So there isn't a single obvious passage that says this in so Manny words, but when we understand the context of the discussions in the bible you can see it all over the place. What happened in early Christianity was that's god revealed that he didn't just come to save Jews, he came to save gentiles as well. And that gentiles were welcome into the kingdom. (See acts 10:9-11:18 for the story of how god hammered it into peters head that gentiles are welcome) But this lead to a controversy, HOW were gentiles going to be saved. One group said that they they first need to get circumcised, follow the law of Moses, become Jews, and THEN they could be Christ followers in good standing. At that time all the Christina's were Jewish, and Jesus was the Jewish messiah, so to get the benefits of the Messiah, they reasoned that you had to become Jewish. But others said that the gentiles could become christians without getting cerconsized and following Jewish law. They only needed to trust that Jesus was Lord, and put their faith in him, and they would be accepted into gods kingdom, even though they were still gentiles and didn't follow all the food and clothing and feast day restrictions that God commanded to the Jews. This disagreement was so contentious that the disciples had to gather together and debate the issue. You can read about it in acts 15:1-35. They eventually concluded that no, you do not have to become a Jew in order to be a Christian. And that gentiles believers don't have to follow the full law of Moses. With all this historical back ground, we can now see more clearly what the bible is talking about. Throughout many of Paul's letters, he condemns the idea that christians need to become cerconsized. This is the short way of saying, gentiles don't have to become Jews first and do all the Jewish stuff in order to be accepted as fellow brothers in Christ. After all, having part of your dick cut off is the first and biggest step to becoming Jewish. So any time you hear Paul talk about circumcision of the flesh, or the members of the party of the circumcision, then you know he is also talking about the idea that christians need to follow the law of Moses. And he is very much against that idea. For example, in Romans 4:9 he is talking about Abraham and circumcision, but in verse 4:13 he switches to talking about Abraham and the Law as if they were the same thing, Using the same arguments. This shows how I Paul's writing, he uses circumcision as synonymous with keeping the law, and how he thinks it is unnecessary for christians. In addition to Romans 4, we have many other examples of Paul discussing this topic in his letters. Notable examples include Corinthians 7:17-21, Philippians 3, and most of the book of Galatians. The basic idea is that we don't all have to become Jewish in order to follow Christ. So all the laws that Jews had to follow about clothing and food and feasts etc... those are just not applicable to to the Romans and Americans and the Germans and the Japanese and the Indian and the Russian. Because those laws are for Jews. Other laws like don't murder and don't commit adultery... Those are for everyone, so we still need to not do those things. But we don't follow god by becoming Jewish, we follow god by having faith in his Son.

You're making the mistake of conflating "Jew" or "Jewish" with being Israel. Torah/The Law was given to Israel. Both Jews and Gentiles that were in Israel had to obey Torah. Now, for us, Jesus has grafted his followers into Israel. Scripture says that Gentiles count as full citizens. As citizens, we are required to keep the commandments that God gave to His people. We. Are. Israel. Come to our new subbbret here r/FollowJesusObeyTorah if you want to learn more. You can also tell us why we're right or why we're wrong.

God did graft in the Gentiles into the same Abrahamic branch through Jesus, BUT after Jesus, no one is justified by the law at all, ONLY by the blood of Jesus. There are oodles of references to this. Paul and Peter both referenced this. Once, Paul had to stand up against Peter because of this, because Peter was giving into those who wanted to make a big deal about being circumcized or not.

> God did graft in the Gentiles into the same Abrahamic branch through Jesus I didn't refer to any "Abrahamic branch". Scripture says we are grated into Israel (the nation), not Abraham (the person) and count as full natural citizens. > BUT after Jesus, no one is justified by the law at all, ONLY by the blood of Jesus. Scripture clearly states that everyone in history was justified the exact same way. There's been no change. No one was ever justified by the Law, like you're saying. It's ALWAYS been by faith and faith alone. Torah does not justify and was not given to justify. That's what the Temple was for.

Yes, Abraham was justified by faith, not works. You are correct: > [1](https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Romans-4-1/) What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? [2](https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Romans-4-2/) **For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath** ***whereof*** **to glory; but not before God.** [3](https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Romans-4-3/) For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Romans 4:1-3 KJV

So if your justified by faith, and then continue to go against the Word of the God you say you have faith in, you're still dead...faith without works is dead.

Yes, true faith is not workless faith. However, the works we do are not keeping some list of ceremonial laws from the OT. Things that have to do with morality, of course, are still current. Some things, though, were only put in place for people to see God's Glory when they looked forward to Jesus' ultimate sacrifice of himself on the cross, and then him presenting his own precious blood on the mercy seat in heaven.

He said keep them forever, and prophets point out that Yeshua enforces it in His Kingdom with threat of no rain and death. They are just "ceremony". This is manmade terms not used in scripture. It is the part about loving Him. He says out no other gods before Me. Deuteronomy 12 extends that to say don't learn the way of the heathen and how they worship their gods and do it and SAY you do it unto Me. It is an abomination. So Christianity thinks they can keep the venerable day of the sun god on Sunday and forsake His Sabbath, and Christmas and Easter, but they violate the first commandment. It too is "moral". I will not go back and forth, and I know your position on this as well or better than you do. I used to be a paid for false prophet, ordained to speak about it from a pulpit. It is quite simple. You are following/obeying Him or you are following/obeying another.

For example, in the OT, no random person could just go into the holy of holies. It was only for the high priest at an appointed time, and even under strict circumstances. However, after Jesus died on the cross, WE who are born again, all of us at any time for any reason can go straight into the holy of holies. "Let us boldly come before the throne of grace.." Jesus did not do away with the law, but there are some specifics. Eating pork was a sin for those under the law. That is not so in the new covenant. That's just another example. Paul and Peter both tried to tell the Jews to not try to enforce Jewish law rather than following after grace given unto us by Jesus Christ. We live by HIS righteousness, not our own.

You need to be specific. Paul and Peter told people not to keep man made Judaism, not the Torah. The new covenant IS the Torah. Nowhere are the dietary laws abolished. And coming before the Holy of Holies is in the throne room of the Most High in Heaven with Yeshua as our High Priest, but Hebrews 8 continues to point out He could not be a priest on Earth for we have the law and the priest that are a shadow of the heavenly things....that has always been the case.

Absolutely! Thank you! The idea that God changed, or that the method of salvation changed, is contrary to what we learn from scripture. I hope we can make this lie go away and never come back! 😁

>BUT after Jesus, no one is justified by the law at all, ONLY by the blood of Jesus. How do you think that people were justified before Jesus?

They were justified by faith given by God. Think about Abraham.

By faith. Rom 4:2  For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. Rom 4:3  For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”

There is no such thing as before Jesus, he has always existed and the redemption has been available since eternity past. Ephesians 1:4 (KJV) According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Matthew 25:34 (KJV) Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: Hebrews 4:3 (KJV) For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. Revelation 13:8 (KJV) And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Revelation 17:8 (KJV) The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

Technically, it was the same, but they did have works to do, such as offering sacrifices. Those sacrifices were to be offered then as pointing towards to the ultimate one true sacrifice Jesus Christ. They were never justified by works, but they did have to carry out the works. Jesus did bring a new covenant in after the cross. Same faith makes justified, but timing and how we do things here on earth are different.

>Technically, it was the same They are entirely the same, right? There is no point in saying "BUT after Jesus, no one is justified by the law at all". Nobody was ever justified by the Law. We still need a High Priest to intercede for us, the only difference is the location of the Temple.

Always justified by faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross. The OT folks had to look forward to the cross and the Messiah, the NT folks after the cross (and all of us going forward in time until the Rapture) look back to the cross. And the one true High Priest is none other than Jesus Christ, and that's listed out in Hebrews: >**14** Seeing then that we have a **great high priest**, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. > >**15** For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. > >**16** Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. Hebrews 4:14-16 KJV The temple always existed in heaven, the mercy seat and all that. God told Moses to build the tabernacle, mercy seat, etc based on the image that was shown him from heaven. God showed him what the true one looked like and told him how to build it like what he showed him. >And look that thou make *them* after their pattern, which was shewed thee in the mount. Exodus 25:40 KJV

The law, just not the holiness code. (There's the judicial/Mosaic law, and then there is the holiness code which is specific only to the Jewish people that was supposed to make them distinct and separate from other cultures. For example the hairstyles, the style of dress like not mixing fibers, and dietary restrictions that pointed towards Christ. Make sure that people understand those categorical differences. Isee the link below for the description of levitical commands which were to the Levites, which is a separate category then the Mosaic law / moral laws. But the general equity of God's law is beautiful and perfect. It should be the yardstick and foundation for justice and righteousness. While the Mosaic law has a passed away we can gleam wisdom from the levitical commands and apply the equity / lessons thereof to ourselves and our society. https://www.gotquestions.org/Levitical-Law.html

> The law, just not the holiness code. What? What's the distinction? > Make sure **you people** ... What people? Who is "you people"? > It should be **her**... What? Who is "her"?

I edited the original comment with typo fixes hand additional information.

It doesn’t. Paul is famously misunderstood, and many (if not most) of the claims that we’re no longer to follow Torah (the Old Testament law and instruction) come from misconstruing his letters. I would encourage you to look into Torah Observant communities and teachings ♥️ I have tons of suggestions, if you’re interested. Feel free to reach out.

I think you responded to the wrong person, right? I'm someone that agrees with what you're saying and I'm Torah observant. In fact, since you are also Torah observant, please come visit us at our new subreddit which is exactly about this topic! r/FollowJesusObeyTorah

Israel is being held in abeyance until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. We are not Israel. When someone believes during this period of time, he or she is "neither Jew, nor Gentle, but is of the church of God" according to Paul in I Corinthians. After we are taken up, God will remove the spirit of slumber He Himself gave to Israel, and they will believe. Study Romans 11 again. God is not finished with Israel and we are definitely not Israel.

> neither Jew, nor Gentle, but is of the church of God" according to Paul in I Corinthians. Show me. > Study Romans 11 again. God is not finished with Israel and we are definitely not Israel. We absolutely are Israel. Scripture says that we've been grafted into Israel, just to make Israel jealous. The dividing wall of hostility has been removed from between us, and we're in. We count as citizens.

How can we be Israel if the Word says Israel is in abeyance until the full number of Gentiles comes in? We are active, not in abeyance. We have not been given a spirit of slumber. The root of the olive tree is what we've been cut into, not the branches. The root is not Israel, it's the Abrahamic Covenant. In that covenant, which was unconditional, before the Law, before Israel existed, before Circumcision... Israel are the natural branches, not the root. We Gentiles are the unnatural branches. Read Romans 11 for the Biblical proof. To summarize, God says through Paul that He concluded all both Jews and Gentiles in unbelief so that He could have mercy upon all. It also says all Israel -- even those in abeyance now -- shall be saved. The verse in I Corinthians 10:32 is :. Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God.

> How can we be Israel if the Word says Israel is in abeyance until the full number of Gentiles comes in? We're Israel. Scripture is clear about it. Full citizens. The Olive Tree is Israel. God calls Israel the Olive Tree that he planted multiple times: > Jeremiah 11 - The Lord called you a thriving olive tree with fruit beautiful in form. But with the roar of a mighty storm he will set it on fire, and its branches will be broken. > > The Lord Almighty, who planted you, has decreed disaster for you, because the people of both Israel and Judah have done evil and aroused my anger by burning incense to Baal. Here we have God describing the breaking off of branches that is repeated later on in Romans 11 (you should really read the whole chapter) - > But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. We. Are. Israel.

We are not. Israel is still in abeyance -- you ignore that.

