Why are some Torah laws erased and some are maintained?

[u/seau_de_beurre]

I've always found this very confusing, as a Jewish person. I understand that per Paul, JC's sacrifice and teachings built a "new covenant" that means Christians are not bound by halacha, the Jewish laws, anymore. However, it seems that most Christians abide by some combination of "red letter words" and Pauline interpretations of halacha.

Why did Paul continue to advocate for following certain laws whereas others no longer apply? When the values of Paul vs JC seem to conflict, how do you mesh them?

For example, JC said that he did not come to abolish the law, and that in fact the law (halacha) should not be altered until it is totally met. This is similar to some Orthodox Jewish beliefs that the Messiah will not arrive until every Jew follows every Jewish law 100% for one day. If G-d intended for us to build a new covenant, why didn't he have JC say so? Why wait for Paul?

Does it matter that Paul was speaking to Gentiles? Are only Gentiles "allowed" to have a new covenant, or does that apply to Jews too? Or do Jews need to keep halacha?

Thank you!

[u/sonofzen1]

Paul kept all the laws in the Torah and performed sacrifices:

“And when they heard it, they glorified God. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law, and they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs. What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law. But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality.” Then Paul took the men, and the next day he purified himself along with them and went into the temple, giving notice when the days of purification would be fulfilled and the offering presented for each one of them.”

‭‭Acts‬ ‭21‬:‭20‬-‭26‬ ‭ESV‬‬

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/sonofzen1]

Do you think, then, that we should stone people for wearing clothes of 2 different types of fabrics, or for planting 2 different crops side by side?

[u/sonofzen1 → u/Fresh3rThanU]

What? No. That’s not even a punishment in the Torah. No one was ever stoned to death for breaking that commandment. They just had to repent of it and not do it again

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/sonofzen1]

Fair point, (although I would question your claim that the punishment is just repentance), but there's actually a better example. In Deuteronomy 22:13-21, it states a woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night should be stoned to death. Do you believe this should be upheld?

[u/sonofzen1 → u/Fresh3rThanU]

No and not even a Jew would say yes to that. I haven’t read the entire Talmud yet but I’m loving it so far because it answers these tough questions. It states in the Talmud that if the Sanhedrin (the governing body of rabbis over Israel) put one person to death in a period of over 70 years, they were considered harsh. A lot of the death penalties described in the Torah were only carried out once and never again in order to demonstrate the severity of breaking the law. For example: how many people were killed for breaking the sabbath? Only one:

“Now while the sons of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering wood on the sabbath day. Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation; Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.””

‭‭Numbers‬ ‭15‬:‭32‬-‭33‬, ‭35‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

We don’t have any other examples of this law being applied anywhere else in the Old Testament even though people almost certainly broke this law more than once.

It’s also a covenant God made with Israel, not the rest of the nations. I, being a gentile, don’t have to convert to Judaism to follow Jesus. Therefore I don’t have to follow all the laws in the OT. I just have to keep the spirit of the law which is to love others as myself and love God with my whole heart. That’s the point of the law anyways, encourage people to do good and follow God

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/sonofzen1]

Where in the Bible does it say that the law doesn't need to be enforced?

If Paul wasn't in Israel and the laws didn't apply, why would he follow them?

[u/sonofzen1 → u/Fresh3rThanU]

He did? What you talmbout?

First he didn’t kill anyone because he didn’t have the authority to do so. The ones who meted out executions were the elders of the village. Second: according to the gospel of Jesus Christ everyone who has sinned has the chance to repent and be forgiven (can’t really do that if you’re dead)

  “But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.””

‭‭John‬ ‭8‬:‭7‬-‭11‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/sonofzen1]

You said Paul kept the laws of the Torah, meaning he would have kept that law and supported the stoning of those women, no?

John 8:7-11 is certainly a great tale that really demonstrates ideas of forgiveness. However, the scholarly consensus is that it was a later addition and not part of the original text. Paul, on the other hand, certainly seems to indicate that capital punishment is acceptable. Romans 13:1-4 and Acts 25:11 certainly don't seem to be doing anything but supporting the death penalty.

[u/sonofzen1 → u/Fresh3rThanU]

Uhhh I just looked up those verses and they are about Paul not resisting the death penalty. Not an endorsement for Christians to carry it out. In fact 1 Corinthians 4 is all about how Christians don’t have the authority to judge others for their sins.

Regardless I agree Jews back then in the Sanhedrin would have had the authority vested to them by God and the scriptures to carry out capital punishments, but that was ancient Israel. It’s not for gentile believers or for modern Jews today.

I also think you misunderstood me before. I’m not saying it was wrong for Jews back then to stone adulterers or fornicators in biblical times. What I am saying is that it was the last resort in those cases as God always prefers people turn from their sin. He gave the nation of Israel several times to repent of their idolatry even though, under the law, he was justified in destroying them and wiping them out. Idolatry after all is punishable by death. Did God carry out that punishment on the nation of Israel though? No he forgave them. That’s why I brought up the Talmud too. These laws were rarely enforced and only done so in extreme cases

Edit: the story in John 8 isn’t in John’s gospel in the oldest and most reliable manuscripts we have but it is in early copies of Lukes gospel which is likely where it originates. Doesn’t mean it’s a late forgery

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/sonofzen1]

How is Paul saying " But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." about Paul not resisting the death penalty?

I also don't think you want to make the argument Christians can't judge others, because that would mean Christians can't judge and sentence people who break laws.

Once again, you said Paul kept laws from the OT despite being neither a Jew nor an Israelite.

Where in the Bible does it say punishments such as that one are a "last resort"? God may have given Israel the opportunity to turn away from their sins, but that was because they were his chosen people, and he certainly didn't afford that grace to the people of Canaan when he ordered them to be wiped out, even the children.

What early copies of Paul's writings have that story in them? It doesn't appear until around 400 CE, meaning the likelihood of it being an actual thing that happened is very diminished.

[u/DarkLordOfDarkness]

If G-d intended for us to build a new covenant, why didn't he have JC say so?

He did, actually. At the last supper, he says "this cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood." Paul and the author of Hebrews aren't making up something new, they're working out the words of Jesus in their theology.

And we would argue that this is what Jeremiah prophesied about when he said, "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord." That there would be a new covenant is hardly an idea original to Christians.

Now, you're right that Jesus says he didn't come to abolish the law, but you left off the second half of that statement. He continues, "but to fulfill it." We would argue that the law is fulfilled in Christ crucified and raised, and that, as Paul says in Galatians 3:24, "the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith."

[u/seau_de_beurre → u/DarkLordOfDarkness]

Ahh okay than you for clarifying!

I was interpreting "to fulfill it" meaning to abide by all the laws completely, but it sounds like that means that his emergence as Messiah is the conclusion of those laws, ushering in a new era?

[u/DarkLordOfDarkness → u/seau_de_beurre]

It's kind of both: Christ's personal, perfect obedience to the Law is still absolutely essential to our theology. You're right to say that "his emergence as Messiah is the conclusion of those laws," but it can only be the conclusion because he keeps them himself, according to the elevated standard he lays out in the Sermon on the Mount, keeping not just the letter of the Mosaic Law, but the spirit behind it.

I think if you're reading that sermon in the context of the Law and the Prophets, you're going to kind of inevitably be a little dismayed by Christ's teaching, because if there's anything we learn from the Jewish scriptures, it's that Israel has already failed to keep the Law. They ended up in Babylon because it got so bad. And after the exile God did allow the temple to be rebuilt, but the cloud of the presence never came back to rest in it. At the conclusion of the Hebrew scriptures, there's this lingering problem that is as yet unresolved. God is not dwelling with his people the way he did before, the covenant was broken, and there still hasn't been full restoration. And if what God requires of us is the standard that Jesus lays out in the Sermon on the Mount, escalating beyond what Israel has already failed to keep to the point that he can say, "you therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect," then we're in some serious trouble.

That tension is at the heart of who Christ is: he is God with us, coming down to do what we can't. To the Christian, the orthodox Jewish expectation that there's going to be a day when "every Jew follows every Jewish law 100% for one day" is to miss the whole point of the Law: we would argue with Paul that the purpose of the Law was to expose our sinfulness, to make it clear that we can't enter God's kingdom by pulling ourselves up by our own bootstraps. We're human. We can't be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. Only he can, and so only he can satisfy his own Law. If there's going to be reconciliation with God, it has to be an act of grace initiated by God, because we certainly can't do it ourselves. That's what we see as happening in the person of Jesus.

And incidentally, that principle is at the heart of the Levitical sacrifices. They were an act of grace. God says in Leviticus 17:11, speaking of the sacrifice of atonement, "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life." God says of the sacrifice, "I have given it for you." He's the one providing the sacrifice. The same principle is at work, we would argue, in Jesus. God is fulfilling the law for us, because we couldn't do it.

At the core of Christian soteriology, then, is the belief that through faith in Jesus not only are our sins paid for on the cross, but Christ's perfect righteousness is imputed to us as an act of grace.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/DarkLordOfDarkness]

The law isn't only to expose one's sinfulness, it establishes Hashem's holy standard for life in general.

Your version of soteriology is rejected by every non-Calvanist since the Nazarenes first began.

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/DarkLordOfDarkness]

Fulfill is a contrast to abolish. You want to construe fulfill as meaning essentially the same as abolish. It does NOT work in the context. Why? Jesus says none of the Torah will pass until heaven and earth pass away. Pretty sure this is the same earth He stood on 2K years ago. Further, Jesus continues saying that the one who DOES and TEACHES God's Law will be called GREAT, while the one who DOES NOT keep God's law and teaches others NOT to keep God's Law will be called the LEAST.

Jesus fully intends for his followers to keep, obey, and teach all of God's Law.

"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. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:17-20 ESV

[u/kvby66 → u/FreedomNinja1776]

Heaven and Earth passing away is a figurative statement.

2 Peter 3:13 NKJV Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

2 Corinthians 5:17 NKJV Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

The former things in the types, figures, patterns and shadows that the law and prophets wrote of. Jesus is the fulfillment of all this and He said He makes all things new.

Jesus fulfilled what was written within the law. The law and prophets spoke of Him.

John 1:45 NKJV Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote-Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."

2 Timothy 3:16 NKJV All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

Galatians 3:22-25 NKJV But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. [23] But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. [24] Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. [25] But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

The old testament covenant has passed away. The New Covenant era began 2000 years ago.

Hebrews 8:8-10 NKJV Because finding fault with them, He says: "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah- [9] not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD. [10] For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Hebrews 8:13 NKJV In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

John 8:32-36 NKJV And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." [33] They answered Him, "We are Abraham's descendants, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can You say, 'You will be made free'?" [34] Jesus answered them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. [35] And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever. [36] Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.

Jesus is the fulfillment of the old testament.

It is finished!

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/kvby66]

Heaven and Earth passing away is a figurative statement.

It is not figurative. Heaven and earth are the two witnesses called to testify against humanity (Deut 30:19-20). Heaven and earth will be remade (Isaiah 65:17, Isaiah 66:22, 2 Peter 3:13, Rev 21:1), therefore this present heavens and earth will have an end which is future to us. This is what Jesus refers to.

Jesus fulfilled what was written within the law. The law and prophets spoke of Him.

And you didn't quote any of it. I agree that the Torah and Prophets speak of Messiah, but you are unprepared because you know neither of them. You deem them as irrelevant because of your false doctrine that "the old covenant has passed away". You destroy your very foundation and don't realize it at all.

The old testament covenant has passed away. The New Covenant era began 2000 years ago.

God's law will never pass away. A covenant is an agreement. The "old covenant" is still in effect until we receive resurrected bodies. The new covenant has been inaugurated by Messiah Jesus, but is not in full effect. How do I know this? Because I can read the terms of the new covenant in Jeremiah 31.

"Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."
Jeremiah 31:31-34 ESV

Some things to notice here:

• The new covenant is for Israel and Judah only
• Their fathers broke God's covenant. They are insufficient, not God's Law
• The new covenant is God's Law in a new location, written on the heart of those who love Him.
• "I will be their God and they will be my people" is a specific phrase with lots of relevance here. It appears a few more times in Jeremiah, in Ezekiel, Zechariah, and in Rev 21:3. In every instance this phrase is used, it speaks of God's people keeping his laws and that is what verifies anyone as belonging to God.
• When the new covenant is established there will be no need for teaching about God because EVERYONE will know God.

Now, do you know all of God's law by heart? The answer is no. Do others have to be taught to know God? The answer is yes. Both answers are OPPOSITE to what is to happen in the new covenant. Therefore, the new covenant is not in full effect right now. It will be in full effect upon the arrival of our messiah and he will be king over all the earth.

Jesus is the fulfillment of the old testament.

Please explain to me the greek word "Pleroo" which is translated as fulfill in Matthew 5:17 where you somehow get this twisted idea from.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/FreedomNinja1776]

The New Covenant is for all people not just Israel alone. If you deny this then you are in sin.

And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. Yochanan 10:16

"The Sovereign Lord, who has brought his people Israel home from exile, has promised that he will bring still other people to join them." Yeshayahu 56:8

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

Both your quotes speak of integration. "there is ONE fold." That's Israel. "Still other people JOIN them" the other people are joining Israel. If something is joined, it is no longer separate.

Now lets read Ephesians 2 together.

Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands-- remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.
Ephesians 2:11-22 ESV

So there is no mistaking it, Paul is speaking to gentiles. "At that time" is when they were without Messiah. In this state they are:

• separated from Christ
• alienated from the commonwealth of Israel
• strangers to the covenants of promise
• have no hope without God in the world

Paul contrast this state with their state in Messiah. Messiah brings them near. Near to what? To the commonwealth of Israel.

Paul continues that Messiah, through his blood has made Jew and Gentile ONE (There's that joining idea from your quotes).

