What Laws Changed In The New Testament

Question

Answer 1

Actually God did not alter His law, human being have tried to do that, merely God'southward law remains forever (Daniel 7:25). Jesus in Matthew 5:17, cannot be more clearer about His law: "Do not think that I have come up to cancel the Constabulary or the Prophets; I have non come to abolish them merely to fulfill them." It's upwardly to the states to read the Scriptures and make up one's mind if nosotros want to follow and obey His word. The but divergence is that in the NT, the formalism law was abolished considering Jesus, the Lamb of God, gave Himself as a sacrifice for our sins and there is no more than demand for the temple animal sacrifice. Paul talks a lot most the fact the ceremonial law was a shadow of Christ, and Christ as a reality in the New Testament (Hebrews 7:eighteen-19,ten:ane, Colossians ii:17). Plain, the Ten Commandments are however in effect, and would be ridiculous to think that under the NT covenant nosotros can intermission any of the Ten Commandments. People have argued that we are now under grace and not nether the law; and that is true; still, are we allowed and then to have other gods, worship idols, boldness parents, murder, fornicate, steal, lie, or covet? Of course not! There is much debate among many Christians about the need to obey the Fourth Commandant. First, let's be clear, the Sabbath was given to man in the Garden of Eden, as a monument of Creation, as a reminder that nosotros are God's children and he is our Creator (Genesis 2:2–3). A day in which God wants us to stop, leave everything backside for 24 hours and talk with Him and be blessed. Zippo has changed, God is withal our Creator, the Sabbath day is however the 7th day and holy. Yep, we tin pray and worship God everyday of the calendar week, we can gather together to bring him prays anytime, but simply the Sabbath day was made holy past God (Exodus xx:8-11). If Jesus wanted the states to residual from our labor and make other twenty-four hour period holy, he would take told the states that while He was on Earth. But He didn't and the only thing I can go by is His Scriptures. I wrote a more extensive respond near the God's police force and the NT and if interested please follow this link: https://ebible.com/questions/11989-did-jesus-follow-all-the-laws-of-the-old-testament#answer-19020

Feb 17 2015 • half-dozen responses • Vote Up • Share • Report

Answer 2

Ariel HaNaviy Messianic Jew and Torah Teacher with Messianic Congregation 'The Harvest'

God did not change any of his laws. God does non modify (Mal. 3:six). Nor did his Son Yeshua (Jesus) change any of the laws. Yeshua also does not change, for he is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Heb. 13:8). But, some will object, didn't the writer of Hebrews speak about a change in the Police force? Yeshua did in fact walk into a priestly office that was radically unlike from the established Police spelled out in the Torah: "For when in that location is a alter in the priesthood, there is necessarily a alter in the law as well. For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to some other tribe, from which no one has e'er served at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing near priests." (Heb. 7:12-fourteen) This difference is termed "alter of law" (Greek=nomou metathesis) in Hebrews, merely it should not exist understood as having changed the Torah Police, particularly the earthy police governing priests. The poetry primarily teaches that Yeshua originates from a different line of priests, that is, one taking its governance from a heavenly say-so, a line that is "changed" from the earthly line. For equally we volition read beneath, earthly Levitical priests volition again be serving in their office in the 1000 yr reign of Christ here on Earth. This means both earthly lines and heavenly lines piece of work in tandem to bring virtually the Volition of God. They do not compete with one some other. On the contrary, they compliment 1 another. Concerning the author's point in Hebrews, we tin can safely conclude as follows: If he were teaching that the Torah has been abolished and is no longer applicable, and then he would non be teaching that a change of the Torah must have place. One would never consider that a law which has been decommissioned ever needs to be changed! Once a law ceases to be law, it no longer is enforceable and is therefore no longer considered viable or necessary to exist administrated. So, the fact that our author speaks of a change taking identify ways that he considers the Torah to be active and feasible. Indeed, the viability of the Torah is why he feels the necessity to speak to the issue of priestly lineage in the beginning identify. Moreover, the so-called the three-fold sectionalisation of the Law idea must exist abandoned if we are to accept the whole Bible as ane harmonious unit. The TaNaKH (called Old Testament by some) never differentiates between so-called moral, ceremonial, and ceremonious commandments. For example, many phone call the Sabbath a ceremonial command, yet repeated remorseless violation of it drew the death penalty (Ex. 31:14, 15). If it is merely a ceremonial commandment, and not a moral 1, why attach the death penalty to its violation? Besides, we know it too (along with sacrifices) volition be enforced during the Millennium. Instance in point: read Isa. 66:21-23 which has all the world keeping the seventh day Sabbath in the Millennium: "And some of them also I will take for priests and for Levites, says the Lord. "For every bit the new heavens and the new world that I brand shall remain earlier me, says the Lord, so shall your offspring and your name remain. From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath. All flesh shall come up to worship before me, declares the Lord."

