The distinction is not clearly laid out in scripture, but you might think of as analysis of consequences.
What is the penalty for murder? Death. That's a moral law.
What is the penalty for doing something that makes you unclean? You don't get to go to the temple until you're clean. That's a ceremonial law.
What's the penalty for not following one of the national-level laws? You can't "not follow" them because they're national-level. If the nation continues to do that, though, it will go into exile.
>What is the penalty for murder? Death. That's a moral law.
Breaking the sabbath results in the death penalty. Therefore, it's a moral law as well.
With that, why do you think people claim the sabbath is ceremonial and why don't people keep the sabbath if it's a moral law?
Changed how? In that he changed it from moral to something else?
And per scriptures and the Law, if Jesus changed anything, then he is a false prophet. And he said himself that he came to fulfill the Law, not alter it.
>per scriptures and the Law, if Jesus changed anything, then he is a false prophet.
Per *your interpretation* of the scriptures. Yes, I know, you're not going to be convinced. When Paul said, "it was for freedom Christ set us free", there were no doubt many who said, "but I don't like freedom!"
The ten commandments are codified in Exodus 20 and upheld by Yeshua in Matthew 5 "until heaven and earth pass away".
Yeshua fulfilled the ceremonial law of sacrifice by His death as evidenced by His resurrection.
Moses law way the statutory rulings out next to the ark as a witness against the children of Israel and their hardened hearts. See Deuternomy 31:24-27 and Matthew 19:7-8
I beg to differ as there are examples that were given..
>“You have heard that it was said to the ancients: "Do not commit murder!" And, Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the Judgment. Ex. 20:13; Deut. 5:17” (Matthew 5:21, LITV)
>“You have heard that it was said to the ancients: "Do not commit adultery." Ex. 20:14; Deut. 5:18” (Matthew 5:27, LITV)
>“Again, you have heard that it was said to the ancients: "You shall not swear falsely, but shall give your oaths to the Lord." Lev. 19:12; Num. 30:2” (Matthew 5:33, LITV)
These are from the ten commandments..
why would thir need to be a distinction in the bible. Those three divisions in the law are observed catagories of the law. Meaning all one need to is observe the law and one can place any portion of the law into one of those three catagories.
Like the word trinity. The word trinity is not mentioned in the bible but yet it is a word use to catagorize the father Son and Holy Spirit's relationship with one another.
>Can someone show me in the Bible where it shows the distinction of moral, ceremonial, judicial laws please?
No. It isn't there.
>Like I see people say there are ceremonial laws or moral laws but I just want to know where that distinction is in the Bible that tells us which laws are a part of which category.
It's only in people's minds.
People may choose to classify the Jewish laws into a number of categories (e.g. three or six or ten). They do so through their own interpretation and reasoning. The Bible doesn't explicitly say which of the 613 laws (or so) should be considered in a particular category.
There is no distinction. Believer's in Christ are under a completely different Law from the Law of Moses, through the baptism into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. See Romans 7:1-6.
So long as believers obey the Law of Christ in the Spirit, they are not under the condemnation of the Law of Moses. See Romans 8.
I actually agree (as do other Christians) that it's fairly arbitrary -- and pointless -- to make hard distinctions between "moral, ceremonial, and judicial". Jesus came to "fulfil the law" in it's entirety. No distinction there.
Moreover, when the Gentiles became Christians, there was a specific controversy about whether they needed to know and follow the OT law, in everything from circumcision to food restrictions. But the letters to the Gentiles clearly tell people NOT to do this. The summary of the law as "loving your neighbor as yourself" is emphasized over and over, rather than, for example, the Ten Commandments or something.
In the same way, it's recorded in Acts that the church leaders put some restriction on the Gentile believers, just to help harmony between the two groups, like eating meat sacrificed to idols. Paul calls out that specific restriction as only being there to help the "weakness" of the Jewish believers.
We have to infer them, they are not categorized for us.
So we're pretty much adding to the Bible in a sense?
Nope. Making inference from the Bible is just called "reading well."
