looking for help reconciling the Sabbath with common observation?

[TMS]

God created the ordinances and laws of the Old testament. They were HIS creation and HIS laws. If He created them, He can also CHANGE THEM. And He has. He says so in Hebrews 7:12. The law has been CHANGED! He illustrates this fact by pointing out that Jesus is our HIGH PRIEST. And in another place it says that ALL Christians today are “priests.” But in the old law of Moses you could not be a priest UNLESS you were from the tribe of Levi. There is no way Jesus can be our HIGH PRIEST if the law of Moses is still in effect, because Jesus was from the tribe of JUDAH. So, he says, “For the priesthood being CHANGED, of NECESSITY, there is also a CHANGE OF THE LAW.” Please remember this is the Holy Spirit talking and the Holy Spirit says the law has been CHANGED.

Hebrews 7:18, “there is an ANNULLING of the former commandment…”
Hebrews 7:19, “ there is the BRINGING IN OF A BETTER HOPE.”
Hebrews 7:22, “ Jesus has become a surety of a BETTER COVENANT.”
Hebrews 8:16, “ He is also Mediator Of a BETTER COVENANT which was established upon BETTER PROMISES.”
Hebrews 8:7, “ For if that FIRST covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a SECOND.”
Hebrews 8:8, “…the days are coming days the Lord when I will make a NEW COVENANT with the house of Israel…” not like that OLD COVENANT that He made with their fathers when he led them out of Egypt ( Mt. Sinai).
Hebrews 8:13, “He says a NEW COVENANT, He has made THE FIRST OBSOLETE. Now what is becoming OBSOLETE and GROWING OLD is ready to VANISH AWAY.”
Hebrews 10:9, “He TAKES AWAY THE FIRST so that He may ESTABLISH THE SECOND.”
Hebrews 10:19-20, we “enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, BY A NEW AND LIVING WAY.”

If these scriptures by the Holy Spirit do not teach that 1) the Old covenant, law of Moses, is no longer binding on us, is no longer in effect, and 2) that Christ as our High Priest has brought in a NEW , BETTER covenant LAW, also called the law of FAITH in Romans 3:27, by which we are governed and held accountable to today, ,,, then please tell me what these scriptures are talking about.

The point Paul makes in Roman’s 7 is that we CANNOT be married to the law of Moses and to the law of Christ at the same time.

Colossians 2:12-16 says that Christ took that old law with its “handwriting of ordinances” away, nailing it to His cross. He specifically names THE SABBATH as part of that which was TAKEN AWAY.

Neither Jesus, nor the Holy Spirit nor any apostle EVER told anyone in the church of Christ or any Christian to keep the Sabbath day holy. That Old Testament law has been ANNULLED, TAKEN AWAY, NAILED TO THE CROSS OF JESUS.

Now here is the serious part. Galations 5:4 says, “You have become ESTRANGED FROM CHRIST, you who attempt to be justified by the law, YOU HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE.” Keeping the Sabbath day as a religious requirement will cause you to be “separated from Christ.”

As Paul specifically says concerning the Old Testament law, “TOUCH NOT, TASTE NOT, HANDLE NOT.” Colossians 2:21.

Different laws

Are all the laws void today. ???

Are we free to commit Adultery today?

Are we free to live without the moral laws?

The laws that were given to define sin have not changed.

Do we make void the law by grace? NO.

In relation to the covenant in Hebrews... ask yourself, did God make a faulty old covenant, did God do things wrong?
No.. the people failed. And God set up a better covenant which is better because Jesus will write the laws in the Heart.

The laws were not faulty.

God does not give faulty laws.

There are 2 different laws being discussed. The cerimonial laws of ordinances and the moral laws.

