Is there a connection?

[Soyeong]

the New testament was written by men Jesus personally taught and they say many time the old Law is done away with dead abolished.

In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus specifically said that he came not to abolish God's law and warned against relaxing the least part of it or teaching others to relax the least part, and in Romans 3:31, Paul confirmed that our faith does not abolish God's law, but rather our faith upholds it, yet you call Jesus a liar, disregard his warning, and seek to abolish God's law instead of upholding it by faith.

In Deuteronomy 13:1-5, the way that God instructed His children to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him was if they taught against obeying His law, so if the disciples of Jesus did as you suggest, then those who consider them to be false prophets would be correctly acting in accordance with what God has instructed His children to do, though the reality is that the disciples were servants of God who would have never done as you suggest. If you interpret the disciples as speaking against obeying God, then you can either conclude that you must have misinterpreted them or that you should not follow what they said, God did not leave any room for His children to follow someone who speaks against obeying Him. If you consider what the disciples said to be authoritative as I do, then that leaves you with the only option of concluding that you must have misinterpreted them, which is my position, and which is I interacted with the verses that you cited to explain why you have misinterpreted them. The whole Bible is true, so no verse should be interpreted as speaking against following a different verse.

 

[A branch]

In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus specifically said that he came not to abolish God's law and warned against relaxing the least part of it or teaching others to relax the least part, and in Romans 3:31, Paul confirmed that our faith does not abolish God's law, but rather our faith upholds it, yet you call Jesus a liar, disregard his warning, and seek to abolish God's law instead of upholding it by faith.

In Deuteronomy 13:1-5, the way that God instructed His children to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him was if they taught against obeying His law, so if the disciples of Jesus did as you suggest, then those who consider them to be false prophets would be correctly acting in accordance with what God has instructed His children to do, though the reality is that the disciples were servants of God who would have never done as you suggest. If you interpret the disciples as speaking against obeying God, then you can either conclude that you must have misinterpreted them or that you should not follow what they said, God did not leave any room for His children to follow someone who speaks against obeying Him. If you consider what the disciples said to be authoritative as I do, then that leaves you with the only option of concluding that you must have misinterpreted them, which is my position, and which is I interacted with the verses that you cited to explain why you have misinterpreted them. The whole Bible is true, so no verse should be interpreted as speaking against following a different verse.

I have posted at least 20 maybe more verses that say the old law is done away with. They all can not be wrong as you imply. I place you here
1 Corin 1

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

 

[Soyeong]

I have posted at least 20 maybe more verses that say the old law is done away with. They all can not be wrong as you imply. I place you here
1 Corin 1

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

The verses are not wrong, but rather it is your interpretation of them that is wrong, and yes, it is easily possible for you to misinterpret over 20 verses. You should be be quicker to think that you have misinterpreted those verse than to think that it makes perfect sense to interpret them against obeying God, and even if your interpretation were correct, then you should be quicker to reject their authority than to reject God's authority.

In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for good works, so the way to believe in what Christ accomplished through the cross is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law while the way to reject what he accomplished is to promote the lawlessness that he gave himself to redeem us from.

 

[Soyeong]

Amen

The Bible informs us every item used in the ceremonies were shadows of the sufferings of Christ beforehand

The Bible notable does not inform us of that a never uses the phrase "every item used in the ceremonies", and even if it did use that phrase, then it would be meaningless without being able to establish what the author considered to be every item used in the ceremonies. In Colossians 2:16-17, Paul was speaking against pagans judging them in regard to food or drink or with regard to a festival or new moon or a Sabbath and that these are important foreshadows of what is to come. We should live in a way that testifies about the truth of what is to come by continuing to observe those days rather than a way that denies the truth of what is to come.

,The old testament born again saints like us received the end of thier new born again faith from the first hearing of the gospel. The glory that followed the cross. We look back by same spirit of faith, Christ that dwells in us they looked ahead to the first century reformation those shadows became sight
(One new shadow or ceremonial law 1 Corinthian 11)

1 Peter 1:9-11 Receiving the end of your (born again) faith, even the salvation of your souls. Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time (first century reformation) the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow

The Gospel message calls for our repentance from our disobedience to God's law, including repenting from not observing God's holy days. In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works on obedience to God's law is also the way to believe in what he accomplished through the cross.

