Which Rules Are for Christians?

[Ancient Paths]

There seem to be different rules regarding right and wrong in different churches and denominations. In some Pentecostal churches, men should not wear short-sleeved shirts. In old-order Mennonite churches, everyone must (should?) drive a black car, but in some other Mennonite churches, any color car is acceptable. In Catholic churches, not going to confession means sins are retained, but most other denominations don't even have the practice of confession. To Seventh-Day Adventists, not going to church on Saturdays is a sin,... or is it that going to church on Sundays is a sin? Some churches/denominations ordain homosexuals and others consider homosexuality a sin.

Where do people/churches get these rules and their definitions of what's sin and what's not? Shouldn't Christianity have a common standard? Shouldn't the Bible somewhere define what constitutes sin and what doesn't, or does/should Christianity get its cues on right and wrong from whichever society or culture a church is in?

So I've asked several questions here that are all getting at the same point: how is right and wrong (sin) defined and who defines it?

Peace.

[tam]

Peace to you Ancient Paths!

"Christianity" can and will do as she chooses. But a Christian should get their cues from the one they claim to follow: Christ.

"If you love me, you will obey my commands." John 14:15

Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them." John 14:21

If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commands and remain in his love. John 15:10

Tammy, I like what you wrote because it sounds sensible to me: Christians follow Christ, so Christians should do as he said. In fact, I think John says as much at 1Jn. 2:6. This leads me to another question, which is: what are his commands?

I hear different Christians say any of the following. Christians must follow:
- only the four laws mentioned at Acts 15:20
- only the Ten Commandments
- only the laws that Jesus reiterated in the NT
- only the Ten Commandments except the Sabbath
- only the two commands to love God and love others as ourselves
- none of God's commandments because the Law is bad
- the "Law of God" but not the "Law of Moses"
- our hearts because God knows our hearts
- whatever one's church says (as long as it's the speaker's church)
- the seven Noahide laws

Which do you say are Jesus' commandments and why?

Whatever Christ said to do... this is what I am to do.

"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."


He said that we are to eat and drink of Him (partake/communion). He said that we are to SERVE, just as He served. He said that we are to wash one another's feet, just as He washed the apostles' feet, setting them an example of what they were to do. He said that we are to forgive, to give to those who ask of us, to bless those who curse us, etc, etc.

Some of these things may seem small (how many follow the command to wash one another's feet, how many even realize that they should be doing that... for a long time I did not know also; I did not even know that I should partake of the bread and wine... but He who is faithful in what is little has shown that they will be faithful what is much.)

**

I think some people are looking for a rule-book... what do we HAVE to follow (and by extension perhaps, what can we get away without following). But how is following a rule-book any different than following the old law, which became about judging and condemning others... rather than examining oneself (a mirror). But when we look back at what WAS (even if we just erect an image of that former thing), then we are showing that our hearts are back there... rather than with Christ.

(Like Lot's wife looked back... because her heart was in Sodom)



But love is the new law; the law written upon our hearts.

- The new command that Christ gave us is to love one another as He has loved us. (not love one another BECAUSE he loved us... but love one anther AS he has loved us)

- The most important commandments He said of course are to love God with your WHOLE heart and body and mind; and to love your neighbor as yourself.


- He said that we are to love even our enemies: and that is how we are to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect: by loving both our friends AND our enemies. (and maybe sometimes we can't feel that, but if we love Christ - then we can at least ask that God forgive those who are our enemies - because they have made themselves out to BE our enemies; we are not to be the enemies of anyone)


Love does not steal. Love does not envy. Love does not murder. Love does not curse. Etc, etc, etc.

Following a set of rules and laws cannot make us perfect because we will all fall short of them at some point. (even the above at times - but thankfully CHRIST does not fall short, and so His blood covers and speaks FOR us those times when WE do) And if we are unclear about something then look to Christ to know what love IS - because Christ is the Truth of God (who is love). Look to what He is written to have said (and of course ask Him). If He has not said something on a particular matter... well, I cannot tell anyone else what to do, but I would choose to risk erring on the side of love (because there is no law against love), than risk "condemning the innocent".


Hope that helps!

Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Ancient Paths]

Thanks for the reply.

The sin sacrifices included in the law were pictures or illustrations of the sacrifice Jesus was made. His death fulfilled them rather than abolished them. They had served their purpose and were no longer needed.

