Grace and Law.

[markss]

The Law of God only brings condemnation for those who refuse to submit to it,

The Law condemns anyone who breaks it, even once.

Much love!

 

[markss]

For example, Jesus did not meet the condition of being a woman, so he had a legitimate reason to not obey the laws in regard to having a period or to giving birth. In Deuteronomy 17:18, it instructs the king to write a copy of the Torah, so everyone who is not the king has a legitimate reason for not obeying that law. Likewise, we have a legitimate reason for not following laws in regard to Temple practice when there is no Temple in which practice them.

I don't see this as valid.

You have no legitimate ability to carve the Law into pieces and then declare what pieces you are to keep. James shut that door completely, showing that the Law is a single thing, "All that you say we will do", and if you fail to keep one single part, you are a lawbreaker, having broken "The Law".

You say, Because Jesus is male that He doesn't have to keep the law regarding birth. I say, anyone who gives birth must keep the law regarding such birth.

That Jesus did not give birth, and therefore did not need to perform that purification ritual, this does not somehow give someone a reason to disregard those parts that apply to them.

Your comments above reflect a human division of the Law, while the correct approach would be that one would keep all the Law.

If you don't have a rooftop patio, you are not required to include a parapet, but that doesn't mean you are exempt, because if you do add a rooftop patio, you most certainly are required to include a parapet.

But the real heart of the matter is that we are not under the Law, we are under Christ, which is as high above the Law as the heavens above the earth. Why would we even think of putting ourselves under the Law when the Bible makes absolute statements that we are not?

Much love!

 

[markss]

The Law of God only brings condemnation for those who refuse to submit to it, though there is a difference between someone refusing to submit to some of its law and someone not obeying some of its laws because their conditions are not met. For example, Jesus did not meet the condition of being a woman, so he had a legitimate reason to not obey the laws in regard to having a period or to giving birth. In Deuteronomy 17:18, it instructs the king to write a copy of the Torah, so everyone who is not the king has a legitimate reason for not obeying that law. Likewise, we have a legitimate reason for not following laws in regard to Temple practice when there is no Temple in which practice them.

Everything in the Law of God is either in regard to how to love God or our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, so it is the Law of Love and the position that we should obey the greatest two commandments is also the position that we should obey the commandments that hang on them. Love is not greater than God’s instructions for how to love and we can’t love God and our neighbor instead of following God’s instructions for how to do that.

Giving a little more thought to this . . .

I think what you are doing here is really the only possible response to a supposed injunction to keep the OT Law. This is what the Jews have done also, even to the point of converting the Day of Atonement to a time of reflection, but with no atoning sacrifice.

Anyone who thinks to keep the Law will of necessity have to carve it up into pieces, because there is so much that cannot be kept.

When you have mold in your shower you are to call a priest, but there are no priests. So ignore that.

When you harvest your crop you are to give a percentage to the Levites, but there are no Levites, so ignore that.

You are to have a fellowship meal with the LORD at the temple, but there is no temple, so ignore that.

You are to offer thanksgiving sacrifices at the temple . . . same as above. And on and on and on this goes on.

Anything left undone makes you a lawbreaker, and condemned with no remedy. Except Jesus.

So here's my question. Let's take just one example, leading your neighbor's stray ox back to it's pen. Considering the fact that this will keep the Law, while the Law of Love may lead you to not only return the animal, but to feed and water it first, and to help your neighbor repair the gate, why would you put yourself under the OT Law instead of the Law of Love?

The OT Law can never bring the results that the Law of Love brings.

Much love!

 

[God-fearing]

The Law of God only brings condemnation for those who refuse to submit to it, though there is a difference between someone refusing to submit to some of its law and someone not obeying some of its laws because their conditions are not met. For example, Jesus did not meet the condition of being a woman, so he had a legitimate reason to not obey the laws in regard to having a period or to giving birth. In Deuteronomy 17:18, it instructs the king to write a copy of the Torah, so everyone who is not the king has a legitimate reason for not obeying that law. Likewise, we have a legitimate reason for not following laws in regard to Temple practice when there is no Temple in which practice them.

Everything in the Law of God is either in regard to how to love God or our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, so it is the Law of Love and the position that we should obey the greatest two commandments is also the position that we should obey the commandments that hang on them. Love is not greater than God’s instructions for how to love and we can’t love God and our neighbor instead of following God’s instructions for how to do that.

