Should Christians follow the Law?

[sandy whitelinger]

Sandy,, that's because you are a false teacher and the truth is something that doesn't agree with you. So,, you like to muddy up the waters as much as possible and bring in confusion. God is not the author of confusion. The Devil is the author of confusion. People like you try to make the scriptures so confusing that you can then say,, Nobody can know the truth. And many quit searching for it.

I've noticed your back-handed comments as well. They tell me about your character. Thanks.

It's more like my therapist says to flee from these types of conversations.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Thanks for doing that for me! I am looking it over, and perhaps someone else will find it interesting as well.

On the side: Romans 2:14 Paul seems to allude to a future fulfilment of Jeremiah 31:33, and I think he indicates this takes place in the future because he says this will happen at the time that the secrets of all hearts are revealed (verse 2:16). Its interesting to me, because many people think that Christianity presumes this has already been fulfilled. Hebrews refers several times to a 'New covenant' alluding plainly to Jeremiah 31 and surrounding passages. There is another allusion to Jeremiah 31 in the gospels that is less clear. Like many things under discussion here its super debatable when Jeremiah 31 is fulfilled, but I mention it since you might find it interesting. I think its one of the 'Quasi-fulfilled' items -- likes fulfilled in the sense that we expect it to happen in the future, kind of like the way all the messianic prophecies are not visibly fulfilled at this time but are fulfilled in christ.

The idea of 'Natural law' makes sense to me (first guess). First it makes sense because the word 'Torah' is not strictly equivalent to the English word 'Law' and has the idea of natural order in it or protocol or physics. In other words if you look in a clock there is a way that its supposed to work. You have to set it and wind it. Secondly it makes sense, because there obviously is a natural order to the world. Paul himself says that anything that can be known about God can be seen in nature -- hence nature is an orderly system that reflects Torah. I think some would consider the laws of Mathematics to be Torah. The point is that Torah is not always referring to the laws Moses gives. This adds weight to the argument that Paul is using 'Law' in an open sense rather than always referring to Moses laws. Therefore context matters and helps, and I can see why you would think of Paul referring to 'Natural law'.

You refer to three kinds of 'Law': Natural, Mosaic and Faith. I think there are more in existence, counting physics and food recipes, dinner etiquette and things like that, but you are talking about Romans and the law sets mentioned in Romans. Three is a lot simpler than seven or ten, so if you can get it down to three in Romans that's nice at least for finding our feet. Even if there are 4 or 5 or 7 it may helpful to say 'Usually Romans is speaking of 3 things when it talks about Law'. For sake of discussion I think 3 is a reasonable number to start with.

My understanding of faith is that it is not well represented to me usually by most people. There is an unhealthy emphasis 'Out there' to teach people to believe and not do much, and it collapses Christianity into a fake miracle industry. I don't like that and don't consider that to have any relation to faith. I have in the past had a lot emphasis given to me about believing, that I should believe and believe and believe. Belief was everything, but I found it was not everything and also not enough. I found over time that believing is not faith and is just a part of faith. Part of this was through looking at concordances, but part of it was reading the Torah itself, the gospels, Jesus comments, and the various letters of the NT. Its impossible to mistake simply belief and faith. The fact that you have gleaned that 'Faith' is a law in Romans implies that faith is an entire system or way of doing things. You live according to a principle or principles and that is faith. You don't just believe in a particular way.

But what is the result of all of this on the original topic of whether Christians should obey Torah? Why does Paul in 3:28 say "For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law."(NIV) We come full circle back to what we were discussing.

A thoughtful reply and to the point at the end. Thank you.

My understanding of Romans is that Paul teaches that sin dwells in the flesh. A person who has faith in Christ is crucified with Him (symbolically) and freed from the bondage to the flesh, therefore, he also teaches that we are freed from the Mosaic Law and are reborn under the law of faith. We are to bring our flesh into submission through our minds which are in the Spirit of Christ.

