Yea, but there's a little more to it than that. Remember that Paul and Peter had to come to an agreement that following Christ didn't entail having to become a Jew and be circumcised and follow Mosaic Law. It wasn't an obvious conclusion for many and Paul spent a lot of time fighting with the Judaizers.
I enjoyed this. I went back and read your first article in delighting in the law as well, in which the literal translation appears to be more along the lines of "instruction", but it nonetheless stands. If you won't stand judged by the Lord for following his ways, then you wouldn't stand judged for delighting in him even when the weight of the laws of the world weigh upon your personal circumstances and seek to judge or extract something from you.
I'll have to keep 1 Corinthians 9 in the back of my mind. Even though I'm free, I've made myself a servant that I might win those under the law. You can't just claim to be like Christ and not be available where he is needed or recognize the value of what came before.
Wow David, thank you for covering this. I was just in a discussion with someone on another site about this very thing. I always found this quite confusing and I am looking forward to your next installment.
That's a great question. The OT doesn't make a distinction. The's why I specifically called out that theologians call it the "Moral Law." The NT does indirectly. Peter and Paul explicitly say after the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) that Christians aren't to be bound to the Law, which undercut the demands of the Judaizers that all Christians should be circumcised and follow the Law of Moses. In Acts 10, Peter has the vision of the sheet with unclean animals being lowered from heaven and is given the direction to kill and eat. God gives him the direction to kill and eat and says that Peter should not call something common which God has made clean. Then, Jesus effectively doubles down on all of the Moral Law in Matthew 5, the Sermon on the Mount. I'll talk a lot more about that when I cover the Law of Christ in the next article. But that's where the distinction is coming from. The foundation of the Moral Law is the Ten Commandments and all the other commands about how to treat other people. Admittedly, the line is fuzzy. But that's also why grace is so wonderful.
Sounds to me that the short answer is that the Bible doesn't make a distinction. I take this to mean that Christians are bound by no law but the indwelling Holy Spirit. Our "rule" for life is laid out in passages such as Galatians 5 and Hebrews 12.
I think the Sermon on the Mount is very often taken out of context. We certainly learn a lot about the character of God from it, but it is not direct instruction to Christians. There were no Christians yet. From a divine-legal perspective, it was still Old Testament.
So, read the next article when it’s released next week and I’ll go into this. Fundamentally, your yardstick for life is what Jesus said in Matthew 22:37-40: 37 And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” That’s the fundamental command that we must strive to obey. That is both Mosaic Law and the Law of Christ distilled to the elemental core.
Your post claiming "the law is gone" is flat-out wrong—Matthew 5:17, "I am not come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am come to fulfil," proves it. In the King James Version, "fulfil" translates the Greek "plēroō," which ties to the Hebrew "malei" (מָלֵא), meaning to fill up or bring to fullness, not to abolish or toss out the Torah, the "law" in this verse. Saying it’s gone is just poor English translation butchering the truth.
Jesus takes the Torah—God’s core instructions—and makes it complete, enriching it to its fullest potential, like filling a vessel to the brim with its true purpose, not dumping it out. The Torah stays alive and foundational, never scrapped. Meanwhile, "law" in other Bible spots (like Romans or Galatians) often points to human rules gone off course, not the Torah itself.
The idea that the Torah’s gone comes from sloppy translation, missing the mark of what "fulfil" and "malei" really mean. Jesus didn’t erase it—he brought it to its fullest expression, keeping its essence intact and thriving, just as he said.
And let’s not forget the actual New Covenant—it becomes a heart issue, as Jeremiah 31:33 promises: ‘I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts,’ fulfilled in Christ (Hebrews 8:10). This internalizes Torah, making obedience a natural outflow of love, not external compulsion…
Yes, you have; you just might not realize that is what happened. It might feel like Christ brought a brand-new law, but the New Testament ties it back to the Torah, not a separate rulebook. In Galatians 6:2, Paul talks about 'bearing one another’s burdens' as fulfilling 'the law of Christ.' That sounds new, right? But it echoes the Torah’s core—like loving your neighbor in Leviticus 19:18, which Jesus calls a top command in Matthew 22:39. Even when Jesus says in John 13:34, 'A new commandment I give you: Love one another,' it’s not replacing the Torah—it’s amplifying what was already there. The Torah’s essence, like loving God and others (Deuteronomy 6:5, Leviticus 19:18), is what Christ lives out and teaches. So, it’s not a different law; it’s the same one, revealed in its fullest through Him.
