IF YOU ONLY FOLLOW JESUS THEN YOU MUST KEEP THE LAW

[amigo de christo]

They attended synagogues throughout Acts, but that doesn't mean that they were not Christians or part of the Church. A Christian is by definition a follower of Christ and I am a follower of Christ.

verily verily i say unto thee
a true follower of Christ
will remind all of the FIRST and foremost absolute dire need to have had to beleive on HIM .
it wont be making paths broad by including false religoins u nder cliam they know GOD .
Look at the dire warnings even JESUS g ave unto all who failed to believe on HIM . said ya daddy is satan .
So , MAKE SURE to include this . but just like the sold out majority of the protestant realm
READER beware these so called messianic leaders , OH THEY FLEECING you all was well .
THERE IS NO place that WHORE has not infiltrated .
NOT saying everyone within such a realm has been inifiltrated . OH BUT MANY HAVE .
So i would like to hear you say
that all religoins from the muslim to b uddism , to any other ism IS IN DARKNESS and knows NOT GOD .
IN fact the only way to BE FREE from teh power of darkness and of satan .
GO READ acts c hapter twenty and six . IT IS by FAITH IN JESUS THE CHRIST . so yeah
ALL other religoins including unbeleiving jews in JESUS , OH THEY IN DARKNESS friend .
Satan r ules over them . ONL Y ONE way to be freed from satan and the darkness and the death sentence .
HIS NAME BE JESUS THE CHRIST . AND ONE has to absolutey BELEIVE HE IS THE CHRIST , THE SON OF GOD
in order to be saved . AGREE , OR NOT . lets hear what YOU have to say on this sub ject .
I AM ALL EARS and waiting for your response .

 

[Soyeong]

Jewish Christianity or Messianic Judaism?
The difference between Jewish Christianity and Messianic Judaism is simple: Jewish Christianity is Christianity that is Jewish. Messianic Judaism is Judaism that is Messianic.

To arrive at Jewish Christianity, you start with Christianity and add Jewish people and Jewish things. You add Jewish customs. You add Jewish songs. You add Jewish clothing and food.

To arrive at Messianic Judaism, you start with Judaism, and add Messianic things. You add the Messiah. You add the Messiah’s teaching. You add aspects of the future Messianic Kingdom, when Jesus will rule the earth. In the end, Messianic Judaism has some vaguely similar appearances to Jewish Christianity, but a radically different way of thinking.

What is a Messianic Jew?

All throughout history, there have been individuals of Jewish descent who have followed Jesus. Typically, this has meant leaving Judaism behind and embracing Christian theology and practice. Towards the end of the 1800s, a new idea emerged among Jewish Christians. They realized that Jesus...

www.bethimmanuel.org

Do you even know what you are a part of? It is not Christianity, it is Judaism, according to the website.

In Acts 24:14, Paul testified that according to The Way, which they call a sect, he continued to worship the God of their fathers, believing everything laid down by the Torah and written in the Prophets, and the religion that The Way is a sect of is Judaism, so do you even know which religion you are part of?

In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith in Jesus who were all zealous for the Torah, which is in accordance with Titus 2:14, where Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possessions who are zealous for doing good works, so Jews coming to faith in Jesus were not ceasing to practice Judaism but were becoming zealous for it. This means that there was a period of time between the resurrect of Jesus and the inclusion of Gentiles in Acts 10 during which all Christians were Torah observant Jews.

 

[HealthyShape]

In Acts 24:14, Paul testified that according to The Way, which they call a sect, he continued to worship the God of their fathers, believing everything laid down by the Torah and written in the Prophets, and the religion that The Way is a sect of is Judaism, so do you even know which religion you are part of?

In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith in Jesus who were all zealous for the Torah, which is in accordance with Titus 2:14, where Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possessions who are zealous for doing good works, so Jews coming to faith in Jesus were not ceasing to practice Judaism but were becoming zealous for it. This means that there was a period of time between the resurrect of Jesus and the inclusion of Gentiles in Acts 10 during which all Christians were Torah observant Jews.

You are all over the place. First you say you are Christian, then you say you are a sect of Judaism. Your own website says you are not Christians, but you personally insist to be called Christian... quite a mess.

BTW, Messianic Judaism originated in the 19th century. It is not anything connected to the New Testament church.

 

[amigo de christo]

In Acts 24:14, Paul testified that according to The Way, which they call a sect, he continued to worship the God of their fathers, believing everything laid down by the Torah and written in the Prophets, and the religion that The Way is a sect of is Judaism, so do you even know which religion you are part of?

