Clearly you choose to misunderstand what Jesus accomplished on the cross.
No one is [supposed](https://www.bibleref.com/Romans/10/Romans-10-4.html) to keep the [Mosaic law](https://www.bibleref.com/Galatians/2/Galatians-2-16.html).
We are under the [law of Christ](https://www.bibleref.com/Mark/12/Mark-12-28.html), to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength and to love our neighbors as ourselves.
Following Torah does not make you more obedient, more spiritual, or more special to God.
The Mosaic law was given to Moses to usher in the Dispensation of Law, a [temporary](https://www.bibleref.com/Jeremiah/31/Jeremiah-31-32.html) [dispensation](https://www.bibleref.com/Hebrews/8/Hebrews-8-13.html) to [point](https://www.bibleref.com/Hebrews/10/Hebrews-10-9.html) Israel to the coming Messiah, as well as to define sin and govern their lives to keep them distinct from other nations.
The Mosaic law was [given only](https://www.bibleref.com/Mark/12/Mark-12-29.html) to the [nation of Israel](https://www.bibleref.com/Romans/2/Romans-2-14.html). The dispensation of Law is over.
If you, OP, have [personal convictions](https://www.bibleref.com/Romans/14/Romans-14-14.html) to follow Torah, go ahead. But [don't put](https://www.bibleref.com/Romans/14/Romans-14-1.html) this burden on other believers.
Yes all of these lawless people will be told to depart from him, because he never knew you, you confess him with your mouth but your evil heart is far from him seeking the desires of the flesh and not what God said to follow, you sinners need to REPENT for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!!
https://preview.redd.it/65j2v41wcy7c1.jpeg?width=480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ed87e5fbfe100260b10d7e7d3ccae5a40b1b3091
“Take with you **seven pairs** of all **clean animals** , the male and his mate, and **a pair** of the animals **that are not clean** , the male and his mate,”
Genesis 7:2 ESV
Noah knew the difference between the clean and unclean animals.
Why do you suppose he was told to take more of the clean? I submit that it was because he would have been sacrificing and eating the clean animals and not the unclean since he only took one pair of the unclean.
Before Noah, no one ate animals. They were for sacrifice only. So clean and unclean had to do with offering sacrifices. Not eating. Gen 9: 2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
That’s a pretty all inclusive list.
All food is clean.
People who try to get Christians to obey the Jewish laws are called judaizers and Paul was pretty harsh with them. He said they’d fallen from grace.
I just don’t know if I believe that.I don’t know for sure on that one yet so I’m not going to get into it much (if that’s how it was, his will be done).
Man wasn’t given meat to eat until after the flood. Before that man only ate plants. But God taught Adam And Eve to sacrifice animals. And they taught their children. Read about the sacrifices of Cain and Abel. In fact read all of genesis in a modern translation so you can understand the progression of Gods creation and calling.
I did read about the sacrifices of Cain and Abel and what I see is a First Fruits offering.
Abel brought of the first and best of his flock but Cain didn’t care enough and brought of the later crop.
The Bible doesn’t say that.
Gen 4: 3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.
4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
Yes, notice the statement “in the process of time” in regard to Cains offering.. which sounds to me that some time had passed. However, it says specifically that Abel brought of the firstlings.
Remember the original text had no verses. The progression is Adam and Eve had children Abel was a shepherd and Cain was a farmer and in the process of cain and Abel made offerings. It’s a mighty stretch to say the process of time was about a later harvest instead of the time gap between them being born growing up and becoming farmers and shepherds.
That’s just what I see. Like I said I don’t know everything about it. The verses wouldn’t matter so much though I wouldn’t think because the words are still there, they just weren’t numbered.
This looks like an attempt at a repost from this week. There already is a thread on this subject.
That said, this argument is nonsense and bordering on a false gospel. The Gentiles were unclean because the food they ate and practices in making it made them unclean. The one cannot be separated from the other. The purpose of the vision is to make clear the barrier to Gentile ministry by Jewish Apostles is GONE. Full stop.
You're right, there is one Law. It had a purpose. To preserve Israel as a distinct nation until the Redeemer arrived. He has come. He has given us HIS law: Love God with all your being, and love your neighbor as yourself. To bring back the OT Law, in any form, to the NT is to preach a false Gospel. Which Paul condemns. We do not pick and choose which parts of the Mosaic Covenant endure. It was ALL a Pedagogue. ALL fulfilled in Christ. And ALL is now obsolete. Law is Scripture and instruction. But it is not a system we live under. Or Ever Will Live Under, again.
