do not take services, funerals etc. ?
I did not believe that you are an ordained priest. Christian priests don't say things like you do. And they can teach. And they are humbled by their stations.


How many marks out of 10 do you think you deserve for your teaching ability?


Jesus came to restore the old laws, which I guess does mean fulfill them, but in the way that you believe. He wanted justice for his own. Your faith is based on Paul's (and others) interpretations about that.

My point has been to discover what OT laws Christians still use and rely upon. Some Christians will still quote OT law., some won't, and some will cherry pick their way through them as suiys their purpose.
I have set out to discover more about that, and also to find out about NT guidance and Commands. Evrery NT word is sent by your God, and so cannot be questioned, I assume?

I've learned a lot and I need to thank all those Christians that have patiently and kindly advised me about my search in this matter.[/QUOTE]

Irrational and hysterical...... ummm.....
Your lesson for this morning:-
(1 PETER 5:5) (COLOSSIANS 3:12) (LUKE 14:8)
(JAMES 4:10) (1 PETER 5:6)
I have been taught very well this last 24 hours.


You are an ordained priest. Why would you need a tyro to show you anything from the New Testament?
Grannies can such eggs better than kids?

[QUOTE The key is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Do you commit rape if this is what drives your behavior, no. Do you commit rape if your life is being led by the Holy Spirit ? No. A Christian is righteous by faith, not by keeping a succession of laws.

The reason why I seek to discover your God's guidance and Commands to Christians is because some like to pick up the law and drop it as they please.
Jesus did not tell you that you can do as you please. His first mission was to have the laws reinstated because so many of them protected the peasant classes, most of Israel. There was not a middle class, by the way.


That's good. You have written it down. Christians to keep the civil laws. Excellent.


This thread is about the OT laws. The OT laws are mostly about Civil and Criminal law, with a % devoted to sacrifice, about 96 of them.


God Ordains people to be his teacher, representative, a priest.
You boasted that you are ordained. Now you tell me that you are not a priest, ergo you do not take services, funerals etc. ?
I did not believe that you are an ordained priest. Christian priests don't say things like you do. And they can teach. And they are humbled by their stations.


How many marks out of 10 do you think you deserve for your teaching ability?


Jesus came to restore the old laws, which I guess does mean fulfill them, but in the way that you believe. He wanted justice for his own. Your faith is based on Paul's (and others) interpretations about that.

My point has been to discover what OT laws Christians still use and rely upon. Some Christians will still quote OT law., some won't, and some will cherry pick their way through them as suiys their purpose.
I have set out to discover more about that, and also to find out about NT guidance and Commands. Evrery NT word is sent by your God, and so cannot be questioned, I assume?

I've learned a lot and I need to thank all those Christians that have patiently and kindly advised me about my search in this matter.[/QUOTE]
Christ's purpose was to point out the failure of the leaders of the Jewish religious establishment in relation to the law. This was an indictment of they and the law. You are hung up on the law in the OT, but there is much more than that that applies today. The prophecy's, the psalms, and many others. It is perfectly correct to quote these. Why would I believe that the OT law declaring menstruating women unclean and putting them away for a period of time ? That is part of the Torah that you say Christ came to re enforce, do you believe that is in harmony with Christ's message ? How about stoning adulterers, or executing homosexuals ? Paul makes it clear that under the new covenant these are anethema. I could go through all 600 + of the laws and identify many that no one would consider fair and Christian's don't keep. The law as written regarding atonement and sacrifice are no longer followed, under the Torah this is the only way to atone for sin and have forgiveness. Christ predicted that the Temple would be destroyed, the very center of keeping the Torah, without which the Torah could not be kept. It was destroyed in 70AD, so was Christ reaffirming old Testament law ?

 

[MJFlores]

‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice'
How much the Old Testament is needed!
The above sentence was, imo, the very foundation of Jesus's whole mission. And John the Baptists'.



Oh..... I'm not sure about this....
ROMANS 13:6 and 7 ?


Yes..... how much of Christianity is drawn from its prophets.....

OT is needed - don't throw it away!

John 5:39-40 New International Version (NIV)

You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

Tithes are no longer observed and you cited this verse? Its about paying taxes and paying debts.

Romans 13:6-7 New International Version (NIV)

This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

The prophets role were pivotal on the gospel of Christ.

