Jesus death fulfill the mosaic law

[j3000ad]

In regards to the word fulfilled the mosaic law.

SO does this mean the law no longer applies and we don't have to take any notice of it and what law as put in its place to replace it?

[FunkyTown]

In regards to the word fulfilled the mosaic law.

SO does this mean the law no longer applies and we don't have to take any notice of it and what law as put in its place to replace it?

"Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy might."

and:

"Love thy neighbour as thyself."

[j3000ad]

Thanks but that doesn't answer my question!

[j3000ad]

SO if you are saying that is what Jesus gave that to replace the mosaic law why do we still need marriage?

[SpiritDragon]

The Bible Dictionary actually helps explain this fairly well.

Law of Moses

The name assigned to the whole collection of written laws given through Moses to the house of Israel, as a replacement of the higher law that they had failed to obey. The law of Moses consisted of many ceremonies, rituals, and symbols, to remind the people frequently of their duties and responsibilities. It included a law of carnal commandments and performances, added to the basic laws of the gospel. Faith, repentance, baptism in water, and remission of sins were part of the law, as were also the Ten Commandments. Although inferior to the fulness of the gospel, there were many provisions in the law of Moses of high ethical and moral value that were equal to the divine laws of any dispensation. The law of carnal commandments and much of the ceremonial law were fulfilled at the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The law functioned under the Aaronic Priesthood and was a preparatory gospel to bring its adherents to Christ. See JST Ex. 34:1–2 (Appendix); Rom. 3:20; Gal. 3:19, 24; Eph. 2:14–16; Heb. 7:11, 18–19; 9:7–14; 2 Ne. 25:24–30; Mosiah 12:27–13:32; 3 Ne. 9:17; 15:1–8; D&C 84:23–27.

One of the major questions the early Church in Palestine had to decide was about the obligation of Christians to the ceremonial law of Moses. The matter was partially solved by the conference held in Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts 15 and Gal. 2. The Jewish Christians in particular had difficulty giving up the ritual of the law of Moses. The Nephites, on the other hand, seemed to have had much less of a problem doing so (see 3 Ne. 15:1–5).

The law as given through Moses was a good law, although adapted to a lower spiritual capacity than is required for obedience to the gospel in its fulness. However, the Jewish leaders had added many unauthorized provisions, ceremonies, and prohibitions to the original law, until it became extremely burdensome. These innovations were known as the “traditions of the elders.” By New Testament times among the Jews the law had become so altered it had lost much of its spiritual meaning. It is this form of the law that is so harshly spoken against by Jesus and by Paul (see Matt. 15:1–9; Mark 7:1–13; Gal. 2:16–21). There is no evidence that the law of Moses had become as altered among the Nephites as among the Jews, and this may partially explain why the Nephites had less trouble in giving it up when the Savior came. See also Aaronic Priesthood; Commandments, the Ten; John the Baptist.

Essentially parts of the law were done away with because they were invented by men and added to the law as originally given to Moses. Other laws like ritualistic animal sacrifice have been fulfilled by the sacrifice of our Saviour Jesus Christ. The new requirement asked of the people is a broken heart and contrite spirit, and remembrance of His sacrifice and renewal of the baptismal covenant by partaking of the sacrament.

[SpiritDragon]

It is also important to remember that the law being fulfilled is different than the law being abolished. The mosaic law was given as a preparatory law for the Lord's people out of mercy because they were not yet ready for the higher law. When the law was fulfilled it was replaced by the higher law; at no point did Jesus teach that we should become a lawless people.

[Dravin]

"Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy might."

and:

"Love thy neighbour as thyself."

Actually Funky, I'd say that has always been the law (and still remains so).

SO if you are saying that is what Jesus gave that to replace the mosaic law why do we still need marriage?

Funky is providing a very top-level answer. That is to say, there are many things that go into it. It's kinda like telling someone to "be healthy", it's a command that consists of multiple aspects, you can't just turn around and say, "You told me to be healthy, you didn't say anything about exercise, eating a nutritious diet, getting plenty of sleep, avoiding poisonous substances..."

Note: I do recognize that you are probably looking for a less top-level answer. I'm just trying to explain that because Funky answered in such a top-level way that doesn't mean there aren't individual aspects under that umbrella.

[j3000ad]

Your now changing it if the law has been fulfilled and is no longer needed that is different to saying the law became corrupted and need to be brought back into line. They are two very different things.

Plus if that’s the case why was blood atonement still practiced in the early church?

[Dark_Jedi]

SO if you are saying that is what Jesus gave that to replace the mosaic law why do we still need marriage?

