The old covenant commandment was not to murder which one could do through even carnal willpower. Jesus' new commandment is to love which is from the heart.
That's not a new commandment. The difference is that it is kept perfectly in Christ. It's the same commandment.
No. the sinful nature is crucified altogether. "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:" Roman 8:3But not just friendship love, but supernatural agape love from the divine nature.
Right. The whole point of Jesus coming was to take sin out of our nature.
The Sabbath was fulfilled by Jesus,
So were all the rest of God's laws.
which is why we don't keep the feast days of Leviticus 23.
And yet Paul explicitly enjoins that they be kept, e.g. "Christ is our Passover, therefore let us keep the feast" Moreover, the new testament Church is given the exact same oracles of God that were given to the children of Israel.
"This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:" Acts 7:38
To us?? Luke is addressing the New Testament Church.
Notice, the first holy convocation in that chapter is the Sabbath Day. Every covenant has a sign of the covenant. And if a covenant ends and is replaced, like a will and testament is replaced by the next will and testament, the sign of the old covenant ends with it.
The sign of the old covenant was not the Sabbath. It's also circumcision as well as all the other signs that accompany those who are observant. There is no law that says this is the only sign between God and his people. Again, this idea that the Sabbath is the only sign is nowhere to be found in scripture. There are all sorts of signs throughout the bible
You just believe the old covenant has continued. And therein lies your confusion.
Not at all. I'm pointing out what Paul says the distinction makes which is that under the old testament, one carried out by their own will and efforts, while the new is accomplished "by grace through faith, and that NOT of yourselves....etc"
And?The dietary laws changed a few times from the week of creation.
If the first dietary law was perpetual, we would all be vegetarians, even the animals. But it changed after the flood.
No, it didn't, at least not with regards to what's clean and what isn't.
Flesh was introduced to both man and animals. In fact, even unclean meat was food as they are included in "everything that moves," except the life-blood.
You're taking that way out of context. Look at it again, and you should see that he includes a very important caveat which precludes that as a possibility. What he says is "just as I gave you the herb of the field...." Did God give them hemlock to eat, how about nightshade? See the problem yet?
Clean meat from the first sin was only for offerings to God.
Not really. You're not paying very close attention to what was allowed to be offered to God. Clean meat was not offered to God. The fat and entrails were offered to God, the meat was eaten.
Then to separate the Jews from the rest of mankind, God gave them dietary laws to eat only what was good enough for an offering for God.
Totally unbiblical. That's not even in the Oral law. Moses points out that they may eat together with the gentiles. The Talmud even goes so far as to allow them to eat out of the same bowl!! Your doctrines are completely unbiblical.
Unclean meat represented the Gentiles. And at first, the gospel went only to the Jews, God's chosen nation. Luke 2:34. But when God allowed the gospel to go to the Gentiles, He cleansed the unclean meats that represented them. Acts 10.
On the surface, it sounds nice, but it's nothing like the reality. Peter's vision is symbolic, and by definition, a Symbol is a substitution. Unclean animals are being substituted for gentiles. It doesn't then follow that unclean animals are gentiles. Peter provides the biblical interpretation, and nowhere does he ever then conclude that God has made unclean animals clean. Moreover, he simply points out that he is not to refer to gentiles as unclean. God didn't cleanse Symbols. he cleansed gentiles.
Now in 1 Tim. 4 we can eat previously unclean meat. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
Let's take a look at that in context:
"Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving "
Created to be received? What animals did God create to be received? Swine? Nope. Shellfish? Nope. Unclean animals were not created to be received at all.
"of them which believe and know the truth."
The truth? Would that be the truth found within the pages of scripture? If so, then there is no place where it states unclean animals are clean.
"4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:"
Every creature? Are people created by God? Yep. Is it a coincidence that God told Peter, "kill and eat'? You yourself are pointing out that this is a direct reference to Gentiles, right?
"5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer."
The word of God? That is a direct reference to the Old Testament. The new testament didn't exist when this was written.
As far as the other laws such as against witchcraft, sexual perversions and such, they are still valid as Paul refers to them.
He doesn't refer to cannibalism, bestiality, and a number of other perversions, I'll not mention in polite company. Furthermore, by annulling the dietary laws specifically, the door is thrown wide open for cannibalism as that is the only set of laws that prohibits that from happening.
But the ceremonial, dietary, and sacrificial laws, as well as the covenant of the Ten Commandments engraved on stone Ex. 34:28 ended. Galatians 4:22-36
You're still conflating the commandments with the ceremonial law. They are not the same. There is nothing in that passage of Galatians that does away with the ten commandments or any of the commandments . What is being distinguished is the fact that the physical nature is incapable of keeping the law without the spiritual. works must be mixed with faith. What is done away is the sacrificial system, but that is only for those who no longer sin
It was a perpetual sign for only the nation of Israel and still is.
There is no other covenant than with Israel. You are either in that one or you're not. There is no place where the gentiles get their own covenant. They are brought into the covenant with God's people as I've already pointed out with Acts 7:38 etc.
But our covenant has a NEW SIGN for only the Jews and Gentiles that came into covenant with Jesus. We don't have two signs in the same covenant, only one.
There is only one sign, and that is keeping God's commandments, not just one. As Paul points out if you break one, you've broken them all.
Cutting off again.