With respect, please stop being overly pedantic and give me some benefit of the doubt. I ended this article saying I would cover the Law of Christ in my next article. If there is something I’ve specifically said that is wrong IN THIS ARTICLE then feel free to comment to that effect, and cite the exact words. But something not yet said when it has been promised is not wrong; it’s not yet said.
David, your article claims Christians aren’t 'bound by the Law of Moses' because Gentiles weren’t part of that covenant and Jesus fulfilled it, which is directionally correct but oversimplifies 'obey' and 'law.' In Hebrew, shama (שָׁמַע) in Deuteronomy 6:4–5 means 'to hear and obey' relationally, tied to loving God, not just rule-following. In Greek, Paul’s 'not under law' (upo nomon, ὑπὸ νόμον) in Romans 6:14 means freedom from condemnation, not obedience itself—see Romans 6:1–2, where he rejects lawlessness. Jesus fulfills (pleroo, πληρόω) the torah in Matthew 5:17, enhancing its intent, and says in John 14:15, 'If you love me, keep (tereo, τηρέω) my commandments.' Your point risks implying no standard for Christians, but Galatians 5:13 and 6:2 show we’re bound to the 'Law of Christ' (nomos Christou, νόμος Χριστοῦ)—obedience through love, not legalism.
The Torah remains valid because it reflects God’s eternal character and wisdom, not just a temporary code. Psalm 19:7 calls it 'perfect,' and Matthew 5:18 says 'not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished'—its moral essence endures, reframed by Christ (Romans 13:10: 'Love fulfills the law'). Righteousness in Scripture is tied to Torah obedience: in Hebrew, tsedeqah (צְדָקָה) means 'rightness' or 'justice,' often defined by living out God’s commands (Deuteronomy 6:25: 'It will be righteousness for us if we are careful to do all this commandment'). In Greek, dikaiosune (δικαιοσύνη) carries this forward—Romans 2:13 says, 'It is not the hearers of the law (nomos) who are righteous before God, but the doers.' Jesus and Paul link this to faith expressing itself through obedience (Matthew 5:20; Galatians 5:6). The New Testament explicitly calls us to obey this reframed Torah. Look up these passages:
Matthew 5:17–19: Jesus insists we do and teach the commandments, not relax them.
John 14:15, 21: Loving Jesus means keeping His commands, echoing Torah’s core.
Romans 13:8–10: Loving others fulfills Torah commandments like ‘do not steal.’
1 John 5:2–3: Love for God is shown by keeping His non-burdensome commands.
James 1:25; 2:8–12: The 'perfect law' and 'royal law' (from Torah) bless the doer.
Your article negates this in two spots: First, when you say 'we are not subject to the Law of Moses' without clarifying that its ethical core persists, it suggests the Torah is obsolete, contradicting Jesus’ affirmation in Matthew 5:17–19 and righteousness as Torah-aligned living. Second, by framing the Ten Commandments as optional ('not required'), you undermine Torah’s ongoing role as a revelation of God’s will—defining righteousness—which Paul upholds in 1 Timothy 1:8–9: 'The law (nomos) is good if one uses it lawfully.'
Reframe it: Christians aren’t under Mosaic penalties or rituals, but obedience endures as a grace-driven response to Christ, with Torah’s timeless principles still guiding us under His authority toward righteousness (tsedeqah/dikaiosune).
Check those scriptures—they’ll sharpen your case! And even though this sounds rough, it is not. I love these discussions, please do not take this as me being angry—I’m sincerely excited to wrestle with this together!