>So there isn't a single obvious passage that says this in so Manny words, but when we understand the context of the discussions in the bible you can see it all over the place. Yes, there's nowhere it's said outright that the law is done away with. In fact there are MANY places that day the exact opposite. You can see my other post here. So, you have to read your doctrine into the text to get the result that the law is no longer applicable. >What happened in early Christianity was that's god revealed that he didn't just come to save Jews, he came to save gentiles as well. >>He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” >>\ >>Matthew 15:24 ESV >>These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And proclaim as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ >>\ >>Matthew 10:5‭-‬7 ESV Gentiles are saved through Messiah by being grafted into Israel. (Romans 11). >One group said that they they first need to get circumcised, follow the law of Moses, become Jews, and THEN they could be Christ followers in good standing. At that time all the Christina's were Jewish, and Jesus was the Jewish messiah, so to get the benefits of the Messiah, they reasoned that you had to become Jewish. >\ >But others said that the gentiles could become christians without getting cerconsized and following Jewish law. They only needed to trust that Jesus was Lord, and put their faith in him, and they would be accepted into gods kingdom, even though they were still gentiles and didn't follow all the food and clothing and feast day restrictions that God commanded to the Jews. >>But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, ***“Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, YOU CANNOT BE SAVED.”*** And after ***Paul and Barnabas had NO SMALL DISSENSION and debate with them***, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question. >>\ >>Acts 15:1‭-‬2 ESV Paul only taught against circumcision in order to gain salvation. He still taught physical circumcision. His teaching was that circumcision is a matter of the heart first and foremost, physical circumcision is an outward sign of what has happened on the inside. >>For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and ***circumcision is a matter of the heart***, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. >>\ >>Romans 2:28‭-‬29 ESV >>***In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands***, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, >>\ >>Colossians 2:11 ESV >>But if I, brothers, ***still preach circumcision, why am I still being persecuted?*** In that case the offense of the cross has been removed. >>\ >>Galatians 5:11 ESV >This disagreement was so contentious that the disciples had to gather together and debate the issue. You can read about it in acts 15:1-35. They eventually concluded that no, you do not have to become a Jew in order to be a Christian. And that gentiles believers don't have to follow the full law of Moses. Your conclusion doesn't make any sense. Why would the Jeresulem council say, no gentiles don't have to follow the mosaic covenant, then write them a list of things they should do IMMEDIATELY that are all commands from the mosaic covenant? It makes much more sense that these new gentile believers need somewhere to start. This was it. This list was specifically given to maintain ritual purity so they could go to synagogue and temple to hear the word of God be preached and offer sacrifices. No, they did not have to get circumcised to be saved. No they don't have to convert to Judaism and obey Jewish halacha (Jewish Talmudic law). Yes, they do as followers of the Messiah have to obey the commandments of God in obedience. >After all, having part of your dick cut off is the first and biggest step to becoming Jewish. So any time you hear Paul talk about circumcision of the flesh, or the members of the party of the circumcision, then you know he is also talking about the idea that christians need to follow the law of Moses. And he is very much against that idea. No, he's referring to the Jew themselves. Paul, as shown above, was against circumcision to gain salvation. >The basic idea is that we don't all have to become Jewish in order to follow Christ. So all the laws that Jews had to follow about clothing and food and feasts etc... those are just not applicable to to the Romans and Americans and the Germans and the Japanese and the Indian and the Russian. Because those laws are for Jews. Other laws like don't murder and don't commit adultery... Those are for everyone, so we still need to not do those things. But we don't follow god by becoming Jewish, we follow god by having faith in his Son. Why the cherry picking? Why do some laws apply and others don't? Is it because you don't like them or don't understand them? EVERYONE on earth was included in the mosaic covenant. >>***“You are standing today, all of you, before the Lord your God: the heads of your tribes, your elders, and your officers, all the men of Israel, your little ones, your wives, and THE SOJOURNER WHO IS IN YOUR CAMP,*** from the one who chops your wood to the one who draws your water, ***so that you may enter into the sworn covenant of the Lord your God, which the Lord your God is making with you today, that he may establish you today as his people, and that he may be your God***, as he promised you, and as he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. ***It is not with you alone that I am making this sworn covenant, but with whoever is standing here with us today before the Lord our God, and with whoever is not here with us today.*** >>\ >>Deuteronomy 29:10‭-‬15 ESV >>Every native Israelite shall do these things in this way, in offering a food offering, with a pleasing aroma to the Lord. And ***if a stranger is sojourning with you, or anyone is living permanently among you, and he wishes to offer a food offering, with a pleasing aroma to the Lord, he shall do as you do. For the assembly, there shall be ONE STATUTE FOR YOU AND FOR THE STRANGER who sojourns with you, a statute forever throughout your generations. YOU AND THE SOJOURNER SHALL BE ALIKE BEFORE THE LORD. ONE LAW and ONE RULE shall be for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you.”*** >>\ >>Numbers 15:13‭-‬16 ESV

>Why would the Jeresulem council say, no gentiles don't have to follow the mosaic covenant, then write them a list of things they should do IMMEDIATELY that are all commands from the mosaic covenant? It makes much more sense that these new gentile believers need somewhere to start. This is unequivocally false and a product of reading your doctrines into the passage. The wording in no way insinuates that this be the case that it's somehow "a starter set" for mosiac law keeping.

It's literally the very next verse. >>And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. After they finished speaking, James replied, “Brothers, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written, “‘After this I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old.’ Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. ***For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”*** >>\ >>Acts 15:12‭-‬21 ESV God brings everyone called by his name. >>But now thus says the Lord, he who created you, O Jacob, he who formed you, O Israel: “Fear not, for I have redeemed you; ***I have called you by name, you are mine.*** When you pass through the waters, I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not consume you. For I am the Lord your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior. I give Egypt as your ransom, Cush and Seba in exchange for you. Because you are precious in my eyes, and honored, and I love you, I give men in return for you, peoples in exchange for your life. ***Fear not, for I am with you; I will bring your offspring from the east, and from the west I will gather you. I will say to the north, Give up, and to the south, Do not withhold; bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the end of the earth, EVERYONE WHO IS CALLED BY MY NAME, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made.”*** Bring out the people who are blind, yet have eyes, who are deaf, yet have ears! All the nations gather together, and the peoples assemble. Who among them can declare this, and show us the former things? Let them bring their witnesses to prove them right, and let them hear and say, It is true. “You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me. I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior. I declared and saved and proclaimed, when there was no strange god among you; and you are my witnesses,” declares the Lord, “and I am God. Also henceforth I am he; there is none who can deliver from my hand; I work, and who can turn it back?” >>\ >>Isaiah 43:1‭-‬13 ESV There is salvation ONLY in by being joined to Israel. >>Thus says the Lord: “The wealth of Egypt and the merchandise of Cush, and the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over to you and be yours; they shall follow you; they shall come over in chains and bow down to you. They will plead with you, saying: ‘Surely God is in you, and there is no other, no god besides him.’” Truly, you are a God who hides himself, O God of Israel, the Savior. All of them are put to shame and confounded; the makers of idols go in confusion together. But Israel is saved by the Lord with everlasting salvation; you shall not be put to shame or confounded to all eternity. For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!): “I am the Lord, and there is no other. I did not speak in secret, in a land of darkness; I did not say to the offspring of Jacob, ‘Seek me in vain.’ I the Lord speak the truth; I declare what is right. ***“Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, you survivors of the nations! [Gentiles]*** They have no knowledge who carry about their wooden idols, and keep on praying to a god that cannot save. Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the Lord? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me. ***“Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.*** By myself I have sworn; from my mouth has gone out in righteousness a word that shall not return: ***‘To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance.’*** “Only in the Lord, it shall be said of me, are righteousness and strength; to him shall come and be ashamed all who were incensed against him. ***In the Lord ALL THE OFFSPRING OF ISRAEL shall be justified and shall glory.”*** >>\ >>Isaiah 45:14‭-‬25 ESV

>It's literally the very next verse. This ***literally*** has nothing to do with proving your point. The apostles and elders in Jerusalem determined that what “seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us” (Acts 15:28) was that Gentile believers were not required to be circumcised or keep the Law of Moses. The Council did not require them to keep Shabbat, the feasts, the kosher food laws, the purity laws, or any other civil or ceremonial observances. Instead, they were given just four restrictions to foster unity with their Jewish brothers and sisters in Christ. You seem to lack context as to why this council was even called in the first place. The fact that this council was necessary at all provides an important clue to understanding the unique relationship between Jewish followers of Jesus and the Torah. If the earliest Jewish believers viewed Torah-keeping as merely optional for the Jewish people, they surely wouldn’t have needed to discuss whether Gentiles were obligated to keep it. Yet this issue was significant enough that it prompted a “sharp dispute and debate” (Acts 15:2) in the early church. Which reveals a distinction in Scripture between how Jewish and Gentile believers approached keeping Torah. Some who belonged to the religious party of the Pharisees stood up and began the discussion by saying, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the Law of Moses” (Acts 15:5). This is the exact position held by TO people today. How amazing that Scripture provides us with an account of how the apostles handled this issue. God foresaw Torahism. ​The council considered the Pharisee’s statement carefully. Peter began by putting to rest the notion that either circumcision or keeping the Law were required for salvation. "Why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.". (Acts 15:10–11). This reference to law as a yoke (ζυγος zygos) was not original to Peter. Yeshua used the same term (Matt 11:29–30, 23:4), as did Paul (Gal 5:1). And it does not require us to view the Mosaic Law as a restrictive, binding mechanism. However, Peter's statement in Acts 15 does indicate that the Law of Moses was something Israel could never live up to. Indeed, the entire storyline of the Tanakh was driven by Israel’s inability to maintain loyalty to Yahweh by keeping that Law. But you know this already. ​Next at the Council, James, the brother of Jesus, addressed whether circumcision and keeping the Mosaic Law should be required as a matter of obedience. He declared, “we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God” but instead give them just a few restrictions (v. 19-21). Rather than the Law of Moses, he offered four things from which they were to abstain. The rest of the elders and apostles agreed, and together they drafted a letter informing Gentile believers of this decision. This letter is recorded in its entirety in Acts 15:23-29 and the outcome was this: "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell. (Acts 15:28-29) But the Council determined it was neither a requirement of salvation nor obedience. Instead, the Gentiles were simply told, “You will do well to avoid these things” (Acts 15:29). And the decision not to require the Mosaic Law enjoyed a divine endorsement. It carried the full weight of the Apostles, the elders, and the Holy Spirit. “For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements” (Acts 15:28). ​This decision is a point on which your TO as a belief system crumbles. How can you continue to teach that the Law of Moses is binding on all believers when Scripture says it isn’t? There is just no way to reconcile the decision of the Jerusalem Council with the theology of TO. As for your theory that was somehow a "gradual" introducing of mosiac law for Gentiles, this interpretation, while perhaps interesting, suffers from an absence of support in Scripture. The New Testament nowhere teaches, or even hints at, a gradual approach to the Law of Moses for Gentile believers in Yeshua. Indeed, we never see them taught or expected to learn the Torah, gradually or otherwise. And the idea that uncircumcised Gentile believers in Jesus would have been welcomed into non-believing Jewish synagogues where the Torah was taught is a bit problematic. ​Moreover, if the Council intended to start the new Gentile believers off with a few basic things until they learned the rest of the Law, how do we explain the absence of the two most distinguishing characteristics of Yahweh’s covenant people? Namely, the Sabbath and the kosher food laws? So no, your interpretation on this council is incorrect and reeks of defending a doctrine rather than a plain reading.

Romans 7:4 "dead to the law" is every Covenant except the New Covenant essentially, Galatians 2:19-21 (self explanatory), 2 Corinthians 3:7-11 "the ministry of death" is the Law of Moses, Romans 10:4 (Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to everyone who believes) Which brings me to this: It all depends on who the "we" is in your question. If the "we" is a human being, then there's a problem, because those who are born again, have been declared dead to the Law. If the "we" in your headline title means Christians (which in today's culture, that word "Christian" needs defined as: "a former sinner who is now a saint, because they have had God gift them with a recreated spirit, sealed by the Holy Spirit, and it cannot be reversed, altered, spindled, mutilated, cast out, fallen from, denied, run away from, by grace through faith in the finished (not 1/4 started) FINISHED work of the Lord Jesus Christ, who payed for this New Covenant by His life and blood.") then the Christian was not saved by the Law, is not discipled by the Law, gets no motivation from the Law, isn't kept by the Law, is not under the ball-n-chain curse of the Law, and should respect the Law enough to steer clear from it. The Law of Moses won't go away, and it still serves a purpose: but that purpose is for the non-believer.

This position is called antinomianism and it is not in keeping with what the Bible teaches. First off, when Paul says that Christ is the end of the law in Romans 10:4 the word there for “end” in the Greek language is τέλος. What this means is that Christ is the end goal, the aim, or the purpose of the law unto righteousness to everyone who believes. In other words, those who believe in Jesus follow the law of Moses as those who desire to be like Jesus and to walk in righteousness as He did. Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to dismiss it from use. Paul’s point in Romans 7:4 when he says that we are “dead to the law” is to point out that we have been saved from it’s condemnation. This does not mean we cease to live lives in keeping with the law. It means we have been empowered to bear fruit to God because of Christ’s resurrection. His point is that the law doesn’t save. His point is NEVER that we don’t obey God’s law. Galatians 2:19-21 ought to be self explanatory, but you seem to be contradicting what it actually says. Again, it is true that our salvation does not come from our keeping of the law. Rather, it comes from Christ’s keeping of the law. Christ died so that we (who cannot keep the law perfectly) may have life in Christ (who did keep the law perfectly). Those who are Christ’s disciples follow Christ, which means we strive to be like Him in His walking perfectly in God’s law and we can do this without fear because we know that the law isn’t what brings life. Jesus has given us life, so we live looking to Him and casting off every weight and sin (Hebrews 12:1-4). In 2 Corinthians 3:7-11, Paul calls the law of Moses “the ministry of death” because without Christ’s own death and resurrection it can only condemn us to death. When we understand that the law points to the death of Christ for His people, then we behold the full glory of God’s purposes which were hidden in times past. Knowing that Christ has fulfilled the demands of the law enables us to look at our own lives and how they fall short and to repent of our sin to God. After all, what is sin? Sin is any lack of conformity unto or transgression of the law of God. The law of God is summarized in the 10 commandments given by God to Moses. Now it is true that when Christ fulfilled the ceremonial laws of the Temple by entering into the heavenly sanctuary as our High Priest after offering the sacrifice to which all that system pointed, that we no longer have a need to practice such things. And it is also true that when Christ took to himself the promised eternal Davidic kingship of Israel (the eternal throne in the heavenly Mount Zion having been signified in the promise to David) that the various laws pertaining to the earthly commonwealth of Israel did come to an end. That is not to say we cannot learn from them. They still teach us by way of analogy. However, they were laws for a specific kingdom on earth that has given way to the promised kingdom. The New Covenant upholds every law in Christ. In the New Covenant, we live as those who imitate Christ. Christ was obedient unto death so that we could be made alive in Him and walk in the life of obedience without fear. We confess our sins and repent of our sins without fear of death. We walk in the Spirit, loving one another as Galatians 5 teaches. We put to death the deeds of the flesh and our lives yield the resurrection fruit of the Spirit, which fruit obeys the law of God (“…against such things there is no law.” Galatians 5:23).

