Did Jesus' Teachings Abolish the Old Testament Laws?

Originally posted by Locoman8
Remember the harlot in the street? Jesus asked the Jewish leaders (who were getting ready to stone her), "let he who has never sinned cast the first stone." Only Jesus was still there with the woman after those words. Judgement is for God and His family..... not man. This was the lesson Jesus was trying to teach here.

sorry to disappoint you, but this passage was added much later, and is likely not true.

Know that I'm not under the "physical" law of the Old Testament but the "spiritual" law of the New Testament. This applies the Old Law with Jesus' teachings. Lust = adultry. Hatred = murder. Turn the other cheek. Divorce (other than for sexual immorality) = adultry. The 11th commandment "Love me as I have loved you." Take the commandments and laws and add the Testimony of Jesus Christ and you have a great ingredient for peace. In the words of John, "here is the patience of the saints, who have the commandments of God and the Testimony of Jesus Christ." (Revelation).

So you see, the FULFILLMENT of the LAW is not an absence of the law but an ADDITION of the law. Jesus MAGNIFIED the Law and made it whole. That's what's meant when He said "I did not come to destroy but to fulfill the Law." Get it out of your head that I'm in the state of stoning people or sacrificing animals. Combine the two testaments and you have the PERFECT LAW.

umm no. your adding and subtracting things and you dont know why.

first off you say "Know that I'm not under the "physical" law of the Old Testament but the "spiritual" law of the New Testament." you are 100% correct in saying this. this is the "law of christ"

does the law of christ replace the law of moses?

undoubtedly yes.

the law of moses had a specific purpose. it was to point to christ. why do you need to follow something that points to christ when you have already found christ?

reply to post by Locoman8


Locoman, following parts of the Mosaic Law, is fine, just remember it's optional.
It's not like your doing anything wrong. Your going above and beyond what God requires of us, that's all.

It would be like a christian who is a vegetarian and never drinks alcohol, that's perfectly fine. That's that person personal choice. But he or she should not try to impose it on other Christians, as it goes beyond what is written in the bible.

Originally posted by miriam0566
even according to the law, it wasnt jesus' place to go around killing people. the judgement and alot of time the execution came the the elders.

so frankly, jesus not killing people has nothing to do with it.

Care to show me where. Because the laws say if a man does certain things you are to kill him. And Jesus didn't just "not kill people", he preached and taught against it.

again, it would not have been his place to.

I'm not disagreeing here, vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. But the laws themselves that are being attributed as being "god's law" here say to kill these people.

what does it mean to fulfill a contract? is the contract still active after it has been fulfilled?

what does it mean to fulfill a promise? is the promise still binding after it has been fulfilled?

what about fulfilling a prophecy?

fulfilling expectations?

its in plain english.

the law had a purpose, that purpose was fulfilled.

And we can see this in understanding when it says - vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. Which means, it's not our place to punish or judge those who sin. Not our place to kill the man who killed. And that is what Jesus fulfills as well.

after jesus fulfilled the law, yes. it changed. it was no longer our place to execute judgement.

here's why.

the law required works. you broke the law, if it was witnessed, you paid.

jesus' sacrifice changed that. because sins could now be forgiven, this added another level to it. it requires the judge to "read the heart" which is something that only jesus and GOD can do.

it also meant that if a sin was able to be forgiven, that works did not carry the same weight judicially as they did in the past.

this means that humans would not be able to correctly judge other humans anymore.

so of course there would be a change in policy after christ

And the rest of this is just the typical Christian jumbo about sacrifice and such. Which is just nonsense. Which in itself implies that 2 injustices make things all right. That 2 wrongs make a right and so forth.

Sorry, but it's all a complete manipulation in the way you present it. It's like saying you can only forgive your child if you kill another child. Once again I have to ask - do you realize what you imply when you say things like this?

If god needed to sacrifice Jesus in order to be able to forgive people, then what does that say of god? Ahh, I need to forgive all these people, I know - I'll sacrifice the truth and someone who walks the path correctly, and then I can forgive them. If he wanted to forgive you, then he would just forgive you.

But in order to be forgiven you must repent for your sins. Which translate out to fix your mistakes. And of course, how could people fix their mistakes if they didn't know how, or that they were mistakes in the first place. Thus, enter Jesus who is the way, the truth and the light. And so by following the example of Jesus, then you can see the truth and the way, and then be that change. When you are that change, then you are repenting for your sins, and thus you are forgiven.

So it has nothing to do with Jesus changing anything. He fulfills the law, which brings understanding on how to properly follow them. And if you follow them and believe in him, then you can repent, change your ways and then you are forgiven. See how that works? Logical, makes sense, has a purpose and isn't just a bunch of idiotic dogma that causes confusion and doesn't suggest God has less common sense than a 5 year old.

How much longer will you accept the wicked over the understanding of the father?


[edit on 3-6-2009 by badmedia]

Originally posted by badmedia
Care to show me where. Because the laws say if a man does certain things you are to kill him.

deut 17:
[6] At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
[7] The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you.
[8] If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy within thy gates: then shalt thou arise, and get thee up into the place which the LORD thy God shall choose;
[9] And thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days, and inquire; and they shall shew thee the sentence of judgment:

- you needed 2 or 3 witnesses, not only does this imply a court but it implies that older men would do the judging.

- the witnesses that testified were to be the that threw first. im sure it was a deterent from bearing false witness.

- "all the people" did not mean all the people of the city. Jewish encyclopedia clarifies that this was customarily all the people involved in prosecuting.

- if things were not so clear, they could bring the case before the levites.

num 25[4] And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel.
[5] And Moses said unto the judges of Israel, Slay ye every one his men that were joined unto Baal-peor.

god gives an execution order to moses, moses immediately goes to the judges.

duet 21:[18] If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
[19] Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
[20] And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
[21] And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

even the very account we are talking about is very clear. this is a judicial process. the people dont just get pissed off at someone and go off and stone him.

the elders sit as judge. any party that prosecutes also stands as executioner.

my point?

unless jesus was involved in a situation where he was condemning someone for breaking the law, he wouldnt have even been at the stoning.

so your claim that we dont have any account of him stoning people means that stoning is not from god doesnt add up

And Jesus didn't just "not kill people", he preached and taught against it.

oh you mean the passage that was added centuries later?

what does it mean to fulfill a contract? is the contract still active after it has been fulfilled?

what does it mean to fulfill a promise? is the promise still binding after it has been fulfilled?

what about fulfilling a prophecy?

fulfilling expectations?

its in plain english.

the law had a purpose, that purpose was fulfilled.

im disappointed you said nothing about this.