Yes, all that is correct but premature. I have not yet written about the Law of Christ. I stand by what I wrote insofar as it goes. But as I wrote at the end of the story, Christians are bound by the law of Christ, which is a far higher moral standard than Mosaic Law. Patience, patience.
I hear what you're saying: the 'Law of Christ' is still coming in your writing, and I’ll wait to see how you unpack it. But I’d push back on calling it a 'far higher moral standard' than the Torah like they’re separate ladders. Jesus, being God, gave the Mosaic Law—its depth isn’t lesser; it’s His own voice (Ex. 20:1-2). When He fulfills it in Matthew 5:17, He’s not raising the bar to a new height but revealing its true weight—like how loving God and neighbor (Deut. 6:5, Lev. 19:18) already demands everything. The 'Law of Christ' in Galatians 6:2 isn’t a step up; it’s the Torah’s heart lived out through His sacrifice.
I’m patient for your next piece, but I’d urge you to show how they’re one, not rivals—Scripture doesn’t split them; man-made logic and doctrine do.
The Law of Christ is not separate from the Torah, but it is a higher moral standard. The Torah discussed actions but not thoughts. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus extends the Moral Law that is found in the Torah to people’s thoughts as well. He says you must love your enemies. He also makes clear in his statements about divorce that God allowed it because of the hard hearts of the people. In other words, God wasn’t as strict in the Law of Moses as he could have been, and as Jesus is now conveying. So, to be clear, it’s not a completely different set of laws, it’s a superset, and even more impossible to meet than the Torah. And yet, as Christians, we are more free under the Law of Christ than the Jews were under the Law of Moses because Christ fulfilled it all. That’s enough for now. I’ll discuss more in the article. In the mean time, perhaps take a look here: https://simplechristianity.substack.com/p/loving-god-obedience
He didn’t abolish it; He perfected it, embodying flawless obedience flowing from love, as 1 John 2:6 mirrors His walk—free from lifeless legalism. The claim it’s vanished is a translational misstep: “fulfill” and the Hebrew “malei” mean Jesus infuses every jot and tittle with living brilliance, revealing how to embrace it wholly.
He was saying, I am your example on how to live a life that is pleasing to God.
I didn’t mean to imply you said “the law is gone”—your article affirms its relevance. My corrections, like refining “freeing believers from its requirements,” clarify that pleroo means Jesus lived the law fully, not ended it, avoiding misinterpretation.
On the Moral Law, I stressed its ongoing call through grace, not a split from torah. I think you (and the majority in church today) miss the law’s point as God’s relational teaching—torah—for joy and communion, not just rules to escape. Jesus demands this heart-focus in Matthew 22:37–40, tying torah to love, and in John 14:15, “If you love me, you will obey my commandments” (which means torah when properly translated), linking obedience to love. Poor translations have caused a massive misunderstanding in Christendom about what torah really means, but delving into it reveals its true depth.
If I misread you, let’s discuss—I value the dialogue!
You have misread me. I do not reject the Law in any sense, and in fact I think I said that the Moral Law is still to be looked to. Specifically, I said “Does that mean the Ten Commandments and other notable pieces of the Law are obsolete or worthless? No, not at all. There is a subset of Mosaic Law that theologians call the “Moral Law.” It’s best exemplified by the Ten Commandments. When we study the Moral Law, we can see God’s character and behavioral standards that he expects of us.”
And later: “So, let me be very clear that being a Christian does not give you license to do whatever you want. Far from it, in fact. In every way, the Law of Christ is even more difficult for any sinful human to follow than is the Law of Moses. Fortunately, we have grace.”
You are right; I misread you, and for that, I am sorry. The lesson I have learned from this is to read other posts by the same author before commenting. Please see my other comment. I hope we can build off of this and sharpen iron. Shalom.
I belonged to a church who obeyed many of those Leviticus laws. For 25 years. But it eventually saw it as doctrine that obscured the very freedom Christ gave us in grace. It was legalism plain and simple. Before, It separated families, made children flee and at times made couples divorce if they married those who were not in The Church. The leadership lived in luxury while we tithed to it. My sister with 2 small boys divorced an abusive husband and this church threw her out when she could not move 50 miles without a job to be able to attend church on Saturday Sabbath.
