Did Jesus ever tell us that we no longer need to keep the law of Moses?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

DeighAnn

Banned Serpent Seed Heresy
Jun 11, 2019
2,436
760
113
well, you can certainly have your opinion , though I would advise you to use facts in something as important as your eternal destiny .

the fact is , no law of any kind will lead you to salvation. get all this law, law , law stuff out of your mind and trust Jesus for salvation.

Law keeping will not save you. command keeping will not save you. Sabbath keeping will not save you. the only thing that will is faith and trust in Christ. that is the only way into the Kingdom.
Once again, Please tell me any post number where I said the law lead to salvation? Hopefully you will give me a post number or an apology, as any decent Christian would do.
 

Yahshua

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2013
2,915
817
113
If this is so why do you accuse me of calling the law sin when all i did was quote the scripture that says 'the law is the power of sin'?

Did God write the power of sin in your heart? Is that a hard question?
It's a strawman that could confuse those new believers who are reading this and seeing thumbs up to your post. It's a slippery slope, when that's not what Paul was getting at.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
It's called context. As before, I can assume I know what you're talking about or I can ask you what you mean, and then say whether you're correct or incorrect or agree or disagree.

The Old Covenant was not a symbol of mankind's issue. That is incorrect. It was a marriage between Israel and Yah.

And everything they went through was an EXAMPLE.
Once again, You show you have a misunderstanding of the old covenant

The mere fact that God was placed in the center of the people. In a room that NO ONE could enter, except the high priest. And ONLY THEN if he did everything just right (otherwise he would die upon entering the most holy place) And the fact that every sin (known, unknown even unintentional sin) required the shedding of innocent blood, should have shown the jews and mankind how desperate our situation is.

I do not know. Maybe you can not figure it out. Because you can not seem to grasp its meaning?? I do not want to try to guess.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Ask this question again in your own words to share what you think it means, then I'll answer in agreement or disagreement.
Another one who can not answer questions..

What are they afraid of?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
It's a strawman that could confuse those new believers who are reading this and seeing thumbs up to your post. It's a slippery slope, when that's not what Paul was getting at.
How do you know?

You misinterpreted him to be saying the law equals sin which is not true

Maybe once you stop for a second and see what paul actually said, and why posthuman quoted him. You can see that also. And know not mahy would be confused because it is prety clear what paul (and post) said.
 

Yahshua

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2013
2,915
817
113
Once again, You show you have a misunderstanding of the old covenant

The mere fact that God was placed in the center of the people. In a room that NO ONE could enter, except the high priest. And ONLY THEN if he did everything just right (otherwise he would die upon entering the most holy place) And the fact that every sin (known, unknown even unintentional sin) required the shedding of innocent blood, should have shown the jews and mankind how desperate our situation is.

I do not know. Maybe you can not figure it out. Because you can not seem to grasp its meaning?? I do not want to try to guess.
That's called the temple service. The temple service IS symbolic, sure. The scriptures are full of relevant symbols that we are to dig through and understand.

You were still incorrect to call the covenant a symbol.

The covenant is a marriage.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
That's called the temple service. The temple service IS symbolic, sure. The scriptures are full of relevant symbols that we are to dig through and understand.

You were still incorrect to call the covenant a symbol.

The covenant is a marriage.
The covenant also gave commands, things the jews were required to do. And they were given the ultimatum that if they did not obey every word (every jot and tittle so to speak) they would be under a curse. So even the moral law proves to man how desperate his situation is to God

Even the ceremonial law has parts which show both aspects.. the problem and the solution.

Paul made it c lear. The PURPOSE of the law was to bring them, and eventually us, to christ.

Trying to take it outside its intended purpose is dangerous, and has led to many people never comming to an understanding of who and what God is.


So once again, I can not buy what you are trying to sell
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Passive aggressiveness. Clearly you have something to say to me but seem...apprehensive...to say it directly. :)
I am not the one hiding from answering questions..

I just stated a fact, Your not the only one here who is this way (refuses to answer questions) so it was directed to a few, But since i quoted your post. It was directly directed to you.
 

Yahshua

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2013
2,915
817
113
How do you know?

You misinterpreted him to be saying the law equals sin which is not true

Maybe once you stop for a second and see what paul actually said, and why posthuman quoted him. You can see that also. And know not mahy would be confused because it is prety clear what paul (and post) said.
Paul clarified it for the Romans. That reference was provided. You would do well to read that post before commenting. It makes you look silly.
 

Yahshua

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2013
2,915
817
113
I am not the one hiding from answering questions..

I just stated a fact, Your not the only one here who is this way (refuses to answer questions) so it was directed to a few, But since i quoted your post. It was directly directed to you.
Like I pointed out to you kettle?

There's nothing to be afraid of when talking to me EG. You can use "you" and not "they" when quoting me.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Paul clarified it for the Romans. That reference was provided. You would do well to read that post before commenting. It makes you look silly.
Me look silly?

I hate to tell you. But just because you say something does not make it true.