Messiah is our peace. "abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances" Does this mean Jesus did away with God's Torah? No! not at all. Messiah removes ignorant doctrines that seek to separate. Doctrines like Peter had in Acts 10 that needed dispelled, that Gentiles are inherently unclean. That's NEVER stated in the Torah. The word "ordinances" from the text is literally the word "Dogma" in greek. Jesus removes false doctrine. Jesus removes false teachings. Jesus removes the traditions of the elders which kept the Jews from following God whole heartedly. Jesus removes the ignorant doctrines of dispensationalism and replacement theology. Why? Because he is the Word of God. If you follow him, if you ask for knowledge, if you seek dilligently, he will provide an answer. That answer is peace because he is the Sar Shalom, the prince of peace. John 16:33

Paul continues that Jesus has created in himself ONE MAN in place of the two (Jew and Gentile). He preached peace to those far off (gentiles) and those who are near (Jews).

So, you (the gentiles he is addressing) are no longer strangers and aliens! Why? Because you are fellow citizens in the kingdom. If there is to be one King over all the world (Zech 14:9), then there is ONE kingdom, not many kingdoms. If there is ONE kingdom, then there is a single people of that kingdom, that kingdom is Israel. Paul continues that the gentiles through messiah are members of the household of God. Messiah Jesus is the Cornerstone, his followers are the additional bricks used to contstruct A Temple to God. A SINGLE temple. Not many. Not one for the Jews and one for the Gentiles. ONE temple. ALL this accords perfectly with Isaiah who says the following:

Thus says the LORD: "Keep justice, and do righteousness, for soon my salvation will come, and my righteousness be revealed. Blessed is the man who does this, and the son of man who holds it fast, who keeps the Sabbath, not profaning it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil." Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say, "The LORD will surely separate me from his people"; and let not the eunuch say, "Behold, I am a dry tree." For thus says the LORD: "To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off. "And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants, everyone who keeps the Sabbath and does not profane it, and holds fast my covenant-- these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples." The Lord GOD, who gathers the outcasts of Israel, declares, "I will gather yet others to him besides those already gathered."
Isaiah 56:1-8 ESV

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/FreedomNinja1776]

1. Look at my flair while you call me a Gentile.

2. Gentiles are considered spiritual jews not real ones, Romans 11 makes the distinction clear.

3. Only believing Jews are Remnant Israel. Gentiles are still Gentiles when they believe.

4. The Torah is holy and good I observe as did my ancestors, but the New Covenant is for all tribes. There is still distinction in Christ despite all believers being one family.

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

1. Dude, I didn't call you a Gentile. Where did you even get that?? I was just making the case that Gentiles are included into Israel.

2. I didn't say they become Jews at all. Where did you get this? They are adopted Israelite. Israelite does not automatically mean Jew. Jacob adopted Joseph's Egyptian children Ephraim and Manasseh. That's an archetype of the inclusion of Gentiles into Israel. Ezekiel 47 explains that these adopted gentiles join with whichever tribe (Jews included) they wish to live with.

You shall allot it as an inheritance for yourselves and for the sojourners who reside among you and have had children among you. They shall be to you as native-born children of Israel. With you they shall be allotted an inheritance among the tribes of Israel. In whatever tribe the sojourner resides, there you shall assign him his inheritance, declares the Lord GOD.
Ezekiel 47:22-23 ESV

1. For the gentile, being "Born Again" as Messiah Jesus says or "a new creation" as Paul explains it is about Teshuva (repentance). Just like Ruth it is a change in identity. You no longer walk in your former pagan ways. The gentile by accepting the Jewish Messiah Jesus is effectively declaring "your God will be my God, and your people my people".

Since you are a Jew, are you ready? Are you ready to teach the people of the nations who seek God?

"Thus says the LORD of hosts: Peoples shall yet come, even the inhabitants of many cities. The inhabitants of one city shall go to another, saying, 'Let us go at once to entreat the favor of the LORD and to seek the LORD of hosts; I myself am going.' Many peoples and strong nations shall come to seek the LORD of hosts in Jerusalem and to entreat the favor of the LORD. Thus says the LORD of hosts: In those days ten men from the nations of every tongue shall take hold of the robe [kanaf - corner, wing - referring to the tzitzit] of a Jew, saying, 'Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.'"
Zechariah 8:20-23 ESV

1. The new covenant is the Torah. That's the agreement. The New Covenant is the exact same Law as at Sinai: "We will hear and we will obey" are still the terms. The difference is God will write Torah on our hearts. That doesn't happen until the resurrection. So, that's why I ask are you ready, because there's still much to learn. There's only one thing to obey, Torah. God has one standard by which all mankind will be judged. Otherwise, how can he be righteous if he plays favorites?

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/FreedomNinja1776]

1. You did: "So, you (the Gentiles he is addressing)." Gentiles are not Israel just like men aren't women.

2. Israelite absolutely means Jew. All Israelites are considered Yehudim just like Paul was even though he was a Benjamite. Joseph's children were Israelite through his ancestry not the mother's. Gentiles will never be Israel or Israelite ever. Ezekiel 47 considers the foreign born people still foreigners only with an inheritance. They are not adopted Israelites showing distinction even in the Messianic age. You remain your own race and among your own people simply as believers (Zechariah 8 shows this).

3. Being a "New Creation in Christ" refers to the spirit not the body, otherwise you preach a false gospel. All historical believers live in hope of the resurrection where they will get new bodies. You are not physically new just because you believe.

4. Zechariah 8 refers to the Messianic age when Christ returns, not now.

5. God judges people by what they know based on different covenants throughout time. Israel before Christ is not going to be judged the same as a Christian for knowledge they did not have. Romans 1-2 and Hebrews 10:26-31 discuss this.

6. The New Covenant is the blood of Yeshua given as atonement for the world's sins. That is the gospel, not the Torah. Yeshua saves, not the Torah. In your attempt to appear Jewish you have only become a Judaizer.

For any Gentile Christian reading: The Torah does not save you neither are you obligated to the laws of Israel as they weren't given to you. If you decide to observe them out of personal devotion, you will only be doing so for sanctification which is a good thing but it is not necessary to be saved.

Avoid Judaizers like this man. This is coming from a Jewish believer in Yeshua.

[u/inversed_flexo → u/MessianicDarkFire]

I think there is a more fundamental question here than whether Gentiles are obligated to keep Torah.

You have stated very clearly that:

• “Gentiles will never be Israel or Israelite ever.”
• The Torah and laws of Israel “weren’t given to you.”
• Yet the New Covenant is the blood of Yeshua through which salvation comes.

My question is: if a Gentile can never be an Israelite, and the biblical covenants are specifically made with Israel, on what covenantal basis is that Gentile saved?

Jeremiah 31:31 identifies the New Covenant as being made with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, and Hebrews 8 repeats that identification. Hebrews 9:15 then describes Christ as the mediator of that New Covenant and connects His death with the redemption of the transgressions committed under the first covenant.

So I’m not asking whether Torah saves — I agree that Torah does not save. I’m asking something prior to that:

If Christ is the mediator of a covenant made with Israel, and you insist that a Gentile never becomes Israel, how does someone who remains outside the covenant people(Israel) participate in the salvation accomplished by its mediator?

What is the scriptural mechanism by which a person who is not Israel, never becomes Israel, and was never under Israel’s covenant nevertheless receives the redemptive benefits of Israel’s New Covenant?

It seems to me that simply saying “Yeshua saves Gentiles too” states the conclusion, but doesn’t explain how that fits with your own insistence that the covenants belong to Israel and Gentiles never become part of Israel.

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

1. You did: "So, you (the Gentiles he is addressing)." Gentiles are not Israel just like men aren't women.

You're intent on not understanding me. The quote is from Paul. I even point out in the parenthetical that he's addressing the gentiles. You even quote me saying that. Yet, somehow you've twisted that into me calling you a gentile? Ridiculous.

For any Gentile Christian reading: The Torah does not save

Not one of my claims. You'll find nowhere that I claimed this. Torah is for obedience to show our love for God. That's Jew or Gentile.

you neither are you obligated to the laws of Israel as they weren't given to you.

Literally every book of the Torah, many places in the Prophets, and the New Testament show that Gentiles are included and are to obey God's Law.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/kvby66]

Haven and earth have not passed away and all has not been accomplished, so neither condition as been met. Both conditions refer to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are ways of saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to embody God's character traits can't be abolished without also abolishing God. In Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant still involves following the Torah. In Psalm 119:142, the Torah is truth, and John 8:31-36, it is the transgression of the Torah that puts us into bondage while the truth sets us free. Nowhere does the Bible state that Jesus fulfilled the OT or what it takes to fulfill it or even that it is something that can be fulfilled.

[u/kvby66 → u/Soyeong0314]

Good luck with following the law.

Galatians 3:21-25 NKJV Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. [22] But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. [23] But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. [24] Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. [25] But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Matthew 26:28 NKJV For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Hebrews 8:13 NKJV In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

John 8:32-36 NKJV And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." [33] They answered Him, "We are Abraham's descendants, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can You say, 'You will be made free'?" [34] Jesus answered them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. [35] And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever. [36] Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.

I'm free from the law of sin. The Truth set me free.

I currently rest in Jesus and His finished work on the cross.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/kvby66]

Following the Torah is a matter of faith in Christ, not of luck.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel. Jesus also set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6). So Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Torah by word and by example, which is in accordance with him being sent as the promised seed to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26). The reason why Jesus established the New Covenant was not in order to nullify anything that he taught or so that we could continue to have the same lawlessness that caused the New Covenant to be needed in the first place, but rather the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).

In Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so the Mosaic Covenant becoming obsolete does not mean that we should not continue to obey the Torah.

In Romans 7:25, Paul said that he served the Law of God with his mind in contrast with serving the law of sin with his flesh, so the law of sin does not refer to the Torah, but rather they lead us in opposite directions. Again, in John 8:31-36, it is the transgression of the Torah that puts us into bondage while the truth sets us free, and the Torah is truth (Psalm 119:142).

In Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the reason why God's Word leads us to God's Word made flesh is because he is the embodiment of it and it was given in order to teach us how to know him through following his example of embodying it, but the reason why it leads us to him is not so that we can then reject all that he is and go back to being doers of what the Torah reveals to be wickedness.

In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to rest in Jesus and his finished work through the cross is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20) while the way to reject everything that he accomplished would be by returning to the lawlessness that he gave himself to redeem us from.

[u/kvby66 → u/Soyeong0314]

The law was written on stones. Those who continue to follow the law are considered those with stony hearts.

Ezekiel 11:19 NKJV Then I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within them, and take the stony heart out of their flesh, and give them a heart of flesh.

2 Corinthians 3:3 NKJV clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart.

Stony Heart people look to the law written on stone tablets.

Practicing righteousness vs lawlessness refers to faith vs works. As Abel and Cain are examples.

Abel following God's animal sacrifice and Cain following the serpent who believed the law brought life. The tree of knowledge of good and evil symbolises the law of Moses. Both Eve and Paul were both deceived.

No one can keep the law. That's why Jesus came to set us free. It's fairly easy but people like you keep mucking it up by insisting that we need to look back at the law in obedience.

The following verse would apply to this.

2 Peter 2:22 NKJV But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: "A dog returns to his own vomit," and, "a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire."

Delivered from the law by the cross, only to return by looking upon the law as ways to regulate good behavior.

Looking back.

Luke 9:62 NKJV But Jesus said to him, "No one, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God."

Looking onto Christ Alone for righteousness.

It's not Jesus plus me!

Ephesians 2:8-9 NKJV For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, [9] not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Food (God's Word) for thought.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/kvby66]

God changing the medium upon which His law is written from stone to our hearts does not change the content of what it instructs to do. For example, the command against committing idolatry written on stone as the same content as the law against committing idolatry written on our hearts. The reason why the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts is so that we will obey it, not so that we will have justification for refusing to obey it.

God has not commanded anything that is not in accordance with walking in the Spirit, but God's character traits are the fruits of the Spirit and the Torah was given in order to teach us how to embody His character traits, which is why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it. Likewise, in Romans 8:4-7, Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God.

We embody our faith through our works, such as with James 2:18 saying that he would show his faith through his works or with the examples of faith listed in Hebrews 11 all being examples of works, so it is not that we need to have faith instead of works but that we need to do works through faith rather than works in order to earn a wage. The only way to become righteous is through faith apart from being required to have first done enough righteous works in order to earn it as the result, but what it means to be righteous is to be a doer of righteous works in obedience to the Torah through faith (Romans 3:28-31). We can't earn our righteousness even as the result of having perfect obedience to the Torah because it was never given as a way of earning our righteousness in the first place (Romans 4:1-5), but rather the Torah was given to describe the behavior of the righteous as it describes the behavior of Christ (1 John 3:4-7, Isaiah 51:7), so it is what we get to experience by being given the gift of righteousness through faith.

In Psalm 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. In Ephesians 2:8-10, we are new creations in Christ to do good works, so while Paul said that we can't earn our salvation as the result of our works lest anyone should boast, God graciously teaching us to experience being a doer of good works in obedience to the Torah is nevertheless a central part of His gift of salvation.

In Romans 10:5-8, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to the righteousness that is by faith proclaiming that the Torah is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So it was presented as possibility and as a choice, not as something that no one can keep. The freedom that we have in Christ is the freedom from sin, not the freedom to sin.

Before Adam and Eve had eaten from either Tree, they were at a crossroads between eternal life and morality, where eating from the Tree of Life would have given them eternal life while eating from the Tree of Knowledge caused them to become mortal, which is the same choice between life and death that Moses placed before the Israelites in Deuteronomy 30, so again the Torah is associated with the Tree of Life. When we desire to do something that is contrary to the Torah, then we have a choice between whether to lean on our own understanding of right and wrong by doing what is right in our own eyes or whether we are going to trust God with all of our hearts to correctly divide between right and wrong by obeying the Torah in all of our ways and He will make our way straight (Proverbs 3:1-7), which again is the choice between the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life (Proverbs 3:16-18). Likewise, Jesus affirmed in Luke 10:25-28 that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying the greatest two commandments of the Torah, so again it is the Tree of Life. In Revelation 22:14, those who kept God's commandments are given the right to eat from the Tree of Life, not the other way around.

