Book of Galatians Law vs Grace with Firsts and Seconds including God's Promise and discussion of Faith compared to Mosaic Law
Book of Galatians Law vs Grace with Firsts and Seconds including God's Promise and discussion of Faith compared to Mosaic Law

Argumentation - The Book of Galatians

Appendix
  
APPENDIX;

Father God tells Isaiah in Isaiah 6:9.10., to inform the people of the first Israel, of their condition and what He has done to them;

Hear ye indeed, but understand NOT (biyn; “to (not) have discernment, insight, understanding”); and see ye indeed, but perceive NOT  (yada`; “to (not) perceive, have knowledge, be wise”) Make the heart of this people fat (shaman; “calloused, or hard, metaph. “to cover over (or veil) the heart), and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.

Yeshua Himself, repeats and confirms this condition, within Matthew 13:13-15.;

Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see NOT; and hearing they hear NOT, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, ‘By hearing ye shall hear, and shall NOT understand (syniēmi; “to put together, i.e. to be capable of (mentally, or spiritually) comprehending”); and seeing ye shall see, and shall NOT (perceive; to see with the mind, to perceive, to know. See note below)’: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

(Note: the English “perceive” in Matthew 13:13. was rendered by Matthew in the Morphological Greek New Testament text,  as “ἴδητε” the transliterated root “horaō”, not the transliterated synonym “eidō” which is utilized within the Textus Receptus, thus the definition, “to see with the mind, to perceive, to know.”)

Nevertheless, the point that I am making is this;
In spite of the first Israel NOT being capable of understanding or perceiving, having their hearts and minds covered with a veil by Father God
(2 Corinthians 3:13-16.), many proponents of the Mosaic Law will seek the understandings of Rabbinical Judaism for some form of spiritual enlightenment. (?)

Let’s look at Isaiah 51:1-2. again;

Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him.

Unfortunately, though the renowned Jewish scholars of Rabbinical Judaism apparently took God the Father’s advice and researched the texts regarding Abraham and Sarah, with all due respect, they were and are at a distinct disadvantage.

Although there may very well be four views of interpretation within the Hebrew Kabbalistic approach to therapeutics, (PaRDeS or PRDS which is an acronym) where briefly these views consist of;
Pashat, the (plain), literal and direct meaning of the text.
Remez, a (hint) of an allegorical significance; an indication of something deeper.
Drash, to (search) out an allegorical, typological application.
Sod, the (hidden) and mystical meaning.

If the individuals that attempt to interpret God’s Spiritual Word are not born of His Spirit, then they simply interpret The Word carnally.
For they neither perceive or understand, God’s Spiritual Word having been blinded to Scripture, by Father God Himself.

For example, scholars such as Rabbi Nehorai and Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki or Rashi, have come to the conclusion based upon their interpretation of Genesis 26:5. that; " Abraham had fulfilled the Mosaic Law, in its entirety, prior to its revelation at Sinai.

Genesis 26:5.;
Because that Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws”.”

Rabbi Nehorai, Mishnah Kiddushin, 4:14.,
Quote; “We find that the patriarch Abraham kept the entire Torah even before it was revealed, since it says, “Because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws .” End Quote.

Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki, or Rashi, Yoma 28b.,
Quote; “Because Abraham hearkened to My voice: when I tested him, and kept My charge: [Referring to] decrees to distance [himself] from transgressing the warnings in the Torah, e.g. secondary prohibitions to prevent incest from occurring, and the Rabbinic decrees to safeguard the prohibitions of the Sabbath. My commandments: [Referring to] things, which, had they not been written, would have been fit to be commanded, e.g. [prohibitions against] robbery and bloodshed. My statutes: [Referring to] things that the evil inclinations and the nations of the world argue against, e.g. [the prohibitions against] eating pork and wearing garments of wool and linen for which no reason [is given], but [which are] the decree of the King and His statutes over His subjects, and My Instructions: To include the Oral Law, the laws given to Moses from Sinai .” End Quote.

