Major misconception: What is legalism and what's not legalism.

[Elin]

What Yeshua and Paul were getting at is that
the Pharisees were adding this, thus
making it extremely hard to keep it.

What Paul was getting at is one thing, and one thing only.
And it was not "adding" to the Law.

Nor was it about shoving the law down their throat. It was much more serious than that.

Paul was teaching against the Pharisees who were trying to make law keeping necessary for salvation,
trying to base salvation on law keeping rather than only by God's free grace through faith.

They held church in their homes, where the gospel, the meaning of Christ, his work and Christian living were taught.

And the NT issue was not the Torah vs. a perverted legalistic Torah.

The issue was law keeping vs. only God's free grace through faith as the basis of salvation.

You obviously do not read my posts thuroughly. I've said not once, that I find grace in the Torah. I have simply said I follow it. I have said multiple times salvation is through Yeshua.

If you are here to bash, please do not twist what I say by just picking out parts of what I say.

I do not twist what you say, I address what you say, which presents a false NT issue regarding Paul and the law.

 

[Elin]

Yeshua is saying those are 2 of the greatest commandments (that means, there's more), you again are not reading it correctly.
Yeshua it saying these 2 commandments sum up the commandments in the Torah. I'm pretty sure if there were only 2 commandments, He would tell them there are only 2 commandments. Again He was asked which is the greatest, so He answer which ones were the greatest, and goes on further to explain that those 2 commandments are the sum of the Torah.

I won't be arguing the plain meaning of "sum up" with you.

You will find it explained in Ro 13: 8, 9, 10.

 

[Biblelogic01]

Deuteronomy 22:28-29King James Version (KJV)

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

I do apologise, you have educated me (I never said I'm knew Torah inside and out, I'm still in a learning process).
If you want to talk to someone on that subject of the Torah, talk to the author of the Torah.
I will do some prayer and meditating on it.

I'm not sure how you want me to respond. I'm assuming you want me to respond in a way where I sound like I support rape. Which I do not.
It also sounds like you have different points of views on punishments and you can't make up your mind.
You're against it talking about stoning someone, yet even though in a distasteful thing (such as rape) your probably wondering why it doesn't say it there to stone the rapist. Which I would agree there. But again I didn't make the Torah, and I did not write it, and I do not know how to answer on that, and I do apologise.
Again if you want clearification (which I do as well), that's where faith, meditation, and prayer comes in.
When God gave Torah to Moses, why did He have the law written out like that?

If I offend anyone in anyway, I do apologise. Please let me know througha private message.

 

[JGIG]

Oh, so you CAN do sacrifices without the Temple in Jerusalem?

I'm guessing you're not doing sacrifices because those jots and tittles have passed - wait - heaven and earth are still here.

What gives? Sacrifices are part of the Law - why aren't you doing them?

No priesthood, you say? Christ is your High Priest now?

Yes, yes He is.

From the tribe of Judah.

New Priesthood.

New Covenant.

Permanent because of an oath form God and the power of an indestructible Life.

The Levitical Priesthood is never coming back.

Why?

Christ is a High Priest FOREVER.

The Old Covenant is obsolete in Christ.

If you're in Christ, you're in the New Covenant.

Grace teaches us to say no to ungodliness; the Law stirs up sinning and is the power of sin.

The choice regarding which covenant to rest in seems pretty clear to me.

-JGIG

You say the commandments (law?) is the enemy. That is the heart of our disagreement.

Where have I said there is no new priesthood? I haven't.

Why is following Messiah and His commandments at odds with each other? They aren't.

Sigh.

1. You didn't answer the question.
   If you're going to follow Old Covenant Law, you must follow it all or you are following NONE of it.
2. I never said the Law is our enemy.
   
   The Bible says -
   --->The Law is good if one uses it properly, given for the unrighteous to point them to Christ, not to the righteous (which we are in Christ - Rom. 5, 2 Cor. 5) for a behavioral guide (1 Tim. 1:8-11).
   
