Rom 2:6  who will render to each person according to his deeds:
Rom 2:7  to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;

Rom 2:11  For there is no partiality with Yahuweh.
Rom 2:12  For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
Rom 2:13  for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before Yahuweh, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

The Hard Sayings of Paul - Part 3

The "New" Testament and the Law   

(To better understand the importance of the Almighy's Law view the video "the Law upon our hearts")

 I'd like to make a suggestion in reading through Part 3 of the Hard Sayings of Paul, and that is, that as you read through this article highlight any and all  passages and/or comments that might cause you to think more seriously concerning the Heavenly Father's Law.  My prayer is that you'll come to see that the Savior died to save us from "sin" and not from the Law itself.  (sin - is a violation of Yahuweh's Law 1 John 3:4)

In Part 2 of the Hard Sayings of Paul we hopefully discussed most of the passages that people often times misunderstand in thinking that the Heavenly Father's Law no longer has to be obeyed. If there are any passages that you feel I've overlooked please let me know and I'll be happy to include them in an updated article. In part 3 we're going to look at the "New" Testament, what it actually is, and what it "is not".

_______________________________________________________

Imagine if you would, the apostle Paul going into a synagogue and opening up "the scriptures" and instead of reading from one of the books from Genesis to Malachi, Paul takes a letter out that he wrote to Timothy or to the Romans or Corinthians and tells the Jews in the Synagogue that this letter he wrote last week, or last month, is now the 'new' scriptures? Or how about the apostles Peter, James or John, could you imagine them doing the same thing, teaching in the synagogues using letters that they themselves" wrote and telling the Jews that the "scriptures" they've been following for the last 1,500 years weren't important any longer.

 "Oh sure" the apostle might say, "there might be some good stories in those 'Old' Testament books, like David fighting Goliath, or Jonah getting swallowed by a big fish, but as far as the Law that the Almighty gave to Moses on Mount Sinai, the same Law that he sent prophet after prophet to tell Israel to turn back to, that no longer matters, it doesn't have to be obeyed any longer, it's been done away with!"

As unbelievable as I think that sounds, and hopefully you do as well, I'm afraid that's exactly what most of Christianity and the Messianic Jews of today believe.  They might not phrase it the way I did, but if you think about it for a moment, that's exactly what they believe happened.  They think that Paul was telling the Jews that the Law the Almighty gave to Moses didn't have to be obeyed any longer.  And they try to take quotes by Paul in an attempt to show the Law has been been done away with.

Even if such a scenario  were possible, which of course it wasn't, I'll expalin why it wasn't in a momet, never did the apostles nor anyone else ever tell anyone that the Law no longer had to be obeyed.  It's a handful of passages that Paul wrote, such as "we're not under the Law" and "no man can be saved by the works of the Law," passages we've discussed in part 2,  that so manyu people today misunderstand in thinking Paul spoke against the Law. And because of their 'misunderstanding' these people "DO NOT" obeyed the Heavenly Father's Law.  And for that reason they'll die in their sins, and they'll die lost (Matt 7:23).

(If you haven't read Part 1 and Part 2 yet, please do so before reading part 3)

The "New" Testament - What is it, and what it is not?   

(View the video "The Law upon our hearts)

The first letter of what is commonly called the "New Testament" today was written approximately 20 to 25 years "after" the Messiah rose from the dead and took his seat at the right hand of the Majesty on High (Heb 1:3-4).  And many of the other 27 letters contained in the "New Testament" were written many years later.  The book of Revelation for instance is believed by most scholars to have been written in the year 97 A.D., while John was on the island of Patmos (Rev 1:9). And the gospel of John was written 'after' John left the island of Patmos and settled in the town of Ephesus, where he lived out his days. The gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, were written in the years 65, 67, 68 A.D. respectively.


