Christians Don't Sin

[JimL]

Because we are the offspring of Adam, and we inherit his propensity to sin, just as God knew would happen.

If God of the bible knew what would happen, then why was he so infuriated when it did? Also if God knew it would happen, if he knew that what he created was flawed, who but himself is responsible for it?

Hence the need for Jesus.

So Jesus is needed as an advocate for his own handywork. "Its not their fault father, please forgive them, after all it was i who created them thus."

[Soyeong]

You are speaking like the judiazers of Paul's day. Cut. It. Out.

I am in complete agreement with Paul about the Judiazers, so please don't confuse me with them.

"God instructions for how to do good works/live rightly/practice righteousness/avoid sin exist independently any particular covenant that offers rewards for keeping them and punishments for disobeying him. As Paul said in Romans 7:7a, it's God's instructions that inform us of what sin is. We are saved by grace through faith, not by practicing righteousness, but for the purpose of practicing righteousness."

This argument is pretty much as simple as it gets, so it's only badly misunderstood theology, such as not understanding the context of what the Judaizers wanted, that twists it. Practicing righteousness in obedience to God's commands is just as important to the Jews as it is to the Gentiles:

1 John 2:3-6 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, 5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: 6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

1 John 3:4-10 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 6 No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. 8 Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's[b] seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.

Jesus was sinless, so he kept the law perfectly, and he taught others how to understand and keep it, such as in Matthew 5. The goal of a disciple was to become a copy of their rabbi by learning how to think and act like them. Jesus taught by example and his disciples tried to model their behavior after him, which would have been included in the Great Commission. Up until Peter's vision in Acts 10, all of the Christians were either Jews and or Gentile proselytes, so for around at least 7 years after Jesus' ascension, Gentiles who were interested in following God were being taught to obey the law. Do you think they said, "Hold on folks, if you wait 10 more years our good friend Paul will write you a letter so you can know what to do"? No, they learned from what they had: the OT Scriptures, and oral traditions for how to keep the law, which possibly oral traditions of the teachings of the Messiah. The Bereans in Acts 17:11 checked everything Paul told them against the OT Scriptures, so there was nothing in Paul's message that was in disagreement with them. So how can we say that we walk in the way that Jesus walked if we don't follow the same commands he did for how to practice righteousness and we don't teach others to do the same?

--

In order to understand the Judaizers, you need to understand the oral law, which consisted of interpretations, rulings, and traditions for how to keep the written law of the Torah, and fences around it to help protect it from being transgressed. So for instance, the Jews took a command, such as not to work on the Sabbath, rigorously defined what counted as work, like how far someone can walk, then set up a fence around that to help prevent anyone from accidentally walking too far. Another example of a fence is when Jesus said that even looking at a woman lustfully was committing adultery. Jesus followed and gave some oral laws, so not all of them were bad, but what would become 24 chapters in the Mishna for how to keep the Sabbath ended up being a heavy burden and a perversion of what was intended to be a simple day of rest. This is what was referred to as the traditions of the elders and what Jesus argued against in Mark 7:1-9.

However, a common Jewish thought was that you couldn't keep the Sabbath without knowing all of the detailed instructions in the oral law for how to keep it and they traced the command for the oral law back to Moses, so they gave it an equal or greater importance than the written law (Mark 7:6-9). In their minds, you couldn't teach the laws of Moses without teaching their instructions for for how to keep it, so when they wanted to require Gentiles to keep the laws of Moses in order to be saved in Acts 15:1, that included their oral laws. What Paul referred to as a heavy burden was what would become 26 volumes of the Talmud for how to keep a law that was a small fraction of the size. So what he rejected was both their oral laws and the idea that we could become justified by keeping them.

I am in complete agreement with Paul that we are saved by grace through faith, not by practicing righteousness, but for the purpose of practicing righteousness, which the Judaizers would not have agreed with, so please don't falsely accuse me of that.