And the rest of this is just the typical Christian jumbo about sacrifice and such. Which is just nonsense. Which in itself implies that 2 injustices make things all right. That 2 wrongs make a right and so forth.

and yet that exactly what god's law has always called for. eye for an eye. tooth for a tooth.

even stealing required the goods to be paid back, sometimes 5x times more.

take that part out of the law, and you dont have a law

even the 10 commandments were enforced in this manner

Sorry, but it's all a complete manipulation in the way you present it. It's like saying you can only forgive your child if you kill another child. Once again I have to ask - do you realize what you imply when you say things like this?

thats the only way you seem to want to see it.

the ransom is not "humans sinned therefore now jesus has to die"

its actually "we sin, and therefore WE have to die."

lets apply this to you child analogy. your child sins. lets say he goes to a store and steal a candy bar. you find out about this and you tell him that he is grounded untill he pays back storeman.

your son is a young boy, he has no job and he has no allowance yet. its simply not possible to pay back that candy bar.

but his older brother step in and says i will pay for the candy bar, but my brother has to pay me back by doing some of my homework for a period of time.

the father agrees and all is right in the world.

GOD laid a standard. "if you eat of the tree you will certainly die". god being righteous is bound to that standard. he wasnt able to say to adam and eve "just kidding". they openly rebelled and condemned themselves to death. the problem being that they had children. their children, inherited their debt.

because humankind cannot possibly pay that debt (psalm 49:7), jesus has been sent to. eye for an eye, perfect human, for perfect human. this mean we are indebted to jesus much like the younger brother to the older brother.

hos 13:[14] I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.

matt 20:[28] Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

If god needed to sacrifice Jesus in order to be able to forgive people, then what does that say of god?

it says that he is righteous and that he practices his own standards.

If he wanted to forgive you, then he would just forgive you.

maybe, but then how would he be called righteous?

But in order to be forgiven you must repent for your sins. Which translate out to fix your mistakes. And of course, how could people fix their mistakes if they didn't know how, or that they were mistakes in the first place. Thus, enter Jesus who is the way, the truth and the light. And so by following the example of Jesus, then you can see the truth and the way, and then be that change. When you are that change, then you are repenting for your sins, and thus you are forgiven.

but jesus never fixed his mistakes. he never made them in the first place. so how was he an example?

if you murder someone, how do you "fix" that? how do you give that mother her child back? you cant.

im not sure that even you know what you are saying.

So it has nothing to do with Jesus changing anything. He fulfills the law, which brings understanding on how to properly follow them. And if you follow them and believe in him, then you can repent, change your ways and then you are forgiven. See how that works? Logical, makes sense, has a purpose and isn't just a bunch of idiotic dogma that causes confusion and doesn't suggest God has less common sense than a 5 year old.

How much longer will you accept the wicked over the understanding of the father?

how much longer will you cut the bible until it fits your philosophies?

its no wonder you are so adamant to cut paul out of the bible, its because paul doesnt agree with you. the point you fail to see is that sometimes you even cut jesus out of the bible, like your refusal to acknowledge matt 20:28?

parts of the mosaic law dont fit? snip!

how much longer are you going to teach YOUR teachings rather than teaching of god?

im sorry badmedia, but im not going to go on in circles with you.

reply to post by miriam0566

lets apply this to you child analogy. your child sins. lets say he goes to a store and steal a candy bar. you find out about this and you tell him that he is grounded untill he pays back storeman.

your son is a young boy, he has no job and he has no allowance yet. its simply not possible to pay back that candy bar.

but his older brother step in and says i will pay for the candy bar, but my brother has to pay me back by doing some of my homework for a period of time.

the father agrees and all is right in the world.

nice analogy!!! I'll copy you and use it in the ministry if the opportunity arises. THANKS!

Originally posted by miriam0566
unless jesus was involved in a situation where he was condemning someone for breaking the law, he wouldnt have even been at the stoning.

so your claim that we dont have any account of him stoning people means that stoning is not from god doesnt add up

Thanks for the reply. I didn't actually mean that people would just do it on their own and so forth. I mean if you are bearing witness and cause a person who sins to be killed, I would consider it as having that person killed. As you could always just not say anything. But then to not say anything would be against the laws correct? Do you see what I'm getting at?

So, this brings us to the obvious question I guess - why doesn't Jesus bear witness to the sins he comes across? He came across demons and went to sinners, so he obviously seen them. But we do not see him taking them in front of the judges and so forth.

I still think he couldn't have fulfilled them unless he did as they say. I think as far as not committing the sins themselves and so forth, he does fulfill those laws. But he doesn't carry the vengeance in the OT and doesn't follow those laws. He teaches not to judge.

And Jesus didn't just "not kill people", he preached and taught against it.

oh you mean the passage that was added centuries later?

Matthew 7

1Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Even if the passage was added centuries later, it's still true in spirit and understanding.

im disappointed you said nothing about this.

Because I find the entire contract perspective to be rather silly. Now god is making contracts with people? Is this a business now?

and yet that exactly what god's law has always called for. eye for an eye. tooth for a tooth.

even stealing required the goods to be paid back, sometimes 5x times more.

take that part out of the law, and you dont have a law

even the 10 commandments were enforced in this manner

Eye for an eye, Reap what you sow, judge not yest you be judged are all basically saying the same thing. It's how the universe/creation works on it's own. I can explain how this works if you'd like.

It's not a problem with the "law", so much as it is who is of the authority to enforce it. Man feels it's up to him to judge and carry things out, rather than allowing god to do it. For example, in Samuel they ask for a king to judge them like the nations rather than god. And god says they reject him.

So it's a matter of who is to do the judging and so forth. And I think it's the place of the father to do that, not men. And IMO that is what Jesus was trying to show people as well.

thats the only way you seem to want to see it.

the ransom is not "humans sinned therefore now jesus has to die"

its actually "we sin, and therefore WE have to die."

lets apply this to you child analogy. your child sins. lets say he goes to a store and steal a candy bar. you find out about this and you tell him that he is grounded untill he pays back storeman.

your son is a young boy, he has no job and he has no allowance yet. its simply not possible to pay back that candy bar.

but his older brother step in and says i will pay for the candy bar, but my brother has to pay me back by doing some of my homework for a period of time.

the father agrees and all is right in the world.

As they are sins against God, then it's the father who is "owed". If he was going to just accept what Jesus did as "payment", then why wouldn't he just forgive the people without killing Jesus? He doesn't need to kill Jesus in order to be "paid back".

The father is not illogical or without heart. 2 wrongs don't make a right, no matter how much you want to say it does. It is unwise and illogical and is not the father I know.

