Did Christ Reform The Law Of Moses?
Shalom, Mike –
Thanks for taking the time to write back. I really appreciate that… Here are some responses to some of the points you made. I hope they make sense, and you’re able to follow along.
First you must understand that Jesus cannot and did not oppose the Torah. His teaching and life ministry was in complete harmony with the Torah (which means “instruction,” and not simply our traditional translation of “law” as some would believe).
You keep saying this, but you don’t address the fact that Christ said that He and His disciples had done that “which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests.” You won’t address the fact that Christ admits that he and His disciples are as “the priests in the temple [ who]profane the sabbath, and are blameless.”
I am not guilty of saying that Christ did “that which is not lawful,” those are the words of Christ concerning the actions of Himself and His disciples. I am not accusing Christ of “profaning the sabbath.” It is He who points out that he and those who were with Him had, like “the priests in the temple, profaned the sabbath and are blameless.” Once again I give you nothing but the scriptures to ponder. I would appreciate some explanation besides “First you must understand that Jesus cannot and did not oppose the Torah. His teaching and life ministry was in complete harmony with the Torah.”
Mat 12:1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.
Mat 12:2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
Mat 12:3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; Mat 12:4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
Mat 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless? Mat 12:6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
Mat 12:7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
How could he say that he came from the Father, if he declared the Words of the Father to be “outdated” or to be in opposition to his “new”, “better” way? He would surely be a false Messiah.
Absolutely not. If He were not a reformer, as was Moses, then “He would surely be a false Messiah.” It was Moses himself who God has chosen to let us all know that the words spoken at Sinai, Torah, are not the words of the True Messiah. It is no less than Moses, the giver of Torah, who God has chosen as the prophet who was to foretell the coming of another great reformer who, as Moses puts it, would be “like unto me.” Here is that prophecy. Read it carefully and ask yourself ‘Is this prophet simply going to repeat the word of Sinai?
Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
Deu 18:16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.
Deu 18:17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Here is Israel’s request which Moses says “They have well spoken that which they have spoken:”
“Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.”
What is God’s response? Is it “OK, I’ll just let you, Moses, hear my words, and you can serve as their mediator, and I will give them ‘the sum of my word’ through you?” Is that what we have here in this prophecy of a coming Moses like reformer? Apparently not:
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Does “whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him” sound as if He would simply be explaining the proper way of understanding…
Deu 21:14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, [ your wife] then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her?
No, of course not, this, “Prophet… like unto thee [ Moses], is to truly be like unto Moses.
Before the time of Moses, any Israelite could build an altar anywhere and make an offering to God. After Moses came this became a capital offense.
Deu 12:13 Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place that thou seest:
Deu 12:14 But in the place which the LORD shall choose in one of thy tribes, there thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings, and there thou shalt do all that I command thee.
Before Moses, all the money hungry false prophets, notwithstanding, there were no tithes to be paid, no weekly sabbath, no holy days to observe, no tabernacle, and no priesthood. But just as with the offerings, all these Moses and Torah oriented institutions, foreshadowed some facet of our multi- faceted ‘spotless lamb’ ‘high priest and king.’ All these things, in all their details simply foreshadow Christ:
Col 2:17 Which [“clean and unclean “meats,” sacrificial, “drinks,” “holy days,” “new moons,” and : sabbath days”] are [ all] a shadow of things to come; but the body [ casting that shadow] is of Christ.
Heb 8:5 Who [ physical descendants of Aaron] serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things..
Heb 10:1 For the [ entire] law having a shadow of good things to come…
No. Jesus was the true Messiah, and his teachings (if we understand them properly) reflect this. One thing you have to remember is that at Sinai, the Torah (instruction) was given to a Redeemed People (Israel). They were given with grace and love (just read Exodus and Deuteronomy to verify this).
