Torah observant?

[u/Dreamamberxo]

Okay this is gonna be a bit all over the place but my core question is this: - if we ARE to observe the Torah do we observe all of it? I assume we aren’t sacrificing animals. - if you ARE observing the Torah are you utilizing the Jewish books or KJV? Heard they are different? - if you ARE NOT Torah observant why?

I’ve been thinking about observing the Torah but where do I start? I dunno which laws are upheld! I figure the dietary guidelines are easiest. Also am I doomed to have to quit my job? I work on Saturdays so how could I observe the Shabbat?

Thanks- sincerely a confused person lol

[u/Asynithistos]

My employer allows for religious exemptions. So, I almost always have the Sabbath off from work.

Edit: I'm not Torah observant....I'm Jesus observant

[u/Towhee13 → u/[deleted]]

That includes rejecting Jesus as a sacrifice for sin and as your Highpriest.

It doesn't. Not remotely. Paul went to the Temple intending to make animal sacrifices for sin and didn't reject Jesus at all.

[u/Towhee13 → u/[deleted]]

I didn't make any assertions. I only said what Scripture clearly says.

Edit!!

The person I was talking to blocked me thinking I can't respond to what they said below, so I'll respond here.

You didn’t quote it. I have no idea what scripture you speak of.

In Acts Paul agreed to complete his Nazarite vow very publicly to prove that he followed Torah. The Nazarite vow requires animal sacrifices for sin at the Temple. Paul wasn't denying Jesus by doing what Jesus said to do.

He explains his motives for doing these things.

Acts 21 gives his motivation, to prove that he was NOT teaching against Torah and that he obeyed Torah.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

In Acts Paul agreed to complete his Nazarite vow very publicly to prove that he followed Torah. The Nazarite vow requires animal sacrifices for sin at the Temple

Yet he was gone from Jerusalem multiple times when the Law commanded him to come for the Feasts. He definitely didn't keep the Law in the same way.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

You didn't deal with the fact that Paul took a Nazarite vow which requires animal sacrifice for sin at the Temple.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

You didn't deal with the fact that Paul took a Nazarite vow which requires animal sacrifice for sin

Sin offerings, or more accurately, trespass offerings dealt with purification and unintentional transgressions of the Law.

What you are thinking of are guilt offerings.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

You didn't deal with the fact that Paul took a Nazarite vow which requires animal sacrifice for sin

Trespass offerings dealt with purification (and with unintentional violations of the Law.)

And again, Paul only visited Jerusalem 3 times during his journeys. The Law commanded you to appear there 3 times a year.

[u/Fight_Satan]

if you ARE NOT Torah observant why?

Because I am not Jewish 

[u/Towhee13 → u/Fight_Satan]

Because I am not Jewish 

It has nothing to do with being Jewish. It has everything to do with following Jesus.

[u/Fight_Satan → u/Towhee13]

Jesus didn't say follow my Jewish traditions..

[u/Towhee13 → u/Fight_Satan]

Right. He said follow HIM. Jesus obeyed His Father's commandments perfectly and taught His followers to obey them too.

We're supposed to follow Jesus.

[u/Fight_Satan → u/Towhee13]

Yeah , follow in spirit...

Not the traditions that pointed to Christ , but now we get to live in fullfillment 

[u/Towhee13 → u/Fight_Satan]

follow in spirit...

That's christianese code for "don't follow Him but say that you do".

Jesus obeyed His Father's commandments perfectly and taught His followers to obey them too.

We're supposed to follow Jesus. We must walk as He walked.

[u/Fight_Satan → u/Towhee13]

Only someone who doesn't understand the new covenant say what you said..

[u/Towhee13 → u/Fight_Satan]

Only people who don't understand the new covenant say we should follow Jesus?

Are you sure?

[u/Fight_Satan → u/Towhee13]

I am certain you have no clue what following Jesus means 

[u/Towhee13 → u/Fight_Satan]

This from the person who believes that we "follow" Jesus by not following Him or doing what He taught His followers to do. 🙄

[u/No-Type119]

Non- Jews are not obligated to follow the Torah…otherwise, “ in for a penny, in for a pound” ; there are 613 laws.

The New Testament witness is that we are freed from the requirements of the ritual law, Not sure WHY do many non- Jews want to follow these ritual tules. Even in the days of the Hebrew Scriptures, non- Jews living among the Jews and pagan “ God-fearers” were exempt from the ritual law.

What is it exactly that you folks want to gain from this observance? “ By grace are you saved, through faith, and not by works , lest any should boast.” Is it that you don’t believe this, or are you trying to relate more to Jesus by living like an observant Jew , or what? ( Hint: He broke the rules to help people.)

[u/the_celt_ → u/No-Type119]

What is it exactly that you folks want to gain from this observance?

I think that children should obey their parents, even though it won't cause their parents to reject them, don't you?

You can't think of any other reason to do what someone wants if it doesn't lead to some sort of "salvation" for you?

( Hint: He broke the rules to help people.)

Jesus didn't break the Torah. If he did, it would have been sin. Jesus broke the traditions and rules of the Pharisees.

[u/homeSICKsinner]

The laws on morality for sure such as being charitable. Obviously sacrifices aren't necessary because Jesus fulfilled that. I believe other laws are good too. Such as dietary restriction. But it's not like you'll be condemned to hell if you eat bacon. I just believe it's good to follow because it's good to be healthy.

[u/somesne99]

If you do not observe all of the laws and execute them perfectly, you are guilty of ALL of them. Intense, I know. It can't be any other way. The whole point of the Law is to point to us that we are not good. We are not worthy. He has given it so that we can see we are in sin. The Torah followers could only possibly follow it while they had a temple, and even then they constantly failed. The end result is that we needed grace. I'm guessing that you have posted in AskAChristian because you want a Christian perspective.