Book of Acts  63 A.D
Letter to the Romans 56A.D.;
1 Corinthians,  52 A.D.
2 Corinthians, 55 A.D.
Colossians,  62 A.D.  
Galatians,  53 A.D.
Ephesians, 60 A.D.  
Philippians,  61 A.D.  
1st and 2nd Thessalonians ,  51 A.D.  
1 and 2nd Timothy, 62 and 64 A.D.  
Titus, 62 A.D.  
Philemon, 61 A.D.
Hebrews, 60-67 A.D.
James, 62 A.D.  
1st and 2nd Peter, 66 and 67 A.D.
1 John, 85 to 95 A.D.
2 John, 90 A.D.  
3 John ??
(all dates are approximate of course, but based on the writings of the early 'church historians' they’re very close to being accurate)

So it's important for us to remember when reading the books of what is commonly called the “New” Testament today, that is from Matthew to Revelation, is that none of these letters would have even been written for at least another 20 some years after the resurrection of the Messiah Yahoshua. In other words the books we call the ‘New” Testament didn’t exist, not even one letter, for the first 20 some years of the preaching of the Good News. We'll discuss some of the ramifications of that in a moment. The fact is that never did the apostles used anything they wrote in preaching the good news for at least for the first 20 some years. Why? Because not one of those letters had been written for the the first 20 some years. 

In the year 150 A.D. there's an account of a man named Justin Martyr, a very well know 'Christian' apologist. 'Apologist' doesn't mean he 'apologized' for anything, the word in the Greek means "to defend," he was a 'defender' of the Christian faith at that time.   Justin Martyr had a debate with a Jew named Trypho, and in the debate Justin Martyr,  said this:  “all who live in the cities or in the country gather together in  one place and the memoirs of the apostles or the writing of the prophets are read as long as time permits. When the reader has ceased the president verbally instructs and exhorts to the memories of these good things”. (Justin Martyrs First Apology, 67) 155 A.D.  

Justin Martyr refers to the writings of the apostles as the "memoirs of the apostles" and not as the 'New Testament'.  It wouldn't be until the year 200 A.D., that a historian named Tertullian was the first ever, that we know of, to refer to the writings of the apostles as the "New Testament." That is the writings that were available to him, for up until that time there is no historical record of all of the 27 letters being compiled into the book form we have today.  

In the year 322 A.D. Constantine, the Roman emperor at the time,  who went on to become the first "Roman Catholic Pope", commissioned a 4th century historian named Eusibius, to gather all the known writing of the apostles and early followers of the Messiah.  Eusibius was to decide which letters were 'creditable' and which ones were not, for at that time there were a number of pseudepigrapha letters being circulated. So it was Eusibius' job to compile those letters that he deemed creditable into a book form. At which time 50 copies were to made up and sent to the Emperor.  Whether Eusibius ever accomplished his task is uncertain. Maybe he did and maybe he didn't, we have no record of him doing so.  But if he did manage to, first decide what letters he deemed credible, and then put them into book form, that would mean sometime around the year 322 A.D. would have been the first time that a collections of the 27 letters that make up what's commonly called the "New" Testament today would have been compiled (canonized) and put into book form.      

What we do know for certain is that the first person to ever identify the same 27 books of the "New Testament" that are in use today, was a man named Athanasius, a bishop of Alexandria Egypt.  Who in the year 367 A.D. wrote a letter in which he identified the same 27 books which are contained in the 'canon' of what's commonly called the "New Testament" today.

Since none of the letters of the apostles would have even been written for the first 20 some years of their preaching the Good News, and since the book commonly called the "New" Testament today would not have been 'canonized,' put into book form, for well over 200 additional years after the resurrection, I think we can safely set aside the idea suggested above about Peter, Paul, or John, possibly going into the synagogues and reading one of their letters and telling the Jews that their letters are now the "new" Scriptures.   If the writings of the apostles and disciples were not considered to be the "New" Scriptures at the time of their preaching, then "what Scriptures" were they using to preach and teach from in the synagogues?

We'll begin to answer that question by reading the account of the 2 disciples who met the Master on the road to Emmaus, after he rose from the dead (Luke 24:19-21).

