To you who promote the Law of Moses in Christianity...

[randyk]

Thank you Randy.

I promise, from my own heart and whatever is written on it, that I will read all that you wrote, consider every sentence and nuance of it, and give you the due respect, because I have had the respect towards you all throughout, in my heart. Otherwise I would have abandoned the thread.

Absolutely Agree.

What you have, my friend, is good character. Some good fellows on this forum sometimes get angry, and call me names, but are really quite good folks. To be quite honest, I don't change easily. When God wants to convince me of something He often has to do it by inflicting a few blows.

We should never give up on one another. Neither should we quickly abandon our honest convictions until we're sure that we should. Thank you much!

[jaybird]

[SIZE=16px]

How many times must I address this before you comprehend the point? I've told you that God doesn't change, and that His morality does not change either, whether it is part of the Law of Moses or part of the Christian Covenant. Other religions have the requirement not to murder, but we're talking about God the Father of Jesus Christ, right? So the moral requirement that man not murder his fellow man remains the same from the Law of Moses to the Covenant of Christ, and existed from the beginning, well before the Law of Moses came into being.

the law such as "dont murder" are still in effect, we just call them "moral requirements" now? and that means the law is abolished? so by this logic i can go out and murder as many people as a want as long as i dont call it murder. again, this makes no sense at all.

"Fulfilled" does not have to mean "abolish." But in this case it does. The NT teaches this.

" I did not come to abolish but i came to abolish"

you really think Jesus is saying that? a nonsensical statement? a statement that contradicts itself? im having a hard time responding to this one, im shocked that anyone would actually think Jesus spoke in such ways. its like everything Jesus says He really means the opposite.

You're repeating yourself again. I already addressed this. This was said *under the OT Law!* Jesus never taught this under the New Covenant!

it makes no difference if it was said in old covenant, new covenant, east coast or west coast. your ignoring one key element, Jesus taught it. and one more time what did Jesus teach, yes i know i am repeating and i am gonna keep repeating this statement of Jesus,
"do not teach against the law" your doing exactly what Jesus said not to do. you can try and spin it how ever you like but in the end you are in fact doing exactly, and i mean exactly what Jesus said NOT to do. I would never in a million years teach anyone something that Jesus specifically said DO NOT TEACH! do you ever worry about what the judgment for this might be?

[randyk]

the law such as "dont murder" are still in effect, we just call them "moral requirements" now? and that means the law is abolished? so by this logic i can go out and murder as many people as a want as long as i dont call it murder. again, this makes no sense at all.

No, we are talking about *God's Law*--not the Law of Moses. It was God's Law from the beginning that Man not murder because it is implicit in the command to walk in the likeness of God. God is not a murderer--therefore, we shouldn't murder either. OT or NT, or pre-Law of Moses, this is God's Law, and this is God's moral requirement for mankind.

The Law of Moses was abolished--not God's Law. These 2 terms mean different things and are not equivalent in meaning. The Law of Moses is God's Law, but God's Law does not have to be the Law of Moses. God's Law existed before and after the Law of Moses. Therefore, the command not to murder did not pass away with the passage of the Law of Moses.

" I did not come to abolish but i came to abolish"

you really think Jesus is saying that? a nonsensical statement? a statement that contradicts itself? im having a hard time responding to this one, im shocked that anyone would actually think Jesus spoke in such ways. its like everything Jesus says He really means the opposite.

Put that way yes, it does sound silly. But that's not the way I read it. Jesus said his purpose was to fulfill the Law. This in effect renders the Law unnecessary. Why would one have to offer animal sacrifices on a continuous basis when the sacrifice of Christ suffices to cover sins for all time? It would be redundant to continue to offer sacrifices for sins that have already been forgiven!