If Israel was as you say, truly “redeemed” and not simply in ‘shadow’ and in “type” ‘redeemed,’ then please explain these verses to me:
Heb 3:17 But with whom [ all but Caleb and Joshua] was he grieved forty years? [ was it] not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
Eze 16:55 When thy sisters, Sodom and her daughters, shall return to their former estate, and Samaria and her daughters shall return to their former estate, then thou and thy daughters shall return to your former estate.
Now you know what Paul meant by “the fulness of the Gentiles,” (Rom 11:25).
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.
This is so because:
Rom 11:29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
But the time table for these events is not what our Torah- oriented Christianity of today teaches. The truth about “if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?” (Rom 11:15), is that “the receiving of them” is “When thy sisters, Sodom and her daughters, shall return to their former estate, and Samaria and her daughters shall return to their former estate, then thou and thy daughters shall return to your former estate” (Eze 16:55). All the resentment in the world against these scriptures, all the false accusations of “anti- semitism,” does not change the truth they reveal.
The Truth still is “and if ye be Christ’s [ that great reformer], then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal 3:29).
You say that Jesus brought love, where the Torah brought condemnation. You site several “contradiction” that you believe verify your claims. If we use this same system of comparison, we will see that Jesus didn’t bring love or even grace. But, according to your method, he brought about a greater condemnation. Here are some comparisons:
Torah Christ Honor your father and mother You must HATE your father and mother Messiah will bring peace “I came not to send peace, but a sword” Only those who physically kill are murderers If you even hate your brother you are a murderer Adulterers are only those who are so physically I am condemned as an adulterer even in my heart These are only four, but the example could go on. It’s just a way to set one idea against another, no matter what your theological persuasion.
“The same system of comparison?”
With Christ’s own words backed up with the prophecies of Moses himself, I demonstrate that the new covenant is “Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers,” (Heb 8:9), that even a “piece that [ is] taken out of the new agreeth not with the old” (Luk 5:36), but is in every way superior to Moses and the old covenant. To refute these plain scriptures, you present the words of Christ in such a way as to make them appear inferior to Moses and Torah.
As Paul and Christ say “both [ must be] preserved” (Luk 5:38).
Luk 5:38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish [ preserve] the law.
(To understand the subject of ‘the law of Moses,’ and its scriptural function in relation to ‘the law of the Spirit,’ see ‘The Law of Moses Versus The Law of The Spirit,’ on this web page.)
The ‘law of Moses’ will always be instrumental in bring us all, generation by generation, to Christ “before faith comes.” “But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.” (Gal 3:25).
So ‘the law’ is ‘preserved’ and ‘established’ as our generation by generation schoolmaster to “bring [‘carnal’ Christians] to Christ, at which point it is “done away” in Christ and “we are no longer under a schoolmaster.”
In all due respect and in brotherly love, I must say that you demonstrate the truth of Christ’s warning to the disciples of John the baptist and the disciples of the Pharisees, when He warned, “No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better” (Luk 5:39). It is not better, rather:
Gal 4:1 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child [ under the old schoolmaster], differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
Gal 4:2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.
Gal 4:3 Even so we, when we were [“carnal… babes in Christ, immature] children [ Greek- nepios- immature, as opposed to huios- mature], were in bondage under the elements of the world [“the law… not made for a righteous man but for the lawless” (1Ti 1:9)]:
Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law [ that is made flesh],
Gal 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons [ Greek- huios- mature sons. We cannot “receive the adoption of sons,” so long as we are still “under the law.”].
The main reason this theological dichotomy exists is because of the caricature we have created of the religion of Moses and the Prophets, as well as of Jesus and his disciples. We believe incorrectly that we understand the Judaisms of the Bible. However, our perception of Judaism is merely a silhouette of the Catholicism of the Middle Ages painted upon the Jews.
Hundreds of years before the very first official ‘Catholic’ ever appeared on the scene, the apostle John distanced himself from Judaism, calling the Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles “feasts of the Jews.” Why did he not refer to them as ‘God’s holy days?’ It was a very zealous Jew named ‘Saul of Tarsus’ who wrote “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law… [ and] Jerusalem which now is… is in bondage [ to the law] with her children” (Gal 4:25).
