Why Do We Not Follow Ot Law?

[brionne]

Yes! Christ paid the penalty. Yes! We are free from the penalty of the Law. But where are we told we are free from no longer trying?
Any insight, once more, Biblically?

I wouldnt say we are free from 'trying' because the mosaic law shows us Gods standards. They are beneficial for us in that we can determine how God views certain matters. But you have to realise that the mosaic law was only applicable to the Jews because they agreed to be joined to God under a very specific covenant which included 'applying' those laws. Exodus 19:5-6 Exodus 19:7-8

Christians were never invited to be under that covenant. They were invited to be joined together under the 'new covenant' which Jesus instituted with his Apostles Luke 22:29. This new covenant was prophesied by the prophet Jeremiah 31:31-34

By instituting a new covenant as a means to be joined to God, it shows us that the mosaic covenant had been replaced.
the new covenant did not require sacrifices because Jesus gave a sacrifice for sin which was far more valuable then any animal sacrifice was. the death penalty of the mosaic law was also not binding on christians which made forgiveness of sins possible without sacrifice. We can simply ask God to forgive our sins and he does whereas if you are under the mosaic law you would be required to give a blood sacrifice...if you did something really bad, you would have to give your own life.

Check out Pauls explanation at Hebrews chapters 8&9

Hebrews 8:6 But now [Jesus] has obtained a more excellent public service, so that he is also the mediator of a correspondingly better covenant, which has been legally established upon better promises.


Also just think about this.. Abraham did not live by the Mosaic laws, nor did the men of faith of old such as Noah or Able or Enoch....yet all were considered righteous by God. You see, following a bunch of laws does not make one righteous...its our attitude toward God which makes us acceptable to him. That is why faith in Jesus is what puts us in line for salvation...our attitude toward Gods provisions and promises is how he judges us by - not by how many laws we perfectly abide by (which we cannot do anyway, so God is really making things easier for us)

 

[TexUs]

I never said that they seen the Father I said they seen Jesus. Read what I posted earlier in the thread. http://www.christian...dpost__p__92473
Who or where did I say Satin was a man?

I thought Satan might be inferred as since he couldn't have seen the father, surely it was the son, and since Satan is not a man, John was not talking of him.

And I do realize you said they've seen Jesus. But your logic at arriving that is flawed, is what I'm saying.
You're basing "they've seen Jesus" on "No man has seen the father". And as you point out this cannot be true as men HAVE seen the father so it cannot be taken at literal face value here, so IMO picking and choosing at your own whim whom God the Father was and whom God the Son was in the OT is folly when attempting to do so on this basis.

I don't know how your getting this concept from what I posted. First I never said that Satan was thrown out of the world. I said he was thrown out of heaven please reread my post.

John 12:31 supports Satan being driven out from the world, not heaven.

Now I don't understand your question at all.
[sup]rev 1:19[/sup] Write[sup][i][/sup] the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after this.

It's ordered.
He wrote what he has seen (vision of Christ), he wrote what is (the letters to the churches) and the rest of Revelation would be that which will be future.

Now, if you take Revelation 12 to be past, you must also take all of the verses before it as past as well. Where in history are the two witnesses? The seven trumpet judgements have happened? When? The seal judgements? When?

If its a future text your still waiting for salvation then. [sup]10[/sup] Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, “Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down.

Your still waiting for salvation, strength, and the kingdom of our God then?

When does it say they came right then? The Greek word used here is similar to our English understanding, it can refer to something present OR past.

If Satan was not removed from before the throne then who is Jesus speaking about here.

It's still Satan.
He got shamed (not banished) out of heaven sometime after the fall. That's his present state. Jesus was a witness to this. Revelation 12 speaks if his banishment out of heaven for good, to earth, future. Revelation 13 goes on to some of his activities on earth. Then through Revelation we see more events including the bowls of wrath. Then we see him used by Babylon. We see Babylon fall. We then see in Revelation 20 where he's finally cast into the lake of burning sulfur forever.

Christians were never invited to be under that covenant.

No? What do you think Abraham was? He was just looking at the cross from the other side. Faith that it was to come, we look at it as faith that was done.

I do understand your point though, good points. I think you've been the first to answer my question, I can't think of any follow up question to ask.

 

[brionne]

No? What do you think Abraham was? He was just looking at the cross from the other side. Faith that it was to come, we look at it as faith that was done.

I do understand your point though, good points. I think you've been the first to answer my question, I can't think of any follow up question to ask.