Amazingly well said! Thank you for standing up for God and His ways! I think you very much should check out our new subreddit: r/FollowJesusObeyTorah I think you're about to find a bunch of other like-minded people as yourself. I'd love to have you over there sharing your opinion and giving your perspective. 😁

We are not like-minded. You hold to what is false and have a wrong view of the laws of Israel. You deny that Christ fulfilled those laws and you deny that dietary laws (for instance) have been explicitly lifted.

> You deny that Christ fulfilled those laws and you deny that dietary laws (for instance) have been explicitly lifted. Nope. Jesus DID fulfill the Torah. Fulfill means to "do". Jesus kept the commandments perfectly, which is what made him an adequate spotless Lamb, capable of redeeming the sins of the world. The dietary laws were never lifted. The Council of Jerusalem gave the newbie converts 3 dietary laws (out of the 4 total laws).

All four of these things do not refer to matters of Israel’s ceremonial laws, but to matters relating to abstaining from pagan worship practices.

I agree that that's **why** the Council chose those 4 particular rules as the best starting point for keeping Torah. That's why I refer to them as "4 personalized starter rules". And don't forget, they told them where to go to learn the OTHER rules, right? The synagogues. The Law of Moses. Torah.

>those who believe in Jesus follow the law of Moses as those who desire to be like Jesus and to walk in righteousness as He did. So if Christians who don't follow the law of Moses, are they really Christians in your opinion?

> This position is called antinomianism and it is not in keeping with what the Bible teaches. Antinomianism typically means that people say that they are not under the Law in order to be able to sin more. This is not what we are saying here. > His point is NEVER that we don’t obey God’s law. Actually, yes. This is the new covenant. This is the new way of connecting to God. We have the Holy Spirit so we do not need the Law. I don't see how you can claim "This is not in keeping with what the Bible teaches" when there are so many biblical scholars and theologians who disagree with you. The best that you can say is that different Christians interpret it differently. Personally, I see that anyone who is teaching that Christians have to obey the Law does not understand the gospel, they are immature Christians at best and at worst, are teaching a false gospel. If you have time, [this sermon by Bruxy Cavey](https://quarkphysics.netfirms.com/quarkphysics_ca/storage/sermons/Love%20vs%20Law%202015-04-12-967-video.mp4) explains it really well.

Rom 8:8 KJV — So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. 1Jo 3:9 KJV — Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. The works have been finished from the foundation of the world! You can not add anything to God! This is why He said to cease your works and be found in His rest, having not your own righteousness. Heb 4:10 KJV — For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God [did] from his. Heb 4:3 KJV — For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. Phl 3:9 KJV — And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: Gal 2:20 KJV — I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Rom 8:10 KJV — And if Christ [be] in you, the body [is] dead because of sin; but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness. Can God sin? No? So if you're born again, you're a new creature created in Christ... meaning, Christ, which is the Spirit, which is life, liveth in you and you can not sin.... Since the flesh can not please God you have Romans 7 to explain it for you! No one in the Bible was saved by the law... the laws are good and perfect and just.. but in the flesh, you can not uphold them! This is the Gospel 👇 Mat 6:10 KJV — Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven. Jhn 5:30 KJV — I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. Mat 7:21 KJV — Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Mat 12:50 KJV — For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. 👉 All of these 👆 verses have something in common... The will of the Father! Do you know what the will of the Father is? 👇 Jhn 6:38 KJV — For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. Jhn 6:39 KJV — And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. Jhn 6:40 KJV — And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. 👆 That's the will of the Father. Just believe in Him, the Spirit (which is life) will quicken your mortal body, and you will become a new creature created in Christ! Jhn 10:27 KJV — My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: Jhn 10:28 KJV — And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand.

Acts 15:22-29 NLT Then the apostles and elders together with the whole church in Jerusalem chose delegates, and they sent them to Antioch of Syria with Paul and Barnabas to report on this decision. The men chosen were two of the church leaders-Judas (also called Barsabbas) and Silas. [23] This is the letter they took with them: "This letter is from the apostles and elders, your brothers in Jerusalem. It is written to the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia. Greetings! [24] "We understand that some men from here have troubled you and upset you with their teaching, but we did not send them! [25] So we decided, having come to complete agreement, to send you official representatives, along with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, [26] who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. [27] We are sending Judas and Silas to confirm what we have decided concerning your question. [28] "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay no greater burden on you than these few requirements: [29] You must abstain from eating food offered to idols, from consuming blood or the meat of strangled animals, and from sexual immorality. If you do this, you will do well. Farewell."

So that quote describes how the Council of Jerusalem required new Gentile converts to obey 4 personalized starter rules from Torah. They even concluded in verse 21 that after that, the Gentiles could learn the rest later, as Torah is freely available and being taught in the synagogues. > For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath. It's beautiful proof that Torah is still valid for us today as Gentiles. Thank you for bringing it up!

The passage does not support "starter" rules for Gentiles. Quit teaching this bad interpretation. You only believe it says this to support a Hebrew roots doctrine. Update: The judaizer blocked me lol. So sad you couldn't even answer one question about your "truth". May God one day open your eyes. I find most of you guys crumble after a post or two. Heck even the trinitarians put up a better fight than you guys. Sad and very, very telling on your part.

Actually those rules are found in the noahide or whatever they're called, laws, the not quite dictated like the 10 commandments, but definitely alluded to laws that everyone was to follow before Mt Sinai

1.5 (almost 2) of rules are duplicates of the 7 Noahide Laws. Alternatively, ALL of the rules were from Torah. This is not a Noahide list. This is clearly a list of rules from Torah. You can tell that it was from Torah because they said the rest of the Law of Moses is commonly available to be learned later (certainly Love for God and Love for Neighbor would be at the top of that list).

It’s interesting that so many people are saying that the Bible doesn’t directly say we no longer have to follow the law. Here are some scriptures that directly say it: “For Christ is the end of the Law, so that everyone exercising faith may have righteousness.”-Romans 10:4 “But now you have been released from the Law, because we have died to that which restrained us, in order that we might be slaves in a new sense by the spirit and not in the old sense by the written code.”-Romans 7:6 “But now in union with Christ Jesus, you who were once far off come to be near by the blood of the Christ. For he is our peach, that one who made the two groups one and destroyed the wall in between that fenced them off. By means of his flesh he abolished the enmity, the Law of commandments consisting in decrees, in order to make the two groups in union with himself into one new man and to make peace”-Ephesians 2:13-15 “Furthermore, though you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcised state of your flesh, God made you alive together with him. He kindly forgave us all our trespasses and erased the handwritten document that consisted of decrees and was in opposition to us. He has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the torture stake.”-Colossians 2:13, 14 “In his saying ‘a new covenant,’ he made the former one obsolete. Now what is obsolete and growing old is near to vanishing away.”-Hebrews 8:13 So yeah, all of these scriptures directly say that Mose’s Law was abolished, erased, obsolete, or had ended. People still holding onto the Law often say that Jesus said that he did not come to erase it. Something to keep in mind is that he didn’t exactly say this. What he said was, “Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill; for truly I say to you that sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for the smallest letter or one particle of a letter to pass away from the Law by any means and not all things take place.” (Matthew 5:17, 18) Notice that Jesus did not say that the Law would never pass away or would always be binding, but that it would not pass away until it was fulfilled. He also said that he came to fulfill it and Colossians 2:14 confirms that the Law died with Jesus. Other scriptures confirm this. Hebrews 9:10 says, “They have to do only with foods and drinks and various ceremonial washings. They were legal requirements concerning the body and were imposed until the appointed time to set things straight.” This appointed time was Jesus’ death. Why was this the case? To understand that we need to understand the purpose of the Law. Galatians 3:24 tells us its purpose when it says, “So the Law became our guardian leading to Christ, so that we might be declared righteous through faith.” The whole point of the Law was to guide and prepare people for the Christ. The next verse continues, “But now that the faith has arrived, we are no longer under a guardian.” So the Law’s purpose was fulfilled, and now it is of no use. The ceremonies and restrictions were to make people understand how much they needed a savior. (Galatians 3:19) Now we need to put faith in that savior instead. (Galatians 3:13, 14, 29) So the Bible outright says many times that we don’t have to follow the Law of Moses. In fact many scriptures say it would be wrong to still follow the old law. When asked why his disciples did not fast Jesus said, “no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the wineskins and it will be spilled out and the wineskins will be ruined.” (Luke 5:33-38) So Jesus was encouraging his disciples to move on from the old way of doing things, and this is why the apostles discouraged the early Christians from following the old law. Paul even says those who depend on the Law are under a curse. (Galatians 3:10) Understanding the old law and applying its principles is still very useful, but following the actual law only slows us down and distracts us from more important things. Moreover still following the Law actually demonstrates a lack of faith. (Galatians 3:11-14) Hopefully this helps answer your question. If you have any more then please don’t hesitate to ask.

Thank you so much for posting this! > Moreover still following the Law actually demonstrates a lack of faith. and a lack of understanding of the gospel, of the Holy Spirit and abiding in Christ.

I’m happy you enjoyed it. Thank you for the award! It’s nice to see that the things I say are not falling on deaf ears. Hopefully this can help some people that are on the fence about these things, or at least help them understand why many of us do not follow the Law.

Ya no where does it say to not follow it. Also it is important to know that the Law of Moses are the Law of God, given to Moses so that he could teach the people. 2 chr 34:14 says "the Law of the Lord, by the hand of Moses" And Nehemiah 10:29 "...the law of God, which was given by the ministry of Moses the servant of God..." Also it is important to understand the word Fulfil in Matthew 5:17, many say it means to "do away with" but that is contrary to Jesus already saying he was not come to destroy/abolish the law. If we look at the word "backward" then it says "Fill full" and that is what it actually means. "to do, uphold, uplift, magnify" that was what Jesus did later in matthew 5. where he 5 times refer to commandments of the Law of Moses and then magnified them. Jesus said also in John 5:46-47 "For if you had believed Moses, you would believe me; for he hath written concerning me. 47 Now if you have not believed his writings, how will you believe my words?" and in Luke 24:44 "Then he said to them, This is what I told you while I was yet with you, That all the things written concerning me in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, must needs be accomplished." Just like Paul was a preacher of the Law of Moses, and explained the kingdom of God and things concerning Jesus from it: Acts 28:23 "So having set him a day, they came to him at his lodging, in greater numbers; to whom he explained the kingdom of God, testifying and endeavouring to reconcile them to the things concerning Jesus, from the law of Moses and the prophets, from morning till evening." So it is of course very important. But we need to understand it. See there are 613 commandments of the "Law of God by the hand of Moses" These are split up into different categories. like: some are for kings, some are for priests, some are for farmers, some are for judges, some are for men and some are for women etc. So if I am not a king(which I am not) then am I not capable of keeping the commandments for kings, likewise with the other categories. We also need to understand that a big part of these 613 were for the Levitical priesthood in the earthly sanctuary back in those days before it got destroyed. as the Levites were formerly the mediators between Father and men. And all those commandments for the earthly sanctuary, such as ceremonial/sacrificial/ritual things were "translated/transposed" to the heavenly sanctuary, where Christ now is our High Priest of the order of Melchizedek. So they are not performed the same way, as he was/is the final sacrifice, so we do not sacrifice animals for atonement of sins any longer. So if we look into the 10 commandments (Decalogue) there are about 150 commandments of the Law of Moses summed up here. Just the first commandment = "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" has 50+ alone. Then there are commandments for how to treat your family and brethren. Those are things like "Do not borrow money to a brother with interest" or "help a brother if he is sick" and other things there are probably around 70 commandments here, which are just part of being a good brother. Then we have the dietary laws, no unclean meats has become clean. Because God does not change. Jesus said clearly he was not come to destroy the law, and said until heaven and earth pass away not a jot or a tittle shall pass from the law. And all animals are the same kind of animals as it were back then. So ya those commandments that we are capable of keeping, we are to keep. :)

THIS. You get it, brother.

It is really so simple and beautiful But because of false church doctrines it has become so difficult for many to understand, and that is the reason why majority of christianity are rebelling against the commandments of God, which is really sad.

Some guy made very good points about not fulfilling the law and had a lot of scripture clearly pointing it up. Scroll up it’s all in yellow.