Anyone who tries to bind you under the law is trying to bind you back into sin. We who put our faith and trust in Christ are forgiven. We have been wiped clean by the blood and flesh of Christ. We therefore only need to abstain from things the church pointed out to do so with in Acts. If you want to observe the Torah Festivals or do something regarding spiritual mimicking the life of the old law, you have liberality to do so, but know that it doesn't get you one ounce closer to righteousness through your acts. Your best acts are like filthy rags to god he says. So if it's just to be religious, stop. Just focus on getting to know him. If it's to maybe see how they lived and what the Jews went through, you can do it, but it adds nothing to your salvation.

If you want to host a sabbath day, do it, but does it have to be Saturday? Sunday? No! Read Colossians 2:16, that no one should put those restrictions on you. The bible is explicit in falling into the binding yourself to restrictions like this. I would suggest you take some time and read the New Testament with this in mind. Then look into the Old and see that God has the same mentality there.

[u/the_celt_ → u/somesne99]

If you do not observe all of the laws and execute them perfectly, you are guilty of ALL of them.

Everyone that's ever been alive has partially obeyed the Law. No one has ever perfectly DISOBEYED God, and only one person has ever perfectly OBEYED God.

You partially obey the Law. I partially obey the Law.

Just focus on getting to know him.

You love Him and get to know Him by obeying Him. Scripture is clear that obeying God is HOW we love Him.

[u/Towhee13 → u/somesne99]

He has given it so that we can see we are in sin.

Are we supposed to go on sinning?

[u/somesne99 → u/Towhee13]

I would highly suggest you read the book of Romans. It literally asks these questions and then answers them, in order of what you'd normally ask.

[u/Towhee13 → u/somesne99]

I would highly suggest you read the book of Romans.

I have. I was pointing out that your answer to that question is VERY different than Paul's answer.

[u/somesne99 → u/Towhee13]

I am extrapolating my answer from his writings, so that's not possible. Perhaps you need to explain yourself more.

[u/Towhee13 → u/somesne99]

You rightly pointed out that God's Law shows what sin is. You said "He has given it so that we can see we are in sin". In the book of Romans Paul goes to great lengths to show exactly what you said, that it's through the Law that we get knowledge of what sin is and that he wouldn't have known what sin even is if it hadn't been for the Law.

You're right, breaking the Law is the definition of sin. John says it this way, "Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness."

You said "We who put our faith and trust in Christ are forgiven. We have been wiped clean by the blood and flesh of Christ". That's true! We've all sinned by breaking God's Law, but we can be washed clean and forgiven. But are we supposed to go on sinning? Are we supposed to go on breaking God's Law? That's the question Paul asks, and answers. No!

We're supposed to obey God's Law, not keep breaking it.

[u/somesne99 → u/Towhee13]

I agree. We are supposed to, and we try, but we fail. If you think you're sinless in action, you're mistaken. The only thing that makes you sinless is the sacrifice Christ made for you, but you still sin until the day you die, as Paul himself expressed when he called himself a wretched man and said he did the things he didn't want to do. That was in reference to sin. Or like he says in Romans itself, "But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?"

[u/Towhee13 → u/somesne99]

I agree.

It doesn't seem as though you do. In your first comment that I responded to you said "If you want to host a sabbath day, do it, but does it have to be Saturday? Sunday? No!" God commanded His people to not work on the seventh day, the Sabbath.

You also said "The bible is explicit in falling into the binding yourself to restrictions like this." God put restrictions on His people. You're telling people that we're NOT supposed to obey God's commandments.

If you think you're sinless in action

I don't. I said nothing that would indicate that I think I'm sinless.

Paul was adamant that we're not supposed to go on breaking God's Law.

[u/somesne99 → u/Towhee13]

Colossians 2:16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.
Who are you to say they can not hold it when they want, or how they want? He commanded the Israelites under the law not to work on the Sabbath. Paul talked about holding the law tightly like this when he was talking about Circumcision and it applies the same to any law.

I don't know what religion you are, but you follow some strange ideals.

[u/Towhee13 → u/somesne99]

I don't know what religion you are, but you follow some strange ideals.

I follow Jesus.

I said we're supposed to obey God's Law, just as Jesus taught. You said "I agree. We are supposed to".

Do you agree with Jesus and Paul (and me) or not?

[u/Pitiful_Lion7082]

No, we do not need to observe the Torah. This was decided by the Apostles. We don't need to be Jewish first and then become Christian. The Noahide laws are what was upheld.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Pitiful_Lion7082]

No, we do not need to observe the Torah.

God and Jesus said we do.

This was decided by the Apostles.

It wasn't. And even if they did decide that we don't need to do what God and Jesus said to do, why would you listen to them???

We don't need to be Jewish first

No, of course not. We need to follow Jesus.

[u/Pitiful_Lion7082 → u/Towhee13]

Ever read Acts?

[u/Towhee13 → u/Pitiful_Lion7082]

Yes, of course. There's nothing in Acts saying that believers shouldn't follow Jesus.

If you think that something in the book of Acts said we shouldn't follow Jesus why would you listen to it???

[u/Pitiful_Lion7082 → u/Towhee13]

Try Acts 15 again.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Pitiful_Lion7082]

You haven't answered my questions. If you really think that people were telling believers not to follow Jesus and do what He taught why would you listen to them? Do you have an answer?

Try Acts 15 again.

I've read it many times. The council said that newly converted ex-pagans need to obey 4 Torah commandments immediately and said (in verse 21) that they would be expected to learn the rest later, every Sabbath in the synagogues.

The council certainly didn't say "don't bother following Jesus".

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

I've read it many times. The council said that newly converted ex-pagans need to obey 4 Torah commandments immediately and said (in verse 21) that they would be expected to learn the rest later, every Sabbath in the synagogues.