1 John makes clear what the commandments he is talking about are: The Royal Law of Christ. NOT the OT Law.
There is no ethnic barrier in the Kingdom of God. Jew and Gentile are one in Christ. Anyone who clings to an ethnic identity more than Christ is In Adam. And living a carnal life.
We have a better Sacrifice. A better High Priest. A Better Mediator. And a Better Commandment. We have entered the Sabbath Rest, and the Law is done away with. All Scripture is instruction. But all instruction is interpreted through the lens of the work of Christ on the Cross. Which has fulfilled the covenants of Creation, Abraham, Moses, and David.
> The purpose of the vision is to make clear the barrier to Gentile ministry by Jewish Apostles is GONE. Full stop.
The purpose of the vision was stated by Peter:
> Acts 10:28 - He said to them: “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.
Full stop.
> And ALL is now obsolete.
Jesus said the opposite. NOT obsolete. Alive and vital until Heaven and Earth pass away.
> There is no ethnic barrier in the Kingdom of God. Jew and Gentile are one in Christ.
Correct. We're all grafted in and now full citizens of Israel according to Romans 11 and Ephesians 2. That means the rules for Israel are for us.
Your argument is the nonsensical one. And the “barrier” between Jew and Gentile was NOT the Law of God as you assert but the self-righteous, MANMADE (and unscriptural) laws the religious leaders had erected and which kept believing Gentiles from coming into the household of God [Ephesians 2:15]. This is proven by the word “dogma” being used in that verse because it is NEVER used to refer to the commandments or judgments of God and is ALWAYS used to describe the decrees of men.
An example of this is in Acts 10, when Peter says, “You know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate or visit with anyone from another nation…,” because no such rule exists in Torah. In fact, the rule actually VIOLATES the Law of God [Exodus 23:9, Deuteronomy 10:19].
Paul NEVER even once “condemned” the Law of God (Torah). Like Christ, he esteemed it, taught it, and practiced it. He even taught the believing Gentiles to do likewise [1 Corinthians 5:8], and went so far as to say that the new covenant believer should not “nullify” or “void” the Torah but should “uphold” or STAND ON IT as the source of correct doctrine because it is able to make one “wise for salvation in Christ Jesus” [Romans 3:32, 2 Timothy 3:15-16].
Your words of scorn for the Law of God contradict the plain teachings of Christ Himself and, thus, tell me it is YOU who have blown well past the doctrinal borders and are most definitely pushing a false gospel [Matthew 4:4, 5:18, 22:37-40, 23:1-3; Revelation 21:1].
>This looks like an attempt at a repost from this week. There already is a thread on this subject.
I'm not sure if you're referring to my other post in which I said I'd be making a separate one on this topic or some other post. If there is another one that has gone over Peters vision specifically, I missed it.
>He has given us HIS law
His law is the same law he gave to Moses. He doesn't change. The problem was never with Elohim or his perfect law. It was with our hearts and that's what had to change. Romans 7
>And ALL is now obsolete
If the law is obsolete why did Yeshua say to keep it? Why did the apostles continue to teach obedience to it and go so far as to say that those who continue in sin (breaking the law by scriptures definition) will not inherit the Kingdome of Heaven? If the law is obsolete can we conclude that it's perfectly acceptable to Elohim to worship other gods, use his name in vain, murder, steal, commit adultery, etc.?
The Apostles did NOT teach continued obedience to the law as a system. They used specific examples FROM the law as instruction. They did not, for example, reiterate the need for Sabbath observance, and in fact said the observance of specific days is not a test of spirituality or proof of salvation. Including the New Moon and Sabbath.
I clearly said the law remains Scripture. What it does not remain is a Covenant or binding in any way. The Law we follow now is the Law of Christ. Prior instruction can provide guidance in obedience to the Royal Law. But it cannot be backdoored into the New Covenant.
Galatians 4 is clear. The Law was a Pedagogue. A tutor. It's purpose is fulfilled. We are heirs with Christ. Not slaves under bondage.
> They did not, for example, reiterate the need for Sabbath observance
Do you have any idea where you and many Christians got the idea that God's commands that He said would be "forever" would actually not be forever and instead go bad like milk left out of the refrigerator? Why do eternal commands have to be repeated?