 

[Brickjectivity]

My understanding of Romans is that Paul teaches that sin dwells in the flesh. A person who has faith in Christ is crucified with Him (symbolically) and freed from the bondage to the flesh, therefore, he also teaches that we are freed from the Mosaic Law and are reborn under the law of faith. We are to bring our flesh into submission through our minds which are in the Spirit of Christ.

My thoughts are that yes that does appear to be Paul's opinion, his line of reasoning culminating in chapter 8 of Romans. Hebrews also addresses the same thing with a similar argument. Should Christians accept Paul's idea? Looking further in chapter 9 he accuses those of failure who approach righteousness through the law. Is he correct? He says they 'Fail' because they pursue works instead of faith, and he claims this is the 'Stumbling stone'. (That is a strange claim for a Jew to make and goes far beyond Jesus dislike for traditions.) Has he really correctly identified the stumbling stone? I tend to think the 'Stumbling stone' is arrogance, so I don't quite take his words as a argument so much as an accusation. Is the law really as weak as he claims? Is he suggesting that Jews shouldn't keep torah or only gentiles? Also, merely because he says something doesn't make it so, so we are still discussing whether Christians ought to keep Torah or not. We have identified Paul's opinion at least where gentiles are concerned.

 

[2ndpillar]

OK, so you can choose which ones are telling the truth and which are lying. You do understand that at the time of Jeremiah, no one was writing the talmud, right? The scribes were writing down untruths observable in the world ("peace" when there was no peace). He says that they will be consumed by God so that by the time of the writers of the talmud, they couldn't possibly exist. Well argued.

Dear ros,
I have to admit, I am not sure what you just said. The writings of Jeremiah are not of Jeremiah, they are the Spirit of Revelation/prophecy. Jeremiah writes as a prophet, not as a man. His writings were with respect to the present, past, and future. "My people" still call themselves "wise" (Jer 8:7-8) to this day, yet "everyone practices deceit" (Jer 8:10). That comes to an end with respect to the sayings of the prophet Zechariah 14:21, "And there will no longer be a Canaanite/merchant, in the house of the Lord of hosts in that day."

 

[rosends]

Dear ros,
I have to admit, I am not sure what you just said. The writings of Jeremiah are not of Jeremiah, they are the Spirit of Revelation/prophecy. Jeremiah writes as a prophet, not as a man. His writings were with respect to the present, past, and future. "My people" still call themselves "wise" (Jer 8:7-8) to this day, yet "everyone practices deceit" (Jer 8:10). That comes to an end with respect to the sayings of the prophet Zechariah 14:21, "And there will no longer be a Canaanite/merchant, in the house of the Lord of hosts in that day."

I'm not sure what point you are making. You are trusting the writing of Jeremiah because you claim it is from the prophecy, but you don't trust what others write because Jeremiah calls them liars. And what if Jeremiah was lying. How do YOU know? Because you arbitrarily trust? Or because the Jewish scribes who established the canon and included Jeremiah say so, and what if THEY are lying. Meanwhile, you continue to ignore all the rest of the facts surrounding what Jeremiah actually said and why, and who the scribes were and why Jeremiah said what he said. Keep dancing.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

How was it intended for jews.
Leviticus 24:22 You shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God.
The same law applies to foreigners as well as jews.

Also Leviticus 19:10; Leviticus 19:33-34 is about someone foreign in ancient Israel.
The temporary Constitution of the Mosaic Law covenant or contract was made only between God and the nation of ancient Israel.
Jesus fulfilled that old temporary law - Romans 10:4
Since Pentecost one is a Jew by spirit or a ' spiritual Jew ' aka Christian - Romans 2:28-29
God's old nation was abandoned by God - Matthew 23:38
God's now nation is now a ' spiritual nation ' with No borders or boundaries found on any map - Galatians 4:26; 6:16; 1 Peter 2:9; 1 Peter 2:5
Through the grace of God the fleshly Israel of today exists as a national group.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The written Law, yes. Then again, Jesus was a Jew and Christians aint.