No, love God and love thy neighbor were not a replacement for Mosaic law, and are, in fact, the essence of Mosaic law. The Jews regard these as the greatest commandments and Jesus confirmed this (Matthew 22:35-40) when asked. This was not new to the Jews, and in fact stymied the question asked of Jesus.

That doesn't answer your initial question. It is my understanding that Christ fulfilled the law of sacrifice with the shedding of his innocent blood. We do still need to obey the commandments. You'll find that all of the commandments fall under one of the two broad categories above, they either show love for God or love for your neighbor. While the Jews live the law of sacrifice, we live the law of obedience. See 1 Samuel 15:22.

The question of marriage is a whole different subject. Do you need to be married to be a Christian or LDS? No. LDS teachings do require temple marriage, among other things, in order to enter the highest level of the celestial kingdom.

[j3000ad]

I guess is what I'm looking for is a detailed expiation of why certain parts of the law of mosses are kept and why other parts have been done away with it's not that I have a problem with is its just I like to understand the detail of why certain parts are no longer needed as it seems it’s been more amended then done away with .

I don’t like inconsistencies and to say they law is fulfilled which is fine but then keep lots of it and do away with or parts of it doesn’t make a lot of census to me.

[FunkyTown]

I guess is what I'm looking for is a detailed expiation of why certain parts of the law of mosses are kept and why other parts have been done away with it's not that I have a problem with is its just I like to understand the detail of why certain parts are no longer needed as it seems it’s been more amended then done away with .

I don’t like inconsistencies and to say they law is fulfilled which is fine but then keep lots of it and do away with or parts of it doesn’t make a lot of census to me.

It sounds like you have an axe to grind with a particular part of mosaic law.

We don't sacrifice bulls any more. We're allowed to eat bacon. We don't have a jubilee every 49 years and we don't celebrate the Passover.

Maybe we can be more helpful for you if you just come right out and say what aspect of Mosaic law you, -in particular- worry that we are keeping that we don't have to.

Rather than asking a question that you're clearly hoping to throw a 'Gotcha!' out at, then arguing whatever anyone says, why don't you state the position you disagree with, why you disagree with it on a gospel level and then you can have the discussion you want.

If, on the other hand, you have a genuine question about an aspect of the gospel and you want to learn more, then ask that question. You'll get better responses.

[jerome1232]

I felt this was an enlightening talk on the subject

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1983/09/the-law-after-christ?lang=eng

The most relevant part i think:

And yet it is vital to note that in the teaching of Jesus, the Law was not revoked nor repealed but fulfilled. (Matt. 5:17.) Under the gospel of Christ, murder, adultery, and dishonesty are still prohibited, and the formal requirements of the Law are still essentially in place; but the demand of the Law of Moses has been expanded, has been filled to its fullest extent. Where there is no hatred or greed, there can be no murder; where there is no lust, there can be no adultery. With the coming of Christ, the ethical portion of the Law had not been abolished; it had been caught up by, included in, and expanded to a broader application its intention, its potential as an ethical standard, had been fulfilled.

The ceremonial portions of the Law, however, were fulfilled in a different way. These were not moral or ethical rules which could be transformed into broader principles, but were what Abinadi and Alma called “performances”—rituals that symbolically prefigured coming historical events. (Mosiah 13:30; Alma 25:15.) For example, animal sacrifice prefigured the future sacrifice of the Savior, the Lamb of God. But when the events prefigured actually occurred, they could no longer be anticipated; they could only be remembered.

[Just_A_Guy]

Your now changing it if the law has been fulfilled and is no longer needed that is different to saying the law became corrupted and need to be brought back into line. They are two very different things.

They're both correct--He fulfilled the true law while exposing the folly of the "traditions of the elders". And this isn't uniquely Mormon doctrine.

Plus if that’s the case why was blood atonement still practiced in the early church?

Oh, my . . .

A version of blood atonement was preached in some quarters, but there the evidence that it was practiced is pretty inconclusive. The fact that it was discussed, naturally led some people to conclude that every suspicious death in Utah Territory was automatically a product of blood atonement and done at the personal directive of Brigham Young--but that's rather like saying that every barroom brawl in frontier California was automatically Leland Stanford's fault. Young talked a very harsh game in public discourse; but privately acknowledged that in such cases he generally didn't mean it literally (see, eg., Turner's biography of Young at 177).

Young may have been right or may have been wrong theologically--at some point we'll be able to get an answer "from the horse's mouth" as it were--and to the degree that his rhetoric led individual Mormons to feel justified at episodes such as the Mountain Meadows Massacre, he will have to account for that someday.

But where Mosaic Law was concerned--the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira would seem to indicate a closer connection between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament, then what modern society would be comfortable with.

How do we determine which parts of "Mosaic law" remain in effect today? By asking the divinely appointed messengers of the Lawgiver Himself.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Just_A_Guy

[Blackmarch]

In regards to the word fulfilled the mosaic law.