Isaiah 58 is a commentary the whole rest not a remnant of rest that some call Sabbath For some odd reason the translators give us the Hebrew word not the Greek *anapauo" and not the english translation rest.

Sabbath = rest . It is not a time sensitive word. Any time we hear his voice and do not harden our hearts we have entered His eternal rest (sabbath)

Those who did not mix the eternal faith of Christ in what there eyes see (the temporal historical ) do not enter the rest .

Hebrews 4King James Version4 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with (Christs) faith in them that heard it.

In Hebrews 3:18-19, they did not enter into God's rest because of their unbelief/disobedience, and in Ezekiel 20:13, it specifically mentions that they greatly profaned God's Sabbaths. In Hebrews 4:9-11, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, we should rest from our work as God rested from His, and we should strive to enter into that rest so that no one may fall away by the same sort of disobedience.

 

[Runningman]

Only trinitarians can accomplish Public worship!

You mean public idolatry?

 

[A branch]

The verses are not wrong, but rather it is your interpretation of them that is wrong, and yes, it is easily possible for you to misinterpret over 20 verses. You should be be quicker to think that you have misinterpreted those verse than to think that it makes perfect sense to interpret them against obeying God, and even if your interpretation were correct, then you should be quicker to reject their authority than to reject God's authority.

In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for good works, so the way to believe in what Christ accomplished through the cross is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law while the way to reject what he accomplished is to promote the lawlessness that he gave himself to redeem us from.

45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

 

[Soyeong]

45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me.

We can't believe Jesus without believing what Moses wrote.

 

[Mr GLee]

In Hebrews 3:18-19, they did not enter into God's rest because of their unbelief/disobedience, and in Ezekiel 20:13, it specifically mentions that they greatly profaned God's Sabbaths. In Hebrews 4:9-11, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, we should rest from our work as God rested from His, and we should strive to enter into that rest so that no one may fall away by the same sort of disobedience.

Yes, they treated the ceremonial laws as shadows as if they were moral laws. The same ones that smite with wicked fist hoping God will hear

Isaih 58: 4 Behold, ye fast for strife and debate, and to smite with the fist of wickedness: ye shall not fast as ye do this day, to make your voice to be heard on high.

 

[Soyeong]

Yes, they treated the ceremonial laws as shadows as if they were moral laws. The same ones that smite with wicked fist hoping God will hear

Isaih 58: 4 Behold, ye fast for strife and debate, and to smite with the fist of wickedness: ye shall not fast as ye do this day, to make your voice to be heard on high.

There is still the major flaw with your position that the Bible never lists which laws are ceremonial or moral laws, it never speaks against treating ceremonial laws are moral laws, and it never even refers to the categories of ceremonial or moral law. You should not interpret Isaiah as if he had in mind a division between two sets of laws that you created.

The category of moral law implies that we can be acting morally while disobeying the laws that aren't in that category, however, there are no examples in the Bible of disobedience to God being considered to be moral and I do not see any justification for thinking that it can ever be moral to disobey God. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws. Legislators give laws according to what they think ought to be done, so for you to suggest that some of God's laws are not moral laws is to suggest that God made a moral error about what ought to be done when He gave those laws and to therefore claim to have greater moral knowledge than God.

 

[Soyeong]

45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

Do you really think it makes sense to interpret that verse as Jesus criticizing the Pharisees for thinking that they should obey what God commanded them to obey? You are pulling that verse out of context to apply it me while ignoring that the context of the verse undermines how you are trying to use it.

 

[Mr GLee]

There is still the major flaw with your position that the Bible never lists which laws are ceremonial or moral laws, it never speaks against treating ceremonial laws are moral laws, and it never even refers to the categories of ceremonial or moral law. You should not interpret Isaiah as if he had in mind a division between two sets of laws that you created.