You ask if I believe that an “eye for an eye” is still in effect. Yes, I do. You however, seem to think it is retaliation. However, this is not what this passage is about. It is about something called “restitution.” In the passage you site (Exo 21:24-25), you skipped over the part right before that (vs. 22) that says:
“If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.”
And you also left out the part right after that (vs 26-27) which says:
“And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye’s sake. And if he smite out his manservant’s tooth, or his maidservant’s tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth’s sake.”
This is why context is so important. If the concept of “eye for eye” and “tooth for tooth” meant what we believe they mean, why don’t these passages that are spelling out this concept view it as such? Why doesn’t Scripture say: </
“And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall have his own eye gouged out as punishment”????
Without comment I give you Torah:
Deu 19:16 If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong;
Deu 19:17 Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;
Deu 19:18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;
Deu 19:19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
Deu 19:20 And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
Deu 19:21 And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
The point is that it doesn’t. The concept of “eye for eye” is restitution.
“You shall do unto him as he had thought to have done unto his brother… thine eye shall not pity but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.” Sounds more like retribution than restitution. Are we to believe that what is really being said here is “Then he shall restore unto his brother as he had thought to have done unto his brother?” I don’t think that is the point. The phrase “and those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you” just doesn’t follow such an interpretation.
It instills within us the value that if we hurt someone or damage their property, then we owe them some type of restitution on the same scale as the offense (whether it were intentional or otherwise).
To follow Deu 19:16-21 would instill a fear of death. Were the Pharisees looking for restitution from the woman caught in adultery? If Christ had such a high regard for Torah, why did He not say ‘Bring in the man you caught her with and let’s get this stoning under way as Torah requires?’:
Lev 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with [ another] man’s wife, [ even he] that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
You are not fighting me. The words that bother you are the words of Christ:
Joh 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. [ Where are these words to be found in Torah?]
Joh 8:8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
Joh 8:9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
Joh 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
Joh 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. [ Does this sound like Torah] I think this is ‘new wine’ and ‘new cloth.’
How many who call themselves Christians today have that value? When, as a teenager, my youth pastor ruined the paint on my truck and nearly did the same with my tires, did he offer to make it right? Of course not. Being divorced from God’s instructions, our subjectivity is all that matters.
When it comes to the hypocrisy of Christianity, you will get no argument from me. But ‘do unto others as you would have them to do unto you’ is better than anything you will find in Torah.
When Jesus says, “You have heard it said…” He is not referring to a quotation of the Law (even though the wording might overlap). He is referring to the common interpretation of a specific statement of the Law. If He were referring to the actual Law, He would do so as He does in other places by saying “It is written…” He is not saying “My Law is greater” in any sense, because He is not dealing with the Law at all, but with the common interpretation of it.
Every time Christ said, ‘you have heard it said by them of old time,’ He is talking specifically about Torah. Must I walk you through them? If I must, just ask.
Thus we have the example of the “eye for eye” that you cited. What does this mean? First we must assess who Jesus is talking to. Is he talking to the Offender, or the Offended? The Torah addresses the Offender. Jesus addresses the Offended. The Torah says that the Offender must make restitution. Jesus says that although the Torah makes provision for the Offended, they should not demand the restitution. Restitution rests on the shoulders of the Offender, not the Offended.
Christ is talking to His disciples:
Mat 5:1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:
Mat 5:2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,
You also do not take seriously the words of Jesus when he says that he did not come to abolish the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfill them. Of course, when we have the liberty to subjectively interpret Scripture on a random basis, we don’t have to deal with topics like this. However, if we look at the Hebrew use (because Jesus was a Hebrew, of course) of the phrase Jesus uses when He talks about “abolishing” and “fulfilling” we will find a very clear understanding of what is about to happen in His teaching. When two rabbis would discuss Scripture, they would each give their interpretation. If one thought the other had an extremely erroneous interpretation of a particular Scripture, he would say that the other was “abolishing” Scripture by his interpretation, because his interpretation did injustice to it. If the accused rabbi held to his interpretation, and sincerely believed that his understanding validated the Scripture, and helped it to be understood properly, he would say that he was not “abolishing” Scripture, but “fulfilling” it. Thus the words of Jesus become a lot clearer: Not only did He come to change them, but to bring their proper interpretation.