We dont practice the law for two reasons.
1 we are not under the law
2 we are not jews.
The law was given as a social structure on how the jews should live. Apart from any other people.
In our eyes through Christ and as Paul explains the law is perfect man is not, so to say the law if obeyed will secure salvation is a lie.
Those who trust in the law for salvation are foolish. It cannot be obeyed 100% by man.
Therefore the law becomes that which condemns you for if you break one law you break them all. And the wages of sin is death.
As jesus points out even a evil thought such as lust puts you behind the eight ball. Are you ready to challenge that?

 

[Soyeong]

The Law condemns anyone who breaks it, even once.

Much love!

Would you like me to introduce you to the concept of repentance?

I don't see this as valid.


You have no legitimate ability to carve the Law into pieces and then declare what pieces you are to keep. James shut that door completely, showing that the Law is a single thing, "All that you say we will do", and if you fail to keep one single part, you are a lawbreaker, having broken "The Law".

Please explain why you do not see it as valid for those who are not the king to be exempt from being required to follow the laws that were specifically given to govern the conduct of the King. Likewise, a large portion of the Law of God was given to govern the conduct of the Levites, which the other Israelites were not permitted to obey, so please explain why it is not valid for the other Israelites to be exempt from these laws? If someone was the king and they choses not to obey the laws that were given to govern the conduct of the king, then they would be guilty of the illegitimate picking and choosing that James was speaking against, but he was not speaking against not following certain laws when we have legitimate reasons for not following them.

You say, Because Jesus is male that He doesn't have to keep the law regarding birth. I say, anyone who gives birth must keep the law regarding such birth.

That Jesus did not give birth, and therefore did not need to perform that purification ritual, this does not somehow give someone a reason to disregard those parts that apply to them.

So you appear to both be agreeing with my position and arguing against it. Why don't you consider this to be carving up the law and then declaring which laws we are keep? And why don't you consider Jesus to be a lawbreaker according to James?

Your comments above reflect a human division of the Law, while the correct approach would be that one would keep all the Law.

If you don't have a rooftop patio, you are not required to include a parapet, but that doesn't mean you are exempt, because if you do add a rooftop patio, you most certainly are required to include a parapet.

When the Israelites were exiled to Babylon after the destruction of the 1st Temple, then to condition for their return to the law was to first return to obedience to the Law of God, which contains laws in regard to Temple practice, so when there are laws that do not have their conditions met, then we should nevertheless be faithful to obey the laws that we can obey. Again, why do you not consider it to be carving up the law or for people to be lawbreakers if they do not built a parapet if they have a rooftop patio but don't extent the same logic to laws in regard to Temple practice?

But the real heart of the matter is that we are not under the Law, we are under Christ, which is as high above the Law as the heavens above the earth. Why would we even think of putting ourselves under the Law when the Bible makes absolute statements that we are not?

Much love!

it is contradictory to think that we are under God's Word made flesh instead of under God's Word.

In Romans 7, the Law of God is the good that Paul wanted to do while the law of sin is what was hindering Paul from doing the good that he wanted to do. In Romans 6:14, Paul described the law that we are not under as being a law where sin had dominion over him, which is not referring to something that is the good that Paul wanted to do, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful but is how we know what sin is, so we are still under the Law of God but are not under the law of sin.

Giving a little more thought to this . . .

I think what you are doing here is really the only possible response to a supposed injunction to keep the OT Law. This is what the Jews have done also, even to the point of converting the Day of Atonement to a time of reflection, but with no atoning sacrifice.

Anyone who thinks to keep the Law will of necessity have to carve it up into pieces, because there is so much that cannot be kept.

When you have mold in your shower you are to call a priest, but there are no priests. So ignore that.

When you harvest your crop you are to give a percentage to the Levites, but there are no Levites, so ignore that.

You are to have a fellowship meal with the LORD at the temple, but there is no temple, so ignore that.

You are to offer thanksgiving sacrifices at the temple . . . same as above. And on and on and on this goes on.

Anything left undone makes you a lawbreaker, and condemned with no remedy. Except Jesus.

The king is required to write a copy of the Torah, but we are not the king, so that is not ignored, but and that does not cause us to become lawbreakers.

So here's my question. Let's take just one example, leading your neighbor's stray ox back to it's pen. Considering the fact that this will keep the Law, while the Law of Love may lead you to not only return the animal, but to feed and water it first, and to help your neighbor repair the gate, why would you put yourself under the OT Law instead of the Law of Love?

