Many people question the divisions of the law and its continuation. For this we must understand that while the laws are norms some of these norms are specific and others general.
How can we understand this? Simple, just look at their practical system and their holistic system. For example the law to Adam was "of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, of that thou shalt not eat;" 1 , the question is is this law is general? Yes and No, now there is no tree of good and evil, so how can we violate this law? But in the general system we have to disobey God is the breaking of the law, as it happened with Adam, in fact the law only ceases to exist because of the impossibility of violating, but the act of violating is the law. Thus disobedience is what is called the Moral Law. Again it must be made clear that for God is right or wrong, the act of dividing into moral law is a concept to facilitate the understanding of what is being said.
Now we can see the division of the laws before Moses, among them we have, God spoken of Abraham and said "Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my precepts, my statutes and my laws" 2 , such things are important, sometimes it is clear that laws exist before Moses, or when speaking of laws they exist, in fact many construct the idea that there is no law before Moses, or forbid these laws to be detected. That is, if you say that there are laws before Moses automatically by factor of creeds, some people with certain religions forbid their existence.
I can see that among them we have "kept my charge, my precepts, my statutes, and my laws," 2 so we have the following separations in this verse.
See that an individual who defines that there are no divisions between the norms that God gives is completely against the scriptures. In fact, normally people who are against the law, try not to study, or try to escape from a deep analysis as such things go against their values ??of pleasure. This is according to the text, "having a great desire to hear pleasant things, shall gather unto themselves teachers according to their own desires" 3 , indeed such people do not have a careful conversation trying only to de-virtualize a study without the detailed analysis of the conclusion that was exposed . And thus not desiring to analyze something that can go against what he desires, then such people determine what determines the continuation of the text, "not only will they turn away the ears of the truth, but will turn to the fables"3 , that is, in addition to diverting the ear, the individual will tend to tell something meaningless analysis of the text, such as putting a joke system or a laughable image, that is, a fable or a "????? (muthos)."
Now by drawing such quoted individuals, a conscious individual will understand that the determinations of God are norms, and such norms are separate. In first we can analyze that the primordial concept is "obeyed to my voice" 2 , that is the principle of the obedience transpasses in all of them. The point is that many who determine themselves justified by faith nullify the foundation of obedience, now the basic norm either perpasses everything and is prior to man is obedience, this is grounded in the universe and in all things that do not bind destruction. Thus in no way would justification negate obedience. Knowing that obedience is a basic rule for divine fellowship, we do.
(??????????) - When we base the term commanded in the Hebrew is defined by limits, ie the warrant is a system in which man is bound to present himself in a form or a character. The term warrant can be described in the new testament by the term prisoner "Paul, prisoner of Christ Jesus," 4 thus defines the quest to appear as the character of God.
(???????) - The term here delimited by precept is nothing more than that the commandment, or a norm to be done, is not necessarily a system of character, but an effect of obedience, it manages an action of custom, aiming an undeclared moral system. At this point a direct moral system is not based, but an action of cause.
(??????) - Here are all norms that are totally liturgical, rules of ceremonial, for example the way to kill a lamb is a statute. In other words, the systems for a ritual are defined in the statutes.
(????) - Here the law is defined as the description of a target, that is, an objective to arrive and that in fact is broader than observed. Such would be a path, the law described is something that one intends to do but one never knows if one has completely hit it. When it is said to Love God above all things such is a law, in the sense described. One can not be sure that one loves nothing more than God, but one knows that this is the direction. Just like a workout to hit a target, the law is this target, which practice manages the improvement. So the purpose of reading the law is to know the direction to follow and to sanctify oneself, that is to train to become more experienced in obeying, but in the sense that it is something natural.
Knowing therefore of such separations we can observe and understand what is said in the text "law of commandments contained in ordinances," 5 which is a group of the law of the commandments. But for this we must observe the peculiarities, because in one the text is Hebrew and in the other the text is Greek.
(?????) - Here the law is placed as a general order, ie the whole law, thus it is observed as everything that was written as rule.
(??????) - It is defined as that which is given, that is the parts that have been given to be placed in the law. I point out that the great problem of various religious systems lies in not understanding the words coming from the Greek and the words coming from the Hebrew. Mixing one thing with another involves confusion, but knowing correctly the meaning in each language can be understood correctly.
(?????) - Here described are civil, or ceremonial laws that involve the organization of a system.
What we have then, that within the law, there are ceremonial and civil rules, and these were overthrown, because it was necessary not to have a specific group, but that all could be considered equal and descended from the promises.
But then let's see the text
Deu_6: 5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
Now this text is in the book of Deuteronomy, that is, it is a text of the law, in the Greek term, but such a text is an ordinance (?????)? No he is not an ordinance, he is a law in the Hebrew system (????), that is a goal. Thus, such law and others of a similar type are not annulled. And many times they declare themselves as moral laws. But such is the meaning of the Hebrew law (????).
Is it wrong to speak Moral Law? Yes and no, for those who understand the meaning of law in Hebrew, and law in Greek, and separate the terms, people would know the difference in speaking one law or talking about another. But as most people today do not read the Bible based on the peculiarities of Hebrew and Greek, the best way to write is Moral Law. Therefore the law is separated in Moral Law, Ceremonial Law, Laws of Health, Civil Law.
In fact a good analysis of the Book of Moses and can extract laws that are not bound to separate a people, and use general laws that are applied to all men. One of them we can note is "The Sabbath was made for the sake of man," 7 and indeed we have generalized norms for man, and out of the civil rules, we can see these factors with the text, "God blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it, because it rested in it. " 8, what we have is that the sanctification of the Sabbath did not exist by a civil system, it determines that such sanctification is a norm of obedience, bound to a moral Law, in which the rest is demarcated for the amplification of the greater one remained with the divine actions, leaving the corporate actions. Its basis is in the concept of sanctification, in fact a day dedicated to divine actions separated from works of common business or actions, manages a point above normal in living with God, because that day seeks to ignore any action that disrupts this connection with God . When we read "sanctification, without which no man shall see the Lord," 9 and one day when 24 hours are placed for sanctification, it is an educational concept as Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for man" 7, it is necessary to understand that sanctification is already broken when a norm is described as the day that must occur and man decides another day. The first point is disobedience, the second is that sanctification does not occur, because the day was your decision and not a system of humility in which the truth is with God. In fact a person who chooses a day to do, is able to make the Sabbath what he desires and not what God desires.
Thus it is possible to analyze the differences of law and which remain, not being laws of civil organization, or ceremonial systems Levitical. When a law is put as something for man such is a moral concept, knowing that in the bible such is put as law, that it is not law of the commandments contained in ordinances. In other words, a moral law is a law of commandments not contained in ordinances.
Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores
Visite o nosso canal youtube.com/buscadaverdade e se INSCREVA agora mesmo! Lá temos uma diversidade de temas interessantes sobre: Saúde, Receitas Saudáveis, Benefícios dos Alimentos, Benefícios das Vitaminas e Sais Minerais... Dê uma olhadinha, você vai gostar! E não se esqueça, dê o seu like e se INSCREVA! Clique abaixo e vá direto ao canal!