I think its were rightly dividing comes in, Of course it gives the difference between ceremonial laws as shadow and moral as judgeable damnable substance.

Violation to a ceremonial law can end up a one dead as a example to the flock.

Ceremonial laws are designed to draw in unbeliever world towards the living word of God. Not a outward sign to themselves,

Believers have prophecy no need for shadows used in parables .

For instance the baptism of one that has a desire to perform the will and become a member of the priesthood like Aaron's two sons .They added to it called "strange fire" self edification They were hoping it was 15 minutes of self-righteous fame . They were consumed, the ceremonial attire not a hint of smoke

Or the man who gathered firewood on the day they were to eat the manna as part of the ceremonial fast .He was stoned .

Number 15 :31-33 Because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him. And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.

Or the young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching he fell out the window (Acts 20:9 as a example.

If every time one did fall asleep during the preaching of the gospel was killed it would reduce the number of those that assemble together .

Turning ceremonial laws into oral tradition of dying mankind. shown in John 21 with Peter. Peter as a oral traditions went to town and started a lie that John would not die . Jesus said if every time he had to dispel the lies of the oral traditions of men we would need a bigger planet to hold the volumes upon volumes that could of been written

John 21:25 King James Version25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen

The whole time period when there was kings in Israel (the abomination of desolation). He use that as a parable not to follow after the oral traditions of men. The old testament shadows disappeared when the time of reformation came

Hebrew 9: 8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, (using the temporal dying things seen to give us the hidden gospel understanding) that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure (parable) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

One new ceremonial law a shadow was given Corinthian 11. (headship parable) That ceremonial shadow to the unbelieving world It will become substance when believers receive their new incorruptible bodies

 

[Soyeong]

I think its were rightly dividing comes in, Of course it gives the difference between ceremonial laws as shadow and moral as judgeable damnable substance.

That is where you are wrongly dividing the word of truth. Again, the Bible never lists which are the ceremonial laws and never even refers to that as being a category of law. You have given no basis for how you are dividing between which laws are ceremonial. We have the freedom to categorize God's laws however we want to, but just because we can do that does not establish that the authors of the Bible categorized God's laws in the same way. If a group of people were asked to create lists of which laws they thought were part of the ceremonial law, then they would end up with a wide variety of lists and none of them should interpret the Bible as referring to a list that they just created.

For example, I could categorize God's laws based upon which part of the body is most commonly used to obey/disobey them, such as with the law against theft being a hand law, but if I were to try to insert my categories back into the Bible by interpreting its authors as referring to hand laws without first establishing that they categorized God's laws in the same manner and agreed with me about which laws are the hand laws, then I would be making the same sort of error that you are making. For example, someone might argue that committing theft more actively uses our feet than our hands, so it should be a foot law, but I have no way to establish that the whether authors of the Bible thought it should be a hand or a foot law or even to establish that they ever categorized God's laws in that manner, and the same is true for your category of ceremonial law.

Violation to a ceremonial law can end up a one dead as a example to the flock.

Ceremonial laws are designed to draw in unbeliever world towards the living word of God. Not a outward sign to themselves,

Believers have prophecy no need for shadows used in parables .

For instance the baptism of one that has a desire to perform the will and become a member of the priesthood like Aaron's two sons .They added to it called "strange fire" self edification They were hoping it was 15 minutes of self-righteous fame . They were consumed, the ceremonial attire not a hint of smoke

Or the man who gathered firewood on the day they were to eat the manna as part of the ceremonial fast .He was stoned .

Number 15 :31-33 Because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him. And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.

Or the young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching he fell out the window (Acts 20:9 as a example.

If every time one did fall asleep during the preaching of the gospel was killed it would reduce the number of those that assemble together .

The fire on the altar was lit by God (Leviticus 9:24) and the altar was to be kept burning continuously in order to preserve it (Leviticus 6:13), so the strange fire used by sons of Aaron was fire that was not lit by God, which had nothing to do with hoping for 15 minutes of self-righteous fame.