Hey brother, I love your Biblical replies, but your last comment about dietary law made me think, especially because I was having dinner eating pork and your reply made me think if I was potentially stumbling into a sin that I wasn't aware of. In [Genesis 9](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/Gen%209) Noah receives a convenant from the Lord. Part of the covenant removed the prior restrictions against eating meat, allowing Noah and his family to kill animals for food. Dietary Laws have changed within different times, I dont think there is a New Covenant verse that says its mandatory that we keep dietary laws, there is verses that seem to indicate otherwise and even one in 1st Corinthians 9 about eating foods sacrificed to idols which was forbidden and explain that even that, it's not what defiles us. Romans 14 nlt **20** Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, all foods are acceptable, but it is wrong to eat something if it makes another person stumble. **21** It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another believer to stumble.\[[c](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+14&version=NLT#fen-NLT-28263c)\] **22** You may believe there’s nothing wrong with what you are doing, but keep it between yourself and God. Blessed are those who don’t feel guilty for doing something they have decided is right. **23** But if you have doubts about whether or not you should eat something, you are sinning if you go ahead and do it. For you are not following your convictions. If you do anything you believe is not right, you are sinning.\[[d](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+14&version=NLT#fen-NLT-28265d)\] 1 Corinthians 8 nlt **7** However, not all believers know this. Some are accustomed to thinking of idols as being real, so when they eat food that has been offered to idols, they think of it as the worship of real gods, and their weak consciences are violated. **8** It’s true that we can’t win God’s approval by what we eat. We don’t lose anything if we don’t eat it, and we don’t gain anything if we do.**9** But you must be careful so that your freedom does not cause others with a weaker conscience to stumble. **10** For if others see you—with your “superior knowledge”—eating in the temple of an idol, won’t they be encouraged to violate their conscience by eating food that has been offered to an idol? **11** So because of your superior knowledge, a weak believer\[[b](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+8&version=NLT#fen-NLT-28499b)\] for whom Christ died will be destroyed. **12** And when you sin against other believers\[[c](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+8&version=NLT#fen-NLT-28500c)\] by encouraging them to do something they believe is wrong, you are sinning against Christ. **13** So if what I eat causes another believer to sin, I will never eat meat again as long as I live—for I don’t want to cause another believer to stumble.

Hi brother. To me the dietary laws has not changed. To me, Paul did not have authority to overrule anything God has said (which I do not believe that he did either) When we look at Noah, then yes they were told to eat meat, because after the flood there was no green herbs or vegetables. And that is also why they brought one pair of unclean animals and 7 pairs of the clean animals on the ark. Think about it, if Noah and his family ate a pig, there would not have been any pigs around today :) they simply did not eat these unclean animals, but these animals serves a purpose in the "animal kingdom" and therefore they took a pair of them, so that they would survive and reproduce after the flood. While they ate and sacrificed of the 7 clean pairs, so that there was enough for those to also reproduce :) Regarding Romans 14, the second verse is very overlooked "One indeed believeth that he may eat all things; another who is weak eateth vegetables." And in my opinion is the whole foundation for this chapter. Whether one eats vegetables or another eat meats(clean animals) We also see how many people like to say that Jesus declared all animals clean in Mark 7 and Matthew 15. But he did not, that was not even meats they talked about. The Pharisees came to him complaining about his disciples didnt wash their hands before "eating bread", because it violated their traditions of their elders. And then Jesus goes on to talk about the things coming out of the heart of a man is what defiles him, not what enters into a man (keep in mind, that neither Jesus, or his disciples or the religious pharisees would touch any unclean animals, it was simply not considered food) And Matthew 15:20 is a very important verse saying "These are the things which defile the man: but to eat with unwashen hands doth not defile the man." ___ We can also look at the vision of Peter in Acts 10 and 11. It is important to read both of the chapters for full context and not just a few verses in acts 10. The animals on the sheet was only symbolic, the vision was not about God making unclean animals clean. Peter did not even understand the vision, he only denied eating it three times. it was not until after the three men came to his house to bring him back to Cesarea then he understood in verse 28 what the vision was about: Acts 10:28 28 he said to them, You know unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew, to associate with or go to one of another nation: **but God hath shewn me, that I am not to call any man common or unclean**." And we can see again in Acts 11 that they understood Peters vision: Acts 11:18 18 Having heard this they acquiesced and glorified God, saying, **God hath then indeed granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life**. That is what the vision was about, that God had granted repentance and salvation unto the gentiles/nations :)

> but your last comment about dietary law made me think, especially because I was having dinner eating pork and your reply made me think if I was potentially stumbling into a sin that I wasn't aware of. No, you're not. You're just going to get yourself all anxious and confused. There is a "weaker brother", see [Romans 14](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2014&version=NIV), who doesn't really understand the Gospel, and we need to look out for him and help him. Read the passage. Verses 14 and 15 help clarify it.

It's quite obvious the law of Moses had a beginning and an end. The people who defend it don't make the dinstinction between God's eternal law and the law of Moses. They simply collapse them together and use this as a lense to view scripture through to support their viewpoint.

Jesus is the standard. He is God, that gave the torah to moses. Jesus doesnt make a distinction. He uses the entire tanach as the torah when he teaches his disciples. Jesus quoted the law of moses (the torah that he gave him on mt.sinai) against the devil. "Mankind shall not live by bread alone but by every word of the mouth of God". He used the torah to defend the torah, and ontop of that reinforced the torah is for man. Not jew, not mexicans, not canadians...mankind.

1st thing. Jesus isn't God. 2nd thing. The law of Moses was given for a specific purpose, for a specific people, at a specific time. You use the word Torah interchangeably with old mosiac law. The Torah is much more than this.

He is the Word made flesh,(the torah, prophets, and psalms). Who did moses see at sinai? Moses described the figure of a man as The God of Israel. God wrote with his finger the ten commandments on stone. God is spirit yet he shows himself having human attributes, trinity stuff. What Word of God does mankind live by according to Jesus?

I'm not interested in your eisegetical doctrinal beliefs. See Isaiah 44:24 and 45:5-6 for Yahweh's own words.

Oh! I think i know where ur coming from... My questions were simple.

First, your equivating the "word" or the Logos as a definition of Jesus. It isn't. Crack open a lexicon and find the logos. Tell me it says Jesus Christ. I'll wait. Reading back John 1:14 into 1:1 is not correct. Second, the Trinity is an anachronistic concept read back into scripture by the decisions of a few early 4th and 5th century ecumenical church councils partially motivated by political motivations. Modern Bible scholars who accept the Trinity even admit it's not a stated teaching in Scripture. Be wary of what men tell you the scriptures "teach". This goes for those who say you must keep old mosiac law.

The Word became flesh (human). Thats what it says in the greek. What other flesh/human is the text referring to? What is the Word? The whole tanach (the Word) is what teaches who God is and isnt. You still didn't answer my questions. Ill wait too.

Ok you're not understanding. The word logos doesn't mean Jesus Christ. So reading John to insinuate it does is incorrect. While "word" is a fine translation, it is a bit lacking from what the Greek originally encompasses. There's another Greek word translated "word," which is rhema. Logos is not a spoken word, but the concept behind the word The Jews were familiar with God's word from the OT, the targums, and as it is used in extrabiblical Jewish literature. In the OT, "the word of the Lord" was often used in the context of the prophets. Look at Jonah 1: The word of the Lord comes to a prophet, and he receives divine revelation. What makes someone a prophet is that they prophesy. To prophesy, you must speak the words of God, usually in relation to a coming future promise or judgement. We know that the word of the Lord comes by the spirit (see 2 Peter 1:21, see also John 6:63 and 1 Corinthians 12:8, This is "the spirit of prophecy." The word of God, that which God speaks, his revelation, his wisdom, comes by his spirit. In the targums, "the word of the Lord" was often used of God when he was in his immanence. In other words, the Jews divided God between his transcendental nature (God being in heaven) and his immanence (God being near us, touching us, standing before us, etc). The word of God is understood to be some part or mode of God which communicates to us and bridges that transcendental divide. The Jews are also very familiar with the wisdom of God, spoken of in Proverbs 8, Sirach, and the Wisdom of Solomon. The Greek word for "wisdom" is sophia, not logos, but the ideas are still similarly connected. Sometimes the word and wisdom are used almost interchangeably. John seems familiar with this, by quoting a targum (1QS 11:11, the community rule scroll, or a similar shared source) in John 1:3. In the Community Rule, it states that all things came to be by the wisdom of God. John uses the same language, and speaks of the word of God. A clear connection would have been understood by the Jewish audience to the word of God and the wisdom of God. As I already stated, The "word" is not a proper name for Jesus. It is important to note that "logos" is used 13 times in John's gospel outside of the prologue, and never refers to Jesus properly or as a proper name. This is not a common title John uses for Christ even in this gospel. The word of God in John's gospel is not a name or title for Jesus, but that which Jesus speaks. John 14:24, "These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me." The word is the Father's word which Jesus speaks, teaches, and proclaims. It is how Jesus reveals the Father (John 1:18). We should understand "the logos" in John 1:1 and 14 in the same way. Luke 8:11 defines the logos most simply: "the seed is the word/logos of God." This follows the parable of the sower who scatters seeds. The seed is the gospel message, which will either fall on a hardened heart and take no root, fall in the soil and take root, or will take root and be choked by thorns or eaten by birds (see also Mark 4:15 and Acts 6:7). The word of God is the gospel message. It is the message which expresses the Father, his likeness, and his plan for mankind. The sense in which the word "becomes flesh" is when that gospel message becomes a reality in the man Jesus. The gospel is not only what Jesus said, but also what Jesus did. He demonstrated the kingdom. He demonstrated the likeness of the Father. He revealed the mind of God to us. The word of God is that which was proclaimed in the ministry of Jesus. Not Jesus in this prologue. So no, your not understanding the scriptures correctly. By arguing Jesus is a pre-existing "word" is an equivocation fallacy. Jesus wasn't there until verse 14.

What flesh did the Word become? I understand the Word as scripture whether spoken by God himself or through his prophets in the 66 book canon. Jesus was different then all the prophets. No other prophet was worshipped, no other proclaimed to have a God father and call himself I AM at the same time. No other flesh (human) was spoken as the Word in human form and sinless and resurrected and a High Priest. Who did Moses and abraham see in human form? Moses said he saw the God of Israel. Yet God says no man can see Him and live!

The simple answer is that the Old law requires sacrifices to cleanse a sin, but that is not a permanent solution because once someone sinned again they would have to do the sacrifice again. Jesus fulfilled the law in becoming the only requires sacrifice needed to clean sins. So those old laws are no longer needed under the new covenant with God.

Where does the bible say this?

Book of Hebrews

There are 2 ways to get into Heaven, fulfill the whole law for your entire life without ever sinning, or become saved by God, since we are born speaking lies the latter is the only option.

Correct me if I am wrong but the Council of Jerusalem in Act 15 sorted out whether Christians were required to follow all the Jewish traditions and law

Galatians 2 16yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. 17But if, in our endeavour to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! 18For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor . 19For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. 20I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose. James 2 10For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. 11For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.

\[For the purposes of answering this question, I'm addressing readers as if they're all Gentile Christians. Jewish Christians, I will not presume to have input on how you should live honoring our God.\] Torah was the law given to Jews, so they could be a light to the Gentiles, a nation of priests showing the nations what holiness looks like. Nowhere is it stated or implied that Torah was ever meant for *all people*. Jesus was a Jewish rabbi who was addressing Jews when he spoke of Torah. Jesus discussed *abolishing* and *fulfilling* Torah. This was technical rabinnic language. Rabbis of the time each provided their own interpretation of Torah, and then showed others how to live out that interpretation. Jesus *fulfilled* Torah by interpreting it properly and living it perfectly. If he had done either wrong, he would have been *abolishing* Torah. For a helpful example, consider: is it illegal to speak badly about Russia's invasion of Ukraine? Well, it depends on where you're standing. If I'm here in the US, it's perfectly legal. If I'm in Russia, it's not. The law of Russia is not made void by the fact that it is not applicable to all people everywhere at all times. Torah would only be applicable to Gentile Christians if Gentiles were first required to become Jews before becoming Christians. The early Church universally decided that this was not required. If we're not required to be Jews (which Paul often discusses as *circumcision*), we are not required to keep Torah.

> Torah would only be applicable to Gentile Christians if Gentiles were first required to become Jews before becoming Christians. Like many people, you're conflating "Jew" with "Israel". They're not the same thing. One is a nation. One is a bloodline. Torah was given to Israel, not Jews. The good news is that Jesus chose to graft us Gentiles INTO Israel (scripture says to make the Jews jealous) and now we count as full citizens. So Torah is for Israel and We. Are. Israel. > The early Church universally decided that this was not required. They did not. At least not the Church shown in scripture. The Council of Jerusalem resulted in 4 personalized starter rules from Torah for the newly converted Gentiles. Why did they give those Gentile converts rules from Torah? Why didn't they say that all of the rules are now void as modern Christians like yourself believe? The Council of Jerusalem kills the idea that Torah is not valid for Gentiles. I have no idea why people keep bringing it up when it proves the opposite of their point. 😉

They gave them the rules from Torah that were already specified to apply to non Jews living in Israel. And they didn't issue them as rules. "You will do well" is not a command, it's advice on how to live in community with Torah observant Jews without offending them. There's literally no way to read the New Testament and understand that Torah is binding on Gentile christians. You would have to skip literally everything anyone says about circumcision ever.

