Christians are in Rebellion against God for not following Torah

[Soyeong]

@Soyeong. I think you're reading Romans 10 differently than Paul intended.

Paul's argument isn't that Christians are required to keep the Law of Moses. He has just stated that "Christ is the end (goal or fulfillment) of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes" (Romans 10:4). When he quotes Deuteronomy 30, he immediately identifies it as "the word of faith which we preach" (Romans 10:8), applying Moses' words to the gospel rather than returning believers to the Mosaic Covenant.

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 Him, in 1 Kings 2:1-3, God taught how to walk in His way through the Law o fMoses, 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 Law of Moses is to graciously teach us how to know God and Jesus by walking in His way, which is the narrow way to eternal life (John 17:3).

in Romans 9:30-10:4, the Israelites had a zeal for God, but it was not based on knowing Him, so they failed to attain righteousness because they misunderstood the goal of the Law of Moses by pursuing it as though righteousness were earned as the result of their works in order to establish their own instead of pursuing the Law of Moses as through righteousness were by faith in Christ, for knowing Christ is the goal of the Law of Moses for righteousness for everyone who has faith. In Romans 10:5-16, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to proclaiming that the Law of Moses is not too difficult for us to obey, in regard to proclaiming that obedience to it brings life and a blessing, in regard to what we are committing to obey by confessing that Jesus is Lord, in regard to the way to believe that God raised him from the dead for salvation, and in regard to the way to obey the Gospel.

Again, the Gospel that Jesus taught in Matthew 4:15-23 called for our obedience to the Law of Moses. in Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purity for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in the Gospel that Jesus spent his ministry teaching and in what he accomplished through the cross by God raising him from the dead is by repenting and becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Law of Moses (Acts 21:20).

The examples from Joshua and Luke describe people living under the Old Covenant before Christ's work on the cross. They don't establish that New Covenant believers remain under the Law of Moses.

@Jack claimed that nobody obeys the Law of Moses and the point of citing Joshua and Luke was to show that there are examples in the Bible of people who did obey it. Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Law of Moses 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, in order to nullify what he accomplished through the cross, or in order to free us to 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 Law of Moses (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).

The New Testament consistently teaches that while the Law is holy and reveals God's character, our righteousness comes through faith in Christ, and believers are led by the Spirit rather than being under the Mosaic Law (Romans 6:14; Galatians 5:18; Romans 7:6).

It is contradictory to think that our righteousness comes through faith in God's Word made flesh and not through following his example of embodying God's Word. God has not commanded anything that is not in accordance with walking in the Spirit, but rather God's character traits are the fruits of the Spirit and the Law of Moses is God's instructions for how to know Him through embodying His character traits, which is why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it (Ezekiel 36:26-27). Likewise, in Romans 8:2-7, Paul contrasted the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death and 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. 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 obedience to the Law of Moses/how to walk in the Spirit.

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. In Romans 6:14, Paul described the law that we are not under as being a law where sin had dominion over us, which is clearly not describing something that is the good that Paul wanted to do, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in Romans 7:7, the law of sin is not sinful [unlike the law of sin, which is sinful], but how we know what sin is, so we we are still under the Law of God, but are not under the law of sin.

In Romans 7:22-23, Paul said that he delighted in obeying the Law of God in contrast the the law of sin, which was waging war against the law of his mind and 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, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. Likewise, it would be absurd 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.

In Galatians 5:16-23, Paul contrasted the desires of the flesh with the desires of the Spirit and everything that he listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Law of Moses while all of fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's character traits that the Law of Moses was given in order to teach us how to embody. Moreover, the desires of the flesh causing us not to do the good that we want to do is how Paul described his struggle with the law of sin in Romans 5-8. In Romans 8:2-7, the law that we are not under when we are led by the Spirit is the law of sin and death, not the Law of God. The Law Moses was given by God and the Spirit is God, so it would be contradictory to interpret Galatians 5:18 as referring to the Law of Moses as if we are not led by God when we are led by God.

So I don't agree that Romans 10 is calling Christians back under the Law of Moses but pointing them to Christ, in whom the Law finds its fulfillment.

It is contradictory to point to God's Word made flesh instead of pointing to his example of embodying God's Word.

 

[Jack]

NOBODY obeys the Law of Moses but many hypocrites love to preach it!

Exodus 35:2 Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.

 

[Soyeong]

Why don't YOU obey the Law of Moses?

Again, the fact that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Law of Moses is true regardless of whether or not I obey it, though it is false that I do not obey it. It is also false that you do not obey it.

 

[Jack]

Again, the fact that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Law of Moses is true regardless of whether or not I obey it,

What? lol

though it is false that I do not obey it.

Exodus 35:2 Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.

It is also false that you do not obey it.

I have the New Covenant in the Blood of Jesus. That's what I obey. That's why He shed His PRECIOUS Blood!

 

[Soyeong]

What? lol

Exodus 35:2 Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.

There can be legitimate reasons for not following particular laws. For example, in Deuteronomy 17:18, it specifically instructs the king to write a copy of the Torah, so everyone who is not the king has a legitimate reasons for not obeying that law. The Israelites were given a number of laws that had the condition "when you enter the land..." while they were still wandering the wilderness for 40 years, so everyone who is not living in the land has a legitimate reason for not following those laws. The condition for the Israelites to return to the land after they had been exiled to Babylon was to first return to obedience to the Torah, which contains laws in regard to Temple practice that they could no longer obey because the Temple has just been destroyed, so they had a legitimate reason to not follow laws in regard to Temple practice, but that did not stop them from obeying the laws that they could obey. Similarly, there is no Sanhedrin, so no one can be put to death in accordance with the Law of Moses. Jesus also gave himself to pay the penalty for our sins, so it would be unlawful to enforce a penalty that has already been paid. Still the fact that God considers some sins to be worthy of the death penalty and the fact that Jesus gave himself to pay that penalty should make us want to go and sin no more.

I have the New Covenant in the Blood of Jesus. That's what I obey. That's why He shed His PRECIOUS Blood!

The New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).

NOBODY obeys the Law of Moses but many hypocrites love to preach it!

Exodus 35:2 Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.

Even if I were a hypocrite, then that wouldn't change the fact that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Law of Moses, but rather it would just mean that I would need to repent from my hypocrisy.