The OT Law can never bring the results that the Law of Love brings.

Much love!

Nothing you described beyond the scope of the command to love our neighbor as ourselves, which is part of the Mosaic Law, so it is not greater than the Mosaic Law.

 

[markss]

Would you like me to introduce you to the concept of repentance?

We can discuss that if you wish. Metanoia, meta = after, noia, the mind, metanoia = the "after mind", that is, the result of an exchange, in this case, from unbelieving to believing, which results in trading the mind of the flesh for the mind of Christ.

Much love!

 

[markss]

Please explain why you do not see it as valid for those who are not the king to be exempt from being required to follow the laws that were specifically given to govern the conduct of the King.

That's the wrong way of looking at it.

I refer you again to James, who declares the OT law to be a single thing. To approach the OT law with a mind of, "what parts don't I have to keep" leads you to apply your human opinions to truncate God's Law, though He says you can't do that.

You are required to keep all the Law that was given. Naturally if you are not the king you are not keeping that which is for the king.

You, not being Isreal, are claiming to be required to keep what was given for Israel. Yet you realize you aren't keeping what was given to the king.

Though you cannot keep the Law, and therefore must find exemptions.

Not being the king is not the same as there not being a temple. The king was required to write his own copy, and all were required to tithe from their increase.

You, being part of "all", according to the Law, must give portions of your increase to the levites, but there are no Levites. Do you see the difference? Not being the king, a person never was required to do the king's work. Yet being part of Israel, a person was required to tithe.

You don't write your own copy of the Bible, but do you tithe to Levites? No, you do not. Therefore you are a lawbreaker, and nother will change that.

This is why we must be justified by Christ joining Him in His death and burial and resurrection.

Much love!

 

[markss]

so we are still under the Law of God but are not under the law of sin.

Romans 7:1-4 KJV
1) Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2) For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3) So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
4) Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

You've become dead to the Law, and married to Christ. The implication to this passage is that returning to the Law is like returning to the corpse of your dead husband. Does that please the Lord? When He desires to lead you personally?

Much love!

 

[markss]

In Deuteronomy 17:18, it instructs the king to write a copy of the Torah, so everyone who is not the king has a legitimate reason for not obeying that law. Likewise, we have a legitimate reason for not following laws in regard to Temple practice when there is no Temple in which practice them.

The one who is not the king does not break the Law by not writing his own copy of the Bible.

Jesus did not break the law of purification by failing to be purified after giving birth. If you've given birth or even have had a period without the purification ritual, you have broken that Law.

Jesus was not a lawbreaker, but the one who gives birth or has a period who skips the purification ritual is a lawbreaker.

Much love!

 

[homwardbound]

Since there is so much confusion and so much false doctrine here, let's see what God's word has to say. By "Law", I mean primarily the 10 Commandments. Some believe that all 613 Levitical laws still apply. I suggest that they try to implement them exactly as God commands. That will make for an interesting court case.

"For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world was not given through the law, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. For if those who live by the law are heirs, faith is useless and the promise is worthless, because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law, there is no transgression." Romans 4:13-15

Is the Law the covenant? Not according to God's word:

"By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear." Hebrews 8:13

"........by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace....." Ephesians 2:15

"For Christ is the end of the law, to bring righteousness to everyone who believes." Romans 10:4

"So the law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith." Galatians 3:24

"Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian." Galatians 3:25

"Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. We realize that law is not enacted for the righteous, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for killers of father or mother, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching that agrees with the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted." 1 Timothy 1:8-11

A word to the legalists:
Galatians 3:3-5
Are you so foolish? After starting in the Spirit, are you now finishing in the flesh? Have you suffered so much for nothing, if it really was for nothing? Does God lavish His Spirit on you and work miracles among you because you practice the law, or because you hear and believe?

I realise that those enslaved by legalism will reject God's word. So my hope is that some who are falling under the SDA spell will be awakened by the truth of God's word.

I will speak about grace in another post.

seeing Phil 3, where Paul says, I gave up under Law to win Christ, thank you Gideon 300 for posting

 

[vassal]

Either you live by the law or you live by grace. If you live by the Law, you are cursed. it really is that simple. You obviously do not understand what it means to be born again or the purpose of the Law. You can reject the clear word of God if you wish. that's on you. Good luck trying to justify yourself before God on the basis of how well you've obeyed the commandments.

