What Old Covenant Laws are the New Covenant believer to obey?

[Soyeong]

Well, most gays weren't gay, but were changed by life circumstances, but most gays don't change back, because homosexuality is a powerful delusion/illicit desire.

The Bible does speak about sexual orientation or about homosexuality, but prohibits homosexual sex regardless of orientation.

I'm not going to discuss the topic with you, because it is my experience that you all pretend to be interested in facts, but only as a means of trying to obtain worship.

I would hope that you make decisions about how to interact with me based upon the experience that you’ve had with me rather than prejudice, but it is your prerogative not to interact with me.

 

[GracePeace]

The Bible does speak about sexual orientation or about homosexuality, but prohibits homosexual sex regardless of orientation.


I would hope that you make decisions about how to interact with me based upon the experience that you’ve had with me rather than prejudice, but it is your prerogative not to interact with me.

I'm prejudiced. LOL I am not going to win the Darwin Awards. I am able to observe patterns and plan accordingly.

 

[Soyeong]

I'm prejudiced. LOL I am not going to win the Darwin Awards. I am able to observe patterns and plan accordingly.

Indeed, it is prejudice towards someone to have preconceived opinions about them that are not based on experience with them. You are making negative judgements about be based on your assumptions rather than on the content of my character. The are a wide variety of people who think that followers of God should follow what He has commanded in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow and even within my congregation there are a wide variety personalities and differences of opinion on various topics, so it is being kind of silly to act like we are all the same, though that is your prerogative.

 

[Soyeong]

What if you obeyed the New Covenant instead.

See, you dont realize that God's Law is Old Covenant, that has been replaced by the NEW TESTAMENT.

I do obey the New Covenant, you don't seem realize that the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33)

That does not mean that the 10 Commandments are not important...., but it does means they are not related to The Cross, regarding SALVATION.

See..... Christianity is CROSS Founded, not Old Testament Law and Commandments, (Moses) founded.

When will you ever understand this?

Never?

Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and it is by the Torah that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so while we do not earn our salvation as the result of obeying it, being obeyers of it through faith in Jesus is intrinsically the content of his gift of saving us from not being obeyers of it. In Titus 2:11-14, our salvation is described as being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good, and to renounce doing what is ungodly, so God gracious teaching us to obey the Torah is part of the content of God's gift of salvation. Furthermore, 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 becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah is thew ay to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20).

Is it because you just can't comprehend it, or is it because you prefer Self Righteousness, to God's Righteousness?

Becoming self-righteous does not involve relying on anyone else, so it is contradictory to think that we can become self-righteous by relying on what God has commanded. If the Torah were God's instructions for how to become self-righteous and God does not want us to become self-righteous, then it would follow that God therefore does not want to be obeyed, which is completely absurd considering that God wanted His people to repent and to return to obedience to the Torah all throughout the Bible and even Jesus began his ministry with that Gospel message, therefore the Torah is not God's instructions for how to become self-righteous, but rather it is God's instructions for how to testify about His righteousness. Likewise, God did not commanded His children to do good works for the purpose of establishing our own goodness, but for the purpose of testifying about His goodness, which is why our good works in obedience to the Torah bring glory to Him (Matthew 5:16).

 

[GracePeace]

Indeed, it is prejudice towards someone to have preconceived opinions about them that are not based on experience with them. You are making negative judgements about be based on your assumptions rather than on the content of my character. The are a wide variety of people who think that followers of God should follow what He has commanded in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow and even within my congregation there are a wide variety personalities and differences of opinion on various topics, so it is being kind of silly to act like we are all the same, though that is your prerogative.

I've had over a decade of experience discussing the facts with you guys, and I haven't found a single one of you interested in facts, so, no, not gonna waste my energy.

You're all impenitent.

In fact, I'll go ahead and place you on ignore, where you belong. I don't want to hear another word.

 

[Jack]

I obey God's law. God's law does not instruct me to go around executing anyone that I think has violated certain laws, but rather it instructs for the witnesses to bring accused people before a judge who does a through investigation, for no one to be put to death without at least two or there witnesses, for the witnesses to throw the first stone, and for the penalty to be applied to the witnesses instead if they falsely accuse someone. Furthermore, Jesus gave himself to pay the penalty of our sins, so it would be unjust the enforce a penalty that has already been paid.