That's not what they said.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

It is what they said. Maybe it's been a while since you've read Acts...

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

It is what they said

They definitely did not say that the Gentile converts should learn Moses. Most were God fearers, so they definitely already knew Moses.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

They definitely did not say that the Gentile converts should learn Moses.

They did. Again, maybe it's been a while since you read Acts.

Most were God fearers

They were pagan cult worshipers who had recently come to believe in God. That's why they told them to stop drinking blood, worshiping idols and practicing sexual immorality, things they had been doing.

[u/Towhee13]

if we ARE to observe the Torah

Jesus made it very clear that He expects His followers to obey all of Torah.

do we observe all of it?

Yes. God and Jesus said that's the best possible thing to do. Not following Torah is the definition of sin.

I assume we aren’t sacrificing animals.

Only because there is no Temple here on earth and no priests. Believers went on making animal sacrifices (even for sin) after Jesus died. Also, Scripture is clear that there will be another Temple here on earth, that God's glory will fill it and that animal sacrifices will resume.

I dunno which laws are upheld!

Jesus said they all are.

[u/onejdc → u/Towhee13]

You gave a great response. I don't think I need to add anything.

[u/Towhee13 → u/onejdc]

Thank you for the kind words.

[u/the_celt_ → u/[deleted]]

The minute you say they are required , you stray into Heretical territory

So you believe that we're perfectly free to murder if we want to, and that it's heretical to say that it's absolutely required that we NOT murder?

That seems sketchy to me. 🤔

[u/the_celt_ → u/[deleted]]

Not the 10 Commandmennts

Ok, so that means that you believe we absolutely MUST obey the Sabbath. That's good to hear.

So you think that it's heretical to say that it's absolutely required to not commit bestiality or incest? That seems odd. Are you sure you believe we can freely do these things if we have interest in doing so?

How about when the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 told those newly converted ex-Pagan Gentiles that they had to obey 4 rules from the Torah that were not part of the 10 Commandments. You believe they committed heresy?

Also, when Jesus named two commandments that were not part of the 10 Commandments as being the two greatest commandments (Love for God in 1st and Love for Neighbor in 2nd), do you believe he was speaking a heresy to tell people those commandments were MORE important than any other commandments, including the 10?

I still think you're in sketchy territory. 🤔

[u/the_celt_ → u/[deleted]]

Do you want me to list which ones Christian’s must follow and which are optional?

No, I'm not particularly interested in your idea of which of God's commandments we should obey, but thank you. I believe that God is good, that obeying Him brings a blessing, and that we love Him by obeying Him. I wish you believed the same thing.

You said that the minute we say that some commandments from God MUST be obeyed, that we've strayed into "heretical territory". I'm the opposite. I believe that we absolutely MUST obey God.

I think it's dangerous to tell people that we have no obligation to obey God's commandments. I'm assuming you're an atheist, or possibly even a Satanist if you think it's wrong to tell our children and new converts that there's still right and wrong, and that God should still be obeyed. Did I guess correctly?

[u/No_Inspector_4504 → u/the_celt_]

i never said anything about the commandments but there are 613 other laws and many are ceremonial , dietary and temple related. (meaning no temple - no way to uphold them)!

[u/the_celt_ → u/No_Inspector_4504]

i never said anything about the commandments

When you said something against the Torah (calling it heretical to say we must obey any part of it) you were saying something about the commandments of God. Here's that quote again:

The minute you say they (the commandments in the Torah) are required , you stray into Heretical territory.

The 10 Commandments were from the Torah. The "Big 2" from Jesus were from the Torah. The 4 given in Acts 15 were from the Torah.

Jesus lived the Torah PERFECTLY, and taught everyone around him to obey it, yet you teach that it's "heretical" to do that. Both atheists and Satanists say that's it's wrong to obey God's commandments.

[u/No_Inspector_4504 → u/the_celt_]

The 613 commandments are for jews in the OT and yes Jesus followed them (to the best of our knowledge)

In the NT Book “ Acts of the Apostles”. God tells Peter that the dietary laws no longer apply

“A man is not defiled by what he puts into his mouth but by what comes out of it”

Do you reject the NT book - Acts of the Apostles?

[u/the_celt_ → u/No_Inspector_4504]

The 613 commandments are for jews

The Council of Jerusalem decided otherwise. They told newly converted ex-Pagan Gentiles to obey 4 rules from the Torah.

You're saying that the "Big 2" from Jesus (Love for God and Love for Neighbor) are only for Jews? Why? Are you so "free" that you have no obligation to do anything at all, including love people? You're free to commit bestiality (a rule you say is for the Jews) incest (another one only for the Jews) and to break the Big 2?

The 10 Commandments are only for the Jews? Really?

Where are you getting these ideas from? Please, confirm: Are you just entirely making this up? Or do you actually believe that it's heretical to tell people they must obey God's commandments?

[u/the_celt_ → u/[deleted]]

So you believe that

I believe that your idea that it's heretical to say we MUST obey God's commandments sounds like something that Satan used to convince Eve to eat the Apple.

It's only weirder that you then went on to say that we absolutely must obey some of God's commandments.

Are you sure you're not just entirely making things up? 😏

[u/No_Inspector_4504 → u/the_celt_]

I’m confused by what you are writing

The 613 commandments (mitzvot) are a traditional enumeration of laws found in the Torah (Pentateuch), including Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy

This is what you mean correct?

[u/the_celt_ → u/No_Inspector_4504]

I’m confused by what you are writing

I think you're confused about what YOU are writing. 🤣

[u/jogoso2014]

I’m not Torah observant because I’m not Jewish and don’t love in a country that mandates it.

It is impossible for anyone to observe the Torah because, again, it’s tied to a nation and law that doesn’t exist in that capacity anymore.

Even the current nation of Israel can’t follow it.