 

[Angelina]

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 Him, in 1 Kings 2:1-3, God taught how to walk in His way through the Law o fMoses, 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 Law of Moses is to graciously teach us how to know God and Jesus by walking in His way, which is the narrow way to eternal life (John 17:3).

in Romans 9:30-10:4, the Israelites had a zeal for God, but it was not based on knowing Him, so they failed to attain righteousness because they misunderstood the goal of the Law of Moses by pursuing it as though righteousness were earned as the result of their works in order to establish their own instead of pursuing the Law of Moses as through righteousness were by faith in Christ, for knowing Christ is the goal of the Law of Moses for righteousness for everyone who has faith. In Romans 10:5-16, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to proclaiming that the Law of Moses is not too difficult for us to obey, in regard to proclaiming that obedience to it brings life and a blessing, in regard to what we are committing to obey by confessing that Jesus is Lord, in regard to the way to believe that God raised him from the dead for salvation, and in regard to the way to obey the Gospel.

Again, the Gospel that Jesus taught in Matthew 4:15-23 called for our obedience to the Law of Moses. in Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purity for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in the Gospel that Jesus spent his ministry teaching and in what he accomplished through the cross by God raising him from the dead is by repenting and becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Law of Moses (Acts 21:20).


@Jack claimed that nobody obeys the Law of Moses and the point of citing Joshua and Luke was to show that there are examples in the Bible of people who did obey it. Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Law of Moses 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, in order to nullify what he accomplished through the cross, or in order to free us to 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 Law of Moses (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).


It is contradictory to think that our righteousness comes through faith in God's Word made flesh and not through following his example of embodying God's Word. God has not commanded anything that is not in accordance with walking in the Spirit, but rather God's character traits are the fruits of the Spirit and the Law of Moses is God's instructions for how to know Him through embodying His character traits, which is why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it (Ezekiel 36:26-27). Likewise, in Romans 8:2-7, Paul contrasted the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death and 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. 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 obedience to the Law of Moses/how to walk in the Spirit.

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. In Romans 6:14, Paul described the law that we are not under as being a law where sin had dominion over us, which is clearly not describing something that is the good that Paul wanted to do, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in Romans 7:7, the law of sin is not sinful [unlike the law of sin, which is sinful], but how we know what sin is, so we we are still under the Law of God, but are not under the law of sin.

In Romans 7:22-23, Paul said that he delighted in obeying the Law of God in contrast the the law of sin, which was waging war against the law of his mind and 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, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. Likewise, it would be absurd 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.

In Galatians 5:16-23, Paul contrasted the desires of the flesh with the desires of the Spirit and everything that he listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Law of Moses while all of fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's character traits that the Law of Moses was given in order to teach us how to embody. Moreover, the desires of the flesh causing us not to do the good that we want to do is how Paul described his struggle with the law of sin in Romans 5-8. In Romans 8:2-7, the law that we are not under when we are led by the Spirit is the law of sin and death, not the Law of God. The Law Moses was given by God and the Spirit is God, so it would be contradictory to interpret Galatians 5:18 as referring to the Law of Moses as if we are not led by God when we are led by God.


It is contradictory to point to God's Word made flesh instead of pointing to his example of embodying God's Word.

@Soyeong,
I appreciate that you are emphasizing obedience and that God's character does not change. I agree that faith in Christ is not a license for lawlessness. The question, however, is not whether believers should obey God, but whether New Covenant believers are placed under the Mosaic covenant.

The New Testament shows that Christ fulfilled the Law, not by making God's character irrelevant, but by bringing us into the reality that the Law pointed toward. Romans 7:6 contrasts the old way of the written code with the new way of the Spirit, and Romans 6:14 says believers are not under law but under grace.

The Spirit does not lead us into sin; He produces the very character of God in us. But the apostles did not place Gentile believers under the Law of Moses as a covenant obligation. Acts 15 specifically addresses this question and does not require Gentile believers to come under Moses.

The Law was a tutor that pointed us to Christ. Galatians 3:24, but now that faith has come, we are sons of God through Christ. Galatians 3:25-26.

Following Jesus means walking as He walked, in love, obedience, holiness, and submission to the Father, but it does not mean returning to the Mosaic covenant that He fulfilled.

 

[Jack]

There can be legitimate reasons for not following particular laws. For example, in Deuteronomy 17:18, it specifically instructs the king to write a copy of the Torah, so everyone who is not the king has a legitimate reasons for not obeying that law. The Israelites were given a number of laws that had the condition "when you enter the land..." while they were still wandering the wilderness for 40 years, so everyone who is not living in the land has a legitimate reason for not following those laws. The condition for the Israelites to return to the land after they had been exiled to Babylon was to first return to obedience to the Torah, which contains laws in regard to Temple practice that they could no longer obey because the Temple has just been destroyed, so they had a legitimate reason to not follow laws in regard to Temple practice, but that did not stop them from obeying the laws that they could obey. Similarly, there is no Sanhedrin, so no one can be put to death in accordance with the Law of Moses. Jesus also gave himself to pay the penalty for our sins, so it would be unlawful to enforce a penalty that has already been paid. Still the fact that God considers some sins to be worthy of the death penalty and the fact that Jesus gave himself to pay that penalty should make us want to go and sin no more.


The New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).


Even if I were a hypocrite, then that wouldn't change the fact that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Law of Moses, but rather it would just mean that I would need to repent from my hypocrisy.

Have you read the CURSE in Duet 28?
Galatians 3:10
10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse;

 

[amigo de christo]

@Soyeong,
I appreciate that you are emphasizing obedience and that God's character does not change. I agree that faith in Christ is not a license for lawlessness. The question, however, is not whether believers should obey God, but whether New Covenant believers are placed under the Mosaic covenant.

The New Testament shows that Christ fulfilled the Law, not by making God's character irrelevant, but by bringing us into the reality that the Law pointed toward. Romans 7:6 contrasts the old way of the written code with the new way of the Spirit, and Romans 6:14 says believers are not under law but under grace.

The Spirit does not lead us into sin; He produces the very character of God in us. But the apostles did not place Gentile believers under the Law of Moses as a covenant obligation. Acts 15 specifically addresses this question and does not require Gentile believers to come under Moses.

The Law was a tutor that pointed us to Christ. Galatians 3:24, but now that faith has come, we are sons of God through Christ. Galatians 3:25-26.