 

[Bible_Locket]

The claim that the Sabbath was only an Old Covenant institution fails when Scripture's timeline is examined. The Sabbath was not introduced at Sinai. It appears before Israel existed as a nation...Genesis 2:2–3 states: "God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it He rested from all the work of creating that He had done." The Sabbath is rooted in creation itself, not merely the Mosaic covenant...Then, when the Ten Commandments were given, the 4th commandment does not say "create a new Sabbath." It says: "REMEMBER the Sabbath day by keeping it holy." — Exodus 20:8 To remember something means it was already established and known...The commandment connects directly back to creation: "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth... but He rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy." — Exodus 20:11...So the biblical sequence is: Creation → Sabbath established → Israel commanded to remember → Sabbath observed. The question is not whether the Sabbath existed under the Old Covenant. It clearly did...The question is whether something established by God at creation and included in the moral law is abolished simply because the Old Covenant reached fulfillment. To also note that marriage as well was also included in the mosaic laws and establish in the days of creation but yet we do not say that marriage is fullfilled. We cant be isolating the Sabbath alone. Jesus said: "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." — Mark 2:27...Notice He did not say the Sabbath was made only for Israel. The foundation of the Sabbath is creation, the command is remembrance, and its purpose predates Sinai. In the book of Revelations 1:10 “I was in the spirit in the Lord’s day” Jesus said he is Lord over the sabbath day and John is busy addressing Jesus himself when he is talking about his experience on the Lord’s day, the Lord’s day is the day Jesus is Lord over which as he said is the sabbath day thus the Lord’s day is Sabbath.

If you want peace in your living faith,don't seek consensus with regard to scripture.

You're on an Internet forum and countless pseudonyms all of which profess faith in Christ.
And all with differing perspectives on what that means.

If you feel led to honor the Sabbath from sundown Friday unto sundown Saturday, do so.
And ignore the critics.
If God leads you to that day he made for you,as Jesus himself said,the Sabbath was made for man. Not man for the Sabbath,believe God.
Follow where he leads.

Be Blessed. And,welcome.

 

[Bible_Locket]

Watch out for that ideology that insists upon something like, God's laws were only for the Jews!

Antisemitism is not a thing of the past.

Study,to show thyself approved.

Certain laws of God were for the Jews. Civil laws, for instance. Ceremonial
laws.

God said he put his laws upon our hearts so we are not far from them. The 10 commands of God are moral laws. They guide us to love God and ourselves,family,and neighbors.

Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy. Sabbath predated the Decalogue.

You'll find many who claim to follow Christ
will insist on ignoring what God teaches in the foundation principles of his first testament.
Some think the first testament was put away as if it is the same as the first,old, covenant.

That's untrue.The first testament contains many covenants.Not just one.

The first covenant was the Adamic covenant.
Go forth from there and find the others.

Know where you came from as one called by God into his grace,so to know why you have arrived in the new covenant by his grace.

Tighten your armor of God about you too. His enemies also crawl the web.
Stay prayed up. No
weapon formed against you shall prosper....not for their lack of trying.

 

[TMS]

If these scriptures by the Holy Spirit do not teach that 1) the Old covenant, law of Moses, is no longer binding on us, is no longer in effect, and 2) that Christ as our High Priest has brought in a NEW , BETTER covenant LAW, also called the law of FAITH in Romans 3:27, by which we are governed and held accountable to today, ,,, then please tell me what these scriptures are talking about.

God gave the 10 commandments and they were perfect... without fault.
God does not make mistakes.

God also gave the cerimonial laws to the nation of Israel.
The ceremonial laws were primarily given by God to Moses serving as a pedagogical system of types and shadows to point the people to the coming Messiah.

They were types and shadows..

The moral law points out sin and defines what sin is. No law = no sin Cain sinned, Adam sinned, Lots of people before the flood were sinning which mean clearly that a law was definitely in place.

The cerimonial law was introduced because of sin.. NO SIN = NO NEED FOR THE CERIMONIAL LAW.

the cerimonial laws all pointed to Jesus. A shadow of the coming Messiah and His priestly ministry.

While the moral law (the Ten Commandments) has existed since the beginning, the ceremonial law of sacrifices and rituals was a later addition.


After the children of Israel came out of Egypt, God spoke the moral law with His own voice Exodus 20:1-17, but He gave the ceremonial precepts through Moses. These included "precepts, statutes, and laws" given "by the hand of Moses" Nehemiah 9:13-14.

Ceremonial religion was multiplied because the people failed to understand the spiritual nature of God's kingdom. The various "meats and drinks and divers washings, and carnal ordinances" were "imposed on them until the time of reformation" Hebrews 9:10.