The Road to Emmaus
Three  days after Yahoshua, the Messiah, rose from the died he met two of his disciples on the road to Emmaus, but their eyes were prevented from recognizing him. As they walked together down the road Yahoshua asked them why they looked so sad and what it was they were speaking to one another about. As we listen to their answer keep in mind that these weren't men that simply "heard of" Yahoshua,  these were two of his disciples, who in all probability ate, slept, and lived with the Messiah for much of his ministry on earth.  Listen to what it is they believed concerning the Messiah and what it was they hoped he was going to do.   

Luk 24:18-21 and one of them, Cleopas answering said to him,…… "Yahoshua the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of Elohim (G-d) and all the people, "…. we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel.
Eventually, as they traveled, the Messiah somewhat rebuked them for their unbelief and "beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.  (Luk 24:27)  

We're told that Yahoshua used "All the Scriptures" (Luk 24:27) in explaining to them the things concerning himself.  What 'Scriptures' did the Messiah use?

Yahoshua tells us further on in the chapter exactly what "all the Scriptures" were.
Luk 24:44  Now He said to them, "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses (Torah) and the Prophets (Nevieem) and the Psalms (Ketuvim) must be fulfilled."
Luk 24:45  Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

"All the Scriptures" used by the Yahoshua to demonstrate that he was the Messiah were what's called the "Tanak," or that which is commonly called the "Old Testament" today.

The word 'Tanak' is an acronym for 'T', 'N', 'K'.  
The 'T' is for the "Torah" the Hebrew word usually translated "Law," representing the first 5 books of the bible attributed to Moses.
The 'N' represents the Hebrew word "Nevieem" translated "Prophets".
And the 'K' represents the Hebrew word "Ketuvim" or the "writings" meaning the Psalms, Proverbs and so forth.  The 3 portions of the scriptures mentioned by the Savior above, which make up "all" the Scriptures that the Messiah and Apostles used.  

Whenever the word "Scriptures" is mentioned in all of the following passages that we'll be taking a look at, it's always referring to the 'Tanak.'

Did you notice also what is was that the 2 disciples on the road to Emmaus were expecting the Messiah to do?  Did they think he was going to put an end to the Almighty's Law?  No, of course not!  The Messiah was sent to "redeem" Israel (Luk 24:21).  The word 'redeem' means to 'buy back', it was going to be his sacrifice for our "sins" that would 'redeem' us back to the Heavenly Father.
 (Isa 62:11-13; Isa 52:1-3, 8-10: Isa 35:9-10; Isa 44:21-23)

If it were not for the misunderstandings so many have today concerning some of the things Paul said the "Good News" would be uderstood today.  The 'Good News" is the fact that the Messiah died to save us from ouir 'sins' and not from the Heavenly Father's Law. The Father, Yahuweh,  sent his only begotten Son into the world to suffer and die "to put an end to sin."  (Matt 1:21)
What is 'sin'? "… sin is the transgression of the law. " 1John 3:4.
The Messiah died to save us from our "sins"  -  "not from the Law."    

As we read through the following accounts of the apostles preaching and teaching from the "scriptures" the fact is that "no one" in their day, nor for another approximately 150 years afterwards, ever referred to the gospels and evangels as the "New Testament". In all the examples we'll be looking at the word "scriptures" being spoken of is clearly 'always' talking about the Tanak.

The New Testament (or Covenant)

Please don't misunderstand what it is I'm saying here, I believe every word contained in the Gospels and evangels, except for maybe 2 or 3 passages that most scholars agree do not belong there.  I am "NOT" minimizing the importance of the apostles writings, for without out them we would have almost no record of the Messiah and the things he said and done, and I firmly believe every word they wrote (except for the few I mentioned that were added centuries later).  But what I am saying is this, that never did Almighty Yahuweh, the Messiah, the prophets, or apostles ever say that the "New Testament" was going to be a collection of 27 letters.  Yahuweh Himself tells us what the New Testament or Covenant is.

