Why keep the Ten Commandments? (2)

[from scratch]

This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created.
The old thread automatically closed is here: "Why keep the Ten Commandments?"

 

[Sophrosyne]

To no longer be under the law doesn't remove our obligation to obedience. To be under the law means to know the law-and our obligation to it- but to be apart from grace-from our need for communion with God, to be apart from Christ. With God all things are possible, including obedience to the righteousness He created for man.

This is meaningless to me.... relate this directly to the 10 commandments. Are we obligated to them or not?

 

[FredVB]

Let me say this again.
1) The Law includes the 10 commandments.
2) Requiring obedience to the Law is promoting the Law.
3) Christians are not under the Law
4) Christians by NOT being under the Law are NOT under the 10 commandments
5) Obligating Christians to the 10 commandments IS putting them under the Law
6) Sin via the 10 commandments applies ONLY to those whom the Law applies to. You cannot sin when the definition of sin is out of its jurisdiction. If it is a sin to eat bananas on Sunday on a small island in the pacific, those people there cannot come to America and arrest everyone that eat bananas on Sunday.

No, it isn't this way. If something is against the law on an island far away, it might not be against the law where we are. But if there is not because of your conscience something that is really sin, with it being the same elsewhere it will still be sin. And saying this is not setting anyone to be under law subject to condemnation. But there is condemnation for sin and only with redemption in Christ is there deliverance, with it deliverance is sure.

 

[Sophrosyne]

No, it isn't this way. If something is against the law on an island far away, it might not be against the law where we are. But if there is not because of your conscience something that is really sin, with it being the same elsewhere it will still be sin. And saying this is not setting anyone to be under law subject to condemnation. But there is condemnation for sin and only with redemption in Christ is there deliverance, with it deliverance is sure.

Let me try another example.
On this remote island they have 3 laws:
1)no eating bananas on Sunday
2)no eating coconuts on Sunday
3)no eating pineapples on Sunday

Now we are living on another island that only has one law
1)no eating fruit on Sunday

So tell me are the people on the other island obeying our laws or are we obeying their laws or what?

 

[FredVB]

Let me try another example.
On this remote island they have 4 laws:

I actually did not see 4 laws there.

If I answer, I can only say that I don't know. Not sure where this would go or if it is to trap, but I did not see it said anyone was obeying.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I actually did not see 4 laws there.

It was an error on my part.... I fixed it.

If I answer, I can only say that I don't know. Not sure where this would go or if it is to trap, but I did not see it said anyone was obeying.

Assume the people on both islands were obeying their islands laws.
1) Are the People on the 3 law island obeying the laws of the 1 law island?
2) Are the People on the 1 law island obeying the laws of the 3 law island?

 

[from scratch]

This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created.
The old thread automatically closed is here: "Why keep the Ten Commandments?"

Well blow me down. Can't believe this thread opened today.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Well blow me down. Can't believe this thread opened today.

you mean split

 

[from scratch]

I requested Fred to Please say Yes the Ten Commandments are required for the Christian - or no the Ten Commandments aren't required of the Christian.

Fred responded with - For the redeemed there is no condemnation. But it is best to do what commandments from Yahweh show. May your conscience guide you to what God desires, what is central in his will for you. Jesus loves you, may you live for him.

I'm so curious I can't hardly stand myself. Why can't Fred respond as requested? What is so difficult about it? c&p is easy and only requires 5 or so key strokes. Instead he refuses to answer the question with well over 200 key strokes.

It appears Fred thinks a Christian is required to or should keep the law for some undisclosed reason. Personally I think it is disbelief requiring a back up system for salvation in case God really hasn't given us a free gift.

I've even asked Fred to say Yes or no. Only 3 key strokes at the most. Instead I get some obscure beat the bushes answer.

The Christian is required or isn't required to keep the law. There is no in between. A woman can't be kinda sorta pregnant. She is or she isn't.