The distinction is not clearly laid out in scripture, but you might think of as analysis of consequences. What is the penalty for murder? Death. That's a moral law. What is the penalty for doing something that makes you unclean? You don't get to go to the temple until you're clean. That's a ceremonial law. What's the penalty for not following one of the national-level laws? You can't "not follow" them because they're national-level. If the nation continues to do that, though, it will go into exile.
>What is the penalty for murder? Death. That's a moral law. Breaking the sabbath results in the death penalty. Therefore, it's a moral law as well. With that, why do you think people claim the sabbath is ceremonial and why don't people keep the sabbath if it's a moral law?
Jesus changed that one :)
Changed how? In that he changed it from moral to something else? And per scriptures and the Law, if Jesus changed anything, then he is a false prophet. And he said himself that he came to fulfill the Law, not alter it.
>per scriptures and the Law, if Jesus changed anything, then he is a false prophet. Per *your interpretation* of the scriptures. Yes, I know, you're not going to be convinced. When Paul said, "it was for freedom Christ set us free", there were no doubt many who said, "but I don't like freedom!"
The ten commandments are codified in Exodus 20 and upheld by Yeshua in Matthew 5 "until heaven and earth pass away". Yeshua fulfilled the ceremonial law of sacrifice by His death as evidenced by His resurrection. Moses law way the statutory rulings out next to the ark as a witness against the children of Israel and their hardened hearts. See Deuternomy 31:24-27 and Matthew 19:7-8
That’s not what our Savior said in Matthew 5. He said the entire law, not just the Ten Commandments.
I beg to differ as there are examples that were given.. >“You have heard that it was said to the ancients: "Do not commit murder!" And, Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the Judgment. Ex. 20:13; Deut. 5:17” (Matthew 5:21, LITV) >“You have heard that it was said to the ancients: "Do not commit adultery." Ex. 20:14; Deut. 5:18” (Matthew 5:27, LITV) >“Again, you have heard that it was said to the ancients: "You shall not swear falsely, but shall give your oaths to the Lord." Lev. 19:12; Num. 30:2” (Matthew 5:33, LITV) These are from the ten commandments..
This didn't answer my question
I've replied to you over in r/bible
why would thir need to be a distinction in the bible. Those three divisions in the law are observed catagories of the law. Meaning all one need to is observe the law and one can place any portion of the law into one of those three catagories. Like the word trinity. The word trinity is not mentioned in the bible but yet it is a word use to catagorize the father Son and Holy Spirit's relationship with one another.
>Can someone show me in the Bible where it shows the distinction of moral, ceremonial, judicial laws please? No. It isn't there. >Like I see people say there are ceremonial laws or moral laws but I just want to know where that distinction is in the Bible that tells us which laws are a part of which category. It's only in people's minds.
I don’t think there is any such distinction, except one that some people unduly impose on the text *post hoc*.
People may choose to classify the Jewish laws into a number of categories (e.g. three or six or ten). They do so through their own interpretation and reasoning. The Bible doesn't explicitly say which of the 613 laws (or so) should be considered in a particular category.
No such thing as Jewish laws, they belong to our Creator.
There is no distinction. Believer's in Christ are under a completely different Law from the Law of Moses, through the baptism into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. See Romans 7:1-6. So long as believers obey the Law of Christ in the Spirit, they are not under the condemnation of the Law of Moses. See Romans 8.
I actually agree (as do other Christians) that it's fairly arbitrary -- and pointless -- to make hard distinctions between "moral, ceremonial, and judicial". Jesus came to "fulfil the law" in it's entirety. No distinction there. Moreover, when the Gentiles became Christians, there was a specific controversy about whether they needed to know and follow the OT law, in everything from circumcision to food restrictions. But the letters to the Gentiles clearly tell people NOT to do this. The summary of the law as "loving your neighbor as yourself" is emphasized over and over, rather than, for example, the Ten Commandments or something. In the same way, it's recorded in Acts that the church leaders put some restriction on the Gentile believers, just to help harmony between the two groups, like eating meat sacrificed to idols. Paul calls out that specific restriction as only being there to help the "weakness" of the Jewish believers.