In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith in Jesus who were all zealous for the Torah, which is in accordance with Titus 2:14, where Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possessions who are zealous for doing good works, so Jews coming to faith in Jesus were not ceasing to practice Judaism but were becoming zealous for it. This means that there was a period of time between the resurrect of Jesus and the inclusion of Gentiles in Acts 10 during which all Christians were Torah observant Jews.

For this is the covenant that i will make with them
I WILL WRITE my laws upon THEIR HEARTS and in their minds
You might wanna tell this to the rain bow crowd
as well as the ecumeincal inclusive crowd . cause their love is T OTAL LAWLESSNESS AND REBELLION TO GOD .
Hyper grace DESTROYED many churches
AS DID its seeker friendly sister
and now they are all being led to the ecumeincal WHORE who sits over many waters .
Just a dire necessary reminder for us all . TO REMIND th is lovey do church age
THAT GOD DONT HONOR SINS NOR UNBELIEF as do this koran kissing budda statue holding inclusive ecumenical
WHORE of idolarty that darn sure has made the road to GOD very broad , sin accepting and NOW even UNBELEIF in CHRIST
accepting . WE BEEN LIED TOO an d many have loved to have it so .
I WILL , now hear this one and all , EXPOSE EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM and their satanic anti christ false love
whore led lie . no ma tter the cost to me . hear it , HEAR IT , no mat ter the cost to me .
I had rather die than sit under a harlot . so now that you know i have no fear of death
and had rather be in prison and killed for not compromising A word of the LORD nor HIS gospel .
What does that make me in your eyes . Do you see me as a wild eyed fantatic terroist
or simply a man whose forehead is harder than flint and by grace SHALL NOT COMPROMISE peroid no matter what it costs me .
you decide .

 

[shepherdsword]

I showed how everything that Peter argued in Acts 15:6-11 was in agreement with the Pharisees from among the believers in Acts 15:5, so please interact with what I said rather than just insisting otherwise. Acts 15 should not be interpreted a ruling that followers of Christ shouldn't follow what he taught.

I just want to be clear here. Let's add verse 5

Ac 15:5-11
But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

To claim this was in agreement with the Pharisees is absurd. The yoke is clearly the law of Moses.

It's like me claiming that the color blue has a wavelength range approximately between 450 and 495 nanometers and you coming back and saying...no that's red and I just proved it to you. Ok...I'm done. I tried to help you but I see that's impossible.

 

[Soyeong]

You are all over the place. First you say you are a Christian, then you say you are a sect of Judaism. Your own website says you are not a Christian, but you insist to be called Christian... what a mess.

Christianity at its origin was the sect of Judaism that recognized Jesus as the Messiah.

A label is good only insofar as it quickly converts information to the average person that are accurate about me. So if I were to identify as a Christian without qualification, then that would communicate to the average person that I am not someone who is Torah observant, which would be false, but if I were to identify as a non-Christian, then that would communicate even more things to the average person that are false about me, so to some extent the label has been ruined for me because I need to provide more information about what sort of follower of Christ I am. So I prefer to use the label of Messianic Judaism because it more accurately communicates information about me. It is not different from someone calling themselves a Lutheran or a Catholic in order to give more accurate information about what sort of follower of Christ they consider themselves to be. I prefer Messianic Judaism to Jewish Christianity in recognition of the fact that Christianity at its origin was the sect of Judaism that recognized Jesus as the Messiah rather adding Jewish customs to modern Christianity. Some who practice Messianic Judaism choose to reject the label of Christianity altogether not because they don't consider themselves to be a follower of Christ, but because they consider modern Christianity to have sufficiently diverged from the religion that Christ practiced.

 

[Soyeong]

I just want to be clear here. Let's add verse 5

Ac 15:5-11
But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

To claim this was in agreement with the Pharisees is absurd. The yoke is clearly the law of Moses.

It's like me claiming that the color blue has a wavelength range approximately between 450 and 495 nanometers and you coming back and saying...no that's red and I just proved it to you. Ok...I'm done. I tried to help you but I see that's impossible.

In Acts 15:1, men from Judea were wanting to require Gentiles to becoming circumcised in order to become saved. In Acts 15:5, were opposed by Pharisees among the believers who agreed Gentiles should become circumcised and obey the Law of Moses but not in order to become saved, so one one there took the position that Gentiles shouldn't obey the Law of Moses, but rather the topic they were debating was the means of salvation.

Again, everything that Peter argued in Acts 15:6-11 was siding with the Pharisees from among the believers against the men from Judea:

"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 Law of Moses 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, which Peter argued in Acts 15:6-7 that Gentiles had heard and believed, so he was agreeing with the Pharisees from among the believers. 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 Law of Moses, which is in accordance with what Peter argued in Acts 15:8-9 that Gentiles had received the Spirt 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 Law of Moses, 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 what Peter argued in Acts 15:10-11 that Gentiles are saved by grace just as we are, so again he sided with the Pharisees."

if you think that what I said about Acts 15:6-11 absurd, then you shouldn't have a problem interacting with what I said in order to explain why you think it is absurd. Moreover, if you want to insist that the yoke is clearly the Law of Moses, then you should interact with the major problems that I've raised with that position, starting with the fact that God's Word says that the Law of Moses is not too difficult for us to keep. Do you think that God was wrong? Can you explain why it is not absurd for you to interpret that the Jerusalem Council as being in direct disagreement with God? Even if your interpretation of Acts 15 were correct, then that would mean that we should believe God's Word instead of the Jerusalem Council, so we shouldn't believe that the Mosaic Law is yoke that no one can bear either way.

 

[shepherdsword]

Again, everything that Peter argued in Acts 15:6-11 was siding with the Pharisees from among the believers against the men from Judea:

ABSURD .. this is totally false as this is what Peter says:

Ac 15:7-11
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
(notice that it is by faith?)
Now Peter refers back to the Pharisees that wanted the gentiles to obey the law of Moses

Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

In other words....not by the yoke of the law but by grace they shall be saved. The yoke was the law. This is why I called your interpretation absurd. Anyone with a 5th grade reading level can see that the yoke refers to the law as opposed to salvation by grace.

 

[Soyeong]

ABSURD .. this is totally false as this is what Peter says:

Ac 15:7-11
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
(notice that it is by faith?)
Now Peter refers back to the Pharisees that wanted the gentiles to obey the law of Moses

Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

In other words....not by the yoke of the law but by grace they shall be saved. The yoke was the law. This is why I called your interpretation absurd. Anyone with a 5th grade reading level can see that the yoke refers to the law as opposed to salvation by grace.

It is not absurd to think that Peter was referring to the position of the men from Judea in Acts 15:1 rather than the position of the Pharisees from among the believes in Acts 15:5. I spoke in regard to how Acts 15:5-11 should be interpreted, so simply quoting that passage again while ignoring what I said does not counter my position or show that is absurd. In Acts 15:10-11, they ruled that Gentiles are saved by grace just as we are, which means that the heavy yoke that no one could bear was not the Law of Moses, but a means of salvation other than salvation by grace, which is what the men in Acts 15:1 had proposed. Again, in Psalms 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 Law of Moses, 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 what Peter ruled.

Do you think that the truth of these verses is compatible with the view that the Law of Moses is a yoke that no one can bear?:

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

 

[Wick Stick]

Do you think that the truth of these verses is compatible with the view that the Law of Moses is a yoke that no one can bear?:

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

I wonder what Law David was looking at?

Modern scholars think that Deuteronomy was lost and not re-discovered til the reign of Josiah. Well, the Bible says so...

Likewise, Exodus and Numbers are thought to have been compiled later based on texts we no longer have.

The stories in Genesis already existed, but weren't yet compiled into a single book. Leviticus is probably the only book we have today that existed in the same version in David's day.

So, what is David talking about when he refers to "the Law?" Probably not quite the same thing we're looking at.

 

[HealthyShape]

Christianity at its origin was the sect of Judaism that recognized Jesus as the Messiah.

No. In fact, Paul clearly distinguishes between following Judaism and following Christ, in his letters. But even the 1st century Judaism pre-70AD was a totally different thing than today's Judaism, and your "Judaism" is not even recognized as Judaism by today's Jews etc. So this term is also frequently misleading.

A label is good only insofar as it quickly converts information to the average person that are accurate about me. So if I were to identify as a Christian without qualification, then that would communicate to the average person that I am not someone who is Torah observant, which would be false, but if I were to identify as a non-Christian, then that would communicate even more things to the average person that are false about me, so to some extent the label has been ruined for me because I need to provide more information about what sort of follower of Christ I am. So I prefer to use the label of Messianic Judaism because it more accurately communicates information about me. It is not different from someone calling themselves a Lutheran or a Catholic in order to give more accurate information about what sort of follower of Christ they consider themselves to be. I prefer Messianic Judaism to Jewish Christianity in recognition of the fact that Christianity at its origin was the sect of Judaism that recognized Jesus as the Messiah rather adding Jewish customs to modern Christianity. Some who practice Messianic Judaism choose to reject the label of Christianity altogether not because they don't consider themselves to be a follower of Christ, but because they consider modern Christianity to have sufficiently diverged from the religion that Christ practiced.

