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

[stonesoffire]

Could the "also" in vs 22 give some idea of part of your answer?

Thank you for answering SG, but isn’t what I’m seeing.

There’s only one way believers are purged and that’s through His blood when taking the cup of communion. It’s a continual process of exchange through Holy Spirits searching the heart, bringing to mind things needing taken care of and repentance.

The scriptures reveal wrong attitudes or ways but Holy Spirit removes.

This is reality not principles.

 

[Marcelo]

Marcelo said:
A friend of mine did that (gave away almost everything he had) and then had to live off his friends. He quit a decent job (as an airline pilot) and ended up working as an executive pilot for Edir Macedo, the number one false prophet in South America.

Yikes! Sad testimonial. Sounds like he tried to have his cake and eat it too.

If you consider the opportunity we have today...Today most people have 100 times the ease comfort and luxuries than any king did in Yahshua' time. Most people in the world today think poverty is the scourge of our day, but actually wealth, possessions, materialism is by far the most spiritually devastating scourge there is. On the flip side, with so much sacrifice to offer, anyone who does so will store up even more treasure in heaven.

My friend was a by-the-book-Christian. He studied the Bible just like lawyers study a civil code, and this is putting the cart ahead of the ox. Christians must be primarily guided by the Holy Spirit and secondly by Scripture.

 

[SimpleGardner]

My friend was a by-the-book-Christian. He studied the Bible just like lawyers study a civil code, and this is putting the cart ahead of the ox. Christians must be primarily guided by the Holy Spirit and secondly by Scripture.

Were you able to share your insights with him? I have known a few people to be led by guilt or desire for the praise of men, but if not called by the lead of the Holy Spirit that is one storm that will be hard to weather.

 

[SoulWeaver]

I do not know how you can have of a fear of losing salvation when you are loving and following Him.

I don't have fear of losing salvation now, I believe eternal safety which makes me believe and follow more effectively. I had the fear of losing salvation as a new believer for years so I'll try to explain. The thing with believing salvation loss is that the person never really feels secure in Jesus nor can really lean on promises of God (because if I mess up then promises don't apply to me anymore), and always feels on thin ice with God. If one can lose salvation, then the premise is also that they are in control of not losing said salvation (otherwise why warn them). Your relationship with God might have started on a better footing...

This post will be a little longer since I am answering about contradictions in the Scriptures you pointed.

It's hard to measure out the full message of God righteously, without turning "to the right or to the left".
I believe irrevocability of God's gifts as stated in the Scriptures, hand in hand with non complacency.
I believe the message you guys are actually trying to get across is non complacency about God's things.
I think we can all agree that the person who has been born again, not complacent about things of God, changed by God so that it is impossible for them to go back to the old vomit life anymore, has everlasting security with God.
I would think from what you said up there, that we agree!

Here's another interesting Scripture:
Jude 1:21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.
22 And of some have compassion, making a difference:
23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

This tells us that there are 3 different groups of people, both believers AND unbelievers, who respond to different things to bring/keep them closer to God, and also calls us to apply some discerning. First group responded to message of God's mercy, another group to Christians being loving to them, and the third group responds to fear. Some people do need to be "shaken up" a little. I take it from this that we must be led by the Holy Spirit in how to best help every individual person. I'd take it also by the order given that mercy goes first, with compassion, but if they are unresponsive to lovingkindness... do what you must!

Sometimes a sharp rebuke is what is needed, I just hate when some people step out on their own self righteousness, it's very ugly looking and does not further the Kingdom of God. We're supposed to be moved by the Spirit of God, not our egos.