Study Galatians and then come back.

I have studied Galatians and I have been studying it in my congregation for the past 17 or so weeks, going verse by verse. It is an important book, but it is unfortunately also one of the most misunderstood books.

[37818]

The above is replete with contradictions. "Christians can't sin because they are not under the law" "But if a Christian should sin he has an advocate to attain forgiveness." Both can't be true!

And not just forgiveness, but something no believer can achieve under his or her own strength, cleansing from all unrighteousness.

Read Romans 7:1-25. And, do note, it is John who also wrote 1 John 3:4, 6 and 1John 5:1, 18.

One has to do with being in the flesh. The other is the believer's standing with God.

[Soyeong]

My understanding of the Mosaic purity laws (including the kosher laws) is that they were supposed to set Israel apart from the gentile nations around them. To maintain that we non-Jews are required to follow these dietary laws seems to me to be a denial of what Paul says about Christ having "torn down the dividing wall of hostility" (Ephesians 2:14) (which I believe these laws are symbols of). Why would we have to follow dietary laws that tell us that Jews and gentiles are distinct when Christ has already removed the divide that these laws are supposed to signify?

ETA: Changed pagan to gentile.

Ephesians 2:8-22 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. 11 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— 12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens,[d] but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. 22 In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by[e] the Spirit.

Ephesians 2:14-15 (YLT) for he is our peace, who did make both one, and the middle wall of the enclosure did break down, 15 the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace,

I included YLT to show that the grammar of the verse in question is not exactly clear what is being broken down or what the enmity is referring to. However, I think we can eliminate your interpretation because Paul just said that we are created in the Messiah to do good works. Why only a few verses later would Paul say that the Messiah did away with his instructions for how to do good works? Furthermore, interpreting this as Jesus abolishing the law is in direct contradiction to his words in Matthew 5:17-19 and in contradiction to Paul's words in Romans 3:31. The context before and after verse 14 is not about Jews being alienated and joining with the Gentiles in their patterns, but about Gentiles being alienated and becoming citizens of Israel through faith in the Messiah. Leviticus 19:34 instructs the Jews to love the Gentiles as themselves, so it was not the law that was acting as a dividing barrier between them.

Josephus speaking of a dividing wall at the Temple in Antiquities of the Jews 15:11:15 and War of the Jews 6:2:4 that separated the Jews and the Gentiles, which forbade Gentiles from entering on pain of death. Bringing a Gentile past this point was what Paul was accused of in Acts 21:27-29. Just as the veil in the Temple was torn when the Messiah died, allowing everyone in Messiah to enter God's presence in the Holy of Holies, the Messiah also removed the barrier preventing Gentiles from mixing with and being counted with God's people. Gentiles can now join the Jewish people and be one with them as God's people through faith in the Messiah.

Another interpretation is that the word for “loosed” (translated as broken down) is used to Judaism in regard to making judgments about how to keep the Torah. To “loose” something meant to permit it while to “bind” meant to prohibit it. So the Pharisees had prohibited Jews from associating with Gentiles (Acts 10:28) and Jesus was loosing or removing that prohibition. This is what is being talked about here:

Matthew 18:18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed[a] in heaven.

The word for hedge (translated as middle wall of separation) is another technical term in Judaism in that’s often used in the Mishna to make a hedge or fence around the Torah, or to make a prohibition beyond what it instructs to help prevent anyone from getting close to breaking it.

The terms taken together as “loosed the hedge” could be taken to mean that Jesus was permitting what another group had prohibited, also known as the rabbinic law that’s being talked about in Acts 10:28. Perhaps Paul was using wordplay, but either way it refers to the same thing.