My point still stands, and you are still showing you do not understand what was said. By Post. nor by paul
 

Yahshua

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2013
2,915
817
113
The covenant also gave commands, things the jews were required to do. And they were given the ultimatum that if they did not obey every word (every jot and tittle so to speak) they would be under a curse. So even the moral law proves to man how desperate his situation is to God

Even the ceremonial law has parts which show both aspects.. the problem and the solution.

Paul made it c lear. The PURPOSE of the law was to bring them, and eventually us, to christ.

Trying to take it outside its intended purpose is dangerous, and has led to many people never comming to an understanding of who and what God is.

So once again, I can not buy what you are trying to sell
Selling? Actually I thought you put me in timeout. Just can't get enough of me huh EG? I love you too.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Like I pointed out to you kettle?

There's nothing to be afraid of when talking to me EG. You can use "you" and not "they" when quoting me.
Afraid?

I was refering to THEY.. You just happened to be included, so I was correct in using THEY

If you would stop trying to look for areas to correct me in, You would not continue to make yourself look silly trying to correct something that is not wrong.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Selling? Actually I thought you put me in timeout. Just can't get enough of me huh EG? I love you too.
Well I see you are still unable to show how I am wrong.. And you asked me, I did not ask you..

But its ok. I am used to that by now.
 

Yahshua

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2013
2,915
817
113
Well I see you are still unable to show how I am wrong.. And you asked me, I did not ask you..

But its ok. I am used to that by now.
What exactly are you talking about right now, because you went from our topic to my conversation with post, back to ours.

You seem discombobulated. Take a breath.
 

gb9

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2011
12,329
6,696
113
What exactly are you talking about right now, because you went from our topic to my conversation with post, back to ours.

You seem discombobulated. Take a breath.
just duck, dodge, and deflect. it's all you judeaizers do, because your false theology would fall apart quickly if you actually engaged and answered questions, which, of course, you won't.

it's the only way to prop up your Hebrew roots nonsense.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,844
13,558
113
It's a strawman that could confuse those new believers who are reading this and seeing thumbs up to your post. It's a slippery slope, when that's not what Paul was getting at.
It's a quote from scripture.

Do you think scripture is strawmen, slippery slopes and confusion?

The law is the power of sin.
The law is not of faith.
The law is not made for the righteous.

These are things the Bible says, and we need to deal with them to understand what it is that God writes in the heart of His children when He remembers their sin no more.

Paul is not under the law but he is not lawless. What does that mean?

if 'noob believers' don't know how to deal with this, then this is something they need to be taught to deal with - not be taught to sidestep or ignore.

We all need to learn to ask and to find answers to hard questions.

Is the power of sin written in our hearts?
What's illegitimate about asking that?
Exactly what law is written in the heart of a believer, such that Paul is not under law, yet not lawless?
What is the difference between 'the law' and 'the law of Christ' in 1 Corinthians 9? Which one of these does Jeremiah prophesy of, or is it another?
 
May 1, 2019
1,336
744
113
Unfortunately what you're implying - The Law = Sin - Paul hoped his readers of Romans would absolutely avoid thinking...

Romans 7:7
7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

The phrase "The power of sin" does not connect or define the law as "sin"...or imply that the law is sin's supporter, even in the slightest.

The phrase means "the sin in us, once it knows a commandment, is immediately empowered and strengthened to disobey it".

Why?

Because we have rebellious hearts. And had the person never heard the commandment they wouldn't be motivated to break it.

...and as Paul says, this PROVES the law is good and that we are carnal/sinful.

Take a child (or even an adult) and give them a rule to follow or a boundary to stay within that they never had before (i.e. "don't do this or that") and they'll instantly be triggered in heart to do that exact thing, many times right in front of you in defiance, just because you told them what not to do.

It's possible they never even dreamed of doing the opposite, but because you told them what NOT to do they are compelled to rebel.

The power or strength of their rebellion is your rule/boundary.

So is your rule or boundary wrong or bad? No, but their rebellious nature is strengthened by your rule because the heart is evil and has not been circumcised.

Again, as Paul emphatically says, "the law is good." So to suggest or infer otherwise is unscriptural.

This is why the very law that the heart rebels against must be etched on that heart, otherwise there will continue to be death. Why? Because sin (i.e. rebellion specifically against the law of Yah) brings death.

The wages of sin is death.

Greetings Y,

Well said, and such an important point to undo the confusion on. Paul only spoke of our relationship to the law! Nevar against the Law or it disregard! If a man is led by the Spirit - meaning obedient! what is the law to him? Nothing, because it applies to the wicked! BUT, the wicked or those who are not led by the Spirit to live in obedience they are under the Law as the Law is there for their sakes to convict them and fdrive them to conviction and repentance. But those who keep sinning and avoid the Law, they never repent and will in the end be judged for unrepentant sin!
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
just duck, dodge, and deflect. it's all you judeaizers do, because your false theology would fall apart quickly if you actually engaged and answered questions, which, of course, you won't.

it's the only way to prop up your Hebrew roots nonsense.
Thats all he knows how to do.

Until he responds to my original question. I will just let him ramble.