Why I break the law

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Bro-Larry

Bro Baron, what version are you quoting from? tks, B/L

That was my own rendetion of ---

Galatians 2:21 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

To go point by point of the major themes of why Jesus did not break the law.

1) Jesus was doing the work of God.
2) Jesus was God manifested thus reflected God's will
3) No where in the law does the Sabbath restrict God's actions.
4) No where in the law does it restrict man to respond to God to not do his work.
5) The law restricted man's labor or work not God's through man.
6) To follow or do the will of God is not man's works or labor but God's work.
7) Jesus who was the extension of God made flesh told the man to take up his bed. Thus the man did not break the sabbath as he only heeded to what Jesus said which was by the authority of God.
8) They falsely claimed a breaking of the sabbath as they misapplied the law to the Holy One of Israel who was not under authority of the Sabbath as the Law or God's promise never restricted him to not do the things he did.
In the end nobody broke the law given by God and Christs actions prove his authority as the Lord of the Sabbath and God manifested in the flesh.

First most of your points are rambling and have no point, Second you excuse Jesus breaking of the law because he was God yet say that He didn't break the law, a bit contradictory, third there is a prohibition against carrying a burden on the Sabbath (Jeremiah 17:21) finally you conclude with, "They falsely claimed." John didn't say the Jews thought He broke the law, we have no problem with the idea that John says he made Himself equal with God, but you want to apply it to the Jews when John says Jesus broke the Sabbath.

I know you want to force Jesus into obedience to the law and he could have obeyed all the law, but he came to change the law and was not bound by it.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Neubill

In the eyes of G-d, you're not Irish, Murphy. Paul says you're a Jew. You're also an adopted son of Abraham. Hmm, Brad Murphstein; you know, it suits you!

People who obey Torah don't consider themselves to be Jewish; they consider themselves to be obedient.

Shalom shalom, Brad Murphstein!

People who try obey the Torah in addition to being a Christian ought to consider the words of Paul to the Galatians. As well as his overall struggle against those that would put Christians under bondage to the law.

1 Corinthians 7:19
Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts.

Not according to the law.

Galatians 2:3-5
Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.

15"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

Galatians 2:17-21
"If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"[d]

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Neubill

Nice wind up thread, Baron. You've got people jumping.

You have every reason to be proud because your posts in this thread can only make a Jewish person come to the conclusion that Jesus does not meet the criteria for being the Messiah as found in the First Covenant. Anyone reading the posts from you and the other anti-Torah posters in this thread show Jesus to be a Sabbath-breaking, Torah-transgressing Mosaic Covenant rebel who does not meet the criteria to be the Jewish Messiah.

Look the Jews have rejected Christ from the beginning, there is nothing that I am going to say to change their mind. I don't see the need for a Messiah to come and follow the Law of Moses. He made the law obsolete, that is what the writer of Hebrews tells us. A new Priest and a new law.

I have a New Covenant and have no desire to make Christ's death in vain by trying to follow a system He made obsolete with His death. If you want to follow Judaism go ahead, I would rather follow Christ.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

First most of your points are rambling and have no point, Second you excuse Jesus breaking of the law because he was God yet say that He didn't break the law, a bit contradictory, third there is a prohibition against carrying a burden on the Sabbath (Jeremiah 17:21) finally you conclude with, "They falsely claimed." John didn't say the Jews thought He broke the law, we have no problem with the idea that John says he made Himself equal with God, but you want to apply it to the Jews when John says Jesus broke the Sabbath.

I know you want to force Jesus into obedience to the law and he could have obeyed all the law, but he came to change the law and was not bound by it.

Again show me where it is against the LAW for GOD to work on the Sabbath?
Show me where it is against the law for MAN to OBEY GOD on the Sabbath?
Works that are initiated on the part of MAN are limited on the Sabbath! Works initiated by GOD unto man are never forbidden!