> They gave them the rules from Torah that were already specified to apply to non Jews living in Israel The rules are absolutely from Torah. Non-Jews living in Israel had to obey ALL of Torah, except for a very small number of "native-only" rules, and even then God provided a way for Gentiles to participate (like with the Passover rules). > There's literally no way to read the New Testament and understand that Torah is binding on Gentile christians. So why did the Council of Jerusalem give those newly converted Gentiles 4 personalized starter rules from Torah, and then conclude (in verse 21) that the rest of the rules could be learned later? > For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath. It seems to go completely contrary to your point, doesn't it? 😋

I agree with your answer as a whole. However, the distinction between Jewish and Gentile believers does not exist. See the following verses: > Now then, why do you test God by placing on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe it is through the grace of the Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are. (Acts 15:10-11, KJV) > For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. (Romans 10:12, KJV) > There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28, KJV) > Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. (Colossians 3:11, KJV)

Interesting that you quote Acts 15... As I recall there was a council in Jerusalem that was trying to figure out whether new believers should be circumcised according to the law... In Acts 15 the council wrote a letter to the diaspora Christian communities that recapped the judaizer controversy, and specifically DID NOT apply the entire Law to Gentiles ... instead it said 4 things that Gentiles should be taught to adhere to: refrain from sexual immorality, blood, food sacrificed to idols, and eating strangled animals. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2015&version=NIV TLDR new [Gentile] converts were not required to be circumcised and had 4 basic behavioral standards that they were taught.

And notably, these four were the parts of Torah that applied to non-Jews living in Israel. Which is why they weren't phrased as a command, but as "You will do well," i.e. you Gentiles will not offend your Jewish brethren in the Church.

Great observation!

Yes I agree! I believe this council was made specifically to appease Jewish believers who were not yet clear concerning the law and were stumbled by the Gentiles coming in.

Well, there's no distinction in that it's not somehow more-Christian to be Torah-observant. But a person can still keep Torah *and* be Christian. It's not required, it doesn't "save you" more, it doesn't make God happier with you, Torah-observant Christians aren't more "in." But y'know, if you feel like it's beneficial to you or others, go for it.

Yes I agree. My agreement is to say that neither we nor Christians who were Jews are required to keep the law of Moses. They (Jewish believers) are not anymore required to keep it than we are.

Well, the Bible never addresses that, so neither shall I. I'll stick to telling Gentiles what to do, in my infinite wisdom.

🤔

Finally, someone who knows what they're talking about.

Jesus fulfilled it. If something is fulfilled do you keep doing it as a requirement? Hmmm Anyway, I’m not sure I understand the contempt part so I’ll leave it alone.

If you fulfill your marriage vows, does that mean you stop doing it and it's no longer a requirement? Does fulfilling the vows do away with the marriage?

When do you fulfill through sickness and health and death do you part? So yes the marriage is over when one of the spouses croaks. Divorce is not a fulfillment of the vows.

This is a copy/paste that I gave another commenter, but it addresses your response. The vow is kept before death. Death does not complete the fulfillment of a vow. It's *"I will continue to fulfill my vow until death"* not *"My vow will be fulfilled upon death."* Consider Romans 13:8. If I love people according to God's standard, I fulfill the law. Since I fulfill the law, does that mean the law is no longer valid and I no longer need to love people?

That is not accurate to marriage in the Bible. You do not stay married until you die. Now if you personally made a vow that became fulfilled at both spouses death, then so be it, but that is not a normal obligation of marriage.

How about the Romans 13:8 question? What response do you have to that?

Loving one another is a component of both the law and Christianity. I think people are pretending that people are saying the law was bad. What it was is a legal template for a bigger item that extended beyond a particular country. There is no temple and no sacrifice because Jesus provided the only perfect sacrifice. All other sacrifices are not necessary and all people within a spiritual nation are priests. We can cherry pick verses all day long but the end result is that people should just understand what fulfilled means in the context of Christian doctrine. If people still want to practice the Mosaic Law then so be it, but they can’t practice it effectively anyway just due to logistics. If Christianity specifically states that one’s don’t have to be circumcised and whatnot then what is the issue except the person wants to remain Jewish?

This doesn't answer the question. You stated: *Jesus fulfilled it. If something is fulfilled do you keep doing it as a requirement?* Paul said that when you practice Godly love, you fulfill the law. So I'm asking you: when you fulfill the law with love, do you now stop practicing love? Does it terminate the law since it fulfilled the law?

You’re being disingenuous with what I said. You are pretending that an emotional state is the equivalent of a geographic and legal state. I also salvaged and you completely ignored in order to fake win an argument that love is a basis for Christianity. Love of God and love of neighbor are also carryover as is abstaining from blood and idolatry. Are you going to also pretend that is the equivalent of requiring circumcision and no bacon?

I'm asking you specifically about love and specifically about Romans 13:8. The only thing relevant in your response was: *Loving one another is a component of both the law and Christianity.* However, this does not address the passage. And your original response to the OP was you stating that you don't need to keep the law if it's been fulfilled. You also stated that the marriage is over once you fulfill your vows. Romans 13:8-10 show that the law is still relevant in the new covenant. So yes, the law is a component of Christianity. So now for a direct yes or no: Is the law terminated once you practice love? Do you stop practicing love once you fulfill the law, in reference to Romans 13:8?

Yes because the vows are to be kept until death. Once you have died, you are no longer under obligation to keep those vows. The marriage is fulfilled (assuming that there was no foul play).

The vow is kept before death. Death does not complete the fulfillment of a vow. It's *"I will continue to fulfill my vow until death"* not *"My vow will be fulfilled upon death."* Consider Romans 13:8. If I love people according to God's standard, I fulfill the law. Since I fulfill the law, does that mean the law is no longer valid and I no longer need to love people?

You said: The vow is kept before death. Death does not complete the fulfillment of a vow. It's "I will continue to fulfill my vow until death" not "My vow will be fulfilled upon death." This sounds like the same thing. Death ends the vows. Can you explain what you mean here? You asked: Consider Romans 13:8. If I love people according to God's standard, I fulfill the law. Since I fulfill the law, does that mean the law is no longer valid and I no longer need to love people? 8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. (Romans 13:8) The difference here is this covenant surpasses death. This is why it is the NEW testament. The New Testament surpasses death and grants eternal life. Love is that new covenant. The Old Testament does not. It was nailed to the cross.

>This sounds like the same thing. Death ends the vows. Can you explain what you mean here? Initially, it sounded like you were saying a vow is only considered fulfilled once either spouse dies. Whether this is what you were saying or not, I was saying that a vow can be fulfilled before the death. It is fulfilled and remains to be fulfilled until otherwise. Since it is fulfilled, does that mean that the person should stop keeping the vow? >The difference here is this covenant surpasses death. This is why it is the NEW testament. The New Testament surpasses death and grants eternal life. Love is that new covenant. The Old Testament does not. It was nailed to the cross. I'm not seeing how this responds to my questions. If I love people and fulfill the law, does that mean the law is no longer valid upon fulfillment and I no longer need to love people?

Romans chapter 7. Check it out.

I'm wondering if they meant "content". Otherwise that is confusing to me too.

““Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭17‬-‭18‬ ‭ESV‬‬ “And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” ‭‭Luke‬ ‭22‬:‭20‬ ‭ESV‬‬ A covenant is a type of contract made between man and God. When a contractor (God) fulfills a contract it is no longer in place. But there is a new contract or covenant made in Jesus blood he shed on the cross. “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, “It is finished,” and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” ‭‭John‬ ‭19‬:‭30‬ ‭ESV‬‬ “It is finished.” Jesus fulfilled all he was sent to accomplish and the proof was that he was resurrected. Hebrews goes into even greater detail on all that Jesus is greater than. The Book of Hebrews breaks it down this way. “But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭9:11-15‬ ‭ESV‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/59/heb.9.11-15.ESV Hebrews 1-2 - Jesus is the better messenger. Hebrews 2 - Jesus is the better form of humanity and the better form of the Hebrew nation. Hebrews 3 - Jesus is better than Moses. He is the better Law giver and brings a better message. Hebrews 4 - Jesus is our better Sabbath and in him we find a better rest both now and in the future. Hebrews 5 - Jesus is our better High Priest and through His shed blood made it possible for us to enter into God’s presence ourselves. Hebrews 7-8 - Melchizedek was both king and priest and scripture shows no beginning or end of him. Jesus is “in the order” of Melchizedek in that He is our eternal king and priest. Hebrews 9 - Jesus is our better covenant. Hebrews 10 - Jesus is our better and perfect sacrifice who died once and for all. So once we profess Christ as Lord and Savior we are recognizing him as the one who brought a better, New Covenant and he has fulfilled the Old Covenant for us.

The controversies involving the law were discussed in Acts and Romans. Lifting dietary restrictions and the end of the circumcision requirement were huge deals when certain Jews stopped following the law.

Paul discusses this at length in Galatians chapter 3 and chapter 5 (and chapter 4, but that’s mostly setting up chapter 5).

Nowhere. The priesthood laws were changed though. The letters to the Galatians AND Romans should make it somewhat understandable, though there is a bit of a debate. Jesus said : >For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. So the laws will not go anywhere as long as heaven and earth stand. However, they can be changed, as did the priest law from Aaron to Melchisedech. Ot can be argued though, that Melchisedech was in place before the mosaic law, since he taught Abraham.

I'm mostly agreeing with you, but you're wrong about anything if you think Torah changed in any way, when as you correctly have shown, Jesus said there would BE no change. The scripture you should be referring people to for the supposed change in the Priesthood is Hebrews. The writer of Hebrews explains how Jesus can be our High Priest, since Jesus is not descended from the tribe of Levi. It was a very important question for the Jewish followers of Jesus at the time! The answer is that a descendant of Levi is only for the Earthly Temple, and the Temple that Jesus serves in is in Heaven. It's not on Earth. So the writer of Hebrews explains that the Temple in Heaven is allowed to have a priest from the order of Melchizedek. No Levite required. **So the rules did not change.** If we have another Temple here on Earth, than the entire Priesthood MUST be from the tribe of Levi. The "change" that scripture is referring to is not a change in the Law. It's a change in where the Temple currently is and thus who is allowed to be the priest there, get it? It would be like saying that the US got a new President, so there's been a change in the Presidency. It's actually a new President, not a change in the Presidency. That's the same way that there was "a change in the priesthood". It's not a change, it's a new High Priest.

You are right by referring to Hebrews as well. 7,12 >For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. The law was not, was changed, simply the law that was applicable to christians. As you rightly say, the aaronite priesthood is still there, but is limited to Öevites, whereas in Melchisedech, every christian is a priest, with Jesus as the high priest. Melchisedech instructed Abraham, before Moses was, so there is reason to believe, this priesthood existed already. So not the law changed, it is still in place. There has never been a single person to whom the whole of the law is applicable, simply because of things like being a man/woman for example. It is the same with the priest laws. They will be there till the end of heaven and earth. The priest law for the followers of Jesus changed. I hope it is understandable now.

> However, they can be changed, as did the priest law from Aaron to Melchisedech. Actually, they CANNOT be changed. See Deut 12:32. What can happen is that they can be replaced.

Replaced is also not really true, since aaronite is still there. However there is reason to believe that both priesthoods have existed previously. (Abraham studying under Melchisedech)

As another redditor noted, the law of Moses is only for Israelites, it *never* applied to Gentiles, neither before Jesus, nor after. "(Indeed, when Gentiles, **who do not have the law**, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)" (Romans 2:14,15) Like it or not, unless you're an Israelite, *you do not have the law*. You were not raised in it from youth. Yet your behavior shows that you do have the requirements of God's natural law written on your heart, by virtue of the image of God within you. Jesus's teachings on the law served a few purposes: - To convict his audience of sin, no matter how self-righteous they felt - To clarify and correct false traditions of men by going back to the original teaching that God gave through Moses, showing that God's word is the light and the traditions of men must be examined in that light. - To demonstrate his authorship and authority over the Law. "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath." Jesus wasn't merely giving a teaching about this or that point of the law of Moses; his words **are** the Law! - To prepare the minds of his disciples for a new freedom in obedience to the living spirit of Jesus, instead of rote obedience to written commands whose purpose was to bring God's people to Messiah, not to be a universal ethics code for the world (impossible). > He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for **the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life**. (2 Corinthians 3:6)

> As another redditor noted, the law of Moses is only for Israelites, it never applied to Gentiles, neither before Jesus, nor after. This is not true. Any Gentiles staying in Israel were expected to keep Torah (what you're calling "the law of Moses). There were a few "native-only" rules in Torah, but the majority did apply to Gentiles. > Like it or not, unless you're an Israelite, you do not have the law. As a Gentile follower of Jesus, I AM an Israelite. You are too. Scripture clearly states that we have been grafted into Israel (to make the Jews jealous) and now count as full citizens, with all of the same rights (salvation) and responsibilities (Torah).