God commanded the building of an earthly sanctuary so that He could dwell among His people Exodus 25:8. This system was "a figure for the time then present" Hebrews 9:9.

The ceremonial law was never intended to be a means of salvation itself; rather, it was a "schoolmaster" to lead us to the true Source of life. It pointed to Christ.

Every sacrifice made was a lesson about Jesus, the Lamb of God. The cerimonial law served as a "shadow of good things to come" Hebrews 10:1.

Because man had transgressed the moral law, the ceremonial law was instituted as an announcement of the Gospel in a concrete, visible form Hebrews 9:6-14.

The law about Adultery and coveting or about taking the Lord's name in vain was not a shadow or school master of Christ.. The 10 commandments directly reflect the morals of God.

Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

ESTABLISH THE LAW.

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances nailed to the cross.

Paul said to establish the law and he said the law was nailed to the cross.

Do agree there are 2 laws?

 

[Gideon300]

Many serious problems with what you have written, and the first one is that you are presenting church tradition as though it were Scripture. You said that the “Lord’s Day” was a first-century church practice passed down by tradition, but tradition is not proof of what the apostles taught. You yourself admitted that the only Scripture you can point to is Revelation 1:10. That verse does not say Sunday. It does not say the first day of the week. It does not say that the Sabbath was changed. It simply says:

I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet. (Revelation 1:10)

If Scripture does not tell us that “the Lord’s Day” means Sunday, then you cannot make the text say something it does not say. The fact that you were taught this orally forty years ago does not turn that teaching into Scripture. We are supposed to test teachings by the Word of God, not use tradition to establish doctrine.

Now you bring up Acts 15:24 and claim that the apostles were saying that they did not teach keeping the Law. But that is not what the passage says. Read the whole matter carefully. The controversy was about Gentiles being told that they had to be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses in order to be saved. The apostles rejected that teaching. They did not announce that the Ten Commandments had been abolished.

Acts 15:24 says: Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”—to whom we gave no such commandment

Notice exactly what the apostles rejected: circumcision and the claim that Gentiles had to take upon themselves the Law of Moses as a requirement for salvation. You have taken that statement and turned it into “therefore the Sabbath commandment no longer exists.” Acts 15:24 never says that.

And you ask, “Was the Sabbath not part of the Law?”

Yes, the Sabbath IS part of the Ten Commandments. But here is where the distinction you are missing becomes very important. The Bible itself distinguishes the Ten Commandments from the other statutes and judgments given through Moses.

God spoke the Ten Commandments directly to Israel, wrote them on tablets of stone, and placed those tablets in the ark. Scripture says: And He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone. (Deuteronomy 4:13)

The Sabbath is the fourth commandment. So if you claim that the Sabbath commandment was abolished or changed, then you need to show the Scripture where God abolished or changed it.

You cannot simply point to Acts 15:24 and pretend that verse says it. And then you say, “Jesus did not observe the Sabbath as understood by the Jews.” That statement actually proves the opposite of what you are trying to prove.

Jesus did not reject the Sabbath. He rejected the man-made traditions and false interpretations that the religious leaders had added to it.

Jesus said: The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. Therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath.(Mark 2:27–28) Notice what Jesus did not say. He did not say, “The Sabbath was made for the Jews only.” He did not say, “The Sabbath is now abolished.” He did not say, “The first day of the week has replaced the seventh day.” men said that and is is NOT based on ANY scripture but only traditions of these same men.

He called Himself Lord of the Sabbath. And Luke tells us what Jesus actually did:

So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. (Luke 4:16)

That was Jesus' custom. He followed the sabbath command and explained it further.

So we have a very simple question: are we going to believe what Jesus actually did and taught, or are we going to replace His words with a tradition that says Sunday became the Lord's Day?

Jesus also said:

If you love Me, keep My commandments. (John 14:15)

And: If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. (John 15:10)

Jesus did not teach His disciples that obedience to God's commandments was now meaningless. He taught them to keep His commandments, all of them all he taught and He Himself said that He had kept His Father's commandments.