We can also take a hint from the fact that the Greek word for "ordinances" is the word "dogma", which is usually refers to man-made laws. It is only through faith in God and the working of the Spirit within us that we are able to keep God's instructions for practicing righteousness in the way that Jesus did, and God is not at odds with Himself, so I think there are a number of good reasons why we shouldn't think Ephesians 2:14 is talking about the law that Jesus gave to Moses. As Ephesians 2:10 and 1 John 2:9-10 state, being in the Messiah means that we are to do good works/practice righteousness, so it is not the law that separates us, but rather it is being obedient to the law in the Messiah that unifies us into one people of God.

[JonathanL]

Ephesians 2:8-22 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. 11 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— 12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens,[d] but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. 22 In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by[e] the Spirit.

Ephesians 2:14-15 (YLT) for he is our peace, who did make both one, and the middle wall of the enclosure did break down, 15 the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace,

I included YLT to show that the grammar of the verse in question is not exactly clear what is being broken down or what the enmity is referring to. However, I think we can eliminate your interpretation because Paul just said that we are created in the Messiah to do good works. Why only a few verses later would Paul say that the Messiah did away with his instructions for how to do good works? Furthermore, interpreting this as Jesus abolishing the law is in direct contradiction to his words in Matthew 5:17-19 and in contradiction to Paul's words in Romans 3:31. The context before and after verse 14 is not about Jews being alienated and joining with the Gentiles in their patterns, but about Gentiles being alienated and becoming citizens of Israel through faith in the Messiah. Leviticus 19:34 instructs the Jews to love the Gentiles as themselves, so it was not the law that was acting as a dividing barrier between them.

Based on the fact that your post barely deals with what I said at all and instead goes into a tangent that has practically nothing to do at all with what I wrote I'm not so sure you even understand my interpretation at all. First of all, I do not read the Mosaic Law as consisting purely of instructions of how to do good works. As Deut 14:2 and 21 indicate, God introduced the dietary laws because the Hebrews were supposed to be a nation set apart from the rest of the world. They were in effect serving as a reminder to the people of Israel that they had been singled out amongst all other nations by God Himself. In this way they signified the divide between Jew and Gentile. So "doing away" with dietary laws (or rather, insisting that Gentiles do not need to follow them) is not the same as doing away with instructions for good works, given that the dietary laws have nothing to do with practicing good works. They fulfill another purpose altogether. Another thing indicating that these laws fulfill not a moral purpose, but a another purpose altogether is that Deut 14:21 also teaches that Jews are allowed to give carcasses, which they themselves are forbidden to eat, to temporary residents in their cities, who are allowed to eat them, should they so desire.

It's this understanding that makes me conclude that since Jesus has torn down the dividing wall of hostility between Jews and Gentile (which I agree is speaking about the alienation of Gentiles and becoming citizens of Israel) there is no need for Gentiles to follow the dietary laws in the OT, because these dietary laws signify the very divide that Jesus removed in the first place. Insisting that Gentiles have to follow this law would under my interpretation of what these laws be the same as denying that the rift between Jew and Gentile has been removed.

I removed the rest of the post because it essentially had absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote in my previous post.

[Paprika]

I have studied Galatians and I have been studying it in my congregation for the past 17 or so weeks, going verse by verse. It is an important book, but it is unfortunately also one of the most misunderstood books.

The best way to cut through the 'Paul was talking about oral law, not the Mosaic Law' nonsense is to go to Galatians 3 where Paul speaks of the Law given to Moses 430 years after the promises to Abraham, the Law that was a guardian, but which those in Christ are no longer under.

Then one goes to Romans 7 to show why Christians are not under the Law: not because the Law is abolished or destroyed (so the Matthew 5 objection fails) but because we have died to the Law, and here to support this point Paul clearly refers to the marriage law from Mosaic Law, not oral law.

[Paprika]

Ephesians 2:14-15 (YLT) for he is our peace, who did make both one, and the middle wall of the enclosure did break down, 15 the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace,

I included YLT to show that the grammar of the verse in question is not exactly clear what is being broken down [/quote]
The Greek seems rather clear to me: it is τὸν νόμον, the law, that was καταργήσας.

or what the enmity is referring to.