Maybe you are wondering who is included in the new covenant and why a new covenant was needed? You might also wonder how one becomes a member of the new covenant and what happens to people who are not included in the new covenant?

 

[marksman]

I really didn't follow you. What are your 612 ordinances, where are they? And then what are your commandments, just the ten? What about the context- are these included with the ten?

The 612 ordinances cover things like dietary law, clothing, worship, sacrifices and those things that deal with day to day living.

Just the 10. What context are you talking about?

 

[TexUs]

Maybe you are wondering who is included in the new covenant and why a new covenant was needed? You might also wonder how one becomes a member of the new covenant and what happens to people who are not included in the new covenant?

I was just taking issue with your "Christians were never invited" thing... Christians WERE in that covenant, they were just looking at the cross from the other side. Their faith was in a coming messiah's work, ours is in the work that was done.

The 612 ordinances cover things like dietary law, clothing, worship, sacrifices and those things that deal with day to day living.

Just the 10. What context are you talking about?

OK, but what are the 612? Where? Are these just randomly selected or do they comprise books?

What immediately follows the 10, there is no break between the 10 and the laws that follow, which include building altars, buying servants, attacking their father or mother and being put to death, etc. There's no break in the law that God is commanding so why do you strip out the 10 but leave the rest?

 

[marksman]

OK, but what are the 612? Where? Are these just randomly selected or do they comprise books?

What immediately follows the 10, there is no break between the 10 and the laws that follow, which include building altars, buying servants, attacking their father or mother and being put to death, etc. There's no break in the law that God is commanding so why do you strip out the 10 but leave the rest?

Point 1. I have already told you. Point 2. They are recorded in the Torah. Point 3. I don't strip out the 10 because what followed were ordinances not commandments. If you cannot understand that, I cannot be of any further help to you

 

[bud02]

Point 1. I have already told you. Point 2. They are corded in the Torah. Point 3. I don't strip out the 10 because what followed were ordinances not commandments. If you cannot understand that, I cannot be of any further help to you

That the smart thing to do. Don't let it wear you down. I think theirs a verse like that in Rev. Know when to walk away Jesus did many times and refused to answer others.

 

[JarBreaker]

What immediately follows the 10, there is no break between the 10 and the laws that follow, which include building altars, buying servants, attacking their father or mother and being put to death, etc. There's no break in the law that God is commanding so why do you strip out the 10 but leave the rest?

The reason the enemy has fought so hard to "strip the 10 from the rest" is that a spiritual principle can be passed down in words, or in the lives of the patriarchs and prophets. When we do not grow up thinking the whole of scripture applies to us, which is wrong in itself as it says to think on it when you lie down and think on it when you rise up and to DILIGENTLY TEACH YOUR CHILDREN --- then we find ourselves 4,000 years later and we do not understand when we say Yahshua was the Word made flesh that the ONLY WORD they had back then were TORAH SCROLLS, He was not standing up teaching at the temple from some watered down new testament only sound bytes that never even mention sin ....

Because of this, the enemy knows scripture better than we do.

Because of this, we think ruling ourselves by the thoughts of our own minds is sufficient.

Because of this, our children rebel from jump street and we as parents cannot effectively discipline a child who we did not bring up in the ways of knowing scripture.

Because of this, those children grow up and do their own thing and choose for themselves a mate who likely will be happy to produce for them offspring who then in turn, will not be brought up knowing scripture.



Is there anyone here who thinks mankind has 4,000 more years to reverse this process ?

 

[bud02]

The reason the enemy has fought so hard to "strip the 10 from the rest" is that a spiritual principle can be passed down in words, or in the lives of the patriarchs and prophets. When we do not grow up thinking the whole of scripture applies to us, which is wrong in itself as it says to think on it when you lie down and think on it when you rise up and to DILIGENTLY TEACH YOUR CHILDREN --- then we find ourselves 4,000 years later and we do not understand when we say Yahshua was the Word made flesh that the ONLY WORD they had back then were TORAH SCROLLS, He was not standing up teaching at the temple from some watered down new testament only sound bytes that never even mention sin ....

Because of this, the enemy knows scripture better than we do.

Because of this, we think ruling ourselves by the thoughts of our own minds is sufficient.

Because of this, our children rebel from jump street and we as parents cannot effectively discipline a child who we did not bring up in the ways of knowing scripture.

Because of this, those children grow up and do their own thing and choose for themselves a mate who likely will be happy to produce for them offspring who then in turn, will not be brought up knowing scripture.



