Christian Laws

The thread is about Christian Laws, so the "we" refers to Christians.

I assumed he was referring to the divine origin of the Bible. Divine means proceeding directly from God.If that assumption is incorrect, then clarify divine origin of what?

quote:

---

The "Christian Law" for the unbeliever is to become a believer and confess Christ as their Lord and be baptized to show the world that you are now one of the "we" of those who belong to Jesus.

---

This isn't about what the nonbelievers or nonreligious are held accountable to. It is about what Christians are held accountable to.
You've already given your 10 cents worth. Abiding, got it.

Where to start. Paul sets up his arguments. Sentences don't make the point by themselves. In Chapter 1, Paul is writing to Gentiles. The point of the argument is made in Chapter 2. The law supposedly referred to the Mosaic Law. Paul is not proclaiming anything different than what the Jews already followed concerning right behavior.

quote:

---

I'd like to add that, just bacause Christians claim to be justified does not mean that we are not morally accountable.

---

So to what laws are Christians held morally accountable?
Where are the laws that backup the characteristics Paul listed?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

I think it is possible to trace many of the 'evils' listed by Paul directly to the ten commandments. For example, I believe the temptation to bear false witness is often driven by such motives as malice, envy and malignity. I could continue if you'd like, but I think you could do it too.

---

The point is to know where you find the laws that backup the characteristics Paul listed. So yes, please continue.So we have do not bear false witness and do not steal.

quote:

---

Maybe it is easier to list laws do not seem to be applicable to Christians today. For example, there is a commandment about not building an altar of hewn stones. I don't know of any, let alone Christians, who seek to apply Exodus 20:24-25 literally today.

---

The footnote made up a reason, but it still doesn't really explain why some of the Mosaic or Jewish Laws (not just the one you listed) applicable today and others aren't?Since the Jewish followers of Jesus continued to follow Jewish law, the most reasonable answer is that Greeks weren't ever required to follow Jewish law since the Jews were no longer a reigning nation.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

What I often have trouble grasping is the huge contradictions in christian law/beliefs. Let me cite a few for you now.

---

This thread isn't to discuss contradictions in the Bible. This purpose of this thread is to list the Christian Laws.Please read the OP (Message 1) and Message 6 to understand the issue that began this thread.By law, I mean something legally binding and enforced by a controlling authority.I don't see that you've listed anything that can be considered a Christian Law.Please stick to the topic.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

I am not sure that I understand what you mean. Aren't those christian laws that I stated?

​

Legally binding?? You mean like a parking ticket offence?
Christian laws are not legally binding as far as I understand it. Only government laws are legally binding.

---

Please read the opening post and Message 6. That is the whole issue of this discussion.Peg says Christians have laws (legally binding), I contend that Christianity does not have legally binding laws separate from the local governing authorities.She has been unable to list any laws that are legally binding other than what is legally binding by local governments. (Don't steal, don't murder, don't falsely accuse, etc.)She can't even tell me clearly what standards all Christians will be held accountable to on judgment day.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

Firstly, the laws for christians were not laid down in the same way as the mosaic law was. That law was written up as a list of binding laws...the christian laws were written down amongst the writings of the NT rather then in one long list.

---

One would think that in over 1500 years, someone would take the time to make a list of "laws" so that everyone is on the same page.

quote:

---

The laws of the Christ are expressed in both direct commands, and in principles. If a christian was to deliberately disregard either of these, then they would be judged adversely for their attitude toward such things.

---

At least you've adjusted your view to include the idea that what we have in the NT are principles and not all legal laws.As I pointed out in Message 12. Law or laws of Christ is not referring to laws of a legal system. The Mosaic laws were part of the legal system. Enforceable in real time.Jesus taught principles that would help people abide by the Jewish legal system and not get caught up in the abuse of the system. Spirit of the legal system and not always the letter of the legal system.

quote:

---

Acts 15:28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication"

---

Message 15
This was to Non-Jews and were part of the Mosaic Laws. Unless Christians are eating Kosher food, there is blood in the meat and who knows when it comes to strangled. No sacrifices today, so not much chance there. As for porneia, Leviticus gives us the list of illegal sexual activities. So Christians are still bound by those Jewish laws?

quote:

---

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom"

---

That's Paul talking to Greeks. This isn't Jesus talking. The discourse by Jesus about the sheep and goats (Matthew 25:31-46) makes it clear that those who help those in need will be on his right. The actions above do not preclude a person from helping those in need. It was part of the Jewish law to help those in need. Where does Jesus support what Paul is saying?

quote:

---

John 13:34 "I am giving YOU a new commandment, that YOU love one another; just as I have loved YOU, that YOU also love one another. 35 By this all will know that YOU are my disciples, if YOU have love among yourselves.