Did Christ fulfill the prophecies concerning His first coming? Of course he did! Are we to continue to prophesy the first coming of Christ? Of course not; “it is finished.”
Has Christ fulfilled the entire sacrificial system? Yes, He has. Are we to continue to sacrifice?
Is Christ our circumcision? Should we continue to circumcise?
The verse you accuse me of ignoring is:
Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
In the next verse Christ makes this statement:
Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Do you see that? “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
If your understanding of this verse is correct then Torah would be the law “till heaven and earth pass.”
Now notice this stern warning that comes in the very next verse:
Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Thus, when Scripture speaks of murder, some of the Pharisees would limit this to the actual, physical slaughter of a person. Jesus explains that God’s original intent for giving such a command was that it would not even be in our hearts, because what is in the heart eventually is expressed outwardly whether in word or deed. He declares His interpretation of this Scripture as the “final word” in the matter. All of the subsequent teachings can be viewed accordingly.
When Paul says that “Christ is the end of the law…” (Rom 10:4) we need to understand this properly. The Greek word for “end” here is “telos.” It is the word from which we get the word “telescope.” While it can have the meaning of “end” in the sense of a “cessation” of something, most of the time in the New Testament it means the “end” in the sense of the “goal” or “end product.” This is what Paul is trying to communicate: Messiah is not the termination of the Law, but the “goal” of the Law “for righteousness to everyone that believeth.” This fits perfectly with what he says about growing up “into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.” (Eph 4:15).
Also, you have made very anti- Semitic comments that, “… the law of Moses was for a carnal, Christ- rejecting Israel.” You will never be able to reconcile Torah and grace until you remember Rom 11, in which Paul specifically warns us:
“If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!” (Rom 11:17-24, NIV)
This blatant contradiction of Torah typifies Christ’s entire ministry. It cost Him His life. Can you imagine Christ coming today and standing in the middle of Jerusalem and telling the people there, “love your enemies… resist not evil… all who take the sword shall perish with the sword” (Mat 5:38-44 and 26:52). I personally can’t imagine Him saying that to our Christian Republican National Party, with our Christian president without being run out of town. Christ kingdom is truly “not of this world.”
The nation of Israel and the Arabs both subscribe to the teaching of Torah, ‘an eye for an eye.’ It is plain for the whole world to see where that teaching is getting them. What is Paul referring to when he says:
2Co 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away;
1Ti 1:5 Now the end of the commandment [ of Mat 5-7] is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and [ of] faith unfeigned:
1Ti 1:6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
1Ti 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the law [ Torah]; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
1Ti 1:8 But we know that the law [ Torah] is good, if a man use it lawfully;
1Ti 1:9 Knowing this [ Meaning this], that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
1Ti 1:10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine [ defined as , “the words of our Lord Jesus Christ,”in 1Ti 6:3]
1Ti 6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words[ this word ‘wholesome is the same Greek word hugiaino 5198- translated ‘sound,’ in the verse quoted above], even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;When the apostles refer to ‘sound doctrine’ or ‘wholesome words,’ they are not referring to Torah. They are referring to “the words of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth [ gives life]; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.”
Christ did not speak Torah. If he had, then Moses would never have been inspired to say:
Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken.
You have quoted Psa 119:160. It is generally agreed by those who realize that Christ did not have a King James Bible, that the ‘from the beginning’ part of this verse is better translated ‘the sum.’ Most modern versions have corrected this verse to read: Psa 119:160 “The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting” (NASB).
Do you really believe that when God gave Moses Torah, that He considered it to be the ‘sum of His word?’ Here is the same thought just a few chapters later:
Psa 139:17 How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them!