Joh 5:10 The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath day: it is not lawful for thee to carry thy bed.

oh 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

John points out the JEWS thought he had broken the SABBATH from prima facia evidence and he was pointing out the mentality the JEWS did not believe him that his "works" claim to be God superceded the LAW of the Sabbath. The Jews knew that the only way he could not be held accountable to that aspect of the LAW was to be God as the LAW did not render GOD impotent on the Sabbath. YES, IF AND I SAY IF Jesus was not God he would have broken the Sabbath but he wasn't. Also if Jesus was not God (which he is) if God tells a man to do something by his authority it is not mans WORK by his own initiative but GODS work and there is not law against such! It is about putting to rest mans desires and works thus LAYING DOWN HIS BURDEN, NOT GODS!
Thus the Jews went after him seeing him AS A MAN NOT GOD MANIFESTED and accused him of both breaking the SABBATH and CLAIMING to be equal with GOD.

Both errors as GOD has not limitations on the Sabbath and Jesus had the authority of GOD.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

Again show me where it is against the LAW for GOD to work on the Sabbath?
Show me where it is against the law for MAN to OBEY GOD on the Sabbath?
Works that are initiated on the part of MAN are limited on the Sabbath! Works initiated by GOD unto man are never forbidden!

Joh 5:10 The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath day: it is not lawful for thee to carry thy bed.

oh 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

John points out the JEWS thought he had broken the SABBATH from prima facia evidence and he was pointing out the mentality the JEWS did not believe him that his "works" claim to be God superceded the LAW of the Sabbath. The Jews knew that the only way he could not be held accountable to that aspect of the LAW was to be God as the LAW did not render GOD impotent on the Sabbath. YES, IF AND I SAY IF Jesus was not God he would have broken the Sabbath but he wasn't. Also if Jesus was not God (which he is) if God tells a man to do something by his authority it is not mans WORK by his own initiative but GODS work and there is not law against such! It is about putting to rest mans desires and works thus LAYING DOWN HIS BURDEN, NOT GODS!
Thus the Jews went after him seeing him AS A MAN NOT GOD MANIFESTED and accused him of both breaking the SABBATH and CLAIMING to be equal with GOD.

Both errors as GOD has not limitations on the Sabbath and Jesus had the authority of GOD.

Ok let’s try this again, If God tells you to break the law its OK? My position is he didn't break the law because the law was passing away soon to be gone forever, except for those folks who want to merge Christianity with a works based salvation based on the Law of Moses
The Bible tells us why the Jews sought to kill him, not what the Jews thought.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

People who try obey the Torah in addition to being a Christian ought to consider the words of Paul to the Galatians. As well as his overall struggle against those that would put Christians under bondage to the law.

1 Corinthians 7:19
Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts.

Not according to the law.

Galatians 2:3-5
Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.

15"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

Galatians 2:17-21
"If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"[d]

The problem is Baron you do not comprehend anything I have written.