Jer 31:31  "Behold, days are coming," declares Yahuweh, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,
Jer 31:32  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 Yahuweh.
Jer 31:33  "But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares Yahuweh, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their Elohim, and they shall be My people.
Jer 31:34  "…..for they shall all  know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," declares Yahuweh, "for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more."
(see also Heb 8:7-13, esp verse 13)

The 'New' Covenant is "the Law written on our hearts." What 'law' do you suppose the Almighty was speaking of in Jeremiah, roughly 600 years before the Messiah walked the earth?  As we've discussed earlier, there is only one Law, and one Lawgiver, in the entire Bible, not two (Jam 4:12; Num 15:16,29; Joh 6:44-45; Joh 7:17). And that is the Law that Yahuweh gave to Moses on Mount Sinai.

A Law which he tells us is "perfect" (Ps 19:7). A Law that we're told will endure forever (Deut 7:9; Mal 4:1-6; Matt 5:18; 2 Kngs 17:37),

A Law that we're told not to add to or take away from (Deut 4:2; 12:32).   

The "New" Covenant or Testament, is not physical thing, it's not a collection of  letters, it's spiritual, it's the Heavenly Father's Law written on the hearts of His People. The very Law that Satan, through his ministers, has deceived so many today into believing they no longer have to obey.

As important as the books from Matthew to Revelation are in helping us to know and understand what it means to be 'saved' they are not the New Covenant.  Anymore then the books from Genesis to Malachi are the "Old Covenant".  The so-called Old Covenant is recorded "in" the books from Genesis to Malachi, just as the New Covenant is recorded "in" the books of Matthew to Revelation, but the books themselves our not the Covenants.  Again, as Yahuweh  Himself tells us, the "New" Covenant is the "Law written on our hearts".  

What does it mean to have the Law on our hearts?  

The Law on the hearts of Yahuweh's people is not something that is going to happen at some future date.  Oh, it's true that in the Kingdom, at the fulfillment of the "New Covenant," the whole earth will be filled with the knowledge of Yahuweh, as the waters over the sea (Isa 11:9), and the Father's Law, at that time, will be on "every man's heart" (Jer 31:34). But the fact is that there has always  been a people, a remnant to be sure, that had, and have, the Father's Law on their hearts.

He's speaking to us today:
Isa 51:5  "My righteousness is near, My salvation has gone forth, And My arm  will judge the peoples (Act 17:30-31); The coastlands will wait for Me, And for My arm they will wait expectantly (Isa 53:1, 2-12).
Isa 51:6  "Lift up your eyes to the sky, Then look to the earth beneath; For the sky will vanish like smoke, And the earth will wear out like a garment And its inhabitants will die in like manner; But My salvation will be forever, And My righteousness will not wane.
Isa 51:7  "Listen to Me, you who know righteousness (Deut 6:25; 1 John 3:4-10), A people in whose heart is My law; Do not fear the reproach of man, Nor be dismayed at their reviling.
Isa 51:8  "For the moth will eat them like a garment, And the grub will eat them like wool. But My righteousness will be forever, And My salvation to all generations."

Psa 37:30  The mouth of the righteous utters wisdom, And his tongue speaks justice.
Psa 37:31  The law of his Elohim is in his heart; His steps do not slip.
Psa 37:34  Wait for Yahuweh and keep His way (his Law), And He will exalt you to inherit the land; When the wicked are cut off, you will see it.  
(Ps 37:11; Matt 5:5)

To have the "law on our hearts" simply means,
We don't have to turn to the written Word, the Torah, to find out what the Almighty expects of us, for instance, in obeying His Sabbath Day, we already know. We've read it and practiced it enough times where now "it's on our hearts" and in our minds.  
We don't have to turn to the written Torah to find out about how to observe the Feast Days.  Through the studying of His Word, His Torah, we know how, it's on our hearts and in our minds.
We don't have to read the written Word to find out what animals Yahuweh considers food, and what animals he considers an abomination when eaten, through the studying of His Word, his Torah, we already know, it's on our hearts, in our minds.

And someday real soon that Law will be on the hearts and minds of all His People.  Why not become one of those people now, today.  For it's written "Today, if you hear his voice, please, do not harden your hearts" (Heb 3:7-8, 13).  Don't wait for  tomorrow, we're never promised a tomorrow, tomorrow may never come  (Matt 7:23).