What you are saying sounds simple, but it is not what Jesus Christ taught.

You say it is either law or grace. Jesus never spoke that way.

Grace is not the opposite of God’s commandments. Grace is God reaching out to save us, and Jesus Himself is that grace in flesh. God sent His Son so that we may live, not to remove His ways, but to bring us back to them.

Listen to Jesus’ own words (ASV):

“If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments.” (John 14:15)

He did not say choose grace instead of commandments. He joined them together. Love, grace, and obedience walk as one.

Again He says:

“And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46)

And at the end, He shows what true faith looks like:

“Every one therefore that heareth these words of mine, and doeth them, shall be likened unto a wise man…” (Matthew 7:24)

Jesus never warned people against keeping God’s commandments. He warned against breaking them while claiming to believe.

The problem is not the Law. The problem is the heart of man.

The commandments, like the Ten Commandments given directly by God though Moses, show what is good and what is sin. They are God’s covenant, His way of life. Jesus did not destroy that. He said:

“Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.” (Matthew 5:17)

To fulfill does not mean to cancel. It means He lived it perfectly and showed its true meaning.

So where does grace stand?

Grace is this: God did not leave us to die in our sins. He sent Jesus. Jesus taught us the truth, showed us how to live, and gave His life so we could be forgiven and restored. That is grace.

But what does He say after giving grace?

“Go, and sin no more.” (John 8:11)

Grace forgives. The commandments guide. Together, they lead to life.

If someone says, “I have grace, so I do not need to obey,” they are speaking against Jesus. Because Jesus always called people to turn, to obey, to follow.

You cannot separate what God has joined.

Grace without obedience becomes empty words.
Law without grace becomes dead effort.
But together, they become life.

In the end, no one will stand before God and say, “I ignored Your words, but I had grace.” Jesus already told us what will matter:

“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day.” (John 12:48)

So it is not law versus grace. It is this:
God shows grace by sending His Son.
And those who truly receive Him walk in His commandments.

 

[Gideon300]

What you are saying sounds simple, but it is not what Jesus Christ taught.

You say it is either law or grace. Jesus never spoke that way.

Grace is not the opposite of God’s commandments. Grace is God reaching out to save us, and Jesus Himself is that grace in flesh. God sent His Son so that we may live, not to remove His ways, but to bring us back to them.

Listen to Jesus’ own words (ASV):

“If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments.” (John 14:15)

He did not say choose grace instead of commandments. He joined them together. Love, grace, and obedience walk as one.

Again He says:

“And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46)

And at the end, He shows what true faith looks like:

“Every one therefore that heareth these words of mine, and doeth them, shall be likened unto a wise man…” (Matthew 7:24)

Jesus never warned people against keeping God’s commandments. He warned against breaking them while claiming to believe.

The problem is not the Law. The problem is the heart of man.

The commandments, like the Ten Commandments given directly by God though Moses, show what is good and what is sin. They are God’s covenant, His way of life. Jesus did not destroy that. He said:

“Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.” (Matthew 5:17)

To fulfill does not mean to cancel. It means He lived it perfectly and showed its true meaning.

So where does grace stand?

Grace is this: God did not leave us to die in our sins. He sent Jesus. Jesus taught us the truth, showed us how to live, and gave His life so we could be forgiven and restored. That is grace.

But what does He say after giving grace?

“Go, and sin no more.” (John 8:11)

Grace forgives. The commandments guide. Together, they lead to life.

If someone says, “I have grace, so I do not need to obey,” they are speaking against Jesus. Because Jesus always called people to turn, to obey, to follow.

You cannot separate what God has joined.

Grace without obedience becomes empty words.
Law without grace becomes dead effort.
But together, they become life.

In the end, no one will stand before God and say, “I ignored Your words, but I had grace.” Jesus already told us what will matter:

“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day.” (John 12:48)

So it is not law versus grace. It is this:
God shows grace by sending His Son.
And those who truly receive Him walk in His commandments.

It is simple, so simple that most who call themselves Christian miss it. it is supreme arrogance to believe that we can live the life that pleases God. If we could, Jesus died for nothing. Obeying Jesus does not mean following the commandments. It means being led by the Spirit of God.
"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

Obviously the Holy Spirit does not lead us contrary to God's will. However, if I see someone broken down on the side of the road on a Saturday, I will stop to help if I can. Or even on a Sunday, since I'm not SDA. That is because I'm not a hidebound religious nut job.