It is very clear. Circumcision is used as synecdoche for the Law which divided and hence caused enmity between Jew and Gentile.

However, I think we can eliminate your interpretation because Paul just said that we are created in the Messiah to do good works. Why only a few verses later would Paul say that the Messiah did away with his instructions for how to do good works?

That's a terrible objection: the Law isn't the only means for us to know what good works are; amongst many others with have the Wisdom literature, the Prophets, the Gospels, and most importantly the Spirit.

Leviticus 19:34 instructs the Jews to love the Gentiles as themselves, so it was not the law that was acting as a dividing barrier between them.

The Law acted as a dividing barrier because it kept the Gentiles from the citizenship of Israel, the covenants of promise, of the hope to be found amongst the Jews.

Furthermore, interpreting this as Jesus abolishing the law is in direct contradiction to his words in Matthew 5:17-19 and in contradiction to Paul's words in Romans 3:31. The context before and after verse 14 is not about Jews being alienated and joining with the Gentiles in their patterns, but about Gentiles being alienated and becoming citizens of Israel through faith in the Messiah.

It is the enmity that is destroyed, in his flesh the Law which divides is nullified. And why? See Romans 7, as above.

[Paprika]

Meaning that we have a JUDIAZER in our midst!

Soyeong is different from the Judaizers in some ways but he makes the same moral demands that Christians need to abide by the Mosaic Law. It is therefore a different gospel and needs to be blown out of the water.

[JimL]

And not just forgiveness, but something no believer can achieve under his or her own strength, cleansing from all unrighteousness.

Read Romans 7:1-25. And, do note, it is John who also wrote 1 John 3:4, 6 and 1John 5:1, 18.

One has to do with being in the flesh. The other is the believer's standing with God.

That doesn't clear up your contradiction. Christians can't be both unable to sin, and need an advocate to propitiate for them should they sin.

[JonathanL]

"God instructions for how to do good works/live rightly/practice righteousness/avoid sin exist independently any particular covenant that offers rewards for keeping them and punishments for disobeying him. As Paul said in Romans 7:7a, it's God's instructions that inform us of what sin is. We are saved by grace through faith, not by practicing righteousness, but for the purpose of practicing righteousness."

But not every prohibition or command in the Mosaic Law is a prohibition against a moral sin, or command to do a moral good. This is obvious for instance (which I'm assuming that you agree with me on), by the fact that animal sacrifices are no longer needed, given that the self-giving sacrifice of Jesus has rendered them obsolete. So in effect a part of the Mosaic Law (the sacrificial laws) were rendered obsolete in the sense that they are no longer obligatory for us to follow.

This argument is pretty much as simple as it gets, so it's only badly misunderstood theology, such as not understanding the context of what the Judaizers wanted, that twists it. Practicing righteousness in obedience to God's commands is just as important to the Jews as it is to the Gentiles:

1 John 2:3-6 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, 5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: 6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

1 John 3:4-10 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 6 No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. 8 Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's[b] seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.

1 John 2:3-6 is not talking about the Mosaic commandments, it is talking about Jesus teaching in the gospel of John to His followers that they should love one another. Following the Mosaic commandments has nothing to do with this love. And verse 6 is not speaking about Jesus following the Mosaic commandments perfectly either (although he did follow them), but about his walk self-denial and self-sacrifice, which we are exhorted to follow, as per Mark 8:34-35.

Source: John 14:15-25 HCSB

15 “If you love Me, you will keep My commands. 16 And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Counselor to be with you forever. 17 He is the Spirit of truth. The world is unable to receive Him because it doesn’t see Him or know Him. But you do know Him, because He remains with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you as orphans; I am coming to you.

19 “In a little while the world will see Me no longer, but you will see Me. Because I live, you will live too. 20 In that day you will know that I am in My Father, you are in Me, and I am in you. 21 The one who has My commands and keeps them is the one who loves Me. And the one who loves Me will be loved by My Father. I also will love him and will reveal Myself to him.”