Turning ceremonial laws into oral tradition of dying mankind. shown in John 21 with Peter. Peter as a oral traditions went to town and started a lie that John would not die .

You appear to be speaking in code. John 21 does not say anything about Peter going to town and starting a lie that John would not die.

Jesus said if every time he had to dispel the lies of the oral traditions of men we would need a bigger planet to hold the volumes upon volumes that could of been written

John 21:25 King James Version25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen

There is a very large difference between what John 21:25 states and what you claimed Jesus said.

The whole time period when there was kings in Israel (the abomination of desolation). He use that as a parable not to follow after the oral traditions of men. The old testament shadows disappeared when the time of reformation came

Hebrew 9: 8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, (using the temporal dying things seen to give us the hidden gospel understanding) that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure (parable) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

One new ceremonial law a shadow was given Corinthian 11. (headship parable) That ceremonial shadow to the unbelieving world It will become substance when believers receive their new incorruptible bodies

Those verses notably do not speak about "the ceremonial law". The time of the reformation is when the earth will be return to the state of how it was in the Garden of Eden, which the lion will lie down with the lamb. In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it gives authority to priests and judges to make rulings about how to correctly obey God's law that the people were obligated to follow, which is the basis for the oral law. In 1 Corinthians 5:6-8, Paul spoke in regard to how Passover foreshadowed Christ by drawing the connection of him being our Passover Lamb, however, instead of concluding that we no longer need to bother observing it, he concluded that we should therefore continue to observe it.

 

[donadams]

What was nailed to the cross?

 

[Soyeong]

What was nailed to the cross?

The purpose of the barbarity of crucifixion was to act as a deterrent, so the Romans wanted to make sure that everyone knew why someone was being crucified by nailing a sign to their cross that announced what they had been charged with committing. This is why they nailed a sign over Christ's cross that announced the charge that was against him that he was the King of the Jews (Matthew 27:37) and this is likely how the disciples knew that the people that Jesus was crucified with had been charged with being thieves. So in regard to Colossians 2:14, what was nailed to Christ's cross was the list of sins that we were charged with committing so that he died in our place to pay the penalty for our sins. There is a difference between these two statements:

1.) You shall not commit murder.

2.) This person has been charged with committing murder.

The first is an example of a law that is for our own good while the second is an example of a handwritten ordinance that was against someone that was nailed to their cross. The laws themselves were not nailed to the cross such that they needed to legislate a new law against murder every time that someone was crucified for committing murder, but what was nailed to their cross was the charge that was against them. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Jesus gave himself to free us from any laws, but in order to free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good work in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20).

 

[Mr GLee]

That is where you are wrongly dividing the word of truth. Again, the Bible never lists which are the ceremonial laws and never even refers to that as being a category of law. You have given no basis for how you are dividing between which laws are ceremonial. We have the freedom to categorize God's laws however we want to, but just because we can do that does not establish that the authors of the Bible categorized God's laws in the same way. If a group of people were asked to create lists of which laws they thought were part of the ceremonial law, then they would end up with a wide variety of lists and none of them should interpret the Bible as referring to a list that they just created.

Not a list more of a manner.of interpretation Without parables the signified understanding of ceremonial shadows as law Christ the Holy Spirit spoke not. . . hiding the spiritual eternal understanding. Teaching of how to walk by faith (Christ's)

We are not free to categorize shadows any way we want. God has designed a particular meaning.having to do with the sufferings of Christ beforehand The first century reformation has come the shadow became sight the glory came

 

[Soyeong]

29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" And then we have the account of the good Samaritan. So you see that even when people think they are obeying the law of God, they are not. And do not forget, that Jesus was speaking to people who were under the Mosaic Law. but to love the Lord God with all out heart--and our neighbor as our self is not strictly a part of the Mosaic Law, It was given in the Law to warn them to not follow other gods, and to treat people as they would have God treat them. Those commands are built into our creation as a creature created by the Creator to mirror Him, an image of Him.