The issue of whether followers of God should follow God's commands in accordance with the example that Jesus set for us to follow is independent of what I happen to be doing. Even if I were the biggest hypocrite in the world who was actively trying to transgress the Mosaic Law as much as I could, then that would just mean that I would need to repent, not that I was wrong about the fact that followers of God should follow God's commands in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow.

You clearly don't know what the Law COMMANDS! You pick the parts you like.

 

[Soyeong]

You clearly don't know what the Law COMMANDS! You pick the parts you like.

We can disagree about whether I am keeping God’s law correctly and God will be the judge, but again even if your baseless accusations were correct, it would just mean that I would need to repent, not that I was wrong about the fact that followers of God should follow what He has commanded in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow.

 

[Soyeong]

Big Boy, we may be in the same church, and maybe on the same pew on this matter. What I am getting at I'll try to explain in the following. Do you agree with my approach as I've written as follows, or where would you revise and/or maybe disagree completely in my statements? You'll recognize that I am thinking of the view of our Reformed brethren on this topic, when I refer to our brothers.

What I am getting at is how to deal with being charged as being antinomian, lawless; when we take Eph. 2:15 for exactly what it says;
of
"For he is our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and 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 bringing the hostility to an end." (Eph 2:14-16 RSV)

I take that to mean the entire Old Covenant, the Law of Moses, including the Ten Commandments. But some brothers reply that the law is of 3 parts: Moral, Civil and Ceremonial and that only the Civil and Ceremonial were abolished, the Moral law (Ten Commandments) were not abolished.

All of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160) and Ephesians 2:14-16 is referring to a law that is not eternal, therefore it is not referring to God's law. God did not make any mistakes when He gave the law, so He had no reason to abolish His own laws. God did not give any laws for the purpose of creating a dividing wall of hostility, but rather His law instructs to love our neighbor as ourselves. In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus specifically said that he came not to abolish God's law and warned against relaxing the least part of it, so interpreting Ephesians 2:14-16 as referring to abolishing God's law is calling Jesus a liar and disregarding his warning. Furthermore, in Romans 3:31, Paul confirmed that our faith does not abolish God's law, but rather our faith upholds it, yet you are seeking to abolish it rather than upholds it. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's nature can't be abolished without first abolishing God.

In Ephesians 2:10, we are new creations in Christ to do good works, so it wouldn't make sense to interpret a few verses later as saying that Christ abolished his instructions for how to do good works. In Ephesians 2:12-19, Gentiles were at one time separated from Christ, alienated from Israel, strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world, which is all in accordance with Gentiles not following God's law, but through faith in Christ all of that is no longer true in that Gentiles are no longer strangers or aliens, but are fellow citizens of Israel along with the saints in the households of God, so it is speaking about Gentiles being joined to these things, not about Gentiles rejecting these things in accordance with God's law being abolished. Moreover, the Greek word "dogma" is refers to something other that God's law every other time that it used by the Bible, so justification needs to be given for why it should be interpreted here as referring to God's law, especially in light of the fact that all of God's righteous laws are eternal.

I find problems with our brothers' view because I see no statement in scripture dividing The Law into 3 parts. It is a whole. Comparing Heb. 8:13 with Ex. 34:28 makes clear the Ten Commandments are a major part of the Old Covenant that was abolished, and was soon to disappear. The other view I have problems with is saying that the Ten Commandments still stand as an obligation on New Covenant believers, as if there was no everlasting law of God prior to Moses, and I reject that. God's everlasting law has existed from creation which may be found within the wording of the Ten Commandments; BUT, you do not find Paul quoting any of the Ten with the full and exact words as they came from the hand of Moses. Paul makes clear we are not to covet; but Paul says nothing about "slaves, oxes or donkeys" as the command is given by Moses.

While the Bible does use different Hebrew words for different categories of law, it never lists which laws are part of the moral, civil, or ceremonial law and never even refers to those as being categories of law, so I also find problems with those categories. The existence of the moral law would imply that we can be acting morally while disobeying the laws that aren't in that category, however, there is no example in the Bible of disobedience to God being consider to be moral and I do not see justification for thinking that it can ever be moral to disobey God. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws. Legislators give laws according to what they think 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 and therefor is to claim to have greater moral knowledge than God.

In Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant involves God putting His law in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so while the Mosaic Covenant has become obsolete, God's eternal law did not become obsolete along with it. Paul spoke about following other laws that are part of the Mosaic Law in verses like Galatians 5:19-21, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, and Titus 3:1-3, so he did not by any means only teach obedience to just the Ten Commandments.