You also mention Colossians 2:16 as though it settles the matter. But even if someone wants to use that passage, they still have to prove what “sabbath days” means in its context. They cannot simply assume that every reference to a Sabbath means the fourth commandment and then declare that commandment abolished. there were many Sabbaths in the old testament

But I will leave that argument aside for now because we do not even need to go there. Jesus' own words already give us the foundation we need.

The bigger problem here is the method being used. You are saying, “I was taught this tradition,” then pointing to a verse that does not actually say what you claim it says, and then declaring that anyone who disagrees is twisting Scripture and that is backwards.

The proper question is not, “What did I hear in church forty years ago?” The proper question is, “What did Jesus and His apostles actually teach?”

And when we put Jesus' words first, as we should, we find no statement from Him saying that the seventh-day Sabbath was abolished and replaced by Sunday.

There is no verse in Revelation 1:10 saying Sunday.

There is no verse in Acts 15:24 saying the Sabbath was abolished.

There is no statement from Jesus saying the fourth commandment was cancelled.

And there is certainly no command from Jesus saying, “Keep the first day instead.”

I would suggest that we all do write about what is actually written in scripture rather than reading later church tor oral tradition back into the text.

If you can show me one statement from Jesus saying that the Sabbath commandment was abolished, changed to another day, or replaced by Sunday, then present it. Until then, your interpretation does not make it Scripture.

and NO I am not a legalist or SDA but simply follow what Jesus commanded.

The Law of Moses never applied to gentiles. End of story. Acts 15. Much of Paul's writing was intended to defend against those who would seek to impose law on believers. Either you live according to law or you live by grace. There is no in between. Worship on Saturday if you wish. It's not wrong. Neither is it an essential observation if you want to keep God happy.

You don't need a scripture to tell you that it is not necessary to worship on Saturday. The whole of the law has been abolished. It has been replaced by the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.

Tell me, if you you were walking (no more than a mile) to church on the Sabbath, would you stop to help a woman who had a flat tyre? That would be work. Not allowed. And that is the point of the good Samaritan parable. The two Jews were not permitted by the law to touch a dead body. The victim had been left for dead. So the Jews went by on the other side of the road. The Samaritan was not under the law, so he saved the man's life. That's grace.

The law has not passed away. Believers have passed away. We die to the law. No law applies to dead people. Even if they were the worst of criminals, they are not going to face court in this life anyway. Bin Laden's body was not charged with terrorist offences. That would be ridiculous. Yet Christians think that the law they died to still applies. That is equally ridiculous. Romans 7, much of Galatians and parts of Colossians confirm that the Law no longer applies to believers.​

 

[OMC]

The Law of Moses never applied to gentiles. End of story. Acts 15. Much of Paul's writing was intended to defend against those who would seek to impose law on believers. Either you live according to law or you live by grace. There is no in between. Worship on Saturday if you wish. It's not wrong. Neither is it an essential observation if you want to keep God happy.

You don't need a scripture to tell you that it is not necessary to worship on Saturday. The whole of the law has been abolished. It has been replaced by the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.

Tell me, if you you were walking (no more than a mile) to church on the Sabbath, would you stop to help a woman who had a flat tyre? That would be work. Not allowed. And that is the point of the good Samaritan parable. The two Jews were not permitted by the law to touch a dead body. The victim had been left for dead. So the Jews went by on the other side of the road. The Samaritan was not under the law, so he saved the man's life. That's grace.

The law has not passed away. Believers have passed away. We die to the law. No law applies to dead people. Even if they were the worst of criminals, they are not going to face court in this life anyway. Bin Laden's body was not charged with terrorist offences. That would be ridiculous. Yet Christians think that the law they died to still applies. That is equally ridiculous. Romans 7, much of Galatians and parts of Colossians confirm that the Law no longer applies to believers.​