I looked at the problematic Scriptures you listed. "God's people" may not actually be synonymous to "the elect" on every instance, which may cause confusion. Take per example:

Genesis 17:14 "...that soul shall be cut off from his people;"
This very phrase. It's obviously shown here that "His people" are not the same as "the elect" because the elect do not lose salvation, being foreknown, as in Jer 1:5. The parable of Jesus where He explains in the end "many are called, but few are chosen" confirms that the elect/chosen do not lose salvation.
In support of it, in other parables of Jesus, such as parable of the faithful servant, unbelievers are lumped together into a single group with the believers and Jesus is called their "Master". (The assembly of believers is not treated as separate group in their midst). Then they are separated, the righteous from the wicked, and rewarded accordingly.
So in some cases "His people" might mean "all the servants in the house"/"many who are called" basically, of whom some get cut off, while in some contexts it means only the faithful servants, or the "elect/chosen". This would clarify a lot of contradiction.

This one also makes me ponder:
Romans 11:2 "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew."
Comma is inserted into text in some translations after "people" because translators assume the meaning and add to it. Ancient Greek did not have punctuation. KJV keeps it without comma, as I quoted.
The verse suggests here that there are some of His people who are not foreknown... those that he foreknew He did not cast away. In other words God casts away some of His people... The unforeknown ones. (please bear with me)
This seems a bit mind boggling, but in the light of Jeremiah 1:5, Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, God knew Jeremiah in advance, because Jeremiah has eternal life. Which means Jeremiah was communing in unity of being with God before his birth, and also after his death. This verse tells us Jeremiah was with God since the beginning of time alongside all the saints, because eternal life is sharing in God's oneness of eternal being. It's easy to understand then how the unforeknown are really not foreknown. They were never the part of God's being.

I was then researching all occurrences of "elect" in the Bible, to see if any of them openly state that it's possible to lose salvation because I really want to get to the depth of this. I will bring only those that might be taken as such:

Mark 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.
I would take this warning as "elect are not immune to deception: watch". The Holy Spirit will convict the elect when they sin, but we need to do our best to not grieve the Spirit. Gospel of John makes it clear that we all sin at times. Loss of salvation is nowhere claimed.

2 Peter 1:10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
Not salvation loss, but rather non complacency. You keep in non complacency towards God, that's how you make sure (know) you are the elect. God doesn't half-elect. Peter is calling for diligence but also saying that if you keep going in diligence, you made sure that you shall never fall (thus "if you do this", you "shall never fall" - that's actually eternal security)... Those who are not diligent in their faith are called to question their election and make sure they are among the numbers of the elect (rather than election itself being revoked, hope I'm making sense here)...

It's basically what you say here:
"I do not know how you can have of a fear of losing salvation when you are loving and following Him."

This is eternal security, my friend, in the most perfect way, and is how it should be taught... simplicity of the Gospel, like a little child. We all get lost in "doctrines" sometimes but it's clear to anyone with common sense that God did not save us to abandon us if we stumble on the way nor is He going to forever endure a corrupt person who doesn't really want Him.
I think "OSAS" is a bit of misnomer. That's half the reason why people fight.

 

[SoulWeaver]

Considering Romans 8:1 in regards to OSAS, is it not your belief that you would no longer face judgment since your salvation is irrevocable, non-losable and eternal as the term OSAS implies?

Correct. Christ completes His work that He started in me and keeps chipping away what isn't of Him, and Jesus endured the judgment of God to save my soul. I am blameless through Jesus because I believe in Him. We believe that those who turn their back on Christ have never really believed to begin with. I take this from Jesus stating that He's lost none, except the son of perdition Judas, and then in that same place also stating He "knew those who would not believe" (speaking of Judas), thus those who would not believe are identified with the lost by Jesus Himself.
To make this point even stronger, Judas was one of the "believers" or disciples who had been around Jesus for years. Yet Jesus does not count him among His elect. He did not "lose salvation" - Judas simply did not ever believe Jesus.

Do you(OSAS) not say and believe that your sins in the past, present and future have all been forgiven?
Correct. We do believe that our sins past present future have all been forgiven on the Cross. Jesus said "it's finished".
But let's not confuse this with daily Christian walk:

...and you therefore have no more need to ask God for forgiveness and repent of your sins?
This is what a lot of people assume about OSAS, but is not true. Conviction by the Holy Spirit and asking for forgiveness if we sin in anything is part of our daily walk in God (1 John 1:9). I don't know where are you guys drawing these beliefs. We are accountable to Jesus who saved us. We love Jesus because He first loved us, and don't want to grieve the Holy Spirit. It's about the relationship with God.