Following Jesus means walking as He walked, in love, obedience, holiness, and submission to the Father, but it does not mean returning to the Mosaic covenant that He fulfilled.

Welcome to the ten ring circus show of smoke and mirrors and of dogs and ponies .
But what they aint , as in neither side , showing us , IS THEY ALL DOING the same agenda BEHIIND THAT CURTAIN ,
behind that vail .
Hear ye the parable of the circus .
There once was a large festival and circus .
And upon it were men dressed in blue and in red . On stage they had the blue fighting the red
and the red fighting the blue . And when the red appeared to be winning those on that side
would cheer loudly , when the blue appeared to be winning those on their side would cheer loudly .
And yet when the song was sung from behind the curtain , both sides would sit still
and smile and say , NOW that is the way to attain peace .
There was a small c hild in the audience , who was not captivated by either side
and desired to know WHY when a certain song was played that both sides seem to be at ease
and even beleive to be THE SOLUTION . And yet on stage it had both sides pitted one against another .
So , the little boy , whose hope was in GOD and in HIS CHRIST and not in men
TOOK A PEEK at what was behind that curtain , that when its song played seemed to have BOTH sides
in agreement with it .
SO he snuck around the back and walked into the back room .
HE then saw a music box , it was all in rainbow and div erse colors and it was called ecumeincalism inclusive love
and the interfaith plan for peace . and to the left it was sung in a dark purple and to the right to a light purple ,
so as to make them believe it came FROM THEIR OWN side .
HE then quickly ran out to the crowd and began warning both sides
THEY ARE ALL DECIEVING YOU , we must return to CHRIST and abandon all hopes in men .
AND the blue would say , OUR SIDE is for GOD , and the RIGHT said OUR SIDE Is for GOD
and they would not heed the warning of that wee child

 

[WalterandDebbie]

(As I said on another thread, this to most of us is common sense and basic Biblical literacy, I let Grok take care of most of the work, unlike my favorite projects where Grok is my editor and I brainstorm and write most everything except the last editing fixes).


Acts 15 context and the core debate. The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 addressed whether Gentile converts needed circumcision "according to the custom of Moses" to be saved (v. 1), and more broadly, whether they must keep the full law of Moses (v. 5, from Pharisee believers). The decision: no circumcision or full Torah yoke for salvation or basic inclusion; instead, four key abstentions (idols/polluted things, sexual immorality, strangled things, blood—vv. 20, 29), with the letter calling these a "no greater burden" (v. 28) that would let them "do well." James adds in v. 21: "For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues."

This isn't a "full Torah later" curriculum for Gentiles as a default expectation. The council resolved a salvation-and-fellowship crisis by affirming grace-based inclusion (Peter's speech, vv. 7-11) while addressing practical Jewish-Gentile table fellowship and idolatry avoidance. Paul and Barnabas's ministry to Gentiles already showed the Spirit's work without full Torah observance upfront.

Rabbi K's claims: "In rebellion," "starting point," and "hearing Moses"​

Your description matches common Torah-observant / Hebrew Roots / Pronomian interpretations (e.g., "starter set" language from channels like Biblical Roots/Professor Solberg, though he critiques the full Torahist spin). Rabbi Kevin (or similar voices) frames non-full-Torah Christians as rebellious, treating the four rules as minimal entry then synagogue learning toward broader obedience. Here's a granular breakdown from every major angle.

1. "Starting point / starter set" claim (minimal requirements, then full Torah via growth). This views the four as a "beginner pack" to cut pagan sins, with ongoing synagogue attendance (v. 21) implying progressive Torah observance for Gentiles. Proponents say it aligns with God-fearers in synagogues who gradually adopted more, and that full law was always the ideal post-faith.

Counter-evidence and problems:

• Textual flow: The letter presents these as sufficient ("no greater burden," "you will do well if you keep yourselves from these"). No "for now" or "until you learn more" language. The council explicitly rejects the Pharisee demand to "command them to keep the law of Moses" (v. 5). Adding "and then more later" as normative re-imposes the yoke Peter called unbearable (v. 10).
• Historical/practical context: These four echo Leviticus 17-18 (universal rules for sojourners in Israel: idolatry, blood, strangled meat, sexual sin) to enable mixed fellowship without forcing full conversion/circumcision. They address real 1st-century issues (temple prostitution, pagan meat, etc.), not a Torah ladder. Gentiles weren't expected to become de facto proselytes.
• Paul's later practice: In Acts 21:25, the decree is reiterated for Gentiles without expansion. Paul's letters (Galatians strongly against law for justification; Romans 14 on food/Sabbath as non-essential; Colossians 2:16-17 on shadows) treat broader Torah commands (circumcision, festivals, dietary beyond basics) as non-binding for Gentiles in Christ. He circumcised Timothy for Jewish mission strategy (Acts 16), not as rule.
• Solberg critique angle (which you mentioned): Even if "starting point," it risks shifting focus from Christ to performance. Hebrew Roots can subtly turn obedience into the center, echoing the very legalism the council opposed. Growth in holiness is via the Spirit and Scripture, not mandated synagogue Torah curriculum for all Gentiles.

2. "Hearing Moses read" (v. 21) as proof of progressive full Torah. Common Torahist reading: Gentiles will attend synagogue weekly, hear full Moses, and naturally adopt Sabbath, feasts, kosher, etc., over time. It's "evidence" the apostles expected ongoing Torah learning.

Stronger scholarly and contextual readings:

• Sensitivity to Jews: "Moses is read every Sabbath" explains why these four (already in Torah, familiar to Jews) won't shock synagogue-goers. Gentiles should accommodate Jewish scruples for unity—practical wisdom, not a curriculum mandate. David Wilber and others note it as continuity with prophets (Amos 9 quoted earlier), but not full law imposition.
• Contrast, not addition: It contrasts the new Gentile inclusion with long-standing Jewish practice. Jews have Moses preached; Gentiles get minimal rules for fellowship. Scholarly consensus (e.g., Bock) leans toward sensitivity or Jewish concerns guidance, not "learn the rest as requirement." No evidence the apostles commanded Gentile Sabbath-keeping or full dietary later.
• Broader NT: Hebrews, Galatians, etc., portray the old covenant as preparatory/shadow, fulfilled in Christ. "Moses" points to Christ (John 5:46; Luke 24:27). Synagogue attendance happened (Acts), but wasn't a Torah bootcamp for Gentiles. Many dispersed churches didn't center on it.
• Rebellion angle weakness: Labeling non-full-Torah observance "rebellion against God" elevates one interpretation to salvific/test-of-obedience level. The council and Paul warned against the opposite: adding law as yoke burdens grace (Galatians 5:1-4). Disobeying clear apostolic decree (idols, immorality, etc.) would be rebellion; not adopting extra-Torah commands isn't, per the text.