 

[vassal]

It is simple, so simple that most who call themselves Christian miss it. it is supreme arrogance to believe that we can live the life that pleases God. If we could, Jesus died for nothing. Obeying Jesus does not mean following the commandments. It means being led by the Spirit of God.
"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

Obviously the Holy Spirit does not lead us contrary to God's will. However, if I see someone broken down on the side of the road on a Saturday, I will stop to help if I can. Or even on a Sunday, since I'm not SDA. That is because I'm not a hidebound religious nut job.

did you miss that part where God said about holiness ? He commanded it!!: “Speak unto all the congregation… Ye shall be holy; for I Jehovah your God am holy.” (Leviticus 19:2, ASV)

And Jesus confirms the same: “Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:48) God would not command something that is impossible. He calls us to it because He also gives the help to walk in it.

Now look at what you said about obedience. You said obeying Jesus does not mean following commandments. But listen to Jesus:“If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments.” (John 14:15) “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me.” (John 14:21)

This is not man speaking. This is Jesus Christ, the son of God, having NOW all authority in Heaven and on earth Yes NOW! God does not change, what he said then is still truth today!.

Being led by the Spirit does not replace obedience,It produces it.

The Spirit never leads someone to ignore what Jesus clearly commanded on the contrary.

Jesus also said: “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father.” (Matthew 7:21) And again: “Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46)

can we be perfect by ourselves? God works in us so that we can walk in His ways.

“Abide in me… He that abideth in me… beareth much fruit.” (John 15:4–5)

Fruit means a changed life. Real obedience. Not empty words.

You also brought up helping someone on the road. That is good. That is exactly what Jesus taught. When He spoke about the Sabbath, He showed that doing good is right: “It is lawful to do good on the sabbath day.” (Matthew 12:12) So helping someone is not breaking God’s law. It is fulfilling its true meaning.

The problem is not obedience. The problem is false obedience without love. Jesus rebuked that. But He never taught disobedience. Here is the balance you are missing:

We are not saved because we are already perfect.
But we are called to become holy, and God helps us to walk in it.

Grace is not permission to remain the same.
It is the power to change.

That is why Jesus said to the one He forgave: “Go, and sin no more.” (John 8:11)

So no, it is not arrogance to believe we can live a life pleasing to God. It is faith. Because it trusts that God’s words are true, that His commandments are good, and that through Him, a man can truly change.

 

[Gideon300]

And Jesus confirms the same: “Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:48) God would not command something that is impossible. He calls us to it because He also gives the help to walk in it.

You still don't get it. It is not "you" living the life that pleases God. Jesus said, "Apart from me, you can do nothing." And that is exactly how God views anything done apart from Christ - nothing.

1 Corinthians 1:26-31
Brothers, consider the time of your calling: Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were powerful; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly and despised things of the world, and the things that are not, to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast in His presence.

It is because of Him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God: our righteousness, holiness, and redemption. Therefore, as it is written: “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.”

"God made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God." 2 Corinthians 5:21

Do you not know that the "I" or ego is crucified with Christ? Do you not know what "It is no longer I that live" means? The sooner you find out, the sooner your Christian life begins to bear fruit. Trees do not produce fruit. Pears come from Pear trees naturally. Too many Christians are like Christmas trees, decorating themselves with religious baubles that look good but are of no use to anyone. Don't be one of them, for your own sake.

 

[vassal]

You still don't get it. It is not "you" living the life that pleases God. Jesus said, "Apart from me, you can do nothing." And that is exactly how God views anything done apart from Christ - nothing.

1 Corinthians 1:26-31
Brothers, consider the time of your calling: Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were powerful; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly and despised things of the world, and the things that are not, to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast in His presence.

It is because of Him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God: our righteousness, holiness, and redemption. Therefore, as it is written: “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.”

"God made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God." 2 Corinthians 5:21

Do you not know that the "I" or ego is crucified with Christ? Do you not know what "It is no longer I that live" means? The sooner you find out, the sooner your Christian life begins to bear fruit. Trees do not produce fruit. Pears come from Pear trees naturally. Too many Christians are like Christmas trees, decorating themselves with religious baubles that look good but are of no use to anyone. Don't be one of them, for your own sake.

yes without Christ we can do nothing I know this very well thank you.