Romans 1:1-3 New International Version (NIV)

Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David,

 

[oldbadger]

Christ's purpose was to point out the failure of the leaders of the Jewish religious establishment in relation to the law. This was an indictment of they and the law.

If you ask the mods to show you how to use the quote feature, then your posts will be more easy to read.

Now, to the above. No. Absolutely not.
Jesus was not indicting the law. The law was beautiful, amazing, and I will answer your questions about that which occur later in your post..... These laws were essential for the strengthening, cohesion, survival and pritection of the whole tribe. You won't find one that does not work towards one or all of these 'ends'. Jesus supported the laws, even though he showed mercy in connection with them at times.

Jesus and John the Immerser were not indicting the priesthood. Threy were acting against everything that the prieshood stodd for. Hence their actions in Baptising folks for little or nothing, rather than let them go through the fleecing money-go-round of Bed, Borad, services, Money-exchange fees, Temple head taxation, Excessive sacrificial lam charges, Priest's fees et al.

You are hung up on the law in the OT, but there is much more than that that applies today. The prophecy's, the psalms, and many others. It is perfectly correct to quote these. Why would I believe that the OT law declaring menstruating women unclean and putting them away for a period of time ? That is part of the Torah that you say Christ came to re enforce, do you believe that is in harmony with Christ's message ? How about stoning adulterers, or executing homosexuals ?

Jesus, not Christ. Yeshua BarYosef is even better. He knew Eastern Aramaic with Galilean accent, and Jesus and Christ just were not in his vocabulary.
Now, thousands of years ago there was no cure for many illnesses and deseases. Laws that are wondered at today were essential back then.
Take the shelfish law. If a large group went along thev foreshore (either fresh or saltwater) taking shellfish because they were easy to collect, the whole group and everybody who shared those meals could die /'out of the blue'... a most dreadful death.
Look up 'shellfish poison paralysis' and see what I mean. I often wonder at that kid in Capernaum, and can guess at what a miracle it looked to all when Jesus saved him. And 'll bet that Jesus said something like 'Your sin is forgiven. Sin no more'.
Sin lead to...... sickness!

Of course, any 'loose' living could transmit a sickness through the tribe in no time. I notice that nobody from other Cacaan truibes (amalek?) could be allowed to live..... this is why.

The punishments were quite dreadful, because the temptations were so strong at times.

Paul makes it clear that under the new covenant these are anethema. I could go through all 600 + of the laws and identify many that no one would consider fair and Christian's don't keep. The law as written regarding atonement and sacrifice are no longer followed, under the Torah this is the only way to atone for sin and have forgiveness.

Jesus championed 'Mercy before sacrifice', and today the 96 off sacrificial laws are over, but back then they gave the priesthood a living, strengthened cohesion and other benfits.

You won;'t find many of the old laws that are bad..... the laws that support the poor are excellent, but our world now has 8 people who own as much as half of the whole population (Oxfam survey) and the OT laws would sort out that rubbish.

Christ predicted that the Temple would be destroyed, the very center of keeping the Torah, without which the Torah could not be kept. It was destroyed in 70AD, so was Christ reaffirming old Testament law ?

Yes.... perfectly. The Temple was not there when OT law was layed down. Jesus and JtB (if he had lived) and many others were hard against the whole fiasco of how the Tremple worked.

 

[oldbadger]

OT is needed - don't throw it away!

So are many of the OT laws, and many Christians identify with that, but then they use the wrong ones., imo!

Tithes are no longer observed

and you cited this verse? Its about paying taxes and paying debts.

Romans 13:6-7 New International Version (NIV)

What do you think tithes are?
Tithes are heavily observed, and many Christian happened to use that word for the 10% Church tax, long after Paul was gone!

All Tithes are..... taxes and dues!

The Tyrian shekel and haf-shekel were the head-tax coins.
I wonder why you thought that tithes were different to taxes, dues, fees and charges? You got that wrong. Paul got it right!

 

[shmogie]

If you ask the mods to show you how to use the quote feature, then your posts will be more easy to read.

Now, to the above. No. Absolutely not.
Jesus was not indicting the law. The law was beautiful, amazing, and I will answer your questions about that which occur later in your post..... These laws were essential for the strengthening, cohesion, survival and pritection of the whole tribe. You won't find one that does not work towards one or all of these 'ends'. Jesus supported the laws, even though he showed mercy in connection with them at times.