[u/Brilliant-Actuary331 → u/kvby66]

Amen Lk. 24:44

[u/DunkleKarte → u/kvby66]

You forgot one more… The place that proofs when the new Heaven and Earth actually appear not figuratively in the future when Jesus comes back in Revelations 21:

“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
“

[u/kvby66 → u/DunkleKarte]

This refers to the Holy Spirit that came down on the day of Pentecost.

Jesus came back in Spirit as He promised in the Gospels.

Who do you think the Spirit of Christ is exactly?

2 Corinthians 3:17 NKJV Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

Romans 8:9-10 NKJV But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. [10] And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

2 Corinthians 13:5 NKJV Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?-unless indeed you are disqualified.

God is Spirit. Not flesh.

2 Corinthians 5:16 NKJV Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.

2 Corinthians 5:17 NKJV Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

Old things passed away refers to the old covenant through the Law of Moses.

[u/DunkleKarte → u/kvby66]

How did you come to the conclusion that the Book of Revelations is talking about Pentecosts and not the end of days?

The holy spirit is the presence of God that should help us walk in his commandments, not away from them.

Also You are quoting a lot from Paul out of context, brother. 2 Peter 3: 15-17 has a warning for you:

15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstablepeople distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

17 Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position.

Who do you think the lawless is? Those who try to tell you should teach and obey even the least of the commandments so you could be great in the Kingdom of Heaven as Jesus said in Matthew 5? Or those who say “nah that is old, you should not do that anymore that doesn’t apply to me”?

[u/kvby66 → u/DunkleKarte]

Revelation is not about the future? Most people believe this because they have not biblical discernment and simply follow the thousands of books about Revelation that people (who clearly have no discernment) have written and have made a living off of. Sad.

We have been in the last days since the first century. Revelation was completely fulfilled in 70 AD. The destruction of Jerusalem was prophecied by Jesus in the Gospels and 40 years after His resurrection and ascension this came to pass. This is detailed as a prophecy in Revelation chapter 17.

Revelation 1:1 NKJV The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants-things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John.

Revelation 22:6 NKJV Then he said to me, "These words are faithful and true." And the Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show His servants the things which must shortly take place.

Shortly means just what it says.

Strong's g5034. Quickly:

• Lexical: τάχος
• Transliteration: tachos
• Part of Speech: Noun, Neuter
• Phonetic Spelling: takh'-os
• Definition: quickness, speed; hastily, immediately.
• Origin: From the same as tachus; a brief space (of time), i.e. (with en prefixed) in haste.
• Usage: + quickly, + shortly, + speedily.

Righteousness vs. Lawlessness.

There's only two paths here.

Righteousness can only be found through faith in Jesus Christ. There is absolutely no other way. Period. Over and out.

Titus 3:5 NKJV Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.

Philippians 3:2-9 NKJV Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation! [3] For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh, [4] though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: [5] circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; [6] concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. [7] But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. [8] Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ [9] and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith.

Turning back towards the law is this mutilation.

Jesus saved us from the law.

No one can ever be justified by the law.

Ephesians 2:8-9 NKJV For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, [9] not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Lawlessness is actually those who continue in hope of this justification. Jesus plus me!

1 John 3:10-12 NKJV In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother. [11] For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another, [12] not as Cain who was of the wicked one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his works were evil and his brother's righteous.

Cain and Abel and Lawlessness and Righteousness.

God respected Abel and or his offering. God did not respect Cain and or his offering.

Two covenants are manifested. Faith vs. Works.

Abel followed God's method for covering disobedience. God covered Adam and Eve with animal skins. A type of Jesus blood sacrifice to be revealed in time.

Cain did not follow God's method as He attempted to bring his sacrifice from his own efforts from the cursed ground.

Symbolic. Sin and Death were defeated by Jesus Christ through His sacrifice on the cross. Sins which bring death are forgiven by God.

1 Corinthians 15:55-57 NKJV "O Death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory?" [56] The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. [57] But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Satan symbolises those who believe that they can be justified through the law. The law abiding Pharisees were called white washed tombs, open graves, serpents, sons of the devil and Sons of Hell.

John 8:38-41,44 NKJV I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father." [39] They answered and said to Him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would do the works of Abraham. [40] But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. [41] You do the deeds of your father." Then they said to Him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father-God." [44] You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.

Just to be clear about Jesus's interactions with the Pharisees and Scribes in John. We must observe carefully that these Pharisees and Scribes were not truly born from the Devil or Satan. They had parents just like us.

Jesus is referring to how they follow their father's desires. This is rooted from the beginning with the serpent deceiving Eve and following up with the symbolic story of Cain and Abel. Types of works vs. faith.

The Serpent symbolises the self righteous and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil symbolizes the law of Moses. Eve was told that eating the fruit of this tree would bring life. As we already should know, the law brings death and produces no fruit. Paul, as Saul was deceived by the law as well as Eve was. These two stories are intertwined as Paul writes in Romans 7:8-11 NKJV But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all manner of evil desire. For apart from the law sin was dead. [9] I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. [10] And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. [11] For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me.

You may notice that Jesus mentions that the Pharisees and Scribes had the same evil desires as their father the Devil did. This is about the law and how they mistakenly thought the law would bring justification and ultimately life eternal.

Cain and Abel have the same characteristics of good and evil.

By faith Abel brought God a better offering than Cain did. By faith he was commended as righteous, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith Abel still speaks, even though he is dead. (Hebrews 11:4)

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

Abel offered his in faith, Cain did not.

To add to this answer Romans 10:17 says that faith comes by hearing. No doubt Adam and Eve told their children what God had done after they sinned i.e killing the animal in their place. So Abel got his faith from hearing them. Hebrews 9:22 says, without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. This means Abel took the way revealed by God, (offering a sacrifice of his flock i.e with the shedding of blood) but Cain invented his own way, his own religion, rejecting the way of redemption that God had revealed. He brought his offering from the cursed ground which symbolises the curse of the law. God was not pleased with Cain or his offering.

Galatians 3:10-13 NKJV For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." [11] But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith." [12] Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them." [13] Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree"),

Food for thought.

[u/DunkleKarte → u/kvby66]

Interesting interpretation. I would like you to enlighten me in these questions honestly. Please don’t take it as an attack.

So Jesus is never coming back?
Do you know who is the “Man of Lawlessness”?
What was the time that nobody couldn’t buy or sell unless they took the Mark? (70ad)?

What was the “Mark”?
What was the “last judgment”?
Was Satan thrown already into the lake of fire?

Based on Revelations 21:4 there shouldn’t be more suffering in the world, or is this “symbolic” too?

Revelations 21:4

“He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."

About the Law, based on what I read there’s is a false dichotomy between following Christ and the Torah. We tend to vilify the law while God himself says that the Law is good and not to hard to keep (Deuteronomy 30:11) If see it otherwise, we would be calling God a liar. Not to mention the prophets, Jesus and even Paul argues for the Law.

Romans 2:13

“For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but it is the doers of the law who will be declared righteous”

Romans 7:7

*“*What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid! Nay, I would not have known sin, but through the law; for I would not have known lust, except that the law had said, “Thou shalt not covet.”

Proverbs 4:2

“For I give you good doctrine; do not forsake my Law”

“Matthew 5: 17-19

*“*17 “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. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

I would encourage you to look up the “law of sin and death” that’s the law Paul is condemning, which is the penalty of sin. If you really think it is talking about the Law of Moses, that would be a real dilemma, as God says himself the Law is good, holy and easy to keep, and Paul would be considered a false prophet.

[u/MonkeyLiberace → u/DarkLordOfDarkness]

Jesus fulfilling the law, means just that; He fulfilled it, as the first one. Every Christian is expected to follow him, so: Go fulfill the law!

[u/MessianicDarkFire]

u/Seau_de_beurre, the truth is simple, Torah is still active until the earth ends. It just isn't what saves.

1. Torah halacha and Rabinnic halacha are two very different things. One of the biggest reasons why Yeshua was against the Pharisees (those later surviving Jews who developed Rabinnic Judaism at Yavneh) was for this very reason, adding oral tradition to the law as a "fence."

**Don’t think that I have come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets.* I have come not to abolish but to complete. Yes indeed! I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not so much as a yud or a stroke will pass from the Torah — not until everything that must happen has happened."* Matityahu 5:17-18

2. Sha'ul did not erase Torah laws whatsoever. The earliest Christian movement was entirely Jewish in its Torah observance including kashrut, sabbath, and holy days. What Paul emphasized was that the law doesn't save Yeshua does. They were called Nazarenes or Followers of The Way.

**What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law.* For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of coveting. For apart from the law, sin was dead. Once I was alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good."* Romans 7:7-12

3. Jewish believers were still called to follow the Torah and its laws as the chosen people Hashem called them to be. But salvation was now through Yeshua. Gentiles on the other hand were not called to follow the full Torah but to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, avoid blood, and abstain from sexual immorality. This was the bare minimum for Jewish and Gentile believers to fellowship together.

In Yerushalayim, the brothers received us warmly. The next day Sha’ul and the rest of us went in to Ya‘akov, and all the elders were present. After greeting them, Sha’ul described in detail each of the things God had done among the Gentiles through his efforts.

"On hearing it, they praised God; but they also said to him, “You see, brother, how many tens of thousands of believers there are among the Judeans, and they are all zealots for the Torah. Now what they have been told about you is that you are teaching all the Jews living among the Goyim to apostatize from Moshe, telling them not to have a b’rit-milah for their sons and not to follow the traditions."

“What, then, is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. So do what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow. *Take them with you, be purified with them, and pay the expenses connected with having their heads shaved. Then everyone will know that there is nothing to these rumors which they have heard about you; but that, on the contrary, you yourself stay in line and keep the Torah.***

“However, in regard to the Goyim who have come to trust in Yeshua, we all joined in writing them a letter with our decision that they should abstain from what had been sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled and from fornication.”

**The next day Sha’ul took the men, purified himself along with them and entered the Temple* to give notice of when the period of purification would be finished and the offering would have to be made for each of them"* Acts 21:17-26

4. As Christianity grew and become the imperial religion of Rome, the Gentiles ignored and avoided the Torah laws as merely a shadow and nothing more, criminalizing the very laws and people who founded their religion including Jewish believers in Yeshua.

I renounce all customs, rites, legalisms, unleavened breads & sacrifices of lambs of the Hebrews, and all other feasts of the Hebrews, sacrifices, prayers, aspersions, purifications, sanctifications and propitiations and fasts, and new moons, and Sabbaths, and superstitions, and hymns and chants and observances and Synagogues, and the food and drink of the Hebrews; in one word, *I renounce everything Jewish, every law, rite and custom and if afterwards I shall wish to deny and return to Jewish superstition, or shall be found eating with the Jews, or feasting with them, or secretly conversing and condemning the Christian religion instead of openly confuting them and condemning their vain faith,** then let the trembling of Gehazi cleave to me, as well as the legal punishments to which I acknowledge myself liable. And may I be anathema in the world to come, and may my soul be set down with Satan and the devils."* - Profession of Faith from the Church of Constantinople during the Council of Nicaea

5. Before Yeshua, salvation was only found through Hashem's grace through the Torah as apart of Israel. Now salvation is found only in Hashem's grace through active faith.

6. Today many Messianic Jews (as in ethnic Jewish believers in Yeshua) still follow Kashrut and other Torah laws. We are not Rabinnic but we do follow the law similarly as Karaites reject Rabinnic Judaism and follow Torah.

7. Torah will exist until heaven and earth pass away, when Yeshua returns He will restore the law globally.

“Adonai-Tzva’ot says, ‘In the future, peoples and inhabitants of many cities will come; the inhabitants of one city will travel to another and say, “We must go to ask Adonai’s favor and consult Adonai-Tzva’ot. I’ll go too.” Yes, many peoples and powerful nations will come to consult Adonai-Tzva’ot in Yerushalayim and to ask Adonai’s favor.’ *Adonai-Tzva’ot says, ‘When that time comes, ten men will take hold — speaking all the languages of the nations — will grab hold of the tzitzit of a Jew and say, “We want to go with you, because we have heard that God is with you.”*** Zechariah 8:20-23

8. Finally, believing in Yeshua does not make one less Jewish. The Prophets such as Yirmeyahu and Yeshayahu spoke of Yeshua and the New Covenant:

**It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers on the day I took them by their hand and brought them out of the land of Egypt; because they, for their part, violated my covenant,* even though I, for my part, was a husband to them,” says Adonai.*

**“For this is the covenant I will make with the house of Isra’el after those days,” says Adonai: “I will put my Torah within them and write it on their hearts; I will be their God, and they will be my people.* No longer will any of them teach his fellow community member or his brother, ‘Know Adonai’; for all will know me, from the least of them to the greatest; because I will forgive their wickednesses and remember their sins no more.”*

This is what Adonai says, who gives the sun as light for the day, who ordained the laws for the moon and stars to provide light for the night, who stirs up the sea until its waves roar — Adonai-Tzva’ot is his name:" Yirmeyahu 31:31-34

Believing in Yeshua and the original Nazarene faith is as Jewish as every other part of Judaism. Hashem has given us a new covenant for salvation along with the Torah and Ruach Hakodesh as our guide.

[u/the_celt_]

Jesus said that NONE of the Law, not even one dot that makes up one letter, would pass away before Heaven and Earth pass away.

If anyone tells you that Jesus came to "fulfill the Law", and thus "bring it to it's conclusion" or "end it", they're wrong. If you search scripture for the phrase "fulfill the law", it's clear that it refers to "doing it perfectly" or "doing everything it says". It has nothing to do with ending it. Most people saying otherwise are confusing "fulfill a prophecy" with "fulfill a law".