The above “laws” within Genesis 26:5. is the very first time within Scripture that the word Torah is used. And since the word laws is recorded in the plural torot, theses scholars have erroneously decreed that Genesis 26:5. was and is referring to the entire corpus of Mosaic Law.

Unbelievably, many proponents of the Mosaic Law actually embrace the above, and will cite Genesis 26:5., along with James 2:21,22. as being evidence for what they believe.

This Rabbinical understanding could have very well been deduced, based upon the following line of reasoning;

If Abram had been declared to be righteous/tsĕdaqah in Genesis 15:6., and Moses said in Deuteronomy 6:25., that righteousness/tsĕdaqah is attained by fulfilling all of the Mosaic Law, then since torot is mentioned as to what Abraham obeyed in Genesis 26:5. then the keeping of the charge, commandments, statutes and laws, must all be referring to the Mosaic Law.

Where the only way that could be reconciled in their minds would be, if Abram/Abraham had somehow received and fulfilled the entirety of both the “Written and Oral Lawprior to its revelation at Sinai.

That’s quite the assumption, and it leaves me at a loss and wondering as to “why”, Father God neglected to mention that majestic occurrence anywhere within the entirety of Scripture? Because in not doing so, it most certainly contradicts Amos 3:7.!

Now I am not necessarily criticizing these scholars for being so focused on the Mosaic Law that they don’t recognize the Messiah, for this was all done with intention and purpose by Father God for the sake of all of the Gentiles He would call. Amen.

However, the above proposal made by Rabbinical Judaism simply contradicts New Second Covenant text.
We” are aware by what is written, “That no mere man will be Justified (be imputed with righteousness) through the Mosaic Law!”

Just like many of the translated English “Righteous, Righteousness, Just and Justified (tsĕdaqah, tsaddiyq, tsadaq, tsedeq)” are intimately connected within the Hebrew language, the same holds true in the Greek.

For example, Genesis 15:6.;
And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
Within the Septuagint, (Targum Hashiv’im, The Translation of the Seventy) Genesis 15:6. is rendered in the Greek as;
“καὶ ἐπίστευσεν Αβραμ τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην” 
δικαιοσύνην = righteousness.”

In Romans 4:3. (and Galatians 3:6) where Paul quotes the above verse he says;
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
Within the Morphological Greek New Testament text, Romans 4:3. is rendered as;
“τί γὰρ ἡ γραφὴ λέγει ἐπίστευσεν δὲ Ἀβραὰμ τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην” 
δικαιοσύνην = righteousness.”

The Greek feminine noun “δικαιοσύνην” above, transliterated “dikaiosynē”, is listed as Strong’s 1343, where its root word is Strong’s 1342, the adjective “δίκαιος” or “dikaios”.
Dikaios is defined in the broad sense as, “state of him who is as he ought to be, righteousness, the condition acceptable to God”.

Strong’s 1344 is the Greek verb “δικαιωθήσεται” or “dikaioō” and it is primarily defined as, “to render righteous or such he ought to be” where its root word is also Strong’s 1342, the adjective “δίκαιος” or “dikaios”.

Dikaioō is utilized and translated into justified within Galatians 2:16.;
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the (Mosaic) law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the (Mosaic) law: for by the works of the (Mosaic) law shall no flesh be justified.
As well as in Acts 13:39., Romans 3:20., 3:28., Galatians 3:11., 3:24. and 5:4..

The above New Second Covenant Scripture, clearly debunks the beliefs and understanding of Rabbinical Judaism.

And if we look at both Romans 4:2,3. again;
For if Abraham were justified (dikaioō; made righteous [or tsadaq]) by works, (Mosaic Law) he hath whereof to glory (kaúchēma; to glory or boast); but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God (pisteúō; had trust, confidence), and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” (righteousness = dikaiosynē or tsĕdaqah)

Granted, Jewish Rabbis don’t read New Second Covenant text, nor are they indwelt with the Spirit, but they have still failed to recognize a few substantial problems with their interpretation and understanding, based solely on the Tanakh.