Before we go on let me remind you of something the Messiah said concerning our need to know the Tanak.  In John 6:44-45 Yahoshua tells us that,
"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. "  John 6:44

How is it that the Father 'draws people to the Messiah?   The Savior answers that question for us in the next verse.
"It is written in the prophets, 'and they shall all be taught of Yahuweh.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me."  John 6:45  

At the time the Messiah made this statement, what was the 'only' way that someone could have been "Taught of Yahuweh" and "heard and learned of the Father"?  It was through the reading and studying of the Tanak, the 'only' Scriptures that Yahoshua and the apostles used in their life times.   The  same Scriptures that so many people today think of as being irrelevant.  

Of course there's much more I would like to say about the 'Covenants' and the  "canonizing" of the letters of the "New Testament" but the thing that's important for us to realize now is that in the "New Covenant" it is not that the Law was going to be done away with, but rather just the opposite, that the "Law would be written upon our hearts."
The same Law that the Messiah followed.
The same Law we're commandment to obey as we "walk even as he walked" (1 John 2:6).
The same Law we would be forced to follow if we joined ourselves to the Messiah's yoke..(Matt 11:28-30)
The same Law Paul tells us, we will perish if we don't obey it (Rom 2:11-13)

For the remainder of the article I'd like to go through and take a look at some of the various accounts of the apostles preaching and teaching. And in the process hopefully you'll see, if you haven't already, that never did they tell anyone that the Law had been done away with.
They did just the opposite, they constantly told the people to "repent,"  turn from their sins, and turn back to the Law (Act 2:38; 3:19; 17:30)  

REPENT - "turn from your sins"

We're told in John 8:11 that a woman who was caught in the act of adultery was brought to Yahoshua, the Pharisees wanting to test him, asked the Messiah what should be done with her?  According to the Law she should've been stoned, "on the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses" (Deut 19:15) .
But by the time Yahoshua finished writing on the ground, there wasn't even one witness to be found. So consequently Yahoshua didn't condemn her either, but as it's recorded, he did tell her to "Go and from now on sin no more." Joh 8:11
(Keep in mind as we read all the following passages that "Sin is a violation of Yahuweh's Law."  The same Law that Satan has so many today believing they no longer have to obey.)

On another occasion some people came to Yahoshua and told him of certain Galilaeans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Yahoshua said to them, "do you think that was bad, I'm going to tell you what, unless you 'repent' and quit sinning, you are all likewise going to perish."   And he went on to say to them, "and what about the eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell, and killed them, do you think they were somehow bigger sinners than everyone else in Jerusalem? Again, I'm telling you no, but except you repent and stop sinning you are all going to likewise perish." Luke 13:1-5  (paraphrased)

Yahoshua,  "…didn't  come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance." Luk 5:32
And yes, contrary to the misunderstanding that so many have today, there were and are "righteous" people in the world, as we seen above (Isa 51:7; Ps 37:31). But since a few have been given honorable mention in the scriptures we'll mention some of them here also.

There's Zechariah and Elizabeth who were 'blameless' keeping all the commandments of Yahuweh perfectly (Luk 1:6),  righteous Abel and Zechariah (Mat 23:35),  John the Baptist, was a righteous and holy man  (Mar 6:20),  Simeon, a righteous and devout man (Luk 2:25),  Joseph, of Arimathea, a righteous man (Luk 23:50),  Cornelius, the first gentle convert was considered "righteous" even before he converted, meaning he was keeping the commandments before he was baptized (Act 10:22; 10:34-35; Deut 6:25).  And Yahoshua talks about "many" prophets and righteous men (Matt 13:17).
And it will be the 'righteous' that will be left when the wicked are "raptured" out (Matt 13:49; Matt 13:43).  I'm sorry to say that the 'rapture' is one doctrine that Christianity has right.  Because of their disobedience to the Law, in thinking they don't have to obey it, they will be "raptured" in the end, but it won't be a good thing. (Matt 13:41-43; 13:49-50). 