It is this “unto Him you shall hearken,” it is this”sum of thy word,” and not just past parts of it that gives legitimacy to the ministry of Christ.
You ask this question?
I really believe that the negative view of the Laws of God comes from our English connotation of the word “law.” In Hebrew the word is “Torah” and means “instruction.” How can we ever say that God’s instructions are “outdated?”
The last thing in the world I want to do is to offend you, but I would like for you to tell me how I should apply this part of the “instructions of Torah?”:
Deu 21:14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her [ your wife], then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.
If I had not “humbled her,” according to Torah I would be perfectly within my rights to sell her like any other of my possessions. Under Torah women were little more than cattle. Under Torah a man could divorce his wife “if you have no delight in her.”
Nowhere were women ever once allowed to divorce or sell their husbands under the ‘instructions of Torah.’
Do you see why the Pharisees asked Christ if a man could put away his wife “for any reason?” It was because, unlike most Christians who are defending Torah as if it were “the sum of Thy Word,” the Pharisees were very familiar with the teachings of Torah and were well aware that Christ was constantly teaching against them. Show me the words “except for fornication” anywhere in the “instructions of Torah.” Very little of what Christ taught is to be found in Torah.
But that is because ‘Truth’ is not defined as “the sum [ the total] of thy word.” You see Darren, it was Moses himself who gave Israel God’s “law of a carnal commandment” and foretold the day of another great reformer “like unto me:”
Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
Those words, “law of a carnal commandment,” are taken from Hebrews chapter seven which deals with “a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof” (verse 18). So Christ, the reformer, comes and “changes the law: ” After all, it was only meant to last “until the time of reformation.”
Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them [ only] until the time of reformation.
Christ is that reformation.
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed [ reformed], there is made of necessity a change [ reformation] also of the law.
Here are just a few of those changes
Torah Christ Hate your enemy. Love your enemy Do not kill your brother If you even hate your brother you are a murderer Eye for an eye Resist not evil If you find no delight in her Except for fornication Don’t commit adultery Don’t look on a woman to lust after her Swear by my name Swear not at all Bear no burden on the Sabbath day Take up thy bed and walk On the sixth day prepare for the seventh I, as the priests, can “profane the sabbath.” Circumcise all males on the 8th day Circumcision is that of the heart Israelite “according to the flesh” If ye be in Christ then are ye Abraham’s seed Gentiles are aliens from Israel Gentiles now fellow citizens in the commonwealth of Israel You ask this question:
“How can we ever say that God’s instructions are “outdated?” And how could we ever say that Christ “deliberately violated” the Laws of God? This would make Him totally inadequate for our salvation, as He would have been a lawbreaker. This would immediately make Him a sinner. Therefore He would not be the Spotless Lamb, but a blemished offering that would be totally unacceptable to the Father. There is also no evidence anywhere in Scripture that Christ violated any of the Law.”
If Christ had kept the “carnal ordinances,” of Torah, He would have been unfit to be our “spotless Lamb.” Was Christ a “righteous man?” Of course He was. And what are we told of Torah? “The law [ Torah] is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers” (1Ti 1:9).
We are told that “I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed” (Mal 3:6). Then Paul informs us:
Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.)
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.Verse 13 tells us that “there was no law… until the law [ of Moses].” Verse 15 then tells us “Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses [ the period when “there was no law yet given], even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.”
Yet we are told that the pre- flood world was so lawless that God had to destroy “all in whose nostrils was the breath of life.”
If no law had been given “sin is not imputed when there is no law,” how could men have been considered lawless? Paul answers that question:
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law [ Torah]? It was added [ to the already existing law of God that Changes not, but only until the ‘times of reformation’] because of transgressions [ because man is totally incapable of’ loving his enemy’ without Christ in him. So a ‘carnal commandment,’ for a carnal nation was, ‘for the hardness of their hearts,’ ‘added,’ only], till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
As Christ told Peter, “Flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto you, but my Father which is in heaven,” so it is with you and with me. All truth comes only by divine revelation. I will convince you of nothing. You will convince me of nothing. Only the Word of God can convince anyone of anything.
