Ben Avraham, if I may, I would like to reiterate what I had said at the outset of this thread:
The understanding that we are no longer bound to trying to live any part of the law does not lead only to the conclusion that we are then free to go out and rob, kill, worship idols, etc. That is an extreme to which some in the Hebrew Roots movement introduce into discussions like this that simply don't align with their beliefs. The law of Moses didn't exist with Abraham, Abel, Noah, et al before he penned them. Yes, there was law before Moses wrote them, but to assume Abraham was under the same exact ordinances as were written by Moses is an argument from silence that some have attempted to assume into a basis of fact.
[Gal 5:1-4] 1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage (the law of Moses). 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
A couple of the HR people tried to put forth a contextual limitation by claiming that Paul was only talking about circumcision, not the law of Moses. Frankly, that's an unfair and dishonest limitation to the scope of the context. For support, I will direct the reader's attention to Acts 15:
[Act 15:5, 7, 9-10] 5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command [them] to keep the law of Moses. ... 7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men [and] brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. ... 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
The dancing about those brothers did with this one staggering. They were adamant that Paul was only referring to the added elements to the law of Moses, not the law of Moses itself, such as the Mishnah. Again, that was yet another argument from silence, for as one can see in the quoted verses above, there is not even a hint at those external writings. They seemed utterly incapable of grasping the enormity of God writing His law in our hearts, and the works of the law. That writing is in the language of love, as Yeshua stated:
[Matt. 7:12] Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
[Matt. 22:40] On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
That is...loving God with one's all, and loving others as self. Therefore my analysis of the power behind what is written in the heart and inward parts. That gives to us the ability to obey the law at a much deeper level than the mere letter, which kills and condemns.
Now, I'm just fine with folks being zealous for the parts of the law they personally choose to uphold for themselves, such as diet, clothing, and other harmless items that can also be cultural distinctions, but when one begins to think that they are pleasing the Lord above others in doing these things, that is where Paul, Peter and James drew the line. Favor, and especially justification, those are not said to be the outcome from zeal for the law. Why?
[1 Cor. 13:3] And though I bestow all my goods to feed [the poor], and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity (love), it profiteth me nothing.
The understanding that we are no longer bound to trying to live any part of the law does not lead only to the conclusion that we are then free to go out and rob, kill, worship idols, etc. That is an extreme to which some in the Hebrew Roots movement introduce into discussions like this that simply don't align with their beliefs. The law of Moses didn't exist with Abraham, Abel, Noah, et al before he penned them. Yes, there was law before Moses wrote them, but to assume Abraham was under the same exact ordinances as were written by Moses is an argument from silence that some have attempted to assume into a basis of fact.
[Gal 5:1-4] 1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage (the law of Moses). 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
A couple of the HR people tried to put forth a contextual limitation by claiming that Paul was only talking about circumcision, not the law of Moses. Frankly, that's an unfair and dishonest limitation to the scope of the context. For support, I will direct the reader's attention to Acts 15:
[Act 15:5, 7, 9-10] 5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command [them] to keep the law of Moses. ... 7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men [and] brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. ... 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
The dancing about those brothers did with this one staggering. They were adamant that Paul was only referring to the added elements to the law of Moses, not the law of Moses itself, such as the Mishnah. Again, that was yet another argument from silence, for as one can see in the quoted verses above, there is not even a hint at those external writings. They seemed utterly incapable of grasping the enormity of God writing His law in our hearts, and the works of the law. That writing is in the language of love, as Yeshua stated:
[Matt. 7:12] Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
[Matt. 22:40] On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
That is...loving God with one's all, and loving others as self. Therefore my analysis of the power behind what is written in the heart and inward parts. That gives to us the ability to obey the law at a much deeper level than the mere letter, which kills and condemns.
Now, I'm just fine with folks being zealous for the parts of the law they personally choose to uphold for themselves, such as diet, clothing, and other harmless items that can also be cultural distinctions, but when one begins to think that they are pleasing the Lord above others in doing these things, that is where Paul, Peter and James drew the line. Favor, and especially justification, those are not said to be the outcome from zeal for the law. Why?
[1 Cor. 13:3] And though I bestow all my goods to feed [the poor], and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity (love), it profiteth me nothing.