We couldn’t socialize with non members and celebrated the Holy Days of Leviticus in a stultifying way, paying more attention to every jot and tittle. I believe Jesus had something to say about that. When we broke free, 2/3 of the worldwide congregation left because the new doctrine of grace and love made them think they were “not special” anymore. The only church. They were wonderful people and I missed them but I stayed because I saw God working in this church. I watched and one day got on my knees and told God he could do anything. I was His. After that my life in Christ opened up and I watched others one by one accept Christs real love and share it with others. Most left again in years to come and hopefully take Christs love and Grace to their own circles of influence and families.
Now, many churches or those seeking a wonderful loving Savior may never go to these lengths to obey, but humans are humans and I believe the New Testament and the crucification and resurrection relieves us of these laws that were absolutely not possible to obey in the time before the resurrection. We did not have the Holy Spirit to do it until that mighty wind fell on the disciples huddling in fear in that house after the resurrection That’s why we needed Christ. The Holy Spirit makes it possible to live how Christ wants us to live. To obey, to forgive. To offer love to our enemies. To stand strong in faith. The o,d testament shows us why we need the New and I lived a part of that contrast. God bless you, David. This is what I lived. ❤️
Thank you for the kind words and for sharing all that. Wow, that's a wild ride you've been on. I'm so happy to hear that it ended well. Indeed, that's EXACTLY what Jesus set us free from. That's horrible what happened to your sister. I fear that the leadership of that church will find themselves standing with the Pharisees of Jesus's time when judgement day comes.
Uh, let's see? Because we're Christians and not Jews?
That's it!
Yea, but there's a little more to it than that. Remember that Paul and Peter had to come to an agreement that following Christ didn't entail having to become a Jew and be circumcised and follow Mosaic Law. It wasn't an obvious conclusion for many and Paul spent a lot of time fighting with the Judaizers.
I enjoyed this. I went back and read your first article in delighting in the law as well, in which the literal translation appears to be more along the lines of "instruction", but it nonetheless stands. If you won't stand judged by the Lord for following his ways, then you wouldn't stand judged for delighting in him even when the weight of the laws of the world weigh upon your personal circumstances and seek to judge or extract something from you.
I'll have to keep 1 Corinthians 9 in the back of my mind. Even though I'm free, I've made myself a servant that I might win those under the law. You can't just claim to be like Christ and not be available where he is needed or recognize the value of what came before.
You nailed it.
Wow David, thank you for covering this. I was just in a discussion with someone on another site about this very thing. I always found this quite confusing and I am looking forward to your next installment.
I agree with you, but where does the Bible make a distinction between moral and ceremonial law?
That's a great question. The OT doesn't make a distinction. The's why I specifically called out that theologians call it the "Moral Law." The NT does indirectly. Peter and Paul explicitly say after the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) that Christians aren't to be bound to the Law, which undercut the demands of the Judaizers that all Christians should be circumcised and follow the Law of Moses. In Acts 10, Peter has the vision of the sheet with unclean animals being lowered from heaven and is given the direction to kill and eat. God gives him the direction to kill and eat and says that Peter should not call something common which God has made clean. Then, Jesus effectively doubles down on all of the Moral Law in Matthew 5, the Sermon on the Mount. I'll talk a lot more about that when I cover the Law of Christ in the next article. But that's where the distinction is coming from. The foundation of the Moral Law is the Ten Commandments and all the other commands about how to treat other people. Admittedly, the line is fuzzy. But that's also why grace is so wonderful.
Sounds to me that the short answer is that the Bible doesn't make a distinction. I take this to mean that Christians are bound by no law but the indwelling Holy Spirit. Our "rule" for life is laid out in passages such as Galatians 5 and Hebrews 12.
I think the Sermon on the Mount is very often taken out of context. We certainly learn a lot about the character of God from it, but it is not direct instruction to Christians. There were no Christians yet. From a divine-legal perspective, it was still Old Testament.
