The Jesus of modern-day Christianity all too often seems to be One who hated His Father's Law, especially the Sabbath day, and abolished it. He hated the holy days of YHWY, and abolished them. He came preaching a gospel which virtually abolished the entire TaNaCh (Old Testament), the Laws of YHWY, and ridiculed and condemned all the religious leaders of the Jews.
To believe that the Old Testament has value in a modern-day Christianity is to be "legalistic". As if havings laws and following them are wrong!! In spite many scriptures of the Old Testament state they are forever, instead they are to be ignored, so says the learned.
Did Jesus come to make a new religion? When did the House of Judah make Jewish laws? Did Jesus hate the Pharisees and Sadducees for "adding to the laws"? Does that same Jesus hate the adding to and the taking away from the foundation of our Christian faith?
Are our beliefs handed down to us from seminary to pulpit? Does your leader/pastor tell you that Jesus is nothing like the God of the Old Testament? That Jesus nailed the Laws to the cross? That Peter's vision of unclean foods are now perfectly OK to eat, however we still call men "unclean" or "legalistic" or "forbidden"?
Just what does the Bible say is to be liefted up or what does the Bible say is on a lesser scale than what we are taught by educated seminary graduates in the church?
How many Christian denominations are there and which one is closest to being what the Bible teaches?
I really like the scriptural debates here on CC. At least we know people are reading their Bibles, right? And growing in maturity? So let's challenge the readers of the Bible and see if this clear as mud discussions can become as Living Waters.
One, your caricature of evangelical Christianity (and even Roman Catholicism/Eastern Orthodoxy) is propaganda that "lawkeepers" claim is true. It is not true. There are different views concerning the continuation of the Mosaic laws within Christianity. And, every congregation I have been a part of is very concerned about obedience to the commands that apply to THEM, not the commands given to ancient Israel. They can distinguish between morality and the ceremonial aspects of the Law.
Two, "lawkeepers" don't keep the Mosaic Law. They can't, because there is not a Temple and there is not a Levitical priesthood. All of the elements must be in place to keep the Mosaic Law. This includes making three annual pilgrimages to Jerusalem for the festivals (Deut 16:16). Almost no "lawkeepers" make this journey.
Three, "lawkeepers" create a dumb-down version of the Mosaic Law and insist that others must keep these laws as a standard of righteousness. It is not the Mosaic Law; it is their dumb-down version of it.
Four, many "lawkeepers" have no focus upon the need to receive Jesus' righteousness as their righteousness. This is a big issue. Even ancient Israel was unable to be justified by keeping the law, nor did it sanctify them.
Five, many "lawkeepers" aren't aware that the regeneration that accompanies salvation imparts to them the Holy Spirit, which guides them into progressively increasing holiness. The standard isn't the Mosaic Law....in fact, it falls short of true holiness, because it accomodated fallen men, particularly in the area of divorce. Additionally, some laws were meant to separate Jews from Gentiles, in order to keep a carnal nation from sinfulness (these include food and calendar observances). The standard is Jesus Christ. The believer has been united with Christ, and has the mind of Christ. Christ has yoked himself to the believer, and communicates with him on a spiritual level, informing him when he is displeasing God through his actions. The Holy Spirit uses the words of Scripture, properly understood, to do this, but ultimately it is Christ who is leading the person joined with Christ, and not the Mosaic Law.
Six, you are ignoring various Scriptures which say the Mosaic Law is not applicable to the NT believer. Read Acts 15, Rom 7:1-6, Galatians 3-4, Heb 7-8, Eph 2:13-15, 2 Cor 3. These passages state definitely that the Mosaic Law has been done away with. Additionally, they state that the believer isn't to be immoral, but he is not enslaved to Mosaic Law.
Seven, extremely condemning attitudes are often possessed by "lawkeepers". This is a tendency amongst them, and as a former "lawkeeper", I actually considered those who disagreed with Sabbath, festivals and clean meat laws as unbelievers. This is the very attitude that Rom 14 addresses.