   --->The Law is also the tutor that brings the unsaved to Christ. Once someone is given over to Christ, we are no longer under that tutor (see Gal. 3).
   
   --->The Law DOES stand in opposition to us unless it is obeyed 100%, 100% of the time - everyone who does not do everything in the Law is under a curse (Gal. 3:10)
3. Messiah's commandment is found in Jn. 13:
   34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. 35 By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
4. The Old Covenant was mediated by the priests of the Tribe of Levi. If you desire to 'keep' the Old Covenant, you have no high priest. At some point, the Temple Institute will likely have a temple with a functioning Levitical priesthood and will again attempt to carry out Old Covenant Laws. I would assume executions would also be reinstated. And all of it will be an absolute abomination to the Work of Christ, the Final, Perfect Sacrifice and the current, Permanent, Perfect High Priest of the New Covenant.

In reality, you're NOT following Messiah and His commandments. You're following a law of your own creation, picking and choosing which laws out of the Old Covenant it's convenient for you to keep.

It is my observation over a period of the last nine years that those who choose to follow a law of their own creation under the guise of 'Torah pursuance' eventually fall into arrogance and religious self-righteousness. They try to put other believers under the Law (which, in reality becomes another set of man-created laws and not the Law itself) instead of simply walking in the love of Christ for those around them, building up their brothers and sisters in who they are in Christ and looking for ways to bring the Good News of the Work of Christ to the Lost.


-JGIG

 

[JGIG]

Deut. 12:32, 13:6-11
32 See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.

6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them.

9 >>> You must certainly put them to death. <<<

>>> Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, <<<

>>> and then the hands of all the people. <<<

10 >>> Stone them to death, <<< because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.​

Yep. Pretty straightforward and simple.

Execution for violation of the 'instructions' isn't a big deal? Easy to do?

Then why aren't Torah folk obeying these 'instructions'?

-JGIG

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11 “No one, sir,” she said.
“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

As God in the flesh, Jesus had the authority to have mercy, forgive, and pardon the woman.

That's one of the reasons the Pharisees hated Him.

Are you saying that the jots and tittles of the Law pertaining to execution have passed? They are rather inconvenient.

If so, you need to reevaluate your whole theology . . .

-JGIG

 

[JGIG]

So how do those fare who don't even attempt to keep the Law?

Oh wait, I think I know...

Mat 7:22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
Mat 7:23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'

So it is about salvation by the Law . . .

Thanks for the clarification.

-JGIG

 

[Biblelogic01]

I do not twist what you say, I address what you say, which presents a false NT issue regarding Paul and the law.

When I was talking about twisting what I had said, I was talking about you going on stating that you cannot find grace in the Torah or a means of salvation in the Torah.

Through this entire thread I have never said I follow Torah because it's my salvation. Not once have I said that, yet you and everyone else who want's to argue on what my walk and beliefs are, are accusing me of saying so. That's what I'm talking about when I say twisting my words. Do not automatically assume someone who is Torah observant is doing it for a means of salvation. That's childish.

I will yet once again state it, I follow Torah because that's how I choose to walk. It is not a means of salvation, nor am i trying to justify salvation.

 

[JGIG]

On the side of having sins forgiven.


Rom 5:8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
Rom 5:9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.
Rom 5:10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Hmmm, being justified for having sinned, not the abolition of the Law, rather the payment for sin.

Christ did not die to abolish the Law, had He done that, you would not need a Savior. If there is no Law, there is no sin...

Rom 4:15 because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression.
Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

And what is sin?

1Jn 3:4 Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.

Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, "YOU SHALL NOT COVET."

Christ is the propitiation for sin...

1Jn 2:1 My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
1Jn 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

G2434

ἱλασμός
hilasmos
hil-as-mos'
atonement, that is, (concretely) an expiator: - propitiation.
Total KJV occurrences: 2


Oh I am. The first thing I notice about obeying God is that He tells us to KEEP His COMMANDMENTS...

Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

My, that's a big straw man you've constructed.

And you've identified yourself to be in the camp that does preach that one must keep the Law or they're not really saved. Thanks for that clarification. Matthew 19:17 was preached to those under the Law before the Cross. Jesus preached the Law to those born under the Law. You're not rightly dividing the Word of Truth.

The Law wasn't abolished. Nor is it a means to righteousness:

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

21 But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. (from Rom. 3)
​

No, the Law stands as a tutor for the unrighteous, to bring them to Christ:

21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. 22 But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

23 Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. (from Gal. 3)
​

Romans 6 tells us TWICE that believers are no longer under the Law, but under Grace. Romans 7 drives the point deeper and tells us that we are DEAD to the Law!

Ephesians 2 tells us that for those in Christ, the Law IS abolished - we have been released from it, we're dead to it, we have nothing more to do with the Law. It could not be more clear.

I hear a lot of prattle about love, yet this never quite seems to get quoted...

1Jn 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
1Jn 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Fulfilling the Law through love means obeying it, not abolishing it. The Law defines sin and also defines love.

Prattle.

Really?

Greater love hath no man . . . just prattle, I suppose. Yet you NEVER see self-sacrificial love in the Law. No, that kind of love comes from Christ alone:

12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

14 Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.

15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.

16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

17 These things I command you, that ye love one another. (from Jn. 15)
​

Jesus was preaching Love, not Law; Fruit, not performance.

But according to you that's just prattle . . .


You wrote, "Fulfilling the Law through love means obeying it, not abolishing it.

No, it's about love, not about law. Those who focus on Law-keeping often become some of the most un-loving and judgemental, sin-centered people I've ever known. The Law makes us conscious of sin, and since they're focused on sin and judgement all the time, that's what their fruit is: sin-consciousness and judgement of themselves and others. There is no rest in that.
You also wrote, "The Law defines sin and also defines love."

The Law does define sin.

The Law does NOT define Love.

There is not a single Scripture to support that assertion.

What do the Scriptures say about love?

7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him. 10 In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us. (from 1 Jn. 4)


4 Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant 5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. 7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

8 Love never ends. (from 1 Cor. 13)​

Just more 'prattle', I suppose.


-JGIG

 

[JGIG]

Again with those jots and tittles. Either they passed or they didn't. Which is it?

-JGIG

Well did they?

Luk 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

Or did Christ lie?

Then if you are going to be Torah compliant you MUST:

• offer sacrifices at the Feasts
• travel to Jerusalem for the appointed times
• observe a Seventh Day Sabbath according to the Scriptures
• stone those who don't
• stone others who violate those laws punishable by death

If you're not doing those things, you're not obeying ANY of the Law and you stand as a condemned man for lawlessness.

-JGIG

 

[Elin]

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11 “No one, sir,” she said.
“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

That was not about Jesus abrogating the law, that was Jesus abiding by the law, for there were several things contrary to the Mosaic law regarding their case.

He used their attempt to trap him by using the woman's sin to show them their own sin, for I suspect what he was writing in the sand was the sin of each man who, when he saw it written, turned and walked away, leaving no one to stone her.

Stoning was prescribed for betrothed virgins committing fornication.

 

[JGIG]

I have to giggle at JGIGgle's scorched earth policy. She comes thru here every few months, burns out the legalistic chaff and moves on. Yet some are die hards in holding on to their chaff.

I rather think of it as plowing up some hard ground and sowing seeds of Grace and Truth .

 

[JGIG]

thats funny, I did not notice that. she comes in, drops a few incendary bombs to clean the place up. then walks away..lol.. so funny, but so true,,

A note of explanation: Not my intended method, but we have seven children and homeschool, so I do what I can, when I can, as I feel led . . . kind of a perfect storm, ha.

 

[JGIG]

well, I agree. and so I was very surprised when first coming here to cc and finding many people who attempt to follow the law...

but every law-follower I've met here also has (imo) a very loose approach...