Is there anyone here who thinks mankind has 4,000 more years to reverse this process ?

I like that very much but the only road map I have ever had was the bible. I'll share with you my first taste of the Holy Spirit, I'm telling you this with reservation, it is not the same for everyone. But I'll play the fool for a moment.

I was watching TV maybe 61 or 62 I was 3 or 4 before I was in kindergarten. I had a doll that was a clown that look just like Red Skelton “Freddie the Freeloader” he had caught my eye, I really didn't understand the skit but I liked it his funny voice and acting silly, but then the show ended and he was talking like anyone else I liked him even more, then the camera zoomed in and he said "And May God richly bless you" It took my breath away, I was so surprised and shocked that I shouted out to my mom and dad did you see that. I've been on the trail ever since. I tasted I knew that scent I knew that shepherds voice where ever I went. You have to learn to be a good tracker. Looking at every sign a broken branch, a scuff in the dirt a turned stone. But the bible, is the most valuable thing you'll ever own on this earth. God Bless you I'm done playing the fool, the Lord does not light a lamp to place it under a basket, so let your light shine before men.

Tell them they need to wake up again JarBreaker. I hoping someone hears me as well.

 

[brionne]

I was just taking issue with your "Christians were never invited" thing... Christians WERE in that covenant, they were just looking at the cross from the other side. Their faith was in a coming messiah's work, ours is in the work that was done.

Ah I see. Ok well you better start applying the mosaic law then. That includes offering a blood sacrifice every time you commit a sin and stoning your family members who turn to other religions, and stoning those around you who commit immorality and celebrating the Jewish festivals as set out in the OT and taking a pilgrimage to Jerusalem to the tem..... oh thats right... there is that little issue of Jerusalem not having a priesthood any longer and no temple to worship at. So you cant really apply the mosaic law if you have no priest to offer a sacrifice for you

Does it make sense to you why God removed the Mosaic law and Christ instituted a new covenant which did not require a priesthood and a temple and sacrifices and stonings?

If you cant see why it was necessary for God to remove the mosaic law, then perhaps you need to ask for Gods help to understand.

 

[TexUs]

Point 1. I have already told you. Point 2. They are corded in the Torah. Point 3. I don't strip out the 10 because what followed were ordinances not commandments. If you cannot understand that, I cannot be of any further help to you

OK, I'll drop my previous question however you've now brought up a new one.
"Ordinances not commandments"- by whose definition? How do you support this?

The reason the enemy has fought so hard to "strip the 10 from the rest" is that a spiritual principle can be passed down in words, or in the lives of the patriarchs and prophets. When we do not grow up thinking the whole of scripture applies to us, which is wrong in itself as it says to think on it when you lie down and think on it when you rise up and to DILIGENTLY TEACH YOUR CHILDREN --- then we find ourselves 4,000 years later and we do not understand when we say Yahshua was the Word made flesh that the ONLY WORD they had back then were TORAH SCROLLS, He was not standing up teaching at the temple from some watered down new testament only sound bytes that never even mention sin ....

Because of this, the enemy knows scripture better than we do.

Because of this, we think ruling ourselves by the thoughts of our own minds is sufficient.

Because of this, our children rebel from jump street and we as parents cannot effectively discipline a child who we did not bring up in the ways of knowing scripture.

Because of this, those children grow up and do their own thing and choose for themselves a mate who likely will be happy to produce for them offspring who then in turn, will not be brought up knowing scripture.



Is there anyone here who thinks mankind has 4,000 more years to reverse this process ?

I've got a question for you personally, what of the OT do you follow and what (if anything) do you not?

Ah I see. Ok well you better start applying the mosaic law then.

How do you arrive at that conclusion from what you've quoted? I wasn't even talking about the law issue anymore.

 

[brionne]

How do you arrive at that conclusion from what you've quoted? I wasn't even talking about the law issue anymore.

because you said "Christians WERE in that covenant, they were just looking at it from the other side"

Did you mean that chrisitians were in the Mosiac covenant?

 

[Anastacia]

Quote Anastacia: You say yes, that you think trimming your bread is a regulation. So, since you believe that not trimming your bread is a regulation, now you have your answer why believers don't trim their bread.

Colossians 2:14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.