That faith ALONE saves and that you are saved the very moment you believe which brought me to asking you about OSAS followers not facing judgment or being exempted from judgment.
Yes, faith alone. Fruits aka good works and change of character that develop are the fruit of our faith in Jesus. There can't be judgment in the sense of condemnation for followers of Jesus (I do not mean hearers of Jesus, but followers).
Romans 8:1, "There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."
The soul is not getting judged if you abide in Jesus, the works are though and by Jesus Himself. Can't take chaff into eternity.
I believe you don't have the accurate picture about what we actually believe, at least based on regular forum members that I know here.

Who are those that are truly in Christ Jesus according to scriptures?
I provided the ff: scriptures for your guidance.

But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.
1 John 2:5-6

And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love.
2 John 1:6

For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in them. Ephesians 2:10

Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Revelation 3:1-6

Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 2 John 1:9

All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained. Philippians 3:12-21

Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.

Confess Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and Walk in Love.

His Love endures forever.

This is not a point of contention. We on the forum who believe OSAS also believe that good works are the fruit of faith, and that who does not display good fruits yet needs to get born again and become a regenerated man in Jesus, regardless what they might think about themselves. Obedience and meekness is what proves that you're the sheep. God bless.

 

[JaumeJ]

No He did not. He did explain in detail how it is to be understood and honored under grace…

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

CORRECTION: On the third line, from bottom to top, replace FIGURE OF SPEECH with HYPERBOLE.

Thanks for your input, UWC! You're right, Jesus is preaching salvation by faith, for verse 40 reads: "For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

My focus, however, is on the differences between Jesus and Paul. Whom should we follow when they differ?

For example:

The earthly Jesus said: Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

Sell that ye have and give alms.

The risen Jesus (through Paul) said: As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy.

First the earthly Jesus says it's hard for a rich person to enter Heaven (some versions say: with difficulty). If difficulty is involved than this is not salvation by grace! Then the Lord says it's easy for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone rich to enter Heaven. Theologians say this is a hyperbole but it can't be. The Lord would never say "it's impossible" for something that is really possible.

Paul's teaching (Christ's spokesman) is completely different. He says it's OK to be rich provided you're not haughty and don't set your hopes on material wealth.

If someone makes riches and possessions their god, they are idolaters. Idolaters cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Jesus was dealing with an idolater (the rich young man) and the epistles were not dealing with an idolater, but rich people who needed to use their wealth responsibly to serve others, especially within the body of Christ.

 

[Grandpa]

No? It's something that "Christianity" doesn't even realize they aren't doing!

Nor, has "Christianity" any idea of, nor can give an interpretation to!

1) The "fullness of the gentiles!"
2) How to "provoke" Israel to jealousy!

CRICKETS!

Ya see? "Christianity" cannot keep going forward being "wise in their own conceits", with the "mind set": "We're going to KEEP on doing it THIS way!" "Not CARING if Israel gets jealous or not!"
As you can see! This "boasting against the branches" gets as DANGEROUS for "Christianity" as it did FOR Israel!
Romans 11
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.

But, "Christianity" CAN'T "see" that, can it?

Well Christianity surely will not cause Israel to be jealous by trying to emulate jewish customs.

What will cause Israel to be jealous is how we are Righteous before God and ARE NOT working at the 10 commandments. That's not fair, they should think. We have done this and have done that in Gods Name and yet we are not righteous before Him but these Christians are who just rest in Christs finished work. Its not fair!

 

[PS]

Well Christianity surely will not cause Israel to be jealous by trying to emulate jewish customs.