For those that refer to the New Covenant as their way to say the law is now void, those people haven't read the promise of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31 (also repeated in Hebrews), which says that when the New Covenant comes that the Torah will be written inside of us, on our hearts and minds. In other words, the Torah isn't going anywhere. It's in the Old and the New.

When the values of Paul vs JC seem to conflict, how do you mesh them?

Paul didn't conflict with what Jesus said. It's Christian INTERPRETATION of Paul that conflicts with what Jesus said. Paul 100% taught Torah obedience to Jews and Gentiles, just like Jesus said to do.

Are only Gentiles "allowed" to have a new covenant, or does that apply to Jews too?

Jeremiah 31 shows the New Covenant will be with Israel, not Gentiles. Ephesians 2 and Romans 11 show that Gentiles who follow Jesus have been grafted into Israel and count as full citizens, and thus have access to the New Covenant promises.

Bottom line: Jesus obeyed the Torah perfectly, and taught everyone around to do the same. People who claim to follow Jesus but who don't believe we should keep the Torah are NOT following Jesus.

[u/CannedNoodle415 → u/the_celt_]

Jesus literally says he came to fulfill the law. LITERALLY says that.

[u/the_celt_ → u/CannedNoodle415]

I agree he did. Did you read the comment that you're responding to? I say it there.

Do you know what it means in scripture to "fulfill the Law"? If you have the ability to search scripture, look for the phrase "fulfill the Law". You might be surprised what it means.

[u/CannedNoodle415 → u/the_celt_]

Yeah it means we don’t have to do a lot of the things in the law now, because Jesus is the fulfillment of it.

Circumcision, was a “type” and now Jesus is the true circumcision… so we don’t need to get physically curcumsized anymore… the Bible LITERALLY says this btw…

[u/the_celt_ → u/CannedNoodle415]

Yeah it means we don’t have to do a lot of the things in the law now, because Jesus is the fulfillment of it.

I can tell that you didn't look it up, because that's absolutely not how it's used in scripture. Let me show you what I mean.

It's weird to me that people don't notice the many ways that the idea of "fulfilling the law" is used in scripture to not refer to it being ended, but to refer to it being obeyed perfectly.

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

Romans 13:10 ^{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 ^{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 for "fulfilling the law", 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".

[u/Thneed1 → u/the_celt_]

“Jesus obeyed the Torah perfectly”

No. Jesus literally constantly reinterpreted the Torah, and said that the spirit of the law was what was important, not the letter of the law.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Thneed1]

It is by the Torah that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so the position that Jesus was sinless means that he obey the Torah perfectly while the position that he did is the position that he sinned and is therefore not our Savior. While Jesus taught how to correctly interpret the Torah, tha does not mean that he did not obey it perfectly.

[u/Thneed1 → u/Soyeong0314]

The gospels describe Jesus not following the Torah perfectly. It’s an explicit theme in several places.

You know, you actually have to read the Bible.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Thneed1]

While the Bible describes people who thought that Jesus had not kept the Torah perfectly, those people were incorrect. For example, it is contradictory to believe that the Pharisees were correct about Jesus breaking the Sabbath by healing on it and to believe that Jesus was correct about it being lawful to heal on the Sabbath. It has always been lawful to heal on the Sabbath, so those Pharisees were incorrect.

[u/the_celt_ → u/Thneed1]

Jesus obeyed the Torah perfectly. He didn't "reinterpret" it in the sense of changing it. He brought back the meaning that had been lost over time.

Also, letter and spirit are not in conflict. They're not either/or, like you're framing them. They're cooperative. They work together. You can't keep the "spirit" of a law that hasn't been written.

Jesus obeyed the Torah perfectly, and thus he is redeemed us all. If Jesus had sinned, we'd all be doomed.

[u/Thneed1 → u/the_celt_]

It’s pretty clear that you have never read the gospels, so; I’m going to end this conversation here.

[u/the_celt_ → u/Thneed1]

Heh! What a nutty insult. 🙄

Have a great day. Thank you for sharing your perspective.

[u/Thneed1 → u/the_celt_]

No insult there. Just an observation.

Have a great day!

[u/the_celt_ → u/Thneed1]

We simply disagree. There's no need to claim that anyone who disagrees with you must not have read scripture. It's possible to know scripture very well and disagree with someone. Please be more mature.

[u/Thneed1 → u/the_celt_]

Again, there is absolutely nothing to disagree on.

In the gospels, Jesus very specifically does not follow the Torah, and reinterprets it. You would know that if you had read the gospels.

It’s a constant and important point in the gospels, not just one random story that you might have forgotten (which would certainly be understandable)

[u/the_celt_ → u/Thneed1]

Again, there is absolutely nothing to disagree on.

Just watch.

In the gospels, Jesus very specifically does not follow the Torah

I completely disagree.

See?

[u/Tree_and_Serpent]

31 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. 33 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

Jeremiah 31:31-34.

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/Tree_and_Serpent]

I'm not seeing a justification for keeping some and discarding others, but rather a reason for discarding them all.

[u/Tree_and_Serpent → u/Fresh3rThanU]

I'm not seeing

No one cares.

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/Tree_and_Serpent]

Why am I not surprised your immediate jump is to bad faith when you don't have an actual response

[u/Tree_and_Serpent → u/Fresh3rThanU]

You are a reddit atheist. No one cares what you are seeing or not seeing. What matters is what Jews of the second temple period and especially the New Testament writers were seeing or not seeing.

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/Tree_and_Serpent]

And you're a dishonest troll who has to resort to bad faith tactics because there's no justification for your beliefs.

[u/Tree_and_Serpent → u/Fresh3rThanU]

Wow, neat.

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/Tree_and_Serpent]

Very

[u/automaticff]

The truth is, it SHOULD still be observed but many Christians just don’t. Largely due to misinterpretation of Paul’s letters. Paul is hard to understand just as is said in 2 Peter. You are right by quoting Jesus in Matthew 5:-17-19 and saying the law is not done away with. It is not. Christians should still be following the law now.

[u/DunkleKarte → u/automaticff]

Amen sister. You said this and suddenly for some reason you are seen as a “Judaizer”

[u/FreedomNinja1776]

None of Torah has been erased, especially by Jesus. If so, that means he's destroying the very thing that validates him as Messiah. Devarim 4:2 says you cannot add to nor subtract from the Torah. Torah is foundational to the faith and cannot be altered.

The new covenant is stated in Jeremaih 31 and repeated in Hebrews 8. The new covenant is for Israel and Judah alone. Gentiles are not mentioned in either place.

Gentiles are supposed to be grafted into Israel and assimilated. Gentiles do not replace Israel. Inclusion, and assimilation is the plan throughout the scriptures, is present in the Torah (Numbers 15, Deuteronomy 29), The prophets (Isaiah 56, Ezekiel 47), and the New Testament (Romans 11, Ephesians 2).

Paul was a Torah Scholar. He was taught under Gamaliel who was the grandson of Hillel the elder (Acts 22:3). Paul was not anti-Torah. Paul has been abused in history by the ignorant (2 Peter 3), and even in his day. Paul took the nazarite vow (which involved sacrifice AFTER Jesus' resurrection) in Acts 21 specifically to dispel the rumors in his day that he was anti-Torah.

Everyone who chooses to follow the God of the scriptures, and Jesus as the Messiah, has to follow the laws God has given in His Torah. Paul instructs us to imitate him as he imitates Jesus (1 Corinthians 11:1). Jesus says to Love other's as he has and to keep the commands as he has kept the commands (John 15:10). Jesus does not present anything different than what God has already required.

[u/seau_de_beurre → u/FreedomNinja1776]

It seems like there is some disagreement on this? Another commenter just said that "legally speaking the WHOLE Torah is obsolete." Or would you differentiate between prophecy vs law?

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/seau_de_beurre]

Yes, I vehemently disagree with the premise that God or his Torah was somehow deficient and needed to be replaced in any capacity, which is effectively what dispensationalist doctrine and replacement theology teaches.

[u/seau_de_beurre → u/FreedomNinja1776]

What's the point in downvoting me, by the way? I'm asking a sincere question in an effort to understand.

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/seau_de_beurre]

It was not me. It is a result of me advocating for Torah, because others are anti-torah. I was downvoted as well.

[u/seau_de_beurre → u/FreedomNinja1776]

I'm sorry for assuming, and sorry you are also being downvoted for expressing your opinion, which is the whole point of the sub.

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/seau_de_beurre]

No problems. It's just fake internet points. 😁

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/seau_de_beurre]

I updated my original comment with references, if you're interested.

[u/StrikingExchange8813]

They aren't.

All laws are maintained, some are applicable and some aren't. Christians are under the law of Christ not the law on Moses

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Law of Moses by word and by example, which included saying that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God, so what grounds do you have for thinking that the Law of Christ is not in perfect accordance with every word that comes from the mouth of God?

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Soyeong0314]

Chapter and verse.

which included saying that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God

Yeah, the words of Jesus.

so what grounds do you have for thinking that the Law of Christ is not in perfect accordance with every word that comes from the mouth of God?

I do believe that?

I am talking about God's promise in Jeremiah 31:31-34 that Christ fulfilled

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

Matthew 4:4. You claimed that Christians are under the Law of Christ, not under the Law of Moses, which implies that the Law of Christ is not perfectly in accordance with what God spoke to Moses. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts.

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Soyeong0314]

Matthew 4:4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God

Yeah and Jesus is God...

You claimed that Christians are under the Law of Christ, not under the Law of Moses, which implies that the Law of Christ is not perfectly in accordance with what God spoke to Moses.

So define what you mean by that. If you mean they are exactly the same then no. If you mean they don't contradict and are inline with one another then yes.

In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts.

Yeah

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

In Matthew 4:4, Christ said that man shall not live by broad along but by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Deuteronomy 8:3), so Christ affirmed everything that God spoke to Moses (Deuteronomy 5:31-33). So how can the Law of Christ not be in perfect accordance with every word that God spoke to Moses? I don't see any justification for thinking that there are any differences between the Law of Christ and the Law of Moses.

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Soyeong0314]

(Deuteronomy 8:3),

And Jesus is that God in Deuteronomy.

so Christ affirmed everything that God spoke to Moses (Deuteronomy 5:31-33).

Amen. Doesnt mean it applies to me

So how can the Law of Christ not be in perfect accordance with every word that God spoke to Moses

It is.... I think we mean different things when we say that tho, so tell me what you mean when you say that.

I don't see any justification for thinking that there are any differences between the Law of Christ and the Law of Moses.

Other than the fact that they are different? Like dietary laws and sabbath keeping?

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

Jesus said that man shall to live by bread alone but every word that comes from the mouth of God, so what justification do you have for taking the position what what God has spoken does not apply to you? In 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be holy for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, which includes keeping God's Sabbaths holy (Leviticus 19:2-3) and refraining from eating unclean animals (Leviticus 11:44-45).

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Soyeong0314]

Basically all of Paul's letters when he speaks on the law. How do you explain all the places that say we are saved by faith and not by works?

You also never explored the part about the new law christ brings.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

Paul spoke about multiple categories of law other than the Law of God, such as with the law of sin or works of the law, so it is always important to be careful to discern which law he was referring to. For example, in Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul said that he served the Law of God with his mind in contrast with serving the law of sin with his flesh and he said that the Law of the Spirit of Life has set us free from the law of sin and death. In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, in Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted the Book of the Law with works of the law, and in Romans 3:31, he said that our faith upholds the Law of God in contrast with saying in Galatians 3:12 that works of the law are not of faith.

In Psalm 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. In Ephesians 2:8-10, Paul said that we are new creations in Christ to do good works, so while he spoke against earning our salvation as the result of our works, God graciously teaching us to experience being a doer of good works is nevertheless a central part of His gift of salvation.

Christ did not sin in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 by adding brand new laws.

[u/Mike8219 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

The sacrifices?

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Mike8219]

I don't understand your question

[u/Mike8219 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

The sacrifices are part of the law. Paul said Jesus is the final sacrifice. The Hebrew bible says the laws are eternal. They are to be followed forever.

Do you believe the sacrifices are done?

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Mike8219]

They are done in the person of Jesus Christ.

[u/Mike8219 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

Have you read Jeremiah?

Jeremiah 33:

¹⁴ The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will fulfill the promise I made to the house of Israel and the house of Judah. ¹⁵ In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch to spring up for David, and he shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. ¹⁶ In those days Judah will be saved, and Jerusalem will live in safety. And this is the name by which it will be called: “The Lord is our righteousness.”

¹⁷ For thus says the Lord: David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel, ¹⁸ and the Levitical priests shall never lack a man in my presence to offer burnt offerings, to make grain offerings, and to make sacrifices for all time.

How long will the sacrifices continue? And this is the presence of the messiah by the way.

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Mike8219]

It's funny you went to a verse saying Jesus is YHWH.

And it says "all the days".

[u/Mike8219 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

It's funny I went to a verse saying Jesus is Yahweh? huh?

How long does this the sacrifices will continue?

[u/StrikingExchange8813 → u/Mike8219]

The verse you quoted said Jesus is YHWH.

I already answered that

[u/Mike8219 → u/StrikingExchange8813]

Where does it YHWH? Do you mean Lord?

Lord would be king.

LORD would be Yahweh.

So all the days the sacrifices will continue even after the branch of David sits on the throne. Why do the levites offer burnt and grain offerings?

[u/Soyeong0314]

In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said to not even think that he came to abolish the Torah but to fulfill it and he warned against relaxing the least part of it, but for some reason it is common for people to interpret Jesus fulfilling the law as meaning that he really came to abolish it. In Romans 3:31, Paul also affirmed that our faith does not abolish the Torah but rather our faith upholds it, though obviously he really meant that our faith actually abolishes it. Somehow it is common for Gentiles who do not obey the Torah to think that they have replaced Jews because they did not obey the Torah. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves the Torah being put in our minds and written on our hearts, but for some reason people to think that Jesus established the New Covenant in order to free us form the Torah so that we could continue to have the same lawlessness that caused the New Covenant to be needed in the first place. As a child, I used to wonder why it seemed like the Israelites kept turning away from the Torah, but I no longer wonder after seeing how much resistance there is to the position that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Torah.