GOD laid a standard. "if you eat of the tree you will certainly die". god being righteous is bound to that standard. he wasnt able to say to adam and eve "just kidding". they openly rebelled and condemned themselves to death. the problem being that they had children. their children, inherited their debt.

because humankind cannot possibly pay that debt (psalm 49:7), jesus has been sent to. eye for an eye, perfect human, for perfect human. this mean we are indebted to jesus much like the younger brother to the older brother.

hos 13:[14] I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.

matt 20:[28] Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

Jesus pays a heavy price for the sins of humanity. He knew the powers of this world would kill him, but he did what he did anyway to show people the path and the correct way. As he was not full of sin, he did not have to be here and he did not have to do it. Thus, he dies for the sins of humanity. If humanity had not been full of sin, then humanity would not have killed him.

And again, this makes actual sense. Man kind needed an example of how to be. If the wages of sin is death, then the way to not die is to not sin. And Jesus shows you how to do that.

To use your own point - If Jesus is perfect human, then how can you pay him back unless you are also a perfect human? And does that not entail following and doing what he says? If you don't, then it's not perfect human for perfect human.

it says that he is righteous and that he practices his own standards.

Ok, so how is killing that which has not sinned in practice with his own standards?

maybe, but then how would he be called righteous?

You think it is more righteous to kill someone like Jesus in order to forgive others, rather than just forgiven them? No, but it makes much more sense that he would give people the example to follow in order to not sin/be killed. Even though man in his sin would kill him.

but jesus never fixed his mistakes. he never made them in the first place. so how was he an example?

He is the example of what you should be after you fix your mistakes. An example on the proper way to follow the laws of god, as intended. You don't go looking at boarded up houses set to be condemned for help on good structural practices do you? You don't go to an alcoholic for advice on what works to quit drinking do you?

if you murder someone, how do you "fix" that? how do you give that mother her child back? you cant.

im not sure that even you know what you are saying.

Fix means to correct it. To no longer do it again. To see the error in your way, and change that way. You will still pay for the previous error, but if change your way, then you will no longer sow that mistake, so you will no longer reap it either. Still reap what you previously sowed, but you will from that point forward do the right thing. Thus, you are automatically forgiven because it is no longer an issue. As you will no longer make the mistake, then you have repented for your sin.

how much longer will you cut the bible until it fits your philosophies?

its no wonder you are so adamant to cut paul out of the bible, its because paul doesnt agree with you. the point you fail to see is that sometimes you even cut jesus out of the bible, like your refusal to acknowledge matt 20:28?

I can talk about all these things without the bible. I know the father and I know the understanding I've been given. I see that understanding and I see things that go against that understanding. If I am misinterpreting parts, then I would love it and thank you very much for clearing it up. However, I will not go against the understanding I have been given from the father.

Just like that verse. I acknowledge it. But it doesn't have the same meaning to me as it does to you. I see the price Jesus pays is that he is murdered for doing the right thing, when he being without sin did not have to be here in the first place. That he did it anyway is his grace, and he is called the way because he is an example to follow, just as he says over and over to do as he says, and that it is by following that path that one will no longer commit sins against the father, and is thus saved.

To just believe in Jesus but not follow the path is to just give lip service, but have a heart that is far. This is often what is sold by the church because it allows people to keep on sinning, and it then justifies the path of death and destruction. People then start to sin in the name of Jesus, such as the crusades and so forth, when if they had stopped and looked at their actions, they would have clearly seen the path they were walking was not the path of Jesus, and that what they were doing is sin. This Jesus even mentions in Matthew 7.

parts of the mosaic law dont fit? snip!

how much longer are you going to teach YOUR teachings rather than teaching of god?

im sorry badmedia, but im not going to go on in circles with you.

It's fine that you do not believe I know the father, or that what I speak of comes from the father. I am not an authority, and there is nothing I can teach you. There is only 1 true teacher, and I am not it. All I am mostly trying to do is point out that you have accepted the teachings of men, rather than the understanding of the father. You should not accept what any man tells you, myself included. When you quit accepting what men tell you, then you will start to hear the father.

That it appears as if it is "my teachings" is nothing more than a result of the father being within. When you no longer accept men, you will do the same.

Here is the understanding the father gave me. This will show you how the path works, why it is important to walk the path of Jesus and follow his example, and why it doesn't do any good to give him lip service.

First off, the father is all knowing. This mean he knows every single possibility which can exist. If there is a possibility the father doesn't know, then it means he would not be all knowing.

You also have free will. As it turns out, if all possibilities do not exist, then free will does not exist. Because when something is not possible, then free will is then limited. Part of free will is the ability to give it away however, and that is something needed in order to create a "reality" we see before us. IE: The laws of physics are places where free will has been given up, in order to experience the reality. Another example is if you play a game. Say Poker. When you play poker, nothing stops you physically from looking at the other cards. But you agree to play by the rules of the game, for the experience those rules bring. If everyone knew all the cards and what the outcome was going to be, nobody would play. The experience is ruined. This is the same for our laws of physics and such.

As the father is all knowing, then it means nothing new happens or changes. There is no time. The easiest way to understand this is by looking at a movie film. If you stretch out the movie film and look at the entire thing at once(all knowing), then that movie doesn't have any time. That is the perspective of the father.

In order to create time and change, we need to take and limit the knowledge and what is known. So that rather than seeing the entire movie at once, only 1 frame is viewed at a time. Each new frame that comes creates what is known as "time". This is the perspective of the son. The father is obviously much greater than the son. The son has no idea what happens in the future, because he doesn't know all. He is in the experience.

But if we had only 1 single film, then free will does not exist. Because we are left with whatever the film has on it. As the father knows all possibilities, then all possibilities exist. This means that rather than a single film, there are an infinite amount of films, all staked on top of each other.

What allows for choice, free will and such is that you are not stuck on a single film. Based on your choices and actions, you move among the flims. We can demonstrate this now. Right now you have a choice. You can raise your arm, or you can not raise your arm. Both future possibilities exist, which one becomes reality is based on your choice, your free will. This is a direct example of free will.

This is also how you get you reap what you sow. You are putting in an action/choice, and the universe returns it back. So lets look at a non direct example. If you go out and rob a bank, steal from someone and so forth, then you can expect a future where you are in jail. If you instead go out and make a friend, you can more likely expect a better future. You are able to do either of those, both possibilities exist. But which one becomes a reality is your choice, your free will. Thus, you reap what you sow.

As you move across these films, you create a path based on your choices. If you make bad choices, you end up with bad things in the future, a "hell" will form around you. If you make good choices, then you get good things around you. So, in order to make a good path, we need to look at the world in an honest manner, and see how people would need to be towards each other and themselves to get to a place where things are not bad. By doing this, we can see the common sense behind the commandments. Do not kill, steal and so forth. And then we be that change. Afterall, how can we expect to live in a world without theft if we ourselves are thieves?