We can agree that the label "Christian" on your profile is misleading, at least. It is also misleading when used by people who do not believe that Jesus is God, who believe that there are three Gods and similar.

This creates the chaos in "Christians Only" Bible forums I already mentioned. I would guess about half of the participants here would not qualify as being orthodox Christians as defined by the ecumenical creeds, based on their posts.

 

[shepherdsword]

It is not absurd to think that Peter was referring to the position of the men from Judea in Acts 15:1 rather than the position of the Pharisees from among the believes in Acts 15:5. I spoke in regard to how Acts 15:5-11 should be interpreted, so simply quoting that passage again while ignoring what I said does not counter my position or show that is absurd.

Ac 15:5-7

5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

This group demanded they keep the law

6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

The apostles came together to consider if they should keep the law or not

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

Peter rose up and explained how the gentiles were saved by faith.

Your jumping back to verse 1 as the matter they were considering is absurd.

 

[Taken]

IF YOU ONLY FOLLOW JESUS THEN YOU MUST KEEP THE LAW

What LAW?

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[amigo de christo]

I wonder what Law David was looking at?

Modern scholars think that Deuteronomy was lost and not re-discovered til the reign of Josiah. Well, the Bible says so...

Likewise, Exodus and Numbers are thought to have been compiled later based on texts we no longer have.

The stories in Genesis already existed, but weren't yet compiled into a single book. Leviticus is probably the only book we have today that existed in the same version in David's day.

So, what is David talking about when he refers to "the Law?" Probably not quite the same thing we're looking at.

bad example of t rying to speak the truth .
Everythin g was already well compiled in torah by the time of david . If you want to expose the falsehoods of others
THIS is not the way to do it . Expose falsehoods by truth . Who so ever hears amen . but dont
t ry and heed scholars who say such things about the torah and thus say David was probably talking about etc .
Its easy enough and simple enough to expose what is contrary by truth alone my friend .

 

[Brakelite]

God gave us the law to show how utterly depraved we are and for us to recognize the need for a savior to impart true righteousness to us. Our self efforts cannot save and that was the lesson the schoolmaster of the law was sent to teach.

Your theology, while expressing some truth e.g. self effort cannot save, and only the Lord can impart true righteousness, you miss an even more powerful truth. That the Lord not only can impart true righteousness, He has promised to do so for those who hunger and thirst for it. You say however that God's righteousness is different from His law. Yet you fail to explain what it actually is, other than some obtuse reference to the life of Christ. And what does the Bible say is God's righteousness?

“My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness. ”
Psalms 119:172 KJV

Unfeigned Bible

Unfeigned Bible

www.unfeignedbible.app

Whatever righteousness is, it comes highly recommended.
Mt 5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
Mt 6:33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

First point we must all realise, is that the 'righteousness', referred to above is Christ's own righteousness. Not our own, not someone else's, not the church's. Isaiah said our own righteousness is worthless, so what we must answer is the question "what is Christ's righteousness?" For it is that righteousness that we must hunger and thirst for, it is that righteousness we must seek for on equal priority to His kingdom.

We all, as professing Christians, have accepted Christ's kingdom. We have all acknowledged His propitiation and atoning death. But His righteousness? What is that? And how do we get it?



Paul answers both questions here...
Ga 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

So the Galatians were thinking that they could be justified by following the law, but Paul says it must be by faith. And he equates justification with righteousness. The cross, the shedding of blood, justifies us. Throughout Biblical history the sacrifice of the animal and the shedding of blood removed sin from being an impediment in the relationship and a wall between God and man. We are 'accounted' righteous in the sight of a holy God, and we then have free access to the throne of grace.

But did God desire that Israel continually sin because they had a "get out of jail free card" grazing in the back paddock? Not at all. In fact several times God showed His great displeasure in the rivers of blood that constantly flowed from the temple altar.
Isaiah 1:10 ¶ Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.
11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.
12 When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts?
13 Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.
14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.
15 And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.