22 Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, “Lord, how is it You’re going to reveal Yourself to us and not to the world?”

23 Jesus answered, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. 24 The one who doesn’t love Me will not keep My words. The word that you hear is not Mine but is from the Father who sent Me.

25 “I have spoken these things to you while I remain with you. 26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit—the Father will send Him in My name—will teach you all things and remind you of everything I have told you.

© Copyright Original Source

Source: John 15:9-17 HCSB

9 “As the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you. Remain in My love. 10 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.

11 “I have spoken these things to you so that My joy may be in you and your joy may be complete. 12 This is My command: Love one another as I have loved you. 13 No one has greater love than this, that someone would lay down his life for his friends. 14 You are My friends if you do what I command you. 15 I do not call you slaves anymore, because a slave doesn’t know what his master is doing. I have called you friends, because I have made known to you everything I have heard from My Father. 16 You did not choose Me, but I chose you. I appointed you that you should go out and produce fruit and that your fruit should remain, so that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He will give you. 17 This is what I command you: Love one another.

© Copyright Original Source

Source: Mark 8:34-35 HCSB

34 Summoning the crowd along with His disciples, He said to them, “If anyone wants to be My follower, he must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow Me. 35 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life because of Me and the gospel will save it.

© Copyright Original Source

Jesus was sinless, so he kept the law perfectly, and he taught others how to understand and keep it, such as in Matthew 5. The goal of a disciple was to become a copy of their rabbi by learning how to think and act like them. Jesus taught by example and his disciples tried to model their behavior after him, which would have been included in the Great Commission. Up until Peter's vision in Acts 10, all of the Christians were either Jews and or Gentile proselytes, so for around at least 7 years after Jesus' ascension, Gentiles who were interested in following God were being taught to obey the law. Do you think they said, "Hold on folks, if you wait 10 more years our good friend Paul will write you a letter so you can know what to do"? No, they learned from what they had: the OT Scriptures, and oral traditions for how to keep the law, which possibly oral traditions of the teachings of the Messiah. The Bereans in Acts 17:11 checked everything Paul told them against the OT Scriptures, so there was nothing in Paul's message that was in disagreement with them. So how can we say that we walk in the way that Jesus walked if we don't follow the same commands he did for how to practice righteousness and we don't teach others to do the same?

Matthew 5 deals with the moral parts of the law, which are written in the hearts of every person, as per Romans 2:15. It has nothing to say on the matter of parts of the moral law which are not on moral issues, such as ceremonial laws, and dietary laws.

Also, proselytes is the keyword here. Until Acts 10 there were only Gentile proselytes amongst the Christians, but after Cornelius, who was not a proselyte converted to the Christian faith, this changed, which ultimately led to the first Christian council in Jerusalem (Acts 15) where it was unambigiously declared that Gentiles do not in fact have to follow the Mosaic law on every matter.

In order to understand the Judaizers, you need to understand the oral law, which consisted of interpretations, rulings, and traditions for how to keep the written law of the Torah, and fences around it to help protect it from being transgressed. So for instance, the Jews took a command, such as not to work on the Sabbath, rigorously defined what counted as work, like how far someone can walk, then set up a fence around that to help prevent anyone from accidentally walking too far. Another example of a fence is when Jesus said that even looking at a woman lustfully was committing adultery. Jesus followed and gave some oral laws, so not all of them were bad, but what would become 24 chapters in the Mishna for how to keep the Sabbath ended up being a heavy burden and a perversion of what was intended to be a simple day of rest. This is what was referred to as the traditions of the elders and what Jesus argued against in Mark 7:1-9.