What will cause Israel to be jealous is how we are Righteous before God and ARE NOT working at the 10 commandments. That's not fair, they should think. We have done this and have done that in Gods Name and yet we are not righteous before Him but these Christians are who just rest in Christs finished work. Its not fair!

Love it.

 

[Grandpa]

Well we can go to the record and see how the order of events progressed. We can post passages of the Exodus event if you want?

But remember your original counterpoint was about how the sacrifice/purification laws can't be sectioned off and later removed because they were all one law with the commandments (correctly citing that confirmed covenants can't be changed).

So do you now agree that the animal sacrifices and leviticus rites were given separately after the Sinai covenant was confirmed?

Well they weren't given all at once. I can agree on that.


Actually, from reading Exodus 19 and 20 I'm not so sure that animal sacrifice and priests didn't pre-exist the giving of the 10 commandments.

It kind of looks like they did.

Exodus 19:22 And let the priests also, which come near to the Lord, sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon them.

Priests? Before the 10 commandments are given?

Also burnt offerings and sacrifices appear to have been practiced as far back as Noah.


So they already had priests giving burnt offerings and sacrifices to God before the 10 commandments are given. I never really saw that before. I guess I never really cared about the timeline of it before.



This is interesting to talk about but doesn't really change the fact that it was ALL given under Moses. Can you say the 10 commandments weren't given under Moses? Can you say that Levitical Rites weren't given under Moses? Do you see how this makes it ALL Moses Law? And not a bunch of separate laws that don't have the Authority of God behind them?

 

[Grandpa]

Considering Romans 8:1 in regards to OSAS, is it not your belief that you would no longer face judgment since your salvation is irrevocable, non-losable and eternal as the term OSAS implies?

We will all face judgement and this will put our faith to the test.

What I will not face is the consequences of that judgement that other people without faith will face.

Who are those that are truly in Christ Jesus according to scriptures?
I provided the ff: scriptures for your guidance.

That would be the people who are free from the law of sin and death.

That would be people who have the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus.

That would be people who stand fast in the Liberty in which Christ has set us free and no longer entangle themselves in the yoke of bondage.

That would be people who rest in Christ and no longer labor or are heavily burdened by their work at the 10 c's.


Step 1 in obeying ANY commandments;

Matthew 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

 

[Yahshua]

Well Christianity surely will not cause Israel to be jealous by trying to emulate jewish customs.

What will cause Israel to be jealous is how we are Righteous before God and ARE NOT working at the 10 commandments. That's not fair, they should think. We have done this and have done that in Gods Name and yet we are not righteous before Him but these Christians are who just rest in Christs finished work. Its not fair!

But with respect that's like a husband changing what he wants from one bride to another.

Does the living God change? Is Yah double-minded?

The one reason He rejected the first bride for failing to do (obey) he doesn't ask from the other, and threatens to reject her if she tries?

That's like the King rejecting obedient Esther while honoring Vashti who refused to do anything.

 

[Grandpa]

But with respect that's like a husband changing what he wants from one bride to another.

Does the living God change? Is Yah double-minded?

The one reason He rejected the first bride for failing to do (obey) he doesn't ask from the other, and threatens to reject her if she tries?

That's like the King rejecting obedient Esther while honoring Vashti who refused to do anything.

God gave the people what they asked for to show them that what they asked for was WRONG and WOULDN'T/COULDN'T work.

God gave them this same lesson with King Saul. The carnal/proud mind thinks a big, mighty, royal looking man should be king. So this is what God gave them.

The carnal/proud mind thinks it can emulate the perfection of God. So God commanded it of them.


Do you think for a second that God DIDN'T know they wouldn't be able to perform it?

And then you think the solution for this is to get rid of animal sacrifice but keep the law that commands Perfection before God by your performance and strength?

No, of course this CAN'T be the SOLUTION FROM GOD. God already knows you will fail at that.

The Solution From God is coming to Christ and receiving rest from your own work at being Perfect before God and instead becoming His Workmanship so the Lord can make you perfect before God.

