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

Yes, but a heart of stone says, "we are not obligated to obey the Law of God".

What I mean is this: we as Christians are righteous before God by faith in Jesus Christ. That is, we began by faith. Paul wrote to the Galatians, who erroneously thought that obedience to the Law had to be added to faith in Christ. Paul asks rhetorically, "Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?" The answer, of course, is No.

Our righteousness in Christ is not maintained by obedience to the Law; it is maintained by faith in Christ. His Spirit in us began a good work and will bring it to completion (Phil. 1:6). We don't bring it to completion by obedience to the Law.

Paul and James both make clear that if we seek to be righteous before God by obedience to the Law, then we must obey ALL of it: circumcision, Sabbath, the offerings, the feasts, the stoning of adulterers and murderers, the Levites and the priests. Well, we can't obey ALL of it because there is no temple, no Levites, and no priests, so it is ludicrous to think that we will be righteous before God by obeying parts of it. The Law was fulfilled by Jesus, and is fulfilled by our loving God and loving our neighbour as ourselves, by the power of the Holy Spirit within us.

Sadly, those who preach adherence to certain parts of the Law are actually preaching a false gospel, one which is contrary to the gospel that Paul preached.

Torah says three times a year every male has to go to Jerusalem and participate in the feasts, not just the firstborn: for passover, or the feast of weeks, and the feast of tabernacles.

but where do you get 'the benefit only lasts a year' ? what benefit? atonement for sin?
if you're getting that from Hebrews 10:3, isn't the reference to yom kippur?
if the sacrifices on the day of atonement - e.g. the 'scapegoat' - are 'only lasting for 1 year' then the 2nd year are the priests again sacrificing for the sins of 2 years ago plus all the sins of the present year? and so on and so on?

i don't understand where you get 'benefit only lasts one year' and link it to passover. in the law passover is commanded to commemorate the day He took them out of Egypt, not to assuage a yearly, repeating threat of the angel of death coming to kill the firstborn of every household that doesn't have blood on the door. AFAIK.

if that's not so, can you show me?

IMO they preach that because they believe that keeping some parts of the law and not ALL the law means some sins are not acceptable to GOD but some sins are excusable.

I've been studying what happed to the Torah after AD70, by decree of rabbis dealing with loss of the Temple. Very interesting, and time consuming. The Torah had it that ALL men of Israel had to show up at Jerusalem for Passover, Sukkot, and Shavuot. That required three pilgrimmage to Jerusalem, leaving border defences unguarded, though God promised would not be a problem. The caveat in that was the effect of Roman dispersions of Jews in the latter years of nation Israel. Many were simply relocated too far away for three trips to Jerusalem Along the way the requirement was changed to first born males for the sake of economy, and many Jews having been dispersed too far away. Each would have to deal with travel time by foot or animal, plus the weeks in Jerusalem. The logistics of all that outstripped the Torah expectations. I'm currently tracking that to the modern essentially "not at all" mode, except for the mode of tourism during those and other holy days per choice of attendee, male or female.

The fact that any Jew was required to make any sacrifice even occasionally carried the fact it was necessary to repeat sacrifices for sin. One could not cover all sins by sacrificing once, once a year, once a decade, once for all. That's the basis of the benefits of sacrifice of animal blood to last only year to year by repeated observances. The problem you raise about priests bridging years of uncovered sins shows additional perversion of Torah. The problem was accommodation of Jews needing a break.

The Exodus Passover observances didn't solve Israel's sin problem. It took JESUS to fix that.

If you study it onward, I welcome you to teach me the gaps in the above statement. I really do lack time to carry it much further.

Meanwhile I submit
Acts 13:29-41 (KJV)
29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.
30 But God raised him from the dead:
31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.
32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,
33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David.
35 Wherefore he saith also in another psalm, Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:
37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.
38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:
39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye

could not be justified by the law of Moses.

40 Beware therefore, lest that come upon you, which is spoken of in the prophets;
41 Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you.

Christians are decaring that upon you!

What I mean is this: we as Christians are righteous before God by faith in Jesus Christ. That is, we began by faith. Paul wrote to the Galatians, who erroneously thought that obedience to the Law had to be added to faith in Christ. Paul asks rhetorically, "Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?" The answer, of course, is No.

Answer: if we have faith we also have faith in the words and commands of God.

Our righteousness in Christ is not maintained by obedience to the Law; it is maintained by faith in Christ. His Spirit in us began a good work and will bring it to completion (Phil. 1:6). We don't bring it to completion by obedience to the Law

Answer: We cannot make ourselves into a God who is perfect, but if we have so little faith in God that we don't listen to His law, it is, as James tells us, no faith. We show our faith by willing to be righteous..

Paul and James both make clear that if we seek to be righteous before God by obedience to the Law, then we must obey ALL of it: circumcision, Sabbath, the offerings, the feasts, the stoning of adulterers and murderers, the Levites and the priests. Well, we can't obey ALL of it because there is no temple, no Levites, and no priests, so it is ludicrous to think that we will be righteous before God by obeying parts of it. The Law was fulfilled by Jesus, and is fulfilled by our loving God and loving our neighbour as ourselves, by the power of the Holy Spirit within us.