Jesus and John the Immerser were not indicting the priesthood. Threy were acting against everything that the prieshood stodd for. Hence their actions in Baptising folks for little or nothing, rather than let them go through the fleecing money-go-round of Bed, Borad, services, Money-exchange fees, Temple head taxation, Excessive sacrificial lam charges, Priest's fees et al.


Jesus, not Christ. Yeshua BarYosef is even better. He knew Eastern Aramaic with Galilean accent, and Jesus and Christ just were not in his vocabulary.
Now, thousands of years ago there was no cure for many illnesses and deseases. Laws that are wondered at today were essential back then.
Take the shelfish law. If a large group went along thev foreshore (either fresh or saltwater) taking shellfish because they were easy to collect, the whole group and everybody who shared those meals could die /'out of the blue'... a most dreadful death.
Look up 'shellfish poison paralysis' and see what I mean. I often wonder at that kid in Capernaum, and can guess at what a miracle it looked to all when Jesus saved him. And 'll bet that Jesus said something like 'Your sin is forgiven. Sin no more'.
Sin lead to...... sickness!

Of course, any 'loose' living could transmit a sickness through the tribe in no time. I notice that nobody from other Cacaan truibes (amalek?) could be allowed to live..... this is why.

The punishments were quite dreadful, because the temptations were so strong at times.


Jesus championed 'Mercy before sacrifice', and today the 96 off sacrificial laws are over, but back then they gave the priesthood a living, strengthened cohesion and other benfits.

You won;'t find many of the old laws that are bad..... the laws that support the poor are excellent, but our world now has 8 people who own as much as half of the whole population (Oxfam survey) and the OT laws would sort out that rubbish.


Yes.... perfectly. The Temple was not there when OT law was layed down. Jesus and JtB (if he had lived) and many others were hard against the whole fiasco of how the Tremple worked.

Actually the temple did exist in a form in the ark of the Covenant and the tent temple structures, which were incorporated in the Temple after the ark was lost. Without the sacrifice for atonement under the first Covenant no one could ever be forgiven for sin, period, they would die in their sins, the mechanism for atonement and forgiveness as given in the law ceased to exist. The most important part of the law could not be kept, there was no priesthood, no sacrifices, no atonement. So, anyone who proclaims the first covenant as binding must also proclaim they aren't keeping it, (The Christ said if you offend in one, you offend in all), and further proclaim they cannot by the law have atonement or forgiveness. So, as a keeper of these beautiful laws, you feel you can substitute your judgement for Gods as to the dietary laws, I read no where in the Torah that they would ever change, so if you don't keep them you don't keep any of the law. You say that the 96 sacrificial laws are over, tell me where in the Torah do you get that, or, if Christ came to reaffirm the Torah, where did he say that ? You can't pick and choose, you can't delete without authority, the law is the law is the law. So, anyone who doesn't keep the Torah exactly as written, all of it, is not keeping any of it, period. Christ is the Koine Greek word for Messiah. The NT was written in Koine Greek, He was and is the Messiah, therefore Christ is more than appropriate.

 

[oldbadger]

Actually the temple did exist in a form in the ark of the Covenant and the tent temple structures, which were incorporated in the Temple after the ark was lost.

Actually, the Temple was the Temple, and the sanctuary was the sanctuary.

Without the sacrifice for atonement under the first Covenant no one could ever be forgiven for sin, period, they would die in their sins, the mechanism for atonement and forgiveness as given in the law ceased to exist. The most important part of the law could not be kept, there was no priesthood, no sacrifices, no atonement. So, anyone who proclaims the first covenant as binding must also proclaim they aren't keeping it, (The Christ said if you offend in one, you offend in all), and further proclaim they cannot by the law have atonement or forgiveness.

Both John tB and Jesus were offering Immersion in water for the Remission of sins, so their position on all this was clear as day.

So, as a keeper of these beautiful laws, you feel you can substitute your judgement for Gods as to the dietary laws, I read no where in the Torah that they would ever change, so if you don't keep them you don't keep any of the law.

It's not what I would keep, it's about what you, a Christian would keep, and you have told me that they are all dead and gone. That's all I need to know.

You say that the 96 sacrificial laws are over, tell me where in the Torah do you get that, or, if Christ came to reaffirm the Torah, where did he say that ?

