Where do you draw the line at adherence to OT laws vs what it says in the NT?

[Desert Snake]

In the NT, we have various verses that literally decry the laws of the OT, the Torah laws. If you adhere to the OT laws,//which ones do you adhere to, do you think they are exempt from the NT criticism// how do you square this with the statements that directly oppose this sort of thinking? I tend to never get 'real' answers to questions like this. Succinct and honest answers would be appreciated, such as 'I don't believe the NT verses etc. This thread is not about the existence of these verses, if need be I will provide some, but it's more about people who already know these verses exist, but don't adhere to them.

 

[Parsimony]

The way I tend to think about it is to start with a clean slate: assume that the old laws are obsolete unless New Testament teaching reasserts them as still relevant (such as Jesus' teachings about the 10 commandments).

 

[nazz]

In the NT, we have various verses that literally decry the laws of the OT, the Torah laws. If you adhere to the OT laws,//which ones do you adhere to, do you think they are exempt from the NT criticism// how do you square this with the statements that directly oppose this sort of thinking? I tend to never get 'real' answers to questions like this. Succinct and honest answers would be appreciated, such as 'I don't believe the NT verses etc. This thread is not about the existence of these verses, if need be I will provide some, but it's more about people who already know these verses exist, but don't adhere to them.

Ptolemy's Letter to Flora

 

[Simplelogic]

In the NT, we have various verses that literally decry the laws of the OT, the Torah laws. If you adhere to the OT laws,//which ones do you adhere to, do you think they are exempt from the NT criticism// how do you square this with the statements that directly oppose this sort of thinking? I tend to never get 'real' answers to questions like this. Succinct and honest answers would be appreciated, such as 'I don't believe the NT verses etc. This thread is not about the existence of these verses, if need be I will provide some, but it's more about people who already know these verses exist, but don't adhere to them.

Only Paul teaches against keeping the law of Moses. And he wasn't one of the twelve apostles so it really doesn't matter. I stick to Yeshua's words which command adherence to the law of Moses.

 

[wintersolstice]

In the NT, we have various verses that literally decry the laws of the OT, the Torah laws. If you adhere to the OT laws,//which ones do you adhere to, do you think they are exempt from the NT criticism// how do you square this with the statements that directly oppose this sort of thinking? I tend to never get 'real' answers to questions like this. Succinct and honest answers would be appreciated, such as 'I don't believe the NT verses etc. This thread is not about the existence of these verses, if need be I will provide some, but it's more about people who already know these verses exist, but don't adhere to them.

I have often wondered the same thing with a little twist: for those Christians who believe in literal translation of the Bible--do they follow all the laws of the OT, ie, do they follow dietary laws? If not, why not? How do they decide which to follow and which to ignore?

 

[Faybull]

Obey the 10, and you have no use of any other laws.

 

[jeager106]

Obey the 10, and you have no use of any other laws.

Well that's an interesting point of view.
What about the other 603 O.T. commandments?????
I thought "all scripture was inspired of God and therefore good".

 

[jeager106]

Ptolemy's Letter to Flora

I thought that letter was in a Gnostic text therefor not part of the Bible.
I read the Gnostic Gospels and find them quite interesting tho.

 

[Pegg]

In the NT, we have various verses that literally decry the laws of the OT, the Torah laws. If you adhere to the OT laws,//which ones do you adhere to, do you think they are exempt from the NT criticism// how do you square this with the statements that directly oppose this sort of thinking? I tend to never get 'real' answers to questions like this. Succinct and honest answers would be appreciated, such as 'I don't believe the NT verses etc. This thread is not about the existence of these verses, if need be I will provide some, but it's more about people who already know these verses exist, but don't adhere to them.

there are mosaic laws which we must adhere to and the NT states this. Gods laws regarding right and wrong have not changed hence some mosaic laws will always be relevant.