You ask, “Why would the Written Word be contrary to the Word Made Flesh?” Once you understand that Christ is the great reformer prophesied by no less than Moses himself, then you can understand that “the written Word” is “The scriptures… they which testify of me” (Joh 5:39). Then you will understand how Christ could so blatantly contradict the scripture just accurately quoted to Him by “the multitudes” who had followed Him across the Sea of Galilee:
Joh 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. { Accurately quoted from both Exo 16:4 and Neh 9:15]
Joh 6:32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
Joh 6:33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.Christ is right here contradicting the ‘law of Moses,’ Torah. Torah says manna was ‘bread from heaven;’ Christ say it is “not that bread from heaven.”
You say
I know that you’ve built quite a bit of teaching around this premise, and to even think about a different perspective now would seem like spiritual suicide… but the Holy Spirit can always heal those whose wineskins have burst due to the new wine if we are willing.”
This parable was spoken specifically to “the disciples of John and of the Pharisees”:
Mar 2:18 And the disciples of John and of the Pharisees used to fast: and they come and say unto him, Why do the disciples of John and of the Pharisees fast, but thy disciples fast not? Luk 16:16 The law and the prophets were [ only] until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
Based on these scriptures, who really is it that is guilty of “putting new wine into old wine bottles or new cloth on an old garment?”
If the old wine of the old covenant is allowed to continue to do its job of “bringing us to Christ” only “until faith comes” at which time “we are no longer under the [ Torah] schoolmaster,” then and only then, can we say with Christ:
Luk 5:37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. Luk 5:38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
But notice the warning with which Christ concludes this parable:
Luk 5:39 No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old [ Torah] is better.
So it is unto this day. Despite all the absolutely carnal ordinances (hate your enemy, if you find no delight in her, an eye for an eye, etc.) Christianity still prefers the old wine.
I will let you close for me,
Instead of harping on you [ it’s a little late for that, but…], I’ll just pray that the Father would begin to reveal Himself to you in His fulness [ Christ the reformer] as you continue to seek His face. Keep the faith, and remember that all is based on how we love one another and that the world see that love working through us. May you be richly blessed.
It seems that in your criticism of the “Pharisees,” you have become the one who prayed “God, I thank thee that I am not as other men are…”
Lastly, while a debate is fun, it is not productive until one of the parties involved is willing to objectively re- examine the evidences. Since your entire theology is based on subjectivity (i. e. your “spirit”) and not upon the foundation of Scripture (God’s plumbline), there is no point in continuing a nonproductive dialogue that is contingent solely upon opinion. You are enjoying breaking God’s laws, and are teaching others to do the same (another thing Jesus specifically warns us about–Mat 18:6, Mar 9:42, Luk 17:2).
Love really is far more important than doctrine. Thank you for your concern. Here is a letter that deals with whether Christ was under the law in much greater detail, if you are interested.