The Jewish people in modern-day fleshly Israel who have converted to Christian are still Jews by birth, but now are associated as ' spiritual Jews '(Christians ) - Romans 2:28-29

Jesus did Not make a new contract with Jews who were Not following him - Luke 22:28-30
Since Pentecost, Not only Jews can become Christians, but so can people of the nations convert - Acts of the Apostles 10:1; Acts of the Apostles 10:28-31

 

[roger1440]

The Jewish people in modern-day fleshly Israel who have converted to Christian are still Jews by birth, but now are associated as ' spiritual Jews '(Christians ) - Romans 2:28-29

Jesus did Not make a new contract with Jews who were Not following him - Luke 22:28-30
Since Pentecost, Not only Jews can become Christians, but so can people of the nations convert - Acts of the Apostles 10:1; Acts of the Apostles 10:28-31

What you wrote has nothing to do with the comment I made

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I follow the Law of Spirit, which Christ revealed, not some old tribal codes that have nothing to do with us today and do not provide spiritual liberation and atonement with God.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

My thoughts are that yes that does appear to be Paul's opinion, his line of reasoning culminating in chapter 8 of Romans. Hebrews also addresses the same thing with a similar argument. Should Christians accept Paul's idea? Looking further in chapter 9 he accuses those of failure who approach righteousness through the law. Is he correct? He says they 'Fail' because they pursue works instead of faith, and he claims this is the 'Stumbling stone'. (That is a strange claim for a Jew to make and goes far beyond Jesus dislike for traditions.) Has he really correctly identified the stumbling stone? I tend to think the 'Stumbling stone' is arrogance, so I don't quite take his words as a argument so much as an accusation. Is the law really as weak as he claims? Is he suggesting that Jews shouldn't keep torah or only gentiles? Also, merely because he says something doesn't make it so, so we are still discussing whether Christians ought to keep Torah or not. We have identified Paul's opinion at least where gentiles are concerned.

If a Christian believes Scripture then Paul was instructed by God as were the other authors, so I would say we follow Paul's teaching. Paul made it clear through chapter 8 that righteousness does not come by the Law. That means that the law of righteousness pertains to the law of faith.

 

[Brickjectivity]

If a Christian believes Scripture then Paul was instructed by God as were the other authors, so I would say we follow Paul's teaching. Paul made it clear through chapter 8 that righteousness does not come by the Law. That means that the law of righteousness pertains to the law of faith.

It appears, moving on to chapters 10 & 11, that Paul considers Israel to consist of a mixture of those who are not elect and those who are elect. He mentions the 'Remnant' as the elect and the rest as not. Onward in chapter 14 he discusses some particular practices. He refers those whose faith is 'Weak' as the ones who only eat vegetables, but its not clear if Jews are present in the group he is writing to. I get the impression that he is writing to a bunch of gentiles, some of whom feel they should follow particular practices. I do not think he is writing to Jews. He says gentile Christians are a wild stock that has been graphed onto the Jews natural vine. Overall I think he is not saying that Torah is cancelled for Jews but does not think Torah is necessary for gentile Christians at all, not even a little bit.

 

[Mr. Beebe]

but does not think Torah is necessary for gentile Christians at all, not even a little bit.

Are you sure you realize what you are saying? You are claiming that "Gentile" converts, may ignore the 10 Commandments. Which means we can rape and murder and lust and covet and steal, dishonor both God and our parents,, and then worship idols,, and still claim the promises of Salvation as well as being a witness for Jesus???? Amazing! Wasn't it Jesus that said ,,"why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord', and not do as I tell you.?" Luke 6:46.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Are you sure you realize what you are saying? You are claiming that "Gentile" converts, may ignore the 10 Commandments. Which means we can rape and murder and lust and covet and steal, dishonor both God and our parents,, and then worship idols,, and still claim the promises of Salvation as well as being a witness for Jesus???? Amazing! Wasn't it Jesus that said ,,"why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord', and not do as I tell you.?" Luke 6:46.