I agree that sin sacrifices were illustrations or foreshadows of the death of Jesus and what it signified, but your statement runs afoul of Jesus' words in the passage I quoted:

"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." -Mt. 5:17-19

Perhaps this will help you:

https://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/2012/ ... -testament

I read it but it expresses a lot of opinion without supporting it with scripture. To be clear, it does quote scripture, but the scripture it quotes doesn't support the claims. It supports various doctrines about God's Law, but nothing quoted explicitly says that the Law is null and void, and I have Jesus himself explicitly saying otherwise. Actually, reading the material at that site sounds like what Jesus is describing at the first half of Mt. 5:19.

Regarding Col. 2:16-17...

The items on the list were commanded by God but the Bible itself shows they were intended only to be in effect until Christ came.

I hear you. I know that what you're saying is the widely held position within Christendom today, but I'm not seeing that in scripture. I'm wondering if this is a matter of correct interpretation versus incorrect interpretation, particularly of Paul's writings on the subject.

[bluethread]

Yet, you interpret Paul's admonition about questions with regard to salvation to say that one no longer needs not keep certain commandments. Paul makes it clear that keeping those commandments and the sacrifices never resulted in salvation. So, does that mean that no one ever needed to keep those commandments?

Those to whom the commands were given needed to keep them. The commands God has given can't bring salvation because no one can keep them perfectly.

Well, that leaves use in a quandary. Wasn't Torah given to Yeshua and His disciples? If that is the case, shouldn't Yeshua's disciples keep Torah?

[Ancient Paths]

Those to whom the commands were given needed to keep them. The commands God has given can't bring salvation because no one can keep them perfectly.

To whom were the commandments of God given that we--Christians today--do not need to pay attention to them?

I agree that no one can obey the entirety of God's Law perfectly throughout one's entire life, but is that a reason to not even try? As Paul says:

"What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?" -Ro. 6:1-2

The only way this verse makes sense is if sin is defined as breaking God's Law, as we see him continuing in this same vein a few verses later:

"What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!" -Ro. 6:15

It's like what you said about Col. 2:16-17, I hear what you're saying but nothing in the verses or their context explicitly says that those things are to be ignored.

I forgot to mention in my previous reply to you that, while I have heard your and others' claim of a distinction between moral, civil, and ceremonial law within God's Law, I have yet to see anything in scripture supporting that distinction. The website you pointed me to mentions it also but doesn't show where it gets this idea from. The author mentions it as though it is established fact.

[bluethread]

Well, HaTorah leaves that to the one who sits in "the seat of Moshe'". In short, if it doesn't violate Torah it is up to the community to decide. That is what Yeshua was referring to when He said, MT. 23:2-3 "The Torah-teachers and the P'rushim," he said, "sit in the seat of Moshe. So whatever they tell you, take care to do it. But don't do what they do, because they talk but don't act!"

This has confused me because much of what Jesus taught against were the extra-biblical laws that the Pharisees and scribes had added and were adding to Torah, yet here he says to obey whatever they instruct.

Yes, He points out their errors, but there is no case in which he resists a direct ruling. If you will note, when the actions of His disciples were questioned, His answers were not found to be in error, though those who questioned Him sincerely desired them to be. So, He is telling His disciples through both word and example that one is to follow one's leaders, however, one is to also question them.

If one wishes to be part of the Methodist community, one should abide by the methods of John Wesley. If one wishes to be part of the RCC one should follow the Papal dictates. That said, if those methods and dictates violate HaTorah, one should consider whether one should be part of such a community.

Except, if I'm understanding you correctly, if Torah is the standard for Christians today, then neither the Methodists nor the RCC would be acceptable. I may wish to be part of a Methodist community, but if that community doesn't keep Torah, and it doesn't, then I shouldn't be a part of that community. So, for you, is Torah what you believe the standard is for Christians today?

Christians? That is a difficult question, given the convoluted nature of Christian theology. However, it is my view that, if one wishes to be considered one of Adonai's people, one should follow Adonai's commandments. I have been part of a Methodist community, as well as Presbyterian and Baptist communities. During those times I was in that place that Yeshua was speaking to above. For the most part I followed that advice, and was seen as a bit of a trouble maker by some. However, just like Yeshua, most of the time, those whom I challenged where at a loss as to how to find fault with what I asked or said.