However, a common Jewish thought was that you couldn't keep the Sabbath without knowing all of the detailed instructions in the oral law for how to keep it and they traced the command for the oral law back to Moses, so they gave it an equal or greater importance than the written law (Mark 7:6-9). In their minds, you couldn't teach the laws of Moses without teaching their instructions for for how to keep it, so when they wanted to require Gentiles to keep the laws of Moses in order to be saved in Acts 15:1, that included their oral laws. What Paul referred to as a heavy burden was what would become 26 volumes of the Talmud for how to keep a law that was a small fraction of the size. So what he rejected was both their oral laws and the idea that we could become justified by keeping them.

This is a pretty good deal of information, but you haven't made any convincing arguments that it was there interpretations, rulings and traditions that the Judaizers demanded Gentile Christians to follow, rather than the law of Moses proper.

I have studied Galatians and I have been studying it in my congregation for the past 17 or so weeks, going verse by verse. It is an important book, but it is unfortunately also one of the most misunderstood books.

Evidently you haven't gotten to Gal 3:19-26 (especially verses 24-25, with verse 19 ruling out beyond question that Paul is talking about the manmade oral laws) which effectively invalidates your equating practicing righteousness with following the Mosaic law. They are not the same.

[Soyeong]

Based on the fact that your post barely deals with what I said at all and instead goes into a tangent that has practically nothing to do at all with what I wrote I'm not so sure you even understand my interpretation at all.

I thought showing the context and arguing for why your interpretation couldn't be correct while giving reasonable interpretations that don't conflict with other verses in the Bible would be relevant.

First of all, I do not read the Mosaic Law as consisting purely of instructions of how to do good works. As Deut 14:2 and 21 indicate, God introduced the dietary laws because the Hebrews were supposed to be a nation set apart from the rest of the world. They were in effect serving as a reminder to the people of Israel that they had been singled out amongst all other nations by God Himself. In this way they signified the divide between Jew and Gentile. So "doing away" with dietary laws (or rather, insisting that Gentiles do not need to follow them) is not the same as doing away with instructions for good works, given that the dietary laws have nothing to do with practicing good works. They fulfill another purpose altogether. Another thing indicating that these laws fulfill not a moral purpose, but a another purpose altogether is that Deut 14:21 also teaches that Jews are allowed to give carcasses, which they themselves are forbidden to eat, to temporary residents in their cities, who are allowed to eat them, should they so desire.

However, you want to look at it, disobeying God's instructions is a sin while obeying them is doing a good work or practicing righteousness. If moral laws are only in regard to man's relationship with man, then all of the first four of the Ten Commandments are not moral commands, including the prohibition of idolatry. On the other hand, if moral laws are in regard to man's relationship with God, then all of God's commands are moral laws.

Matthew 5:14-16 “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that[b] they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.

God wants His people to be the light of the world, so did that change now that Gentiles are no longer alienated and part of His people? Should Gentiles not shine their light before others by doing the good works that God has instructed through His Spirit to give glory to God? God already has all the glory and the only thing that pleases Him is when He does good works through us. Gentiles are now part of God's people not because the distinction has been removed, but because Gentiles are now part of that distinction through faith in Messiah.

[whag]

This has devolved into a distinctly boring discussion.

[Yttrium]

This has devolved into a distinctly boring discussion.

I was hoping that a Christian who followed the Christians-don't-sin belief would drop by, but I guess there aren't any lurking around these days.

[Adrift]

I was hoping that a Christian who followed the Christians-don't-sin belief would drop by, but I guess there aren't any lurking around these days.

I don't think any Christian really believes that, or if they do, you've likely misunderstood what they mean when they say it. Maybe somewhere out there in this great big goofy world of ours someone is saying it and means it in the way you understand it, but if so, they're clearly in the extreme minority.

[Yttrium]

I don't think any Christian really believes that, or if they do, you've likely misunderstood what they mean when they say it. Maybe somewhere out there in this great big goofy world of ours someone is saying it and means it in the way you understand it, but if so, they're clearly in the extreme minority.

Well, that's a big part of what I wanted to know, so thanks for the information.