Where one would be what is written within Nehemiah 9:7,8.;
Thou art the LORD the God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham; And foundest his heart faithful before Thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites, to give it, I say, to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for Thou art righteous:”.

Abraham had a believing and faithful heart, mind and soul.
The English “his heart faithful” was derived from the Hebrew “לְבָבוֹ֮ נֶאֱמָ֣ן” transliterated respectively as the masculine noun “lêbâb” or “mind, heart, soul” and verb “ʼâman” or “made firm and faithful”.
There is nothing written in respects to any “works”, or the Mosaic Law being fulfilled there.

Another would be that this Rabbinical understanding, contradicts what Moses says within Deuteronomy 5:1-3.;
And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them. The LORD our God made a covenant with  US in Horeb (Sinai). The LORD MADE NOT THIS COVENANT WITH OUR FATHERS, but with US, even US, who are ALL OF US HERE ALIVE THIS DAY.

Furthermore, if Abraham was declared to be righteous (as Abram in Genesis 15:6.) because he had obeyed all of the Mosaic Law, then how does Rabbinical Judaism reconcile Abraham’s complete disregard of the Mosaic Law tôwrâh that expresses the “Firstborn Inheritance Birth Rights” within Deuteronomy 21:15-17.?
If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he MAY NOT make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn:
But he SHALL ACKNOWLEDGE the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the RIGHT OF THE FIRSTBORN IS HIS.

The aspect of whether a wife is hated or beloved is inconsequential.
The point that Father God is making here, is that no matter what the circumstances are, the firstborn son is to receive the rights of inheritance as the firstborn son.

Yet, by not giving Ishmael the firstborn birth rights, and a double portion of all that he had, Abraham doesn’t obey, but completely “breaks” the Mosaic Law of Deuteronomy 21:15-17.!

However, it was YHVH Himself, (being fully aware of “who” the children that would be born would be, and was therefore referring to Isaac), that told Abram in Genesis 15:4. that “he would father a child that would become his heir”, and in Genesis 18:10-14. it was YHVH who confirmed this again after Ishmael had already been born.

And it was 'Elohiym who had previously told Abraham in Genesis 17:16-21. that this child would be Isaac, and after Isaac had been born, it was 'Elohiym who solidified this confirmation of heir, when He told Abraham to listen to Sarah in Genesis 21:12., and to “cast out” both Hagar and Ismael, as Sarah had said to do in Genesis 21:10..

And it is written within Genesis 25:5., (Genesis 24:36.) that Isaac was (as Yeshua is) the Heir;
And Abraham gave all that he had unto Isaac.” (Ishmael received nothing from Abraham.)

What Genesis 26:5. actually reveals, is that Abram/Abraham was not only obedient to the tôwrâh instruction and direction that he was given by YHVH/'Elohiym, but that it was also the Divine that instructed and directed him to do everything that he did.
Which would therefore mean, that it was the Divine that “instructed and directedAbraham to “break” what would eventually become a Mosaic Law!

(Note; Yeshua also told the lawyer, (and the others that were listening) to break the Mosaic Law within Luke 10:25-37..
In the parable of the “Good Samaritan”, which He used as an example as to how to fulfill the Law of “loving your neighbour as yourself”, both the Priest and the Levite would have had to break Leviticus 22:4-6. and Numbers 19:11-22. if they had demonstrated the same mercy as the Samaritan had.)

Genesis 26:5. has nothing to do with the Mosaic Law itself, but is referring instead, to Abram/Abraham’s complete obedience, in doing everything that the Divine had told him to do.

Genesis 26:5.;
Because that Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.

However, before looking at this obedience, I would like to briefly address something.
That being, the aspect of Monotheism as opposed to Trinity.
Though this topic could be a book all on its own, I would just like to say the following;

You may have noticed that I just utilized both YHVH and 'Elohiym separately above, and I did so as per what is specifically recorded within the text.