[Ancient Paths]

Whatever Christ said to do... this is what I am to do.

"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."

Okay, you quoted Jn. 14:23, which uses the word "teaching." I have no problem with this concept but, to do so, one must identify what he taught. Because I love him, I desire to know everything he taught and to, as that verse puts it, obey it. So two verses earlier Jesus said almost the exact same thing:

"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him." -Jn. 14:21

Here, however, the word that corresponds to "teaching" in verse 23 is commandments. In the place of obeying his teachings, we have keep his commandments. Same idea, I believe. So does Jesus have a list of commandments or teachings that are different from the ones God gave in the OT?

He said that we are to eat and drink of Him (partake/communion). He said that we are to SERVE, just as He served. He said that we are to wash one another's feet, just as He washed the apostles' feet, setting them an example of what they were to do. He said that we are to forgive, to give to those who ask of us, to bless those who curse us, etc, etc.

It's the "etc., etc." that I'm interested in identifying. We have the Bible in black and white. It should be a simple matter to come up with the list of what a Christian should be doing if s/he really is saved, yet for some reason, after about 2,000 years, nobody really knows (or perhaps nobody really wants to know). I don't see anywhere that we were saved to sit on our duffs and consume our spare time by playing video games, gushing over the latest fashions, or even playing church (Mt. 5:16, Eph. 2:10, Php. 2:12, 1Ti. 2:9-10, 1Ti. 5:9-10, 1Ti. 16:17-19). I mean, according to your list above, not counting the etc., etc., I can lie, cheat, steal, rape, and generally get away with murder and still be in right standing with God. Now, I know other places such as 1Co. 6:9-10 give a list of those--fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, effeminate, homosexuals, thieves, coveters, drunkards, revilers, swindlers--who will not inherit the kingdom of God, but these are straight out of the OT. So are Jesus' commands found only in the NT or in both the NT and OT? If his commands are found in the NT and include some but not all of the commands in the OT, then there must somewhere be a clear distinction provided, in scripture.

I think some people are looking for a rule-book...

I confess that I am looking for a rule book. Rules are important. Try driving without them. I find it incomprehensible that God would put us on this earth and not give us a rule book for living here. He expects nothing of us other than that we accept Christ as savior? What about as Lord? I don't know if you remember VCRs, but everybody had them and hardly anybody knew how to program them because we were too lazy to read the rule book (user manual).

...what do we HAVE to follow (and by extension perhaps, what can we get away without following).

For me, this is not about trying to find out what I can get away with. It's about love for God, just as in Jn. 14:21 and 14:23 above. Love.

But how is following a rule-book any different than following the old law, which became about judging and condemning others... rather than examining oneself (a mirror).

I'm going to nit-pick here (as if I haven't been already). You used the word old in reference to the law. Do you mean it's old as in someone's grandparents or old as in replaced by a new law? Is God old? Which old?

You also used the word became, which suggests that it [the old law] wasn't always about judging and condemning others rather than examining one's self. Was the old law always bad or was it at one point good?

But when we look back at what WAS (even if we just erect an image of that former thing), then we are showing that our hearts are back there... rather than with Christ.

But wasn't it Christ who said at Mt. 5:17-19 that the old law is to remain valid forever and that those who teach others to disobey even the least of those commandments shall be called least in God's kingdom? How can it be the same Christ who then teaches that the old rule book is no longer in effect? I'm seeing a discrepancy in all this.

But love is the new law; the law written upon our hearts.

Ah, now you've said something really interesting. First, I'm going to point back to the verses you and I quoted above from Jn. 14. They both express that obedience to God and love are inseparably linked. The law being written on our hearts is from Jer. 31:33 and pertains to the New Covenant.