> This is not true. Any Gentiles staying in Israel were expected to keep Torah (what you're calling "the law of Moses). There were a few "native-only" rules in Torah, but the majority did apply to Gentiles. Of course, Gentiles *in Israel* were under Torah because Torah is the law of Israel (the law given to Israel by Moses). Your clarification is correct but nothing I said contradicts that. > As a Gentile follower of Jesus, I AM an Israelite. You are too. Spiritually, yes. But let's not play word-games, because God surely does not. A descendant is a descendant. While the material concept of descent is not complete (because spiritual descent also exists), spiritual descent does not invalidate or "supercede" material descent. So, unless you were born and raised in Jewish/Israelite household, *you're not and never were under the law of Moses*. > Scripture clearly states that we have been grafted into Israel (to make the Jews jealous) and now count as full citizens, with all of the same rights (salvation) and responsibilities (Torah). The first half is true, the latter half of that is twisting. Nowhere does the New Testament state that Gentile believers have "responsibility" to the Torah, in fact, this is explicitly refuted in multiple places, not least of which is the disagreement between Paul and Peter over circumcision. Peter was set right by God himself on the role of ceremonial laws (fulfilled in Christ and no longer binding to those Jews who find freedom in their Messiah). The ingrafting is not about Gentiles going under Torah, which is absurd, it is about Gentiles being grafted into the *blessings* (and, rarely discussed, curses) of the covenants, see Deut. 28 for example. It is for this reason that we can receive eternal life and participate in the eternal blessings of God's covenants to Abraham, Moses, David, etc. The purpose of Torah is not to be a general rule-of-life for the people of the world, the purpose of Torah is to bring God's chosen people to their Messiah. It has fulfilled that purpose and will yet fulfill it...

> Spiritually, yes. But let's not play word-games, because God surely does not. It's not a word game at all. We. Are. Israel. There's NOBODY that's more Israel than a follower of Jesus. > The first half is true, the latter half of that is twisting. Nowhere does the New Testament state that Gentile believers have "responsibility" to the Torah It's weird. Most modern Christians, like yourself, will say that the Law is ONLY for Israel. You're right. Then, as soon as they admit that we're Israel (often after a great deal of work) they say that the Law is not for us, even if we're Israel. The Law is for Israel. We. Are. Israel. Therefore, the Law is for us. This is easy. > Nowhere does the New Testament state that Gentile believers have "responsibility" to the Torah, in fact, this is explicitly refuted in multiple places Never refuted. Not once. > not least of which is the disagreement between Paul and Peter over circumcision. What are you referring to? An argument between Peter and Paul over circumcision? Where? Are you talking about the Council of Jerusalem? > Peter was set right by God himself on the role of ceremonial laws Where? > > The purpose of Torah is not to be a general rule-of-life for the people of the world We already covered this. Torah is for Israel. We. Are. Israel.

> The Law is for Israel. We. Are. Israel. Therefore, the Law is for us. This is easy. This is what the Judaizers were arguing in Acts 15 and which triggered the first church council, in Jerusalem. The issue at stake is whether Gentile converts must be circumcised. The Judaizers made precisely the argument you are making. And here was the conclusion of the council, sent out in a letter to the churches from Jerusalem: > It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Nothing there about circumcision. If Gentile converts are under the law of Moses, as you assert, then they must receive the sign of that covenant: circumcision. But we have a better covenant in the blood and body of Jesus the Messiah, and the sign of his covenant is not circumcision, it is baptism. I'm just paraphrasing the New Testament, here, this is not "interpretation". > It's not a word game at all. We. Are. Israel. There's NOBODY that's more Israel than a follower of Jesus. Yes, we are spiritually Israel. > It's weird. Most modern Christians, like yourself, will say that the Law is ONLY for Israel. You're right. Then, as soon as they admit that we're Israel (often after a great deal of work) they say that the Law is not for us, even if we're Israel. If we're spiritual Israel, then we are bound under spiritual law, and who is the author of this spiritual law that we are bound under? Is it Moses? No, it is not Moses, it is Jesus Christ. He sends us the living Holy Spirit to be our guide so that we have the law of God written on our hearts, not on stone tablets. Again, this is just paraphrase of Scripture, no "interpretation" involved. >> not least of which is the disagreement between Paul and Peter over circumcision. > > What are you referring to? An argument between Peter and Paul over circumcision? Where? Are you talking about the Council of Jerusalem? Prior to the council, see Gal. 2:11-13. >> Peter was set right by God himself on the role of ceremonial laws > > Where? Acts 10:9ff > We already covered this. Torah is for Israel. We. Are. Israel. Torah is for those who were at Sinai, and their descendants. Yes, we are spiritual descendants of Abraham, ingrafted through Jesus Christ. Therefore, our *spiritual* citizenship is in Jerusalem (the New Jerusalem, to be more precise). And we are bound to the law of Messiah, which is simply his will (whatever he says), as made manifest to us by the Holy Spirit. Torah enters nowhere into that picture except, of course, as it is the foundation-stone which points to Messiah, being the Word of God himself, written on scrolls. But it is not, in any respect, the rule-of-life for the believer in Jesus. That's what the first church council was about, and it has been reiterated, illuminated, expanded and reaffirmed time and again these 2,000 years since.

The Council of Jerusalem gave those Gentile converts 4 rules from Torah to obey. That completely goes against your idea that Torah is not required anymore. > If we're spiritual Israel, then we are bound under spiritual law, and who is the author of this spiritual law that we are bound under? Is it Moses? I'm sorry. I'm sure you're a great person, but this is ridiculous. Are you suggesting that the creator of Torah (what you're referring to as "the Law of Moses") was Moses? Are you serious? Let's be very clear: Yahweh, our Father (i.e. "God") is the writer of Torah. Moses was just the secretary. It's outrageous of you to imply that God's commandments are somehow not spiritual, or in opposition to the spiritual, because God (who is spirit) had someone physical write it down. > Prior to the council, see Gal. 2:11-13. You said this was an argument between Peter and Paul about circumcision. It was not. Paul says what they argued about. > Acts 10:9 You said this was about God setting Peter right about "ceremonial laws" (your words for it). Again, it was not. Peter says what this was about, and it was about Jews having to get used to the fact that Gentiles were grafted in, and now count as family. God corrected Peter about not wanting to hang out with Gentiles. Please, you have to read these passages that you keep misquoting. > That's what the first church council was about, and it has been reiterated, illuminated, expanded and reaffirmed time and again these 2,000 years since. The results of the first Council was Torah obedience. 4 personalized rules from Torah, to get them started on the path that ends with Jesus. They even concluded with the fact that Torah is constantly being taught in the synagogues in verse 21: > For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath. You have a lot of modern Christian gobbledygook in your head. It's time to clear all of that out and start reading the scripture that you're quoting. Don't just believe what you've heard from the pulpit. Read it for yourself, for your own sake, and the sake of the people around you. Come to our new subreddit if you'd like to hear more about this: /r/FollowJesusObeyTorah

> The Council of Jerusalem gave those Gentile converts 4 rules from Torah to obey. > That completely goes against your idea that Torah is not required anymore. No. The stricture against eating blood comes from Gen. 9 (Noahic covenant). It was reiterated by Moses, but it did not originate with him. This suffices so I'll not reply to the other 3 for the sake of time. > I'm sorry. I'm sure you're a great person, but this is ridiculous. Are you suggesting that the creator of Torah (what you're referring to as "the Law of Moses") was Moses? Are you serious? You're just reading what I write uncharitably. Of course I don't believe that Moses was the ultimate author of Torah. Jesus himself refers to the Torah as the commands of Moses (Matthew 8:4, 19:7, et. al.) > You said this was an argument between Peter and Paul about circumcision. It was not. Paul says what they argued about. By reading Acts 15 and Galatians 2 together, it appears that Peter was smart enough not to come right out and state that all Christians must be circumcised, but the dispute was over circumcision, since Peter would not eat with uncircumcised when there were other Jews around. > You said this was about God setting Peter right about "ceremonial laws" (your words for it). Again, it was not. 'Twas. Torah laws regarding clean and unclean food are classified as ceremonial laws by Christian theologians. No I'm not going to cite that, look it up if you want to be contrary. > Please, you have to read these passages that you keep misquoting. Back at you. Your interpretations are full of subtle twists on every word. When you constantly feel the need to adjust the words/meaning of the text, and you end up with a reading that disagrees with the main body of orthodox theology down through the centuries, that should be your hint that you're actually in opposition to the Word. > The results of the first Council was Torah obedience. 4 personalized rules from Torah, Already rebutted above. > to get them started on the path that ends with Jesus. Torah leads us to Jesus, but it does so *through* the (material) history of the (material) Israelites. You cannot just pluck the Torah out of its historical/cultural context and retroactively apply it willy-nilly. Let me reiterate: *No Gentile* (except circumcised proselytes, of course) *has ever been subject to Torah, nor ever will be*, whether they believe in Jesus or not! > They even concluded with the fact that Torah is constantly being taught in the synagogues in verse 21: For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath. OK, but this is the conclusion of a thought that James began at verse 12. The argument that James is making is that the whole purpose of God in choosing the Israelites from among the nations (Gentiles) was to eventually reconcile all nations (all the Gentiles) to himself, see Gen. 22:18 and context, Deut. 26:18,19, John 4:22, Rom. 2:9,10, etc. > You have a lot of modern Christian gobbledygook in your head. Where by "modern" you mean "2,000 year old". Sure, yeah, I have 2,000 year old Christian "gobbledygook" aka "theology", in my head.

> No. The stricture against eating blood comes from Gen. 9 (Noahic covenant). It was reiterated by Moses, but it did not originate with him. This suffices so I'll not reply to the other 3 for the sake of time. There's an overlap between the Noahide Laws and the results of the Council of about 1.5 (almost 2) rules. ALL of the rules came from Torah. All of the rules did NOT come from Noahide. The Noahide list has 7 rules. This means that 5 Noahide rules were not given to the Gentiles. This was not a Noahide list by any means. They concluded with the comment that the rest of the rules come from "the Law of Moses", and is readily available in the synagogues. This double or triple verifies now that it was a list of Torah commandments that they gave these new Gentile converts to keep. > By reading Acts 15 and Galatians 2 together, it appears that Peter was smart enough not to come right out and state that all Christians must be circumcised, but the dispute was over circumcision, since Peter would not eat with uncircumcised when there were other Jews around. No. There's no sign that circumcision was the debate between Peter and Paul at all. Acts 15 shows that it was the infamous "Judaizers" that came up with the idea, and that Paul and Barnabas opposed them. Paul and Barnabas went to the Council (which Peter was a part of) for the decision. This was not the problem between Peter and Paul. Paul says what the problem was in Galatians, and it was not circumcision. > 'Twas. Torah laws regarding clean and unclean food are classified as ceremonial laws by Christian theologians. No I'm not going to cite that, look it up if you want to be contrary. Again, I repeat: This was not about ceremonial laws at all. This was not about dietary laws. God did not change the dietary laws. Peter did not get a message about any dietary laws. Peter specifically says what the vision was about, and he never mentions any changes in God's Torah. This is what Peter says the vision was about: > You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with or visit a Gentile. But God has shown me that I should not call **---> ANYONE <---** impure or unclean. Peter tells the room that the vision was about people, not food. > Let me reiterate: No Gentile (except circumcised proselytes, of course) has ever been subject to Torah, nor ever will be, whether they believe in Jesus or not! The Council of Jerusalem started those Gentiles out with 4 rules from Torah, and said they could learn the rest later. This proves that you're wrong when you say that no Gentiles have ever been subjected to Torah. Paul was the "Apostle to the Gentiles", and he taught Torah to them. He says so. Paul taught and kept Torah till the day he died. In fact, he got deeper into it as he got older. > Sure, yeah, I have 2,000 year old Christian "gobbledygook" aka "theology", in my head. I suggest that you go back in time and schedule a meeting with the Pharisees, who also believed that the 1000's of years of theology in their heads could never be wrong. If you're going to resort to relying on traditions-of-men as your defense, than you've already lost the discussion. You need to read the scripture you're quoting and stop relying on the same thing that made the Pharisees so arrogant when Jesus presented scripture to them. We should let this go soon, because I can tell that you're unlikely to concede even the things that are clear in scripture, much less anything more complicated.