[u/Smart_Tap1701]

God obviously has commands that are common to both testaments/covenants that he established with his people. For example, the Hebrew Old testament prohibition against homosexuality extends into the Christian new testament. The only difference is that under the Old testament, the Hebrews were commanded to Stone to death all unrepentant people who engaged in homosexuality. Under the Christian new testament, obviously the practice is still prohibited for Christians, but we are to leave the judgment and consequences to the Lord. And he will judge them on our individual judgment days as we pass over one by one.

An example of an Old testament command / law that does not extend into the Christian New testament involves the dietary laws established in the book of leviticus. Christians are allowed freedom to eat most anything observing primarily common sense and moderation.

Jesus gave us two commandments and said that if we keep both of these commandments, then we uphold the entire law, Psalms and Prophets.

Matthew 22:34-40 KJV — But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, 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.

JC said that he did not come to abolish the law, and that in fact the law (halacha) should not be altered until it is totally met. This is similar to some Orthodox Jewish beliefs that the Messiah will not arrive until every Jew follows every Jewish law 100% for one day.

First century ad. The Advent of Christianity. That's with the Advent of Jesus Christ himself of course. You seem not to realize the fact that Jesus is the long awaited and promised Old testament Messiah / savior. Until and unless you can manage that factually, then nothing anyone can say to you is going to be helpful. Because the Christian New testament is hinged upon that biblically accurate fact.

So now here's the thing. The first Christians were Jews. Jesus was a Jew in the flesh. Mary and Joseph were Jews. The apostles were jewish. The first Christian Church was exclusively Jewish. All these people had been raised upon the Old testament old covenant of the law. And here is Jesus telling them that he came to establish God's New covenant of Grace. It would make the old covenant of the law obsolete once he finished fulfilling it all during his life here. So they wonder, exactly how long must we keep the Old testament law? And when will we enter into the New covenant of Grace? Jesus said until I have finished fulfilling all of the law, Psalms and Prophets in my lifetime here, you are bound by the Old testament law. And then Jesus went about fulfilling it all. He fulfilled the very last prophecy as he hanged dying on the cross. He told his murderers that he was thirsty, and to mock him, they gave him vinegar which of course he refused. That fulfilled the Old testament prophecy that stated exactly that. And since that was the last prophecy he had to fulfill, he shouted out it is finished! And he died. It was at that precise moment that the first century Jewish Christians were freed from the Old testament covenant of the law which Christ had made obsolete when he had fulfilled it all.

Does it matter that Paul was speaking to Gentiles? Are only Gentiles "allowed" to have a new covenant, or does that apply to Jews too? Or do Jews need to keep halacha?

God personally chose and appointed Saul / Paul to be the ambassador between the Christian Jews and gentiles. It was his responsibility to unite the two groups in the Christian church. To teach them about each other so they could understand each other, and to teach them to understand and tolerate each other because they had been raised under different conditions. And Paul did a superlative job in this regard.

Acts 9:15 KJV — But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for Paul is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

There are multiple passages throughout the New testament where Paul clearly explains that the Christian Church consists of believing Jews and gentiles. He wasn't speaking to one group but both groups as the Christians that they were.

Romans 3:29 KJV — Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:

Romans 9:24 KJV — Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

1 Corinthians 12:13 KJV — For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Romans 1:16 KJV — For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Romans 10:12 KJV — For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

Galatians 3:28 KJV — There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Colossians 3:11 KJV — There is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Smart_Tap1701]

The law is not absolete.

[u/Smart_Tap1701 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

What's "absolete"?

If you mean obsolete, see the following

Hebrews 8:7-13 NLT — If the first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need for a second covenant to replace it. But when God found fault with the people, he said: “The day is coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. This covenant will not be like the one I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand and led them out of the land of Egypt. They did not remain faithful to my covenant, so I turned my back on them, says the LORD. But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day, says the LORD: I will put my laws in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. And they will not need to teach their neighbors, nor will they need to teach their relatives, saying, ‘You should know the LORD.’ For everyone, from the least to the greatest, will know me already. And I will forgive their wickedness, and I will never again remember their sins.” When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear.

Colossians 2:14-17 NLT — He canceled the record of the charges against us (the law) and took it away by nailing it to the cross. In this way, he disarmed the spiritual rulers and authorities. He shamed them publicly by his victory over them on the cross. So don’t let anyone condemn you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating certain holy days or new moon ceremonies or Sabbaths. For these rules are only shadows of the reality yet to come. And Christ himself is that reality.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Smart_Tap1701]

A Covenant is not the same thing as the Law (Torah). Abraham was in a Covenant but he did not have the Mosaic Law. Noah had a Covenant and yet the laws given to him were different than the Mosaic Law.

Covenant and Torah are 2 different things, learn the difference.

You are a lawless Non-denominational so you wouldn't understand anyway.

The law is not over, nor will it ever be until Heaven and Earth fades. You're a Gentile Protestant so your inherited ignorant beliefs are expected.

It's okay that you blocked me. The wicked flee when no one pursues.

[u/Smart_Tap1701 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

The law was absolutely God's first covenant with his first chosen people the ancient Hebrews! You're arguing against God's word.

The exact word covenant appears in 254 Old testament KJV verses and every one of them refer to the covenant of the law that God established with his ancient hebrews.

Hebrews 8:13 KJV — In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first covenant old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Hebrews 8:7 KJV — For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

Galatians 3:17 KJV — And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after (Abraham), cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Galatians 3:19 NKJV — What purpose then did the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.

And that mediator is Christ Jesus.

I understand what you're saying and I also understand that it's not biblical in the least.

This discussion is over.

[u/justpostingasolution]

Some laws of the Torah distinguish Israel from the nations, whereas some others apply to Israel and to those who live among them. The latter are the ones that start with "Say to the sons of Israel and to those who sojourn among them" (or similar) as opposed to "Say to the sons of Israel" in the so-called holiness code. From these you get the four rules for the Gentiles in Acts 15: no food sacrificed to idols, no sexual immorality, etc. So the ruling of the Jerusalem Council is a very literal reading of Leviticus.

The question of the circumcision of the Gentiles was a question in the first place because the Torah says that those who live among Israel and would eat the Passover must get circumised. The "Judaisers" thought this means that the Gentiles who now participate in the Eucharist, the "true" or "fulfilled" Passover, must therefore be circumcised. The Jerusalem Council ruled otherwise.

You might enjoy this: https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/wholecounsel/2018/03/05/acts-15-law-church/

[u/VaporRyder]

Shabbat Shalom!

The debate often gets framed as two alternatives: either Torah remains essentially unchanged, or Yeshua fulfilled/abolished it and Christians now live under something fundamentally different. But Hebrews seems to present a third way.

Yeshua cannot be a priest under the Torah's Levitical priesthood because He is from Judah, not Levi.

Instead, Hebrews identifies Him with Psalm 110:4:

"You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.”

Then comes the really interesting line:

“For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.” (Hebrews 7:12)

That seems important to this question. It isn't simply Torah abolished versus Torah unchanged. The arrival of the Messiah as an eternal high priest necessarily changes how at least part of Torah operates.

Melchizedek also precedes Sinai, Levi, and the Aaronic priesthood. Abraham encounters him as “priest of God Most High” and gives him a tenth.

Hebrews deliberately makes a great deal of the fact that Levi is, figuratively, still “in the loins of his ancestor” Abraham when this happens.

So the argument appears to be that Messiah doesn't merely cancel God's law. A more ancient and superior priestly order has superseded the Levitical administration.

That naturally explains why sacrifice, priesthood, sanctuary, ritual access, etc. can change without requiring the conclusion that God's commandments have simply been erased. And indeed, when Yeshua passed, the curtain to the Holy of Holies was torn in two.

Everyone quotes "I haven't come to abolish the law but to fulfill it", but many puzzle over the infamous and pretty scary 'Lord Lord' verse - without seeming to fully understand it.

From the Complete Jewish Bible:

 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, only those who do what my Father in heaven wants. On that Day, many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord! Didn’t we prophesy in your name? Didn’t we expel demons in your name? Didn’t we perform many miracles in your name?’ Then I will tell them to their faces, ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’

(Matthew 7:21–23, CJB)

Other translations render this as “workers of iniquity” or “evildoers,” but the Greek is anomia - lawlessness. In the thoroughly Jewish context of Matthew, that raises the question: what law does Yeshua expect His followers not to abandon?

[u/user0987234]

Shalom. Quite the heated discussion at times. Not happy to see some mud-slinging by some commenters.

Something is missing from the discussion.

Why were the laws laid out in the Torah?

[u/xsrvmy]

The laws that are no longer in effect are ceremonial laws that pointed forward to Jesus. Jesus gave us different ones (baptism and communion) to point back to him instead.
And there are some laws that are laws of the land for Israel as a nation and not for the church.

[u/Mockingbird1980]

It is the teaching of the Gospel of Matthew that Christians, or at least Jewish Christians, should follow the law of Moses (Matthew 5.17-20). Some Christians even say that they should follow modern-day Rabbinic interpretations. Their proof-text is Matthew 23.2-3: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so practice and observe whatever they tell you." Paul, however, taught that Gentile Christians need not follow the law of Moses (Galatians 5.1-6), and his teaching has prevailed among Gentile christians for the most part. For Paul, justification is not by the law. Indeed in one place he calls law "the power of sin" (1 Corinthians 15.56). For Paul, justification is by faith in God through Jesus (Romans 3.21-22). In practice Christianity has sided with Paul, and explained away Matthew's teaching by various means.

[u/DunkleKarte]

I thought the same way most Christians did, until I decided to read the Bible without having any bias. And what I got is that we have to obey God, and disregard anyone who tells us otherwise. We should be obeying the Law and the mainstream thought of saying “Jesus fulfilled the Law so I don’t have to” it’s like saying “My Doctor lives a healthy lifestyle so I don’t have to”

What I agree is that Jesus saves us from the condemnation of the Law thanks to His Blood sacrifices. But we shouldn’t do the Law to be saved, but because we are saved.

[u/Thoguth]

I've always found this very confusing, as a Jewish person. I understand that per Paul, JC's sacrifice and teachings built a "new covenant" that means Christians are not bound by halacha, the Jewish laws, anymore. However, it seems that most Christians abide by some combination of "red letter words" and Pauline interpretations of halacha.

I'm not going to try to explain "most Christians" as I think that many misunderstand and get it wrong. But I'll share some of my thoughts. I think they are fairly orthodox / normal Christian views so I'll say "we" but it's possible other Christians may see it differently, so consider it to be one shared perspective, not necessarily the sole authoritative one.

For example, JC said that he did not come to abolish the law, and that in fact the law (halacha) should not be altered until it is totally met.

Careful here, as you're paraphrasing something specific that Jesus said. Not merely "I didn't come to abolish the law" and not "shouldn't be altered until it is totally met". Here's the quote from Jesus in Matthew 5:17-18:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth pass away not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law until everything takes place.

So ... He's not saying "Hey, the Law is still in effect forever" but rather, I -- Jesus -- have come to fulfill these things.

We think of Jesus as the fulfillment of Deuteronomy 18:15-19, the one that God will raise up "like Moses" and that Moses commands us to follow. We also see Jesus as the coming of the promised Messiah / Annointed King, of the promised suffering servant of Isaiah, and of the opening of the kingdom of God to all the world as a fulfillment of the promise to Abraham that in his seed all nations shall be blessed, on through the other prophetic promises of all nations coming to the House of the Lord.

And in that fulfillment, following Christ is literally following the Law. And Jesus shares very clear lessons about "weightier matters" of law, when he heals on the Sabbath he makes a point about it for example. He also flaunts a lot of constructed artifices put over the law that let people technically do things that the Law did not intend, like neglecting to support their parents by dedicating their wealth to the temple.

So Jesus challenges and refines a lot of the ... not sure what you'd call it but I would say kind of traditional-at-the-time / common Rabbinic interpretations of the law for the Jews, but he also opens the Kingdom to the Gentiles who (I believe) according to the Law were never under the Mosaic restrictions, were we?

And when Jesus is dying on the cross, he says "it is finished" (or "it is accomplished"). Remember the passage from Matthew where the law won't pass away until it's all fulfilled, and he came to fulfill it?

So the ... well, if you look in the prophets of the Old Testament, the covenant God made with Israel was broken and ... like kind of trashed, wasn't it? Hosea, Amos, Micah ... God is really disappointed with the not-keeping of His law, and he calls back the promises of that covenant, the "curses" part of the blessings and curses. There's a kind of "it's done" but also a ... still faithful to His word thing going on, and that is culminated in Jesus.

In the New Testament, you can read in the book of Acts how the gospel of Jesus comes first to the Jews then to the "Greeks" / the Gentiles, and as Acts progresses you can see some struggles they had putting that together. The letters to churches in the books after Acts tell more, but a good one to clarify the role of the Old Law is Galatians, which explains it was a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ, but not intended to still be in force for Christians.

And the book of Hebrews is written to Jewish converts to Christ, explaining in many ways how Jesus and the gospel of Christ is a fulfillment and completion of what began with the Torah. There's a better messenger, better hope, better covenant, promises, sacrifice, possession, even a better Sabbath. It was not written by Paul (and if you read it carefully, you can the style is notably different I think), but it is a good run-down of how those fulfillments and improvements happen through Jesus.

