ayoku777:

Ofcourse, when we say the law is a shadow, it means it carries the similitude of love. Just like your shadow has a limited measure of your form. But love is the new commandment, not the law. Its like saying walking in love by the Spirit was where the law and prophets was leading us.

And then the gospel that was preached to them was the gospel of the kingdom.

Alwaystrue:
Love has been the commandment since the beginning for I can show you in the OT where the bible says Love your neighbour as yourself and Love God. The difference is Jesus (God in flesh) came to demonstrate His love to us for uncircumcised hearts cannot love, people in the OT tried to find loopholes in the law to do what they wanted as is done in contemporary law today.
The difference is Faith and Belief. That was what Jesus was always talking about. That was what the Israelites did not have. And Jesus gave us enough examples in His testament explaining the law versus the Spirit. So no matter how we try to walk around God's Word there is a Spirit behind it and even if the physical law is not broken the spiritual is. Jesus came to also cleanse us with His word and give God's laws full perfect expression. It is not just of the letter but of the Spirit.

ayoku777:

Then why did Jesus call it a NEW COMMANDMENT?

Candour: Gal 3:24-25
'Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. [25] But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.'

Can Image123 or another of the brethren kindly the explain the scripture above with respect to the old and new covenant?

Thanks in anticipation.

Alwaystrue:
Because it is new....this was the first time we will see Jesus 'in flesh' demonstrate love. @Ayoku, I have answered it in my prior statement.
'Love as I have loved you', 'Love as you have seen me love' now they had seen the God's love with their 'naked eyes' in the flesh for God dwelt with them.

ayoku777:

The old one was love your neighbour as yourself, the new is love one another as i have loved you. The love commandment from Christ was new, it wasn't the same one that was given at sinai as you're trying to make it look.

Image123:
There is no need trying to find holes or start arguments.

Image123:
You would have to ask God for clarifications for that one oh. He said.
Exo 19:5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

Image123:
i said The covenant or agreement is that IF man obeys God's words, he will be peculiar, justified and holy before God.

Image123:
i believe that what is gone majorly is the condition, not necessarily the commandment. The condition of the covenant, the agreement was that IF God's words were obeyed THEN they would be.

Image123:

So, the Old Covenant was our school master, When faith(the new covenant) has come, we are no longer under the Old covenant. The Old Covenant taught us that we could not keep God's commandments on our own. That we had to depend on God, have faith in Him.

Alwaystrue:
Ofcourse it is new.I simply asked if it meant the two great commandments are negated because of it or it is an addition?
I have expanded the question. You did not answer the last one I asked.

And I tried to explain the carnal man can not even love in truth. Jesus had to show us how to love for us to even be able to love others as ourself.

ayoku777:

I answered the two questions in one, the love of Christ is light years ahead of the one demanded under the law. The love of Christ isnt an addition, its an outright replacement.

If you were using a landline before, and i gave you a new smartphone. It can do all that the former can do and other things the former cant do. When i love others like Jesus loves me, i no longer need to love them like i love myself.

And yes we couldnt even love others as ourselves much less as Christ. Thats why the love of Christ can only be shed abroad in our hearts by the holy ghost. We can't work up enough emotion to have it or express it.

The new love doesnt negate the old but it moves beyond it into what it couldnt do. The old love has as much substance and reality when compared to the new, as your shadow does to your body. It is not an addition. We dont love others as Christ loved us in addition to loving them as we love ourselves

Alwaystrue:
Thanks for your post. You did not answer the entire question here. There are two greatest commandments: Love God with all your heart, soul and love your neighbour as yourself which the law and prophets are hinged making 2 commandments, I asked if the new commandment of Jesus was said to replace the two or not? You claim its a replacement....of which of them?
The two or one? That's all I need to know and if it replaced just one, what about the other? I hope you understand my question now. I am not even comparing any of them.

DrummaBoy: I needed to state my position so that my response to what other have written can be better appreciated.



This is not particularly correct. I had shown you in another thread that the Abrahamic Covenant can only be likened to the New Covenant in Christ in the sense that both of them were accessed by faith (alone). The Abrahamic covenant was ratified by physical Circumcision (Genesis 17); The New Testament is ratified by Jesus blood. If the covenant is the same as the Abrahamic covenant, we would need physical circumcision. Paul wrote in the Galatians that you refered to that we do not come into the New Covenant by physical circumcision. So with all due respect, sir, you are wrong in this: The Abrahamic covenant is not the New Covenant. You need not take such a position all in the bid to justify tithing like Abraham. (just in case that is the reason you are propagating this error).

ayoku777:

If Jesus called it a new commandment, then new it is, meaning it never was before then. And its a replacement not just for both but the ten and the entire law. We are to love both God and man with the love of Christ, as Christ did and as Christ would. So if you would, we should love God with the heart and mind of Christ. And this is only possible with the Holy Spirit.