Your claim that “the Law of Moses never applied to Gentiles, end of story” is half‑true and therefore dangerous: yes, Gentiles were never under the Sinai covenant, but Paul’s entire argument in Romans 2 is that Gentiles do by nature the things of the law and that the work of the law is written on their hearts — meaning the moral content of the law condemns them even without covenant membership; Acts 15 does not abolish the law, it abolishes imposing Sinai on Gentile converts, which is not the same thing as declaring the law meaningless.
Your Good Samaritan reading is simply wrong: Jews were permitted to help the injured on Sabbath, and touching a corpse was not forbidden by Sabbath law but by purity law — and Jesus uses the parable to expose lovelessness, not to teach that “law prevents compassion.”
Your “law has been abolished” claim contradicts Jesus directly: He says not one jot or tittle will pass until all is fulfilled, and Paul says the law is holy, righteous, and good; what has changed is not the law but the covenant relationship to it — believers have died to the law as a covenant of condemnation, not to the law as the revelation of God’s moral will.
Romans 7 does not teach that Christians have no law; it teaches that the believer is freed from the law’s jurisdiction for justification, not freed from the law’s moral content.
Galatians does not teach antinomianism; it teaches that justification is by faith and that the Spirit fulfills the law’s righteous requirement in those who walk by Him.
Your argument collapses because you treat “law” as a monolithic category when Scripture distinguishes Sinai covenant law, moral law, purity law, and civil law, and Paul’s polemic is against using the law as a means of righteousness, not against the law as a standard of holiness.

 

[Gideon300]

you don't understand a thing do you? People need to seriously read scripture and reject the doctrines of men.

the rest in Christ proposed is not about the sabbath day, replacing it not does it abolish it. In the N.T people still followed the sabbath day its all over scripture from the first book of the new testament to the last one.

You do not understand the place of the law. You are also wrong about believers following the Sabbath. You need a history lesson as well as studying God's word. By the way, the NT is not the gospels. It began the night Jesus was betrayed.

 

[Gideon300]

Your claim that “the Law of Moses never applied to Gentiles, end of story” is half‑true and therefore dangerous: yes, Gentiles were never under the Sinai covenant, but Paul’s entire argument in Romans 2 is that Gentiles do by nature the things of the law and that the work of the law is written on their hearts — meaning the moral content of the law condemns them even without covenant membership; Acts 15 does not abolish the law, it abolishes imposing Sinai on Gentile converts, which is not the same thing as declaring the law meaningless.
Your Good Samaritan reading is simply wrong: Jews were permitted to help the injured on Sabbath, and touching a corpse was not forbidden by Sabbath law but by purity law — and Jesus uses the parable to expose lovelessness, not to teach that “law prevents compassion.”
Your “law has been abolished” claim contradicts Jesus directly: He says not one jot or tittle will pass until all is fulfilled, and Paul says the law is holy, righteous, and good; what has changed is not the law but the covenant relationship to it — believers have died to the law as a covenant of condemnation, not to the law as the revelation of God’s moral will.
Romans 7 does not teach that Christians have no law; it teaches that the believer is freed from the law’s jurisdiction for justification, not freed from the law’s moral content.
Galatians does not teach antinomianism; it teaches that justification is by faith and that the Spirit fulfills the law’s righteous requirement in those who walk by Him.
Your argument collapses because you treat “law” as a monolithic category when Scripture distinguishes Sinai covenant law, moral law, purity law, and civil law, and Paul’s polemic is against using the law as a means of righteousness, not against the law as a standard of holiness.

Tell me how many Gentiles obeyed the sabbath throughout history. Did God not write that particular law on their hearts? You forget the purpose of the law. It is to bring us to Christ. Then its done its job.

"For through the law I died to the law so that I might live to God." Galatians 2:19. What laws apply to dead people?

But now, having died to what bound us, we have been released from the law, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code." Romans 7:6.

"All who rely on works of the law are under a curse. For it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Now it is clear that no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.” The law, however, is not based on faith; on the contrary, “The man who does these things will live by them.” Galatians 3: 1-12

When you follow the law, you are not living by faith. That means that you are not pleasing God.

"Before this faith came, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian." Galatians 3:23-25

The law does not save us and neither does it make us righteous. "Whoever keeps the whole law, but stumbles at just one point, is guilty of breaking all of it." James 2:10

"But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law." Galatians 5:18

"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

Learn to be led by the Spirit. Then you will be pleasing God.