1) I have never said live according to the MC. Which would nullify the atonement of Christ as there is no atonement in the MC and not new preisthood.
2) Do you not believe stealing is wrong? Is it a SIN? Then according to YOUR logic you have brought the law if you answer YES!
3) Circumcision is a sign of the covenant made to Abraham and his people. It was a type of that which was to come. It was the sign of the outward aspect of the law. THe new covenant is a inward thus written on our hearts to be expressed.
4) Then if you are free from "LAW" you are antinominian and you believe in eternal security. Also you are not under NEW Covenant as by definition it meane New LAW! You trying to say God's opinion on sin changes. Then you call God a liar and say his nature changes. SIN is still SIN and Paul pointed to what SIN was and he pointed to the MC.
5) Obviously freedom did not includethe RIGHT to SIN? Shall we continue in sin that Grace may abound? Tell me what sin is? Or is there no SIN?
6) The law of circumcision is still here. One must still be circumcised! It is a circumcision of the HEART. Circumcision only changed forms!
7) Nobody has claimed to be justified by the LAW of MOSES!
8) We study the scripture and see God's righteousness THROUGHOUT the WHOLE BIBLE! Thus apply it to our lives. ALL SCRIPTURE..... is given instruction in righteousness which is a reference to the OT. They did not have a BIBLE of all the writing back then.
9) By understanding what is good, right and holy in his word we seek to reflect him not for salvation but because of love! We don't sit back and go oh well God does not care about ALL of my life. So I will just live and eat whatever I want. Sure you may be under grace but it does not mean that a mature Christian should not be more understanding as a whole of what God wants in ALL of your life. That includes your health.
10) Babies live in the graces of those who feed them. They grow up and mature and realize after time what to do not to do and what to eat and not to eat spiritually.
11) You make two Gods. One of a OLD covenant and one of the NEW! You treat God like his nature changes like the wind. What God wants for you has not never ever changes. Growing in knowledge vs staying inthe elementary things is not going back into the law. It is understanding GOD in all his holiness.
12) You are not going back under the law by seeing and saying things that we should do in love to God. Again righteousness was in the OT. The problem it could not be attained through the weakness of our flesh. Only if one claims he is saved by WORKS of the LAW can one be said to try to gain salvation through personal merit instead of faith.
13) By saying Jesus broke law you make Jesus a transgressor and you clearly are putting your doctrinal glasses first than seeing basic principles of truth. By Jesus being a transgressor of the LAW, not in the errant view on the stupid pharisees! You make Jesus the spotten lamb that would need to make sacrifice his sins instead of the spotless lamb. Thus he could not be a sacrifice for all. This is HERETICAL!

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

The problem is Baron you do not comprehend anything I have written.
Not sure if that is the fault of the reader or the author.

2) Do you not believe stealing is wrong? Is it a SIN? Then according to YOUR logic you have brought the law if you answer YES!

I have already answered this several times with the contract analogy.

3) Circumcision is a sign of the covenant made to Abraham and his people. It was a type of that which was to come. It was the sign of the outward aspect of the law. THe new covenant is a inward thus written on our hearts to be expressed.

And yet is was a requirement of the law as well.

4) Then if you are free from "LAW" you are antinominian and you believe in eternal security. Also you are not under NEW Covenant as by definition it meane New LAW! You trying to say God's opinion on sin changes. Then you call God a liar and say his nature changes. SIN is still SIN and Paul pointed to what SIN was and he pointed to the MC.

Your conclusory statements are not an argument. I believe nothing of the kind, nor does my position lead to those conclusions. Did you mean, “antinomian”? I have already answered that. That is not someone who rejects mosaic law but one who rejects all law.

5) Obviously freedom did not includethe RIGHT to SIN? Shall we continue in sin that Grace may abound? Tell me what sin is? Or is there no SIN?

Pure silliness and more ridiculous conclusions that I don’t believe there is sin.

6) The law of circumcision is still here. One must still be circumcised! It is a circumcision of the HEART. Circumcision only changed forms!

When you change the contract you change the whole contract, you want to pick and choose. Yes it did change, circumcision is no longer required because it is a new law.

7) Nobody has claimed to be justified by the LAW of MOSES!

Rico, was certainly looking for justification in the law

8) We study the scripture and see God's righteousness THROUGHOUT the WHOLE BIBLE! Thus apply it to our lives. ALL SCRIPTURE..... is given instruction in righteousness which is a reference to the OT. They did not have a BIBLE of all the writing back then.

OT is not = to Mosaic law

9) By understanding what is good, right and holy in his word we seek to reflect him not for salvation but because of love! We don't sit back and go oh well God does not care about ALL of my life. So I will just live and eat whatever I want. Sure you may be under grace but it does not mean that a mature Christian should not be more understanding as a whole of what God wants in ALL of your life. That includes your health.

What he doesn't want is a return to a dead system.

10) Babies live in the graces of those who feed them. They grow up and mature and realize after time what to do not to do and what to eat and not to eat spiritually.

OK?


11) You make two Gods. One of a OLD covenant and one of the NEW! You treat God like his nature changes like the wind. What God wants for you has not never ever changes. Growing in knowledge vs staying inthe elementary things is not going back into the law. It is understanding GOD in all his holiness.

Yes it has changed, and no I don't make two gods just two covenants, take a look it's there in the NT.