This is how I learned the path. I then found Jesus and the bible later, and was astonished that Jesus does exactly the above. I found an example that was exactly as I was taught. Thus I have been studying these topics sense.

The path from above is the path of Jesus. And so when it says he is "the way", and that their is a path, that is exactly what it means. As you can see, merely giving Jesus lip service, but then making bad choices does not do you any good. Because you are still walking the path with bad choices.

Creation in this manner automatically adjusts to give us the lessons we need. Because the good and bad decisions will be reflected back to us. Truly brilliant in how it works.

And while we have all sinned, and we have walked down the wrong path, at any time we can change our ways and start walking the right path. As we do this, we are fixing our mistakes, repenting for our sins and we are automatically forgiven. Simply asking for forgiveness and then continuing on with the same choices has no effect. As you did not repent or fix your mistakes. You didn't ask for forgiveness, you asked for a blind eye.

Thus we look at the actions and fruits of what is being done to see what is true or not. We look to see if what is being said is that which is a correct action, or not a correct action that agrees with the path.

Rituals, ceremonies and other repetitive things have no bearing on the path. Thus they are useless, outside being good reminders from time to time, and being a way of starting intent. But it's not the ceremonies and such themselves that do anything magical.

So when it comes to eye for an eye, the way I see it is that the people thought it meant they should poke the eye out, but it's the universe itself that will do the judging. As vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. So it was seen as 2 sins, not just one when the man killed the man who killed. And so Jesus comes to bring proper understanding on how to follow them. Do not judge others, or you will be judged on that.

Also I was shown not to make myself into an authority. Because then people will just accept what I say and so forth. It's not about accepting what men say, it's about seeking and finding out for yourself. Jesus says there is only 1 true teacher, and that is the truth. Paul says there are many teachers, and that is not true. The father gives in understanding and wisdom, doesn't tell people what to accept. If you try to give your will to the father, he will not take it. Instead, he will give you the wisdom and understanding you need in order to see the truth, and then your will is inline with his and then you "do his will".

Btw, you are the son in the above example. We all are. Our souls are the father, and thus why when you sin against another you sin against god. In this reality we all associate ourselves as being the flesh and feeling the flesh etc, so we will die. But if you accept, then you will not understand. No different than accepting 1+1=2 or understanding how to add.

This is how I understand things, and this is why I am all about the path of Jesus, but not so much the worship and acceptance of the idol while not walking the path. I see that as manipulation to keep people from walking the path.

As far as the bible is concerned, I am mostly learning and seeing how what it says fits into what I learned. And I see direct examples of what I learned, as well as direct examples of what I am not to do(Paul). For me, the difference is no different than knowing the difference between if 1+1=2 is right, or if 4+5=2 is right. And when one has understanding, it's that simple. And it is plain as day.






[edit on 4-6-2009 by badmedia]

reply to post by miriam0566

what does it mean to fulfill a contract? is the contract still active after it has been fulfilled?

what does it mean to fulfill a promise? is the promise still binding after it has been fulfilled?

what about fulfilling a prophecy?

fulfilling expectations?

its in plain english.

the law had a purpose, that purpose was fulfilled.

I'll jump on this one if you don't mind. I especially like the part where you said "its in plain english" because knowing you on this website, PLAIN ENGLISH is not your style. You know the New Testament was written in Konine Greek so let's see what the PLAIN GREEK says about this word "fulfilled" shall we?

Isaiah 42:21: "The Lord is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law and make it honorable"

The word fulfill in Matthew 5:17 means "fill up," "make full," "fill to the full" or "complete." Jesus came to magnify, or fill completely full, the meaning of God's law. Jesus' teaching that a man who lusts after a woman has already committed adultery in his mind represented Jesus' magnification of all of the Ten Commandments. He explained the full meaning—the spiritual intent—of the commandments. He showed that He expects more than just a legalistic, letter-of-the-law approach; He also expects a submissive, yielded mind focused on love for God and love for our fellow man.

The Bible tells us that Christ came as the Mediator of a new covenant (Hebrews 8:6). The popular belief that the New Covenant abolishes God's law reflects a misunderstanding of both covenants. God tells us that He altered the original covenant and made "a better covenant, which was established on better promises" (verse 6). But it was not established on different laws. The law stayed the same.

There was, however, a weakness, or fault, in the original covenant. That fault was with the people, not with the law. "Because finding fault with them, He says: 'Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah'" (verse 8). It was because the people "did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD" (verse 9).

In the Old Covenant God wrote the law on tablets of stone. It was external, not part of the thinking and motives of the people. It was in their literature but not in their hearts. In the New Covenant God writes the law in the minds and hearts of His people (Hebrews 8:10; Jeremiah 31:33-34).

To enable people to internalize His law—to love it and obey it eagerly and willingly—God makes this promise: "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them" (Ezekiel 36:26-27). God's Spirit enables His people to obey His laws.

People lacking the Holy Spirit are incapable of wholehearted obedience. Why? "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God" (Romans 8:7-8).

This is why the Old Covenant and the New Covenant differ. Paul explains that "what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh" God has accomplished by sending Jesus, who overcame the flesh and "condemned sin [lawlessness] in the flesh, 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" (Romans 8:3-4; see also 1 John 3:4).

Romans 8:4 basically says: "God's purpose in 'condemning' sin was that His law's requirement might be fulfilled in us, that is, that his law might be established in the sense of at last being truly and sincerely obeyed—the fulfillment of the promises of Jer 31:33 and Ezek 36:26.1."

Jeremiah 31:33-34 is often misunderstood as a promise of a new law to take the place of the old or else as a promise of a religion without law at all. But the new thing promised in v. 33 is, in fact, neither a new law nor freedom from law, but a sincere inward desire and determination on the part of God's people to obey the law already given to them.

The following passages in the New Testament confirm, either explicitly or by example, that Jesus Christ and the apostles viewed the Ten Commandments as a necessary part of Christian living.

First Commandment: Matthew 4:10; 22:37-38.

Second Commandment: 1 John 5:21; 1 Corinthians 6:9; 10:7, 14; Ephesians 5:5.

Third Commandment: Matthew 5:33-34; 7:21-23; Luke 11:2; 1 Timothy 6:1.

Fourth Commandment: Luke 4:16; Acts 13:14, 42, 44; 16:13; 17:2; 18:4; Hebrews 4:4, 9.

Fifth Commandment: Matthew 15:3-6; 19:17-19; Ephesians 6:2-3.

Sixth Commandment: Matthew 5:21-22; 19:17-18; Romans 13:9, Galatians 5:19-21; James 2:10-12.

Seventh Commandment: Matthew 5:27-28; 19:17-18; Romans 13:9; 1 Corinthians 6:9; 10:8; Ephesians 5:5; Galatians 5:19-21; James 3:10-12.