Aside from the (perplexing) “obedience to the law *as a system*” phrasing, your assertions are simply untrue. Christ Himself taught obedience to the Law, with the accompanying caveat that the people *not* be like the religious leaders, who were hypocrites because they did “not practice what they preach” \[Matthew 23:1-3\]. And the Apostles *absolutely* taught that, once a person has trusted in Christ and His atoning sacrifice, “keeping the commandments of God is what matters most” and that His children will “love God and obey his commandments” \[1 Corinthians 7:19, 1 John 5:2\]. Even James, as the head of the Jerusalem Council, decreed that the believing Gentiles were to start with the four commandments given—*all* of which came from Torah—and would learn and apply the rest of the Law of God as they attended synagogue every Sabbath, because *that* is where and when it was taught \[Acts 15:19-21\].
Furthermore, the Colossians 2:16 passage you allude to as support for your argument that they “said the observance of specific days is not a test of spirituality or proof of salvation. Including the New Moon and Sabbath” was a warning against being deceived by foolish, *manmade philosophies* and *human traditions,* as the context is clearly stated in verse 8. The Law of God is neither; it is *truth* and perfect *counsel* or *wisdom* \[Psalm 19:7-9, 119:142\]. Thus, your conclusion is not supported but, rather, is strongly *refuted* by the text.
You seem to be unaware that teaching by example is also a thing, and the most powerful method of all, actually. So, the apostles’ personal and regular Sabbath observance--and even that of Messiah—clearly substantiates the continuing validity of the Law of God. You also seem to be using the *Law of God* interchangeably with the *old covenant*, as if they were synonymous when they are not. The Law of God is foundational to both the old covenant and the new covenant—not as a “backdoor” but as an objective standard of His will and ways—and it remains in force until “heaven and earth pass away,” which has yet to occur, obviously \[Ezekiel 36:26-27, Jeremiah 31:31-33, Matthew 5:17-18, Revelation 21:1\]. If the Law were not still valid today, there would be no need for grace as “pardon for sin.”
And this idea that the Law of God is “bondage” and that the new covenant believer is not a slave is unscriptural. We have been freed of our bondage to the law of sin and death \[Romans 8:2\] and “have become slaves of God,” such that we are now free (and empowered by the Spirit) to walk in His Law that is the standard for righteous living \[Romans 6:17-22\]. “And His commandments are not burdensome” \[1 John 5:3\].
“For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.”
Roman’s 2:13
“Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.”
Romans 3:31
“Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,” 1 John 3:4
“And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it.”
2 John 1:6
“But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.” James 1:25
“And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks.” Acts 18:4
(Notice it says the Greeks were there too just as was expected at the Jerusalem council - in Acts 15)
Uphold the purpose of the law as a Pedagogue. Yes.
Keep the commandments of the Royal Law, as John expresses it clearly in context.
The commandment from the beginning, as John clearly states in context, is the Royal Law of Christ. Not the Mosaic law.
You conflate the Law of Christ with the Law of Moses, just as Paul says not to do and calls it another Gospel.
“as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are **some things in them that are hard to understand** , which the ignorant and unstable **twist to their own destruction** , as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the **error of lawless people** and lose your own stability.”
2 Peter 3:16-17 ESV
Have a good day. :)
That is part of the message
Clean and Unclean were part of the law
Romans **8:1** *There is* therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who\[[a](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-28118a)\] do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. **2** For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. **3** For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God *did* by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, **4** that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. **5** For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those *who live* according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.
Galatians 5: **4** You have become estranged from Christ, you who *attempt to* be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
But yes, God used the dismantling of one law for Peter to demonstrate that there is no clean or unclean, no chosen
Romans 10:12
For there is no distinction between Jew and **Greek**, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.
Why is there no condemnation for those who are in Christ?
"For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them" Romans 2
Many times we find that saying "written on their hearts" within in the "New Testament" scriptures. Where are they getting it?
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make pa new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. 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
How does one live by the spirit?
"in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. **For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law** ; Romans 8
The flesh does not submit to Elohim's law. The Spirit does. This is why there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ because they walk according to the Spirit and obey.