What is going on here? It was in Eden that God Himself set up the sacrificial system. And a whole range of various sabbaths and holy days and services and sacrifices for the express purpose of gaining forgiveness, yet here is God saying He wants them to stop? What's missing? Isaiah in the next few verses gives the answer. And after, John the Baptist confirms this.
16 ¶ Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;
17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.
18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
19 If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:

Matthew 3:7 ¶ But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
Php 3:7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 ¶ And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.


Righteousness is holiness; likeness to God, and God is love. (1 John 4:16) It is conformity to the law of God, for "all Thy commandments are righteousness" Psalm 119:72, and "love is the fulfilling of the law". Rom. 13:10
Righteousness is love, and love is the true light and life of God. The righteousness of God is embodied in Christ, and we receive righteousness by receiving Him.
2 Peter 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

It has been said that we take but two things to heaven with us from this world. The souls we have have helped save through our witness, and our characters. Eternity is dependant upon what characters we develop now, whether Christ's or the prince of this world.
Eph.4:17 ¶ This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind,....22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.


Thus righteousness is both imputed, (justification) and imparted (sanctification.) Both are essential, both are Christ's, and both can be ours if we have but faith.
Rom.5:17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Romans 8:1 ¶ There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit...4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

By the way. No-one has claimed that keeping the sabbath can save us. Obedience to all the commandments cannot save us. Only grace. But grace does a far greater work than offering us eternal life.

No-one should think that they can separate the law from the gospel.On many occasions the Pharisees in their hypocrisy were roundly and rightly rebuked by Jesus for thinking that by keeping the law they would be saved; on one such occasion Jesus said:
Matthew 23:23

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.

So obedience is good, and ought always to be done, but there are more important aspects of life in Christ, as Jesus put it 'weightier matters of the law', which have a greater priority. Love, mercy, faith, justice. That Jesus said they are a part of the law is significant. There are those who claim the law was nailed to the cross: they have to reconcile the fact that love, justice, and mercy, that is the gospel,is part and parcel of that very law which they claim is of no further relevance to the Christian. How can 'thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart etc' be no longer of any significance to the Christian life? Is this not the very essence of the law? That upon love for God as paramount and impartial love for neighbour hang all the law and prophets? How then can the law and the gospel be separated? They cannot. They intertwine and overlay each other intimately, having different purposes yet they run parallel to one another. And please, enough of this nonsense that claims that the law was done away with but reinstituted by the church through the writings of Paul. Far out, God didn't need Moses to establish law, nor did He need Paul. God's law was established in the heavens, since eternity past and into eternity future. His law is His nature, His character. His righteousness. To do away with His law is to do away with God Himself.

 

[Brakelite]

No-one should think that they can separate the law from the gospel.On many occasions the Pharisees in their hypocrisy were roundly and rightly rebuked by Jesus for thinking that by keeping the law they would be saved; on one such occasion Jesus said:
Matthew 23:23

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.

So obedience is good, and ought always to be done, but there are more important aspects of life in Christ, as Jesus put it 'weightier matters of the law', which have a greater priority. Love, mercy, faith, justice. That Jesus said they are a part of the law is significant. There are those who claim the law was nailed to the cross: they have to reconcile the fact that love, justice, and mercy, that is the gospel,is part and parcel of that very law which they claim is of no further relevance to the Christian. How can 'thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart etc' be no longer of any significance to the Christian life? Is this not the very essence of the law? That upon love for God as paramount and impartial love for neighbour hang all the law and prophets? How then can the law and the gospel be separated? They cannot. They intertwine and overlay each other intimately, having different purposes yet they run parallel to one another. And please, enough of this nonsense that claims that the law was done away with but reinstituted by the church through the writings of Paul. Far out, God didn't need Moses to establish law, nor did He need Paul. God's law was established in the heavens, since eternity past and into eternity future. His law is His nature, His character. His righteousness. To do away with His law is to do away with God Himself.

It is as we take a hold of Christ and cleave to Him in faith and love, that His law ceases its claims upon us because of two things. First and foremost, we are dead to the law, (note well, it is us that are dead, not the law) in Christ. This means that God the Father considers us as having died with His Son, Jesus. Because Jesus died as an innocent man, God can include in Him the guilt of humanity, that includes you and me. God considers the debt paid. What claims the law has upon us as far as guilt is concerned is eternally dealt with.