So the "abolishment" of the Law was not given in the sense of opposing the purpose of the Law, which was what Jesus denied he was doing. Rather than oppose the purpose of the Law, he was actually agreeing with the purpose of the Law, which was to supplant the Law with himself. He specifically said that he had to come *fulfill the Law.*

it makes no difference if it was said in old covenant, new covenant, east coast or west coast. your ignoring one key element, Jesus taught it. and one more time what did Jesus teach, yes i know i am repeating and i am gonna keep repeating this statement of Jesus,
"do not teach against the law" your doing exactly what Jesus said not to do. you can try and spin it how ever you like but in the end you are in fact doing exactly, and i mean exactly what Jesus said NOT to do. I would never in a million years teach anyone something that Jesus specifically said DO NOT TEACH! do you ever worry about what the judgment for this might be?

Jesus taught that he came to fulfill the Law. But teaching the continuance of the Law you are, in effect, opposing Jesus' teaching! He was saying not to teach against the Law *while it was in effect.* But he said that at the cross he was fulfilling the Law. "It is finished," he said, while hanging on the cross.

You have confused "abolishment* with *opposition.* Jesus said not to oppose the Law. He did not say he would not abolish the Law in the sense that he would fulfill the purpose of the Law.

[Snazzy]

God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. ⁹ He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith...we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are. Acts 15:8-11

I will respond to the highlighted text, because it implies that all of us are also saved, and that the Holy Spirit is given to us by default, i.e. through the grace of Lord Jesus, whatever you mean by this statement....
What we know is that only through the Holy Spirit we are saved..And this is up to God, to give it to us. Only those sent/chosen by God are given to Jesus Christ, i.e. Jesus's disciples were chosen/given to him by God....Read Romans. Read NT.
There are numerous references in the bible which explain why receiving the Holy Spirit is not an automatic entitlement. Find them.

Each one of us needs to sacrifice the desires of the flesh and come out of the darkness first, and start living in the Light, the Light of Jesus Christ, who is the Light, who is the way, who is the example of how to..... Keep in mind that the reason why Jesus died for us is clearly stated in the Bible(Hebrews 2:14)....It's nothing to do with entitlement to the Holy Spirit, abolishing God's laws, forgiving sins, automated entitlements to anything at all, etc...On the contrary, we need to make a bigger effort than ever...The bar is raised.

Hebrews
2:14 Therefore, since the children have partaken of blood and of flesh, He also likewise took part in the same things, so that through His death He might destroy the one holding the power of death, that is, the devil

[Snazzy]

He did not say he would not abolish the Law in the sense that he would fulfill the purpose of the Law.

But teaching the continuance of the Law you are, in effect, opposing Jesus' teaching! [/SIZE]

Hey Randy, Jesus never said anything about abolishing the law. Fulfill to me means Fill it Full, add to it, make it complete. It is not an end. It is addition to an existing law that gives the bigger picture, and the law continues. I might be wrong but this is how I interpret it.

No, we are talking about *God's Law*--not the Law of Moses. It was God's Law from the beginning that Man not murder because it is implicit in the command to walk in the likeness of God. God is not a murderer--therefore, we shouldn't murder either. OT or NT, or pre-Law of Moses, this is God's Law, and this is God's moral requirement for mankind.

Yes, agree.

The Law of Moses was abolished--not God's Law. These 2 terms mean different things and are not equivalent in meaning. The Law of Moses is God's Law, but God's Law does not have to be the Law of Moses. God's Law existed before and after the Law of Moses. Therefore, the command not to murder did not pass away with the passage of the Law of Moses.

Yes, agree.

To add:
God's Law is not the law of Moses. The law of Moses is the interpretation of God's law by humans. Moses died in the desert with the rest of sinners, because he sinned. This is what I think and believe, as God opposed those rituals, sacrifices, etc...in both old and new testament. I quoted references to that numerous times already.

[randyk]

Hey Randy, Jesus never said anything about abolishing the law. Fulfill to me means Fill it Full, add to it, make it complete. It is not an end. It is addition to an existing law that gives the bigger picture, and the law continues. I might be wrong but this is how I interpret it.