 

[pinebeach]

What you are saying sounds simple, but it is not what Jesus Christ taught.

You say it is either law or grace. Jesus never spoke that way.

Why do you ignore the fact that Galatians tells us that we are under a curse if we try to live by the law?

See, the dead end you face in your long and wrong explanations, is that you choose, which no one really gets to do, to ignore the fact that Paul is called by Jesus.

You, are not called by Jesus or you would not ignore large parts of the New Testament. Jesus' own disciples welcomed Paul and gave him legitimacy but you, (I'm just gonna say in your arrogance and fake humility) seem to think you know better. smh

 

[markss]

Nothing you described beyond the scope of the command to love our neighbor as ourselves, which is part of the Mosaic Law, so it is not greater than the Mosaic Law.

Not so.

Jesus said, a new commandment I give you, love as I have loved you.

The Law required men to love others as they love themself. The New Commandment is to love others as Jesus loves us. Do you see the difference? Between how a man loves himself and how Jesus loves us?

To me this new law is as high over the old law as the heavens are above the earth. It never fails to surprise me that people insist in holding on to the old law, and even though is was given to Israel and not others. Even though the Bible says we are dead to it.

It's like being a caterpillar who refuses to become a butterfly, or so it seems to me.

Much love!

 

[markss]

And Jesus confirms the same: “Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:48)

The context shows this is not a command to general moral excellence, rather, to love others equally. Check it out.

You've removed a verse from it's context, and are acting as though it means something other than it does. All too common today.

Much love!

 

[Soyeong]

Not so.

Jesus said, a new commandment I give you, love as I have loved you.

The Law required men to love others as they love themself. The New Commandment is to love others as Jesus loves us. Do you see the difference? Between how a man loves himself and how Jesus loves us?

To me this new law is as high over the old law as the heavens are above the earth.

In order to correctly know how to obey the command to love our neighbors as ourselves we need to know how we should love ourselves and the answer to that is that we should love ourselves as Jesus loves us, which is therefore also how we should love our neighbor, so Jesus was not teaching anything brand new or other than how to correctly obey the command to love our neighbor as ourselves.

It never fails to surprise me that people insist in holding on to the old law, and even though is was given to Israel and not others.

The Law of God was to Israel in order to equip them to be a light and a blessing the nations by turning them from their wickedness and by teaching them to obey it in accordance with the promise and with spreading the Gospel message. If Gentiles had no need to obey the Law of God, then Gentiles would have no need to refrain from sin, no need to repent from sin, no need of salvation from sin, no need of grace, no need of faith, no need of the Gospel message, and no need of Jesus to have given himself to redeem us from all lawlessness.

Even though the Bible says we are dead to it.

We need to die to the law of sin in order to be free to obey the Law of God, not the other way around.

It's like being a caterpillar who refuses to become a butterfly, or so it seems to me.


Much love!

You have it the other way around. This is what you are refusing in favor of bondage:

Psalm 19:7-11
The law of the Lord is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the Lord is sure,
making wise the simple;
8 the precepts of the Lord are right,
rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the Lord is pure,
enlightening the eyes;
9 the fear of the Lord is clean,
enduring forever;
the rules of the Lord are true,
and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
and drippings of the honeycomb.
11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.

If you believed that these verses accurately describe the Law of God, then you would delight in the opportunity of getting to obey it even if you had no obligation to do so.

 

[markss]

You have it the other way around. This is what you are refusing in favor of bondage:

Jesus lives in me, and He is my Law. He informs me what He wants me to do, this is my Law. He shows me what it means to love others, that is my Law. He leads me away from what is not good, this is my Law. I know it's Him, I know it's real, when my character is what the Bible describes of God's children.

Jesus is not teaching me to obey a list of rules, that were actually a covenant with a particular nation, He is transforming me into a different person, not the man of flesh, as those for whom the Law was given (the disobedient and ungodly), but the man of spirit, living according to the Holy Spirit.

You will not find that in Exodus or Leviticus or Jeremiah.

Should I tell Jesus, No, I'm not going to let you personally lead me, after all, I have your covenant with those other people that I'm going pick out the commands I'm going to "obey", instead of simply living and walking with you?

There is nothing wrong or bad about the Law, the problem is that man does not keep it. You do not keep it. No one does. No one can. God made that happen.

Much love!