In Deuteronomy 6:4., in what Judaism commonly refers to as the Shema, (Shema Yisrael or Sh'ma Yisrael, the Hebrew: שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל‎) Moses says;
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

The word one above is derived from the Hebrew adjective “אֶחָד” transliterated as “'echad”.
'Echad is primarily defined as being, “one” and Judaism understands this to be as “One and only One” in the solitary sense. Hence Monotheism.

However 'echad is also the same word that is utilized within Genesis 2:24.;
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be " one" flesh.
Where clearly we have two entirely separate and distinct from each other individuals, both man and wife, that are comprised of this “ oneflesh.

Furthermore, for just one last example, in Ezekiel 37:16,17. we have YHVH saying to Ezekiel;
Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

Each bold highlighted word above within these two verses has also been translated from the Hebrew adjective “אֶחָד” or “'echad”, where we not only have two entirely separate and distinct sticks”, but they also symbolically represent at the same time, two entirely separate and distinct groups of people”, where both become “one” stick and “one” people.

Now, in having said that, I ask that you please consider the significance of the following;
Though we know from Exodus 6:3. that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, only knew the Divine as “שַׁדַּי אֵל – 'El Shaddai”, (being translated in the King James, as “Almighty God” in Genesis 17:1.) Moses was inspired to respectively scribe, 'Elohiym, Ruach and YHVH from the very beginning.

This begs the question; “Why do that, if there wasn’t a reason to do so?

By the time that Moses had inscribed what he did, these distinctions certainly weren’t of any benefit to those who had already died, where any Patriarch of the past would have considered any encounter with the Divine to be just that, rather than being able to distinguish whether it was with YHVH, 'Elohiym, Ruach Hakodesh or even an Angelic Emissary.

These distinctions certainly weren’t of any benefit to the Jews either, for they simply consider them to be alternative Names for the “LORD our God is one LORD”. 

Therefore, isn’t it more likely, that what Moses had scribed, was done with intention for the benefit of those of the future?
For those after Yeshua, that have been Blessed with God’s Spirit. For those that can perceive and understand?

In respects to what Moses had scribed, before continuing, and without going into great detail, we should also all have some knowledge regarding the following.

The original text that Moses had scribed is not the Hebrew text that we would read today.
The original text consisted of ketav Ivri, (which is comprised of characters that bear a resemblance to that of ancient Phoenician) and was used during the First Temple period.

This sacred Hebrew text was then translated by the priest and scribe Ezra after the Babylonian exile into the Aramaic language, and the more familiar “square style” Assyrian script ketav Ashurit in the 5th. century BC..

Where once more, at a later period, through a decision made by the Great Assembly, it was then translated again into the Hebrew language which we read today, and which has been meticulously maintained over millennia, by the Jewish scribes, (See, Talmud [Sanhedrin 21b].)

Nonetheless, the authority and legitimacy of this text was confirmed by Yeshua Himself, within Matthew 5:18. as well as other passages’, which He both culled and read from. Not once did He question the authenticity of its translation, so none of us should be concerned regarding its genuineness.

However, we should be able to see by the text that Moses had scribed, and that which has been translated, that that though indeed One, (Exodus 6:2., John 1:1.) a definite distinction also exists between YHVH, 'Elohiym and Ruach.

If we as Christians believe in the Divinity of Yeshua from Everlasting, and that of the Trinity being comprised of Father, Son and Spirit, “why” do we seem to place limits upon Them in respects to Their Distinctiveness? (Remember from above, that Allah the imposter denies the THREE?)

Though most assuredly, They function Together in Concert as ONE, why do we appear to not give Them latitude, to be in possession of Their own unique qualities and attributes?

We know from the New Second Covenant text of, John 1:1-3.,1 Corinthians 8:6., Ephesians 3:9., Colossians 1:16,17., Hebrews 1:2., and 2:10., that Yeshua is the Word, Who created ALL things.

Could this possibly explain why only 'Elohiym is mentioned within Genesis 1:1 through to 2:3.?