Actually I was having a discussion with someone about what I think Paul is talking about. A discussion is when two people talk about something without treating each other like crap. We were discussing.

 

[Mr. Beebe]

Actually I was having a discussion with someone about what I think Paul is talking about. A discussion is when two people talk about something without treating each other like crap. We were discussing.

I haven't treated anybody like crap. I just pointed out your lack of thought. So, if you're offended, it's because you chose to be offended. Have a nice day.

 

[metis]

Actually I was having a discussion with someone about what I think Paul is talking about. A discussion is when two people talk about something without treating each other like crap. We were discussing.

Ya, I just ran into the same problem with the person you're responding to above.

 

[NathanShepard8888]

I enjoy Mr. Beebe posting in my thread.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

It appears, moving on to chapters 10 & 11, that Paul considers Israel to consist of a mixture of those who are not elect and those who are elect. He mentions the 'Remnant' as the elect and the rest as not. Onward in chapter 14 he discusses some particular practices. He refers those whose faith is 'Weak' as the ones who only eat vegetables, but its not clear if Jews are present in the group he is writing to. I get the impression that he is writing to a bunch of gentiles, some of whom feel they should follow particular practices. I do not think he is writing to Jews. He says gentile Christians are a wild stock that has been graphed onto the Jews natural vine. Overall I think he is not saying that Torah is cancelled for Jews but does not think Torah is necessary for gentile Christians at all, not even a little bit.

You are getting into some really complicated areas here; elect, grafted in etc. I'll stick to matters of the law since that's the OP. I get no sense from preceding chapters that anything changes in matters of natural law, Mosaic Law or the law of faith than I've previously stated. Natural law is simple and clear. God will condemn those who make their own laws as well as followers of Mosaic Law. There is no redemption under either according to Paul. It makes no difference whether Jew or Gentile. Redemption comes through Christ and the law of faith.

The analogy of the husband and wife in chapter 7 seems to negate the Mosaic Law for the Jewish Christian by stating that when the husband dies the wife is free. The analogy seems to put the Law as the Husband and the believer as the wife. Keep in mind that Paul also states that the Law is a matter that pertains to the sin of the flesh and since a believer is crucified with Christ their flesh is symbolically dead which frees them from the Law of Moses.

Now before the trumpeters sound off about this new-found freedom to break commandment keep in mind that the believer is still under a law, it's just not the Mosaic Law or natural law.

 

[12jtartar]

Your righteousness is righteousness forever; and your law is true. Psalm 119:142

For my hope is in your rules. Psalms 119:43

So shall I keep Your law continually, forever and ever. And I will walk at liberty, for I seek your precepts. Psalms 119:44-45

Mainstream doctrine says God freed us from freedom.

The law of Yahweh is perfect, reviving the soul; Psalms 19:7

Can perfect be made more perfect? Mainstream doctrine teaches Gods law changed.

There is a reason God says I am against the Shepherds in the last days.

Thus says Yahweh "Behold, I am against the Shepherds, and will require My flock at their hand."
Ezekiel 34:10

For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to GOD, for it does not submit to God's law. Romans 8:7

And I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statues and be careful to obey my rules. Ezekiel 37:38.

Yeshua is the Word in the flesh John 1:14. The Word of God Revelation 29:13.The same forever. Revelation 19:13 The Word does not change. Isaiah 40:8That means he cannot change. Yeshua is a walking Bible.

Yeshua said, "You have a fine of setting aside the commandments of God in order to observe your own traditions. For Moses said..." Mark 7:8

Yeshua said it is wrong to nullify what Moses wrote. He taught obedience to what Moses wrote. Is what was right now wrong. Is what was wrong now right?