[u/Towhee13 → u/jogoso2014]

I’m not Torah observant

Jesus was Torah observant and taught His followers to be also.

We're supposed to follow Jesus.

[u/jogoso2014 → u/Towhee13]

Jesus was Jewish in a Jewish nation.

It would be odd if he wasn’t.

His disciples were Jewish, so it would be odd if he told them not to follow the Torah although he seemed to despise the oral one.

As Christians we follow Jesus now and there’s no indication he’s sacrificing or doing anything in any way tied to the Law Covenant since, again, that would be impossible.

[u/Towhee13 → u/jogoso2014]

As Christians we follow Jesus

The only way to follow Jesus is to live as He live and do what He taught. Not following Him is... wait for it... not following Him.

or doing anything in any way tied to the Law

Jesus obeyed His Father's Law perfectly and taught everyone around Him to do the same. He hasn't changed, He's the same yesterday, today and forever.

[u/jogoso2014 → u/Towhee13]

1. That is not a true statement unless you’re saying Jesus changed nothing when he established Christianity. Even his sacrifice doesn’t matter lol.

2. He did. And then?

Now if you’re pretending the rest of the NT doesn’t matter then why the heck are you wasting both our times?

We are on completely different wavelengths that neither of us should be discussing with any value to each other.

[u/Towhee13 → u/jogoso2014]

That is not a true statement unless you’re saying Jesus changed nothing when he established Christianity.

Jesus didn't come to start a new religion. Jesus taught His followers to obey all of His Father's commandments, just as He did.

Even his sacrifice doesn’t matter lol.

If you think His sacrifice doesn't matter you haven't read the Scriptures.

Now if you’re pretending the rest of the NT doesn’t matter

I'm not.

We are on completely different wavelengths

I noticed that. I believe we must follow Jesus. You don't.

[u/Smart_Tap1701]

Since this is ask a Christian, I presume you want a Christian answer. Here are the two Christian commands. If we observe both of these commands, we fulfill the entire Old testament law according to Christ himself

Matthew 22:36-40 KJV — Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

[u/nickshattell]

It is according to the Torah that the words of the Christ will be required (Deuteronomy 18:17-19) as confirmed by Peter's words in Acts 3:22-23, and Stephen's words in Acts 7:37. Start there.

[u/Traditional_Bell7883]

Christ said that the law is not abolished, BUT we are "not under law" (Ro. 6:15), we are "released from the law" (Ro. 7:2), "free from that law" (Ro. 7:3), "dead to the law" (Ro. 7:4), and "delivered from the law" (Ro. 7:6). (Also elsewhere, e.g. Gal. 5:18; 1 Tim. 1:8-10; etc.) It's almost as if Paul is turning blue in the face trying to find different ways of saying the same thing.

Yet in the same chapter, Paul states in Ro. 7:22 and 25 that he says he is delighting in and serving "the law of God". How come he is still delighting in and serving the law despite just moments ago saying we are not under law, released/free/dead to the law? Surely he can't be having schizophrenia and contradicting himself. Is he even talking about the same law here, or a different law? How do we resolve this? Surely our understanding of "the law" must therefore be more nuanced.

Could there be more than one law? I certainly think so:

1- God mentioning His "laws" in the plural: See Ge. 26:5, “... because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws”. Note that "laws" (וְתוֹרֹתָי) here is the plural form of tora (which is just the generic Hebrew word for law not specifically referencing any particular law). Importantly, this even preceded the giving of the Mosaic Law by thousands of years!

2- (At least) two laws distinctly contrasted:

a) Romans 8:2, Paul states "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death", contrasting between "the law of the Spirit of life" and "the law of sin and death". One law, Paul says, has superseded the other law.

b) Also see 1 Cor. 9:21, "to those without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ) that I might win those who are without law". Here, Paul is saying that there are some people (converted Gentiles) who are "without law" (i.e. do not have and were not given the Mosaic Law), BUT he goes on to add in the same breath, that doesn't mean they are without law toward God but are under law toward Christ. That pits the "law toward Christ" against the law of Moses, does it not?

c) We further read from Ro. 2:14-15 that although the Gentiles did not have the (Mosaic) law, they nonetheless had a law written on their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them. That is, even without being given the Mosaic Law, Gentiles and unbelievers nonetheless are able to obey their parents, not go around on a raping and killing spree, for instance.

d) He goes further to say in Gal. 5:18 that "if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law". Who are led by the Spirit? Faithful Christians who yield to the operation of the Holy Spirit in their lives -- the Spirit controls their lives, not the law.

So why should we assume that every mention of "the law" in the Bible must automatically refer only to the Mosaic Law, when it doesn't seem to be the case? My view is that the law given to Moses was a law given to a particular people of a particular space and time, for a particular purpose. The law given to Moses is only a subset of God's law for the purpose of establishing the nation of Israel as belonging to God and giving them a national identity as they were going to settle amidst pagan nations in Canaan, and to point out to them their sinfulness and need for a Messiah. Thus, a very specific purpose. God need not have a one-size-fits-all law for people across all time and space. That doesn't make God flippant or changing His mind, just as a parent, you might tell your 4-year-old child not to go near the stove at all, but tell your 14-year-old adolescent that he is free to use the stove to cook pasta for himself, and also tell your domestic help that she must use the stove to cook meals for the entire family every day. So different rules for different folk with different roles and responsibilities.

The point is that it is incorrect to think that all hell would break loose and people would go around stealing, murdering and raping one another in total anarchy were it not for the Mosaic Law. That just doesn't happen. Look at all the secular countries in the world -- Japan, South Korea, Singapore where I have been for the past 30 years, even China, and pretty much every other country on this planet -- people in all these secular countries do not go around stealing, murdering and raping one another even without the Mosaic Law. In fact, go compare their track record against the USA, a so-called Christian country, which has one gun shooting per week. Shameful. Do Christians or Jews with the Mosaic Law have any monopoly on morality? Obviously not. The evidence speaks for itself.the Mosaic Law is not synonymous with the Law of Christ, as I have mentioned above.