September 02 2015 • 6 responses • Vote Upward • Share • Study

Answer 3

Danny Hickman Laic in The Gospel Of Jesus Christ

God didn't alter the laws that we must obey from the onetime to new testament. Jesus is recorded past Matthew equally telling His disciples He didn't come to abolish the law just to fulfill it Matt. five:17....not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law UNTIL all is fulfilled Matt. 5:18b. So, the question is, do y'all yous believe Jesus did what He claimed He came to do, fulfill the Law? What is fulfill? According to Webster information technology is to 'carry out, bring to realization, perform, to SATISFY requirements, obligations, etc'. So Jesus says He came to satisfy the requirements of the Law. Did He do that for Himself or for the globe? For God so loved the earth....John 3:16. There is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ... Romans 8:1. If I am in Christ and then I have satisfied the requirements of the Law, that'southward why I'm no longer condemned. I took a test to be licensed to bulldoze when I was 16 years old. I passed the test and then I satisfied the requirements of the DMV for the entire United States, even though not all the laws are the same for all l states.That was 45 years ago and I haven't had to take the test once more, although laws have changed over the years. Fulfilled in one case and for all time. Why would I study for the test and accept it over once again? The Police force and the Prophets were until John; since then the skillful news of the kingdom of God is preached...Luke xvi:16. Titus three:nine Avoid foolish arguments... and quarrels about the Law, they are unprofitable and worthless. If you are bent on keeping rules, keep that one.

September xi 2016 • 2 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report

Answer 4

Thomas Underwood

Information technology is truthful that all formalism laws, to some extent were changed, simply the laws of abominations and other sinful acts were not removed from the law. Paul tried to separate himself from his sins by maxim that it was non him that committed the sin, simply it was his flesh that was to blame (Romans 15-24). Yes, indeed, who can save him from the torso of death? The answer? Simply himself, and I believe he knew that due to his writing in Hebrews x:26-27; "For if nosotros sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, at that place remaineth no more than sacrifice for sins, Merely a sure fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."   This is a return to the warning stated in Hebrews 6 regarding the final and total betrayment of persons who were in one case true Christians, apropos whom information technology was affirmed that it "is impossible" to renew them. Here, the reason for that impossibility is stated in the fact that the rejection of Christ'southward ane sacrifice tin only result in the sinner'south beingness left with none at all, "there remaineth no more a sacrifice"! Of course, it would exist a mistake to construe every stronghearted and presumptuous sin equally "an eternal sin," although the danger that it might become so should never be overlooked. The impossibility of betrayment, euphemistically called the final perseverance of the saints, is not a educational activity of the New Attestation; and the credence of such a doctrine tin quite hands pb to a presumptuous arrogance that issues in eternal death.   Romans 1:24-28; "Wherefore God also gave them upwardly to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And also too the men, leaving the natural use of the adult female, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet. And even as they did not similar to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate listen, to do those things which are not convenient;"   "God gave them up" means more than the mere removal of the restraining hand of providence from the lives of sinners, for there is included a conscious requirement of God that the sinner thus judged shall be compelled to continue upon the shameful path he has chosen, but every bit in the case of Judas who received the judgement from Christ, "What m doest, do speedily" (John xiii:7), in which case he had been given up past Christ to commit the treacherous human activity already committed in his center. Once people have consciously put God out of mind and allows their own lust to have dominion in their thoughts, they have at that point entered the downwards road, and God himself will see to it that they go all the way to the end of the road they have deliberately called, or, to borrow an sometime maxim, lie in the beds they accept fabricated. This is non to say, nonetheless, that God causes people to practise wrong; far from it.  This is more than than permission to fall into uncleanness, but it is less than what caused this autumn. God'south action is judicial. At first, God always restrains past moral persuasion, past legal and other hindrances; only when God is completely bandage off, when the mensurate of ungodliness overflows, his castigating justice hands the sinners over completely to their sins in order to let the sins run to excess by which the sinner destroys themselves.

November 22 2020 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Written report