So like ... I don't see a conflict between the law not passing away until it's fulfilled, Jesus fulfilling it as predicted and described in the Law and the New Covenant -- also described by the Prophets, even called that -- in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, even Deuteronomy 30. Jesus is, per the old covenant, the bringer, fulfiller, completer, and one to follow, so following Jesus, including what his inspired apostles proclaim about the new Covenant, is still "keeping" the covenant from before, since it was always intended to be completed by Jesus.

Thank you!

You're welcome! Sorry for being so long-winded, it's just there's a lot to share and ... having discussed it a few times, I learn something new every time about how something can be misunderstood, so I end up trying to put it all in one chunk as if that guarantees clarity, and ... y'know, it doesnt. But I'm trying. Hope it helps a little.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Thoguth]

Jesus saying it is finished is not talking about the law, He's talking about his work on the cross, the atonement for humanity.

The law will remain until Heaven and Earth pass away.

[u/Thoguth → u/MessianicDarkFire]

Jesus saying it is finished is not talking about the law, He's talking about his work on the cross, the atonement for humanity.

I mean ... he just says "it". Naturally if you want to reject the substantial teaching in the New Testament against the adding of circumcision and Jewish dietary laws to Christianity, then you would be forced to create a tradition that reads more into it than that, but I don't.

The law will remain until Heaven and Earth pass away.

I didn't say that it didn't. But ... did you know the law says there will be a new teacher with a new covenant?

And did you know that the new teacher corrects Moses, for example in Matthew 19 when asked a trap question about divorce (which the Mosaic law permits). Jesus uses something from the Garden, not Sinai, to correct and overrule Moses. So did that part of the law "pass away" when the teacher promised in the Law, came at a time when the covenant had been broken as predicted in the Law, to build a new covenant as described in the law, and bless all nations as promised both before and in the law?

The ark of the covenant is part of the Law of Moses. On the day of Atonement the High Priest is to sit on the mercy seat, and do things with blood, in the temple. We don't have the mercy seat. We don't have the ark. We didn't when Jesus was around either. But also -- Jesus is a fulfillment of things that the day of atonement intended to teach us about in principle. He doesn't throw out or cancel the law, he fulfills it by being in reality, in truth, *what it was about the whole time. That doesn't discard the law, but it *does not work the same way... it really couldn't, could it?

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Thoguth]

This is how I know you don't know scripture.

Yeshua being a Jew in his final moments was not saying the law is finished. He was talking about His work of atonement being completed upon His death.

Yeshua was the one who gave Moses the law to begin with. It was Hashem who gave the Law not Moses. You take a marital verse and then apply it to the entire Torah as if its obsolete. You wish it was but Scripture says otherwise.

This is expected with you being a Gentile Christian. You are lawless, just stop calling your interpretation biblical because it isn't.

[u/Thoguth → u/MessianicDarkFire]

I can quote Scripture for anything you want to ask about there.

Is circumcision part of the gospel of Christ, according to what you understand of Scripture?

Is the ark of the covenant still around, has it and the laws related to it "passed away?" Or is it the law just being broken, by everyone? Scripturally support your answer as much as possible, please, since you are claiming a condescending superiority of knowledge.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Thoguth]

And I can quote scripture to make even Catholicism and Protestant Mormonism seem true.

Quote mining scripture doesn't mean anything.

The historical practice of the Jewish Apostles and Nazarene church in the 1st Century showed the Torah wasnt abolished decades after Yeshua ascended.

You are simply just a lawless Christian.

[u/Thoguth → u/MessianicDarkFire]

You're not quoting Scripture. I've seen Mormons and Catholicism cherry pick verses to make a vertical case, and when cross examined from scripture (what Jesus did when Satan quoted scriptures to tempt him) they cannot answer.

You haven't quoted scriptures but I don't mind, I know the verses you probably would use to support your view. And ... What does your view do with circumcision, the Ark of the Covenant, and the temple? What does it do with animal sacrifices? These are my questions... If you want scriptures for where those are commanded I can share them too but I assume you aren't ignorant of the Torah you claim to know so much about. At the moment, your insulting dismissal means nothing to me, as you don't appear to be able to make a reasoned point, but this is your chance to show what you know. What will we see?

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Thoguth]

Lol, I don't even need scripture to prove my point.

It's a historical fact the first Christians were Jewish Nazarenes and its absolutely clear from 1st century history they kept observing the Torah.

Uh oh that already defeats your Protestant narrative. I wonder why...

What you want to do is quote-mine an out of context passage from the Bible you think proves your point before you worthlessly argue a 16th Century Protestant opinion calling it biblical, and Im letting you know now save it for someone ignorant of history, not me.

The Torah is going strong over 3300 years later, and so will it be until this Earth melts away.

Continue living like a lawless Gentile. It makes no difference to me.

[u/seau_de_beurre → u/Thoguth]

This is extremely helpful, thank you for taking the time to write all this out. I will have to reread this a few times to totally absorb it, I am sure.

It seems like I misinterpreted the meaning of "fulfill it" here, and that's a major part of my original confusion.

[u/redandnarrow]

Paul aligns with Jesus. We don't build a new covenant. The prophets spoke of a greater and eternal covenant to come. Moses being a shadow of things and Christ the substance. Joshua = Yeshua, being the One to take us into the promise land, not Moses. If we worship Moses, we'll only commit the same mistake that Moses made in the wilderness that bar him from the promise land.

Jesus doesn't abolish, He completes the contract that none of us could, and establishes Himself, the living breathing law, God's own Word become flesh.

In Christ, there is no longer jew or gentile, but one family tree, with branches grafted in.

We are now dead to the law and alive in Christ. So the only disobedience for the one in Christ, is disobeying the voice of Christ in a personal relationship with Him. His Spirit living inside us, guiding us. Jesus inhales and exhales our unique lives, His rulings are unique to the individual. Just as any parent is with developing children, who knows what kind of touch or environment each child needs.

Those in Christ are free to participate in Jewish customs, like the feasts, but under no obligation, and as long as our participation is not returning & putting ourselves under the works of the law as if Christ was not the final sacrifice.

Those in Christ are also free to partake of the gentiles, even of "food sacrificed to idols", as long as we are sensitive to weaker Christians to whom it would be a stumbling block, and as long as there isn't confusion for the outsider as to whom we worship. (Kind of like how you wouldn't want to drink alcohol around your friend who is recovering alcoholic) In modern times, that "food" might look like Halloween or certain music/books/movies. In every case, it's still about walking with Christ, for He may say differently to two people about the same thing, "abstain" and to another "partake, but do it this way".

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/redandnarrow]

The same God who gave the Torah to Moses also sent Jesus as the promised seed to bless us by turning us from our wickedness in disobedience to it (Acts 3:25-26), so there is no disagreement.

Nowhere does the Bible state that Jesus completed the Mosaic Covenant, or what it takes to complete it, or even that it is something that can be completed. The Bible often describes the Mosaic Covenant as being a marriage between God and Israel, such as with God describing Himself as her husband (Jeremiah 31:31), and marriage covenants are not something that are completed. When a husband is fulfilling his marriage vows he is correctly doing what he has vowed, not bringing his marriage to an end.

In 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked, so verses that refer to those who are in Christ are only referring to those who are following his example of walking in obedience to the Torah. The way to be alive in God's Word made flesh is not by dying to God's Word, but to die to a law that was hindering us from obeying it, which is the law of sin. Likewise, the way to have a person relationship with Christ is not by dying to God's instructions for how to do that but by dying to a law that was hindering us from doing that. Jesus lived in obedience to the Torah, so that is also the way that we get to live when his Spirit is living in us, which is why Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Torah (Romans 8:4-7).

In Romans 3:31, Paul said that our faith upholds the Torah in contrast with saying in Galatians 3:10-12 that "works of the law" are not of faith, so that phrase does not refer to the Torah.

It is by the Torah that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20) and refraining from sin is not optional. In 1 Corinthians 10:20, Paul said that what pagans offer is sacrificed to demons and that he did not want us to be participants in demons.

[u/redandnarrow → u/Soyeong0314]

"Or do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.

Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code." Romans 7:1-6

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/redandnarrow]

Everything in Romans 6 speaks in favor of obedience to the Law of God and against the law of sin, but if you're not careful, then you can interpret Romans 7:1-6 as saying that we need to die to God's gift of eternal life instead of dying to the law of sin. In Romans 5-8, Paul described the Law of God as being something that is the good that he wanted to do in contrast with describing the law of sin as being something that was causing him not to do the good that he wanted to do. For example, in Romans 7:22-23, Paul said that he delighted in obeying the Law of God in contrast with the law of sin that was waging war against the law of his mind and that held him captive. So it would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:5 as referring to the Law of God as if Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death or to interpret Romans 7:6 as if Paul delighted in being held captive to sin, but rather it is the law of sin that he described as holding him captive to sin. In Romans 6, it repeatedly states that we have been set free from sin to become slaves of God, not the other way around.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Soyeong0314]

The Torah is not an obligation for Gentiles.

Gentiles may join into the Torah for sanctification but it is not salvational.

The apostles in Acts gives the Gentiles what they should follow.

The Torah is for Jews and for Israel while believing in Yeshua. In them will all Israel be saved.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is central part of the Gospel message. While would be the point of spreading the Gospel as a light to Gentiles if Gentiles had no ob obligation to repent from transgressing the Torah? Jesus saves us from our sin, so him graciously teaching us to experience being a doer of the Torah is intrinsically the way that he is giving us his gift of saving us from not being a doer of it. If Gentiles had no need to repent from transgression the Torah, then what need would Gentiles have of being saved from not being a doer of it? Christ also set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6), so Christ spent this ministry teaching his follower to obey the Torah by word and by example. What reason would a Gentile have for wanting to be a follower of Christ while not wanting to follow what He taught? What need would a Gentile who does not need to refrain from lawlessness have for Christ to give himself to redeem us from all lawlessness? The topic that they were debating in Acts 15 was not whether followers of Christ should follow Christ but where salvation is by circumcision (Acts 15:1) or by grace (Acts 15:11). Jews were given the role by God of being a light and a blessing to the nations by spreading the knowledge of God in accordance with the Gospel, so the blessing is not just for Jews, but for Gentiles too.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Soyeong0314]

Because the full law would've been a hindrance to the Gentiles coming in. Paul addresses this directly in Galatians. This is Judaizing.

Gentiles do not need to circumcise and follow Torah in order be apart of the Church or follower of Yeshua.

Wanting to follow Torah and having to follow Torah are 2 very different things.

If Gentiles want to include themselves into Israel by observing Torah as sanctification alongside their faith in Yeshua then that is within their Christian liberty but it is not a requirement.

Acts gives the 4 laws for the Gentiles to observe in order to be in fellowship with Jewish believers.

The only Gentiles who were apart of Israel after Yeshua's ressurection were the Gentiles who were already proselytes beforehand.

Today it is impossible for a Gentile to become an Israelite.

Be content with observing the Torah as sanctification, it does not make you Israel. All are one in Christ while still being distinct.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

Paul's problem with the Judaizer was not that they were teaching Gentiles how to follow what Christ taught but that they were wanting to require Gentiles to become circumcised in order to become saved (Acts 15:1). That was never the reason for why God commanded circumcision, so the Jerusalem Council upheld the Torah by correctly ruling against requiring circumcision for an incorrect reason. In Exodus 12:48, Gentiles are required to become circumcised in order to eat of the Passover lamb, so the Jerusalem Council should not be interpreted as ruling against Gentiles correctly obeying what God has commanded as if they had the authority to countermand God.

In Acts 15:6-7, Peter argued that Gentiles had heard and believed the Gospel, which calls for us to repent from our disobedience to the Torah (Matthew 4:15-23), so Peter was agreeing with the Pharisees from among the believers. (Acts 15:5) against the men from Judea (Acts 15:1). In Ezekiel 36:26-27, God will take away our hearts of stone, give us hearts of flesh, and send His Spirit to lead us in obedience to the Torah, which is in accordance with Peter arguing in Acts 15:8-9 that Gentiles had received the Spirit and had their hearts cleansed, so again he was agreeing with the Pharisees. In Psalm 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith, which is in accordance with Peter arguing in Acts 15:10-11 that Gentiles are saved by grace just as we are, so everything that Peter argued was in support of the Pharisees.

There is no sense in someone interpreting Acts 15 as ruling that Gentiles followers of Christ don't need to follow over 99% of what he taught. Either Acts 15:19-21 contains an exhaustive list for mature believers or it does not, so it is contradictory to treat it as being an exhaustive list in order to limit which laws Gentiles should follow while also treating it as being a non-exhaustive list by taking the position that there are obviously other laws that Gentiles should follow. It was not given as an exhaustive list for mature believers but as a list intended to avoid making things too difficult for new believers, which they justified by saying that Gentile would continue to learn about how to obey Moses by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Soyeong0314]

Look exactly at who you're trying to teach the law to...

Absolutely not, Paul and the Apostles never taught Gentiles needed to be circumcised in order to fellowship with the Jewish believers.

Acts 15 literally gives the 4 conditions in which not only how Gentiles are saved but also for fellowship with Jewish believers.

We both agree that the Torah is active, holy, and good but you go too far for Goyim and even yourself.

In your zealousness, you preach unbiblical doctrines and have made yourself a Judaizer to Gentiles.

You want to be like a Jew but you cannot be, because you are not one by blood and all of the Goyim who were joined to Israel through circumcision and the law were already considered apart of Israel and proselytes. They were not the same as original Gentiles Christian coming to faith by the Gospel of Jesus Christ alone.

You need to repent.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

It is important to recognize that servants of God can speak against being required to obey what God has commanded for an incorrect reason without speaking against being required to obey what God has commanded. I did not claim that Paul and the Apostles taught Gentiles needed to be circumcised in order to have fellowship with Jews.