I think this is clear enough.

Zikkyy:

what I read you saying here is that the Christian becomes like Christ (Christ-like). The law lovers believe the spirit enables you to adhere or obey the thou shalts contained in the old covenant forgetting that you don't need the spirit to adhere to the law. A good example is the man in Mark 10:17-22. He was able to adhere to the requirement of the old covenant (the thou shalts) without assistance of the spirit, but adherence to the requirement of the law did not change him (same case for most Christians today) he valued his possessions more than anything. Christ told him to sell his possessions and follow him (Christ). that is where you need the assistance of the spirit; to follow Christ.
Even an armed robbers can chose not rob to avoid going to prison, but it does not change his natural inclination to do evil. For him to hate crime, a change (from the heart) will be required. He becomes a new person with no desire to evil. For him the laws are no longer relevant.

Image123:
So, the Old Covenant was our school master, When faith(the new covenant) has come, we are no longer under the Old covenant. The Old Covenant taught us that we could not keep God's commandments on our own. That we had to depend on God, have faith in Him.
.

ayoku777:

If Jesus called it a new commandment, then new it is, meaning it never was before then. And its a replacement not just for both but the ten and the entire law. We are to love both God and man with the love of Christ, as Christ did and as Christ would. So if you would, we should love God with the heart and mind of Christ. And this is only possible with the Holy Spirit.

I think this is clear enough.

ayoku777: You believe Jesus came to add grace to the law, not replace it. You sugarcoat with semantics, but its clear from scripture. The law said love the Lord with all your heart and soul. Paul needed to have done this to be blameless. Yet he counted it as dung.

And show me where love your neighbour as yourself came up after Jesus instituted love one another as i have loved you.

ayoku777: You believe Jesus came to add grace to the law, not replace it. You sugarcoat with semantics, but its clear from scripture. The law said love the Lord with all your heart and soul. Paul needed to have done this to be blameless. Yet he counted it as dung.

And show me where love your neighbour as yourself came up after Jesus instituted love one another as i have loved you.

Bidam:

Lol, there is no need arguing over these issues, i understand clearly what Alwaystrue is saying.She is not promoting the mosaic laws here but making you see that the WORD(LAW) and the Spirit go together. You can't operate only in the spirit alone and say you don't need the word of God.

The corinthian Churches fell into all kinds of problems when they operated only by the Spirit.

The Spirit always have to agree with the Word.Paul had to write to them some set of instructions on marriage,Morals, givings worship,celibacy, etc. Quoting the same mosaic laws you are kicking against here. But in this case Paul was able to inteprete accurately by the help of the Holy Spirit the mind of God on the Law, unlike the pharisees who only see the letters and not the Spirit behind it.

Alwaystrue:
Lool. I knew you did not understand me, no wonder people still did not understand Jesus so it is not surprising. All Jesus spoke about 'doing' was of the Spirit.
Paul was speaking for himself about being blameless and yes what he counted dung was according to the law. He was on a mission to kill and persecute when He was caught by God yet he felt he was doing according to the law of GOD. Hope you understand that it was about works without the heart and when He was arrested by God, all that changed and He started with the heart and showed us a lot of 'heart doings' of the law of Moses, guess you will say he mixed grace with law or when he said the Israelites did not mix with faith the Word they heard. Someday you will personally understand this yourself and will know I have been saying about the law of the Spirit.

For the scriptures, do your own check and realise that before you start saying things are replaced you should first search scriptures. No, I won't do that for you.

ayoku777:

this is the pride that puts me off. Just say you can't find a passage to defend your point. I've searched everywhere love came up in the new testament. There is no love your neighbour as yourself after Christ instituted the new one.

Just say Ayo i disagree with you. No need to sound esoteric like there's one ghen ghen holy spirit that shows only you how the new covenant still operates the law of the old

Bidam: I guess you wanna now turn this peaceful thread into a tithe fighting argument. The Abrahamic covenant wasn't ratified by circumcision as you erroneously posted but by animal sacrifices in Gen 15. Circumcision was just a SIGN of the covenant.

Even if you no need physical circumcision, me i need am.

Both John the Baptist and Jesus were circumcised (Luke 1:59; 2:29).

Alwaystrue:
The only pride as see is not willing to search the scriptures yourself. I have personally seen 2 exactly saying so and as I said before, do your search yourself for I will not for you. I am not sure I have said anything wrong in that.
If you call my asking you 'to search the scriptures yourself' to find it as pride, then there is nothing more to say. When you see it then we will know who is proud, I do not go about making claims for the fun of it.

ayoku777: @Alwaystrue

I understand your view point very very well. You believe Christ came to show us how to obey the law of God the way he intended. That we couldnt keep the law as perfectly as God wanted, so the Father sent Christ. But thats not true.

