J-D

I’m not familiar with those other threads, and I don’t think you cited them when you started this one.

If the question is: ‘does “the New Testament” purport to overturn “the law”?’, then my answer would be that somebody who wants to read the New Testament as doing that can find textual support, but that somebody who wants to read it differently can also find textual support, and that for an unbeliever it is meaningless to ask which reading represents ‘the truth’ (unless a narrower and more restricted sense of ‘the truth’ is defined). I don’t think finding out what Jesus really had in mind, or even what he really said, is possible.

Chili

The Law is never eternal or it could not be fulfilled. The Law is an inspired human concept that is part of the mythology we ascribe to.

There is no grace in the Gospel message, it only testifies on behalf of grace (Jn.5:39).

The law leads to estrangement and that is how it must convict us as sinner. Hence: no law = no sin.

Only the self righteous will be stuck with the law until they die.

It is cold comfort to seek grace in the Gospel where Lucifer (angel of light) is at work on a daily basis.

There is a contradiction in eternal or not. To fulfil the law it to recognize its efficacy = is to recognize its purpose in the mythology whence we came.

But you are right, the law is not part of the Christian life, but neither is religion.

sunspark

J-D: When and where are the OT laws repealed? and The Law?

Prester John

So what about the OT peoples. They seem to have been stuck with a law they couldn't follow. Seems a bit unfair to me. Also i've always wondered why god is schizophrenic The OT god is nothing like the NT god. Why did the perfect one bother with those laws that can't be followed?

Its interesting to see how this is all rationalised.

Gamera

Well, I can tell you what the NT says about that: that people of faith have always lived by faith, even while under law. Read Hebrews 11:

You may disagree, but calling it a rationalization adds nothing to the debate.

Hebrews 11:11 - By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.

Hebrews 11:17 - By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was ready to offer up his only son,

Hebrews 11:20 - By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau.

Hebrews 11:21 - By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff.

Hebrews 11:22 - By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial.

Hebrews 11:23 - By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid for three months by his parents, because they saw that the child was beautiful; and they were not afraid of the king's edict.

Hebrews 11:24 - By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter,

Hebrews 11:27 - By faith he left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king; for he endured as seeing him who is invisible.

Hebrews 11:28 - By faith he kept the Passover and sprinkled the blood, so that the Destroyer of the first-born might not touch them.

Hebrews 11:29 - By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as if on dry land; but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned.

Gamera

I think the NT, including the gospels, are texts and can be examined for the meaning/intent. But in any case, that's all we have are those texts, so if Jesus's teachings are important to a person, as they are to me, a hermeneutics of the text is necessary. In that regard, I think intepretations of the NT which purport that the law was not overturned by Jesus's teachings are just plain misinterpretations of plain language.

noah

This is a classic xian conflation of terms. The word faith in every one of these verses has nothing to do with the Paulinian doctrine of faith in JC as a human blood sacrifice. These verses have to do with trust that Yahweh will do the right thing for them, Jews are commanded to have this trust or faith in Yahweh. Faith in Yahweh in the sense that Jews trust Yahweh to do what is best for them is one of the 613 commandments.

Jew are forbidden to put their faith in anyone or thing except Yahweh. It's one of their commandments. They are not permitted by definition to have a Paulinian faith in JC or anyone else.

The xian "faith" has only one context, the Paulinian context. The xian version of faith is specifically and singularly linked to and synonymous with the Paulinian doctrine of faith in Jesus as a human blood sacrifice.

In fact, the Paulinian doctrine of faith, of faith in JC as a human blood sacrifice, is absolutely foreign to the Old Testament. Nowhere does God say his perfect and eternal laws will ever be outdated or replaced or become an option. It's just nowhere in the texts.
There is also no mention of Jesus anywhere in Yahweh's Laws.

Yahweh forbids anyone altering or diminishing his Laws:

Deut. 4:2

That means they stand fast forever

Jesus himself tells us that his laws can never be diminished and that they are in effect and save forever:

Mathew 5:17-20

JC then tells us that along with his laws, his word lasts forever:

Matthew 24:35

That means Yahweh's last are the key to salvation forever. No mention of Paul. No mention of faith in Jesus as a human blood sacrifice.

Prester John

I'm an athiest, you have two very different holy books, how you reconcile them is interesting. Frankly i've got nothing against Yahweh, he just seems a bit unlikely! Anyway you don't seem to have addressed my points directly. Your god is still charged with having schizophrenic tendancies and being unfair in setting laws that cannot be followed.

rlogan

pfffft.


God can kiss my ass.

spin

I hope you wash it first!