I agree that Jesus was saying the Law was good, and that it was still in effect at that time, and should be kept--every single requirement. But to pursue the whole purpose of the Law is to see that Christ was the ultimate purpose of the Law, which is redemption under an entirely different covenant.

The covenant of Law only covered sins temporarily. Christ's covenant covers sins for all eternity. The covenant of Law was designed to lead to the covenant of Christ.

So in showing proper respect for the Law, we recognize that it was still valid while Jesus was speaking to his people during his earthly ministry. But we must also show respect for it by recognizing that no sin needs to be dealt with under the old covenant any longer now that the new covenant has preempted it. Laws like "do not murder" do not go away simply because the Law has gone away. That command continues under the New Covenant, as well.

To add:
God's Law is not the law of Moses. The law of Moses is the interpretation of God's law by humans. Moses died in the desert with the rest of sinners, because he sinned. This is what I think and believe, as God opposed those rituals, sacrifices, etc...in both old and new testament. I quoted references to that numerous times already.

God says numerous times that His Law was good, that the Law of Moses was His will for Israel. King David sang the praises of the Law of Moses in Psalm 1 and in Psalm 119. It is not man's interpretation of God's Law. It was a form of God's Law for a time, up until it was completely broken and abrogated by God, due to Israel's apostasy.

Israel's apostasy led to a divorce from God under the Law twice in their history--once in the Babylonian Captivity, and again at the cross of Christ. At Christ's death the divorce was finallized. But by putting our faith in Christ, we can die with him to our old self and come alive with him in his eternal righteousness. That's what happens when we give up our old life to live by his Spirit. He comes to dwell in our heart, and his life displaces our old life of independence and sin.

The Law also accomplished this, but only on a temporary basis, until Christ came to make final atonement. Some kind of atonement had to be made for sin on a temporary basis until Christ could come and make final atonement.

[Snazzy]

Thank you Randy. It took me that long to respond because work went ape **** busy lately and I had no brains left to think.

But to pursue the whole purpose of the Law is to see that Christ was the ultimate purpose of the Law, which is redemption under an entirely different covenant.

It is not man's interpretation of God's Law. It was a form of God's Law for a time, up until it was completely broken and abrogated by God, due to Israel's apostasy.

I will lay out my opinion on those quotes. In my opinion what Christ did is, explain to us, how to interpret the Law, the existing Law. Christ to me is the interpretation of the Law.He showed us how to follow the same law by his own example, living by the same Law, and adding to it, "fullfil" that the Law is about Love, love for God, love for one another. He never told us to abolish the law.

And at the same time,I agree, that in human eyes one can say it is entirely new covenant, because we never understood what God wanted in the first place. And I quoted a lot on that point in the past, where God said it is not sacrifices he wanted or weird rituals on Sabbath day. God wants us not to sin, to be good, to care for one another, even on Sabbath day. He wants us not to think bad about one another or wish one another anything bad. This is not a new thing in the New Testament. God did refer to that in the Old testament, hence God told us already we never got it right in the first place. But He knew we would not because we were in a way under the devil's grasps....Then God explains to us in the New Testament why He sent Christ..He sent Christ to remove the grasp of the devil over us.

At Christ's death the divorce was finalized.

In my opinion, what the Bible says on that is that at Christ's death the devil's power was cast away, he had held the power of death before Christ's coming.What that means to me, based on the Bible is, that he held a power over us to lead us into sin. He no longer does. We now have a choice of heart....

I did again repeat the related verse below, but it is because I do want to emphasize on it. The Bible tells us why Christ died....It is not to abolish the Covenant. It is to take the power away from the Devil. We now have a choice to stay with the Devil(Darkness) or follow Christ(The Light). The "power of death" in this verse to me means, the power to lead us into sin. Because when the devil leads us into sin, the result is death, as per what is explained majorly in Romans for example.

Hebrews
2:14 Therefore, since the children have partaken of blood and of flesh, He also likewise took part in the same things, so that through His death He might destroy the one holding the power of death, that is, the devil