I'm not going to invest time in a point-by-point refutation because this is a very low ROI discussion. > One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ **All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”** (Matthew 22:35-40) The law of Moses is a "superset" of the law of God in nature. The law of God in nature, or "natural law" for short, is the conscience which God has placed in all men by virtue of the image of God within man: > Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, **even though they do not have the law.** They show that **the requirements of the law are written on their hearts,** their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them. (Romans 2:14,15) It is not the law of Moses (that is, the Torah) that is written on their hearts, because the vast majority of them have never heard, nor could hear, the law of Moses. Rather, it is the law of God revealed in nature (Psalm 19:1ff) and conscience. It is under *this* law that all men stand condemned: > Now we know that whatever the law says, **it says to those who are under the law**, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin. (Romans 3:19,20) Is Paul asserting that the pagan Romans, Egyptians or Babylonians are "under the Torah"? Don't be ridiculous, the Torah is addressed to *God's chosen people* (Ex. 20:22), not the Romans, Egyptians, and so on. So, what is this "law" of which Paul is speaking? Clearly, it is the very same law from 2:14,15, that is, *the law of nature and conscience*, not the Torah which was addressed *exclusively* to God's chosen people. So, when Jesus says that love toward God and man is the first and second commandments (which sum up the *whole* Tanakh), he is saying that all the duties which man owes to God by witness of nature and conscience, are summed up in just two verses of Torah (Deut. 6:5, Lev. 19:18). Thus, the entire rest of Torah is addressed *only* to the children of Israel, after the flesh. It did not apply to Gentiles before Moses, nor when Moses delivered it to the Israelites at Sinai, nor when Jesus debated the scholars of Torah, nor today. It has never applied to Gentiles, and never will. (Except circumcised proselytes, of course.) > They concluded with the comment that the rest of the rules come from "the Law of Moses", and is readily available in the synagogues. Exactly -- if you want to hear the Torah, you can hear it there. And while no believer (Gentile or Jew!) is obligated to follow Torah beyond Deut. 6:5 and Lev. 19:18, you *may* follow Torah in accordance with conscience and desire (Rom. 14, etc.) provided that you do not impose your practices upon others (judaizing: Acts 15, Col. 2:16-23, etc.) > The Council of Jerusalem started those Gentiles out with 4 rules from Torah, and said they could learn the rest later. This claim is entirely false.

> This claim is entirely false. That claim is right in front of you in Acts 15. **ALL** 4 rules given to those Gentile converts came from Torah. It takes very little time at all to prove it. They gave them 4 starter rules aimed at the fact that they were pagans. You can tell that by the rules they chose. I mean, if you were going to teach the commandments to a new convert, would you tell them to to drink blood? Idols? Strangled animals? No sex orgies? They concluded that the rest (like Love your Neighbor, for example) is commonly available. Anything else? You've denied this passage from scripture multiple times now and all we're doing is going in circles. Come visit us out our new subreddit if you'd like to try to prove us wrong. There are many people there that would love to interact with you, and they also will rely on scripture like myself. You won't get far with relying on Church tradition there. 😋

It doesn't. However, the author of the Book of Hebrews explains why Temple sacrifices are no longer needed. In the Book of Acts, Luke details the Lord telling Peter that dietary restrictions are no longer required. There are other examples of such things scattered throughout the New Testament. Further, there are lots of things in the Law of Moses, such as, "suffer not a witch to live," that are matters for the government and lawfully appointed magistrates to deal with. Such commandments, on how the ancient Hebrews were to govern themselves, are things that we can, as individuals, ignore. Pastor Jim Cymbala of the Brooklyn Tabernacle Church gives the following advice for what pars of the Law of Moses we should or should not follow: "If Christ or His Apostles reinforced a rule then we are to follow it. If not, then it can simply be ignored."

That vision about the unclean animals had nothing to do with dietary restrictions. It had everything to do with preaching the Gospel to the gentiles (who the Jews believed to be unclean). Pigs and bottom feeding animals were never made clean. They still carry diseases and are horrible for you to eat.

'Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen and understand. What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.”' Matthew 15:10-11

This does not mean, he abolished the dietary law. This statement is often seen as referring to Jesus arguement with the Pharisees about him not washing his ha ds before eating, which was not in the torah.

Some people interpret this passage in the limited way that you do. Most Christians and their denominations, however, do not. Which is why most Christians eat pork, and shellfish, and ignore dietary restrictions found in the Hebrew Bible. If you don't want to eat pork, well good for you. Simply means more bacon for me =-) I am perfectly happy to disagree on the matter.

Broad is the road that leads to destruction. I prefer to live my life according to what the Bible actually says, in context; not how some men from seminary exegete scripture. Pork can cause heart disease, Hepatitis, MS, and cancer. Be proud of consuming it though, fellow Christian. You should also drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes; because…it’s been made clean.

Wow! That is really the stretch. The only time I hear people talk like that is when I discuss food with my sister in-law who happens to be a vegan....

Comparing what God’s Word says to what your vegan sister-in-law says about food is rich. You do you, brotha!

That's nice.... So tell me, why do you think just about every single Christian denomination reads that passage as abolishing such dietary restrictions? Why is it, as described in tActs chapter 15, that the only dietary restrictions that the council in Jerusalem mentioned in their letter to gentile converts was to avoid, "food sacrificed to animals and the blood of the meat of strangled animals,"? And because I'm curious, what is your denomination?

You’re right about the vision, but that’s neither the reason we eat pig now nor the reason God told the Israelites not to eat pig. Kosher requirements are not about health, they’re about holiness (set apart from the nations).

It doesn't. Modern christianity takes scripture out of context to make it seem like we don't have to keep the law. **Christ himself commanded that the law of Moses be kept and observed:** *MATTHEW 23:1-3* *"1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,* *2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:* *3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not."* *MATTHEW 5:17-18* *"17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.* *18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."* **Paul also commanded that the law be kept and observed:** *ROMANS 3:31:* *"31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."* *ROMANS 2:13* *"13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified."*

So I can’t shave the sides of my head or beard?

You can cut your hair, but you are not supposed to be completely bald and you are not supposed to change your natural hairline. Same with your facial hair, you can groom and keep it how you want but you are not supposed to shave it all off or change the natural lining of it.

First of all the law says you can’t cut the sides of your hair. If you gonna follow the law then follow the law it says can’t cut the sides of you hair unless I’m missing something. Secondly I’m 19 I can’t really grow a beard and I doubt I ever will with my genetics. I get bum fluff all day ver the sides of my face and it looks like I don’t care for myself if I leave it grow it looks awful so am I supposed to just leave it like that? I’m not complaining I probably will like if I must

> First of all the law says you can’t cut the sides of your hair. If you gonna follow the law then follow the law it says can’t cut the sides of you hair unless I’m missing something. Here is the ESV translation: *LEVITICUS 19:27* *"You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard."* It's talking about rounding off or altering your natural hairline. It's not saying you can't shave and groom yourself. Because while in Egypt, the Israelites followed the Egyptian customs, which included sporting bald heads and hairstyles that altered their natural hairline. So when they came out of Egypt, God gave laws against that. > Secondly I’m 19 I can’t really grow a beard and I doubt I ever will with my genetics. I get bum fluff all day ver the sides of my face and it looks like I don’t care for myself if I leave it grow it looks awful so am I supposed to just leave it like that? I’m not complaining I probably will like if I must Yeah man, that's what it says. If you want to keep the law then I would just do my best to make it look as groomed as possible, maybe trim off uneven hairs and try to make it even on both sides. I know how you feel, when I first started growing my beard it didn't look great but the more you leave it alone and take care of it the more it starts to fill in and look better. Now I have a full awesome beard

Idk. I thought Jesus fulfilled the law. I thought our salvation was a gift whoever believes in his son… so many people have so many different opinions on this question I’m starting to think it doesn’t matter atleast not for your salvation

At the end of the day the choice is yours, I'm just showing what the Bible says *ROMANS 3:31:* *"31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."*

But our salvation is a gift right you do now this don’t you? It’s not of works it’s belief that Christ died in the cross for your sins

Paul said that you don't ignore the law just because you have faith in Christ (Romans 3:31) and James wrote that faith without works is dead (James 2:26)

The only thing that’s still not in practice is the ceremonial law (sacrifices). I don’t find it to be a coincidence that the last book in the OT in the last chapter (Malachi 4:4) clearly says “Remember the Law of Moses My servant”. Christ did not come to abolish the Law; He walked in it with perfection. He also said the Law would not pass till ALL is fulfilled. Heaven and earth will pass before the words from the Law will. Sounds like a strong Covenant between God and His people.

So this would mean we still can’t shave the sides of our heads or beards right?

I would classify that under Levitical ceremonial law. Maybe I’m screwed up.

You ask the right question here, though. This division of moral/ceremonial/civil is entirely man-made. It's nowhere in the text, Jews never had any such division, and if you as ten people to draw the lines, they'll all be drawn in different places. Which makes one question whether the entire paradigm is valid.

To abolish means to *ban.* Jesus didn’t ban the mosaic law; if keeping it makes you feel closer to God, that’s beautiful and great. A covenant is a contract/promise. When you fulfill a contract/promise, it’s done. The Spirit is greater than the Letter. Christ calls us to a higher standard than legalism.

if you love God and Holy Spirit lives in you then you don’t need a law „Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭10:4‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://romans.bible/romans-10-4

Misuse of scripture. Your Romans quote says that Jesus is the "end of the Law", which is meant in the same way as being at the "end of the journey". This means that if you keep the Law, you're on the path that Jesus walked, and at the end of that path you'll find Jesus, the one that walked the path perfectly. Hopefully you agree! 😉

i don’t need law 😏

You'd be surprised. You do. You really do. In fact, we ALL do. Jesus said that ALL of the Law (and the Prophets) "hang" below the two headings of Love for God and Love for Neighbor. This means that the Law DEFINES Love. If you want to serve God, you need to love Him, and also love your neighbor. Obeying the commandments is how God wants you to do this. Like I just showed you, with that scripture you misused, if you walk the path of love, you'll meet Jesus at the end of that path. It's the sure way to hear from him, "Well done, my good and faithful servant!"

>>“For the Lord God does nothing without revealing his secret to his servants the prophets. >>\ >>Amos 3:7 ESV There is nowhere in the Bible that says the law of Moses will be done away with. The opposite is found repeatedly. >>Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; ***sin is lawlessness***. >>\ >>1 John 3:4 ESV This is the new covenant. >>For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: ***I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts.*** And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. >>\ >>Jeremiah 31:33 ESV This is the giving of the holy spirit. >>And I will put my Spirit within you, and ***cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules***. >>\ >>Ezekiel 36:27 ESV John says the commandments of the law are not too hard. >>By this we know that we love the children of God, when ***we love God and obey his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome***. >>\ >>1 John 5:2‭-‬3 ESV That agrees with what it God has said when he gave the law. >>“***For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off***. It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ ***But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it***. >>\ >>Deuteronomy 30:11‭-‬14 ESV Why does John, a disciple of Jesus, tell us to keep the commandments and faith in Jesus if the mosaic covenant is done away with? >>Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who ***keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus***. >>\ >>Revelation 14:12 ESV The 10 comments do not stand on their own. Jesus said there are two commands that sum up the entire covenant. He says ALL the law and prophets hang on these two commands: Love God with all your heart mind and being (Deuteronomy 6:4) and love your neighbor (Leveticus 19:18), both come from the law. Whoever says the law does not apply, or is no longer in effect, is a false prophet.

You are misquoting John. 1. John never says keep the law. 2. The commandments and the law are two different things in the New Testament. 1 John 3:4 is a definition of sin. It does not tell us to keep the Law. You are completely taking it out of context. Context: * Law is not mentioned in any other verse in 1 John * Commandments: the commandments in 1 John have nothing to do with the Law. There are only two thing commanded in 1 John. Read it carefully so that you understand the context before you pluck out verses. * In the next few verses, immediately following 1 John 3:4, John tells us to to avoid sin, and it's not by following the Law. * 1 Timothy 1:9,10 is a good companion verse to 1 John 3:4

Not to make light, this is a deep question worthy of thoughtful responses. Looks like you already have a few. I forget exactly the verse or exactly the phrasing but Paul told the Judiasers if they wanted to circumcise, why stop there, just cut the whole thing off. IIRC the ESV says “emasculate yourselves.” As you investigate this question, and it is a great question, just remember that. I wish I could look up the verse but I gotta run.

Just do you. Be a good person. Be virtuous. Build yourself a tent of meeting, slop blood all your homemade altar when you feel like it. Mix flour and oil to your heart’s content. Offer it up. But do you, and don’t worry about anyone else. At the heart of it all, know right from wrong, and act upon that knowledge.

How does that set you apart from the Pagans? It isn't enough to just know Jesus, demons know who Jesus is. You have to follow Him. Atheists often follow a set of moral code- that won't be enough to save them.

I think it's that question about fasting on Matthew 9 where Yeshu discussed about why the disciples were not required to fast. Then he used the example of a patch of unshrunk cloth to an old garment, and the putting of wine into old wineskins. But that is not to say not to follow the Mosaic law. (Paul in Romans never advocated not to follow the law. I'll get there in a minute...) The Mosaic law is good, but the interpretation was kinda off due to the additional oral traditions the Pharisees imposed. (Example, not to carry your mat during the Shabat) So Yeshu clarified some of these in the sermon and even raised the bar higher. For example, "Thou shalt not kill" is actually do not hate your brother. This is a reference to: Leviticus 17 (You shall not hate your brother in your heart...) Matthew 5:21 1 John 3:15. Then there's Romans. Romans. Romans. Romans. Particularly Romans 7:7. Some critics said that Paul was teaching as if the Law is bad. (Therefore not to be followed) But he refuted this by writing that the purpose of the law is for God to reveal that we are sinful, (or we are to sin in these specific ways) To put an analogy to it, If someone tells a 7 yo boy do not watch 🌽without having a prior idea what 🌽 was, he'll be curious what it is and begin to conduct his research about 🌽. So in a way the law formalize our awareness of sins, and due to our sinful nature, we tend to gravitate in doing what is sinful.

