What have you understood about the charcater of The Ten Commandments??

[Elder 111]

It has to do with the reason you observe the speed limit. When under the law we obey due to fear of authority while when under grace we obey due to love of the authority, without reference to or even awareness of the law, as we've come to recognize its reality, righteousness, and the wisdom behind it for ourselves.

So in relation to the Ten Commandments, it is not the law that is the problem but our attitude? So that I still do what the law requires but because I love Jesus.

 

[fhansen]

So in relation to the Ten Commandments, it is not the law that is the problem but our attitude? So that I still do what the law requires but because I love Jesus.

Yes, love fulfills the law but for the right reasons, as God always intended, rather than merely as some obligation I must satisfy by my own efforts, by my own abilities at achieving a commanded righteousness. I like to quote Basil of Cesarea, a third century believer:

"If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children"

 

[Frogster]

we were bron again, into this...


1 Peter 1:23 since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God;


not this....



23 since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of A RULE BOOK, , through the living and abiding word of God;


That is my understanding of the character of the 10.

 

[from scratch]

Firstly we are talking about the principles of the Law. Can you leave out the Sabbath and deal with that please?
[/list]
Jesus said that He and His father are one. He told Phillip if he saw Him he see the Father. How come you are separating them? Obviously this oneness is in character and purpose. What the Father stands for so does Jesus. So how do you get one set of commands for the Father and one set for the Son? Do you realize too that you promote the idea here that the Son supersedes the Father in replacing His commands. Explain.

Jesus didn't say He and His Father are the same as you're trying to imply. Jesus separated them in John 15:10.

So Jesus could have sinned and still be righteous? Because Jesus Kept the Ten commandments I don't have to keep them?

You've no idea what you're saying here. You're implying that God could sin.

 

[from scratch]

So in relation to the Ten Commandments, it is not the law that is the problem but our attitude? So that I still do what the law requires but because I love Jesus.

I simply don't believe you in light of the Bible.

 

[Strong in Him]

i suppose the question is...

why are commandments the center of one's existence, instead of a resurrected Christ?

The 10 commandments were summed up by Jesus - love God and love your neighbour. They, and the rest of the law, were kept perfectly by Christ and fulfilled by and in him. If we are in him, we too have perfect righteousness - the righteousness which comes from keeping the law. This righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees because they were unable to keep it perfectly.

Guess that's not an SDA option though, because it doesn't lead to the question, "if you believe the commandments are from God, why don't you keep the Sabbath?"

 

[Sophrosyne]

Firstly we are talking about the principles of the Law. Can you leave out the Sabbath and deal with that please?
[/list]

Jesus said that He and His father are one. He told Phillip if he saw Him he see the Father. How come you are separating them? Obviously this oneness is in character and purpose. What the Father stands for so does Jesus. So how do you get one set of commands for the Father and one set for the Son? Do you realize too that you promote the idea here that the Son supersedes the Father in replacing His commands. Explain.

So Jesus could have sinned and still be righteous? Because Jesus Kept the Ten commandments I don't have to keep them?

I'm sorry but you cannot leave out a law that calls into question your idealogy. Jesus himself said that he does his Father's will.... NOT his own too. In other words the NT is full of Jesus obeying the Father, but we still have one verse where he obeys the Father's Laws and we are supposed to obey Jesus' Laws, it would be very easy just say obey the Fathers Laws instead of differentiating the two sets of Laws. You seek to play this game of seperating the trinity into Jesus only when it suits you and they putting it back together when it suits you instead of properly looking at scripture in context and trying to actually see which part(s) of the trinity is acting.
As far as the sons commandments replacing the Fathers, this is where the Old Covenant is replaced by the New Covenant.
As far as Jesus sinning you are playing another Game. I never said he could sin and be righteous, I said Jesus WAS righteous BEFORE the Law therefore the Law therefore he had no need of keeping it to be righteous. One could look past your desire to say that sin ONLY exists defined by the 10 commandments which is false. The Bible (as you see it) has the Sabbath created at one time and unless you have a different idea about God, Jesus existed PRIOR to creation and he was the creator of the universe therefore the Sabbath had NOTHING to do with him sinning or not (or any of any commandments) for he was sinless prior to such things.
If one looks back to this time (before creation) the commandments have NOTHING to do with Jesus righteousness, which means in him they are superfluous to us. Jesus kept the commandments not to be righteous but for the sake of doing away with the Old Covenant that required keeping of them. He fulfilled ANY obligation of the Law for those who choose to believe in him because as creator of the Law who existed prior to it inception he was not obligated to it. The Law is for those who practice lawlessness and Jesus was never did such things. To say Jesus needed the Law is to equate he had a sin nature like us.... which is absolute nonsense.