3. "In rebellion" thesis. This is strong rhetoric. If the apostles set a floor (not ceiling) and Spirit-led growth varies, calling standard Christian practice "rebellion" over-reads. Empirical NT church: diverse observance, unity around Christ/essentials (1 Cor 8-10 on idols/meat; Rom 14). Early church fathers moved away from mandatory Torah elements. Rebellion language fits rejecting the decree itself or core morality, not this debate.

Other angles (granular):

• Salvation vs. sanctification: Council was about salvation/entry (not "you cannot be saved" without circumcision). Post-salvation growth is discipleship, not uniform Torah.
• One Law vs. two-house views: Some Torahists distinguish Jew/Gentile roles; others say one law for all. Acts 15 leans against uniform application.
• Prophetic fulfillment: James quotes Amos 9 (rebuilding David's tent so Gentiles seek the Lord)—inclusion, not conversion to Judaism.
• Modern application: Christians should study OT deeply (all Scripture profitable, 2 Tim 3:16), avoid idolatry/immorality, pursue holiness. Many do via church, personal study—not requiring synagogue. Disagreement here is secondary, not rebellion. Sarcasm in debate often arises when one side frames the other as disobedient to God.

Overall assessment: The "starting point + hearing Moses = full Torah" view is a creative but strained reading. It imports assumptions not explicit in the text or consistent with Paul's ministry. The council liberated Gentiles from the full yoke while preserving unity—grace + minimal essentials. Your relief at sarcasm makes sense; these debates get circular when positions harden into "thus saith the Lord" on inferences.

Hello, Pavel Mosko. How are you all? We are well. This OP caught my attention. In Jude 3 KJV, thank you for sharing. Love always, Walter and Debbie Jude 3 KJV at DuckDuckGo.

Love, Walter and Debbie

 

[amigo de christo]

Hello, Pavel Mosko. How are you all? We are well. This OP caught my attention. In Jude 3 KJV, thank you for sharing. Love always, Walter and Debbie Jude 3 KJV at DuckDuckGo.

Love, Walter and Debbie

Jude verse three .
Now lets see what the ecumenical interfaith dialogue says .
IT AINT THE ONE TRUE FAITH at all . IN FACT IT DENIES THE ONE TRUE FAITH .
WHY ya think i am warning against IT and reminding all that all other religoins are in darkness
And know NOT GOD and are not OF GOD .
THE ONE TRUE FAITH . WELL IT POINTS TO THE DIRE NEED TO BELIEVE ON JESUS .
It dont say HEY everyone , hey all religoins , the jews , buddists , hindu and muslim and etc
ALL worship the same GOD the christains DO .
OH we got a few saints who still CLING TOO and HAVE ALL HOPE IN that one FAITH
that was once delivered unto the saints . AND THEY DARN SURE AINT finding common ground
with false religoins for any reason . THEY exposing the works of a highly clever harlot
who has sold her inclusive love , her seeker friendly love , her judge not correct not love
Which led to much leaven and made ready their minds to the big lie of all .
THE WE ARE ONE WORLD FALSE FAITH of anti christ and its intefaith peace plan .
And many think ME the judger and monster . NOPE . I ACTUALLY DO contend for the one true faith
and give out ZERO FALSE HOPE to any . Can i please get some help .
THe call i make is ITS HIGH TIME for to contend for the one true faith , AND INTEFAITH AINT IT . NOT even .
Interfaith b e of anti ch rist and its peace plan . THE FAITH POINTS ONLY TO JESUS with the absolute
dire warning of YE NEEDS TO BELIEVE ON HIM .

 

[Nancy]

In Matthew 4:15-23, Christ 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. Christ also set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah and as his followers 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 his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Torah by word and by example and the topic that they were debating in Acts 15 was not whether followers of Christ are required to follow Christ but whether salvation is by grace (Acts 15:11) or by circumcision (Acts 15:1).

In Acts 15:6-7, Peter argued that Gentiles had heard and believed the Gospel, which calls for obedience to the Torah (Matthew 4:15-23), so he was taking the side of the Pharisees from among the believers (Acts 15:1) 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 siding 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 came down on the side of the Pharisees against the men from Judea.


The reason why God commanded circumcision was not in order to become saved as the result, so the Jerusalem Council upheld the Torah by correctly ruling against requiring circumcision for an incorrect reason. In Exodus 12:48, Gentiles who want to eat of the Passover lamb are required to become circumcised, 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 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 if the heavy yoke that no one could bear had referred to the Torah instead of salvation by circumcision, then the Jerusalem Council would have been denying the word of faith that we proclaim, they would have been in disagreement with God, and they would have been ruling that Gentiles should choose death and a curse instead of life and a blessing. In 1 John 5:3, to love God is to obey His commandments, which are not burdensome, so if the yoke had been referring to God's commandments, then they would have been ruling that Gentiles should not love God and been denying that His commandments are not burdensome. The Psalms also express an extremely positive view of obeying the Torah, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it, so if the yoke had been referring to the Torah, then they would have been expressing a view that is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture.


While it is possible for someone to interpret Acts 15:19-21 as ruling that Gentiles shouldn't follow over 99% of what Christ taught, I don't think that it makes much sense to do that. Either Acts 15:19-21 contains an exhaustive list for mature believers or it does not, so it would be contradictory to treat it as being an exhaustive list in order to limit which ways followers of Christ should follow Christ 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 rather it was given as a list intended to avoid making things too difficult for those coming to faith, which they excused in Acts 15:21 by saying that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey Moses by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues.


I don't see any reason for Acts 15:21 to make that point if they did not expect that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey Moses by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues.


Paul's problem in Galatians was not with those who were teaching Gentiles how to follow what Christ taught but with those who were wanting to require Gentiles to obey "works of the law" in order to become justified. In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, in Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted the Book fo 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 that "works of the law" are not of faith, so that phrase does not refer to the Law of God, which is why it is not of faith.