{31} "Behold, days are coming,� declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, {32} not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,� declares the Lord. {33} “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,� declares the Lord, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." -Jer. 31:31-33

Try using that line on the local constabulary when they pull you over for driving 75 in a 55 mph zone. "It's okay, officer, you see, the law is written on my heart." That wouldn't keep one from getting a ticket--in fact, it may ensure that you do get one--and I suspect that it wouldn't work with God, either. In Jeremiah's day as in Jesus' day, when Jews spoke of "the Law," there is only one thing that this term could refer to, which is the whole body of 613 commandments contained in the Pentateuch. I checked, and the Hebrew word for Law there is "Torah." So Jesus says in the OT that the Torah would be written on our hearts as part of being in the New Covenant, Jesus says in Mt. 5 that the Law/Torah is to remain valid for his people until heaven and earth disappear, Jesus says in Jn. 14 that what it means to love God is to obey his commands, and John defines sin at 1Jn. 3:4 as violation of the Law. Yet, at other places, we are to believe that Jesus and the apostles, Paul in particular, are chucking God's Law in the waste bin and saying that we may do as we please now because the Law was bad. Somewhere in Christian doctrine there is a disconnect. Somewhere in the Bible, God would have to have told us through his prophets that he was going to delete his Law or Christ would have to have told us which commands were to be ignored and which were to be obeyed.

Following a set of rules and laws cannot make us perfect because we will all fall short of them at some point (even the above at times - but thankfully CHRIST does not fall short, and so His blood covers and speaks FOR us those times when WE do).

You may have an incorrect idea about my purpose in starting this thread. I do not link following God's rules to salvation or being perfect. I believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone and, to be clear, not by works. I believe, however, that we were saved unto good works, and obedience is better than sacrifice. I have, rightly or wrongly, perceived the church--or the myriad denominations, individual churches, and individuals within a given church--to be all over the map on this subject, but most being not interested or refusing to identify anything that we as those who bear his name ought to do and not do to live rightly as his ambassadors. Something is seriously out of whack (that's a highly technical term).

Peace Tammy.

[Ancient Paths]

Yes, He points out their errors, but there is no case in which he resists a direct ruling. If you will note, when the actions of His disciples were questioned, His answers were not found to be in error, though those who questioned Him sincerely desired them to be. So, He is telling His disciples through both word and example that one is to follow one's leaders, however, one is to also question them.

And yet his disciples later disobeyed a direct order from the high priest.

When they had brought them, they stood them before the Council. The high priest questioned them, saying, “We gave you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name, and yet, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.� But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him.�

I'm wondering if this was a case of us having to listen to whomever sat in the seat of Moses until either Christ died or the seat of Moses was no more (70 A.D.), or if this is a case of Ecc. 3, namely knowing the particular time for the particular purpose at hand.

Christians? That is a difficult question, given the convoluted nature of Christian theology. However, it is my view that, if one wishes to be considered one of Adonai's people, one should follow Adonai's commandments.

Which of his commandments? Do you see a separation of commandments in the Bible between those that Christians--God's people--should be keeping and those that Christians should or need not keep?

[bluethread]

Yes, He points out their errors, but there is no case in which he resists a direct ruling. If you will note, when the actions of His disciples were questioned, His answers were not found to be in error, though those who questioned Him sincerely desired them to be. So, He is telling His disciples through both word and example that one is to follow one's leaders, however, one is to also question them.

And yet his disciples later disobeyed a direct order from the high priest.

When they had brought them, they stood them before the Council. The high priest questioned them, saying, “We gave you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name, and yet, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.� But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him.�

I'm wondering if this was a case of us having to listen to whomever sat in the seat of Moses until either Christ died or the seat of Moses was no more (70 A.D.), or if this is a case of Ecc. 3, namely knowing the particular time for the particular purpose at hand.

Emphasis Mine

No, as the parts I emphasize show, this is a matter of the hierarchy of revelation. The Shema require us to discuss HaTorah. If the direction established Yeshua as teach against Torah, or encouraged Adonai's people to ignore the rabbinics of the Sanhedrin, you would have a point. However, that was not the direction. The direction was to not give credit to their rabbi, ie stop teaching what their rabbi had instructed them to teach. This is a violation of both the Shema and their rabbinic practice of crediting one's rabbi for one's teachings.

The book of Ecclesiastes is a comparison of various philosophical positions to Adonai's ways. It is therefore, more of an apologetic than a statement of base Torah principle. Therefore, I believe that using Eccl. 3 to support violating HaTorah is to misuse the teaching.

Christians? That is a difficult question, given the convoluted nature of Christian theology. However, it is my view that, if one wishes to be considered one of Adonai's people, one should follow Adonai's commandments.

Which of his commandments? Do you see a separation of commandments in the Bible between those that Christians--God's people--should be keeping and those that Christians should or need not keep?

As I stated, if one wishes to be considered one of Adonai's people, whether on wishes to call themselves a Christian or not, that one should keep all the commandments that are possible to keep.

[Ancient Paths]

As I stated, if one wishes to be considered one of Adonai's people, whether on wishes to call themselves a Christian or not, that one should keep all the commandments that are possible to keep.

But most Christians say that we can't keep the whole law and, because we can't keep the whole law, we shouldn't even try to keep any of it. The vast majority of Christian denominations teach us that, to obey any of God's laws (except for the ones that the church leadership likes on that particular day) is to be in bondage and to deny that Christ paid our sin debt in full, in essence to be unsaved as a result of attempting to earn salvation.

I don't see it that way because it flies in the face of far too many passages of scripture as well as common sense, but that's what I hear from almost every corner of the Body of Christ. Can so many people be so wrong for so long on such an important matter?

Peace.

[tam]

Peace to you Ancient Paths,

This post is long, I know, but I hope the examples given will also aid understanding the responses.

Okay, you quoted Jn. 14:23, which uses the word "teaching." I have no problem with this concept but, to do so, one must identify what he taught. Because I love him, I desire to know everything he taught and to, as that verse puts it, obey it. So two verses earlier Jesus said almost the exact same thing:

"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him." -Jn. 14:21

Here, however, the word that corresponds to "teaching" in verse 23 is commandments. In the place of obeying his teachings, we have keep his commandments. Same idea, I believe. So does Jesus have a list of commandments or teachings that are different from the ones God gave in the OT?

Yes, as you have said, same thing - different translations use these words interchangeably on this verse: teaching, command, word. He also taught by example. And if we are being trained for a job, we both listen to our trainer, and we watch what they do so that we can do the same.

Christ did give commands that are different than what is written in the OT ("You have heard it said, but I tell you NOW..."), but not every command written in the OT was as it was meant to be from the beginning. Some laws were given because the hearts of the people were too hard to do what was true. ("Moses gave you this law because your hearts were hard. But it was not that way from the beginning...")

As well:

"How can you say, 'We are wise for we have the law of the LORD', when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely." Jeremiah 8:8

So not every law that we have written is as it was meant to be, or is the truth from God. Some are a result of making allowance for the heard hearts of the people/damage control; and also some are a result of the lying pen of the scribes.

So do we rely upon a written law that is not all Truth, and that even the bible says has been mishandled by the 'lying pen' of the scribes? Or do we turn to Christ and listen to Him, who IS the Truth, and who IS from God?

I think that is a rhetorical question, lol... but some people go with the first part. That makes no sense to me.

[

quote="tam"]
He said that we are to eat and drink of Him (partake/communion). He said that we are to SERVE, just as He served. He said that we are to wash one another's feet, just as He washed the apostles' feet, setting them an example of what they were to do. He said that we are to forgive, to give to those who ask of us, to bless those who curse us, etc, etc.

It's the "etc., etc." that I'm interested in identifying. We have the Bible in black and white. It should be a simple matter to come up with the list of what a Christian should be doing if s/he really is saved, yet for some reason, after about 2,000 years, nobody really knows (or perhaps nobody really wants to know). I don't see anywhere that we were saved to sit on our duffs and consume our spare time by playing video games, gushing over the latest fashions, or even playing church (Mt. 5:16, Eph. 2:10, Php. 2:12, 1Ti. 2:9-10, 1Ti. 5:9-10, 1Ti. 16:17-19). I mean, according to your list above, not counting the etc., etc., I can lie, cheat, steal, rape, and generally get away with murder and still be in right standing with God.

Except that those things are against the law of love. Love does not steal, rape, murder. There are of course exceptions to things like lying IF say, you were hiding Jews in your basement during the holocaust but you told the nazis that there were no Jews around. If that is a sin, it would be covered over by love.

"Love covers over a multitude of sins." 1Peter 4:8

Now, I know other places such as 1Co. 6:9-10 give a list of those--fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, effeminate, homosexuals, thieves, coveters, drunkards, revilers, swindlers--who will not inherit the kingdom of God, but these are straight out of the OT. So are Jesus' commands found only in the NT or in both the NT and OT? If his commands are found in the NT and include some but not all of the commands in the OT, then there must somewhere be a clear distinction provided, in scripture.