Eighth Commandment: Matthew 19:17-18; Romans 13:9, Ephesians 4:28

Ninth Commandment: Matthew 19:17-18; Romans 13:9; Colossians 3:9; Ephesians 4:25

Tenth Commandment: Luke 12:15; Romans 7:7; 13:9; Ephesians 5:3, 5.


Once again, "fulfilled" in Matthew 5:17 means 'to fill', 'to magnify', 'to make whole'. Not 'to abolish' or 'to end' or 'to finish'. It's a continuation of the law with MORE, not less emphasis on how to follow it.

reply to post by miriam0566

what does it mean to fulfill a contract? is the contract still active after it has been fulfilled?
what does it mean to fulfill a promise? is the promise still binding after it has been fulfilled?
what about fulfilling a prophecy?
fulfilling expectations?
its in plain english.
the law had a purpose, that purpose was fulfilled.

Jesus did what we could not, because of our sinful nature.
Jesus satisfied the demands of the Law.
Therein is our salvation.
If the Law was removable, why bother?
What was removable was only removable after the fact.
The fact is that we have a savior.
The things that were the shadow of him and his work were no longer necessary.
The core principles of what is deemed by God to be good behavior is still intact.

reply to post by badmedia

If you make bad choices, you end up with bad things in the future, a "hell" will form around you. If you make good choices, then you get good things around you.

That is not allowed.
Nice if it was.
What we have is a satan force at work in the world.
Job (who by the way, had three daughters and seven sons, not ten sons) is a good example.
He was close to perfect in his actions but had all those good things taken from him by a satan being.
What happened to him is going to happen to everyone on Earth.
We need to have a One who is above all material things, including the very existence of the universe to intercede on out behalf.
First he had to work out our salvation through the institution we call the Law.
Now that that has been accomplished, we are able to be taken out of this satanic world and live in a land ruled by the spirit of holiness.
In that new place, the Law will be still in effect, but our natures will be changed from the one that is obsessed with the physical, to one that is centered on the spiritual.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Sorry, I didn't mean that nothing bad could ever happen at all. As you mention who is in control of this world, and as we are to learn both good and evil, we are still subjected to evil and the sins of the world. But in order to live in a peaceful and heavenly society you have to walk that path, as failure to do so renders the society impossible.

I don't know if this world will ever be different, as I see it as more of a school than anything. Even in revelations it talks about 1000 years of peace, and then I guess it's reset and the school starts again. You have to remember that we are here to "know both good and evil". There are tests and such, no doubt about that. But the above principle will still apply, and you have to stay on course during any such tests.

I mean if you look at Jesus, he did great and wonderful things and was still murdered and so forth. But stayed on course and didn't do "evil" things in response. As Jesus mentions - if this was his kingdom and so forth.

So yes, you are right about that part and I agree. It would be much easier to walk the path if people were more focused on the spiritual than the physical, but the path stays the same in both.

[edit on 4-6-2009 by badmedia]

reply to post by Blue_Jay33


Here's a nice little explanation for you to ponder on... specifically on clean and unclean foods and practices.

The health laws found in the Bible pose an interesting dilemma for anyone who believes in following biblical teachings. The Bible clearly states that certain foods are not to be eaten, and that certain behaviors are sinful and an abomination in God’s sight. Yet people have been claiming for centuries that Jesus did away with these regulations, and that they are burdensome, outdated, bizarre and even barbaric.
But just how did these laws come about? Who authored them, and why were they given? Did Jesus really abolish them, or are they still applicable today? Medical science and history and sound Bible scholarship agree—the answer is absolutely contrary to what most who profess belief in Christ wrongly assume!

The biblical health laws are usually referred to as the Laws of Moses. Many scholars assume that Moses collected primitive taboos to form a code of laws. Some claim that the reasons for clean and unclean foods are purely arbitrary, irrational or unexplainable. Some anthropological speculations suggest that unclean animals are imperfect members of their species—tell that to a pig and you will probably get a well-deserved snort of disgust! Educated scholars also claim that the biblical laws have nothing to do with health, but were merely rituals to separate the Israelites from their pagan neighbors, and that only Jews need to observe these laws today. However, all these attempts to explain the biblical health laws are inadequate, as you will see.

In Leviticus 11–20, where these laws are first outlined in detail, we find that "the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying to them, ‘Speak to the children of Israel, saying, "These are the animals which you may eat"’" (Leviticus 11:1–2). This same introductory statement precedes the enumeration of other health laws in the book of Leviticus. According to the Bible, the author of the biblical health laws was not Moses—but God Himself! God explained to the Israelites that if they obeyed His commandments they would experience "none of the diseases" that plagued other nations (Exodus 15:26). God gave these laws to His chosen people so they could be an example to the world! God wanted their better health to be noticed by surrounding nations who could then inquire how they, too, could gain the same results (see Deuteronomy 4:1–8). While some theologians have naively suggested that these "regulations" were given to Israelites to punish them for their disobedience, these laws were actually given by a God of love to show human beings a better way to live. The health laws were to be taught by the priests, because of their fundamental importance!
It is quite instructive to read what Bible reference books have to say about the health laws. Halley’s Bible Handbook states: "Moses’ Law… [including] its Health and Food regulations, was far purer, more rational, humane and democratic than, and showed a wisdom far in advance of, anything in ancient legislation, Babylonian, Egyptian or any other" (24th edition, p. 138). Eerdmans’ Handbook of the Bible states: "Today we are able to understand and appreciate the sound principles of diet, hygiene and medicine which these laws express" (p. 176). The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, commenting on Leviticus 11, states that "the Levitical laws of cleanness have no known extensive parallels in surrounding cultures," so the idea of Moses borrowing primitive taboos does not hold up, because "surrounding cultures exhibit little of this sort of law."
While some scholars assert that the biblical laws were not given for reasons of health, this same commentary states that "the spiritual and hygienic reasons for the laws may still be affirmed. They are remarkably valuable in the area of public health… These laws protected Israel from bad diet, dangerous vermin and communicable diseases... These were rule-of-thumb laws that God gave in His wisdom to a people who could not know the reason for the provision" (ibid.). Thus, the idea that these biblical laws are outdated and old-fashioned and have nothing to do with health is simply nonsense!