In Romana 14:1, the topic of the chapter is in regard to how to handle disputable matters of opinion, not in regard to whether followers of God should follow His commands, so nothing in the chapter should be interpreted in a way that turns it against following what God has commanded. For example, in Romans 14:2-3, they were judging and resenting each other based on whether or not someone chose to eat only vegetables even though God gave no command to do that. In Romans 14:4-6, Paul spoke about those who eat or refrain from eating unto the Lord, so he was speaking about those who esteems certain days for fasting as a disputable matter of opinion. For example, it had become a common practice to fast twice a week even though God did not command to do that and people were judging and resenting each other about whether or not they chose to fast or about which two days of the week they chose to fast (Luke 18:12). Paul was not saying that we are free to commit murder, adultery, theft, kidnapping, break the Sabbath, or eat unclean animals just as long as we are convinced in our own minds that it is ok to disobey what God has commanded, but rather that was only said in regard to disputable matters of opinion in which God has given no command.


In Colossians 2:16-23, the Colossians were celebrating God's feasts, they were being judged for doing that by pagans who were promoting human traditions and precepts, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them for obeying what God has commanded. Those promoting asceticism and severity to the body would be judging people for celebrating feasts, not for refraining from doing that. God's feasts are foreshadows of what I stop come and we should live in a way that testifies about the truth of what is to come by celebrating them rather than a way that bears false witness against what is to come, so Paul was emphasizing the importance of not allowing anyone to prevent us from obeying God, which makes it especially ironic that these verses are commonly used by people to try to justify their refusal to obey what God has commanded.

Hello @Soyeong

Hello @Soyeong

I think you are in danger of becoming a Noahide. The 7 Noahide Laws, which are only for Gentiles and will be enforced on the many who receives them by a court with Noahide judges. On the surface these 7 laws seem very Christian but are anything but. The first of these laws say's not to worship idols and only worship The Father. According to the "Jews", every Christian is already breaking the first law by worshipping Jesus. The punishment is BEHEADING.


Here is a post on Quora:

"The Noahide laws are very deceptive though at first glance they seem to align with Christian doctrine.

A Gentile isn't required to follow the Mosaic law but all Gentiles are required to follow Noahide law in Judaism.

Do not deny God is one that deals with idolatry. The other is to not blaspheme.

“Do not worship false gods. Acknowledge that there is only one G‑d who is Infinite and Supreme above all things. Do not replace that Supreme Being with finite idols, be it yourself, or other beings. This command includes such acts as prayer, study and meditation.” (alephne.org is the source for this quote).

This seems like a tenet of Christianity until you understand that Judaism regards the worship of Jesus Christ as idolatry, not recognizing Him as God. The maximum penalty for violating this law is death.

These, I suspect, will come into enforcement under the rule of the Antichrist who will have his power base in Jerusalem. There are actually laws even in the USA now that are pro-Noahide that will fit into this agenda later.

Biblical prophecy teaches us that during the Tribulation many will be beheaded for their witness to Christ.

There are many things about the Noahide laws that Christians would not like if they researched them thoroughly rather than taking them at face value. The Messiah that Judaism is still waiting on aligns very much with the Biblical Antichrist of prophecy.

The Noahide laws are themselves very antichrist and Christians have no business supporting being governed under them."

Remember, Satan presents himself as an angel of light and the modern "teachings" in the modern day "churches" are coming along very well for the enemy, and most of them will follow along because "it sounds good"...well again, a

 

[amigo de christo]

Hello @Soyeong

I think you are in danger of becoming a Noahide. The 7 Noahide Laws, which are only for Gentiles and will be enforced on the many who receives them by a court with Noahide judges. On the surface these 7 laws seem very Christian but are anything but. The first of these laws say's not to worship idols and only worship The Father. According to the "Jews", every Christian is already breaking the first law by worshipping Jesus. The punishment is BEHEADING.


Here is a post on Quora:

"The Noahide laws are very deceptive though at first glance they seem to align with Christian doctrine.

A Gentile isn't required to follow the Mosaic law but all Gentiles are required to follow Noahide law in Judaism.

Do not deny God is one that deals with idolatry. The other is to not blaspheme.

“Do not worship false gods. Acknowledge that there is only one G‑d who is Infinite and Supreme above all things. Do not replace that Supreme Being with finite idols, be it yourself, or other beings. This command includes such acts as prayer, study and meditation.” (alephne.org is the source for this quote).

This seems like a tenet of Christianity until you understand that Judaism regards the worship of Jesus Christ as idolatry, not recognizing Him as God. The maximum penalty for violating this law is death.

These, I suspect, will come into enforcement under the rule of the Antichrist who will have his power base in Jerusalem. There are actually laws even in the USA now that are pro-Noahide that will fit into this agenda later.

Biblical prophecy teaches us that during the Tribulation many will be beheaded for their witness to Christ.

There are many things about the Noahide laws that Christians would not like if they researched them thoroughly rather than taking them at face value. The Messiah that Judaism is still waiting on aligns very much with the Biblical Antichrist of prophecy.

The Noahide laws are themselves very antichrist and Christians have no business supporting being governed under them."

Remember, Satan presents himself as an angel of light and the modern "teachings" in the modern day "churches" are coming along very well for the enemy, and most of them will follow along because "it sounds good"...well again, a

Look again at the title . NOAHIDE laws . That alone proves something .
IT PROVES IT WITHOUT a doubt . THEY POINTING to something , OTHER THAN JESUS CHRIST .
AND that , my near and dear lil lady IS A FACT .
As for me , OH ITS JESUS I SHALL POINT TOO and unto HE ALONE shall I POINT .

 

[amigo de christo]

Hello @Soyeong

I think you are in danger of becoming a Noahide. The 7 Noahide Laws, which are only for Gentiles and will be enforced on the many who receives them by a court with Noahide judges. On the surface these 7 laws seem very Christian but are anything but. The first of these laws say's not to worship idols and only worship The Father. According to the "Jews", every Christian is already breaking the first law by worshipping Jesus. The punishment is BEHEADING.


Here is a post on Quora:

"The Noahide laws are very deceptive though at first glance they seem to align with Christian doctrine.

A Gentile isn't required to follow the Mosaic law but all Gentiles are required to follow Noahide law in Judaism.

Do not deny God is one that deals with idolatry. The other is to not blaspheme.