Which means they're 'keeping' none of the Law they claim to follow. That makes them mockers of both the Law of God they pursue and mockers of His Grace, to which the Law, as it was given, drives us. And then there's the fruit . . .

-JGIG

 

[Elin]

What Yeshua and Paul were getting at is that
the Pharisees were adding this, thus
making it extremely hard to keep it.

What Paul was getting at is one thing, and one thing only.
And it was not "adding" to the Law.

Nor was it about shoving the law down their throat. It was much more serious than that.

Paul was teaching against the Pharisees who were trying to make law keeping necessary for salvation,
trying to base salvation on law keeping rather than only by God's free grace through faith.

They held church in their homes, where the gospel, the meaning of Christ, his work and Christian living were taught.

And the NT issue was not the Torah vs. a perverted legalistic Torah.

The issue was law keeping vs. only God's free grace through faith as the basis of salvation.

You obviously do not read my posts thuroughly. I've said not once, that I find grace in the Torah. I have simply said I follow it. I have said multiple times salvation is through Yeshua.

If you are here to bash, please do not twist what I say by just picking out parts of what I say.

I do not twist what you say, I address what you say, which presents
a false NT issue regarding Paul and the law.

The issue with Paul was not the Toral vs. a perverted legalistic Torah.

When I was talking about twisting what I had said,
I was talking about you going on stating that you cannot find grace in the Torah or a means of salvation in the Torah.

I did not say that you said that.

I simply reiterated the truth about what the real NT issue was, in response to
the false issue you presented--Pharisees adding to the law making it too difficult to keep.

Through this entire thread I have never said I follow Torah because it's my salvation. Not once have I said that

Nor have I claimed that you did.

I am addressing the false NT issue you presented, not whether you follow the law because it is your salvation,
for I did not understand you to be saying that you did.

However, I did understand the straw man you set up about the NT issue regarding Paul and the law
being the Pharisees adding to it making it too difficult to keep.

 

[JGIG]

it's not burdensome if you follow it loosely... is that the short version?

also, I appreciate your presence here.

Dan, where in the Law do you see where it permits a 'loose' adherence?

That's the thing: Torah-pursuant folks are not following THE Law, they are following a law of their own creation, something not as God gave it at all. It's an insult to the Holiness of God and His Provision in Christ.

I know there's a great desire to 'get along' with other points of view, and on secondary, disputable matters, that's fine (see Romans 14: Indisputable Matters – Torah or the Gospel? for my take on that), but those who advocate Torah observance for BELIEVERS are preaching against some core issues in the Gospel - the Work and High Priesthood of Christ specifically.

Being agreeable to the Torah-pursuant point of view shows an attempt at peace-keeping, not peace-making. Ephesians 2 says it beautifully:

14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.​

We don't celebrate the Shadow, but Christ Himself, for HE is our peace, not that which pointed to Him.

-JGIG

 

[JGIG]

Are you familiar with type and anti-type?

Num 15:38 Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them fringes in the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the fringe of the borders a ribband of blue:
Num 15:39 And it shall be unto you for a fringe, that ye may look upon it, and remember all the commandments of the LORD, and do them; and that ye seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a whoring:

The tassels or fringes were a physical type for a people without access to the Holy Spirit as a reminder.

The anti-type is here...

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

The fringes were a shadow of the Holy Spirit to come. The ceremonial practices were the type of the spiritual...

Heb 9:1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
Heb 9:2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
Heb 9:3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
Heb 9:4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
Heb 9:5 And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
Heb 9:6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
Heb 9:7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
Heb 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
Heb 9:9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;

Then why do you continue in the shadows . . . ?

 

[Biblelogic01]

The wheels on the bus go around and around. Nuff said. I guess why don't we all just agree to disagree.