"When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, to which their own conscience also bears witness; and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them on the day when, according to my gospel, God, through Jesus Christ, will judge the secret thoughts of all." (Rom 2:14-16 NRSV)

That is affirming that believing Gentiles will nature be doers of God's law.

When Jesus told the 11 apostles "teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you", I take that as written, and any law or command for the Christian is written in the New Covenant. Jesus lived under the Old Covenant, so caution is called for in understanding what he states as law in the gospels, whether it is included in the New Covenant as we find in the NT epistles.

Indeed, Jesus lived under the Mosaic Covenant, so everything he taught prior to the establishment of the New Covenant was in regard to how to live under the Mosaic Covenant, which is included in what he was what he was wanting his disciples to teach to the nations.

 

[Jack]

We can disagree about whether I am keeping God’s law correctly and God will be the judge, but again even if your baseless accusations were correct, it would just mean that I would need to repent, not that I was wrong about the fact that followers of God should follow what He has commanded in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow.

Baseless? lol You keep YOUR law. I'll stick with the New Covenant in Jesus's WONDERFUL Blood!

Galatians 3:10
10 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."

And that ain't good!

 

[Soyeong]

Baseless? lol

Indeed.

You keep YOUR law. I'll stick with the New Covenant in Jesus's WONDERFUL Blood!

It is God's law, not my law. God's law is God's word and it is contradictory for you to want to stick with God's word made flesh instead of sticking to God's word. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting His law in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so those who want nothing to do with sticking to God's law want nothing to do with the New Covenant.

Galatians 3:10
10 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."

And that ain't good!

Please address what I said in regard to that verse rather than just repeating it.

 

[Davy]

In Matthew 27:11, Jesus affirmed that it was as he said, however, my point in citing Matthew 27:37 was not to discuss whether he or anyone else thought he was the King of the Jews, but rather my point was that they nailed a sign to his cross that announced the charge that was against him. The did not nail the laws themselves to people crosses, but a list of the violations of the law that they had been charged with committing, which fits perfectly with the list of our violations of God's law that we have been charged with committing being nailed to Christ's cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, but has nothing to do with nailing any of God's laws to the cross.

It's important to include the Gospel of John account, which gives the most evidence that the Jews didn't like that idea of calling Jesus "king of the Jews". They never claimed Jesus said any such thing either. Instead, they wanted Jesus crucified because He claimed He was the Son of God, as written that I quoted.

Pilate was the one messing with those Jews with his use of that "king of the Jews" idea.

So it should never... be forgotten, that Lord Jesus Christ is King of Israel, God The Son, even King of kings, and Lord of lords.

 

[Soyeong]

It's important to include the Gospel of John account, which gives the most evidence that the Jews didn't like that idea of calling Jesus "king of the Jews". They never claimed Jesus said any such thing either. Instead, they wanted Jesus crucified because He claimed He was the Son of God, as written that I quoted.

Pilate was the one messing with those Jews with his use of that "king of the Jews" idea.

So it should never... be forgotten, that Lord Jesus Christ is King of Israel, God The Son, even King of kings, and Lord of lords.

The issue of whether the Jews who wanted Jesus crucified appreciated Pilate's honesty is completely irrelevant to the point that I was making, so please address my point.

 

[Jack]

Indeed.


It is God's law, not my law. God's law is God's word and it is contradictory for you to want to stick with God's word made flesh instead of sticking to God's word. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting His law in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so those who want nothing to do with sticking to God's law want nothing to do with the New Covenant.


Please address what I said in regard to that verse rather than just repeating it.

The Law COMMANDS to execute gays, adulterers, those who work on weekends. How many have you executed?

 

[Soyeong]

The Law COMMANDS to execute gays, adulterers, those who work on weekends. How many have you executed?

The law does not command me to do that, but rather it requires for the witnesses to be the ones who throw the first stones, for no one to be put to death without at least two or three witnesses, and for a judge to do a thorough investigation into the matter. Jesus gave himself to pay the penalty for our sins, so while the law has the same penalty, he has paid in our place. It would be unjust to enforce a penalty that he has paid and for you to demand that it should still be paid is to deny that Jesus paid it.

 

[Jack]

The Law preachers LOVE to preach the Law. But they avoid obeying it like PLAGUE! Utter hypocrisy! Much like what Jesus said, scribes, pharisees, HYPOCRITES!