---

Message 6Christian view of agape: In the New Testament, agapē is charitable, selfless, altruistic, and unconditional. It is parental love, seen as creating goodness in the world; it is the way God is seen to love humanity, and it is seen as the kind of love that Christians aspire to have for one another. The Christian version is amongst Christians, not necessarily all mankind.Again, the Jewish legal system addressed helping others and treating others fairly. Jesus gave them an example of following Jewish law.

quote:

---

James 1:27 "The form of worship that is clean and undefiled from the standpoint of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself without spot from the world"

​

James 4:4 "Adulteresses, do YOU not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God"

---

This also is not Jesus talking. The first one addresses worship, not a legal system.Why didn't you include James 2:1? Not showing favoritism is also in the Jewish law.In James 4, the writer isn't presenting a legal law. Basically he's telling his audience not to get caught up in material things. That doesn't mean we aren't allowed to have material things. When we get caught up in the "rat race" we tend to quibble over unimportant issues and don't pay as much attention or don't see those in need around us. (Like churches that split because some want the podium in the center and others want it off to the side.)The author was dealing with the issues of his time. Setting higher standards of behavior so that one can follow the Jewish laws and the reigning legal system, doesn't make those standards a law.Getting angry is not illegal and is not forbidden by God.
Getting drunk is not illegal and is not forbidden by God.But if one commits an illegal act out of anger or while drunk, then they suffer the consequences. So it is better to manage our anger and consumption of alcohol to avoid breaking a law.

quote:

---

1John 2:15 "Do not be loving either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; 16 because everything in the worldthe desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of one’s means of lifedoes not originate with the Father, but originates with the world"

---

Same point as James 4. The writer wrote this information so that his audience would not sin. He wasn't presenting legal laws, but principles that will help them stick to the legal laws given by God. The author feels that sin is lawlessness. Transgression of the legal system.

quote:

---

Matt 7:21 Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will"

---

This is part of the discourse telling people to watch out for false prophets. It isn't a law, just a statement.

quote:

---

Matt 26:52 Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword."

​

Matt 7:1 Stop judging that you may not be judged"

---

Again, not laws.

quote:

---

These words show that the things which Jesus and his disciples taught and recorded in the NT are the things by which Christians and all mankind will be judged. Jesus teachings/principles are the 'laws of the Christ' and they constitute the standards by which God will judge us.

---

So these aren't actual laws, other than those that have actually been put in our legal system.As I said in Message 58:Show me that there are Christian laws, not just principles and standards of living. I agree there are principles and standards of living.A law can be a principle or standard, but all principles and standards are not laws.Christians interchange these ideas so much that they have lost meaning. I want the weight put back in the word law and stop throwing it around lightly.What you've shown me is that we are to obey the legal laws of our respective governments and apply the higher standards taught by Jesus to choose right behavior.God judging us by these standards, does not make them laws. How do we know those not spoken by Jesus are actually God's standards?So there is a difference between laws of a legal system and standards of behavior for day to day living or final judgment.Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

then you say "God judging us by these standards, does not make them laws. How do we know those not spoken by Jesus are actually God's standards?"
which seems to mean that the standards of the NT are not laws.

---

I'm asking what makes those standards not presented by Jesus to be laws? Jesus made no changes to Jewish law. He did not have the authority to tell a Jew not to follow the Jewish laws. He also said that no one should tell anyone not to follow the Jewish laws.Even in Judaism there is a authoritative trail of reasoning behind new laws and how they relate to the Mosaic Laws. These are done by those who have the authority to make and change laws.Today, a clergy can make a sermon and say that Christian women are not allowed to wear jeans or trousers. (Women should not wear mens clothing.) Does this now become a law that women will be judged by judgment day?
Preachers that say people much attend church. Is this now a law?Paul is not Jesus. Why would anything in his letters be considered law?
Why would standards written in letters with unknown authors be considered law?
The book of Matthew may be written as a satire. Why would anything in it be considered a law?
The authors of all four gospels are unknown. Why would standards in them be considered laws?At least the Mosaic laws were considered to be written by someone who did have the authority to make laws, whether one believes it was Moses or the Priestly writer. The written law was on the books and people suffered real time consequences for not abiding by those laws.A teacher can give you commands, but that doesn't make them laws.

quote:

---

I really dont care how you or anybody else defines a law, im interested in what God views as law and legally binding. If he is going to judge us on the basis of Jesus teachings then it stands to reason that according to him they are laws.

​

Hence, the words of Jesus and his apostles are 'laws' that we will be held accountable to.