But really its up to christians to apply those laws in a broader application by finding the principle behind the law because those mosaic laws are set to the specific circumstances of the people who lived 3,000 years ago... for that reason we need to know the underlying principle of a mosaic law in order to apply it today

But what has most certainly changed is the way we approach God. The Isrealites were required 'by law' to approach God through the mosaic law....this included more then just living by Gods standards of right and wrong....it required offering sacrifices, supporting the temple, participating in the festivals, abiding by the dress code etc etc
The fact is, nobody (not even the jews) can completely fulfill all the requirements of the mosaic law today....nor do they fufill its requirements. And according to the law, if you fail to do even just one commandment, you are a transgressor of them all.

Deuteronomy 27:26
“‘Cursed is the one who will not uphold the words of this Law by carrying them out.’+ (And all the people will say, ‘Amen!’)

To hang onto the mosaic law at a time when it cannot be carried out leads to being cursed. Who wants that?

So this is why we must distinguish between what God requires of us, and where the mosaic law fits into that picture. Obviously not all of the mosaic law is going to fit in which is why christians are called up on to uphold Gods righteousness...this would include all his righteous morals and standards, some of which are expressed in the mosaic law.

 

[nazz]

I thought that letter was in a Gnostic text therefor not part of the Bible.
I read the Gnostic Gospels and find them quite interesting tho.

Yes, you are correct. I was just using it to answer the question from my own perspective.

 

[jeager106]

Yes, you are correct. I was just using it to answer the question from my own perspective.

Of course and interesting. One wonders what was excluded from Canon that we might have learned from?

 

[nazz]

Of course and interesting. One wonders what was excluded from Canon that we might have learned from?

tons of stuff

 

[jeager106]

"tons of stuff: I don't doubt that. It would be awful to learn one day from a newly found manuscript that we have been chasing our tails for nearly 1900 years.
I try hard to reconcile differences between the various denominations in my heart and mind and try to follow a path that is more correct. IF there is one more correct?
Then one must ask the self, "what is correct?"
Witnesses believe they are the only denomination that "has it right, spot on" right.
I do admire them for going out preaching tho as it can't always be easy.
People tend to get irritated with them. I am polite when they come round and
take the magazines and booklets and actually read them.
I must also add that Witnesses are very well schooled in their Thrus. night ministry school.
Is there another Christian religion that preaches door to door distributing literature besides the Witnesses and Latter Day Saints?

 

[jeager106]

Reading those sites I was given has been at least enlightening.
Thank you again.
I've read a good bit about Islam out of pure curiosity, trying to understand the violence perpetuated for the past 1400 years. I still don't understand the violence.

 

[Simplelogic]

"Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments (Torah), and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Matt: 5-19

 

[Wharton]

When you change the priesthood from Levitical (Moses) to Melchezidek (Jesus) you change the Law.

 

[Nimblewill]

7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. 13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

What was engraved in stone?
Look at why Moses put a veil over his face.
Why is there still a veil?

 

[Simplelogic]

When you change the priesthood from Levitical (Moses) to Melchezidek (Jesus) you change the Law.

There is no Mechezidek priesthood. Only the Levitical priesthood. Yeshua is like Melchezidek because he was a King and a Priest like Melchezidek. Nope the Levites will continue to serve the Messiah in the future kingdom.

A King, who is also a Priest, has never existed in Israel’s history. The kingdom and the priesthood were always separate. The kingdom was established forever in David’s descendants, and the priesthood was established in the descendants of Levi and Aaron forever as well.

And here are some of God’s promises to the Levitical priesthood.

“And you shall gird them with sashes, Aaron and his sons, and put the hats on them. The priesthood shall be theirs for a perpetual statute, So you shall consecrate Aaron and his sons.” Exodus 29:9

“You shall put the holy garments on Aaron, and anoint him and sanctify him, that he may minister to Me as priest. And you shall bring his sons and clothe them with tunics. You shall anoint them, as you anointed their father, that they may minister to Me as priests; for their anointing shall surely be and everlasting priesthood throughouttheir generations.” Exodus 40:13-15

Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying; “Phinehas the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, has turned back My wrath from the children of Israel, because he was zealous with My zeal among them, so that I did not consume the children of Israel in My zeal. Therefore say, ‘Behold, I give to him My covenant of peace; and it shall be to him and his descendants after him a covenant of an everlasting priesthood, because he was zealous for his God, and made atonement for the children of Israel .’” Numbers 25;10-13

God promised the Messiah would be both king and priest like Melchizedek in Psalm 110:4. God also spoke through other prophets on numerous occasions that He would indeed bring both offices into one in the Messiah.