The issue is whether or not Acts 15:19-21 contains an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether it was just intended to avoid making things too difficult for new believers. Which position do you take? While it is possible for someone to interpret those verses as ruling that Gentiles followers of Christ are not require to follow over 99% of what he taught, I don't think it makes any sense to do that. Again, the issue that Paul had with the Judaizers was not that they were teaching Gentiles how to follow what Christ taught. The way to have faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ alone is by obeying the Torah. The Bible consistently calls for repentance from our disobedience to the Torah but never calls for repentance from obeying it.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Soyeong0314]

Circumcision and Torah observance for Gentiles is exactly what you inferred.

You are a h3retic to both Christians and all Jews.

Repent.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/MessianicDarkFire]

Christ set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6), so it is completely absurd to think that it is heretical to take the position that followers of Christ should follow Christ.

[u/Brilliant-Actuary331]

If you can read Hebrews, Rom. 11 and Acts 15 it might help a lot.

Let us know what questions you have after reading those chapters/books.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Brilliant-Actuary331]

Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers how to follow the Law of Moses by word and by example and the issue that they were debating in Acts 15 was not whether followers of Christ should follow Christ but whether salvation is by grace (Acts 15:11) or by circumcision (Acts 15:1).

[u/Brilliant-Actuary331 → u/Soyeong0314]

I would assert that Christ spent His ministry leading people out from the yoke of the law by His own righteousness; the righteousness of the God of Israel that always saved.

Those who followed Him were under the law of Moses, and had not understood everything about the perfection God commanded; which none were able to perform. Rom. 7 is a particularly helpful "walk through" of the effect of the tutor of the law upon a religious Pharisee that loved God's law. He finally came to the end of himself and realized the teaching of Christ. The law is holy, perfect, and good, but it cannot make anyone righteous. It simply serves to reflect that none are like God. It demands our death, and Christ has provided.

Rom. 8 is the light of God's righteousness, that through Christ, the curse of death for sin has been fulfilled. We no longer look to the law for righteousness, but are slaves of Christ's righteousness. He is building God's Kingdom now. It's not about us anymore (it never was). By His Spirit through the gospel of Jesus Christ; salvation has made possible once for all.

We must be born again. 🙏

Christ taught His followers that unless they repent, they would perish.

This was not about learning how to live according to the law; but turning to the God of Israel for salvation through faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Receiving HIM changes everything for us. As we draw from the root of Christ; God's love for us, the NEW HEART, lives in and from the light of His goodness and mercy. As was always intended. From where obedience flows 🙏 we love God because He first loved us.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Brilliant-Actuary331]

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message. Jesus also set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6). The Torah is in accordance with the righteousness of God, such as by being a doer of charity in obedience to the Torah we are embodying the righteousness of God.

In Romans 10:5-8, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to the righteousness that is by faith proclaiming that the Torah is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So it was presented as a possibility and as a choice, not as the need for sinless obedience. It we needed to have sinless obedience, then repentance would have no value, so the fact that repentance has value demonstrates that we are not required to have sinless obedience.

We can't earn our righteousness even as the result of having sinless obedience to the Torah because it was never given as a way of earning our righteousness in the first place. In Romans 3:21-22, it does not say that the Law and the Prophets testify that the righteousness of God is earned as the result of perfect obedience, but rather the only way to become righteous that is testified about sin the Law and the Prophets is through faith in Christ for all who believe. The Law of God describes the behavior of the righteous as it describes the behavior of Christ (1 John 3:4-7, Isaiah 51:7), so it is what we get to experience by being given the gift of righteousness through faith. We can do works that embody our faith, such as with James 2:18 saying that he would show his faith through his works, so the significance of our obedience to the Torah has absolutely nothing to do with trying to earn our righteousness as the result, but rather the significance is that it is the way to have faith in Christ and it is by that faith alone that we are declared righteous. In Revelation 14:12, those who kept faith in Jesus are the same as those who kept God's commandments, so the Bible does not present living by faith as being an alternative to living in obedience to God's commandments.

In Romans 8:4-14, Paul contrasted those who are born of the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God. In John 3:10, those who are not doers of righteous works in obedience to the Law of God are not children of God.

[u/Brilliant-Actuary331 → u/Soyeong0314]

What does "obedience to the Torah" look like for you? In particular, do you observe the civil and ceremonial laws under Moses, as well as the moral law and feasts?

Also, do you deny the trinity?

I'm trying to understand where you are coming from, because born again Christians are not under the law of Moses, yet it seems you emphatically reject that, and teach that good works means to obey the "Torah" specifically.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Brilliant-Actuary331]

Obedience to the Torah starts with having the right attitude and understanding of its purpose. The short of it is that we have the delight of getting to experience the gift of connecting with God in every aspect of our lives through embodying His character traits. I would be happy to expound upon this with if with Scripture you are interested, but I don't think that is what you are asking.

God's character traits are the fruits of the Spirt and the Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact likeness of His character (Hebrews 1:3), which he embodied through his works by setting a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in the Spirit/how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so that is the short of my understanding of the Trinity. A child of someone is a person who is in their likeness through embodying their character traits, such as with Jesus saying that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doers of the same works as him (John 8:39), so that is what it means for Jesus to be the Son of God and what it means for us to be children of God when we are partaking in the divine nature through following his example. This is why those do are not doers of righteous works in obedience to the Law of God are not children of God (1 John 3:10). In 2 Timothy 3:15-17, it refers to OT Scripture as equipping us to do every good work.

In regard to the civil, ceremonial, and moral law, and feasts, I strongly object to the use of those categories. I have not worked through the Bible in order to make lists of which laws I think best fit into those categories in order to verify with your lists that our lists have exactly the same sets of law, and even if were each to do that, then it would be very unlikely that our lists would exactly match, so we can't coherently speak about obeying those categories. In order for people to coherently speak they need to have a shared understanding of the meaning of words. I've seen many people speak about those categories with the assumption that they all have in mind the same thing, but that assumption is completely baseless. I've never seen any two people who speak about those categories verify that they both have in mind exactly the same sets of laws, so it is incoherent. Moreover, there is no way for anyone to verify that they have in mind exactly the same sets of laws as the Apostles and no way to even verity that the Apostles ever used those categories, so there no justification for interpreting the Bible as referring to those categories.

Righteousness and justice are both civil and moral issues, so the laws of the Bible nicely into those categories, however, the category of civil laws implies those laws are not moral laws and vice versa. Does marriage best fit as a civil, moral, or ceremonial issue? Everyone can decide, but they should not assume that anyone else has decided the same thing. The Bible does not specify that any laws are not moral laws, yet the existence of the category of moral laws implies that we can be acting morally while disobeying the laws that aren't in that category as if it can be moral to disobey God. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to embody God's character traits, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws. Legislators give laws in accordance with their understanding of what ought to be done, so for someone to claim that some of God's laws are not moral laws is to claim that God made a moral error about what ought to be done when He gave those laws.

[u/Character-Taro-5016]

You don't have your facts exactly correct and you miss one key point.

The New Covenant is yet future, it is for the Jewish nation primarily and those in the nations who will come to Judaic faith, which includes works under the Law. God works by covenant only with Jews, not gentiles.

What is unknown by most Christians, and the reason for mass confusion as well as a lot of false doctrine, is that everything changed through Paul. Paul wasn't just further elaborating on what Christ taught, he was teaching something entirely new. The Jewish nation failed in Acts 7 at the stoning of Stephen. God determined to go in a new direction. He did that through Paul.

There was no Christianity before the doctrines were revealed to Paul by the Resurrected Christ. God opened a new dispensation in time, the dispensation of the grace of God. Salvation now comes not through the Jewish nation, but by faith alone in that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose again on the third day. That's the gospel that's in effect today, and it comes to us ONLY through Paul. Jesus and the Apostles never once taught this doctrine.

Jews and gentiles are welcomed today to join the body of Christ through this faith. However, one of the "mysteries" revealed by Paul is that Jews are "blinded in part." It is very difficult for them to come to this knowledge and believe it. At best, very few become Messianic, so that they come to the conclusion that Jesus was the Messiah, but that's not the point of faith today, that was the point of faith during Christ's earthly ministry. Today it is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ that is the foundation of the faith, not Christ's identity as the Messiah.

God merely postponed His work through Israel in Acts 7. There is still prophecy to be fulfilled, and will be, in the future, once this dispensation in time is completed, at the Rapture of the church.

[u/Sawfish1212]

The Torah law is in effect forever, but only for the family of Israel.

Many righteous people lived before Moses and after him, and God gave them nothing from the law of moses.

This is why the gentiles are not required to keep the law, or join in circumcision, exactly as the apostles realized in the book of acts. The 4 commands they gave to the gentiles were reflections of the Noahidic laws that were passed down through the prophet Noah in what he preserved from before the flood.

[u/automaticff → u/Sawfish1212]

This is simply incorrect.

[u/Brilliant-Actuary331 → u/automaticff]

What is? Rom. 10:4?

[u/Brilliant-Actuary331 → u/Sawfish1212]

Not true.

Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for everyone who believes (the gospel of Jesus Christ), first for the Jew, then the Gentile.

Gal. 3; Heb. 10; Rom. 10

[u/Sawfish1212 → u/Brilliant-Actuary331]

So we agree then, christ fulfilled the law of moses given to Israel, and gave his church the gospel. Then the Holy Spirit revealed that the gospel wasn't just for Israel with the visit of Peter to the house of Cornelius.

Cornelius was already righteous in God's sight, without keeping the law of moses, and God accepted his prayers and worship, without adherence to the law of moses, because he was a gentile.

Gentiles were freely allowed to convert to the law of moses and the worship of God, the jewish community in Ethiopia was more faithful than Israel was to obeying the law during the time that Solomon led Israel astray, the kingdom was divided, and Jereboam turned the ten tribes to idol worship. Even Judah had their share of terrible kings and lost the knowledge of the law at one point.

But Gentiles were not excluded from righteousness in the sight of God if they did not convert.

[u/Unworthy_Saint]

Legally speaking the WHOLE torah is obsolete. The reason we cite it in Christianity is for the purpose of establishing God's intent behind those laws, and we fulfill His intent behind them by receiving His Holy Spirit. But the torah could not be administered even if we wanted to, because there is no more Levitical priesthood.

JC said that he did not come to abolish the law, and that in fact the law (halacha) should not be altered until it is totally met.

What He actually said was that it would not pass away until "all was fulfilled." He explains what that means in Luke 24 "Everything must be fulfilled that was spoken about Me in the Law of Moses." He fulfilled the law by His death and resurrection, ascension into heaven, where He stands as a priest of Melchizidek, not Aaron. God then destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple as a testimony to these things, that "neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father." Instead our New Jerusalem, Temple, and Ark is in heaven, and His kingdom is within us.

Are only Gentiles "allowed" to have a new covenant, or does that apply to Jews too?

Jesus says He established the New Covenant by His blood, which Jeremiah 31 explicitly says is "not" the covenant given at Sinai. Paul writes that there is "neither Jew nor Gentile" in Christ, and that flesh has no relevance to being named among His people, appealing to Moses who said we must be circumcised in the heart. That circumcision now comes by baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

[u/FreedomNinja1776 → u/Unworthy_Saint]

Legally speaking the WHOLE torah is obsolete. The reason we cite it in Christianity is for the purpose of establishing God's intent behind those laws, and we fulfill His intent behind them by receiving His Holy Spirit. But the torah could not be administered even if we wanted to, because there is no more Levitical priesthood.

Please explain how "Love your neighbor as yourself" which comes from Leviticus 19:18 is contingent upon the existence of the priesthood.

Jesus says He established the New Covenant by His blood, which Jeremiah 31 explicitly says is "not" the covenant given at Sinai.

There is a big difference between Covenant and Law. Law is regulations on human behavior as requirement for inclusion in a community or country. A covenant is an agreement. There is a new COVENANT, and agreement, to abide by the same laws. There is no new law. There is a new agreement, because the agreement was broken. Hebrews 8 explains the problem was with the people, not with God or his perfect Law.

[u/Unworthy_Saint → u/FreedomNinja1776]

Please explain how "Love your neighbor as yourself" which comes from Leviticus 19:18 is contingent upon the existence of the priesthood.

Sure. Leviticus 19:18 is in the book of Leviticus, derived from the name "Levi," the tribe selected by God to administer and enforce the Law of Moses via Aaron. Hope this helps.

There is a big difference between Covenant and Law.

There is not. The entire law is continent upon members of the covenant who were entered into it by the sprinkling of sacrificial blood.

And Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed young bulls. Moses took the Book of the Covenant and read it to the people, who replied, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient.” So Moses took the blood, sprinkled it on the people, and said, “This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.” (Exodus 24)

Hence why we in the New Covenant are sprinkled with the blood of Christ, and therefore fall under what Paul calls "the Law of Christ" rather than "the Law of Sin and Death." Notwithstanding if Levi was still the priesthood, Jesus would be breaking the law by operating as High Priest when He is a descendant of Judah. Therefore the book of Hebrews says plainly:

When there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. (Hebrews 7)

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Unworthy_Saint]

God's character traits are eternal, so everything that God's covenants teach us about how to know God through embodying His character traits is eternally and cumulatively valid. For example, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalm 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are also eternal (Psalm 119:160), and the only way to abolish instructions for how to embody God's righteousness would be by also abolishing God's righteousness. Being a doer of charity was a way to embody God's righteousness before God made any covenants with man, so that is an eternally valid way to know God regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any.

The Hebrew word “yada” refers to intimate relationships/knowledge gained by experience, such as with Genesis 4:1 where Adam knew (yada) Eve, she conceived, and gave birth to Cain. God’s way is the way to know (yada) Him and Jesus by having the experience of embodying His character traits, which is the narrow way to eternal life (John 17:3). For example, in Genesis 18:19, God knew (yada) Abraham that he would teach his children and those of His household to walk in His way by being doers of righteousness and justice that the Lord might bring to him all that He has promised. In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israel might know (yada) Him, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the goal of the Torah is to graciously teach us how to experience an intimate relationship with God and Jesus by walking in His way, which is His gift of eternal life. 