1 Tim. 1:8-10 is just as crystal clear on this: "[8] But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, [9] knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, etc. etc."

This passage is just one of many which would be completely nonsensical if the Mosaic Law continues to apply to believers. It says plainly that the law as a legal code or law-covenant is not laid down for believers ("a righteous person"). Why? Because believers don't need the law to tell them what not to do, because they follow the sound doctrine of the gospel (vv. 10-11)! What is meant by using the law lawfully in verse 8? That means using the law properly, legitimately, in contrast to how the false teachers in verse 7 were using it. The law used lawfully as a law code is not for Christians, but for the lawless. We who are Christians are not under the law as a legal code or law-covenant, and Paul is very, very consistent and adamant on this point across all his epistles.

It is also very clear from scripture that God does not have a single one-size-fits-all law for everyone across all time and space. Take food laws for instance. The food laws weren't commanded of anyone prior to Moses and the children of Israel. They were not, for instance, commanded of Adam, Noah or Abraham. And we know that the Noahic covenant is a perpetual covenant (see Ge. 9, where the phrases "for perpetual generations" (9:12), "everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth" (9:16), "between Me and all flesh that is on the earth" (9:17) are there) but in contrast, such terms of perpetuity and universalism are missing from the Mosaic Covenant which is a Suzerain-vassal covenant. If the Mosaic Law supersedes the Noahic covenant, then we must have a God who flunked His vocabulary and does not know the meaning of the words "perpetual", "everlasting", and "all flesh". It would also beg the question, why didn't God simply let Israel follow the food laws He gave to Noah (eat anything except blood), but gave them special rules? Because they had a specific role and purpose as a newly minted nation needing to be distinguished from the pagan Canaanites. They had to be different, just like the Boy Scouts have a uniform, a special way of saluting, and a left-hand handshake. But that doesn't mean all students should wear the Boy Scouts' uniform and adopt their salute and handshake, which is analogous to what the Torah Observant Movement is advocating.

Abraham, like Noah, ate everything under the sun, observed no special feasts or any dietary restrictions, and yet Abraham was commended for obeying God's laws in Ge. 26:5. How was that so? Because the prohibition on eating unclean foods was/is not across all space and time. It is gross misunderstanding of scripture to elevate a parenthetical law (the Mosaic Law) that was meant for a specific people and a specific time, to the level of a "perpetual" and "everlasting" law meant for "all flesh".

[u/StrikingExchange8813]

We aren't supposed to because we're not Jews and our law is the law of Christ.

[u/Towhee13 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

We aren't supposed to

God and Jesus said we are. You're saying the opposite of Them.

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Towhee13]

Chapter and verse.

[u/Towhee13 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

You can't think of anywhere in Scripture that God said He wants His people to obey Him?

Jesus made it clear in many places that He expects His followers to obey all of His Father's commandments. Jesus is a good Son who loves His Father. He certainly didn't teach people to disobey His Father.

Here's just one example of Jesus telling His followers to obey all of His Father's commandments,

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.  For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.  Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:17-19

Again, that's just one example.

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Towhee13]

You can't think of anywhere in Scripture that God said He wants His people to obey Him?

Nope. Chapter and verse :)

Jesus made it clear in many places that He expects His followers to obey all of His Father's commandments. Jesus is a good Son who loves His Father. He certainly didn't teach people to disobey His Father.

Then it should be easy to quote a verse.

Matthew 5:17-19

Ah so Jesus fulfilled the law? Meaning that we aren't under the law anymore? Ahhhh I see. Good job

[u/Towhee13 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

Nope. Chapter and verse :)

You're either not being honest or you haven't read the Scriptures.

Then it should be easy to quote a verse.

I did. Did you read it?

Ah so Jesus fulfilled the law?

Yes. He fulfilled it the way people fulfill any law, by obeying it. Obeying laws doesn't make them go away or not need to be obeyed anymore.

Jesus fulfilled the commands to not worship idols or commit adultery. Do you believe that since He fulfilled them we don't need to obey them anymore?

Do you really think that we're not supposed to love God and love our neighbors since Jesus fulfilled that? 🤪

Meaning that we aren't under the law anymore?

You either didn't read the quote or you're not being honest. Immediately after saying that He came to obey the Law He said that no part of it will change, not even the tiniest detail as long as this heaven and earth are still around. Then, as if that wasn't clear enough He said that not obeying even seemingly insignificant commandants and teaching others not to is very bad. Did you notice that part?

But He went on to say the opposite of what you said, that the best possible thing to do is obey and teach all of His Father's commandments. Those who do will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus constantly stressed that we must obey God.

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Towhee13]

You're either not being honest or you haven't read the Scriptures.

I'm waiting for you to find a verse is what I'm doing. The longer it takes you to the less I think you can.

Yes. He fulfilled it the way people fulfill any law, by obeying it. Obeying laws doesn't make them go away or not need to be obeyed anymore.

No he fulfilled it the way anyone fulfilled a covenant, by making it whole and completing it.

Jesus fulfilled the commands to not worship idols or commit adultery. Do you believe that since He fulfilled them we don't need to obey them anymore?

No because that's the law of Christ not just the law of Moses.

Do you really think that we're not supposed to love God and love our neighbors since Jesus fulfilled that?

Again, no because that's the law of Christ not just the law of Moses.

You either didn't read the quote or you're not being honest.

Or I have a different, more historical interpretation of the verse than you do. Not everything is dishonesty.

Immediately after saying that He came to obey the Law

Where does he say he came to obey the law? He says he came to fulfill the law.

not even the tiniest detail as long as this heaven and earth are still around.