In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus gave an example of someone loving their neighbor in obedience to God's command, so his point was not that we are not obeying God's law even when we think that we are. Jesus did not establish the New Covenant until the end of his ministry, however, he did not establish it for the purpose of undermining everything that he spent his ministry teaching prior to that point, but rather the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law (Jeremiah 31:33). Moreover, John 12:46-50 does not give us any room to disregard anything that Jesus taught during his ministry. The purpose of the Mosaic Law is to teach us how to love God with all of our heart and how to love our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, and which is also how to be in God's image. For example, in 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be holy for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, so following those instructions is part of the way to be in God's image. The Bible often uses the same terms to describe the character of God as it does to describe the character of the Mosaic Law, such as with it being holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), which again is because it is God's instructions for how to be in His image.

You simply do not make a distinction between the legal written document of the Mosaic Law and the law of God that says be as I am in all you do and think and say. Now tell me---can anyone do that perfectly? Any infraction against that law is sin and condemns a person before God. You also don't take into account that the reason we are unable to to it is because, through Adam, sin dwells in us and we are a slave to it. Our very nature as a sinful being, one who sins, is an affront to God's holiness. And that is what Jesus came to remedy, and did remedy for all whom the Father is giving Him. We are taken out of Adam through faith in the person and work of Jesus alone, and placed in Christ. Not so we can obey the Mosaic covenant written law, (which you have evidently primarily reduced to Sabbath and festival and dietary keeping) but so the law of God placed in us in being created in His image and likeness, is our delight, and not our burden.

In Deuteronomy 5:31-33, Moses wrote down everything that God commanded without departing from it, so the Law of Moses is the Law of God, which is also why it is referred to as the Law of God in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23. The Law of Moses is God's instructions for how to be as He is in all that we think and say and it would't make sense to think that God would give the Mosaic Law as instructions for how to be other than He is in all that we think and say.

The Mosaic Law came with instructions for what to do when he people sinned, so it did not require perfect obedience. If someone comments any infraction, then they can repent and have their sins forgiven, which again means that we do not need to have perfect obedience. In Deuteronomy 30:11-14, it says that God's law 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 it was presented as a possibility and as a choice, not as something that we are unable to do, and Romans 10:5-8 references that as the word of faith that we proclaim, which is the word of faith that you deny. In 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walks, so we are placed in Christ so that we can obey the Mosaic Law as part of the New Covenant. I've said nothing to reduce the Mosaic Law to the Sabbath, festivals, and deitary laws. David repeatedly said throughout the Psalms that he delighted in obeying the Mosaic Law, so that is the correct response to it.

As for those He interacted with who did understand WHO HE IS---He says clearly in both John 6 and John 10, it is because they are given to Him by the Father and they are His sheep and He knows who they are.

The Mosaic Law is the God of Israel's instructions for how to understand who He is, so someone can't understand who He is while refusing to obey the Mosaic Law.

 

[Soyeong]

Not a list more of a manner.of interpretation Without parables the signified understanding of ceremonial shadows as law Christ the Holy Spirit spoke not. . . hiding the spiritual eternal understanding. Teaching of how to walk by faith (Christ's)

We are not free to categorize shadows any way we want. God has designed a particular meaning.having to do with the sufferings of Christ beforehand The first century reformation has come the shadow became sight the glory came

Sure, it is matter of interpretation, but you've given no justification for it. There is a huge difference between someone being able to show how you they have derived their interpretation from the Bible and you inserting a foreign concept into the Bible as if the authors of the Bible had in mind a set of laws that you created. The Bible never speaks about "ceremonial shadows", so that is a concept that you invented that is unrelated to what is taught by the Bible. Christ expressed his faith by walking obedience to the Mosaic Law, so that is also the way to have faith in him/to walk by his faith. If there is a set of laws that have a trait in common, then we have the freedom to categorize them according to that trait. God has given laws that are important foreshadows of what is to come and we should live in a way that testifies about the truth of what is to come by obeying them rather than a way that denies the truth of what is to come.