“Behold, the days are coming”, says the Lord, “that I will perform that good thing which I have promised to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah; In those days and at that time I will cause to grow up to David a Branchof righteousness; He shall execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. In those days Judah will be saved, andJerusalem will dwell safely. And this is the name by which she will be called; ‘THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS’. For thus says the Lord; David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel; nor shall the priests, the Levites, lack a man to offer burnt offerings before Me, to kindle grain offerings, and to sacrifice continually.” Jeremiah 33:14-18

“Behold, the man whose name is the BRANCH! From his place he shall branch out, and he shall build the temple of the Lord; Yes, he shall build the temple of the Lord. He shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule on his throne; So he shall be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.” (both offices) Zechariah 6:12-13

“Then it shall be the prince’s part to give burnt offerings, grain offerings, and drink offerings, at the feasts, the New Moons, the Sabbaths, and at all the appointed seasons of the house of Israel. He shall prepare the sin offering, the grain offering, the burnt offering, and the peace offerings to make atonement for the house of Israel .” Ezekiel 45:17

God had said the Levites had and “everlasting” priesthood. The only way God could fulfill these promises He made to David and the Levites is if the Messiah was from both tribes. Yeshua just so happens to be descendant of both David and Levi!

 

[rusra02]

In the NT, we have various verses that literally decry the laws of the OT, the Torah laws. If you adhere to the OT laws,//which ones do you adhere to, do you think they are exempt from the NT criticism// how do you square this with the statements that directly oppose this sort of thinking? I tend to never get 'real' answers to questions like this. Succinct and honest answers would be appreciated, such as 'I don't believe the NT verses etc. This thread is not about the existence of these verses, if need be I will provide some, but it's more about people who already know these verses exist, but don't adhere to them.

I have not seen verses in the Christian Scriptures that decry the Laws of the Mosaic Law Covenant. In fact, we read statements such as: "So the Law in itself is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good." (Romans 7:12) I believe the Mosaic Law covenant was replaced by a better covenant, and we are no longer under it's requirements. Still, we can learn much about God by studying this Law, and discerning the principles underpinning the Law. These righteous principles have not changed.

 

[Simplelogic]

I have not seen verses in the Christian Scriptures that decry the Laws of the Mosaic Law Covenant. In fact, we read statements such as: "So the Law in itself is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good." (Romans 7:12) I believe the Mosaic Law covenant was replaced by a better covenant, and we are no longer under it's requirements. Still, we can learn much about God by studying this Law, and discerning the principles underpinning the Law. These righteous principles have not changed.

Paul is blunt in Ephesians 2:15, Colossians 2:14, 2 Cor. 3:11-17, Romans 7:1-3 et seq, and Galatians 3:19 et seq. The Law is "abolished," "done away with," "nailed to a tree," "has faded away,' and was "only ordained by angels...who are no gods." If we were to cite Paul's condemnations of the Law in one string, the point is self-evident that Paul abrogated the Law for everyone. See Eph. 2:15 ("setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations"); Col. 2:14 ("having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross;") 2 Cor. 3:14 ("old covenant"); Gal. 5:1 ("yoke of bondage"); Rom. 10:4 ("Christ is the end of the law"); 2 Cor. 3:7 ("law of death"); Gal. 5:1 ("entangles"); Col. 2:14-17 ("a shadow"); Rom. 3:27 ("law of works"); Rom. 4:15 ("works wrath"); 2 Cor. 3:9(ministration of condemnation); Gal. 2:16 ("cannot justify"); Gal. 3:21 (cannot give life); Col. 2:14 ("wiped out" exaleipsas); Gal. 3:19, 4:8-9 ("given by angels...who are no gods [and are] weak and beggarly celestial beings/elements").