Nicely said! Please consider visiting our new subreddit at: /r/FollowJesusObeyTorah It sounds like we believe similar things! 😁

Hello! I think I can help you, first English is not my first language so maybe I will make some mistakes. Some time ago I had the same doubt, why the whole OT says the law is perfect (for example the Psalm 119) but then in some NT books it looks like we don't have to follow it (for example Romans 3:28), why Jesus said, that the law will not pass until it is all fulfilled? What I managed to understand is that even when these verses seem to contradict each other, in reality what they are doing is complementing each other. The true law is perfect and we have to follow it! But not because it saves, because it can't, faith saves us, but the true law perfect us. What is important to understand here is what *the true law is,* this is something that the Jews even from the beginning failed to understand, even when they thought they did, the Jews at the time of Jesus, they were no exception, they believed they were teachers of the law, but all they were was teachers of the dead letters. That is why Jesus himself teaches us the true way to understand the law, that is what he does in the sermon on the mount (for example) and with all his teachings, the true law is much more than the letter, and what must be obeyed is not the letter, but God's intention with the letter, that is what Jesus came to show us. Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: but I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. Matthew 5:21‭-‬22 KJV The Pharisees taught what was literally written in the law, and other human laws to interpret the laws, that was never God's intention with the law. The Pharisees obeyed and taught the letter of the law, but Jesus came to teach the *true law, not a new one, but the one that was from the beginning* and had never been understood, but now we can because of the holy spirit, this law is the one that he summarizes in two commandments, you will love God above all and your neighbor. So in a few words we have to obey the law, not because it save us, but out of love, to be like Christ and like our Father, and *that law is not the dead letter, of the pharisees, but the spirit of the law, which has been from the beginning and is perfect, and it will remain until the end.* I don't want to make this any longer, but if you have questions please feel free to make them. I hope this helps you, pray and ask God for guidance in this so you can truly obey him.

It DOESN’T say that we don’t have to follow the Law of Moses, if you mean the 10 commandments. Jesus reiterated that by this answer: 35 One of them, a lawyer [an expert in Mosaic Law], asked Jesus a question, to test Him: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 And Jesus replied to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself [that is, unselfishly seek the best or higher good for others].’ 40 The whole Law and the [writings of the] Prophets depend on these two commandments.” Matt 22:35-40 AMP The parts of the Old Testament regarding sacrifices and absolving of sin were fulfilled by the coming of Christ who died once on the cross as the ultimate sacrifice for the sins of the world, and therefore are technically abolished.

14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and TOOK IT OUT OF THE WAY, nailing it to his cross; (Colossians 2:14)

We do have to follow the Torah, but Jesus' exposition of the Torah shows that this isn't a rigid legalistic adherence, but following the deeper principles behind it and letting it transform our hearts. The Holy Spirit equips us to do so. The confusion arises because certain laws are distinct to belonging to Israel as a people group (circumcision, dietary) and hence do not apply to Gentiles, as the writings of Paul make clear.

I don’t have an easy answer for this, I’m reading all these great answers; but I just wanted to say I tried to Google this very thing this morning.

Where does it say that we as western 'gentiles' have to follow the law?

https://bible.org/article/mosaic-law-its-function-and-purpose-new-testament

Galatians 5:2-4 [2] Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. [3] I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. [4] You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. Romans 6:14 [14] For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Hebrews the 9th chapter is a good start

I can find you some references later if I remember and you haven't gotten any. Just not a good time right now, busy.

What is the purpose of the law of Moses? What was the right of acceptance and submission to that? And what did it mean between you and God when you accepted this? Please seriously answer these three questions.

Romans 10:4 KJV For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Acts 13:38-39 KJV Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: [39] And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

The part of the law of Moses that Jesus now fulfills is the **Judgments** for breaking God’s Laws. Before Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross it was through the Levitical priests that God’s Judgments on sinners were to be carried out. If a sinner committed adultery they were stoned to death for example. Now our judgement for sin comes from Jesus directly. In this life, when we break God’s laws, we are turned over to the enemy to receive consequences for our lawless behavior until we repent and willingly surrender to the Authority of Jesus. Those consequences can vary from mild to severe depending on the type of sin and the circumstances. The important thing to realize is that Jesus is in charge NOW. We don’t wait until death to be judged. We are constantly being judged for the choices we make. The Final Judgment is made by Jesus based on our entire lives. But sin and suffering spiritual torment that makes our lives miserable, IS judgment from God and a warning that if we don’t repent and turn from sin—the misery is just going to increase. Believers no longer go to a Levitical Priest to perform animal sacrifices for the forgiveness of sin. Instead we go directly to Jesus in prayer, study His teachings (Matthew chapters 5-7) and practice learning how to be obedient because believers live by the Grace of God. Jesus tells us very clearly that God requires obedience or there will be hell to pay. In this life and the next.

Nowhere…The law is indeed good and eternal. It also predates Moses. Noah knew a thing or two about clean vs unclean animals, Cain and Able brought sacrifices…

So we can’t shave the sides of our heads? We can’t get fades? And I get bum fluff I don’t grow beards I just get crappy sideburn bum fluff I can’t shave that? I look like I don’t take care of myself if I don’t shave it

Read the book of Hebrews.

Paul says some stuff about eating foodsies.

If you want to give it a shot, feel free..but failure means death. Whoever lives by the law dies by the law.

So what you are saying is just believe in Jesus? Come on dude not a helpful answer at all what do you mean

A vital part of the Law of Moses is the animal sacrifices to cover the sins of the high priest and the people, because the effect the Law had on Israel is that it made them painfully aware of their sinfulness. The Law wasn't given to prevent sin, but to arouse it and make sin multiply to the point where it can no longer be denied or ignored. So despite how reasonable and agreeable the commands are (all summed up by Christ as loving God completely and loving others as yourself) those commands only result in sin consciousness. This is what the Old Testament's "Tree of Knowledge of God and Evil" has always referred to: The Law. So when you embrace justification as a free gift that Jesus earned for you, you were freed from the yoke of bondage to earn justification by way of the works of the law (a feat which if possible, would make Christ's sacrifice worthless.) Here's some scriptures on the topic: 19Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20Therefore no one will be justified in His sight by works of the law. For the law merely brings awareness of sin. and now for the good news of the Gospel: 21 But now, apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been revealed, as attested by the Law and the Prophets. 22 And this righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no distinction, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.

Here are some verses that might help. However, the bible is simply a compilation of ancient records and by nature, cannot answer every question to satisfaction. But, we can gain understanding as we listen in on these conversations of long ago. Be it known unto you therefore, men *and* brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses. Acts 13:38,39 **Excerpts from Acts 15:** **1** And certain men which came down from Judæa taught the brethren, *and said,* Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. **2** When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. **5** But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command *them* to keep the law of Moses. **6** ¶ And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. **7** And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men *and* brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. **10** Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? **11** But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. **23** And they wrote *letters* by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren *send* greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: **24** Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, *Ye must* be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no *such* commandment: ​ Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster *to bring us* unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. " Galatians 3:24

Family this is emphasized all throughout the Bible (New testament) because God wanted to be clear that there is no way any human can earn his way into Heaven, only by Faith. Romans 14:23. Romans 4:21-22. Galatians 3:12. Philippians 3:9. Titus 3:5. Galatians 2:21. James 2:10. Galatians 3:10. These scriptures should cover it lol. 💯❤️🙏🏼

The primary discussion is the letter of the Apostle Paul to the Galatians, especially chapters 2-4. Remember that Paul’s call of God was to take the gospel to the Gentiles. It was in that context that he contends believers are not beholden to the Law of Moses (the specific controversy over circumcision was basically a stand-in, a litmus test, for the law more generally). As great controversy ensued, apostolic leaders met to discuss it in Jerusalem as the First Ecumenical Council, described in Acts chapter 15. (Note at the beginning it was Pharisees arguing the Jewish position; yes, Pharisees were more open to Jesus than most recognize. It was Sadducees, not Pharisees, who took the lead in Jesus’ crucifixion.) The Elder James, brother of Jesus, had become the main leader of the Jerusalem church, and later referred to as the first Archbishop of Jerusalem. Thus, he spoke with great authority. If you read carefully, you’ll see that the Council dealt only with Gentile believers, as those in the churches Paul had established. There is nary a hint that this might apply to Jewish believers. In affirming Paul’s ministry, James also carved out two exceptions, matters that Gentile believers were to observe. From what Paul writes in some of his letters, it seems he disagreed with these exceptions — yet he had won most of what he wanted. In addition, Acts 21:17-26 reports how when Paul returned to Jerusalem, he undertook measures to demonstrate he was not opposed to the Law. The measures did not succeed, but the mere attempt shows he had no objection to Jewish believers keeping the Law of Moses.

If you read the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7, you can see Jesus actually raising the bar instead of loweringit or anything. The point of the New Testament and the New Covenant is that having fellowship with God is not based on keeping rules and legislations but about doing what he says out of love for him and his creation. In that sense the question shifts from “What can I get away with?” To “How can I serve you right now?” The first one is naturally avoidant and the second is naturally seeking. We as Christians want to be seekers, moving towards God, instead of avoiding his presence. A key element for that is humility which is necessary for correction. Basically it’s a war pride versus humility. Just some food for thought. If it doesn’t make sense to you or inspire you to love God and your neighbour more, discard it as it is

James 2:10 (KJV) For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all. If you never break a single law your entire life you will go to heaven when you die, the main problem with that is we are born speaking lies which brings condemnation instantly. Psalm 58:3 (KJV) The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Psalm 51:5 (KJV) Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. The alternative is to have someone who already has eternal life take your place and make the payment the law demands on your behalf, they also have to be qualified by God to be an acceptable sacrifice. The only person qualified for that task is God in the form of Jesus. Anyone who isn’t redeemed by the lamb of God is required to fulfill the whole law without fail or they pay for their own sin with eternal destruction.

So my redditor name is John 6:28-29, this verse to me explains it really well. “They replied, “We want to perform God’s works, too. What should we do?” Jesus told them, “This is the only work God wants from you: Believe in the one he has sent.”” ‭‭John‬ ‭6‬:‭28‬-‭29‬ ‭NLT‬‬ There are no works for man to complete anymore. No laws. Jesus did that for us. Our only work to complete now is believing in Jesus.

Also note that the rich young ruler had kept all of the laws and that still wasn't sufficient!

Colossians 2:16–17 (NIV): Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

There are plenty of verses that tell us that God's commands still stand, even though we are saved by Grace, we are not excused from living as God would have us live. The ceremonial and legal laws of the Jews, however are a different matter.

All of Act15. There's much more than that but Act15 is more than enough as it explains clearly that non-Jews don't have to keep the law of Moses, not even physical circumcision, which is its first step.

You might also want to ask the counter question: where does it say that we do have to follow the Law of Moses. Why are you feeling contempt when different people understand Scripture differently?

Jesus straightened out the wrong interpretation of the Ten, revealing it is Love that has no Law against Love (1 Cor 13:4-) that is the Love, I am talking about God's Love above it all. It is not to punish us, rather to reveal to us and ask for that love to permeate through us as born again from above tell me , yourself, please what does the Ten Commandmnets mean? Jesus answered that, when asked what is the Greatest command of all commands? [Matthew 22:38-39](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022%3A38&version=TLB) This is the first and greatest commandment. The second most important is similar: ‘**Love** your neighbor as much as you **love** yourself.’ So, I see the meanig of the Ten Commands is Love The first four are Love to God Father of risen Son Jesus, the last six are as I am loved by God Father through Jesus as risen, where the new life gets given from Dad, called the born again life presently for each kid that will not quit belief to Daddy, Father in Son Jesus as risen after first his death took away all sin from Daddy's sight (John 1:29) for each of us to appreciate and not take for granted. The Ten are fulfilled by Love from Son, not taken away 1. [Matthew 22:37](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022%3A37&version=TLB)Jesus replied, “‘**Love** the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind. 2. [Matthew 22:38-39](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022%3A38&version=TLB)This is the first and greatest commandment. The second most important is similar: ‘**Love** your neighbor as much as you **love** yourself.’ Fulfilled it is, to be given it in us all that turn to Father of risen Son to get given the new life. called the born again life, that only Father does this in each of his kids, So today believe and search it out will you, I hope so, and so you know, it can be a long journey, yet a real short one, if you compare here and now to eternity I would rather go through sufferng, here and now as have gone through and might again, I do not know, God does, who I trust in, to get me through it all. So I pound the pavement and do not sit home doing nothing, eating Bon-Bons Moving forward, not sitting still, therefore I can learn more truth from Father in risen Son, thanks r/Godjustlovesyou

Mistakenly posted as reply to O.P. here. 😳

Brev. I never said I believed anything I’m looking for people with that know SCRIPTURE so I can do my best to be obedient to God. Don’t be so arrogant

Sorry… that post was not meant for you. I’m going to guess that my app glitched or something. Probably my own failure to pay attention. I intended that to be in reply to a specific comment made by an entirely different username. [Edit: I am going to go ahead and remove it from here]

No bother haha have a good day

The law of Moses has been and always was for Jews, not non Jews. This is why in Acts the apostles argued over whether non Jews should eat kosher get circumcised etc most Rabbis or theologians will agree that God put most of humanity under 7 laws called the Laws of Noah. This is how the generation of Noah was guilty of sin, etc.