 

[Soyeong]

Do you really believe that the Mosaic covenant legal written code is the sum total of God's righteousness. In the first place it was a land grant covenant. I will leave it to you to figure out what that is. It was serving an interim purpose until the Savior should arise. And btw no one is called a Savior who just shows how to be saved but does not save. No one is called a Redeemer unless they actually redeem.

God could have given someone millions of laws that that are examples of how to act in accordance with His righteousness in various situations and still not come close to teaching the sum total of His righteousness in every possible situation, so the point is to teach us a spiritual principle of righteousness that we can use to guide us in all situations that is extrapolated from what a smaller set of laws has in common. The Savior arriving did not change the eternal way to act in accordance with God's eternal righteousness or whether or not we should do that, but rather the Savior saves us from continuing to live unrighteously by leading us to live righteously in obedience to God's law. Jesus would not be our Savior from sin if he only saved us from penalty of our sin while we continued to live in sin, so our salvation from sin must also include being saved from continuing to live in sin by leading us to living in obedience to God's law.

Jesus was righteous because of His perfect obedience. Christianity does not teach that Jesus was righteous so that we don't have to be, so again yo bring a straw man into your premise. Jesus was not setting an example of how to practice righteousness. He knew perfectly well that sinful beings cannot do any such thing perfectly and He knew why, and He also knew that He was the second Adam who would gather a people to the Father by defeating the power of sin and death for them through His vicarious suffering and death on their behalf. He was teaching that the promised Messiah had come and He was Him. The Messiah who would deliver them from their sin. And no one is a deliverer who does not deliver actually. He was showing the Jews that no one comes to the Father except through faith in Him. Not through Law keeping or animal sacrifices or by being a physical descendent of Abraham. Only through faith in Him, that is, in who He is. Son of God, Son of Man, who redeems a people from their sin and reconciles them to God, through His life, death, resurrection, ascenditon. Period. A branch in the Vine through faith, produces the fruit of that Vine.

The Bible does not say that Jesus earned his righteousness because of his perfect obedience.

The whole point of a rabbi/disciple relationship was to teach how to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example so that the disciple could then be equipped to teach others how to do that in accordance with spreading the Gospel, and we see verses that support that we should follow his example, such as in 1 Peter 2:21-22, 1 John 2:6, and 1 Corinthians 11:1, yet you deny these verses by denying that Jesus came as an example of how to keep the Mosaic Law. Moreover, in Acts 3:25-26, Jesus was sent in fulfillment of the promise to bless us by turning us from our wickedness, so you reject why Jesus was sent and the blessing that he has to offer us by teaching us to obey the Mosaic Law. You said that Jesus fulfilled the law so that he might act as our substitute and that he made the regulations of the Mosaic Covenant no longer necessary, so I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding you, but that seeJesms to me to be essentially saying that Jesus obeyed them so that we don't have to.

Jesus did set an example for us to follow of how to practice righteousness and the fact that we can't perfectly follow his example does not negate that. There has never been a need for us to practice righteousness perfectly because we are not giving ourselves to pay for the sins of the world. If the Messiah does not deliver us from continuing to live in sin by leading us to follow his example of obedience to the Mosaic Law, then he would falling short of delivering us from sin. Jesus is God's word made flesh, so obeying God's word is not a different way to the Father than through Jesus. The Son is the exact image of God's doers (Hebrews 1:3), so the way to have faith in the Son is by believing that we ought to be doers of his character traits through following his example of obedience to the Mosaic Law, or in other words, us embodying God's word through following the example of the one who is the embodiment of God's word is the way to believe in him.

 

[Soyeong]

No, I said keeping the Sabbath according to Mosaic covenant law according to you is not the true rest, Jesus is. The straw man is that you say Christ alone, faith alone teaches that we don't have to be obedient to God. You reduce that obedience to keeping the Sabbath according to Mosaic Law, when Hebrews clearly tells us that Jesus is our rest, and those who place their faith in Him have entered the true rest. The legal written code of the Mosaic Law has been abolished because it has become obsolete.