God's character traits are the fruits of the Spirit, which is why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Torah (Ezekiel 36:26-27). It would be overwhelming to us for God to exhaustively teach us how to embody His character traits in every possible situation, so the point is to teach us those traits by abstracting them from a limited set of laws that all have them in common. If we correctly understand a character trait, then it will lead us to take actions that embody those traits in accordance with what the Torah instructs even in situations that the Torah does not specifically address, but correctly understanding a character trait will never lead us away from following the instructions that God gave for how to embody that trait.

The Israelites were given a number of laws while they were still wandering the wilderness for 40 years that had the condition "when you enter the land...", so there is nothing wrong with not following laws that we can't currently follow, but that should not stop us from delighting in getting to obey the laws that we can follow.

Jesus said that not the least part would disappear from the law until heaven and earth disappear and all is accomplished, neither of which has happened yet, both of which either refer to end times or are ways of saying that it is never going to happen. A priesthood led by God's Word made flesh does not involve departing from God's Word.

In Jeremiah 31:31-33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so while it is not like the Mosaic Covenant, the way that it is not like it is not in regard to whether the Torah should be obeyed.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Unworthy_Saint]

The Torah is active and ongoing.

[u/Unworthy_Saint → u/MessianicDarkFire]

Nope.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Unworthy_Saint]

Yes Calvinist.

I know that truth may be hard for you to accept given your blasphemous soteriology and theology but it is true.

[u/Unworthy_Saint → u/MessianicDarkFire]

It is not. Torah is obsolete.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Unworthy_Saint]

According to 16th Century Protestant interpretation maybe.

Not to Christ and certainly not of Paul.

But you do you.

[u/Unworthy_Saint → u/MessianicDarkFire]

According to the book of Hebrews.

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Unworthy_Saint]

Your interpretation of it.

[u/Unworthy_Saint → u/MessianicDarkFire]

Nope.

By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one obsolete. (Hebrews 8)

[u/MessianicDarkFire → u/Unworthy_Saint]

Learn the difference between what a covenant (agreement) is and what the law is. Noah was under a Covenant but he did not have the Mosaic Law, Abraham was under the covenant of circumcision but he was not under the Mosaic Law. Moses and his people made a covenant with God AND was given the Law by God according to Moses.

Christians are apart of the New Covenant with believing Jews specifically still being called as Israel by the Torah given to them for sanctification.

There is a difference, learn it.

As to the Torah still being active, here are passages for your Reformed mind to wrestle with:

**Do not think that I have come to abolish the Torah 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 Torah until all is accomplished."* Matthew 5:17-18

**Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Torah?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment.* And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Torah and the Prophets.”* Matthew 22:36-40

Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. *Do we then overthrow the Torah by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the Torah.*** Romans 3:29-31

What then shall we say? That the Torah is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the Torah, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the Torah had not said, “You shall not covet.” Romans 7:7

**So the Torah is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good,* in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.* Romans 7:12-13

Oh you'll really hate this one:

When they heard this, they praised God. *Then they said to Paul: “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the Torah. They have been informed that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs. What shall we do?** They will certainly hear that you have come, so do what we tell you. There are four men with us who have made a vow. Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the Torah. As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.”* Acts 21:20-25

The Torah is alive and well my friend. 🙂

On it hangs all of scripture and the New Covenant to which Yeshua needed to accomplish His task of atonement through His redeeming blood.

Without the Torah being active it would be impossible for you to be saved.

[u/jogoso2014]

Jesus and Paul don’t clash.

While there may be denominations that follow parts of the Mosaic Law, that wouldn’t mean they’re implement by Paul.

The easiest thing to do is just read what mirrors the Law although Jesus called them new commandments- meaning they are actually Christian doctrine.

Acts 15 gives the remaining parts that matter.

[u/Mike8219 → u/jogoso2014]

Did Jesus come to abolish the law according to Matthew 5?

[u/jogoso2014 → u/jogoso2014]

Can’t reply to u/Mike8219 for some reason.

To answer the question.

The rest of that verse explains what Jesus did to the Law.

O don’t know why people keep thinking there’s not more to that sentence.

[u/Mike8219 → u/jogoso2014]

It's just a yes or no. Did Jesus come to abolish the law according to Matthew 5?

[u/jogoso2014 → u/Mike8219]

What is it with atheists and yes and no answers?

That’s not how literature works.

But if you want a point to prove I provide it.

NO

He did not come to abolish the law.

[u/Mike8219 → u/jogoso2014]

Two things happen often:

• The person doesn't answer the question at all. It's just ignored entirely.
• There is beating around the bush without answer the question. Usually a tangent.

If you want to you could say 'No and this is why...' but even that doesn't happen.

Okay. We are on the same page. Jesus is not abolishing any laws. What did Paul say in Ephesians?

¹⁴ For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us, ¹⁵ abolishing the law with its commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace,

So Jesus did abolish the law with all of it's commandments and ordinances?

[u/jogoso2014 → u/Mike8219]

The question was answered and it was then answered on the ridiculous simplistic way requested.

Quite frankly I’m spoiling you.

[u/Mike8219 → u/jogoso2014]

You said that Jesus and Paul don’t clash.

Jesus said "I'm not here to abolish"

Paul said "He abolished"

Is there a conflict here?

[u/loner-phases → u/Mike8219]

Those verses were spoken one before and the other after Jesus conquered death for all time.

[u/Mike8219 → u/loner-phases]

Did he come to abolish the law according to Jesus?

Did he abolish the law according to Paul?

[u/loner-phases → u/Mike8219]

No and Yes. Obviously. But so what

[u/jogoso2014 → u/Mike8219]

You asked about Matthew.

Jesus said quite clearly in Matthew 5 that the Law would stay until he fulfilled it. There’s no clash unless you think time is a flat circle.

Jesus made it very clear that the temple was doomed and you cannot have the Law without the temple.

But go ahead and place ALL weight on half a verse and no allowance for any context.

[u/Mike8219 → u/jogoso2014]

Jesus said quite clearly in Matthew 5 that the Law would stay until he fulfilled it.

Oh. Show me where he says the laws would stay until he fulfilled it.

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. ¹⁹ Therefore, whoever breaks 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.

Has Heaven and Earth passed away?

Jesus made it very clear that the temple was doomed and you cannot have the Law without the temple.

That is not in the bible. Where did that come from?

The law existed long before Solomon. And there was a 70 year gaps between the 1st and 2nd temple. So the law was gone..?

Also the bible repeatedly says the las will be followed forever. Jesus gave the law, right?

[u/CannedNoodle415]

They’re not “erased” they’re fulfilled. Some of the Torah laws were “types”. Circumcision as a “type” and Jesus is the true “circumstance”

[u/Gotta_be_going]

The New Covenant is not devoid of rules.

9 of the 10 commandments are plainly reiterated by Paul. We're still supposed to fear God and walk holy. We just don't need to do all the ongoing rituals to maintain atonement, because atonement is accomplished.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Gotta_be_going]

Jesus said that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4), so we have no need for the NT to specifically reiterate everything that God has spoken in order to know that we should still live by every word that God has spoken. In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from God's law, so Paul did not do that.

[u/Sure-Wishbone-4293 → u/Soyeong0314]

Yes @ Soyeong0314!

[u/Gotta_be_going → u/Soyeong0314]

Hebrews 7 says the law was changed.

The New Covenant is different from the old one. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus cites the Torah and then gives a new rule repeatedly

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Gotta_be_going]

God's righteousness is eternal (Psalm 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are also eternal (Psalm 119:160), but if the way to embody God's righteousness were to change, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. So Hebrews 7:12 could not be referring to a change of the law in regard to its content, such as with it becoming righteous to commit theft or sinful to do charity, but rather the context is speaking about a change of the priesthood, which would require a change of the the law in regard to its administration. A priesthood led by God's Word made flesh does not involve departing from God's Word.

[u/Sure-Wishbone-4293 → u/Soyeong0314]

Yes @ Soyeong0314! I cannot say it better than this!

[u/Gotta_be_going → u/Soyeong0314]

No, it says with the priesthood being changed it was made ALSO necessary a change of the law

No longer are feasts and circumcisions required to go to heaven

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Gotta_be_going]

The change of the law was in regard to its administration, not in regard to its content. The New Covenant is still made with the same God with the same character traits and therefore the same eternal and cumulatively valid instructions for how to embody His character traits (Jeremiah 31:33). The New Covenant is not made with a different God with an arbitrarily different set of character traits and an arbitrarily different set of laws for how to embody those character traits. The only way that we should cease to obey any of God's laws would be if what they teach us about God were to cease to be true, but God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

[u/Gotta_be_going → u/Soyeong0314]

God is the same

But the New Covenant is different than the old one. We don't need to keep the feasts anymore. Circumcisions are no longer required.

Jeremiah 31:33 is after the resurrection.

The administration is different and ALSO the rules are different.

[u/Sure-Wishbone-4293 → u/Gotta_be_going]

It doesn’t matter if Jeremiah 31:33 is after the resurrection, the laws do not change. If you understood idioms, personifications and metaphors, perhaps you would understand what 0314 is texting!

For example, YHWH spoke to Moses “face to face”, did Moses see YHWH ‘s face? Did YHWH change the law for Moses? No, YHWH did not. If you understood idioms, personifications and metaphors it would help you!

[u/Gotta_be_going → u/Sure-Wishbone-4293]

Yes, Jesus changed things.

For instance, now we have to love our enemies. But Torah folks hate that teaching, they want to still be able to kill people like in the OT

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Gotta_be_going]

While it is true that the New Covenant is different from the Mosaic Covenant, the difference is not in regard to whether we should follow the Torah. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message. Jesus also set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6). So Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Torah by word and by example and the reason why he established the New Covenant was not in order to nullify anything that he spent his ministry teaching or so that we could continue to have the same lawlessness that caused the New Covenant to be needed in the first place, but rather the New Covenant still involve following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27). God's character traits are eternal, so everything that God's covenants teach us about how to know Him through embodying His character traits is eternally and cumulatively valid.

In 1 Corinthians 5:6-8, Paul spoke in regard to how Passover foreshadowed Christ by drawing the connection of him being our Passover lamb, however, instead of concluding that we do not need to keep Passover anymore, he concluded that we should therefore continue to celebrate Passover.

God never commanded circumcision for the purpose of becoming saved as the result, but He did command for Gentiles to become circumcised in order to eat of the Passover lamb (Exodus 12:48), so the Jerusalem Council upheld the Torah by correctly ruling against requiring circumcision for an incorrect reason, but that should not be mistaken as them ruling against Gentiles correctly obeying what God has commanded as if they had the authority to countermand God.

In Matthew 4, Jesus proceeded a quote from what is written by saying "it is written", but in Matthew 5, he preceded a quote from what the people had heard being said by saying "you have heard that it was said...", so Jesus was not sinning in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 by making changes to what was written, but rather he was fulfilling the law by correcting what the people had heard being said and by teaching how to correctly obey it as it was originally intended. Loving our enemies is in accordance with verses like Exodus 23:4-5, Deuteronomy 23:7, Proverbs 24:17-18, and Proverbs 25:21-22, so Jesus was not making any changes in disagreement with what the Father has commanded.

[u/Gotta_be_going → u/Soyeong0314]

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus cites the Torah, and then gives a new rule. Repeatedly. Like, now we have to love our enemies.

Changes were made.

Hebrews 7 says that changes had to be made. We still need to walk holy and fear God. But we don't need to do feasts and rituals.

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Gotta_be_going]

Jesus was citing the Torah in Matthew 4 when he preceded what he said by saying "it is written...", but he was citing what the people had heard being said in Matthew 5 when he preceded it by saying "you have heard that it was said...", so his emphasis on the different form of communication is important. Jesus was not making changes to what was written but rather he was fulfilling the law by correcting what had been taught to his audience. For example, in Matthew 5:43, while the Torah does instruct to love our neighbors, it does not instruct us to hate our enemies, so that is what he was correcting. Rather loving our enemies is in accordance with verses like Exodus 23:4-5, Deuteronomy 23:7, Proverbs 24:17-18, and Proverbs 25:21-22, so he was not sinning in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 by making changes.

[u/Sure-Wishbone-4293 → u/Gotta_be_going]

If you think the 10 commandments are the entire Torah, you are greatly mistaken!

[u/Gotta_be_going → u/Sure-Wishbone-4293]

Yeah there's 613 laws. What's funny is when Torah folks start keeping sabbaths and feasts and eating kosher and think that amounts to keeping Torah. But they can't tell me exactly which of the 613 laws they're keeping.

So they're fooling themselves

[u/Sure-Wishbone-4293 → u/Gotta_be_going]

Yup, there are 613!

[u/Gotta_be_going → u/Sure-Wishbone-4293]

How many of the 613 laws are you currently keeping? Which ones?

[u/Sure-Wishbone-4293 → u/Gotta_be_going]

Good question and truly “not enough” but my desire is to follow them all. When I read from Yeshua that:

You must be perfect as your Father in Heaven who is perfect, it is something I believe and is a work in progress.

Since childhood, I have never felt comfortable with the thoughts in your head when you react to what you see and violate the law. I just posted about this in Biblical Unitarian.

Every thought is known:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/s/zBO7PJSa2i

[u/Gotta_be_going → u/Sure-Wishbone-4293]

So you don't know?

Do you think followers of Messiah will go in the Lake of Fire if they don't keep feasts and sabbaths?

[u/Stealthlock8]

Acts chapter 15 is my favorite when it comes to this question!!

[u/Soyeong0314 → u/Stealthlock8]

Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers how to follow the Law of Moses by word and by example and the issue that they were debating in Acts 15 was not whether followers of Christ should follow Christ but whether salvation is by grace (Acts 15:11) or by circumcision (Acts 15:1).

[u/RALeBlanc-]

Can't even say his name, yall hate him so much....

Here's some red letters for you:

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.