In His love,
Mike Vinson
Other related posts
- You Shall Not Seethe A Kid In The Milk (January 23, 2006)
- Wipe Out Their Enemies, and Cannot Sin (June 9, 2008)
- Why Are They Blessed? (May 13, 2011)
- Who Is Yahweh? (August 8, 2010)
- Who Is Under the Law? (July 22, 2014)
- Who Is The Israel Of God? (November 17, 2008)
- Who Is Increasing And Who Is Decreasing? (June 5, 2007)
- Who Is Facing Judgment? (August 28, 2007)
- Who Can Eat Of The Sin Offering? (October 15, 2008)
- Who Are His Chosen People? (March 30, 2008)
- Wherefore Then Serveth the Law (May 13, 2011)
- Where Did Cain Find His Wife? (March 6, 2008)
- What Christian Customs Are Not Lawful? (July 28, 2009)
- What Are The Elements of The World? (August 10, 2005)
- Was The Sabbath Observed From The Creation? (October 20, 2006)
- Understanding The Bible (October 9, 2010)
- To Give Account Of Every Idle Word (November 18, 2009)
- Those Who Died Under The Old Covenant (July 11, 2005)
- The numbers three in scripture (June 5, 2007)
- The True Commission Of The Elect (May 16, 2005)
- The Trinity and All Other False Doctrines (July 26, 2007)
- The Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil (March 23, 2008)
- The Teachings Of Christ (April 24, 2009)
- The Teachings Of A.E. Knoch Versus Scripture (December 22, 2004)
- The Role Of Women Clarified (October 5, 2008)
- The Order of the Work of God (September 25, 2011)
- The New Testament Versus The Old (February 4, 2010)
- The New Covenant Versus The Old (June 6, 2009)
- The Necessity Of The Mosaic Law First (January 4, 2010)
- The Meaning of Fornication (October 5, 2005)
- The Meaning Of The Moon (July 16, 2010)
- The Meaning Of Ceasing From Your Works (March 24, 2010)
- The Lost Sheep Of The House Of Israel (August 25, 2008)
- The Law of Moses Versus The Law of The Spirit (May 3, 2009)
- The Differences Between The Laws (July 23, 2003)
- The Book of Romans, Part 8 - “The Romans Road” (August 15, 2023)
- The Book of Romans, Part 7 - God is Justified (July 25, 2023)
- The Book of Romans, Part 6 - The Old and New Law (July 18, 2023)
- The Book of Romans, Part 15 - Married to Another (October 3, 2023)
- The Book of Romans, Part 12 - From Sin to Righteousness Through Grace (September 12, 2023)
- The Book of Romans, Part 1 - Introduction (June 13, 2023)
- The Book of Jeremiah - Jer 3:18-25 You Shall Call Me, My Father and Shall no More Turn Away from me (February 13, 2021)
- The Book of Jeremiah - Jer 2:29-37 I Will Plead With Thee, Because Thou Sayest, I Have Not Sinned (January 9, 2021)
- The Book of Jeremiah - Jer 20:1-18 I Will Make Thee a Terror to Thyself (October 9, 2021)
- The Book of Hebrews - Heb 7:12-17 "Whither the Forerunner is for us Entered, Even Jesus" - Part 3 (October 29, 2020)
- The Book of Hebrews - Heb 5:10-14 "Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ" - Part 4 (September 10, 2020)
- The Body Of Christ Be A Legal Entity? (July 2, 2009)
- Taking Up Arms (July 6, 2006)
- Study of the Book of Kings - 2Ki 14:19-29 "Flesh and Blood Cannot Inherit the Kingdom of God" (December 22, 2022)
- Studies In Psalms - Psa 94:5-15 "If Thine Enemy Hunger, Feed Him..." (October 12, 2017)
- Studies In Psalms - Psa 94:16-23 "If Thine Enemy Hunger, Feed Him..." Part 3 (October 20, 2017)
- Studies In Psalms - Psa 104:19-23 "I Will Be Glad In The Lord", Part 5 (April 12, 2018)
- Rev 1:13, Part3 - Christ Revealed in the Law of the Offerings (October 11, 2008)
- Responses To Two Laws (June 12, 2009)
- Prophecy of Isaiah - Part 7, Isa 1:21-26 (July 16, 2016)
- Prophecy of Isaiah - Isa 33:1-12 Out of Thine Own Mouth I will Judge Thee (December 8, 2018)