Even in the secular world there is a code of law. The laws are stipulated and the penal aspects of it outlined. That is what the Mosaic law is, and it had to do with keeping the land and having God as there God. It was a schoolmaster. Christ is the mediator of the New Covenant, one without a legal written code for the simple, clearly stated fact in Romans, "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

For you to assert that that means in Christianity, or to any true Christian, that we do not have to obey the God who made us, is ludicrous. Faith produces obedience, otherwise it would not be faith! But it is not obedience to the written law, the legal code, but to the law that is written on our hearts. The law that is given in the very act of our being created in His image and likeness. The law that is who He is, and who we are as His creatures. And out of the heart, this hard and stoney heart that was removed, and a heart moldable and pliable in His hand, comes the fruit of the Spirit. It is quite glorious and every bit of the glory belongs to God.

Jesus came to show us how to have true rest by leading us to follow his example. In Matthew 11:28-30, Jesus was inviting people come to him for rest and to learn from him not inviting people to come to him for rest instead of learning from his example. Moreover, by Jesus saying that we will find rest for our souls, he was referencing Jeremiah 6:16-19, where God's law is described as the good way where we will find rest for our souls. Jesus is the embodiment of God's word, so saying that he is our rest is the same as saying that embodying God's word through learning to follow his example is our rest. It is contradictory for someone to think that we should have faith in God's word made flesh, but not in God's word.

All of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so the Mosaic Law will never be abolished. In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus specifically said that he did not come to abolish the Mosaic Law, and in Romans 3:31, Paul confirmed that our faith does not abolish it, but rather our faith upholds it. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's nature can't be abolished without first abolishing God. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Mosaic Law in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so the position that the Mosaic Law has been abolished is also the position that the New Covenant has been abolished. In 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked, so only those who are walking in obedience to the Mosaic Law should consider verses that speak about those who are in Christ to be referring to them, such as Romans 8:1.

In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Mosaic Law, so the way to have faith is by obeying it. It is contradictory for someone to argue that faith proceeds obedience while also arguing that the law that faith produces obedience to has been abolished. The Law written on our hearts is the Mosaic Law (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27), which is the law; given in the very act of our being reared in His image an likeness.

 

[Soyeong]

This statement presents works as producing faith. It presents the suffering and death of Jesus---the atonement---- as not redeeming anyone actually, but only making redemption possible if we do what we were taught to do before but could not do. You have a Redeemer who does not redeem, a Savior who does not save.

Jesus died on the cross to take the penal aspect of the Law and the law (relating to the sinfulness of man since Adam and Eve)that God's just judgement on sin, death with no hope of redemption, might be met and conquered by His perfect righteousness that death could not hold. He gave Himself as a satisfaction to the Father for sin by bearing our sins on His body on the cross, making propitiation, substituting Himself for the sinner to take the punishment the sinner deserves. In this, their debt to God incurred by their sin was satisfied in full, and through faith they have Christ's righteousness imputed to them in the same as as their sin was imputed to Him. The one placed in Christ through this faith, has been reconciled to God, and God to him, the enmity removed. Through faith in Christ, he has been justified by God, that is, declared righteous.



Col 2
11In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15He disarmed the rulers and authoritiesb and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

Jesus actually did something in His atonement. He actually saved. He actually defeated our enemies. He actually redeemed. He actually raised His people to life. He actually provided what was necessary for our forgiveness.

It is that works produce faith but that works are the way to have faith. I quoted Titus 2:14, so where is your disagreement? I don't think that verses presents Jesus as not redeeming us actually, but rather it is describing the way that he actually redeems us. I agree that Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and also to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, Jesus expressed his righteousness through His obedience to the Mosaic Law, so that is also the way that we live through faith when his righteousness is imputed to us through faith, which is in accordance with becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to it. Jesus would not have saved us in actuality if it didn't involve him giving himself to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law. Our salvation is from transgressing the Mosaic Law, so Jesus abolishing it would be abolishing his gift of salvation.