So, read the next article when it’s released next week and I’ll go into this. Fundamentally, your yardstick for life is what Jesus said in Matthew 22:37-40: 37 And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” That’s the fundamental command that we must strive to obey. That is both Mosaic Law and the Law of Christ distilled to the elemental core.
Your post claiming "the law is gone" is flat-out wrong—Matthew 5:17, "I am not come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am come to fulfil," proves it. In the King James Version, "fulfil" translates the Greek "plēroō," which ties to the Hebrew "malei" (מָלֵא), meaning to fill up or bring to fullness, not to abolish or toss out the Torah, the "law" in this verse. Saying it’s gone is just poor English translation butchering the truth.
Jesus takes the Torah—God’s core instructions—and makes it complete, enriching it to its fullest potential, like filling a vessel to the brim with its true purpose, not dumping it out. The Torah stays alive and foundational, never scrapped. Meanwhile, "law" in other Bible spots (like Romans or Galatians) often points to human rules gone off course, not the Torah itself.
The idea that the Torah’s gone comes from sloppy translation, missing the mark of what "fulfil" and "malei" really mean. Jesus didn’t erase it—he brought it to its fullest expression, keeping its essence intact and thriving, just as he said.
“The short answer is No, we are not subject to the Law of Moses, for two reasons:
1….
2. Regardless, Jesus fulfilled the Law so that those who accept his free gift of grace don't have to. “
That alone is not in alignment with good translation. It’s common but is errant.
Worth breaking down.
Great, feel free to break it down.
And let’s not forget the actual New Covenant—it becomes a heart issue, as Jeremiah 31:33 promises: ‘I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts,’ fulfilled in Christ (Hebrews 8:10). This internalizes Torah, making obedience a natural outflow of love, not external compulsion…
I have not yet written on the Law of Christ.
Yes, you have; you just might not realize that is what happened. It might feel like Christ brought a brand-new law, but the New Testament ties it back to the Torah, not a separate rulebook. In Galatians 6:2, Paul talks about 'bearing one another’s burdens' as fulfilling 'the law of Christ.' That sounds new, right? But it echoes the Torah’s core—like loving your neighbor in Leviticus 19:18, which Jesus calls a top command in Matthew 22:39. Even when Jesus says in John 13:34, 'A new commandment I give you: Love one another,' it’s not replacing the Torah—it’s amplifying what was already there. The Torah’s essence, like loving God and others (Deuteronomy 6:5, Leviticus 19:18), is what Christ lives out and teaches. So, it’s not a different law; it’s the same one, revealed in its fullest through Him.
With respect, please stop being overly pedantic and give me some benefit of the doubt. I ended this article saying I would cover the Law of Christ in my next article. If there is something I’ve specifically said that is wrong IN THIS ARTICLE then feel free to comment to that effect, and cite the exact words. But something not yet said when it has been promised is not wrong; it’s not yet said.
David, your article claims Christians aren’t 'bound by the Law of Moses' because Gentiles weren’t part of that covenant and Jesus fulfilled it, which is directionally correct but oversimplifies 'obey' and 'law.' In Hebrew, shama (שָׁמַע) in Deuteronomy 6:4–5 means 'to hear and obey' relationally, tied to loving God, not just rule-following. In Greek, Paul’s 'not under law' (upo nomon, ὑπὸ νόμον) in Romans 6:14 means freedom from condemnation, not obedience itself—see Romans 6:1–2, where he rejects lawlessness. Jesus fulfills (pleroo, πληρόω) the torah in Matthew 5:17, enhancing its intent, and says in John 14:15, 'If you love me, keep (tereo, τηρέω) my commandments.' Your point risks implying no standard for Christians, but Galatians 5:13 and 6:2 show we’re bound to the 'Law of Christ' (nomos Christou, νόμος Χριστοῦ)—obedience through love, not legalism.