Mercy before sacrifice! plus his actions.
Do you remember what he did? he demonstrated and picketed in the Temple two days running.

You can't pick and choose, you can't delete without authority, the law is the law is the law.

Christians cherry-pick rather badly, imo.

Christ is the Koine Greek word for Messiah. The NT was written in Koine Greek, He was and is the Messiah, therefore Christ is more than appropriate.

I think he would be rather cross, as would Cephas and several others, who would no doubt prefer to be called by their own names.
But that's my opinion.

 

[meghanwaterlillies]

Maybe say in passing than ignore would be right term
These would be:

The Sabbath - no longer observed
Matthew 12:1-8New International Version (NIV)

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. When the Pharisees saw this, they said to him, “Look! Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.”

He answered, “Haven’t you read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread—which was not lawful for them to do, but only for the priests. Or haven’t you read in the Law that the priests on Sabbath duty in the temple desecrate the Sabbath and yet are innocent? I tell you that something greater than the temple is here. If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”

Tithes - no longer observed
2 Corinthians 9:7 New International Version (NIV)

Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Worship Services - very important
Hebrews 10:24-27 New International Version (NIV)

And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.

Hating brother = Murderer
1 John 3:15 New International Version (NIV)

Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

Materialistic = no eternal life
1 John 2:15-17 New International Version (NIV)

Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.

Christianize celebrations = still pagan
1 Peter 4:2-4New International Version (NIV)

As a result, they do not live the rest of their earthly lives for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God. For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. They are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living, and they heap abuse on you.

There are others could not include those here.

I need to tell you something. If a lamb survives this when other did it anyways do these laws fall from givers mouth?

 

[meghanwaterlillies]

I have met unsilenced of the lambs before and they stayed to finish what the liar started.

 

[shmogie]

Actually, the Temple was the Temple, and the sanctuary was the sanctuary.


Both John tB and Jesus were offering Immersion in water for the Remission of sins, so their position on all this was clear as day.


It's not what I would keep, it's about what you, a Christian would keep, and you have told me that they are all dead and gone. That's all I need to know.


Mercy before sacrifice! plus his actions.
Do you remember what he did? he demonstrated and picketed in the Temple two days running.



Christians cherry-pick rather badly, imo.


I think he would be rather cross, as would Cephas and several others, who would no doubt prefer to be called by their own names.
But that's my opinion.

If they were using baptism as the atonement and sacrifice for sin, they were in violation of the Torah. UNLESS they knew the Torah, the entire Torah was to be very soon obsolete. Baptism for Christians represents the death and burial of Christ, and his resurrection in the life of the person being baptized, This includes Christ's imputed perfect life, His atonement, and His forgiveness of sin. None of this is found in the Torah. The most Holy place, where God dwelled with Israel was found in the Temple.

 

[oldbadger]

If they were using baptism as the atonement and sacrifice for sin, they were in violation of the Torah.

So now you know why Antipas had to send out a force to arrest them.

UNLESS they knew the Torah, the entire Torah was to be very soon obsolete.

They actually wanted the Torah ti be re-instated in full!

Baptism for Christians represents the death and burial of Christ, and his resurrection in the life of the person being baptized, This includes Christ's imputed perfect life, His atonement, and His forgiveness of sin.

Interesting but irrelevant to this thread.

None of this is found in the Torah. The most Holy place, where God dwelled with Israel was found in the Temple.

....We are discussing the Christian Laws and so far all but 9 of the OT laws are finished, over, dead..... for Christians at least.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Christ did not do away with the Law and teachings of the Prophets - he fulfilled it.

What does that mean? How can a law be fulfilled? I'm not aware that fulfilling is something that can be done to a law. A law can be written, repealed, upheld, broken, interpreted, obeyed, passed, etc..

But it cannot be eaten, sat upon, or fulfilled. Some concepts simply don't apply. The sentences are semantically malformed - a category error.

Promises are fulfilled, hopes and dreams can fulfilled, and prophecies can be fulfilled.

But not laws. They just going on until they expire if they have an expiration date, are repealed by a legislature, or are overturned by a court. Did Jesus repeal those laws? If so, why call it fulfilling them?

Think about what the words would mean if applied to the laws you presently live under. If you're American, those might include the requirement to file a tax return or extension by every April 15th, or to not exceed 65 mph on a particular stretch of highway. Now you awaken one morning to read that somebody fulfilled those laws. What happened? Who did what?