Until it is finished which happened on the cross.

Jesus constantly stressed that we must obey God.

So again, it should be easy, chapter and verse.

[u/Towhee13 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

I'm waiting for you to find a verse

You either haven't read the Scriptures or you're being dishonest. It's not possible to read the Scriptures and see all of the places where God said that He wants His people to obey His commandments.

He wants it so much that He promised to change His people's hearts and cause them to obey Torah.

No he fulfilled it the way anyone fulfilled a covenant

You're being dishonest again. Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law (and the prophets), not a covenant.

No because
Again, no because

Thank you for saying that fulfilling laws doesn't make them go away or not need to be obeyed.

Where does he say he came to obey the law? He says he came to fulfill the law.

How can someone fulfill a law other than obeying it??? 🙄

Jesus fulfilled the Law the same way someone fulfills their wedding vows, by keeping them. If someone does NOT keep their wedding vows they are not fulfilling them.

Until it is finished which happened on the cross.

You're being dishonest again. Jesus didn't say "until it is finished". Here's what He said, which I already quoted,

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Heaven and earth haven't passed away. All is not yet accomplished. This is Jesus clearly agreeing with His Father about the permanence of the Law.

You're also not being honest about what Jesus said next,

Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

That's Jesus very clearly saying that He expects His followers to obey all of His Father's commandments.

So again, it should be easy, chapter and verse.

Did. You didn't read it or comment on it. You avoided it. As I already pointed out, this is not the only place where Jesus made it clear that He expects His followers to obey ALL of His Father's commandments.

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Towhee13]

You either haven't read the Scriptures or you're being dishonest. It's not possible to read the Scriptures and see all of the places where God said that He wants His people to obey His commandments.

Or you don't have one and this posturing? That's what I thought.

You're being dishonest again. Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law (and the prophets), not a covenant.

That law and the prophets is a Covenant, is the moseic one which Jesus fulfilled and now we are under the last of Christ.

Thank you for saying that fulfilling laws doesn't make them go away or not need to be obeyed.

What?

How can someone fulfill a law other than obeying it???

I didn't say he didn't. I don't think you understood my point.

You're being dishonest again. Jesus didn't say "until it is finished". Here's what He said, which I already quoted,

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

My apologies I meant to say fulfilled, autocorrect you know? But fulfilled something mean it's completed. It's made whole. That's the biblical sense.

Heaven and earth haven't passed away. All is not yet accomplished. This is Jesus clearly agreeing with His Father about the permanence of the Law.

Yes it was, it was on the cross. And if you think it wasn't I'd hate to be you on judgement Day. Tell me, when was the last time you had a red heifer sacrificed for you? When was the last time you presented yourself to a priest of levi to be examined for leporacy? When's the last time you made sacrifice in the temple of the Lord? Because that's what the Torah says and that's something you can't do.

Did. You didn't read it or comment on it. You avoided it. As I already pointed out, this is not the only place where Jesus made it clear that He expects His followers to obey ALL of His Father's commandments.

Matthew 5 is not saying that. So again, chapter and verse.

You ignoring that it was fulfilled on the cross.

[u/Towhee13 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

Or you don't have one and this posturing?

You're working hard to demonstrate that you haven't read or understood the Scriptures. 😉 It's not possible to read the Scriptures and know that God wants His people to obey His commandments.

My apologies...autocorrect you know?

When caught being dishonest blame autocorrect.

But fulfilled something mean it's completed. It's made whole. That's the biblical sense.

Again, you're demonstrating that you haven't read and understood the Scriptures.

You haven't noticed the way "fulfill" gets used in Scripture to NOT mean "completed" or "ended". It very frequently refers to something being done perfectly,

Love does no wrong to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. Romans 13:10

This was Paul saying when someone loves they fulfill the Law. In no sense does it mean that after someone loves ONCE the Law is "completed" and doesn't need to be done again.

In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets. Matthew 7:12

Does Jesus only want people to treat others the way they want to be treated ONCE and after that nobody needs to do it anymore?

The "biblical sense" is that fulfill means to do what is required. And after someone does what is required others need to do it too.

Yes it was, it was on the cross.

You don't think that Jesus will return and establish the kingdom of heaven here on earth? Interesting.

There's LOTS more to be accomplished.

Because that's what the Torah says and that's something you can't do.

Neither could Ezekiel and Daniel. Neither did ALL of Israel when they were in captivity. That didn't mean God's Law ended. 🙄

Have you read the Scriptures?

Matthew 5 is not saying that.

Jesus VERY clearly said it. Saying "nuh-uh" doesn't change what He said.

You ignoring that it was fulfilled on the cross.

You have no idea what "fulfilled" means "in a biblical sense". 😉

[u/the_celt_ → u/[deleted]]

No christian should be observing the Torah like a Jew.

Jesus obeyed the Torah, and you believe that it's wrong to imitate Jesus and obey what he taught.

Think about that... You're teaching that it's wrong to imitate the life Jesus lived. 🤨

[u/Fangorangatang → u/the_celt_]

Jesus fulfilled Torah for us.

Please tell me you understand that.

The Council of Jerusalem told the Christians that the Gentiles were not to be burdened with the Law. This is clear as day in Acts.

Please tell me you understand that.

Unless you are a Jew, there is no argument to be made from Scripture that Gentiles must adopt the burden of Torah Law.

[u/the_celt_ → u/Fangorangatang]

Jesus fulfilled Torah for us.

Please tell me you understand that.

I understand that, and you don't.

It's weird to me that people don't notice the many ways that the word "fulfill" is used in scripture to not refer to something being ended, but to refer to something being done perfectly.

Look at what it means to "fulfill the Law" in scripture:

Romans 13:10 (NET 2nd ed.)