 

[Jack]

The law does not command me to do that, but rather it requires for the witnesses to be the ones who throw the first stones, for no one to be put to death without at least two or three witnesses, and for a judge to do a thorough investigation into the matter. Jesus gave himself to pay the penalty for our sins, so while the law has the same penalty, he has paid in our place. It would be unjust to enforce a penalty that he has paid and for you to demand that it should still be paid is to deny that Jesus paid it.

So you're all for executing gays and those who work on weekends!

 

[Jack]

Why weren't Jesus' disciples executed for working on Sabbath??? Jesus was with them and even defended them!

 

[Davy]

The issue of whether the Jews who wanted Jesus crucified appreciated Pilate's honesty is completely irrelevant to the point that I was making, so please address my point.

You don't know what you are saying.

Labeling Jesus Christ as the "king of the Jews" is actually insulting Lord Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is KING OF ISRAEL, not of the Jews.

So it's obvious you do not know the difference, and need more Bible study.

Those who began to call theirself by that title of 'Jew' were those ONLY of the southern "kingdom of Judah", made up of only 3 tribes, Judah, Benjamin, and Levi.

But those of the northern "kingdom of Israel" under the tribe of Ephraim were made up of 10 tribes of Israel, and actually made up the majority of the children of Israel, and was known Biblically as Israel after God rent old Israel in Solomon's day (1 Kings 11 forward).

All... those today who think the title of 'Jew' applies to all 12 tribes of Israel show they have not studied God's Word about His splitting old Israel into 2 separate kingdoms. So to try and say Jesus Christ is "king of the Jews" is to say that He is KING only over a small portion of the children of Israel, i.e., Jews.

 

[Soyeong]

So you're all for executing gays and those who work on weekends!

The Law preachers LOVE to preach the Law. But they avoid obeying it like PLAGUE! Utter hypocrisy! Much like what Jesus said, scribes, pharisees, HYPOCRITES!

How about addressing what I've said instead of throwing out accusations? Even if I were the biggest hypocrite in the word, then that would just mean that I would need to repent, not that I was wrong about the fact that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are independent issues. You are attacking the person rather than my argument, which is an ad hominem.

Christ set a perfect example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Mosaic Law, so he was much more zealous for obedience to it than the Pharisees were and he never criticized them for obeying it, but he did criticize them for not obeying it or for not obeying it correctly. For example, in Mark 7:6-9, Jesus criticized them as being hypocrites for setting aside he commands of God in order to establish their own traditions. In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that tithing was something that they ought to be doing while not neglecting weightier matters of the law of justice, mercy, and faith, so he was not opposing their obedience to it, but rather he was calling them to have a higher level of obedience to it in a manner that is in accordance with its weightier matters.

Why wasn't Jesus' disciples executed for working on Sabbath???????????

While God commanded priests to rest on the Sabbath, He also commanded priests to make offerings on the Sabbath (Numbers 28:9-10), however, it was not the case that they were forced to sin by breaking one of the two commands no matter what they chose to do, but that the lesser command was never intended to be understood as preventing the greater command from being obeyed. This is why Jesus said in Matthew 12:5-7 that priests who did their duties on the Sabbath were held innocent, why David and his men were held innocent, and why he defended his disciples as being innocent. This is also why it is lawful to circumcise a baby on the 8th day if it happens to fall on the Sabbath or to get an ox or a child out of a ditch on the Sabbath.

 

[Soyeong]

You don't know what you are saying.

Labeling Jesus Christ as the "king of the Jews" is actually insulting Lord Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is KING OF ISRAEL, not of the Jews.

So it's obvious you do not know the difference, and need more Bible study.

Those who began to call theirself by that title of 'Jew' were those ONLY of the southern "kingdom of Judah", made up of only 3 tribes, Judah, Benjamin, and Levi.

But those of the northern "kingdom of Israel" under the tribe of Ephraim were made up of 10 tribes of Israel, and actually made up the majority of the children of Israel, and was known Biblically as Israel after God rent old Israel in Solomon's day (1 Kings 11 forward).

All... those today who think the title of 'Jew' applies to all 12 tribes of Israel show they have not studied God's Word about His splitting old Israel into 2 separate kingdoms. So to try and say Jesus Christ is "king of the Jews" is to say that He is KING only over a small portion of the children of Israel, i.e., Jews.

The fact that Jesus is King of the Jews does not say imply that he was not King of Israel, but rather being King of Israel includes being King of the Jews, which is not insulting to Jesus. We can acknowledge that "Jew" originally referred to someone who was from the southern kingdom of Judah while also acknowledging that it has come to refer to anyone who is a descendant of one of the tribes of Israel.