12) You are not going back under the law by seeing and saying things that we should do in love to God. Again righteousness was in the OT. The problem it could not be attained through the weakness of our flesh. Only if one claims he is saved by WORKS of the LAW can one be said to try to gain salvation through personal merit instead of faith.

I stand by my position that Christians are not under the law.

13) By saying Jesus broke law you make Jesus a transgressor and you clearly are putting your doctrinal glasses first than seeing basic principles of truth. By Jesus being a transgressor of the LAW, not in the errant view on the stupid pharisees! You make Jesus the spotten lamb that would need to make sacrifice his sins instead of the spotless lamb. Thus he could not be a sacrifice for all. This is HERETICAL!

No, preaching another Gospel that requires obedience to the law is heretical. No I don’t make Jesus anything, He brought a new law.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

No, preaching another Gospel that requires obedience to the law is heretical. No I don’t make Jesus anything, He brought a new law.

WHO SAID HE DID NOT BRING A NEW COVENANT! Baron seriously you don't get it! There are things in the MC that are ETERNAL THEY CANNOT BE CHANGED! What do you not understand about that! They reflect God's etenal nature and will! God's covenants reflect his will and nature! Thus covenant after covenant will have most of the same things when it comes to what is right to do between our fellow man, God and our surroundings! Paul clearly points back to what the OT said. As what was right! TO do otherwise was sin thus we transgressed! The law pointed to God's righteousness! We failed through the flesh! The aspects of the law we failed showed our lack of character and holiness and our sinful nature!

Seriously I am about done with your circular reasoning.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Ok let’s try this again, If God tells you to break the law its OK? My position is he didn't break the law because the law was passing away soon to be gone forever, except for those folks who want to merge Christianity with a works based salvation based on the Law of Moses
The Bible tells us why the Jews sought to kill him, not what the Jews thought.

1) the law had not passed away at that time!
2) Again NO LAW AGAINST WHAT JESUS DID! You are building fences like the Pharisees!
3) NOBODY is talking about merging anything! You seem to not realize this!
4) What is the definition of sin?
5) "The Bible tells us why the Jews sought to kill him, not what the Jews thought."

AGAIN, they sought to kill him because they had there own view! (facts of the event)

There view!

1) guy walking and caring his bed. TRANSGRESSION!
2) guy says "he told me to" Jesus in TRANSGRSSION as he told him to break the law.
3) Jesus in general word and action claims to be equal with God. TRANSGRESSION!

All of these facts say in the present state say YES he broke the law.

The problem is those are not ALL the facts.

1) No law against God working and God telling you what to do on the Sabbath as it is of God's initiative, not your own works thus not your burdens. Othewise really having a law given by God on what TO DO on the Sabbath would be a contradiction.
2) Guy walking caring his bed was instruction given by Jesus who is the Lord of the Sabbath and God manifested. Thus he did not sin as it was not work initiated of his own but divine instruction.
3) Jesus is God but the Jews did not believe him, if they would have the whole issue would have been moot as there is no law against to do what God tells you on the Sabbath. As God told his people to rest and gave instruction on limited action. Thus what God says goes on the Sabbath. God is not contradictory and the chain of divine order was not broken thus no transgression.
4) Jesus alleged breaking of the Sabbath pointed to his deity thus his ability to do as the will of God dictated as God is not limited on the Sabbath!
5) The general summary THEY DID NOT KNOW WHO JESUS WAS!

Also righteousness (to do what is right) does not change. Also merging Christianity in a works based salvation is something of your own concoction! Nobody is saying one is saved by doing the works of the law. If that is the case don't ever tell ANYONE to not, cheat, lie, steal, commit adultery, covet,hate your neighbor, etc.... Otherwise you are transgressing and abandoned grace, thus making the blood of non effect according to your view! Those and others are still viable as they are principles God has given to us. They transend covenants as God's nature is eternal as are his laws which reflect his nature and character! Simply doing them never saves us! Nor does pointing to them as "to do what is right throw us under the law" You can only be under the law if you use works of the law as justification for salvation. Nobody is claiming that!