Answer: You are concluding that we must not seek to be righteous, but that is not what these scripture teaches. From this we can know we cannot make ourselves equal to God, and we are not to try. It teaches we need Christ. There is nothing in these words to teach ignoring law, in not loving christ so we listen to Him, or anything that opposes what other scripture tells us.

Sadly, those who preach adherence to certain parts of the Law are actually preaching a false gospel, one which is contrary to the gospel that Paul preached.

Answer: Teaching hat our works save us is a false gospel. Teaching to ignore Christ's instruction to us is also teaching a falsehood.

The Law could not serve eternal salvation, but ony does and don'ts. There was never gien a way to live a life of righteousness before God.. It is Jesus' righteousness that provides eteranl salvation. The former righteousnes affored by the Law was temporal, accessed year to year by animal sacrifices.

God is not on record as changing His mind on sin.

He is still opposed to homosexuality, lesbianism, child molestation, rape, prostitution (whoring), even evil thoughts, murders, thefts, coveteousness, etc. You sinners will have no "legal standing" before Holy God.

Answer: if we have faith we also have faith in the words and commands of God.

Answer: We cannot make ourselves into a God who is perfect, but if we have so little faith in God that we don't listen to His law, it is, as James tells us, no faith. We show our faith by willing to be righteous.

Answer: You are concluding that we must not seek to be righteous, but that is not what these scripture teaches. From this we can know we cannot make ourselves equal to God, and we are not to try. It teaches we need Christ. There is nothing in these words to teach ignoring law, in not loving christ so we listen to Him, or anything that opposes what other scripture tells us.

Answer: Teaching hat our works save us is a false gospel. Teaching to ignore Christ's instruction to us is also teaching a falsehood.

IMO they preach that because they believe that keeping some parts of the law and not ALL the law means some sins are not acceptable to GOD but some sins are excusable.

Sorry, that makes no sense. Words and commands didn't die on the cross for me; Jesus did. Words and commands weren't raised to life three days later; Jesus was. I'll put my faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ. I read His word, believe it, and follow its teaching as it applies to me, but my faith is in the Person. Words and commands are visible to us; we need not have faith in them because they are seen, and faith is certainty in things unseen.


Who said anything about not listening to the Law? Who said anything about no works accompanying faith? I certainly didn't. However, as I said before, our righteousness before God is not maintained by the works of the Law, but the works accompanying faith. Paul used the example of Abraham, who was told to sacrifice his son. Is that a commandment of the Law? No. Neither are the works that Jesus prepared beforehand for us to do in faith.


No, that is not what I'm concluding at all. You're having difficulty understanding me because you're trying to do so through the lens of the Law. I have said nothing to suggest we are to ignore the Law, and I would really appreciate it if you would stop badly misrepresenting my position every time you paraphrase it.


Good; you're halfway there. Now you need to get across the other half. Jesus knew what He was doing; He told part of the story, and He commissioned Paul, in particular, to tell the rest of the story. Paul's teaching is not contrary to that of Jesus, but complementary. Jesus taught that the righteousness that God requires exceeds that of the Pharisees; in other words, it was impossible to attain by human effort. Jesus taught, through Paul, that righteousness is by faith from first to last (Romans 1:17).

If you are going to make statements of beliefs you have and then deny you made the statements, you are not reasonable enough to respond to. Scripture tells us about people who preach your way.

I'm not a law-keeper, but I still haven't found a single piece of evidence -- in the Gospels -- that Jesus ever told us to stop keeping the Law. Should we rely solely on what Paul said?

I'm not a law-keeper, but I still haven't found a single piece of evidence -- in the Gospels -- that Jesus ever told us to stop keeping the Law. Should we rely solely on what Paul said?

I'm not a law-keeper, but I still haven't found a single piece of evidence -- in the Gospels -- that Jesus ever told us to stop keeping the Law. Should we rely solely on what Paul said?

Isn’t all of the Bible true? Or do you believe only the words in “red”? Paul was chosen by Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9). Do you really believe there would be a contradiction between what Paul taught and what Jesus taught? 2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by the inspiration of God... 2Peter 1:21 -“...holy men of God we’re moved by the Holy Spirit ...”. It doesn’t matter whether Paul or Jesus said it. Paul had the gift of the spirit and taught what the Holy Spirit wanted him to preach. The real question is...DO YOU BELIEVE. IT?

That's because when Jesus was ministering, He was ministering to the Jews before the cross, Paul was teaching from the perspective after the cross, after the fulfillment of the law by Jesus .

Above all, don't try pitting Jesus vs Paul. Because Jesus approved Peter and Peter approved Paul.

I'm not a law-keeper, but I still haven't found a single piece of evidence -- in the Gospels -- that Jesus ever told us to stop keeping the Law. Should we rely solely on what Paul said?

I am not pitting Jesus against Paul. The purpose of this thread is to examine the DIFFERENCES between the teachings of Jesus before the cross and the teachings of Jesus after the cross (who spoke to us through the apostle Paul).

I'm not a law-keeper, but I still haven't found a single piece of evidence -- in the Gospels -- that Jesus ever told us to stop keeping the Law. Should we rely solely on what Paul said?

I am not pitting Jesus against Paul. The purpose of this thread is to examine the DIFFERENCES between the teachings of Jesus before the cross and the teachings of Jesus after the cross (who spoke to us through the apostle Paul).