---

Well we've reached the "I don't care about real definitions, I'll stick with my own" response. If everyone goes by their own definition, then there is no consistency.Don't forget what got us into this discussion. (Message 6) You clearly make the Christian Laws different than the teachings of the apostles.Other than Paul, who didn't know the living Jesus, there are no writings by the original 12 apostles in the NT. The authors are unknown.The NT consists of stories, letters and sermons. These are over 1500 years old and in an ancient language. We can tell by all the sects of Christianity that interpretations are not consistent across the board.Laws that carry dire consequences should be clearly stated. The NT doesn't give us this. Hence all the accuracy issues, authorship issues, doctrine issues, etc. Jesus was bringing people into line with the spirit of the Jewish laws.Once Christianity separated from Judaism, they no longer fell under that legal system. Once Christianity was embraced by the Roman Empire, they fell under the Roman legal system.Your premise is contradictory: There's a difference between a law and living as someone directs. They aren't necessarily one and the same.The Mosaic Laws are supposedly God's laws.Jesus made it clear when he echoed the sentiments of Rabbi Hillel. Love your neighbor as yourself; IOW, if you don't want it done to you, don't do it to others. That's the spirit of the Jewish Law and the teachings of Jesus. Jesus didn't give us new laws.There are no Christian laws.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

He took the law one step further. He wasnt necessarily changing it but he was deepening and widening its force by showing the spirit behind it. Continued ill will became as serious as murder. Merely thinking lustful thoughts became as adultery. Divorcing without legal reason became tantamount to adultery. A higher law of truth shows repetitious oaths to be unnecessary. A higher law of mildness sets aside retaliation.

​

He replaced the laws with a higher law based on the principles of the mosaic laws....and he outright contradicted the religious leaders and their oral laws.

---

You were doing good until you said he replaced the laws with a higher law. He didn't replace the legal system. I agree he was trying to teach people to strive for a higher standard and the spirit behind the legal system.He didn't change the legal system or teach that people should not follow the legal system.It would be a falsehood to claim something is what it isn't.Christians today do not have their own legal system. Aside from the actually laws that were mentioned in the NT, the teachings of Jesus were not presented as laws in a legal system. Don't throw the word "law" around so easily.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

ok purpledawn, you can believe whatever you like about what you consider to be law or not

​

Its easy to do when you ignore the fact that Jesus quoted from the mosaic laws when teaching the people about those laws and how they 'should' be applied.

---

It isn't about belief. It's about understanding what is said.There is a difference between laws of a legal system, like the Mosaic Laws and Jewish Laws and rules of procedure which is really where your "law of Christ" fall. There is no Christian legal system.God supposedly gave the Mosaic laws to the nation of Israel for the legal system. Those were God's laws for Israel. A working legal system.That why when you make statements like this: It shows you rely on doctrine more than what is actually written.If God's laws are not the Mosaic law, what are God's laws and where are they written. If you say it is written on our hearts, then God's laws are the same as mankind's.Righteous simply means one isn't breaking the rules of their legal system. Like Noah.Righteousness conveys the idea of conformity to an ethical or moral standard.So as Christians we are bound by our current legal system. We are not to break those laws. Jesus taught that we should live by a higher moral or ethical standard. Just because something is legal, doesn't mean we should do it. Just because we can doesn't mean we should.Just like marriage and divorce. Choose a mate wisely and strive to keep the relationship healthy so divorce isn't necessary. Today we know that divorce can adversely impact the children and the spouse depending on what caused the split. The impact on women and children was different thousands of years ago than it is today, but consequences were there. So while divorce is legal and is there if all else fails, it shouldn't be used indiscriminately.Just as laws change, ethical and moral standards also change over time.When you say: Remember that it is 'Faith' in God that counts a person as righteous, not works of any law.
To show faith in God, one must adopt HIS laws....or better put, live as he directs.; you're contradicting yourself because you don't make it clear what is meant by law. Also remember that Paul is the one who speaks of works of the law. I don't feel he was talking about the legal system. I feel Paul was talking more about religious procedures.Kinda like what I've said before about Christians doing all the right things in Church, but not necessarily in their lives. Going to church every Sunday doesn't make one right before God. Singing in the choir doesn't make one right before God. Wearing a dress instead of jeans doesn't make a woman right before God. Being an Elder in the church doesn't make one right before God. You get my drift.If one does all those things, but won't give a man gas for his car when needed; then they didn't learn the lesson.Your statement doesn't make that distinction clear. Catch phrases tend to lose meaning over time. Always good to take a close look at what is really being said and whether the speaker knows what they are actually saying. Given your responses, I don't feel that you do understand what you're actually presenting.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion