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.
Oct 24, 2019
302
28
28
Ok, and you could also say that the Lord Jesus amended the law of stoning: "The one without sin among you should be the first to throw a stone". Since no one is without sin this ordinance cannot be put into practice.

Do you guys observe the following ordinance?

Numbers 15:38 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘Throughout the generations to come you are to make tassels on the corners of your garments, with a blue cord on each tassel.
The Messiah did not amend the Torah by saying that only those who have never sinned can carry out the death penalty of the Torah. He merely put everyone at the same level as the adulteress, that we must ALL repent from the sins we have ALL committed. But certainly the adulteress deserved to die for what she did, and at the second coming of the Messiah, adulterers will be put to death again, but this time not with stones, but with aeonial fire. And the ones to carry out these judgments are not the Messiah himself, but the people of God, who were previously sinners in the previous bodies, for the people of God will be granted authority to judge the world. So no, the Messiah did not amend the Torah in this instance regarding who can carry out the death penalty.

And yes, I wear tzitzit every day I go out. Do you not see them in my picture?
 
Oct 24, 2019
302
28
28
Then you don't follow the Torah. That means you are a hypocrite, and you have no moral basis on which to argue your position.
Tell me, what priest shall I pay tithes to, to the megachurch pastor who collects tithes to fly in his private jet? Foolish. The Messiah became high priest, abolishing the Levitical priesthood, which came with the command to pay tithes to them. Tithes are also included under "foreshadows of realities found in the Messiah" of matters of Torah that are not required under the new covenant, for during the rulership of the Messiah tithes will be collected from the earth, and those tithes will be given unto us, for we will be granted the riches of the earth, and a tenth of the tenth will be granted to the Messiah. You have no clue what you are talking about, and are using a false pretense to discredit the truth that the Torah is indeed still binding, which is in itself sin.
 

NayborBear

Banned Serpent Seed Heresy
A change in the priesthood brought a change in the Torah, not an abolishment of the Torah. The Torah is still binding, hence the reason the Messiah said, "I did not come to abolish the Torah", and also why Paul said, "do we therefore nullify the Torah with this belief? Not at all, we uphold the Torah". You cannot abolish a Torah that defines all that is sin, at least while sin still exists, which it still does. You shall not murder is as binding today as it was 3,000 years ago. A man shall not dress as a woman is as binding as it was 3,000 years ago. Understand.

http://www.wisdomofgod.us/2019/02/14/the-torah-has-not-been-abolished/
I've said this at least onced before, but, because "young" (baby) "Christians", are so wont to keep "sucking the bottle" (salvation), then they are in "those efforts" (inward works) "required" in "a" remaining in "a" "chosen" (Spiritually mature/ing/Order of Melchizedek/Holy Priesthood) status, (the few) as opposed to "called" status "IN GOD'S EYES", and, not the majority's eyes (the many), cannot seem to grasp the "Spiritual reasoning", as to the why the "first" HAD to give way for the second covenant. The "Spirituality" of the first, which leads us TO Christ, was made WEAK "by the flesh!" Yet? "The Law?" REMAINS THE SAME! The "second" covenant, is in the "HOPES" that bY keeping the law "in one's spirit?" Would "someday" "make itself manifest THROUGH THE FLESH! IN THE GENTILES! In any event? THE LAW REMAINS THE SAME!
Is rather like the "law" brings us TO Christ, and, Christ brings us BACK TO "the law!"
AS has been seen here in CC, No one even has a "clue" to that which Paul's "fulness of the gentiles" mystery means! Nor, does it seem "the many" could give two hoots, about it either! Hence, all the "strivings" towards "normalcy!" Which, when one looks at what "being/acting" normal is? It's merely the "GENERAL CONSENSUS" of what and how a "Christian" should act and behave. It's as though "normal christians" think that by weight of SHEER numbers, "God will "surely" not put an end to us!" "We're SAVED!" So? For y'all that believe this? This is not FOR y'all! It's for "the few", who "feel" that being saved "only" is not enough! To those who think and feel: "there MUST be more!"
"I'm sad as they keep putting "God in a box!" "There MUST be more!"
I'm here to tell y'all? There IS!
Isaiah 28
9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
Hebrews 6
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ
, let us go on unto perfection (Spiritual maturity); not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
1 Peter 2
5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to "offer up spiritual sacrifices", ACCEPTABLE to God BY Jesus Christ.

Romans 11
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: OTHERWISE THOU ALSO SHALT BE CUT OFF!

IOW? THE LAW REMAINS THE SAME!

(you'll see a lot of "high-minded, non fearing believers" posts in here)

Btw? Welcome to CC!
 
Oct 24, 2019
302
28
28
Congratulations! For the first time I see a law keeper in CC who is consistent with his own beliefs.
Good. May it be an example for you to also do the same. For these commands of the Torah are indeed necessary to obey under the new covenant still.
 

NayborBear

Banned Serpent Seed Heresy
The Messiah did not amend the Torah by saying that only those who have never sinned can carry out the death penalty of the Torah. He merely put everyone at the same level as the adulteress, that we must ALL repent from the sins we have ALL committed. But certainly the adulteress deserved to die for what she did, and at the second coming of the Messiah, adulterers will be put to death again, but this time not with stones, but with aeonial fire. And the ones to carry out these judgments are not the Messiah himself, but the people of God, who were previously sinners in the previous bodies, for the people of God will be granted authority to judge the world. So no, the Messiah did not amend the Torah in this instance regarding who can carry out the death penalty.

And yes, I wear tzitzit every day I go out. Do you not see them in my picture?
Speaking of "picture?"
In mine? These are just "several" of the "72 virgins" the sons of ishmael, have to look forwards to "entertain" them on the "other" side of death! ;)
 
Oct 24, 2019
302
28
28
Speaking of "picture?"
In mine? These are just "several" of the "72 virgins" the sons of ishmael, have to look forwards to "entertain" them on the "other" side of death! ;)
I suggest you change that picture to avoid an appearance of evil. Catholic nuns holding guns? It is not worthy of any person that professes to be a believer.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,685
13,373
113
Tell me, what priest shall I pay tithes to, to the megachurch pastor who collects tithes to fly in his private jet? Foolish. The Messiah became high priest, abolishing the Levitical priesthood, which came with the command to pay tithes to them. Tithes are also included under "foreshadows of realities found in the Messiah" of matters of Torah that are not required under the new covenant, for during the rulership of the Messiah tithes will be collected from the earth, and those tithes will be given unto us, for we will be granted the riches of the earth, and a tenth of the tenth will be granted to the Messiah. You have no clue what you are talking about, and are using a false pretense to discredit the truth that the Torah is indeed still binding, which is in itself sin.
You started so well, and ended so poorly. You have conflated "torah" (the Law as given to Moses) with "law" in every sense, and your position is based on this fallacy of equivocation.

Paul wrote to the Galatians with this quote from Deuteronomy 27:26, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” In other words, if you don't follow the Torah in its entirety, you are under its curse. Jesus set us free from that, and returning to it is foolish. Jesus' death and resurrection didn't "modify" the Torah (as given to Moses); they made it obsolete.

The future state (as you understand it) is, at this point in time, irrelevant. You can keep the personal comments to yourself, by the way. If you want a flame war, you'll need to find a different forum.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,685
13,373
113
I suggest you change that picture to avoid an appearance of evil. Catholic nuns holding guns? It is not worthy of any person that professes to be a believer.
I suggest you focus on what's important and don't make silly comments about the avatar pics others choose. Yours certainly isn't above criticism.
 
Oct 24, 2019
302
28
28
I suggest you focus on what's important and don't make silly comments about the avatar pics others choose. Yours certainly isn't above criticism.
You are free to criticize me, as you already have regarding my stance on the requirement to do good works, just as I am free to criticize others in accordance to the truth. This is an online forum, after all. Whether or not he wants to listen is up to him/her.
 

NayborBear

Banned Serpent Seed Heresy
I suggest you change that picture to avoid an appearance of evil. Catholic nuns holding guns? It is not worthy of any person that professes to be a believer.
An "appearance" of evil, in "the eyes of men", does not matter in the "eyes of Jehovah Shammah."

Would you agree?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,685
13,373
113
You are free to criticize me, as you already have regarding my stance on the requirement to do good works, just as I am free to criticize others in accordance to the truth. This is an online forum, after all. Whether or not he wants to listen is up to him/her.
You clearly don't understand the distinction between criticism of your person and criticism of your ideas.
 
Oct 24, 2019
302
28
28
You started so well, and ended so poorly. You have conflated "torah" (the Law as given to Moses) with "law" in every sense, and your position is based on this fallacy of equivocation.

Paul wrote to the Galatians with this quote from Deuteronomy 27:26, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” In other words, if you don't follow the Torah in its entirety, you are under its curse. Jesus set us free from that, and returning to it is foolish. Jesus' death and resurrection didn't "modify" the Torah (as given to Moses); they made it obsolete.

The future state (as you understand it) is, at this point in time, irrelevant. You can keep the personal comments to yourself, by the way. If you want a flame war, you'll need to find a different forum.
What you are saying is simply not true, because what you are implying is this, "since I cannot tithe, since there are no priests, then I am not obligated to obey the entire Torah, for it is all or nothing", which is "lawlessness", which is discarding the entire Torah, "torahlessness". The entire Torah is indeed still binding, but under the new covenant certain matters of Torah are fulfilled differently than under the old covenant, such as the requirement to kill the Passover lamb every year. Under the new covenant we already have a Passover lamb that was killed, and it is the Messiah, therefore we are not required to kill lambs every year, because we fulfill that requirement of the Torah through the Messiah. This is why Paul said, "let no one judge you by food, drink, feast, new moon, or shabbath, for these are all foreshadows of realities in the Messiah" and also why it is written, "for when there is a change in priesthood there must also be a change in the Torah". And it is through this understanding that we obey the entire Torah, but differently under the new covenant. You see me wearing tzitzit, but I eat pork, which may seem contradictory or as torahlessness, but under the new covenant certain matters of Torah have changed, such as the matter of food, which goes back to what Noah was told, "everything that moves shall be food for you", meaning clean and unclean. Abstaining from eating pork under the old covenant of Moses foreshadowed a greater reality, abstaining from friendships with unbelievers, who according to the scriptures, are considering pigs, hence "do not throw your pearls to pigs". But many people, such as yourself, take these examples in the new testament of matters of the Torah that are no longer required to be observed under the new covenant to mean that the entire Torah has been done away, which is a great error, and go into the extreme of torahlessness, which is worse than disbelief. This is why the Messiah said, "I did not come to abolish the Torah" and will say to many believers, "depart from me, you workers of torahlessness".
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,685
13,373
113
What you are saying is simply not true, because what you are implying is this, "since I cannot tithe, since there are no priests, then I am not obligated to obey the entire Torah, for it is all or nothing", which is "lawlessness", which is discarding the entire Torah, "torahlessness". The entire Torah is indeed still binding, but under the new covenant certain matters of Torah are fulfilled differently than under the old covenant, such as the requirement to kill the Passover lamb every year. Under the new covenant we already have a Passover lamb that was killed, and it is the Messiah, therefore we are not required to kill lambs every year, because we fulfill that requirement of the Torah through the Messiah. This is why Paul said, "let no one judge you by food, drink, feast, new moon, or shabbath, for these are all foreshadows of realities in the Messiah" and also why it is written, "for when there is a change in priesthood there must also be a change in the Torah". And it is through this understanding that we obey the entire Torah, but differently under the new covenant. You see me wearing tzitzit, but I eat pork, which may seem contradictory or as torahlessness, but under the new covenant certain matters of Torah have changed, such as the matter of food, which goes back to what Noah was told, "everything that moves shall be food for you", meaning clean and unclean. Abstaining from eating pork under the old covenant of Moses foreshadowed a greater reality, abstaining from friendships with unbelievers, who according to the scriptures, are considering pigs, hence "do not throw your pearls to pigs". But many people, such as yourself, take these examples in the new testament of matters of the Torah that are no longer required to be observed under the new covenant to mean that the entire Torah has been done away, which is a great error, and go into the extreme of torahlessness, which is worse than disbelief. This is why the Messiah said, "I did not come to abolish the Torah" and will say to many believers, "depart from me, you workers of torahlessness".
First, writing a wall of text is a great way to get ignored.

Second, your understanding of my implication is simply wrong.

Third, what part of "The gentiles are not under the Law" don't you understand? Read Acts 15.
 
Oct 24, 2019
302
28
28
An "appearance" of evil, in "the eyes of men", does not matter in the "eyes of Jehovah Shammah."

Would you agree?
It depends, if what is considered to be evil by man is also considered to be evil by God. A believer promulgating photos of nuns holding guns is certainly something that God would take offense by. But it is your choice what you choose to do with your own profile. You mentioned your own photo, so I gave you my opinion regarding it.
 
Oct 24, 2019
302
28
28
First, writing a wall of text is a great way to get ignored.

Second, your understanding of my implication is simply wrong.

Third, what part of "The gentiles are not under the Law" don't you understand? Read Acts 15.
What you call a "wall of text" is a sound and logical explanation of why the Torah is still binding today. But of course, someone who does not want to obey the Torah will find any reason to not listen, such as saying, "writing a wall of text is a great way to get ignored", when in truth, it was merely just a short paragraph explaining why it is true that the Torah is still binding. And besides that, did it not occur to you that there are more types of sins than just abstaining from blood and sexual immorality? The reason that the Jerusalem council only mentioned these specific things is because these were specific matters of Torah that the Gentiles commonly disobeyed, so rather then quote them the entire Torah, they only mentioned the specific matters that needed to be communicated to them right away, which is why in that same passage we read,

Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.
Acts 15:19-21

Meaning that the Torah is still binding. It would be like you trying to fix the engine of a car. If me, knowing how to fix the engine of a car, would I going to give you a year's worth of classes regarding engines, or would I quickly tell you what you need to do to fix the engine? So in likewise manner it was with the Jerusalem council, rather than quote them the entire Torah, which was already read all over the world, they simply quoted them matters of Torah they had to obey now that the Gentiles commonly disobeyed.
 

Marcelo

Senior Member
Feb 4, 2016
2,359
859
113
73
Good. May it be an example for you to also do the same. For these commands of the Torah are indeed necessary to obey under the new covenant still.
I appreciate your concern about my salvation, but I believe we are not under the law of Moses.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,685
13,373
113
What you call a "wall of text" is a sound and logical explanation of why the Torah is still binding today. But of course, someone who does not want to obey the Torah will find any reason to not listen, such as saying, "writing a wall of text is a great way to get ignored", when in truth, it was merely just a short paragraph explaining why it is true that the Torah is still binding. And besides that, did it not occur to you that there are more types of sins than just abstaining from blood and sexual immorality? The reason that the Jerusalem council only mentioned these specific things is because these were specific matters of Torah that the Gentiles commonly disobeyed, so rather then quote them the entire Torah, they only mentioned the specific matters that needed to be communicated to them right away, which is why in that same passage we read,

Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.
Acts 15:19-21

Meaning that the Torah is still binding. It would be like you trying to fix the engine of a car. If me, knowing how to fix the engine of a car, would I going to give you a year's worth of classes regarding engines, or would I quickly tell you what you need to do to fix the engine? So in likewise manner it was with the Jerusalem council, rather than quote them the entire Torah, which was already read all over the world, they simply quoted them matters of Torah they had to obey now that the Gentiles commonly disobeyed.
Skip the personal attacks, dude.

Read verses 10-12 and 28. They defeat your position completely.