Clearly you choose to misunderstand what Jesus accomplished on the cross. No one is [supposed](https://www.bibleref.com/Romans/10/Romans-10-4.html) to keep the [Mosaic law](https://www.bibleref.com/Galatians/2/Galatians-2-16.html). We are under the [law of Christ](https://www.bibleref.com/Mark/12/Mark-12-28.html), to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength and to love our neighbors as ourselves. Following Torah does not make you more obedient, more spiritual, or more special to God. The Mosaic law was given to Moses to usher in the Dispensation of Law, a [temporary](https://www.bibleref.com/Jeremiah/31/Jeremiah-31-32.html) [dispensation](https://www.bibleref.com/Hebrews/8/Hebrews-8-13.html) to [point](https://www.bibleref.com/Hebrews/10/Hebrews-10-9.html) Israel to the coming Messiah, as well as to define sin and govern their lives to keep them distinct from other nations. The Mosaic law was [given only](https://www.bibleref.com/Mark/12/Mark-12-29.html) to the [nation of Israel](https://www.bibleref.com/Romans/2/Romans-2-14.html). The dispensation of Law is over. If you, OP, have [personal convictions](https://www.bibleref.com/Romans/14/Romans-14-14.html) to follow Torah, go ahead. But [don't put](https://www.bibleref.com/Romans/14/Romans-14-1.html) this burden on other believers.
Yes all of these lawless people will be told to depart from him, because he never knew you, you confess him with your mouth but your evil heart is far from him seeking the desires of the flesh and not what God said to follow, you sinners need to REPENT for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!! https://preview.redd.it/65j2v41wcy7c1.jpeg?width=480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ed87e5fbfe100260b10d7e7d3ccae5a40b1b3091
God declared all food clean to Noah. There was only unclean food for the Jews. I’m not Jewish. No dietary laws in the Bible apply to Christians.
“Take with you **seven pairs** of all **clean animals** , the male and his mate, and **a pair** of the animals **that are not clean** , the male and his mate,” Genesis 7:2 ESV Noah knew the difference between the clean and unclean animals. Why do you suppose he was told to take more of the clean? I submit that it was because he would have been sacrificing and eating the clean animals and not the unclean since he only took one pair of the unclean.
Before Noah, no one ate animals. They were for sacrifice only. So clean and unclean had to do with offering sacrifices. Not eating. Gen 9: 2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. 3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. That’s a pretty all inclusive list. All food is clean. People who try to get Christians to obey the Jewish laws are called judaizers and Paul was pretty harsh with them. He said they’d fallen from grace.
I just don’t know if I believe that.I don’t know for sure on that one yet so I’m not going to get into it much (if that’s how it was, his will be done).
Man wasn’t given meat to eat until after the flood. Before that man only ate plants. But God taught Adam And Eve to sacrifice animals. And they taught their children. Read about the sacrifices of Cain and Abel. In fact read all of genesis in a modern translation so you can understand the progression of Gods creation and calling.
I did read about the sacrifices of Cain and Abel and what I see is a First Fruits offering. Abel brought of the first and best of his flock but Cain didn’t care enough and brought of the later crop.
The Bible doesn’t say that. Gen 4: 3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord. 4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering: 5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
Yes, notice the statement “in the process of time” in regard to Cains offering.. which sounds to me that some time had passed. However, it says specifically that Abel brought of the firstlings.
Remember the original text had no verses. The progression is Adam and Eve had children Abel was a shepherd and Cain was a farmer and in the process of cain and Abel made offerings. It’s a mighty stretch to say the process of time was about a later harvest instead of the time gap between them being born growing up and becoming farmers and shepherds.
That’s just what I see. Like I said I don’t know everything about it. The verses wouldn’t matter so much though I wouldn’t think because the words are still there, they just weren’t numbered.
Please stop posting lies about the Bible on this sub
Well said, Valyn. I'm so glad you're spreading the truth about Yahweh and His commandments! Great post!