The Torah remains valid because it reflects God’s eternal character and wisdom, not just a temporary code. Psalm 19:7 calls it 'perfect,' and Matthew 5:18 says 'not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished'—its moral essence endures, reframed by Christ (Romans 13:10: 'Love fulfills the law'). Righteousness in Scripture is tied to Torah obedience: in Hebrew, tsedeqah (צְדָקָה) means 'rightness' or 'justice,' often defined by living out God’s commands (Deuteronomy 6:25: 'It will be righteousness for us if we are careful to do all this commandment'). In Greek, dikaiosune (δικαιοσύνη) carries this forward—Romans 2:13 says, 'It is not the hearers of the law (nomos) who are righteous before God, but the doers.' Jesus and Paul link this to faith expressing itself through obedience (Matthew 5:20; Galatians 5:6). The New Testament explicitly calls us to obey this reframed Torah. Look up these passages:
Matthew 5:17–19: Jesus insists we do and teach the commandments, not relax them.
John 14:15, 21: Loving Jesus means keeping His commands, echoing Torah’s core.
Romans 13:8–10: Loving others fulfills Torah commandments like ‘do not steal.’
1 John 5:2–3: Love for God is shown by keeping His non-burdensome commands.
James 1:25; 2:8–12: The 'perfect law' and 'royal law' (from Torah) bless the doer.
Your article negates this in two spots: First, when you say 'we are not subject to the Law of Moses' without clarifying that its ethical core persists, it suggests the Torah is obsolete, contradicting Jesus’ affirmation in Matthew 5:17–19 and righteousness as Torah-aligned living. Second, by framing the Ten Commandments as optional ('not required'), you undermine Torah’s ongoing role as a revelation of God’s will—defining righteousness—which Paul upholds in 1 Timothy 1:8–9: 'The law (nomos) is good if one uses it lawfully.'
Reframe it: Christians aren’t under Mosaic penalties or rituals, but obedience endures as a grace-driven response to Christ, with Torah’s timeless principles still guiding us under His authority toward righteousness (tsedeqah/dikaiosune).
Check those scriptures—they’ll sharpen your case! And even though this sounds rough, it is not. I love these discussions, please do not take this as me being angry—I’m sincerely excited to wrestle with this together!
Yes, all that is correct but premature. I have not yet written about the Law of Christ. I stand by what I wrote insofar as it goes. But as I wrote at the end of the story, Christians are bound by the law of Christ, which is a far higher moral standard than Mosaic Law. Patience, patience.
I hear what you're saying: the 'Law of Christ' is still coming in your writing, and I’ll wait to see how you unpack it. But I’d push back on calling it a 'far higher moral standard' than the Torah like they’re separate ladders. Jesus, being God, gave the Mosaic Law—its depth isn’t lesser; it’s His own voice (Ex. 20:1-2). When He fulfills it in Matthew 5:17, He’s not raising the bar to a new height but revealing its true weight—like how loving God and neighbor (Deut. 6:5, Lev. 19:18) already demands everything. The 'Law of Christ' in Galatians 6:2 isn’t a step up; it’s the Torah’s heart lived out through His sacrifice.
I’m patient for your next piece, but I’d urge you to show how they’re one, not rivals—Scripture doesn’t split them; man-made logic and doctrine do.
The Law of Christ is not separate from the Torah, but it is a higher moral standard. The Torah discussed actions but not thoughts. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus extends the Moral Law that is found in the Torah to people’s thoughts as well. He says you must love your enemies. He also makes clear in his statements about divorce that God allowed it because of the hard hearts of the people. In other words, God wasn’t as strict in the Law of Moses as he could have been, and as Jesus is now conveying. So, to be clear, it’s not a completely different set of laws, it’s a superset, and even more impossible to meet than the Torah. And yet, as Christians, we are more free under the Law of Christ than the Jews were under the Law of Moses because Christ fulfilled it all. That’s enough for now. I’ll discuss more in the article. In the mean time, perhaps take a look here: https://simplechristianity.substack.com/p/loving-god-obedience
Where did I say “the law is gone?” Yes, Jesus fulfills the law and it will exist forever.
