@Soyeong,
Thank you for taking the time to respond so thoroughly. I appreciate your desire to uphold God's holiness, righteousness, and goodness. We agree that God's character never changes and that the Holy Spirit leads believers into holiness rather than lawlessness.
However, I think our discussion has moved away from the original question of this thread.
The title is
"Christians are in Rebellion against God for Not Following the Torah." That is a very specific claim. To establish that claim from Scripture, it is not enough to show that the Torah reflects God's character or that God's moral character is eternal. I agree with both of those statements.
The question is whether the New Testament teaches that New Covenant believers are
in rebellion against God if they are not living under the Torah as the governing rule of the New Covenant.
That is where I believe the New Testament answers differently.
You have repeatedly equated God's eternal character with the Mosaic Torah itself. I believe Scripture distinguishes between the two.
God's righteousness is eternal because God is eternal. The Mosaic Law is a holy revelation given by God, but it was also given within a specific covenant made with Israel through Moses.
Hebrews says, "
By calling this covenant 'new,' He has made the first one obsolete." Hebrews 8:13
The writer is not saying God's holiness became obsolete. He is speaking about the covenant.
Likewise,
Hebrews 7:12 says that with a change of the priesthood there is necessarily a change of the law. The argument throughout Hebrews is covenantal, not merely administrative. The Levitical priesthood, sacrifices, and temple ministry were all ordained by God, yet Scripture itself says they have been fulfilled in Christ.
That does not diminish God's character. It magnifies Christ's work.
Regarding
Jeremiah 31:33, I agree that the Hebrew word is
Torah. But Hebrews does not conclude that every covenant obligation given through Moses continues unchanged. Instead, Hebrews spends several chapters explaining why the New Covenant is superior because Christ has fulfilled what the Old Covenant anticipated.
If Hebrews intended to teach that the Mosaic covenant simply continues unchanged internally, much of the book's argument would lose its force.
You also continue to interpret
Romans 7 as though every occurrence of
"law" must refer either to the Law of Moses or the law of sin. I agree that Paul uses
"law" in different ways, and context determines which he means.
However,
Romans 7:6 plainly says:
"But now we have been released from the law... so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code."
Paul immediately follows this by affirming:
"So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good." Romans 7:12
Those two statements are not contradictory. Paul can affirm the goodness of the Law while also teaching that believers are no longer under it as a covenant administration because they have died with Christ.
Likewise, in
1 Corinthians 9:20-21 Paul distinguishes between being
"under the law" and being
"under the law of Christ." If those expressions are identical, Paul's contrast becomes difficult to explain.
Regarding
Acts 15, I understand your view that the issue was circumcision for salvation. But the broader question before the council was,
"What covenant obligations should be placed upon believing Gentiles?"
If the apostles believed that all Gentile believers were expected to keep the whole Torah under the New Covenant,
Acts 15 was the ideal place to say so. Instead, they did not place the yoke of the Mosaic Law upon them.
Most importantly, I believe the New Testament consistently directs our attention to Christ Himself. Jesus said:
"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about Me, yet you refuse to come to Me that you may have life." John 5:39-40
The purpose of the law was never to become the final destination.
Its purpose was to bear witness to Christ.
Paul, who was once blameless according to the righteousness found in the Law
Philippians 3:6, later counted all of that as loss compared with knowing Christ
Philippians 3:7-9. His confidence was no longer in covenant identity or Torah observance, but in the righteousness that comes through faith in Christ.
That brings me back to the original proposition of this thread.
Can we honestly say that Christians who have trusted in Christ, received the Holy Spirit, love God, love their neighbor, and walk in holiness are
in rebellion against God because they do not observe the Torah as you understand it?
I do not believe the apostles ever made that accusation.
Rather, they consistently taught that salvation is through Christ alone, that believers walk by the Spirit, and that the righteous life produced by the Spirit fulfills the very purpose toward which the Law pointed.
Christ is not leading us away from God's righteousness. He is the fulfilment of it.