Eight, "lawkeepers" seem to ignore that Jewish individuals kept the festivals and other observances (including physical circumcision; see Acts 21), but they were not required for Gentiles, so they use these verses to claim that all believers are required to observe them. They weren't required for Jews either, but some enjoyed the calendar observances, so they continued to observe them (see Rom 7:1-6). There should have been mutual respect and love for each other on this point, but this was lacking in the Church at different times.
Nine, the language of "new religion" is deceptive. The OT and the NT are one organic progression of salvation. However, the OT was full of types and shadows. They were a "pattern" or "model" of the reality, which is found in Jesus and the Church. Those who claim that we need to observe the Mosaic Law are like a woman that claims the dress pattern should be worn instead of the dress itself. I hope that younger people can understand this analogy, so I will explain that when people used to make their own clothing, they would buy the cloth, and then use a paper pattern to cut the cloth. They would then discard the paper pattern as it was a mere outline for drawing the dress. The Mosaic Law was largely like this paper pattern that pointed to the reality, which is Jesus and the Church.
These shadows and types, which pointed toward spiritual realities, include festivals and the weekly Sabbath. Food laws were used as separation commandments, to place a separation between Jews and Gentiles.
One must go through the hard work of figuring out what the purpose of the individual laws were, in order to determine whether they related to morality or not. Calendar and dietary observances are not moral in nature, and Romans 14 addressed these claims well. Each should follow their own conscience, and not condemn their brother who thinks otherwise. However, their brother must be addressed, and even harshly, if they claim that such observances define the difference between true believers and false believers.
Ten, the language of "forever" in regards to the Mosaic Law has to do with their economy, which disappeared with Jesus. It is more like "economy-lasting". Even physical circumcision was instituted "forever" but it is not a requirement for believers. Jews are not under the Mosaic economy, and neither are Christians.
Eleven, a charge is being made that Christians are simply traditionalist, and that "lawkeepers" have the true religion. This type of claim is an attempt to discredit Christianity, and is very common amongst "lawkeepers". It is true that some pastors today are traditionalists, and many believers are following traditions that are not valid. At the same time, though, some pastors have a clear understanding why they are not bound under the Mosaic Law, and they correctly instruct their congregation. They may have some of the details wrong, but in essence, they know that believers are not bound under the Mosaic Law.
Twelve, there is an attempt to discredit Christianity due to pointing out all the different denominations. So, where does this lead? This leads to the claim that the person represents the "true faith" rather than having the humility to acknowledge that their beliefs are simply one more opinion. In their mind, though, they are the true faith, and the rest, characterized as "denominations", are the counterfeit. Again, this is typical cultic behavior and claims, and I experienced the same thing as a member of a "lawkeeping" group.
By the way, there are many denominations with different opinions, but they agree on basic, core Christian concepts, particularly in the evangelical Christian camp. Here are some of these essentials: 1) the full deity and full humanity of Jesus Christ (Jesus is God and glorified man) 2) monotheism or the belief in one God 3) the doctrine of the Trinity 4) justification by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone 5) the inspiration and sole authority of Scripture as the rule of faith 6) substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ on the cross (Jesus died in the place of the believer) 7) original sin 8) virgin birth of Jesus 9) bodily resurrection of Jesus and 10) eternal reward of the righteous and eternal punishment of the unrighteous. A new believer might not understand the details of these teachings, but no sound evangelical bible teacher denies them. They are integral to the message of Scripture, because they are focused on the person and mission of Jesus Christ.
Often these "lawkeeper" groups deny one or more of them, view non-biblical writings as canonical, and discount the writings of Paul, claiming they are non-canonical. Paul was gifted at seeing the OT shadows and types and telling us what they mean in a NT context. That is why "lawkeepers" don't typically like his writings.
I would warn individuals against these manipulative techniques. One of the things I've done as a member of such a group is to carefully analyze their persuasive method in this regard. Because, the reality is that these methods show up not only in groups labeled as cults but in some Christian groups too.