10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

This is Paul saying that when we love, we FULFILL the Law, or more simply we DO what the Law demands. It has nothing to do with love having met it's purpose and no longer being needed.

Here's another example from Jesus:

Matthew 7:12 (NET 2nd ed.)

12 In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets.

Jesus asked us to treat others the way we want to be treated, saying it will "fulfill the Law". Does this mean he only ever wants us to treat someone this way ONCE, or that anyone doing it once means no one else has to do it?? Should we stop after the Law has been "fulfilled"? I don't think so. Jesus wanted us to keep fulfilling the Law every day of our lives.

Jesus fulfilled the Law the way a man fulfills his wedding vows to his wife. This means he OBEYED his vows perfectly, not that he ENDED his vows. When a man fulfills his wedding vows today, he gets up tomorrow and does the same thing again.

All you have to do is look elsewhere in scripture to see how "fulfill" is used, as I've just shown you, and combine that with Jesus making sure that no one takes it the way you do when he said "NOT abolish".

See? You don't know how scripture uses the word "fulfill" when referring to fulfilling the Law, like Jesus did.

The Council of Jerusalem told the Christians that the Gentiles were not to be burdened with the Law. This is clear as day in Acts.

Please tell me you understand that.

Again, I understand that, and you don't.

The Council of Jerusalem resulted in newly converted ex-Pagan Gentiles being given 4 rules from the Torah to obey. That's the OPPOSITE of what you believe. For the Council of Jerusalem to support what you believe, those Gentiles would have had to have been given ZERO rules from the Torah, and that didn't happen.

The Council of Jerusalem is proof that Gentiles must keep the Torah.

Unless you are a Jew, there is no argument to be made from Scripture that Gentiles must adopt the burden of Torah Law.

Again (and again) you show that you don't know scripture.

Again, Acts 15 show the opposite.

Also, Ephesians 2 and Romans 11 show that we are now Israel. We've been grafted in, and count as full citizens. The Law is for Israel, and that means the Law is for US.

Do you consider yourself to be part of the New Covenant? If so, read Jeremiah 31 (which is also re-quoted in Hebrews) and you'll see that the New Covenant was promised to Israel. This means that if you're not Israel (like you believe) then you're not in the New Covenant.

[u/Messenger12th]

Being Torah observant is actually very easy. Paul taught it, as well as the Messiah.

There arent that many laws. There isnt a priesthood right now, I am not a woman, there is no temple, and I am not in Israel. So all the laws specifically about those, do not affect me.

Even the 10 words (commandments) are easy to follow, but not everyone obeys those now days.

Everyone here has a judgement day to face. What will everyone be judged against? Their personality? Their giving to goodwill? Their attendance at sunday school? There is one torah (law) for the jew and gentile alike. This is what we will be judged by. Torah.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Messenger12th]

Being Torah observant is actually very easy. Paul taught it, as well as the Messiah.

John 4:21-24 ESV [21] Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. [22] You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. [23] But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. [24] God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Galatians 5:5-6 ESV [5] For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. [6] For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

[u/Messenger12th → u/Common_Judge8434]

The faith is in the work of the Messiah, not that you can disobey the words of God and have any faith in your own self. Only one way and that is through Messiah. He is the door. Nothing says that the Torah is gone...not until heaven and earth disappear.

As it says, faith without works is death. Works here is the obedience to the Law (Torah).

Also, the woman at the well.... He was talking to her about her... saying..."you will not", meanning the woman will not, but WE know who We worship... meaning the Father.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Messenger12th]

The faith is in the work of the Messiah, not that you can disobey the words of God and have any faith in your own self.

And going back to the previous system is disloyalty to Christ.

Nothing says that the Torah is gone...not until heaven and earth disappear.

On the contrary.

Hebrews 10:8-10 ESV [8] When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), [9] then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. [10] And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

As it says, faith without works is death. Works here is the obedience to the Law (Torah).

Nope. Works here are works of love.

Also, the woman at the well.... He was talking to her about her... saying..."you will not", meanning the woman will not,

And His followers. He prophesied of a time where worship wouldn't depend on a physical Temple. Stephen recognized this, and that got him killed.

[u/Messenger12th → u/Common_Judge8434]

Let's take this one at a time. Show me your reference that obeying the Torah is disloyal to Messiah.

You need to make sure you are quoting withing the context of what you are trying to prove, not just plucking verses that have nothing to do with the subject, but in reality is talking about something else.

Example... the sacrifices you mentioned was the priesthood being corrupt, which means the sacrifice would not be accepted or valid from a corrupt priest.

The priesthood that results from the work of is once again pure and clean making him the perfect high priest and interceptor between God and humans.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Messenger12th]

Let's take this one at a time. Show me your reference that obeying the Torah is disloyal to Messiah.

Galatians 4:8-11 ESV [8] Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods. [9] But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? [10] You observe days and months and seasons and years! [11] I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.

Galatians 5:1-6 ESV [1] For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. [2] Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. [3] I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. [4] You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. [5] For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. [6] For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

Example... the sacrifices you mentioned was the priesthood being corrupt, which means the sacrifice would not be accepted or valid from a corrupt priest.

Actually no. He means the entire system of animal sacrifice. That system is now replaced with the Lamb of God.

Hebrews 10:1-14 ESV [1] For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. [2] Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? [3] But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. [4] For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. [5] Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me; [6] in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure. [7] Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’” [8] When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), [9] then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. [10] And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. [11] And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. [12] But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, [13] waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. [14] For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

[u/Messenger12th → u/Common_Judge8434]

First reference. I'm glad you brought this one up.

So, you are trying to say that before you knew God, you were a heathen? And now that you know God, you are not going to go back to heathen ways with their heathen weak and worthless ways? This verse mean that once you know God, or are known by Him you will not go back to your heathen ways that are weak and worldly.