- Prophecy of Isaiah - Isa 30:10-18 "...Speak Unto us Smooth Things..." (October 6, 2018)
- Philadelphia Church and A. E. Knoch (August 10, 2005)
- Orthodoxy and The Two Covenants (March 28, 2005)
- Numbers 30:1-16 The Command to Honor our Vows (December 4, 2023)
- Mortal Adam And The Two Trees In Eden (April 20, 2005)
- Marriage and Being Unequally Yoked (November 18, 2009)
- Mal 3:6-18 Behold, I will send my messenger - Part 2 (January 11, 2024)
- Mal 2:1-17 This Commandment if for You (December 28, 2023)
- Law of Moses Versus The Law of The Spirit - Part 16, Good Things to Come (March 9, 2024)
- Kill Their Enemies (May 5, 2009)
- Just How Christ-Centric Is Scripture? (September 24, 2007)
- Israel and Strangers (February 13, 2010)
- Is There An End Time Mark of The Beast? (November 8, 2010)
- Is Our Faith A Gift or A Free Choice? (August 10, 2005)
- Is God Really One? (July 1, 2009)
- Is A Physical Assembly Really Needed (April 6, 2008)
- Hebrews 7_8 And Tithing (October 12, 2010)
- Grounds For Divorce (July 24, 2007)
- Gospels in Harmony - Matthew 19:1-12 and Mark 10:1-12, Part 1 (October 13, 2020)
- Gospels in Harmony - Luke 18:9-14 The Pharisee and Publican Within (September 15, 2020)
- Gospels In Harmony - “They” Say and Do Not (July 27, 2021)
- Gods True Name (November 18, 2009)
- God Has Joined A Couple Together? (June 10, 2007)
- Free Will And Man (April 18, 2005)
- Free Will And His Sovereignty (October 4, 2010)
- Free Moral Agency The Fall (October 9, 2010)
- Four Stages Of Mans Free Will (November 7, 2008)
- Forgiveness Without His Death On The Cross (August 10, 2005)
- Exo 34:1-35 The Shining Face of Moses (January 23, 2023)
- Exo 31:1-18 Bezaleel and Aholiab; and the Sabbath (January 2, 2023)
- Exo 22:1-15 Laws Regarding Protection of Property (August 28, 2022)
- Exo 18:1-27 I, Thy Father-in-law Jethro am Come unto Thee... (July 25, 2022)
- Does Heb 7:8 Teach Tithing? (January 23, 2006)
- Does God Foreknow Our Decisions? (October 9, 2010)
- Does God Ever Change? (May 13, 2011)
- Do We Hate His Words While In Babylon? (July 14, 2010)
- Did Christ Reform The Law Of Moses? (January 8, 2005)
- Did Christ Keep the Sabbath? 2012_02 (February 24, 2012)
- Did Christ Keep Torah - Should We? (September 30, 2015)
- Did Christ Keep The Law of Moses? (June 17, 2007)
- Controlling Evil Versus Being Evil (August 8, 2010)
- Clarification On the Laws Paper (July 6, 2006)
- Church In Kenya (April 13, 2004)
- Christs Words Versus His Law (November 23, 2009)
- Christ and The Torah (June 12, 2007)
- Christ Is Our Sabbath (December 31, 2008)
- Christ In The Flesh Of Adam (March 15, 2009)
- Christ And The Law (June 12, 2007)
- Choosing Evil And Dutch Translation Of Site (February 10, 2009)
- Capital Punishment (May 3, 2008)
- Can Christians Serve In The Military? (June 12, 2007)
- Can Christians Divorce And Remarry? (July 28, 2010)
- Can A Policeman Be A Christian? (June 12, 2009)
- Can A Christian Serve In The Peace Corps? (November 18, 2008)
- Can A Christian Defend Others (August 4, 2009)
- Can A Christian Be A Pharmacist? (April 3, 2009)
- Book of Jeremiah - Jer 41:1-18 They Departed to go Into Egypt (June 4, 2022)
- Awesome Hands - part 03: "The Law of Moses Prophets and Psalms" (May 5, 2012)
- Are Parts of The Law Still To Be Kept? (August 20, 2007)
- And The Child Grew and Waxed Strong in Spirit - Part 2 (December 12, 2015)
- Acts 2:25-47 And Many Wonders and Signs were Done by the Apostles (December 11, 2022)
- Acts 2:25-47 And Many Wonders and Signs were Done by the Apostles (December 1, 2022)
- A Sweet Smelling Savor Offering (August 6, 2009)
- "Second Resurrection" - Part 2 (May 18, 2018)