If we look at Joel 2:32. it would state that we call on the Name of YHVH for deliverance;
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD (YHVH) shall be delivered (mâlaṭ; to slip away, escape, be delivered): for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance (pĕleytah; escape, deliverance), as the LORD (YHVH) hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD (YHVH) shall call.
( Father God’s ( YHVH’S) calling, as opposed to works, i.e. Romans 9:11.)

But we know by “Acts 2:21. & 4:10-12., Romans 10:9-13., and John 14:1-6.” that we CALL only upon the name of Yeshua!
And as per John 6:44. and 6:55. we are only drawn or granted to come, (or called) to Yeshua by God The Father (YHVH).

(Note, to the “Sacred Name” folk, Yeshua, Jesus, or Yasue (Arabic), Lesu (Japanese) Jezu (Albanian) or what have you.
Father God, (in having called and drawn these individuals), knows their heart and knows full well WHO’S Name they are referring to.
If Luke in his recording of Acts, takes the time within Acts 9:36., regarding Tabitha and the translating of her name into Greek as being Dorcas, yet NOT Once does any Apostle or Disciple mention anything about the Name of Jesus, then that should demonstrate that you are simply barking up the wrong tree.)

Continuing…
So clearly some form of distinctiveness exists, and I ask for you to maintain the thought of that possibility, as we look at how obedient Abram/Abraham was in his dealings with the Divine, and how the following is far more relevant to Genesis 26:5. than anything to do with the Mosaic Law.

YHVH Commanded Abram to, “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:…..” (Genesis 12:1-3.).
Abram obeyed YHVH, (Genesis 12:4-6. and his journey continued on).

YHVH then said to Abram in Genesis 13:17., “Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee”.
Abram then obeyed YHVH, he removed his tent, and went to dwell in the plain of Mamre, in Hebron, Genesis 13:18..

Abram, after the appearance of Melchizedek King of Salem, (Yeshua) and after YHVH had told him that Eliezer would not be his heir, but that he would father a child himself, (Genesis 15:2.) had Faith and Belief, and he was then declared as being “righteous”, (tsĕdaqah, Genesis 15:6.).

In Genesis 15:9. YHVH told Abram to “Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon.” In Genesis 15:10. Abram obeyed YHVH.

Abram obeyed the “Angel, (or Messenger) of YHVH”, (Genesis 16:11.) and named his natural born son through Hagar, “Ishmael”, (Genesis 16:15.).

In Genesis 17:1,2., when Abram was 99 years old, YHVH appeared to him and said; “I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect (tamiym; completely and entirely whole, without blemish). And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.
So far, Abram had obeyed each and every thing that YHVH had asked for him to do.

However, I’d like for you to remember that as a damah, Abram symbolically represents and foreshadows Israel. Therefore I ask for you to consider that the above Covenant, represents YHVH’S First Provision, the Mosaic Law, which also had to be executed perfectly and without blemish, (Matthew 5:48.).

In Genesis 17:3,4., we now have 'Elohiym, making His Covenant with Abram.
Abram, (Exalted Father) is told that he will now be a “Father of Multitudes or Nations”, (Genesis 17:4.) and his name is changed accordingly to Abraham to represent this new designation and title, (Genesis 17:5.).

Abraham obeyed 'Elohiym and kept His Covenant, (Genesis 17:9-14.) and he, Ishmael and every male of his house, were all circumcised, (Genesis 17:23-27.).
This particular circumcision being the First with Ishmael, symbolically represents the circumcision of the flesh and the Old First Covenant of the Mosaic Law

In Genesis 17:15. Abraham obeyed 'Elohiym, and henceforth called his wife Sarah, (Noble Woman, or “Princess of Multitudes or Nations” as per verse 17:16.) instead of Sarai, (Princess).

Abraham obeyed 'Elohiym, (Genesis 17:19.) and called the promised son “Isaac”, and then obeyed by circumcising Isaac, (Genesis 21:3,4.).
This particular circumcision being the Second with Isaac, symbolically represents the circumcision of the Heart and the New Second Covenant of Liberty and Freedom.

Abraham obeyed 'Elohiym, (Genesis 21:12.) and cast out Ishmael and Hagar, (Genesis 21:14.).