The most familiar biblical health laws define clean and unclean meats—creatures that are acceptable to eat and those that are not—yet most people (even theologians!) have little or no understanding of the medically sound reasons behind these instructions! The scientific wisdom behind the biblical dietary laws is seldom taught today; instead, these laws are commonly viewed as Old Testament regulations that are no longer applicable. However, as Eerdmans’ Handbook of the Bible comments: "These lists [of clean and unclean creatures] have a significance often ignored. Far from being based on fad or fancy, these lists emphasize a fact not discovered until late in the last century… that animals carry diseases dangerous to man" (p. 176). In fact, the same animals labeled unclean in Scripture still carry parasitic diseases that are still dangerous to human beings today!
"Clean" land animals are ruminants—grazing animals such as cattle, sheep, deer and elk—whose digestive tracts are designed to turn grass that human beings cannot digest into meat that we can digest. Most unclean animals are carnivores or scavengers that can transmit dangerous diseases to human beings. Pigs eat roots and grains, rather than grass, and thus are ecological competitors to human beings. Clean fish have fins and scales. Unclean aquatic organisms like clams and oysters are filter feeders that purify water, and that concentrate poisonous chemicals and pathologic bacteria and viruses in their tissues. Eating an oyster is like eating your vacuum cleaner bag—yet modern connoisseurs do not like to think about this! Crabs and lobsters are scavengers that eat dead things on the bottom of bodies of water. Most unclean birds are carnivores or scavengers. God in His wisdom inspired laws that protect humans from contracting dangerous diseases, but also protect "nature’s clean up crew" by making them "off limits" as food for mankind.
These biological principles still operate today. As a point of illustration: the SARS outbreak was traced to an area in southern China where civet cats (an unclean animal) are eaten as a delicacy!
However, the laws of clean and unclean meats are not the only biblical instructions that concern diet. In Leviticus 3:17, we read that "you shall eat neither fat nor blood" (cf. Leviticus 7:23–27). One of the most significant discoveries in the last century was that high fat diets are linked to increased levels of heart disease, stroke, cancer of the colon and breast and a host of other pathologies—including obesity—that bring additional complications. Our challenge is to learn to recognize major sources of fat in our diet (visible fats on meat, fatty cuts of meat—like bacon, generous amounts of heavy dressings, spoonfuls of oil, etc.), and reduce our intake of fats that are high in calories and often high in saturated fats. It has also become painfully obvious in recent decades that contaminated blood and blood products can transmit AIDS and hepatitis. The simple principle of avoiding fat and blood is a powerful principle of prevention—if it is followed—because it still works today!
Biblical principles also cover the use of plant foods—carbohydrates. Ezekiel was instructed to make a nutritious bread from "wheat, barley, beans, lentils, millet and spelt" (Ezekiel 4:9). This was a multigrain bread containing complex carbohydrates for energy, different kinds of fiber and multiple amino acids for proteins and bodybuilding. It was not a highly refined product like today’s common breads that have most of their nutrients removed, then are misleadingly called "enriched" when a few nutrients are added back.

The Bible advises us to use sweets like honey or other simple sugars sparingly (Proverbs 25:16; 27). We are warned against overeating—gluttony (Proverbs 28:7). Modern books on health give the same advice! The biblical dietary guidelines are not old-fashioned, burdensome regulations—they are divinely inspired guidelines that have taken mankind’s science thousands of years to understand!

Many sincere religious people believe it is evil and sinful to drink alcohol. Yet, when we look at the biblical health guidelines, we find that drunkenness is what is sinful—not the use of alcohol. Warnings against the misuse of alcohol run throughout the Bible (Genesis 9:20–21; Ephesians 5:18; 1 Peter 4:3). Yet, it is worth noting that Jesus’ first miracle was turning water into wine at a wedding feast (John 2:1–11). He would not have done this if drinking alcohol were a sin! However, priests were forbidden to drink on the job (Leviticus 10:9). Paul advises Timothy about the medicinal value of wine for an upset stomach (1 Timothy 5:23). The beneficial effects of moderate amounts of alcohol have been one of the surprises of modern medical studies. People who use alcohol in moderation—a glass of wine a day—have fewer heart attacks than alcohol abusers or total abstainers! Elderly people with digestive problems caused by a lack of stomach acid experience improvement when they take a small glass of wine with meals. Biblical instructions about alcohol are in harmony with scientific evidence, and are still applicable today. We may use alcohol, but we must develop character to use it properly.

At first glance, some may think that biblical instructions about childbirth are biased against women. At the birth of a male child, a woman was considered unclean for 7 days and continued in a state of purification for 33 days; following the birth of a female child, the mother was considered unclean for 14 days and her purification period was 66 days. (Leviticus 12:2–5) However, these instructions fit very well with modern scientific discoveries about childbirth and development and disease prevention. By declaring a woman who had just given birth unclean, the biblical health laws required whoever touched the new mother (especially the midwife) to wash and to avoid immediate contact with other people—a practice designed to prevent the spread of diseases such as childbirth fever, which claimed untold lives throughout history. It was not until the mid-1800s that an Austrian physician, Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis, recognized that the spread of childbirth fever could be prevented if birth attendants washed after a delivery—yet biblical health laws had promoted this practice almost 3,000 years earlier!
But there are even more benefits in these instructions. While a new mother was unclean (7–14 days), she was free from the duties of cooking and ordinary housework—giving her time to regain her strength after delivering a baby. During the purification period (33–66 days), she remained in semi-isolation, thus avoiding crowds and contact with disease germs that could harm her or her newborn child. She was not required to travel to a place of worship to make an offering until the end of her purification period. Since travel was often arduous, this gave a nursing mother time for her breast milk to come in, to establish a feeding routine and for the baby to build antibodies and gain strength. The longer period for female babies was not due to male chauvinistic bias. Even today, female babies often have lower birth weights and higher mortality rates, so this longer period at home with the mother was meant to give them a better start in life.
The Bible instructed that male babies were to be circumcised on the eighth day (Genesis 17:12–14; Leviticus 12:3). Modern scientific studies have shown that the blood-clotting mechanism in a baby is not fully developed until the eighth day, so it was not wise to do a surgical procedure earlier because of the threat of hemorrhage (see None of These Diseases, McMillen, pp. 20–21).
While some well-meaning people consider male circumcision barbaric, medical science shows that circumcised little boys have a reduced risk of urinary infections, circumcised men have lower rates of cancer of the penis and women married to circumcised men have much lower rates of cervical cancer!
The custom of female circumcision is a totally different matter. It is non-biblical, and should not be confused with biblical circumcision of males, where only the foreskin is removed. Female circumcision, however, actually removes part of a woman’s genitalia, rather than just skin tissue. Female circumcision is simply mutilation, and has nothing to do with biblical circumcision.