Besides the couple of things listed above - scripture points to Christ. He is the One to whom God gave us to listen. (This is my Son, listen to Him) Scripture is like a bike with training wheels. Once we come to Christ - the Living Spirit and Living Word of God - so as to learn from Him, we don't need the training wheels anymore. In fact, if we become so dependent on the training wheels, we might never learn to ride a two-wheel on our own. We might become TOO afraid to even try.

"You diligently search the scriptures because you think that by them you have eternal life. These are the scriptures that testify to me, yet you refuse to come to me to have Life." (John 5:39,40)

A dear one once shared a saying that I loved:

The finger pointing to the moon is not the moon.

And as another one once said:

At some point you have to stop reading the menu, and eat.

Sorry, lol... getting carried away. But listen to Christ, even if you start with what you read in the gospels to find out what He said and did, and then DO those things also. Because His promise is true:

"If someone loves me, they will obey my commands. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with(in) them."

But don't forget to ask Him, to knock, to seek, to listen, to ask for ears to hear if you do not have them. Because He also said:

"Seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened; ask and it will be given to you."

"My sheep hear my voice. I call them by name and they follow me."

I think some people are looking for a rule-book...

I confess that I am looking for a rule book. Rules are important. Try driving without them. I find it incomprehensible that God would put us on this earth and not give us a rule book for living here. He expects nothing of us other than that we accept Christ as savior? What about as Lord? I don't know if you remember VCRs, but everybody had them and hardly anybody knew how to program them because we were too lazy to read the rule book (user manual).

The rule God has given you is to listen to His Son. That Son said that if you love Him, you will obey His commands. Don't worry about anyone else; or any other teachings. Not the OT, not Paul, not any of the many many denominations, not doctrines (no matter how long they have been around), not religious leaders. Just listen to and follow Christ. If there is anything more that you need to know, HE will teach you and lead you into ALL truth.

These other things can give you 'bits' of truth. That is the lure - so that those seeking truth may get trapped in them (if they never leave so as to follow Christ). But there is only One who can give you ALL truth.

So tear all the rest down, and build upon the TRUE foundation (of Truth - Christ).

...what do we HAVE to follow (and by extension perhaps, what can we get away without following).

For me, this is not about trying to find out what I can get away with. It's about love for God, just as in Jn. 14:21 and 14:23 above. Love.

Yes, I understood that about you from what you posted. But it can be about that for some.

But how is following a rule-book any different than following the old law, which became about judging and condemning others... rather than examining oneself (a mirror).

I'm going to nit-pick here (as if I haven't been already). You used the word old in reference to the law. Do you mean it's old as in someone's grandparents or old as in replaced by a new law? Is God old? Which old?

When I wrote that I was just thinking old testament, the law of Moses (what are there 6 hundred and something of them?).

You also used the word became, which suggests that it [the old law] wasn't always about judging and condemning others rather than examining one's self. Was the old law always bad or was it at one point good?

That is correct. The TRUE law of God was never bad (though it did not save anyone) - but it was used badly - to condemn others rather than SEE the sin in oneself; and also mishandled.

I will share some of what I received from the Spirit on the law that Christ corrected: eye for eye, life for life. Not that you have to take my word for anything, but perhaps an example of listening to the Spirit (rather than looking to the black and white), and an example of how the old law was mishandled, might be helpful to you. Perhaps someone will also ask and hear for themselves.

"Eye for eyes, life for life was not meant as in: go take a life in vengeance. Or go take an 'eye' in vengeance. It was not about vengeance. Christ taught the truth about what a person was to do with regard to the wrongs done to them... to turn the other cheek, bless those who curse you, etc. Christ taught the truth as it was from the beginning. Abel - whose blood cried out not for vengeance, but for mercy, for his brother Cain.

Life for life, eye for eye... this was meant to be about GIVING... not taking. But just as Israel did not understand that the law was meant to be a mirror and not a pointing finger, somewhere along the way Israel understood that this was about vengeance, and perhaps - due to the hard hearts of the people - it was said so as to deter (from crime). But it was not that way from the beginning. Same as the law Moses gave the people about divorce. He allowed it - because of the hard hearts of the people who would have done worse to the wives they no longer wanted - but it was not that way from the beginning.

Had Israel understood this... then they might have recognized Christ when He came by what He did. Because it was meant to point to Him. Life for Life. Just as Christ gave His life FOR us. His life FOR ours."

But when we look back at what WAS (even if we just erect an image of that former thing), then we are showing that our hearts are back there... rather than with Christ.