 

[OMC]

Tell me how many Gentiles obeyed the sabbath throughout history. Did God not write that particular law on their hearts? You forget the purpose of the law. It is to bring us to Christ. Then its done its job.

"For through the law I died to the law so that I might live to God." Galatians 2:19. What laws apply to dead people?

But now, having died to what bound us, we have been released from the law, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code." Romans 7:6.

"All who rely on works of the law are under a curse. For it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Now it is clear that no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.” The law, however, is not based on faith; on the contrary, “The man who does these things will live by them.” Galatians 3: 1-12

When you follow the law, you are not living by faith. That means that you are not pleasing God.

"Before this faith came, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian." Galatians 3:23-25

The law does not save us and neither does it make us righteous. "Whoever keeps the whole law, but stumbles at just one point, is guilty of breaking all of it." James 2:10

"But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law." Galatians 5:18

"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

Learn to be led by the Spirit. Then you will be pleasing God.

Brother, you keep quoting Paul as if “law” is a single, undifferentiated block, but Paul never uses nomos that way; when he says “I died to the law” (Gal 2:19) and “we were released from the law” (Rom 7:6), he is talking about the Sinai covenant as a jurisdiction of condemnation, not the moral will of God, which is why the same Paul says the law is “holy, righteous, and good” and that the Spirit fulfills “the righteous requirement of the law” in believers (Rom 8:4) — meaning the moral content of the law still defines holiness even though the covenant no longer defines our standing.
Your Sabbath example proves the point: Gentiles didn’t keep the Sabbath because the Sabbath was a covenant sign given exclusively to Israel (Ex 31:13), not because God failed to write moral law on their hearts; Paul’s Romans 2 argument is that Gentiles bear moral accountability, not covenant obligations.
Your Good Samaritan reading is simply incorrect: purity laws, not Sabbath laws, governed corpse‑contact, and Jesus’ point is that lovelessness violates the law’s heart, not that law prevents compassion.
When Paul says “if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law” (Gal 5:18), he means you are not under law‑based righteousness, not that you are free from God’s moral commands — which is why the same chapter lists adultery, idolatry, hatred, and drunkenness as damnable works of the flesh.
The law brings us to Christ, yes, but once we come to Christ, the Spirit writes the moral substance of the law on the heart; dying to the law means dying to its condemnation, not dying to holiness.

 

[Gideon300]

Different laws

Are all the laws void today. ???

Are we free to commit Adultery today?

Are we free to live without the moral laws?

The laws that were given to define sin have not changed.

Do we make void the law by grace? NO.

In relation to the covenant in Hebrews... ask yourself, did God make a faulty old covenant, did God do things wrong?
No.. the people failed. And God set up a better covenant which is better because Jesus will write the laws in the Heart.

The laws were not faulty.

God does not give faulty laws.

There are 2 different laws being discussed. The cerimonial laws of ordinances and the moral laws.

There is a new law, the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. The Levitical laws that Israel were required to obey covered every aspect of life. Those laws were never given to Gentiles. "Hear Oh Israel.........." remember that bit in the Bible? Now if you are a Jew, then that's fine. You won't find salvation in the law, but at least you will be able to boast before God about your own righteousness.

 

[Gideon300]

Brother, you keep quoting Paul as if “law” is a single, undifferentiated block, but Paul never uses nomos that way; when he says “I died to the law” (Gal 2:19) and “we were released from the law” (Rom 7:6), he is talking about the Sinai covenant as a jurisdiction of condemnation, not the moral will of God, which is why the same Paul says the law is “holy, righteous, and good” and that the Spirit fulfills “the righteous requirement of the law” in believers (Rom 8:4) — meaning the moral content of the law still defines holiness even though the covenant no longer defines our standing.
Your Sabbath example proves the point: Gentiles didn’t keep the Sabbath because the Sabbath was a covenant sign given exclusively to Israel (Ex 31:13), not because God failed to write moral law on their hearts; Paul’s Romans 2 argument is that Gentiles bear moral accountability, not covenant obligations.
Your Good Samaritan reading is simply incorrect: purity laws, not Sabbath laws, governed corpse‑contact, and Jesus’ point is that lovelessness violates the law’s heart, not that law prevents compassion.
When Paul says “if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law” (Gal 5:18), he means you are not under law‑based righteousness, not that you are free from God’s moral commands — which is why the same chapter lists adultery, idolatry, hatred, and drunkenness as damnable works of the flesh.
The law brings us to Christ, yes, but once we come to Christ, the Spirit writes the moral substance of the law on the heart; dying to the law means dying to its condemnation, not dying to holiness.