People kept the law. The young ruler said in Matthew 19v20 -ALL THESE THINGS HAVE I KEPT from my youth up. Paul also in Philippians 3v6 -touching the righteousness which is in the law, BLAMELESS.

So people kept the law and obeyed it perfectly. Paul said he was blameless. In other words if it was a demand in the law, it was kept by Paul. He had no loophole. He loved the Lord with all his heart, he loved his neighbour as himself, he didnt bear false witness, he didnt covet his neighbours whatever. No blame by the standard of the law. Yet he counted them as dung v8. We don't need Jesus coz we couldnt keep the law perfectly, we need Christ coz the law was a shadow of Christ and His love. Jesus doesn't help us keep the law perfectly. He is the reason we dont need the law again. People kept the law perfectly and were still imperfect before God.

For by the DEEDS OF THE LAW, there shall no flesh be justified in his sight (Romans 3v20 and Gal 2v16 and Gal 3v11). Whether you obey the law or not, it wont justify you. Coz it was a shadow of Christ and his love. If i hand you something, you cant receive it from my shadow.
The law cant justify us at all. We dont need Christ coz we couldnt keep the law, people kept the law. We need Christ coz his love is the reality of what the law presented in shadow pictures.

This is the part you're finding hard (i wont say impossible) to agree with. That we dont need the law again is far fetched to you.

ayoku777: You believe Jesus came to add grace to the law, not replace it. You sugarcoat with semantics, but its clear from scripture. The law said love the Lord with all your heart and soul. Paul needed to have done this to be blameless. Yet he counted it as dung.

And show me where love your neighbour as yourself came up after Jesus instituted love one another as i have loved you.

DrummaBoy:

So if d Abrahamic covenant was ratified by animal sacrifices, is the New
Covenant also ratified with animal sacrifice ?

DrummaBoy: My debate with you is that d Abrahamic covenant is not d same as d New
Covenant. And your post has proved that.

As for tithing, we can never avoid it: all discusses on matters of
covenants still boils down to that practice. It is an old covenant
practice not binding on NT Christians under d New Covenant.

Bidam:

You initially said it was ratified by circumcision.Meanwhile Christ is our passover Lamb.

Bidam:

I have never said what you wrote above. I said the Abrahamic covenant is foundational to understanding both the NT and OT and every other covenants is as a result of the outworking of this covenant which is not obsolete but in effect till date.

christemmbassey:

@Bidam, what happen to d new covenant of d blood of Jesus if Abrahamic covenant still subsist? Pls read/study d following and respond accordingly -Matt26:28, Heb9:20, Heb8:6, Heb8:13 IN THAT HE SAIth A NEW COVENANT, HE HAD MADE THE FIRST OLD, NOW THAT WHICH DECAYETH AND WAXETH OLD IS READY TO VANISH AWAY",Heb12:24, Heb13:20. Bros, Abrahamic covenant is OBSOLETE, has expired, decayed and rotened, if in this life, you have hope in Abrahamic covenant u are most pitied, bc Ahrams covenant has nothing to do with gentiles, Eph2:12, bros Abram no sabi you. Jesus death is our only deal. And is bigger than what soever Abie got.

Bidam: Of cos i understand why your crew will click like to this error..Instead of correcting you, they will be happy to see you wallow in ignorance of scripture.SMH! Set of gnostics folks!!!

Galatians 3:16-17

Amplified Bible (AMP)

16 Now the promises (covenants, agreements) were decreed and made to Abraham and his Seed (his Offspring, his Heir). He [God] does not say, And to seeds (descendants, heirs), as if referring to many persons, but, And to your Seed (your Descendant, your Heir), obviously referring to one individual, Who is [none other than] Christ (the Messiah)

17 This is my argument: The Law, which began 430 years after the covenant [concerning the coming Messiah], does not and cannot annul the covenant previously established (ratified) by God, so as to abolish the promise and make it void.

[size=16pt]Under the New Covenant, the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant are valid, and Abraham is our spiritual father[/size], as it were.

[size=16pt]As New Covenant believers we become the heirs of Abraham and the Abrahamic Covenant[/size]:Another scripture to debunk your error,

Romans 9:6-8 "For not all Israelites are true Israelites nor are all Abraham's descendants his children, but as Scripture says, 'through Isaac shall your descendants be called.'

Abrahamic covenant is foundational to understanding both the NT and OT and every other covenants is as a result of the outworking of this covenant which is not obsolete but in effect till date

[size=16pt]Under the New Covenant, the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant are valid, and Abraham is our spiritual father[/size], as it were.[/b]

[size=16pt]As New Covenant believers we become the heirs of Abraham and the Abrahamic Covenant[/size]

DrummaBoy:

Thank God you accept Christ is our passover; no more debate on that



This is what you said in response to Christembassey



you responded



Christembassey said we are not under Abraham's covenant but you said no we are. Why deny your own words now?

Compare

U just said now,

with

you said before now

Do they means same thing?