QuoteTexUs: Actually I take beef with whatever translation you've quoted (Appears to be the old NIV) because "with its regulations" isn't in the original text at all... (I was going to look up what Greek word was used there, to see how it contrasted to other references regarding law, code, etc... but I couldn't because that phrase doesn't exist).
Check out the ESV, NASB, KJV... Even the new 2010 NIV translation has fixed this passage: "having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross."








TexUs, you did not like it that I used Colossians 2:14 from a 1984 NIV to explain something to you.


This is what Colossians 2:14 says in the NIV 1984---

having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.


NIV 2010----

having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.



You said "regulations" wasn't supposed to be in Colossiand 2:14, so what do you think about Ephesians 2:15 from the NIV 1984?-----


by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace,



NIV 2010----

by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace,




How about from the King James Version?-----

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;




You like the NASB better?------


by [sup](A)[/sup]abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is [sup](B)[/sup]the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might [sup](C)[/sup]make the two into [sup](D)[/sup]one new man, thus establishing [sup](E)[/sup]peace,




Maybe the ESV?------


by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in[sup](A)[/sup] ordinances, that he might create in himself one[sup](B)[/sup] new man in place of the two, so making peace,

 

[JarBreaker]

Quote Anastacia: You say yes, that you think trimming your bread is a regulation. So, since you believe that not trimming your bread is a regulation, now you have your answer why believers don't trim their bread.

Colossians 2:14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood ....[sup][/sup][sup][/sup][sup][/sup][sup][/sup][sup][/sup][sup][/sup][sup][/sup]

"Having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us and which was hostile to us ; and YHWH has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.



That translation saying "canceled the written code..." makes it easy to point to what we imagine the "written code" to be, and say this was the Torah .... it's actually more like the decree against YOU for all those times you did not fulfill it ... the CERTIFICATE OF DEATH, is the legal judgment against all who did not fulfill the laws which were against us --- being against us because we cannot and could not perform these in the flesh, which is why He sent us messiah in the first place.

The certificate of death was nailed to the stake with Him, when we believe on Him then that "WRITTEN DECREE AGAINST YOU" for the times you failed to fulfill the law was taken away and nailed to the stake with Him --- heaven and earth pass away before one jot or tittle from the Word shall pass --- but upon belief the death sentence is taken away from us because we put the old man of sin to death in that watery grave with Him.



EDIT:

NIV 2010----

having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.


that NIV translation is actually pretty close to this --- the "CHARGE OF OUR INDEBTEDNESS" --- this is like that decree of death, it's as if it's a piece of paper with all your shortcomings toward Torah which you could not fulfill in the flesh.

 

[Anastacia]

"Having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us and which was hostile to us ; and YHWH has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.



That translation saying "canceled the written code..." makes it easy to point to what we imagine the "written code" to be, and say this was the Torah .... it's actually more like the decree against YOU for all those times you did not fulfill it ... the CERTIFICATE OF DEATH, is the legal judgment against all who did not fulfill the laws which were against us --- being against us because we cannot and could not perform these in the flesh, which is why He sent us messiah in the first place.

The certificate of death was nailed to the stake with Him, when we believe on Him then that "WRITTEN DECREE AGAINST YOU" for the times you failed to fulfill the law was taken away and nailed to the stake with Him --- heaven and earth pass away before one jot or tittle from the Word shall pass --- but upon belief the death sentence is taken away from us because we put the old man of sin to death in that watery grave with Him.



EDIT:

NIV 2010----

having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.


that NIV translation is actually pretty close to this --- the "CHARGE OF OUR INDEBTEDNESS" --- this is like that decree of death, it's as if it's a piece of paper with all your shortcomings toward Torah which you could not fulfill in the flesh.

Hi JarBreaker, thank you so much for the explanation. I really posted what I did because TexUs didn't like the word 'regulations' used in Colossians 2:14 in the older NIV, and yes, it was removed in the newer versions. But I was trying to show him that another scripture, Ephesians 2:15 uses the word 'regulations, in the newer NIV.....and if that helped him to see that if you take the word 'regulations' out of Colossians 2:14....then you still have it in Ephesians 2:15. Therefore, what TexUs tried to say Colossians 2:14 did not say---it was still said in Ephesians 2:15. Know what I mean?

 

[TexUs]

because you said "Christians WERE in that covenant, they were just looking at it from the other side"

Did you mean that chrisitians were in the Mosiac covenant?

Yes, I mean that. Faith in Messiah = Christian.

You said "regulations" wasn't supposed to be in Colossiand 2:14, so what do you think about Ephesians 2:15 from the NIV 1984?-----

I agree, as I've expressed before.