Yeshua said "Has not Moses given you the law. Yet not one of you keeps the law." John 7:19

Yeshua said, "The teachers of the law sit in Moses seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. Matthew 23:2

Yeshua said, "Do not think I came to abolish the law or the prophets. I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you until heaven and earth pass away not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one on the least of the commandments and teaches others to do the same shall be called the least. Matthew 5:17

Not everyone who says to me Lord, Lord shall enter the kingdom of heaven but he who does the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me in that day "Lord, Lord have we not prophesied in your name cast out demons in your name and dine many wonders in your name?" And then I will declare to them, " I never knew you; depart from me you who practice lawlessness. Matthew 7:1

For if we sin willfully after we have received knowledge of the truth there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins but a certwin fearful expectation of judgment and firey indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has re ejected Moses law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Hebrew's 10:26

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

For as the body without the spirit is dead so faith without works is dead also. James 2:26

NathanShepard8888,
The Mosaic Law Covenant was an interim, De Bene Esse Covenant, never meant to be forever. Jeremiah wrote about The New Covenant around 600 years before Jesus was born on earth, Jeremiah 31:31-34.
The Bible tells us that Jesus instituted this New Covenant on the night before his death, Luke 22:14-20, 1Corinthians 11:23-26. The Mosaic Law Covenant was a kind of type leading to Jesus. Many of the things that were in the Old Law Covenant were symbols of what Jesus would do for the people. The Sacrifice of Jesus's life was the most important part of the Covenants, symbolized by the animal sacrifices of tha Mosaic Covenant. Under the Old Covenant these sacrifices would continue forever!! This is one of the very important things that Jesus came to earth for, to put away the Old Covenant, so that after Jesus' sacrifice, those animal sacrifices would cease, Hebrews 7:11,12,23,24,27. Jesus came to earth with a body to use as a sacrifice for everyone who would have faith in him, Heb 10:1-10. Notice, the law was. Shadow of things to come, but the real thing was Jesus. The Law Covenant was like a tutor, Galatians 3:22-25.
Jesus fulfilled the Law Covenant, and that ended the Mosaic Law Covenan, at Jesus' death, Colossians 1:21-23, 2:13,14. Jesus said that no one obeyed the Covenant when he was on earth, John 7:19. Peter said that the Jews could not obey the Mosaic Law Covenant, Acts 15:5-11.
Everyone who was under the Mosaic Law Covenant was under a CURSE, because no one could obey the whole law perfectly, and if you broke one commandment you have broken the whole Covenant, James 2:10. Consider Galatians 3:10-14. Jesus used his own body as a sacrifice to save people from the curse of the Law Covenant, which condemned to death all under it, Romans 6:23. The Law need with Jesus death, Romans 3:20-25, 26-28, 7:6. If you consider 2Corinthians chapter 3:6-16, tells us about the much greater Covenant that Jesus instituted, that the Jews were blinded as if that had a veil over their eyes, but if they turn to God the veil is removed, 2Corinthians 4:3,4.
The Mosaic Law Covenant was instituted on the blood of goats and Bulls, Hebrews 9:15-20. The New Covenant was instituted on the blood of Jesus, Hebrews 9:23-26. Which one do you think that God would look on with the most approval???
There are other things that make the New Covenant better, Hebrews 10:14, made all who confessed Jesus were considered PERFECT FOREVER, and 16-18, where no sins are charged against those who believe in and follow Jesus.
Another point, if you want to stay under the Mosaic Law Covenant you are thinking that Jesus sacrifice was of no benefit to you, Galatians 2:20,21. Even more important is Hebrews 10:28,29.
Much more is written about the Mosaic Law Covenant and the better Covenant that superseded it, at Hebrews 8:6-13.

 

[NathanShepard8888]

Every person who practices sin commits an act of lawlessness: and sin is lawlessness. 1 John 3.4

 

[NathanShepard8888]

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.18For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.19Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.20 Matthew 5.17

Jesus is saying the law will always be, even up to heaven and earth passing away.