The biblical laws of sanitation were clearly ahead of their time! There was really no way to fully understand the reasons for these laws until the invention of the microscope, the discovery of bacteria and the pioneering work of pathologists in recent centuries, yet these ancient biblical laws have proven scientifically valid today! People who touched a dead or diseased animal or person—or even garments or secretions from a sick person—were to bathe and wash their clothes and avoid contact with others. Contaminated garments were to be washed or burned—important sanitizing principles that are still followed today. Dwellings that showed signs of mold, or that had harbored sick individuals, were to be cleaned, repaired or destroyed, to prevent the spread of disease (see Leviticus 13–15). Porous vessels that came into contact with dead animals were to be broken, since they would harbor bacteria. People showing signs of sickness were to be isolated—quarantined—until examined by a priest and declared well. People were to wash after having sex. Tattoos and cuttings on the flesh were also forbidden (Leviticus 19:28), for reasons that include the risk of contracting disease. Modern physicians warn that tattoos and body-piercing carry a risk for contracting infectious diseases like hepatitis B, hepatitis C, syphilis and HIV/AIDS (International Journal of Infectious Disease, 2001, 5(1), 27–34).
In Deuteronomy 23:9–14, we learn that human wastes were to be buried, away from human dwellings. Today we call this sanitary waste disposal, and its benefits are widely understood but not always practiced—especially in poverty-stricken areas. History is filled with epidemics of typhus, cholera and dysentery, linked to the careless dumping of human waste into streets and rivers, or feeding human waste to animals that are then eaten. Burying human waste breaks the life cycle of many parasitic organisms that spread disease. This simple practice is much more effective, and less expensive, than treating disease after it breaks out—and God put this principle in the Bible thousands of years before mankind’s science understood its benefit!

Many of the moral laws of the Bible also have definite health implications. Adultery and fornication are clearly forbidden in Scripture (Exodus 20:14; Leviticus 18:20; 1 Corinthians 6:9) because they threaten not only the stability of the family and society, but also the health of the individual. One of the most easily demonstrated facts of medical history is that promiscuity spreads diseases—often dangerous and deadly diseases of which AIDS is only the latest and most notorious. Sexually transmitted diseases bring suffering, disfigurement, infertility and death. This is one reason why Paul advises us to "flee sexual immorality," and warns that the person "who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body" (1 Corinthians 6:18). One reason why prostitution is labeled a sin in the Bible is that it spreads disease. Serious health risks are among the reasons why the Bible prohibits homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13) and bestiality (Leviticus 18:23–30). Sexually active homosexual men have a much shorter life span than the average man, and a much higher risk of contracting—and dying from—a serious disease. The Bible warns that people practicing immoral sexual activity "lack understanding," because they do not grasp the serious risks they are taking—healthwise or otherwise (Proverbs 6:32). These health-related moral laws—and the consequences of breaking them—are still very much in force today!
God is the author of the biblical health laws. The Bible reveals that God does not change (Malachi 3:6), which means that His fundamental laws do not change. The laws of biology did not suddenly change, or stop operating, when Jesus died on the cross! The same factors that caused or prevented disease in the days of Moses still operate today.
Most ancient cultures had extensive lists of medicines and procedures for treating disease. The health laws that God gave to Moses, however, did not focus on treating disease, but instead focused on preventing disease and promoting health! This is why medical historian Ralph Major describes Moses as "the greatest sanitary engineer that the world has ever seen" because "Moses recognized the great principle that the prevention of disease is usually simpler and invariably more far reaching than the cure of disease… His doctrines [in the book of Leviticus] could be summed up by the objects of sanitation today—pure food, pure water, pure air, pure bodies and pure dwellings" (A History of Medicine, vol. 1, pp. 62–64). The biblical health laws are timeless! They were valid in the days of Moses, and they are just as valid—and applicable—today. The Bible reveals that when Jesus Christ returns to establish the Kingdom of God on this earth, the laws of God will be proclaimed to the world from Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:2–4). As human beings around the globe learn to live by these simple yet fundamentally important laws, their health will improve—and the plague of disease will begin to disappear (Isaiah 35:5–7). This is part of the gospel! You can play a vital role in this incredible transformation (Isaiah 30:20–21)—if you learn the value of applying these biblical health laws in your own life today!

Did Jesus do away with fundamentally important biblical laws concerning human health? Those who believe this usually cite Mark 7 and Acts 10. Some Bible translations of Mark 7:18–19 say: "Jesus declared all foods clean"—yet other translations render the verse differently. When you compare Mark 7 with a similar account in Matthew 15, you find that Jesus was not even addressing the subject of clean or unclean foods—the issue in question was eating without a ceremonial washing of the hands! Acts 10 describes Peter’s vision of a sheet coming down from heaven containing unclean animals that he is told three times to kill and eat. Peter, who had been trained by Christ for more than three years, understood that this was wrong and resisted! While Peter pondered the meaning of the vision (Acts 10:17), several Gentiles arrived at his home. On hearing their mission, Peter grasped the meaning of the vision: "God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean" (Acts 10:28). According to Scripture, Peter did not conclude from this vision that the laws of clean and unclean foods had been eliminated. This is confirmed by a prophecy that indicates when Christ returns He will bring judgment on idol worshipers and those who persist in eating unclean animals (Isaiah 66:15–17).

Nowhere does it say in the new testament that the unclean meats are alright to eat. Those writings of Paul that seem to suggest so are simply read in the wrong context. When he speaks about not letting people judge for the meat you eat or the Sabbath or feasts in Colossians is simply Paul explaining how the pagans of the city were judging the gentile christians for their "unorthadox" practices in a pagan land. There are many examples of this.

reply to post by miriam0566

Originally posted by Locoman8
Remember the harlot in the street? Jesus asked the Jewish leaders (who were getting ready to stone her), "let he who has never sinned cast the first stone." Only Jesus was still there with the woman after those words. Judgement is for God and His family..... not man. This was the lesson Jesus was trying to teach here.



sorry to disappoint you, but this passage was added much later, and is likely not true.

So you are disreguarding a piece of scripture because it is "likely" not true? You are specifically picking which portions of the new testament you want to follow if this is the case. Please explain to me how this story in the bible is "not true?"

reply to post by holywar

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

How about the fact that the written code and regulations happens to be our carnal nature and sin. Jesus nailed the penalty of sin to the cross through giving us the option of everlasting life. We must turn from our carnal minds and abide in God's Laws in a spiritual mind. You quoted this scripture from Paul and then said "what part of this do you not understand" yet I lead you to probably one of the most quoted scriptures of this thread which seems to contradict your thinking of the Law.

Matthew 5:17-19
"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. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practises and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven"

Last time I checked, the earth was still here... (I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished).