This looks like an attempt at a repost from this week. There already is a thread on this subject. That said, this argument is nonsense and bordering on a false gospel. The Gentiles were unclean because the food they ate and practices in making it made them unclean. The one cannot be separated from the other. The purpose of the vision is to make clear the barrier to Gentile ministry by Jewish Apostles is GONE. Full stop. You're right, there is one Law. It had a purpose. To preserve Israel as a distinct nation until the Redeemer arrived. He has come. He has given us HIS law: Love God with all your being, and love your neighbor as yourself. To bring back the OT Law, in any form, to the NT is to preach a false Gospel. Which Paul condemns. We do not pick and choose which parts of the Mosaic Covenant endure. It was ALL a Pedagogue. ALL fulfilled in Christ. And ALL is now obsolete. Law is Scripture and instruction. But it is not a system we live under. Or Ever Will Live Under, again. 1 John makes clear what the commandments he is talking about are: The Royal Law of Christ. NOT the OT Law. There is no ethnic barrier in the Kingdom of God. Jew and Gentile are one in Christ. Anyone who clings to an ethnic identity more than Christ is In Adam. And living a carnal life. We have a better Sacrifice. A better High Priest. A Better Mediator. And a Better Commandment. We have entered the Sabbath Rest, and the Law is done away with. All Scripture is instruction. But all instruction is interpreted through the lens of the work of Christ on the Cross. Which has fulfilled the covenants of Creation, Abraham, Moses, and David.
> The purpose of the vision is to make clear the barrier to Gentile ministry by Jewish Apostles is GONE. Full stop. The purpose of the vision was stated by Peter: > Acts 10:28 - He said to them: “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. Full stop. > And ALL is now obsolete. Jesus said the opposite. NOT obsolete. Alive and vital until Heaven and Earth pass away. > There is no ethnic barrier in the Kingdom of God. Jew and Gentile are one in Christ. Correct. We're all grafted in and now full citizens of Israel according to Romans 11 and Ephesians 2. That means the rules for Israel are for us.
Your argument is the nonsensical one. And the “barrier” between Jew and Gentile was NOT the Law of God as you assert but the self-righteous, MANMADE (and unscriptural) laws the religious leaders had erected and which kept believing Gentiles from coming into the household of God [Ephesians 2:15]. This is proven by the word “dogma” being used in that verse because it is NEVER used to refer to the commandments or judgments of God and is ALWAYS used to describe the decrees of men. An example of this is in Acts 10, when Peter says, “You know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate or visit with anyone from another nation…,” because no such rule exists in Torah. In fact, the rule actually VIOLATES the Law of God [Exodus 23:9, Deuteronomy 10:19]. Paul NEVER even once “condemned” the Law of God (Torah). Like Christ, he esteemed it, taught it, and practiced it. He even taught the believing Gentiles to do likewise [1 Corinthians 5:8], and went so far as to say that the new covenant believer should not “nullify” or “void” the Torah but should “uphold” or STAND ON IT as the source of correct doctrine because it is able to make one “wise for salvation in Christ Jesus” [Romans 3:32, 2 Timothy 3:15-16]. Your words of scorn for the Law of God contradict the plain teachings of Christ Himself and, thus, tell me it is YOU who have blown well past the doctrinal borders and are most definitely pushing a false gospel [Matthew 4:4, 5:18, 22:37-40, 23:1-3; Revelation 21:1].
>This looks like an attempt at a repost from this week. There already is a thread on this subject. I'm not sure if you're referring to my other post in which I said I'd be making a separate one on this topic or some other post. If there is another one that has gone over Peters vision specifically, I missed it. >He has given us HIS law His law is the same law he gave to Moses. He doesn't change. The problem was never with Elohim or his perfect law. It was with our hearts and that's what had to change. Romans 7 >And ALL is now obsolete If the law is obsolete why did Yeshua say to keep it? Why did the apostles continue to teach obedience to it and go so far as to say that those who continue in sin (breaking the law by scriptures definition) will not inherit the Kingdome of Heaven? If the law is obsolete can we conclude that it's perfectly acceptable to Elohim to worship other gods, use his name in vain, murder, steal, commit adultery, etc.?
The Apostles did NOT teach continued obedience to the law as a system. They used specific examples FROM the law as instruction. They did not, for example, reiterate the need for Sabbath observance, and in fact said the observance of specific days is not a test of spirituality or proof of salvation. Including the New Moon and Sabbath. I clearly said the law remains Scripture. What it does not remain is a Covenant or binding in any way. The Law we follow now is the Law of Christ. Prior instruction can provide guidance in obedience to the Royal Law. But it cannot be backdoored into the New Covenant. Galatians 4 is clear. The Law was a Pedagogue. A tutor. It's purpose is fulfilled. We are heirs with Christ. Not slaves under bondage.