 

[JGIG]

Slaves, yes there are laws on slaves, but Torah also says to obey the laws of the land and there are no slave in modern culture. Also on slavery (don't pick an choose things you don't understand), they didn't treat slaves the way modern culture shows slave owners treating them. They were actually treated more like servants, kind of like butler or maid, I know this because there are laws on how to properly treat a slave, but again there are no slaves in modern culture where we live, so there really was no point in bringing this up.

Stoning, there can't be a modern stoning because there is not court/justice system for it. There's a whole series of events that have to take place for a stoning, they don't just grab people and stone them. 1 basically the accused has to be brought forth by 2 witness, has to be accused, and has to know that it would lead to this. Why do you think Yeshua said, "Let the one with no sin cast the first stone." It's because after the religous leaders that brought the adulterer to Yeshua left, therefor noone left to accuse her. Yeshua being the judge of our sins told the adultress that she is forgive and tells her to turn away from her sin. Also along with stoning you have to have a priesthood set up for what would be like a court session. There is no temple and there is no priesthood that can conduct a proper trial for this to due so, and then again that goes back to Yeshua, He is our High Priest and our judge.

Sacrifices; there is no temple, or Holy/sanctified ground like a tabernacle or the temple. All sacrifices require that. Since there is no temple in this world that is deemed a sanctified holy temple unto God, there cannot be sacrifices. Plus Yeshua was the ultimate sacrifice for us.

The rapist must marry the victim? You're taking that way out of context to perverse the Torah. That law portains to basically immorality of pre-marrital intercorse. Along with that if there is a rapists I'm pretty sure that would fall under sexual immorality in itself, and there are laws against that.

I can keep going if you would like.

And I eat eggs, I don't eat bacon or pork. So what. I was actually not eating pork long before I became Torah observant because my personal trainer in middle/high school had me on a strict diet, and pork and shellfish were not allowed. I only ate fish chicken and veggies, and again that was before I became Torah observant. I started that in 8th grade, I didn't start following Torah until I was a senior in high school.

If you're going to ask a question on it, please do not perverse and twist the wording.

So what you're saying is that the Law can't be kept because jots and tittles have passed? No priesthood, no temple?

In 2000 years, God has not allowed for those things to be restored so that the Law might be kept properly?

WHY NOT, if the Law is not obsolete in Christ???

Is not God's Law, if He intends for it to be our way of life in Christ, of paramount importance?

Why did God change the priesthood from Levi to Judah by an oath?

If Christ's Priesthood is permanent, as the Scriptures say, WHY ON EARTH would you seek to keep a Law made obsolete FOREVER by Christ and mediated by a priesthood which no longer exists?

Forgive my frustration, but it really could not be more clear:

1. The Law remains ONLY as a tutor to point the unrighteous to Christ
2. Once one comes to Christ, they die to the Law; they are no longer under the tutor
3. Love, not Law, is how the believer in Christ pleases God. And this is not of ourselves, but is a Fruit of the Spirit Who lives in and through us, and if we are led by the Spirit, we are not under the Law.

So simple.

-JGIG

 

[Biblelogic01]

Like I said, we can agree to disagree. I will continue my walk in Torah, and glorifying Yeshua and His name.

 

[Biblelogic01]

Oh on 1 final note

[SUP]18 [/SUP]So Paul still remained a good while. Then he took leave of the brethren and sailed for Syria, and Priscilla and Aquila were with him. He had his hair cut off at Cenchrea, for he had taken a vow. [SUP]19 [/SUP]And he came to Ephesus, and left them there; but he himself entered the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews. [SUP]20 [/SUP]When they asked him to stay a longer time with them, he did not consent, [SUP]21 [/SUP]but took leave of them, saying, “I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem;[SUP][c][/SUP] but I will return again to you, God willing.” And he sailed from Ephesus.

There are only 2 vows that require shaving. To become a Priest, and a nazarite vow.
Nazarite vow only requires the head to be shaved.

That vow

Is a nazarite vow, which requires a sacrifice in it.

So even after coming to Yeshua, Paul is doing sacrifices.