“Do not worship false gods. Acknowledge that there is only one G‑d who is Infinite and Supreme above all things. Do not replace that Supreme Being with finite idols, be it yourself, or other beings. This command includes such acts as prayer, study and meditation.” (alephne.org is the source for this quote).

This seems like a tenet of Christianity until you understand that Judaism regards the worship of Jesus Christ as idolatry, not recognizing Him as God. The maximum penalty for violating this law is death.

These, I suspect, will come into enforcement under the rule of the Antichrist who will have his power base in Jerusalem. There are actually laws even in the USA now that are pro-Noahide that will fit into this agenda later.

Biblical prophecy teaches us that during the Tribulation many will be beheaded for their witness to Christ.

There are many things about the Noahide laws that Christians would not like if they researched them thoroughly rather than taking them at face value. The Messiah that Judaism is still waiting on aligns very much with the Biblical Antichrist of prophecy.

The Noahide laws are themselves very antichrist and Christians have no business supporting being governed under them."

Remember, Satan presents himself as an angel of light and the modern "teachings" in the modern day "churches" are coming along very well for the enemy, and most of them will follow along because "it sounds good"...well again, a

The law was only to be used for correction , NEVER to attain righteousness apart from FAITH IN
THIS JESUS CHRIST unto WHOM EVEN THE LAW AND PROPHETS POINTED TO and SPOKE OF my dear sister .
Many teach many thin gs in this late and last hour
BUT you wanna know what i notice about it all . A form of godliness that DENIES THE POWER of GOD .
THE GOSPEL which IS THE POWER OF GOD unto salvation .
Having a form of godliness but DENYING THE POWER THEREOF . that my near and dear lil lady
IS WHAT MANY NOW DO , and under the guise of an well cloaked harlot follow an inclusive love
of an ecumenical harlot who simply leads them all to an , to THE intefaith of anti christ .
AND IT WILL BE CENTERED smack dab in JERSUALEM . SO no marvel they now also
try and merge us to become as the jew . AND NOT RATHER as THE JEW.
FOR HE is not a jew who is one which is outwardly and circumsion is merely of the flesh .
OH NO LIL LADY and all , HE is a jew which circumsion IS OF THE HEART . THAT ONE BELEIVES ON JESUS
it dont DENY JESUS . WE gots problems upon problems , so many problems a math book could not contain all such problems ,
IN THE HOUSE of christendom . JESUS is and has been DENIED , HIS GOSPEL DENIED
and a lovey do works salvation has replaced it . A LIE OF COURSE and it will surely damn them all .

 

[Soyeong]

@Soyeong,
I appreciate that you are emphasizing obedience and that God's character does not change. I agree that faith in Christ is not a license for lawlessness. The question, however, is not whether believers should obey God, but whether New Covenant believers are placed under the Mosaic covenant.

I have not suggested that Gentiles should come under the Mosaic Covenant, but rather I have been speaking about the way to live under the New Covenant, which is also the way that we should live regardless of which covenant we are under. 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 eternal 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), so anyone who has the goal of knowing God through embodying His righteousness will consider all the instructions that God has given for how to do that to be cumulatively valid. Being a doer of charity was a to embody God's righteousness before God made any covenants with man, so that that is an eternally valid way to know God regardless of which covenant they are under, if any. In any case, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33), so someone who doesn't want to obey the Torah also doesn't want to come under the New Covenant.

New covenants don't nullify the promises of covenants that have already been ratified, so God's covenants are eternal and cumulatively valid. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 33:16, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be made obsolete by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative with it. One thing can only make another thing obsolete to the extent that it has cumulative functionality, so a computer makes a typewriter obsolete but does not make a plow obsolete, which means that if the the New Covenant involved following something different that was not cumulative with the Mosaic Covenant, then it could not make it obsolete. So the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is cumulatively based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6). In other words, the New Covenant is still made with the same God with the same character traits and therefore the same cumulatively valid instructions for how to know Him through embodying His character traits.

The New Testament shows that Christ fulfilled the Law, not by making God's character irrelevant, but by bringing us into the reality that the Law pointed toward. Romans 7:6 contrasts the old way of the written code with the new way of the Spirit, and Romans 6:14 says believers are not under law but under grace.

"To fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known by the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so Jesus fulfilled the law throughout the rest of Matthew 5 by correcting what the people had heard being said and by teaching how to correctly obey it as it was originally intended. According to Galatians 5:14, anyone who has loved their neighbor has fulfilled the entire law, so it refers to something that countless people have done and should continue to do in perpetuity, not to something unique that only Christ did.

If the written code referred to correctly obeying what God has command and that leads to death, then that would mean that God would be misleading us and should not be trusted. Rather, there are many verses that repeatedly states that the New Covenant involves following the Law of God, that the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it, and that obedience to it brings life, so there is something deficient about following the written code that is not correctly obeying what God has commanded. For example, 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 chose life! In Romans 8:2-7, Paul said that the Law of the Spirit has freed us from the law of sin and death and he 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, there are not good grounds for interpreting Romans 7:6 as saying that we need to walk in the Spirit instead of submitting to the Law of God. 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 His law.

Paul spoke about multiple categories of law other than the Law of God, such as the law of sin and works of the law, so it always important to correctly discern which law he is referring to. I made the case for why Romans 6:14 should be interpreted as referring to the law of sin rather than the Law of God. 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 His law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this is what it means to be under grace, this is why those who are under grace are not permitted to do what the Law of God reveals to be sin (Romans 6:15), and this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith.

The Spirit does not lead us into sin; He produces the very character of God in us. But the apostles did not place Gentile believers under the Law of Moses as a covenant obligation. Acts 15 specifically addresses this question and does not require Gentile believers to come under Moses.

The purpose of the Torah is to teach us how to know God through embodying His character traits, which is why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it. It is contradictory for the character of God to be produced in us instead of us following God's instructions for how to embody His character traits. I addressed everything that Peter argued in Acts 15:6-11 and showed that it was in support of Gentiles of obeying the Torah, so it is incorrect they did not require Gentile to come under it. In Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed to determine that someone is a false prophet is if they speak against obeying the Torah, so even if it were correct that the Jerusalem Council had ruled agains obeying the Law of Moses, then followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Torah rather than the Jerusalem Council.

The Law was a tutor that pointed us to Christ. Galatians 3:24, but now that faith has come, we are sons of God through Christ. Galatians 3:25-26.