After that, 'Elohiym, then put Abraham to the “proof or test”, (which by the way, is after he had already been declared as being righteous) and told him to go to Moriah, (Genesis 22:1,2.) which Abraham obeyed. And when Abraham arrived there, he was to sacrifice Isaac as a burnt offering. And as we know, Abraham obeyed 'Elohiym, with each and every aspect of that as well, (Genesis 22:1-19.).

And it is this particular “proof or testobedience to 'Elohiym, that James is referring to within, James 2:21,22.;
Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

The English “works” in 2:21., is derived from the Greek neuter noun “ἔργων” or “ergon”.
Ergon is defined in context as, “an act, deed or thing that one undertakes to do”.

The English “made perfect” is derived from the Greek verb “ἐτελειώθη” or “teleioō”.
Teleioō is defined as, “to make perfect, complete, accomplish, to add what is yet wanting in order to render a thing full.”

Therefore, just as Noah demonstrated his Faith, (after he had found Grace, Genesis 6:8.) by constructing the Ark, (Hebrews 11:7.) where no Mosaic Law played any part at all, James questions in verse 2:22.;
Do you see how Abraham’s Faith gave him strength and assisted him in the deed that he was told to do regarding Isaac, and as a result, his Faith, together with his demonstrated obedience (works), was perfected?

Abraham demonstrated that his “Love for God”, superseded “his love for his own son”! (See Matthew 10:37.).
That Abraham so loved God, that he was willing to give Him, his only begotten son.

The whole Akedah, Genesis 22:1-19., with “Abraham being a “type” of God the Father” is as a damah, and a foreshadowing of John 3:16..
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

As Abraham, this “ altar” in Genesis 22:9. is the first and last altar that he ever built.
Subsequently, Abraham never did present any other sacrifice or offering to God after demonstrating his willingness to sacrifice Isaac, a “type” of Yeshua.

This can be understood as a symbolic foreshadowing as to how after Yeshua’s, Sacrifice, Resurrection and Ascension, further need of any sacrifice for the atonement of man, (or the maintaining of the position of righteousness) through the Mosaic Law, is comparably insufficient and no longer necessary, if one has Faith and Belief in Yeshua.

Though proponents of the Mosaic Law may disagree, Genesis 26:5., (and James 2:21,22.) have nothing to do with the Mosaic Law.
Abraham did not know of, or fulfill any Mosaic Law!

Because in James 2:23. it is written;
And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

If one takes into account Genesis 15:6. and Nehemiah 9:7,8. from the Tanakh, and each and every other mention of Abraham within the New Second Covenant text, there are ONLY TWO prerequisites that are expressed for him in being declared and imputed as being RIGHTEOUSwhich are also the ONLY TWO prerequisites expressed to maintain that position as well.

And those are “BELIEF and FAITH”! (Romans 4:3-5., 4:9-16., Galatians 3:6-18., Hebrews 11:8-17. and James 2:23.)
Then there is the demonstration of that Faith, which for us as believers would consist of “fulfilling the Royal Law of loving others as ourselves” as expressed in James 2:8-26., and numerous other verses by Yeshua, Apostles and Disciples.

We LIVE by FAITH and WALK in the SPIRIT, and we Demonstrate Our Faith, by Demonstrating the Fruit of the Spirit, by Loving Others as we would Love OurselvesThat is how we Please Father God and Perfect our Faith.
We DON’T Please God by religiously observing the Mosaic Law!

****************************************************



If you wish to comment, or contact me, you will find that those options have been disabledI have no desire to experience the condemnation of those that do not comprehend the above. Nor do I wish to contend with them. Neither do I require the praise of those that do understand. If you have been enlightened with any of the above, that in itself is my thanks. I look at all of this a “Love Offering” and a demonstration of my “Love and Hope” for others, and I pray that Father God and our Lord simply see it the same way.
In Their service. Amen.
  

Book of Galatians Law vs Grace with Firsts and Seconds including God's Promise and discussion of Faith compared to Mosaic Law