My point is that the phrase that laws were fulfilled is indistinct language that actually says nothing clearly. A semantically (albeit not doctrinally) correct statement might be, "The prophecy that Jesus would rescind the old law was fulfilled when Jesus came to earth and declared it all null and void"

What do you think? What exactly does fulfilling a law mean?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

It's impossible to figure out what the scriptures are about unless God is involved.

Not for me. What's the hard part? Sometimes, scripture is vague or ambiguous, in which case the words have no clear meaning. Poetry and song lyrics can be deliberately vague to allow each reader or listener to bring his own interpretation to the matter - a sort of verbal Rorschach test. Much of the Bible is vague in this sense.

But in other places, the language is clearer. There is only one meaning that can reasonably be assigned to the words, such as the story of Noah. It's pretty straightforward to understand. It's significance might be debatable, but the words as written aren't too cryptic.

Assuming God is involved when you read scripture,but not when I do, what would we expect the differences in those two processes to be? Why would you get any more out of it than I would?

You might suggest that God is helping you understand things I can't see, things not in the words. Is that it?

 

[shmogie]

What does that mean? How can a law be fulfilled? I'm not aware that fulfilling is something that can be done to a law. A law can be written, repealed, upheld, broken, interpreted, obeyed, passed, etc..

But it cannot be eaten, sat upon, or fulfilled. Some concepts simply don't apply. The sentences are semantically malformed - a category error.

Promises are fulfilled, hopes and dreams can fulfilled, and prophecies can be fulfilled.

But not laws. They just going on until they expire if they have an expiration date, are repealed by a legislature, or are overturned by a court. Did Jesus repeal those laws? If so, why call it fulfilling them?

Think about what the words would mean if applied to the laws you presently live under. If you're American, those might include the requirement to file a tax return or extension by every April 15th, or to not exceed 65 mph on a particular stretch of highway. Now you awaken one morning to read that somebody fulfilled those laws. What happened? Who did what?

My point is that the phrase that laws were fulfilled is indistinct language that actually says nothing clearly. A semantically (albeit not doctrinally) correct statement might be, "The prophecy that Jesus would rescind the old law was fulfilled when Jesus came to earth and declared it all null and void"
The OT laws were terms of a contract, quid pro quo. The contract, covenant, lays out specific responsibilities for the parties of the contract. The laws were part of these responsibilities for Israel. Contracts are fulfilled all the time, and once fulfilled are no longer binding, nor can be. If I contract to build a building, and complete it, the contract is fulfilled. Christ said he came to fulfill the law, he is it's total fulfillment. He said he came to bring about his kingdom, not the old theocratic nation temporarily given by God, but the ultimate Spiritual Kingdom, a new , covenant based covenant was fulfilled, on faith, not doing. When the temporary contract of the first contract was fulfilled, another took it's place
What do you think? What exactly does fulfilling a law mean?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

If there is no written code then do unto others is not a law either. Yet you would be wise to do it. Perhaps the difference is in the nature of law. Law is enforced by punishment, but doing good is rewarded. And the law was never intended to prevent anyone from doing good. So you may do good even without a law, and to "do unto others" is good.

Wouldn't it be nice if that were true, but far too often, it simply is not -- which in my mind leads me inevitably towards my atheism. I know far too many stories of very real human beings stopping to "do good" (for example after a car accident on the highway, or in a house-fire, or trying to help the victim of a mugging) who, for their pains have lost their own lives. Doing good isn't always rewarded -- and only those who believe in the bizarre notion of Hell can ever suppose that punishment is always meted out for those who offend "the law." In fact, far too many get away with it altogether. Just another evidence against the idea of a just and omnipotent being, to me.