Again you misinterpret the place of the law. Being led by the Spirit means that we do not follow the lusts of the flesh. You do not have to tell the Holy Spirit not to steal or murder. If you are being led by the Spirit, holy and righteous behaviour becomes normal, not the exception. Law brings death, the Spirit gives life. And that is why Lord Jesus came. That we might have the life that He has in Himself, the life of God. Live according to that life and victory is yours. Keep trying to obey the law, then you will fail.

 

[OMC]

Again you misinterpret the place of the law. Being led by the Spirit means that we do not follow the lusts of the flesh. You do not have to tell the Holy Spirit not to steal or murder. If you are being led by the Spirit, holy and righteous behaviour becomes normal, not the exception. Law brings death, the Spirit gives life. And that is why Lord Jesus came. That we might have the life that He has in Himself, the life of God. Live according to that life and victory is yours. Keep trying to obey the law, then you will fail.

Yes — being led by the Spirit means you don’t follow the flesh, and yes — you don’t have to tell the Spirit “don’t steal, don’t murder,” because the Spirit produces holiness as the new normal. But that reality does not mean the moral law disappears; it means the Spirit fulfills what the law demanded. Paul never says, “Ignore the law because the Spirit replaces it.”
He says, “The righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled in us who walk by the Spirit” (Rom 8:4). He never says, “Law brings death, therefore moral commands vanish.”
He says, “The law is holy, righteous, and good,” but the Sinai covenant condemns because the flesh cannot obey it.
Your statement “keep trying to obey the law, then you will fail” is exactly Paul’s point in Romans 7 — the law cannot give life — but Paul’s solution is not antinomianism; it is Spirit‑empowered obedience to the very moral content the law revealed. Galatians 5:18 (“not under the law”) means “not under law‑based righteousness,” not “free from moral obligation,” which is why the same chapter lists adultery, idolatry, hatred, and drunkenness as damnable. The Spirit gives life, yes — but the life He gives is the life that walks in the holiness the law described.

 

[Davidstarr]

I hope none of you lawless (anarchist) people ever visit my place.
I would have to hide my wife, children, valuables from you.
Load my guns and turn loose the dogs.

"Take the kids Honey. RUN, HIDE. Here comes one of THOSE Christians!!!
They claim they are not under the law so murder, theft and adultery are OK with them.
They call it 'love thy neighbor'"

 

[OMC]

I hope none of you lawless (anarchist) people ever visit my place.

Recklessly calling fellow believers “lawless” or “anarchists” is itself a sin Scripture condemns.
Jesus says that hostile labels toward a brother put a person “in danger of judgment” (Matt 5:22).
Paul forbids slander and reviling inside the church (Eph 4:31; 1 Cor 5:11).
James says the one who speaks evil against a brother sets himself against the law of God (James 4:11).
And Revelation identifies accusation of the brethren with the devil’s work, not the Spirit’s (Rev 12:10).
So calling Christians “lawless” without evidence is false accusation, and false accusation is lawlessness.
The tongue that curses brothers reveals a heart out of step with the Spirit (James 3:9–10).

 

[Davidstarr]

Recklessly calling fellow believers “lawless” or “anarchists” is itself a sin Scripture condemns.
Jesus says that hostile labels toward a brother put a person “in danger of judgment” (Matt 5:22).
Paul forbids slander and reviling inside the church (Eph 4:31; 1 Cor 5:11).
James says the one who speaks evil against a brother sets himself against the law of God (James 4:11).
And Revelation identifies accusation of the brethren with the devil’s work, not the Spirit’s (Rev 12:10).
So calling Christians “lawless” without evidence is false accusation, and false accusation is lawlessness.
The tongue that curses brothers reveals a heart out of step with the Spirit (James 3:9–10).