SO does this mean the law no longer applies and we don't have to take any notice of it and what law as put in its place to replace it?

it does not mean the law was replaced, it means that it was built upon. It was best described as a teacher, and when Christ instituted his teachings it was akin to a graduation Much like when you go from learning how to add, subtract, multiply and divide and then eventually graduate to calculus.. you do not discard the principles and methods that you learned prior, but you use them .

The mosaic law was designed to teach about various aspects of God and Godliness (such as Justice, Mercy, Sacrifice, Obedience), but was mostly concerned with outward behavior. When Christ instituted his teachings a lot of the focus shifted to the inward condition of a person's being.

We still have to make sacrifices, be just, faithful, exercise mercy... but instead of having to give up the best or first of our flocks or go through some official process, we now have been given the greater requirements of sacrificing our pride and sins, being clean and faithful in more than just our actions and through our own accord. In place of the older laws we have also been given new commandments to help teach us and achieve even more.

(a good example would be the replacing of the observance of the Passover with the Sacrament/communion, another are new duties given to the priesthood, another the creation of an organization for the women to assist in the work)

We are also have been given the requirements to remember the Christ and prepare for the second coming rather than just of the requirements of looking towards his first coming. The work of God has also been expanded from being just administered to the house of Israel to bringing in all who are in the world, if they will hearken, as well as also expanding to do work for those who have passed on without having the opportunity have the gospel.

The new testament in the bible has many of the things that Christ instituted during his time, and the first apostles time. the Latter Day saints Doctrine and Covenants has [many of] the Laws that have been given in these days to expand the work even further.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Blackmarch

[Dravin]

How do we determine which parts of "Mosaic law" remain in effect today? By asking the divinely appointed messengers of the Lawgiver Himself.

It's also important to keep in mind that before we discuss what parts of the Mosaic law remain in effect we'd need to first define just what the Mosaic law is. Before one asks, "Why is this part of the Mosaic Law still around?" one needs to establish what one is talking about is actually part of Mosaic Law. For instance I think one is in error if they conflate the Mosaic Law's commandments concerning something with the thing itself. For instance one is in error to conflate leverate marriage with marriage in general.

Your now changing it if the law has been fulfilled and is no longer needed that is different to saying the law became corrupted and need to be brought back into line. They are two very different things.

You didn't quote anyone, who are you directing this to?

Edited August 27, 2013 by Dravin

[prisonchaplain]

Thanks but that doesn't answer my question!

Actually he did. Jesus cites these two Mosaic laws. He expects us to live up to them. Most Christians of most stripes (read: denominations) have come to understand that we are saved by grace, empowered by the Spirit, so we can live by the moral guidelines established in the Law of Moses. We are not national Israel, so we do not abide by the unique covenant, with its 613 commandments. Nevertheless, so many of the moral principles Moses laid out are quoted--even enhanced--by Jesus and his followers.

Moses said to love your neighbor, Jesus said love your enemy.

Moses said to not commit adultery, Jesus said to not even think about it (lust).

Moses said not to kill, Jesus said not to speak angrily and with condemnation about a brother.

We are covered by the blood of Jesus, but not without purposes. The forgiveness we have empowers us to live for Christ and his Kingdom. Those OT laws remain excellent guideposts for us.

[Traveler]

Actually he did. Jesus cites these two Mosaic laws. He expects us to live up to them. Most Christians of most stripes (read: denominations) have come to understand that we are saved by grace, empowered by the Spirit, so we can live by the moral guidelines established in the Law of Moses. We are not national Israel, so we do not abide by the unique covenant, with its 613 commandments. Nevertheless, so many of the moral principles Moses laid out are quoted--even enhanced--by Jesus and his followers.

Moses said to love your neighbor, Jesus said love your enemy.

Moses said to not commit adultery, Jesus said to not even think about it (lust).

Moses said not to kill, Jesus said not to speak angrily and with condemnation about a brother.

We are covered by the blood of Jesus, but not without purposes. The forgiveness we have empowers us to live for Christ and his Kingdom. Those OT laws remain excellent guideposts for us.

This is a very good response and I thank you for it. But what many do not recognize is that the law was changed. Although many agree that the law was changed what has become a great deal of confusion is what exactly the law was changed to. In essence pointing to portions of the new law and assuming it is the complete new law.

I believe even more than theology and doctrine it is this understanding of the new Covenant and new Law that today divides Christianity. Having pointed out that there are differences in Christians as to the Law - I will leave the arguments concerning such ordinances of the New Covenants to those that argue their difference - my point being that there are differences and that in being born again and one with G-d there cannot not be differences.

The Traveler