Don't you think it would make more sense that He would be better at it than us?

Doesn't it make more sense that He would make His Bride into something He wants instead of something we imagine He wants?

I guess it does to me.

 

[Yahshua]

Well they weren't given all at once. I can agree on that.

Ok.

Actually, from reading Exodus 19 and 20 I'm not so sure that animal sacrifice and priests didn't pre-exist the giving of the 10 commandments.

It kind of looks like they did.

Exodus 19:22 And let the priests also, which come near to the Lord, sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon them.

Priests? Before the 10 commandments are given?

Also burnt offerings and sacrifices appear to have been practiced as far back as Noah.


So they already had priests giving burnt offerings and sacrifices to God before the 10 commandments are given. I never really saw that before. I guess I never really cared about the timeline of it before.



This is interesting to talk about but doesn't really change the fact that it was ALL given under Moses. Can you say the 10 commandments weren't given under Moses? Can you say that Levitical Rites weren't given under Moses? Do you see how this makes it ALL Moses Law? And not a bunch of separate laws that don't have the Authority of God behind them?

...But this is critical to the original point you made, which was "a covenant can't be changed once confirmed and so adding or taking away laws isn't possible", so we looked to scripture to see when certain laws were given...before or after the confirming of the sinai covenant.

Have you ever heard of the saying "an absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence"? In other words we can't use speculation as proof.

It serves us no good to speculate if we are basing doctrines off what scripture says, you know?

Offerings and sacrifices have indeed been offered as far back as Noah. As far back as Abel actually (and actually I believe Adam was the first Priest), but we were talking about the Sinai covenant and when laws were specifically given. Like bookends, there's the entering into the covenant...and then the stuff inside it...and then it's sealed/locked by blood.

----

So do you agree that scripture details sacrifices or priest laws given OUTSIDE the sinai covenant being offered and it being sealed?

----

Moses himself isn't the covenant and yes all laws the living God gives have his authority behind them. But the issue you've expressed to me is in me saying that the living God can change his law by necessity (as stated in Hebrews); you said it all was given and locked within the sinai covenant. I was just hoping we could see from scripture that it all wasn't.

 

[Yahshua]

God gave the people what they asked for to show them that what they asked for was WRONG and WOULDN'T/COULDN'T work.

God gave them this same lesson with King Saul. The carnal/proud mind thinks a big, mighty, royal looking man should be king. So this is what God gave them.

The carnal/proud mind thinks it can emulate the perfection of God. So God commanded it of them.

....But...they didn't ask for anything but deliverance from their bondage to pharaoh, Grandpa. They didn't ask for laws or statues or commandments. That's what the almighty asked from them. He asked, "will you obey me", and they answered "yes".

Do you think for a second that God DIDN'T know they wouldn't be able to perform it?

And then you think the solution for this is to get rid of animal sacrifice but keep the law that commands Perfection before God by your performance and strength?

No, of course this CAN'T be the SOLUTION FROM GOD. God already knows you will fail at that.

The Solution From God is coming to Christ and receiving rest from your own work at being Perfect before God and instead becoming His Workmanship so the Lord can make you perfect before God.

Don't you think it would make more sense that He would be better at it than us?

Doesn't it make more sense that He would make His Bride into something He wants instead of something we imagine He wants?

I guess it does to me.

Now do I think He knew they wouldn't or couldn't obey? Yes, 100% in agreement with you.

But that doesn't mean He's going to get rid of what he asked for, because that's what he wants. His word can't return void once it's put out there.

We haven't imagined the bride he wants. No one imagined the 10 commandments. Everything came from Him. The only words recorded that were actually shouted by the living God to a mass of people all at once were the commandments. What getting rid of his words suggests is that he didn't know the bride he wanted the first time around. That He's the unstable one.

No Instead, He's going to make it possible to become the very bride he wants, as eventually Christ came to give us the very strength to use to obey...but WE have to use that strength.

Think about this...