 

[from scratch]

you mean split

Yes

 

[from scratch]

Fred says - For the redeemed there is no condemnation. But it is best to do what commandments from Yahweh show. May your conscience guide you to what God desires, what is central in his will for you. Jesus loves you, may you live for him.

His next post contains - I never said I was promoting the law.

To which I'm going to say - really? I must be very dense.

 

[from scratch]

fhansen says - To no longer be under the law doesn't remove our obligation to obedience.

Since when does under not imply obligation?

 

[fhansen]

This is meaningless to me.... relate this directly to the 10 commandments. Are we obligated to them or not?

Of course

 

[fhansen]

fhansen says - To no longer be under the law doesn't remove our obligation to obedience.

Since when does under not imply obligation?

Obligation is what fallen man disdains. Adam rejected his obligation, any and all obligations to God. With the New Covenant Jesus shows us how to fulfill our obligation. With Him our yoke becomes easy, our burden light, because we come to willingly obey as we come to love God and neighbor, without even reference to our obligation. It's really not so complicated. This is the meaning of God placing His laws on our hearts and writing them in our minds. With love there is no condemnation because there's nothing to condemn. Man will always be obliged to love-and there really shouldn't be an argument against that.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Of course

I'm sorry but I don't see it, and do you keep the Saturday Sabbath properly?

 

[fhansen]

I'm sorry but I don't see it, and do you keep the Saturday Sabbath properly?

Yes, the church has recognized the Lord's Day as fulfilling the spirit of the sabbath day of rest since the beginning of Christianity.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Yes, the church has recognized the Lord's Day as fulfilling the spirit of the sabbath day of rest since the beginning of Christianity.

No, the Sabbath command according to the Mosaic Law was never changed in the Bible. The Law cannot be changed either it is fulfilled and no longer binding upon a person or (if they choose to keep it) fully binding. You are engaging in a pick and choose type of lawkeeping here which puts you in violation. You either must do it absolutely according to how it was laid down in the Old Testament or not at all there is nothing inbetween that is valid.

 

[fhansen]

No, the Sabbath command according to the Mosaic Law was never changed in the Bible. The Law cannot be changed either it is fulfilled and no longer binding upon a person or (if they choose to keep it) fully binding. You are engaging in a pick and choose type of lawkeeping here which puts you in violation. You either must do it absolutely according to how it was laid down in the Old Testament or not at all there is nothing inbetween that is valid.

Christ could certainly make the change-so long as He didn't violate the Spirit of the Law. Did Christ fulfill or violate the law regarding sabbath when He healed or picked grain on that day?

 

[Sophrosyne]

Christ could certainly make the change-so long as He didn't violate the Spirit of the Law. Did Christ fulfill or violate the law regarding sabbath when He healed or picked grain on that day?

I'm sorry but the covenants don't work that way, God doesn't change them he stands by them 100%. The only way to change the day is to complete the contract and make a new contract with the difference in it. There is no mention of a sunday sabbath command in the New Covenant anywhere.
As far as Jesus violating the Law regarding the Sabbath he explained that doing good deeds wasn't against the Law, if an animal got stuck in a well pulling it out wasn't against the Law neither was healing or feeding people that needed food.

 

[fhansen]

I'm sorry but the covenants don't work that way, God doesn't change them he stands by them 100%. The only way to change the day is to complete the contract and make a new contract with the difference in it. There is no mention of a sunday sabbath command in the New Covenant anywhere.
As far as Jesus violating the Law regarding the Sabbath he explained that doing good deeds wasn't against the Law, if an animal got stuck in a well pulling it out wasn't against the Law neither was healing or feeding people that needed food.

Christ's the Lord of the Sabbath: God's The Lord of His covenants. The Old Covenant became obsolete because it couldn't effect the righteousness it commanded. The New Covenant replaces it because it can effect the righteousness the old commanded-and tremendously more yet.