 

[shmogie]

You are confusing the concept of civil laws with those that are part of a contract. The covenant (contract) with Israel was based upon quid pro quo responsibilities for both parties. The law was part of these responsibilities. Contracts ( covenants) are fulfilled all the time. If I agree to the terms of a contract to build a house, and do so, the contract is fulfilled. Therefore fulfilled is the most precise word to use for what occurred. The first covenant, including the laws was fulfilled, and a second covenant was instituted. The first covenant was based upon doing, the second is based upon faith. God instituted the first covenant laws, and he fulfilled them.The laws were temporary and fulfilled. They no longer apply. The new covenant does

 

[Ron Hackel]

shmogie

Consider that you are not using the right laws in your premise. The law that Jesus fulfilled was the law of love-Ten Commandments. God gave us the wine analogy to understand what was happening about revealing his character. He compared Israel to a vineyard and said they never produced good grapes. He then said he took the vine out of Egypt in Psalm 80:8 and told the vines fate in verse 16 and who would fulfill the covenant in verse 17 which is verified by Jesus in John 15:1. If you look at the second covenant the new results wound be that everyone would know God-His character. If you study the beginnings of the word atonement it started simply as the word "one". Two people would have a difference of opinion and a third party would "one" them. They would be made one in thought. It then evolved into "at one". same meaning but different expression. Over the centuries Satan has been able to get mankind to combine the two words and give it a legal meaning which was never intended. Our relationship with God is supposed to be like a marriage covenant-one in thought. That is why he likens our relationship to a groom and his bride.

Jesus made an atonement at the cross not by paying some kind of penalty but by showing the depths of his love for creation. He would allow us to spit on him, curse him, torture and even kill him and all he would do is say, I love you.

Think of the lie that Satan promulgated. We have a God of agape love (unconditional love) yet Satan has gotten us to believe He would kill His creation for eating a piece of fruit. Your theology was not the theology of the early church. It all started with a guilt ridden man named Augustine. A man that was so sick in his head that he would declare that unbaptized babies were to go to hell for eternity. The second man, that allowed his thoughts to become the law of the land, was emperor Justinian. He tried to railroad this thought of eternal damnation through the church council but failed because it is not scriptural. He did have one delegate that sided with him in the vote however. Several years later he would have the sitting bishop of Rome removed and install the man who sided with him. He also at that time closed all the teaching centers on theology and declared Rome as the ONLY authority on religious matters in the empire. Rome has used the teachings of Augustine as their template. How a few people can completely change history. As God said:

JEREMIAH 31 : 29 "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge."

Simply because lies have been handed down for centuries does not make it truth.

 

[Hawkins]

Christians, which Old Testament Laws to obey, and which to ignore?
How were some O.T. laws dropped, and others kept?
A few Christians can be self-righteously judgemental about the lives, feelings, cultures, sexualities and beliefs of others.
Exactly what laws are within the New-Covenant, and which others 'repealed'?

No law is dropped. The Law we are talking about usually refers to the Mosaic Law which comes which a covenant signing off for the Jews. The covenant covers only the Jews who usually do circumcision on the 8th day of birth. They won't apply to gentiles. However, covenants may have a set of core commandments applicable to all covenants alike.

Matthew 19:18-19 (NIV2011)
18 “Which ones?” he inquired. Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony,
19 honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”

Here Jesus doesn't mean to skip the Sabbath. The verses mean to say that the named commandments are still valid in the New Covenant.

Practically however, early Christians still practice certain Jewish customs due to the fact that especially in the Palestine area, Christians are a mixture of Jews and gentiles. Thus if certain Jewish customs are not respected, the Jews will be very much offended. One example is that women should cover their hair inside the church. Even Paul specifies that this should be enforced. Till the time when churches are no longer mixtures of Jews and gentiles, this custom is thus gone away.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You are confusing the concept of civil laws with those that are part of a contract. The covenant (contract) with Israel was based upon quid pro quo responsibilities for both parties. The law was part of these responsibilities. Contracts ( covenants) are fulfilled all the time. If I agree to the terms of a contract to build a house, and do so, the contract is fulfilled. Therefore fulfilled is the most precise word to use for what occurred. The first covenant, including the laws was fulfilled, and a second covenant was instituted. The first covenant was based upon doing, the second is based upon faith. God instituted the first covenant laws, and he fulfilled them.The laws were temporary and fulfilled. They no longer apply. The new covenant does

So what is the contract, and how was it fulfilled? Who agreed to do what, and how was it determined when it was over? To simply call it fulfilled and move would have to be agreed upon by both parties in the case of a contract.

The covenant,or contract as you called it, had no expiration date to my knowledge, and I don't recall man being consulted either about entering into or revising the contract.

Besides, we were not told that a contract or covenant had been fulfilled, but that the Old Testament law itself had been fulfilled. Remember? It was not destroyed, just fulfilled. How can a law be fulfilled? That was the question.