Following Jesus means walking as He walked, in love, obedience, holiness, and submission to the Father, but it does not mean returning to the Mosaic covenant that He fulfilled.

Someone who disregarded everything that their tutor taught them after they left would be missing the whole point of a tutor. The God's Word was given in order to teach us how to point to God's Word made flesh and we should live in a way that points towards him by following his example of embodying it rather than a way that points away from him. God's Word leads us to God's Word made flesh 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 it was not given to lead us to him so that we can then reject all that he is and go back to being doers of what it reveals to be wickedness.

A child of someone is a person who is in their likeness through embodying their character traits, such as with John 8:39, where Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doers of the same works as him. 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 Sprit/how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so that is what it means for Jesus to be the Son of God and while it means for us to be children of God when we are partaking in the divine nature through following his example. It is contradictory to walk in the same way that Christ walked instead of following his example of walking in obedience to the Law of Moses. In Galatians 3:26-29, every aspect of being children of God, through faith, in Christ, and children of Abraham and heirs to the promise is directly connected with walking in obedience to the Law of God.

 

[Soyeong]

Hello @Soyeong

I think you are in danger of becoming a Noahide. The 7 Noahide Laws, which are only for Gentiles and will be enforced on the many who receives them by a court with Noahide judges. On the surface these 7 laws seem very Christian but are anything but. The first of these laws say's not to worship idols and only worship The Father. According to the "Jews", every Christian is already breaking the first law by worshipping Jesus. The punishment is BEHEADING.


Here is a post on Quora:

"The Noahide laws are very deceptive though at first glance they seem to align with Christian doctrine.

A Gentile isn't required to follow the Mosaic law but all Gentiles are required to follow Noahide law in Judaism.

Do not deny God is one that deals with idolatry. The other is to not blaspheme.

“Do not worship false gods. Acknowledge that there is only one G‑d who is Infinite and Supreme above all things. Do not replace that Supreme Being with finite idols, be it yourself, or other beings. This command includes such acts as prayer, study and meditation.” (alephne.org is the source for this quote).

This seems like a tenet of Christianity until you understand that Judaism regards the worship of Jesus Christ as idolatry, not recognizing Him as God. The maximum penalty for violating this law is death.

These, I suspect, will come into enforcement under the rule of the Antichrist who will have his power base in Jerusalem. There are actually laws even in the USA now that are pro-Noahide that will fit into this agenda later.

Biblical prophecy teaches us that during the Tribulation many will be beheaded for their witness to Christ.

There are many things about the Noahide laws that Christians would not like if they researched them thoroughly rather than taking them at face value. The Messiah that Judaism is still waiting on aligns very much with the Biblical Antichrist of prophecy.

The Noahide laws are themselves very antichrist and Christians have no business supporting being governed under them."

Remember, Satan presents himself as an angel of light and the modern "teachings" in the modern day "churches" are coming along very well for the enemy, and most of them will follow along because "it sounds good"...well again, a

Hello, I was speaking in regard to the Torah, not just the Noahide laws. Whether or not Jesus can be worshiped in a way that is idolatrous and/or non-idolatrous is an important issue, but the flaw is not with God's command against committing idolatry. Jews parade a Torah scroll around the room during a Torah service and bow, touch it, or kiss it as it passes by them, and while some might consider that to be idolatry, they would be incorrect for the same reason that it is not idolatry to worship Jesus. A Torah scroll is essentially chicken scratch on a dead goat attached to two poles, but it is more than that, it is God's Word, and what what Jews are worshipping is not the physical object, but rather Jews are worshipping God's Word. Jesus has a human body, but he is more than that, he set a perfect example for us to follow of how to embody God's Word by living in sinless obedience to the Torah, so he is God's Word made flesh, and what Christians are worshipping is not his physical body but rather Christians are worshipping God Word. The purpose of God's Word is to teach us how to know, love, worship, believe in, and testify about Him through embodying His character traits. The problem with idolatry is that it misrepresents the character of God. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact likeness of His character (Hebrews 1:3), so if he were anything less than that, then worshipping him would have been idolatry, but because he is all of that, then the way to worship him is exactly the same as the way to worship the Father, so our good works in obedience to the Torah worship both the Father and the Son and it makes no difference to specify that our good works worship one or the other.

 

[Soyeong]

Have you read the CURSE in Duet 28?
Galatians 3:10
10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse;

According to Deuteronomy 27-30, the way to be blessed is by relying on the Book of the Law while the way to be cursed is by not relying it, which is why everyone who relies on works of the law instead of the Book of the Law comes under that curse.

 

[amigo de christo]

I was speaking in regard to the Torah, not just the Noahide laws. Whether or not Jesus can be worshiped in a way that is idolatrous and/or non-idolatrous is an important issue, but the flaw is not with God's command against committing idolatry. Jews parade a Torah scroll around the room during a Torah service and bow, touch it, or kiss it as it passes by them, and while some might consider that to be idolatry, they would be incorrect for the same reason that it is not idolatry to worship Jesus. A Torah scroll is essentially chicken scratch on a dead goat attached to two poles, but it is more than that, it is God's Word, and what what Jews are worshipping is not the physical object, but rather Jews are worshipping God's Word. Jesus has a human body, but he is more than that, he set a perfect example for us to follow of how to embody God's Word by living in sinless obedience to the Torah, so he is God's Word made flesh, and what Christians are worshipping is not his physical body but rather Christians are worshipping God Word. The purpose of God's Word is to teach us how to know, love, worship, believe in, and testify about Him through embodying His character traits. The problem with idolatry is that it misrepresents the character of God. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact likeness of His character (Hebrews 1:3), so if he were anything less than that, then worshipping him would have been idolatry, but because he is all of that, then the way to worship him is exactly the same as the way to worship the Father, so our good works in obedience to the Torah worship both the Father and the Son and it makes no difference to specify that our good works worship one or the other.

The jews are NOT worshipping Gods word . IF they believe not HIS WORD. which BE JESUS THE CHRIST .
Just a friendly reminder that it is about HIGH TIME to point TO JESUS and not something else .

 

[rockytopva]

Mod Hat On... The rules include...

[*]Do not attack another member's character in any way. Address the post content, not the member's character, family, denominational affiliation or any other subject that may be perceived as a personal attack by the Christianity Board team and is not germane to the topic or post at hand.
[*]Do not state or imply that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christians. If there is an issue where a member seems to have circumvented the basic tenants of the faith in order to join the community, please privately contact the Christianity Board Team to voice your concern.

