Many nominal Christian religions today observe some form of the Mosaic Law, in whole or in part, sans the punishments, which are not sanctioned in the Christian Scriptures. They may observe the sabbath day of the week (Friday/Saturday) or the first day of the week (Sunday) in honor of Christ's resurrection without knowing what the Scriptures say on the matter. Some even observe a sabbath month and year according to the Law of Moses. Many perform circumcisions or have a long list of dietary restrictions. They may even impose restrictions in excess of the law, often about veganism and/or clothing and grooming, ritualistic practices, etc.
But are Christians under obligation to continue to observe the Mosaic Law? Are there any parts of the Mosaic Law that Christians are required to observe according to the Scriptures? If so, why? Are any laws not in the Mosaic Law added to Christians?
The question really comes down to what it means to be obedient and what it means to be lawless? Which are you? An obedient servant of God who uses God's non-sacrificial laws to the benefit of all? A harsh and unyielding obeyer of non-sacrificial laws? Or a Lawless opposer of any kind of law-like restrictions? What was Jesus?
In this refutation against slaving to the Mosaic Law, I will show that Christians are not under obligation to any part of the Mosaic Law as being unyieldingly binding and that such slaving undermines salvation; but due to very Christian principles, the Scriptures tell us unequivocally what remains for Christians to avoid that are key to our salvation. I will also show that there are no additional rules that Christians are required to observe, but may remain as principles that guide us.
It takes scriptures taken out of context and faulty logic to establish doctrines enslaving Christians to the Law instead of taking the words of the Scriptures as written. Such choice disregard also causes many to abandon God's laws entirely as being unimportant. The Mosaic Law served its purpose and was taken out of the way, but let's find out why it is not binding on Christians and what use it still serves for us today.
While there are certain things in the law that Christians are required to observe, not because they are in the law, but because they apply to rules that existed before the law, specific laws such as the Sabbath, circumcision and dietary restrictions, each require a clear statement or example of Christ's disciples observing such laws without mitigating circumstances.
If under some law, it must be shown which specific restrictions were made binding on Christians, while showing that they are not binding because of the Mosaic Law, but because they have been binding on all mankind from the beginning or became binding afterward as part of the law of the Christ.
Additional viewing:
Geoffrey W. Jackson: Jesus Fulfilled the Law (Matt. 5:43)
Go to: the beginning of the Salvation vs. project
Go to: Part 2: A Brief History of God's Laws
In this refutation against slaving to the Mosaic Law, I will show that Christians are not under obligation to any part of the Mosaic Law as being unyieldingly binding and that such slaving undermines salvation; but due to very Christian principles, the Scriptures tell us unequivocally what remains for Christians to avoid that are key to our salvation. I will also show that there are no additional rules that Christians are required to observe, but may remain as principles that guide us.
It takes scriptures taken out of context and faulty logic to establish doctrines enslaving Christians to the Law instead of taking the words of the Scriptures as written. Such choice disregard also causes many to abandon God's laws entirely as being unimportant. The Mosaic Law served its purpose and was taken out of the way, but let's find out why it is not binding on Christians and what use it still serves for us today.
What Is Needed for Proof One Way or the Other?
To get at the heart of this issue, we must establish what is needed to both prove and disprove each viewpoint.Required Proof to Show Christians Are Under Law
In light of Paul's statement that we are not under law, there must be a clear statement saying that we are under the law, perhaps sans the sacrifices. Barring that, then proof must be presented that Paul was talking only about the sacrifices in the law.While there are certain things in the law that Christians are required to observe, not because they are in the law, but because they apply to rules that existed before the law, specific laws such as the Sabbath, circumcision and dietary restrictions, each require a clear statement or example of Christ's disciples observing such laws without mitigating circumstances.
Required Proof to Show That Christians Are Not Under Law
The proof is already well established with Paul's words that we are not under law, but it must be made clear that Paul was referring to the whole law and not just the sacrifices. Barring that, or in addition to that, another scripture must be provided showing that we are not under laws not related to sacrifices.If under some law, it must be shown which specific restrictions were made binding on Christians, while showing that they are not binding because of the Mosaic Law, but because they have been binding on all mankind from the beginning or became binding afterward as part of the law of the Christ.
Additional viewing:
Geoffrey W. Jackson: Jesus Fulfilled the Law (Matt. 5:43)
Go to: the beginning of the Salvation vs. project
Go to: Part 2: A Brief History of God's Laws
Comments