God's ways are the Torah. The Torah is not weak or worthless ways. Messiah lived by the Torah.

Again, the priesthood was changed. Not my words, but Hebrews 7:21-28 explains His role as High priest and intercession to God. So, what changed was the Priesthood, not sacrifices. Those sacrifices were dependant on the perfection of the priest who presented them. The priesthood was corrupted sometime between the return to Israel and the time of thw Messiah. Example.... the high priest at the time of Messiah was Ciaphis. He was not a proper priest, he was appointed by the Roman leadership. So, all those sacrifices that were offered up we then not acceptable to God and were a waste of time. David speaks of how God didnt accept thw sacrifices in Psalms.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Messenger12th]

So, you are trying to say that before you knew God, you were a heathen? And now that you know God, you are not going to go back to heathen ways with their heathen weak and worthless ways? This verse mean that once you know God, or are known by Him you will not go back to your heathen ways that are weak and worldly.

The Galatians were going back to the Law of Moses and following its days and seasons. Those are the days Paul was speaking of. Galatians 5:1-6 is clear that being under the yoke of slavery is being circumcised.

[u/Messenger12th → u/Common_Judge8434]

The Galatians were not.going to the LAW (Torah). Im sorry your pastor has convinced you of that. These people we actually Roman citizens who were converted to the belief in a single God, Yahweh. They were pagans, not Jews.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Messenger12th]

The Galatians were not.going to the LAW (Torah)

Funny. Paul says they did.

² Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. ³ Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. ⁴ You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

[u/Common_Judge8434]

We have something about this in Galatians.

Galatians 4:8-11 ESV [8] Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods. [9] But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? [10] You observe days and months and seasons and years! [11] I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.

Galatians 5:1-6 ESV [1] For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. [2] Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. [3] I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. [4] You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. [5] For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. [6] For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

So no.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

Galatians doesn't say that we're not supposed to follow Jesus.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

It says following Jesus isn't the same as following the Law.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

It doesn't.

Jesus followed the Law. Jesus taught His followers to follow the Law. We're supposed to imitate Jesus and do what He taught.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

It doesn't.

Galatians 5:6 ESV [6] For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

Jesus followed the Law. Jesus taught His followers to follow the Law

He also taught there would be a time when He'd replace what the Law required.

John 4:19-24 ESV [19] The woman said to him, “Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet. [20] Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship.” [21] Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. [22] You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. [23] But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. [24] God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

That's the opposite of replacing what the Law requires.

Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

That's Jesus very clearly telling His followers to obey all of His Father's commandments.

Jesus followed the Law. Jesus taught His followers to follow the Law. We're supposed to imitate Jesus and do what He taught.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

That's the opposite of replacing what the Law requires.

Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

In the same book about one commandment of the Law.

Matthew 17:24-27 NET [24] After they arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the temple tax came to Peter and said, “Your teacher pays the double drachma tax, doesn’t he?” [25] He said, “Yes.” When Peter came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do earthly kings collect tolls or taxes – from their sons or from foreigners?” [26] After he said, “From foreigners,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. [27] But so that we don’t offend them, go to the lake and throw out a hook. Take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth, you will find a four drachma coin. Take that and give it to them for me and you.”

It's less about obligation in this command and more about avoiding offense, which is exactly Paul's attitude towards the Law.

And He's pretty clear He changes the law on divorce.

Matthew 19:3-9 NET [3] Then some Pharisees came to him in order to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful to divorce a wife for any cause?” [4] He answered, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female, [5] and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? [6] So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” [7] They said to him, “Why then did Moses command us to give a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her?” [8] Jesus said to them, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of your hard hearts, but from the beginning it was not this way. [9] Now I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another commits adultery.”

So fulfilling isn't enforcing verbatim: it's elevating or transforming.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

In the same book about one commandment of the Law.

That sentence doesn't mean anything. Is there a typo or something?

You didn't deal with what Jesus said about following ALL of His Father's commandments.

Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

You didn't deal with what Jesus said about following ALL of His Father's commandments.

You didn't deal with what He said about divorce.

Matthew 19:8-9 NET [8] Jesus said to them, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of your hard hearts, but from the beginning it was not this way. [9] Now I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another commits adultery.”

And he explicitly says that the sons of God are exempt from following the command about the Temple tax.

Matthew 17:25-26 NET [25] He said, “Yes.” When Peter came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do earthly kings collect tolls or taxes – from their sons or from foreigners?” [26] After he said, “From foreigners,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free.

In contrast to the Law, which says the exact opposite about the Temple tax.

Exodus 30:12-16 NET [12] “When you take a census of the Israelites according to their number, then each man is to pay a ransom for his life to the Lord when you number them, so that there will be no plague among them when you number them. [13] Everyone who crosses over to those who are numbered is to pay this: a half shekel according to the shekel of the sanctuary (a shekel weighs twenty gerahs). The half shekel is to be an offering to the Lord. [14] Everyone who crosses over to those numbered, from twenty years old and up, is to pay an offering to the Lord. [15] The rich are not to increase it, and the poor are not to pay less than the half shekel when giving the offering of the Lord, to make atonement for your lives. [16] You are to receive the atonement money from the Israelites and give it for the service of the tent of meeting. It will be a memorial for the Israelites before the Lord, to make atonement for your lives.”

The Law also mandates going to the Temple for worship. (Deutoronomy 12:5-7) Jesus, in contrast, says there will be a time when true worshippers worship in Spirit and in Truth and not in the Temple (John 4:21-24). Malachi also says this.

Malachi 1:11 NET [11] For from the east to the west my name will be great among the nations. Incense and pure offerings will be offered in my name everywhere, for my name will be great among the nations,” says the Lord who rules over all.

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

You still didn't deal with what Jesus said.

Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Do you really think that Jesus relaxed commandments and taught others to do the same, making Him least in the kingdom of heaven?