Before we go through the book of Acts and take a look at the accounts of what it is that the apostles were preaching and teaching it's important that we first recognize a fact that is often times overlooked.

____________________________________________

"All or Nothing"

Even those that believe the Law has ben done away with are careful not to say it was done away with 'immediately'.  What I mean by that is, most people would agree that it's obvious in reading the Book of Acts that the apostles never told anyone that the Law didn't have to be obeyed. So what those that say the Law was done away with they say is,  "Well the apostles didn't realize right away that the Law was done away with. It was something they learned gradually." And then these same people might try to use something like the vision Peter had on the roof in Acts chapter 10, to say that "at that point in time" the food laws were done away with.  Of course the vision was to show Peter, and the Jews, that the 'gentiles' were now accepted into the faith (Act 10:17, 28, 34-35). It wasn't to show Peter that Yahuweh had now sanctified pigs, snakes, rats and cats as food. (Lev 11:10,11,12,13,20,23,41,42)

And then these same people will go on to say that in was in Act 15, which occurred some 20 years "after" the apostles had already been preaching the Good News of the Kingdom for 20 some years, that they came together for the first time, at the council in Jerusalem, to 'decided' whether the Law had to be obeyed or not.  But you see that couldn't have possibly been the reason for their coming together. For Paul tells us in Galatians:  
Gal 3:15  Brethren, I speak in terms of human relations: even though it is only a man's covenant, yet when it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it.
(I'll be posting an article on Act 15 soon)

You see once a covenant has been ratified, or sealed, it can no longer be changed in any way whatsoever.  Nothing can be added to it or taken away from it.  So contrary to what a number of ministers teach or believe, once the Messiah died "nothing" could be taken away from it or added to his covenant. And his covenant began the moment he died.
Heb 9:16  For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it.
Heb 9:17  For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives.

So it wasn't, as I've heard people say in the past, 'a progressive thing' in the Law being done away with. That's not possible.  Either "all" of the Law was done away with the very second that the Savior took his last breath, or it wasn't done away with at all.  And the fact is "it wasn’t done away with at all".

The apostles know exactly what it was they were preaching and teaching on that very  "first day", the day of Pentecost. (Act 2:22-40) It wasn't something they "gradually" learned as they went along, as I've heard people in the past imply.

I have to tell you, it's always amazed me the arrogance that some people have in thinking they know more then the apostles did, the apostles who traveled with the Messiah,  ate their meals with him, and slept next to him at night. And yet some people today think they know more of what Yahoshua meant in the things he said, then the apostles did.  Wow!  

So the fact is, that if someone wants to believe that Yahoshua died to set them free from the Almighty's Law, rather then their sins, then they 'have to believe that "all" of the Law ceased the moment the Messiah took his last breath.  And as we read through the book of Acts it's going to be very obvious that no one thought that to be the case.
________________________________________________

Not all of the Law


What I'm about to say may shock some of you at first but you'll see that it's absolutely true. The Messiah, Yahoshua,  told us that until heaven and earth pass away "not the smallest letter or stroke" will pass from the Law (Matt 5:18).  But sadly just about all of Christianity refuses to believe that.  They fail to see it was 'sin' that the Savior died to set us free from "NOT THE LAW".  So allow me to state it another way. It was never Yahoshua's intent to change or do away with his Father's Law, and the fact is he could not have changed it or done away with it, "even if he wanted to."  (John 7:16-17).   Why is it that it could not have been changed? Well as we've just read above, Paul tells us that  once a covenant has been ratified, "no one has the right to add anything to it or take anything away from it..   
Gal 3:15  Brethren, I speak in terms of human relations: even though it is only a man's covenant, yet when it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it.

When the Almighty made the covenant with the nation of Israel, and the people agreed to obey all that Yahuweh had commanded (Ex 19:8; 24:3,7), Moses 'sealed' that covenant with the blood of a bull. (Ex 24:8) and at that point it couldn't be changed. Which is why we're told not once, but twice, that nothing is to be added to it or taken away from it - ever.
Deu 4:2  "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of Yahuweh your Elohim which I command you.
Deu 12:32  "Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it.