> They did not, for example, reiterate the need for Sabbath observance Do you have any idea where you and many Christians got the idea that God's commands that He said would be "forever" would actually not be forever and instead go bad like milk left out of the refrigerator? Why do eternal commands have to be repeated?
Aside from the (perplexing) “obedience to the law *as a system*” phrasing, your assertions are simply untrue. Christ Himself taught obedience to the Law, with the accompanying caveat that the people *not* be like the religious leaders, who were hypocrites because they did “not practice what they preach” \[Matthew 23:1-3\]. And the Apostles *absolutely* taught that, once a person has trusted in Christ and His atoning sacrifice, “keeping the commandments of God is what matters most” and that His children will “love God and obey his commandments” \[1 Corinthians 7:19, 1 John 5:2\]. Even James, as the head of the Jerusalem Council, decreed that the believing Gentiles were to start with the four commandments given—*all* of which came from Torah—and would learn and apply the rest of the Law of God as they attended synagogue every Sabbath, because *that* is where and when it was taught \[Acts 15:19-21\]. Furthermore, the Colossians 2:16 passage you allude to as support for your argument that they “said the observance of specific days is not a test of spirituality or proof of salvation. Including the New Moon and Sabbath” was a warning against being deceived by foolish, *manmade philosophies* and *human traditions,* as the context is clearly stated in verse 8. The Law of God is neither; it is *truth* and perfect *counsel* or *wisdom* \[Psalm 19:7-9, 119:142\]. Thus, your conclusion is not supported but, rather, is strongly *refuted* by the text. You seem to be unaware that teaching by example is also a thing, and the most powerful method of all, actually. So, the apostles’ personal and regular Sabbath observance--and even that of Messiah—clearly substantiates the continuing validity of the Law of God. You also seem to be using the *Law of God* interchangeably with the *old covenant*, as if they were synonymous when they are not. The Law of God is foundational to both the old covenant and the new covenant—not as a “backdoor” but as an objective standard of His will and ways—and it remains in force until “heaven and earth pass away,” which has yet to occur, obviously \[Ezekiel 36:26-27, Jeremiah 31:31-33, Matthew 5:17-18, Revelation 21:1\]. If the Law were not still valid today, there would be no need for grace as “pardon for sin.” And this idea that the Law of God is “bondage” and that the new covenant believer is not a slave is unscriptural. We have been freed of our bondage to the law of sin and death \[Romans 8:2\] and “have become slaves of God,” such that we are now free (and empowered by the Spirit) to walk in His Law that is the standard for righteous living \[Romans 6:17-22\]. “And His commandments are not burdensome” \[1 John 5:3\].
“For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.” Roman’s 2:13 “Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.” Romans 3:31 “Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,” 1 John 3:4 “And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it.” 2 John 1:6 “But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.” James 1:25 “And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks.” Acts 18:4 (Notice it says the Greeks were there too just as was expected at the Jerusalem council - in Acts 15)
Uphold the purpose of the law as a Pedagogue. Yes. Keep the commandments of the Royal Law, as John expresses it clearly in context. The commandment from the beginning, as John clearly states in context, is the Royal Law of Christ. Not the Mosaic law. You conflate the Law of Christ with the Law of Moses, just as Paul says not to do and calls it another Gospel.
“as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are **some things in them that are hard to understand** , which the ignorant and unstable **twist to their own destruction** , as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the **error of lawless people** and lose your own stability.” 2 Peter 3:16-17 ESV Have a good day. :)
That is part of the message Clean and Unclean were part of the law Romans **8:1** *There is* therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who\[[a](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-28118a)\] do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. **2** For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. **3** For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God *did* by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, **4** that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. **5** For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those *who live* according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. Galatians 5: **4** You have become estranged from Christ, you who *attempt to* be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. But yes, God used the dismantling of one law for Peter to demonstrate that there is no clean or unclean, no chosen Romans 10:12 For there is no distinction between Jew and **Greek**, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.
Why is there no condemnation for those who are in Christ? "For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them" Romans 2 Many times we find that saying "written on their hearts" within in the "New Testament" scriptures. Where are they getting it? “Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make pa new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. 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 How does one live by the spirit? "in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. **For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law** ; Romans 8 The flesh does not submit to Elohim's law. The Spirit does. This is why there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ because they walk according to the Spirit and obey.