He didn’t abolish it; He perfected it, embodying flawless obedience flowing from love, as 1 John 2:6 mirrors His walk—free from lifeless legalism. The claim it’s vanished is a translational misstep: “fulfill” and the Hebrew “malei” mean Jesus infuses every jot and tittle with living brilliance, revealing how to embrace it wholly.
He was saying, I am your example on how to live a life that is pleasing to God.
From your other long comment, I still don’t see any place I said “the law is gone.” Indeed, I’m pretty sure I said quite the opposite.
I didn’t mean to imply you said “the law is gone”—your article affirms its relevance. My corrections, like refining “freeing believers from its requirements,” clarify that pleroo means Jesus lived the law fully, not ended it, avoiding misinterpretation.
On the Moral Law, I stressed its ongoing call through grace, not a split from torah. I think you (and the majority in church today) miss the law’s point as God’s relational teaching—torah—for joy and communion, not just rules to escape. Jesus demands this heart-focus in Matthew 22:37–40, tying torah to love, and in John 14:15, “If you love me, you will obey my commandments” (which means torah when properly translated), linking obedience to love. Poor translations have caused a massive misunderstanding in Christendom about what torah really means, but delving into it reveals its true depth.
If I misread you, let’s discuss—I value the dialogue!
You have misread me. I do not reject the Law in any sense, and in fact I think I said that the Moral Law is still to be looked to. Specifically, I said “Does that mean the Ten Commandments and other notable pieces of the Law are obsolete or worthless? No, not at all. There is a subset of Mosaic Law that theologians call the “Moral Law.” It’s best exemplified by the Ten Commandments. When we study the Moral Law, we can see God’s character and behavioral standards that he expects of us.”
And later: “So, let me be very clear that being a Christian does not give you license to do whatever you want. Far from it, in fact. In every way, the Law of Christ is even more difficult for any sinful human to follow than is the Law of Moses. Fortunately, we have grace.”
You are right; I misread you, and for that, I am sorry. The lesson I have learned from this is to read other posts by the same author before commenting. Please see my other comment. I hope we can build off of this and sharpen iron. Shalom.
Correct. Why do you think I said any different? Feel free to quote something specific.
I belonged to a church who obeyed many of those Leviticus laws. For 25 years. But it eventually saw it as doctrine that obscured the very freedom Christ gave us in grace. It was legalism plain and simple. Before, It separated families, made children flee and at times made couples divorce if they married those who were not in The Church. The leadership lived in luxury while we tithed to it. My sister with 2 small boys divorced an abusive husband and this church threw her out when she could not move 50 miles without a job to be able to attend church on Saturday Sabbath.
We couldn’t socialize with non members and celebrated the Holy Days of Leviticus in a stultifying way, paying more attention to every jot and tittle. I believe Jesus had something to say about that. When we broke free, 2/3 of the worldwide congregation left because the new doctrine of grace and love made them think they were “not special” anymore. The only church. They were wonderful people and I missed them but I stayed because I saw God working in this church. I watched and one day got on my knees and told God he could do anything. I was His. After that my life in Christ opened up and I watched others one by one accept Christs real love and share it with others. Most left again in years to come and hopefully take Christs love and Grace to their own circles of influence and families.
Now, many churches or those seeking a wonderful loving Savior may never go to these lengths to obey, but humans are humans and I believe the New Testament and the crucification and resurrection relieves us of these laws that were absolutely not possible to obey in the time before the resurrection. We did not have the Holy Spirit to do it until that mighty wind fell on the disciples huddling in fear in that house after the resurrection That’s why we needed Christ. The Holy Spirit makes it possible to live how Christ wants us to live. To obey, to forgive. To offer love to our enemies. To stand strong in faith. The o,d testament shows us why we need the New and I lived a part of that contrast. God bless you, David. This is what I lived. ❤️
Thank you for the kind words and for sharing all that. Wow, that's a wild ride you've been on. I'm so happy to hear that it ended well. Indeed, that's EXACTLY what Jesus set us free from. That's horrible what happened to your sister. I fear that the leadership of that church will find themselves standing with the Pharisees of Jesus's time when judgement day comes.