 

[Frogster]

The 10 commandments were summed up by Jesus - love God and love your neighbour. They, and the rest of the law, were kept perfectly by Christ and fulfilled by and in him. If we are in him, we too have perfect righteousness - the righteousness which comes from keeping the law. This righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees because they were unable to keep it perfectly.

Guess that's not an SDA option though, because it doesn't lead to the question, "if you believe the commandments are from God, why don't you keep the Sabbath?"

interesting posts as usual sis

taker one step further, we are of Abrahamic faith righteousness, even pre law..

 

[fhansen]

I'm sorry but you cannot leave out a law that calls into question your idealogy. Jesus himself said that he does his Father's will.... NOT his own too. In other words the NT is full of Jesus obeying the Father, but we still have one verse where he obeys the Father's Laws and we are supposed to obey Jesus' Laws, it would be very easy just say obey the Fathers Laws instead of differentiating the two sets of Laws. You seek to play this game of seperating the trinity into Jesus only when it suits you and they putting it back together when it suits you instead of properly looking at scripture in context and trying to actually see which part(s) of the trinity is acting.
As far as the sons commandments replacing the Fathers, this is where the Old Covenant is replaced by the New Covenant.
As far as Jesus sinning you are playing another Game. I never said he could sin and be righteous, I said Jesus WAS righteous BEFORE the Law therefore the Law therefore he had no need of keeping it to be righteous. One could look past your desire to say that sin ONLY exists defined by the 10 commandments which is false. The Bible (as you see it) has the Sabbath created at one time and unless you have a different idea about God, Jesus existed PRIOR to creation and he was the creator of the universe therefore the Sabbath had NOTHING to do with him sinning or not (or any of any commandments) for he was sinless prior to such things.
If one looks back to this time (before creation) the commandments have NOTHING to do with Jesus righteousness, which means in him they are superfluous to us. Jesus kept the commandments not to be righteous but for the sake of doing away with the Old Covenant that required keeping of them. He fulfilled ANY obligation of the Law for those who choose to believe in him because as creator of the Law who existed prior to it inception he was not obligated to it. The Law is for those who practice lawlessness and Jesus was never did such things. To say Jesus needed the Law is to equate he had a sin nature like us.... which is absolute nonsense.

I've never known the Trinity to be described other than that Jesus' will and the Father's will are one. And we're to follow Jesus, the Good Shepard, in our own obedience of the Father's will, the power to do so being a part of the New Covenant. How did Jesus keep/fulfill the law?

 

[Elder 111]

Yes, love fulfills the law but for the right reasons, as God always intended, rather than merely as some obligation I must satisfy by my own efforts, by my own abilities at achieving a commanded righteousness. I like to quote Basil of Cesarea, a third century believer:

"If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children"

So it is then that we keep the Ten Commandments out of Love for Christ and acknowledgement of His Lordship in our lives?

 

[fhansen]

So it is then that we keep the Ten Commandments out of Love for Christ and acknowledgement of His Lordship in our lives?

as a by-product-but we were never meant to break them in any case

 

[Sophrosyne]

I've never known the Trinity to be described other than that Jesus' will and the Father's will are one. And we're to follow Jesus, the Good Shepard, in our own obedience of the Father's will, the power to do so being a part of the New Covenant.

There will is one through the Godhead, but there is a scripture that does require separation of them in a way where Jesus is keeping the commandments of the Father while telling us to keep HIS (Jesus') commandments. This scripture is used along with telling us Jesus gave the 10 commandments at Sinai to tell us we have to keep the Law. The problem here is that we have an identity problem swapping in/out a separate Jesus and the entire trinity to try and bind Christians to keeping the 10 commandments. There must be a difference in the commandments of the Father (God) and those of Jesus (God) such that they would be mentioned BOTH and identified as such in ONE scripture.
How did Jesus keep/fulfill the law?[/quote]How? by living as a Jew of course obeying all their rituals and laws and observing all the holidays and sacrifices. We are told we are to keep the Law like Jesus did but he did it as his LIFE as a Jew..... this is not what Christianity is about at all.
Jesus as God did not need to keep the Law to prove himself to God, he kept it to prove US righteous to God. Through HIS keeping of the Law those who are under the Law or not are righteous in God's eyes. We could be seen righteous like Abraham was through I think Jesus at the time (in spirit perhaps) faith in him or those under the Law see his works as righteous and hopefully make the jump to conclude... he did it FOR us so we are no longer bound to it as our standing before God.