The evidence is in your own words whenever you claim one of God's 10 commandments should not be kept.

Yes, that's the stance of the man of lawlessness, an anarchist.....

And then try to teach others to join in your rebellion is purely Satanic.

 

[OMC]

The evidence is in your own words whenever you claim one of God's 10 commandments should not be kept.

Yes, that's the stance of the man of lawlessness, an anarchist.....

And then try to teach others to join in your rebellion is purely Satanic.

You cant just say im saying things, where is the proof so we can go over it?

 

[2Christ]

Jesus also didn’t teach them to stop circumcision or eating unclean foods either. Perhaps because Jesus didn’t teach any gentiles that we know of.

Also you continue to cite Jesus saying ‘my commandments’ and conveniently change it to ‘the commandments’. The disciples were sent out preaching the gospel, not the law…

Jesus taught a few gentiles as in scripture but his mission was first to go to the people of israel BUT he had chosen 12 disciples by him that followed him during his ministry they lived with him and were witnesses and they were sent to ALL nations in His name to teach all they saw and were taught by Jesus.

The disciples were sent out to preach ALL Jesus said and did and that includes the commandments that are the covenant, it is written in scripture why say its not so. he expressly said clearly that to enter into life to keep the commandments, He even mentioned them by name. All he said and did applies to us all that will never change.

 

[Gideon300]

I hope none of you lawless (anarchist) people ever visit my place.
I would have to hide my wife, children, valuables from you.
Load my guns and turn loose the dogs.

"Take the kids Honey. RUN, HIDE. Here comes one of THOSE Christians!!!
They claim they are not under the law so murder, theft and adultery are OK with them.
They call it 'love thy neighbor'"

Stupid and ignorant comment. If Jesus can commit all those crimes, so can believers. I am not lawless. I live by the the law of the Spirit. There is a world of difference. I don't need the commandments to know right and wrong. I knew stealing was wrong long before I was saved and before I knew there were commandments. Knowing right from wrong does not empower people to live accordingly. How many high flying preachers have been caught in adultery over the years? Do think they don't have the commandments? What good does it do them? How about pastors who preach love then beat up their wives after church? Those who walk in the Spirit don't do that. The Spirit restrains them. The law rebukes them but does nothing to help them.

 

[Gideon300]

Jesus taught a few gentiles as in scripture but his mission was first to go to the people of israel BUT he had chosen 12 disciples by him that followed him during his ministry they lived with him and were witnesses and they were sent to ALL nations in His name to teach all they saw and were taught by Jesus.

The disciples were sent out to preach ALL Jesus said and did and that includes the commandments that are the covenant, it is written in scripture why say its not so. he expressly said clearly that to enter into life to keep the commandments, He even mentioned them by name. All he said and did applies to us all that will never change.

Tell me one instance where Jesus said to keep the Sabbath. Or one place in the whole of the New Testament for that matter.

 

[Davidstarr]

Stupid and ignorant comment. If Jesus can commit all those crimes, so can believers. I am not lawless. I live by the the law of the Spirit. There is a world of difference. I don't need the commandments to know right and wrong. I knew stealing was wrong long before I was saved and before I knew there were commandments. Knowing right from wrong does not empower people to live accordingly. How many high flying preachers have been caught in adultery over the years? Do think they don't have the commandments? What good does it do them? How about pastors who preach love then beat up their wives after church? Those who walk in the Spirit don't do that. The Spirit restrains them. The law rebukes them but does nothing to help them.

Would YOU want someone who sees no wrong in stealing, killing, committing adultery in your house?
Those are just 3 of the 10 commandments.
What about someone cursing around your children all the time?

I could name off 9 of the 10 and you would agree, those laws should be kept.
But throw in the 4th commandment (the 7th day sabbath) and now everyone's all huff and puff about it.

You know it is the ONLY one of the 10 that actually tells you which God gave that law? Our Creator Exo 20:11
The other 9 do not say.
Even Pagan nations/religions can have good moral laws about murder, theft, adultery, worshiping other gods besides their own, etc.
But without that 4th commandment the Creator is not there.