We are not going to state or imply that the keeping of the Old Testament rules and regulations are requirements for salvation.

Mod Hat Off...

 

[Soyeong]

The jews are NOT worshipping Gods word . IF they believe not HIS WORD. which BE JESUS THE CHRIST .
Just a friendly reminder that it is about HIGH TIME to point TO JESUS and not something else .

Someone can reject a misrepresentation of Jesus without rejecting the actual Jesus. For example, Jews have been persecuted in the name of Jesus over the course of the past two thousand years, so there is nothing wrong with Jews rejecting that Jesus. In Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed to determine that someone is a false prophet is if speak against obeying the Torah even if they perform signs and wonders, so if Jesus had done that, as many Christians teach that he did, then Jews who consider him to be a false prophet for that reason would be correctly obeying what God has instructed them to do out of love for Him, so again there is nothing wrong with rejecting that Jesus. 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 example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, and many Jews fully support embodying God's character traits in obedience to the Torah, so they have not rejected the actual Jesus. It is contradictory to point to God's Word made flesh instead of pointing to his example of embodying God's Word.

 

[Angelina]

I have not suggested that Gentiles should come under the Mosaic Covenant, but rather I have been speaking about the way to live under the New Covenant, which is also the way that we should live regardless of which covenant we are under. 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 eternal 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), so anyone who has the goal of knowing God through embodying His righteousness will consider all the instructions that God has given for how to do that to be cumulatively valid. Being a doer of charity was a to embody God's righteousness before God made any covenants with man, so that that is an eternally valid way to know God regardless of which covenant they are under, if any. In any case, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33), so someone who doesn't want to obey the Torah also doesn't want to come under the New Covenant.

New covenants don't nullify the promises of covenants that have already been ratified, so God's covenants are eternal and cumulatively valid. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 33:16, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be made obsolete by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative with it. One thing can only make another thing obsolete to the extent that it has cumulative functionality, so a computer makes a typewriter obsolete but does not make a plow obsolete, which means that if the the New Covenant involved following something different that was not cumulative with the Mosaic Covenant, then it could not make it obsolete. So the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is cumulatively based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6). In other words, the New Covenant is still made with the same God with the same character traits and therefore the same cumulatively valid instructions for how to know Him through embodying His character traits.....

Hi @Soyeong,
I appreciate your desire to uphold God’s righteousness and to reject any idea that grace permits sin. We are agreed that believers are called to holiness, that the Spirit produces obedience, and that God’s character does not change. Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8.

The point I am making is not that God’s moral character has changed, but that the New Testament distinguishes between God’s eternal righteousness and the Mosaic covenant as the governing covenant for His people.

First, Jeremiah 31:31–34 does say that God will write His law on the hearts of his people. However, the passage also says, “I will make a new covenant, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers when I took them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt." Jeremiah 31:32. Hebrews quotes this passage and concludes: “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete." Hebrews 8:13. The contrast is not merely between external and internal obedience; it is between the covenant made at the Exodus and the new covenant established through Christ’s blood. Luke 22:20.

You argued that because God’s righteousness is eternal, all the righteous laws given through Moses must remain binding in the same way. Yet Scripture itself shows otherwise. Circumcision was commanded as an everlasting covenant. Genesis 17:13, and the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices were also described with enduring language. Exodus 29:9; Leviticus 16:34. Nevertheless, Hebrews teaches that the priesthood has changed, and “when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well." Hebrews 7:12. The sacrifices have ceased because Christ fulfilled what they pointed to Hebrews 10:1–14. Therefore, the word “everlasting” cannot mean that every covenantal regulation remains binding unchanged under the New Covenant.

Regarding Matthew 5:17, I agree that plēroō includes the idea of bringing God’s will to its intended expression. But Jesus does more than teach correct Torah observance. He fulfills the Law and the Prophets in his person and work. Matthew repeatedly uses “fulfilled” for events accomplished in Christ. Matthew 1:22; 2:15; 2:17; etc. Paul can therefore say, “Christ is the end [goal/culmination] of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes." Romans 10:4. Love fulfills the law. Romans 13:8–10; Galatians 5:14 because love is the righteousness the law was aiming at, and not because believers remain under the Mosaic covenant as a covenantal system.

In Romans 7:6 and 6:14, the text itself says, “We are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive… not under law but under grace.” Paul is speaking about the believer’s relationship to the Mosaic law as a covenant. He is not saying the law was sinful. Romans 7:12, nor that Christians are free to sin. Romans 6:15. Rather, believers have died with Christ and now serve in the new way of the Spirit.
Romans 8 then explains that the righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled in us as we walk according to the Spirit, Romans 8:4. The Spirit produces the righteousness the law required, but Paul does not say that believers are placed back under the Mosaic covenant in order to achieve it.

Acts 15 is especially important because the apostles were addressing the specific question of whether Gentile believers must be brought under Moses. Peter says that God made no distinction between Jew and Gentile and warns against “placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear." Acts 15:10. The council’s conclusion is that Gentiles should not be troubled with the requirement of coming under that covenant, apart from a few necessary instructions related to fellowship and separation from idolatry, Acts 15:19–20. If the apostles believed all Gentile believers were obligated to keep the Torah, that was the moment to say so plainly, yet they did not.

You also appealed to Deuteronomy 13. But the apostles were not leading Israel to other gods or away from obedience to God. They were proclaiming that Jesus is the promised Messiah and that righteousness comes through faith in him. Paul himself could say, “Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." Romans 3:31. He upheld the law by proclaiming the One to whom the law pointed.

Finally, Galatians 3 says the law was our guardian until Christ came, “but now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian," Galatians 3:24–25. A tutor is not rejected as useless; rather, its temporary role has reached its goal.

The believer does not throw away the Old Testament. We continue to learn from it, because “all Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable." 2 Timothy 3:16. But we read it through the lens of Christ and the New Covenant.

We follow Jesus by walking in the Spirit, loving God and neighbor, pursuing holiness, and obeying the teachings of Christ and His apostles. That is not lawlessness; it is the obedience of faith Romans 1:5, produced by the Spirit and grounded in union with Christ, not a return to the Mosaic covenant that has been fulfilled and rendered obsolete in Him.