What I disagree with is seeming confliction. He's abolished the barrier of law (Ephesians). Yet says he hasn't come to abolish it (Matthew 5).
????????????????????????????????

 

[Anastacia]

I agree, as I've expressed before.

What I disagree with is seeming confliction. He's abolished the barrier of law (Ephesians). Yet says he hasn't come to abolish it (Matthew 5).
????????????????????????????????

I'm not sure what all the question marks are for. All I'm saying is you didn't like the fact that I used an older version of the NIV and quoted Colossians 2:14 with the word 'regulations' in it. I posted Ephesians 2:15 from the newer NIV, and it has the word 'regulations' in it. That's what I was showing you.

 

[TexUs]

I'm not sure what all the question marks are for. All I'm saying is you didn't like the fact that I used an older version of the NIV and quoted Colossians 2:14 with the word 'regulations' in it. I posted Ephesians 2:15 from the newer NIV, and it has the word 'regulations' in it. That's what I was showing you.

The question marks designate a question. How do you deal with this seeming confliction.

 

[JarBreaker]

Hi JarBreaker, thank you so much for the explanation. I really posted what I did because TexUs didn't like the word 'regulations' used in Colossians 2:14 in the older NIV, and yes, it was removed in the newer versions. But I was trying to show him that another scripture, Ephesians 2:15 uses the word 'regulations, in the newer NIV.....and if that helped him to see that if you take the word 'regulations' out of Colossians 2:14....then you still have it in Ephesians 2:15. Therefore, what TexUs tried to say Colossians 2:14 did not say---it was still said in Ephesians 2:15. Know what I mean?

I certainly see what you mean, and the whole thing with an ambiguous word or phrase can often be settled by charging yourself to not strain out a gnat over the issue, move on and not beat a dead horse because next week someone else will likely post a new thread with the same question and it never ends ... im gonna find a pic of a merry-go-round for situations like that : -) be a lot easier and less hassle to not keep going over and over it again and just look at that picture lol


I see many times a verse may have a single word pointing 3-4 directions or more, if we start off on the wrong foot, then those other 3 times the word is pointing somewhere else we surely will get wrong too. And if we get 1 right then there is still the other 3 instances of that one word that the enemy can trip you up on.

and then make a thread about it every week for the next 10 years ....


I think the reason Scripture was translated as it was --- Hebrew, greek, Latin, Germanic languages, olde english, middle english, modern english etc etc is for exactly this purpose.

"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."

Try that sentence on for size !! this is a grammaticly correct sentence !!


Now if the above sentence is actually correct and proper English --- then how are we supposed to check a verse like I mentioned, where one word may be used 3-4 times and point to something unique and specific each time ?

 

[Anastacia]

I certainly see what you mean, and the whole thing with an ambiguous word or phrase can often be settled by charging yourself to not strain out a gnat over the issue, move on and not beat a dead horse because next week someone else will likely post a new thread with the same question and it never ends ... im gonna find a pic of a merry-go-round for situations like that : -) be a lot easier and less hassle to not keep going over and over it again and just look at that picture lol


I see many times a verse may have a single word pointing 3-4 directions or more, if we start off on the wrong foot, then those other 3 times the word is pointing somewhere else we surely will get wrong too. And if we get 1 right then there is still the other 3 instances of that one word that the enemy can trip you up on.

and then make a thread about it every week for the next 10 years ....


I think the reason Scripture was translated as it was --- Hebrew, greek, Latin, Germanic languages, olde english, middle english, modern english etc etc is for exactly this purpose.

"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."

Try that sentence on for size !! this is a grammaticly correct sentence !!


Now if the above sentence is actually correct and proper English --- then how are we supposed to check a verse like I mentioned, where one word may be used 3-4 times and point to something unique and specific each time ?

Jarbreaker, Please don't use words to me that Jesus used to the Pharisees. Maybe you are guilty of what you falsely accuse me of? Maybe you want to swallow a gnat? I have every right to post here....just like you. And I can prove with scripture when someone accuses me of posting something wrong, in this case TexUs didn't think that the scripture I used was correct, since the newer version kept out out a word the older version used. So it is important to show another scripture that has the same meaning.
Now it sure isn't for you to judge as not important. Would you like it if I went behind things you posted and said what you said to me here. We are in a discussion group that posts to each other if they want, when they want. And if you are getting dizzy, stay off the computer awhile, but don't tell me to.