How much of the total bible do you think speaks about obeying the Almighty and his commandments versus what can be interpreted as instructions not to try at all?

Have you ever notice? It's not even a 50/50 split. In fact only portions of Galatians, Romans and Hebrews come to mind that can be directly interpreted as "do not try".

The rest of Paul's letters, the other apostles letters, the record of Paul's words in acts, the gospels, the "OT" and the book of Revelation ALL speak about or include obeying God's commandments.

And then, we have testimony of one of the original apostles warning folks about misinterpreting Paul's words, which - regardless of whether Peter meant it one way or the other (and I'm not diving into that discussion again) - proves Paul's words can be misconstrued somehow.

So we have 95% of all of scripture saying also obey the commandments with effort and 5% that can be interpreted as "do not try", and that 5% comes from the one person that an *original* apostle said can be misunderstood...

Do you see what I mean?

 

[Grandpa]

Ok.



...But this is critical to the original point you made, which was "a covenant can't be changed once confirmed and so adding or taking away laws isn't possible", so we looked to scripture to see when certain laws were given...before or after the confirming of the sinai covenant.

Have you ever heard of the saying "an absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence"? In other words we can't use speculation as proof.

It serves us no good to speculate if we are basing doctrines off what scripture says, you know?

Offerings and sacrifices have indeed been offered as far back as Noah. As far back as Abel actually (and actually I believe Adam was the first Priest), but we were talking about the Sinai covenant and when laws were specifically given. Like bookends, there's the entering into the covenant...and then the stuff inside it...and then it's sealed/locked by blood.

----

So do you agree that scripture details sacrifices or priest laws given OUTSIDE the sinai covenant being offered and it being sealed?

----

Moses himself isn't the covenant and yes all laws the living God gives have his authority behind them. But the issue you've expressed to me is in me saying that the living God can change his law by necessity (as stated in Hebrews); you said it all was given and locked within the sinai covenant. I was just hoping we could see from scripture that it all wasn't.

So you are saying the sacrifices weren't part of the Mosaic covenant?

They were just extra laws given that had no bearing on the covenant?

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

I have been looking at when some of these threads started, and how many pages of remarks there are..amazing

 

[PS]

But with respect that's like a husband changing what he wants from one bride to another. Does the living God change? Is Yah double-minded?

The one reason He rejected the first bride for failing to do (obey) he doesn't ask from the other, and threatens to reject her if she tries?

That's like the King rejecting obedient Esther while honoring Vashti who refused to do anything.

Of course God does not change, but being supreme He can make a New Covenant that includes all those who believe in Him just like the OT patriarchs did, no strings (rituals) attached except we love, honour and obey Him. Anything else is like a kicking God in the face and I would not like to be in that persons shoes.

 

[PS]

Ok.



...But this is critical to the original point you made, which was "a covenant can't be changed once confirmed and so adding or taking away laws isn't possible", so we looked to scripture to see when certain laws were given...before or after the confirming of the sinai covenant.

Have you ever heard of the saying "an absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence"? In other words we can't use speculation as proof.

It serves us no good to speculate if we are basing doctrines off what scripture says, you know?

Offerings and sacrifices have indeed been offered as far back as Noah. As far back as Abel actually (and actually I believe Adam was the first Priest), but we were talking about the Sinai covenant and when laws were specifically given. Like bookends, there's the entering into the covenant...and then the stuff inside it...and then it's sealed/locked by blood.

----

So do you agree that scripture details sacrifices or priest laws given OUTSIDE the sinai covenant being offered and it being sealed?

----

Moses himself isn't the covenant and yes all laws the living God gives have his authority behind them. But the issue you've expressed to me is in me saying that the living God can change his law by necessity (as stated in Hebrews); you said it all was given and locked within the sinai covenant. I was just hoping we could see from scripture that it all wasn't.

Sacrifice is ended.

 

[PS]

I have been looking at when some of these threads started, and how many pages of remarks there are..amazing

Due entirely to stubbornness.