Does anyone find it some what amazing that after reading that "no one is to add to or take away from the Law"  that Satan has deceived so many people into believing that the "ENTIRE" Law has been done away with? I know I do!

But someone might ask, "didn't the fact that the Messiah died to save us from sin, mean the Law somehow changed?"  and to that person I say, "good question".  But the answer is still,  "No".
What did we just read in Jeremiah 31 about the New Covenant, did it say that the Law was going to be changed or done away with?  No, it said that same Law was going to be put on the hearts of all of Yahuweh's people.  Then why did Yahoshua have to die?  Yahoshua died as a sacrifice, a vicarious atonement, for the sins of those that would surrender their lives to him, and let him live his life in us and through us (Gal 2:20) . Well then, someone might say again,  "then he changed the Law."  No, not at all.  As Paul explains it, "
Act 13:38  "Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you
Act 13:39  and through Him everyone who believes is justified from all things, from which you could not be justified through the Law of Moses.

What was it that "we could not be justified for through the Law"?  (I know I mentioned this in Part 2 but it bears repeating)
You have to understand that there were 'basically' two types of sin mentioned in the Torah, "unintentional" sin and "intentional" sin. (I'm simplifying that somewhat to make the point here)  All the sin sacrifices in the Torah were specifically for one type of sin, and that was "unintentional" sin (I can explain sin in more detail if someone is interested). "Unintentional" meaning times we violated the Law unknowingly or in ignorance. For that type of sin, a sacrifice could be made and the sin would be forgiven. (Lev 4:20,26,31,35; Num 15:28)  But what if someone was aware that what they were about to do was a direct violation of the Law, and they decided to it anyway, let's say like working on the Sabbath day? What could that person do to make it right with the Almighty?  Listen carefully!  The answer is "NOTHING." The penalty for that sin is death. That person was totally cut off from being part of Yahuweh's people, and there wasn't any way, according to the Law, by which we could be justified.    
Num 15:30  'But the person who does anything defiantly (knowingly), whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming Yahuweh; and that person shall be cut off from among his people.
Num 15:31  'Because he has despised the word of Yahuweh and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt will be on him.'"
(you might want to go back and re-read Part 2, "By the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be Justified..." Rom 3:20)

I don't think it was a coincidence that right after telling us we'd be completely and utterly cut off, that in the very next verse we're given an example of a man that did exactly that, violated the Sabbath. You might want to read the account in Numbers 15:32-36.

So again there were no provisions in the Law by which a person could 'justified' for the intentional sins he committed, sins that were punishable by death, such as working on the Sabbath Day.  So for us to reconciled back to Father, Yahuweh had to make a way 'outside' the Law.  And that he did. He sent his 'only' begotten Son, to suffer a cruel and agonizing death because of the times  "YOU and I" violated His Law.  "Yahoshua didn't died to 'changed' anything about the Law, he died to "fulfill that which the Law required.  The penalty for 'intentional' sin - which was "death."

Rom 8:3  For what the Law could not do, … Yahuweh  did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,
Rom 8:4  so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

The Law required the death sentence for the transgressor, and the death sentence was carried out. "Thank you" Yahoshua.       

__________________________________________________

I don't think I'm alone in believing the end of days is fast approaching. Never has there been a time in the history of mankind when the world is as ripe as it is right now, for the Messiah's return.  Please consider carefully all that's been said in these 3 parts.  And hopefully you'll come to see that the Messiah died to set us free from sin, - not from his Father's Law.

In the Hard Sayings of Paul part 4 we'll take a look at why all the Prophets were sent.

May Yahuweh bless those that are honestly seeking him in spirit and truth.

Shalom Reuven 

Part 1 Explaining 2 Peter 3:14-17 and "Why did the Savior have to die"

Part 2 Objections people "think" they have for not obeying the Heavenly Father's Law.

Part 4 -"For I, Yahuweh, (the L-RD) do not change..." Mal 3:6

Paul - "I do the very evil that I do not want to do" -Rom 7:15,19.