But wasn't it Christ who said at Mt. 5:17-19 that the old law is to remain valid forever and that those who teach others to disobey even the least of those commandments shall be called least in God's kingdom? How can it be the same Christ who then teaches that the old rule book is no longer in effect? I'm seeing a discrepancy in all this.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. 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. Matthew 5:17,18

He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms." Luke 24:44

All be fulfilled in Christ.

That does not mean we can go steal, etc. The new law is love... and love does not steal.

"The law is a tutor leading to Christ." The understanding that I received about life for life gives that some deeper meaning to me, as well.

But love is the new law; the law written upon our hearts.

Ah, now you've said something really interesting. First, I'm going to point back to the verses you and I quoted above from Jn. 14. They both express that obedience to God and love are inseparably linked. The law being written on our hearts is from Jer. 31:33 and pertains to the New Covenant.

{31} "Behold, days are coming,� declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, {32} not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,� declares the Lord. {33} “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,� declares the Lord, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." -Jer. 31:31-33

Try using that line on the local constabulary when they pull you over for driving 75 in a 55 mph zone. "It's okay, officer, you see, the law is written on my heart." That wouldn't keep one from getting a ticket--in fact, it may ensure that you do get one--and I suspect that it wouldn't work with God, either.

LOL, yes, I don't think I would have the guts to try something like that. However, saying one has the law - but not doing as that law SAYS - these may be two different things.

Sort of in the same way that 'faith without works is dead'. If your faith does not lead you to works, then what good is it? If the law of love upon your heart does not lead you to acts of love, then what good is it? Are you sure you even have it?

In Jeremiah's day as in Jesus' day, when Jews spoke of "the Law," there is only one thing that this term could refer to, which is the whole body of 613 commandments contained in the Pentateuch.

It is also Jeremiah who rebukes the lying pen of the scribes who have handled the law falsely.

I checked, and the Hebrew word for Law there is "Torah." So Jesus says in the OT that the Torah would be written on our hearts as part of being in the New Covenant, Jesus says in Mt. 5 that the Law/Torah is to remain valid for his people until heaven and earth disappear,

Until all is fulfilled.

Jesus says in Jn. 14 that what it means to love God is to obey his commands, and John defines sin at 1Jn. 3:4 as violation of the Law. Yet, at other places, we are to believe that Jesus and the apostles, Paul in particular, are chucking God's Law in the waste bin and saying that we may do as we please now because the Law was bad. Somewhere in Christian doctrine there is a disconnect. Somewhere in the Bible, God would have to have told us through his prophets that he was going to delete his Law or Christ would have to have told us which commands were to be ignored and which were to be obeyed.

I think this is a summary of all that you have said above, so I will leave my responses above as they are. If there is something in here that was not addressed, please let me know.

Following a set of rules and laws cannot make us perfect because we will all fall short of them at some point (even the above at times - but thankfully CHRIST does not fall short, and so His blood covers and speaks FOR us those times when WE do).

You may have an incorrect idea about my purpose in starting this thread. I do not link following God's rules to salvation or being perfect. I believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone and, to be clear, not by works. I believe, however, that we were saved unto good works, and obedience is better than sacrifice. I have, rightly or wrongly, perceived the church--or the myriad denominations, individual churches, and individuals within a given church--to be all over the map on this subject, but most being not interested or refusing to identify anything that we as those who bear his name ought to do and not do to live rightly as his ambassadors. Something is seriously out of whack (that's a highly technical term).

Peace Tammy.

[/quote]

Well, I agree with your use of that highly technical term ; )

If I recall correctly, without going back to check, the reason I emphasized what it is that makes us perfect - loving our friends AND our enemies - is because I have read many people saying that we are perfect if we obey the laws (whichever version they mean), and they use this verse to support that.

But in that verse Christ is saying that we are to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect - by loving both our friends and our enemies.


No reason other than that.

May you again have peace, and ears to hear so that you may get a sense of these things, and that you may hear and receive the truth to the questions that you are asking. May you also hear as the Spirit and the Bride say to you, "Come... take the free gift of the water of Life."


Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ Jaheshua,
tammy (who says "Come!" because she means it, as part of the Bride. But says it also in obedience, which is in keeping with this topic: 'And let him who hears say, "Come!" Revelation 22:17)