Last time I checked the commandments were outlined in exodus 20 and have not changed but have been expanded. Jesus affirms that the Laws are still to be followed in this very verse.....(Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practises and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven).
The word translated fulfill in this passage means "to make full, to fill to the full" (Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, "Fill"), and that is exactly what Jesus did. He perfectly kept the Ten Commandments and completely filled their meaning. He showed their spiritual intent, explaining that unjustified anger equates with murder (verses 21-22), and lust is mental and emotional adultery (verses 27-28). Jesus expanded the intent of the Ten Commandments.
That's way more cut and dry to me than Paul saying the codes and regulations (meaning the carnal aspect of the law) are nailed to the cross. If this is the case, Jesus taught something contradictory to His teachings. I don't believe that for one second. What is the least commandment? You would probably say the Sabbath or 4th commandment yet Jesus basically tells us that they are all equally important.

"Now behold, one came and said to Him, 'Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?' So He said to him, 'Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments'" (Matthew 19:16-17).

Pretty cut and dry to me.... "KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS" ..... the words of Christ!

Jesus left no doubt. When asked which ones, Jesus responded: "You shall not murder," "You shall not commit adultery," "You shall not steal," "You shall not bear false witness," "Honor your father and your mother," and "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (verses 18-19).

He briefly recited half of the Ten Commandments. He then quoted another command, from Leviticus 19:18, that summarizes the intent of the Ten Commandments and confirms the validity of the rest of the law. He was clearly referring to the law of God, not to the restrictions added by certain other religious leaders (Matthew 15:1-3).

Jesus expects much more from us than lip service. He demands that we do as the Father has commanded. Jesus said, "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven" (Matthew 7:21). Jesus plainly taught obedience to God's law.

There is simply no excuse for believing that Jesus came to abolish any commandments of God. On the contrary, when asked, "Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?"

He responded, "But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matthew 19:16-17).

He explained that obeying the Ten Commandments is a prerequisite for receiving God's gift of eternal life. One who repents is one who simply begins keeping the laws of God, because sin is the breaking of those laws (1 John 3:4).

Did Paul teach us to keep the Laws or that they are "Done Away With"?

Some selectively use parts of the apostle Paul's writings to say that he taught against God's laws. Yet Paul makes one of the most powerful and unambiguous statements in support of keeping God's law. Contrasting the merits of circumcision with the merits of God's commandments, Paul says, "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters" (1 Corinthians 7:19). The wording of the New Revised Standard Version is even more emphatic, saying, "obeying the commandments of God is everything."

In the introduction of his letter to the church in Rome, Paul explained that he and the other apostles had all "received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations" (Romans 1:5). What did Paul personally strive to obey? In the context of describing the battle we all wage against the weaknesses of the flesh, Paul said, "So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God . . ." (Romans 7:25). The law of God was written in Paul's mind and heart just as it is to be in ours (Hebrews 10:16).

Paul clearly explained his personal view of God's law: "Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good" (Romans 7:12). And "I delight in the law of God in my inmost self (verse 22, NRSV). He calls it a "spiritual" law (verse 14).

Paul taught, "For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous . . ." (Romans 2:13, NIV). These are plain statements showing that Paul fully supported God's law.

Those who opposed Paul were the first to falsely charge him with breaking the law. They introduced an accusation that has been repeated through the centuries.

In defending himself, Paul vigorously denied he was a lawbreaker of any kind. At one of his trials "the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove, while he answered for himself, 'Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all'" (Acts 25:7-8).

In a similar setting Paul markedly told those judging him that He had continued to use the Old Testament Scriptures as the authority for his beliefs: ". . . I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets" (Acts 24:13-14).

Accusations—then or now—that Paul taught against the law of God are fallacious. Even of his preaching to the gentiles, He said, "I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God ..." (Romans 15:18, NIV). Paul kept the commandments of God. He taught them to Jews and gentiles alike.

Paul, the main source for "abolishing the law" believers even says himself that the Law is good and just and holy. He obeyed them and taught Jews and Gentiles alike to obey them..... in spirit, not the flesh (sinful body). Repentance of sin (the first step in conversion) is the complete following of God's law and continuation in it.

reply to post by Locoman8


Peter and John teach obedience:
The apostle John clearly defines sin, telling us that "sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4, KJV). Like Paul, John describes the saints as "those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus" (Revelation 14:12). He also gives us this sobering warning: "He who says, 'I know Him,' and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him" (1 John 2:4).

Peter delivers a similar warning. "For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them" (2 Peter 2:20-21).

In the final chapter of the Bible, Jesus Christ through the apostle John (Revelation 1:1) reminds us of the supreme importance of God's commandments to our eternal life. "Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city" (Revelation 22:14).

It is important that we believe what Jesus and His apostles said about their own view of the commandments of God. Once that is clear to us, then the reasonings of men cannot deter us from respecting and obeying those commandments from the heart.

God said to Moses, "Oh, that they had such a heart in them that they would fear Me and always keep all My commandments, that it might be well with them and with their children forever!" (Deuteronomy 5:29). And Jesus said, "If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love" (John 15:10).

Remember the advice in the first Psalm: "Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stands in the path of sinners, nor sits in the seat of the scornful; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law he meditates day and night. He shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that brings forth its fruit in its season, whose leaf also shall not wither; and whatever he does shall prosper" (Psalm 1:1-3).

The choice is ours.
Each person must choose whether to obey the living God, who gave us the Ten Commandments. His standards can be the guidelines for our thoughts, the yardstick for our behavior. They can shape our minds and hearts. Or we can ignore them and choose another way.

In making our decision, we should remember Jesus Christ's words: ". . . If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matthew 19:17). God admonishes us to consider our choice. "See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil, in that I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commandments . . . I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live" (Deuteronomy 30:15-19).

I hope you understand that a simple passage about codes and regulations does not hold weight (in your understanding of it) to what I have presented to you. Countless accounts of Jesus and the apostles continuously speaking about KEEPING the commandments and laws. Jesus gave us a new commandment but never took ANY of the old ones away. It's so important that Jesus, John, and Peter in their respective words all said that the only way into the kingdom is through the following of the commandments. That holds too much weight to simply ignore and reason around.

reply to post by Locoman8


Yes Jesus seemed to abolish OT laws, all except the 10 commandments.

reply to post by ahnggk


Did you read my spill on clean and unclean things in the OT? How about following God's Holy Days outlined in Leviticus 23? They are all annual sabbaths. Using the 4th commandment of the Ten Commandments in keeping the Sabbath holy, we are to honor the Annual Sabbaths also....7 total. Are you one of those who believes in following 9 commandments and worshipping on sunday instead of honoring the 4th commandment? I'm not criticizing, just asking for informational purposes because if you're the latter, you contradict yourself when saying the 10 commandments are to be followed.

Originally posted by Locoman8
Are you one of those who believes in following 9 commandments and worshipping on sunday instead of honoring the 4th commandment? I'm not criticizing, just asking for informational purposes because if you're the latter, you contradict yourself when saying the 10 commandments are to be followed.

I think you got your answer already, you know many/most Christians do attend church on Sundays even if they might be wrong.