 

[Sophrosyne]

as a by-product-but we were never meant to break them in any case

We (gentiles) cannot break laws we are not obligated to keep by covenant. Gentiles can never break the Sabbath command unless we obligate ourself to it by partaking of the covenant it is attached to.

 

[Strong in Him]

interesting posts as usual sis

Thank you. I can't really take any credit though; some of what I said was stated in a book I have recently read - I think by David Pawson, but I've read several recently. I also think I have a cold coming on - can't express myself too clearly at the mo.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Thank you. I can't really take any credit though; some of what I said was stated in a book I have recently read - I think by David Pawson, but I've read several recently. I also think I have a cold coming on - can't express myself too clearly at the mo.

don't sneeze on your screen

 

[fhansen]

There will is one through the Godhead, but there is a scripture that does require separation of them in a way where Jesus is keeping the commandments of the Father while telling us to keep HIS (Jesus') commandments. This scripture is used along with telling us Jesus gave the 10 commandments at Sinai to tell us we have to keep the Law. The problem here is that we have an identity problem swapping in/out a separate Jesus and the entire trinity to try and bind Christians to keeping the 10 commandments. There must be a difference in the commandments of the Father (God) and those of Jesus (God) such that they would be mentioned BOTH and identified as such in ONE scripture.
How did Jesus keep/fulfill the law? How? by living as a Jew of course obeying all their rituals and laws and observing all the holidays and sacrifices. We are told we are to keep the Law like Jesus did but he did it as his LIFE as a Jew..... this is not what Christianity is about at all.
Jesus as God did not need to keep the Law to prove himself to God, he kept it to prove US righteous to God. Through HIS keeping of the Law those who are under the Law or not are righteous in God's eyes. We could be seen righteous like Abraham was through I think Jesus at the time (in spirit perhaps) faith in him or those under the Law see his works as righteous and hopefully make the jump to conclude... he did it FOR us so we are no longer bound to it as our standing before God.

So why does Rom 2 tell us that both those under the law-those who've heard it- and and those who haven't heard it, will be declared righteousness by observing it? And if there was no need to observe the law to begin with, then why did Jesus bother to fulfill it?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Strong in Him

The 10 commandments were summed up by Jesus - love God and love your neighbour. They, and the rest of the law, were kept perfectly by Christ and fulfilled by and in him. If we are in him, we too have perfect righteousness - the righteousness which comes from keeping the law. This righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees because they were unable to keep it perfectly.

Guess that's not an SDA option though, because it doesn't lead to the question, "if you believe the commandments are from God, why don't you keep the Sabbath?"
​

interesting posts as usual sis

taker one step further, we are of Abrahamic faith righteousness, even pre law..

I understand that and agree.
But do ya think think the unblieving non-Christian Jews of today will

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

JOHN 5:45 "Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you — Moses, in whom you trust.
46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me.
47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?" (NKJV)

LUKE 16:30 And he said, "No! father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent."
31 But he said to him, "If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead." (NKJV)



.

 

[Sophrosyne]

So why does Rom 2 tell us that both those under the law-those who've heard it- and and those who haven't heard it, will be declared righteousness by observing it? And if there was no need to observe the law to begin with, then why did Jesus bother to fulfill it?

Nobody was ever declared righteous by observing the Law, faith alone is the way to achieve that. Jesus fulfilled the Law as part of the covenant with Israel. The standard of righteousness the Law demanded was such that it was impossible for man to achieve it so God stepped in and achieved it for ALL.
The demands of the Law are fulfilled for those who put trust in the fulfiller of the Law..... Jesus. To demand of someone to AGAIN fulfill the demands of the Law for righteousness is to tell Jesus that he FAILED to achieve that purpose.
Those who are in the spirit (through Jesus) are NOT under the Law. Christians are SUPPOSED to be in the spirit and NOT be partakers of the Law as their standard of righteousness.
Either your righteousness lies in Jesus..... or is of your own doing.. NOT both.

 

[Strong in Him]

don't sneeze on your screen

Off to bed now, so probably won't.

Thanks.

 

[Frogster]

as a by-product-but we were never meant to break them in any case

you were meant to break em, the law was added to INCREASE the sin rom 5:20...

rom 7:13, sin became utterly sinful by law, rom 3:20, the knowledge of sin comes by law...

that is the point, it came to show man his flesh...and it did, now bye bye strict prison pedagogue of Gal 3:25....you did your job Mr prison, you aroused sin Rom 7:5, bye bye now Mr law..... Take errr easy bro....