Secondly, we are gifted with His righteousness. Not just accounted righteous like a book-keeping entry, but changed, sanctified, made righteous each day and made a new creature that lives, breathes, loves, obeys, cherishes the good and despises the evil. Sin no longer has an attraction to us. Grieving the Holy Spirit that abides in us becomes a detestable consideration. And as we hunger and thirst after righteousness we come to the point when we would rather die than tell a lie. We would rather burn than deny our love for our Maker. We would rather be tortured than be found to be a thief, or an adulterer. We would rather suffer ridicule, abuse, and slander than to compromise truth, reduce holiness to a human standard, or behave in such a way that brings disrepute upon He who saved us.

What a wonderful God who through the power of His word and the work of His Spirit can fulfill in us His promises as laid out in His law. But it takes faith. You must believe that God has the power, and the willingness to accomplish this. You must also decide if you want this. Jesus said that those who hunger and thirst for righteousness will be filled. Do you believe His words, His promises? Below are a set of promises, that as you surrender your life to Him, fully trusting in Him and allow Him to work in you His righteousness and holiness, and that if you believe that what He promises will assuredly come to pass, these will become real for you in this life.

You shall love the Lord thy God with all the heart, with all the soul, and with all thy strength.

You shall worship the Lord thy God and you will only serve Him.

You shall not have any other god before Him, nor shall you make any graven image.

You shall never take the name of the Lord in vain.

You shall remember to keep holy His Sabbath day.

And you shall love thy neighbour as thyself.

You shall not dishonour your parents.

You shall not murder.

You shall not commit adultery.

You shall not steal.

You shall not lie.

You shall not covet.

 

[shepherdsword]

Your theology, while expressing some truth e.g. self effort cannot save, and only the Lord can impart true righteousness, you miss an even more powerful truth. That the Lord not only can impart true righteousness, He has promised to do so for those who hunger and thirst for it.

I didn't miss this...I live this

You say however that God's righteousness is different from His law. Yet you fail to explain what it actually is, other than some obtuse reference to the life of Christ. And what does the Bible say is God's righteousness?

You are very confused. I never said God's righteousness is different from his law. I said (actually the bible says) that the LETTER of the law kills but the SPIRIT gives life. You, in you presumptuous arrogance, may label that as "obtuse" but it just goes to show that your 30 years of membership in a sabbath day sect has not led you any closer to the truth. You just parrot their doctrine like a good obsequious cult member. Why do I label SDA as a cult? Because it takes a partial truth and makes it the whole and you follow a false prophetess. People that have been there for decades still babel and regurgitate diatribes about the sabbath, the coming Sunday law and how those that worship on Sunday will have the mark of the beast, This shows they never go beyond basics and really mature. This is what happens when you follow a false prophetess like Ellen White.

 

[Wick Stick]

bad example of t rying to speak the truth .
Everythin g was already well compiled in torah by the time of david . If you want to expose the falsehoods of others
THIS is not the way to do it . Expose falsehoods by truth . Who so ever hears amen . but dont
t ry and heed scholars who say such things about the torah and thus say David was probably talking about etc .
Its easy enough and simple enough to expose what is contrary by truth alone my friend .

From my perspective, I was asking a question... and I don't have an answer to that question, so I'm not trying to insert some theology there.

But I don't think David had exactly the same Genesis-Deuteronomy that we have today.

 

[Soyeong]

Ac 15:5-7

5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

This group demanded they keep the law

6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

The apostles came together to consider if they should keep the law or not

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

Peter rose up and explained how the gentiles were saved by faith.

The Gospel that Peter argued that Gentiles had heard and believed calls for obedience to the Law of Moses, which is in accordance with Acts 15:5. In Psalms 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 Law of Moses, 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 Acts 15:11 and 15:5.

Your jumping back to verse 1 as the matter they were considering is absurd.

The only two verses that use the word "saved" in Acts 15 are 15:1 and 15:11, so why do you think that it absurd to think that the ruling in 15:11 in regard to the way to be saved is addressing the position stated in 15:1 in regard to the way to be saved?

 

[Soyeong]

I wonder what Law David was looking at?

Modern scholars think that Deuteronomy was lost and not re-discovered til the reign of Josiah. Well, the Bible says so...

Likewise, Exodus and Numbers are thought to have been compiled later based on texts we no longer have.

The stories in Genesis already existed, but weren't yet compiled into a single book. Leviticus is probably the only book we have today that existed in the same version in David's day.

So, what is David talking about when he refers to "the Law?" Probably not quite the same thing we're looking at.

The Torah did not become lost during the reign of David. Things were certainly passed down orally regardless of when they were written down and losing the scrolls did not mean that there was no one who was following the Torah.