Things to consider about the Ten Commandments

[from scratch]

You are born again Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.(Romans 8:7)

I'm at a loss here. What's yer point? You can't argue both ways. A divided house can't stand.

 

[from scratch]

There is one trait that I have seen in your presentations. You conclude things that are not stated. She did not say she does not know! Highlighted for you.
I have stated also that the bondwoman meaning Hagar was man's idea (Sarah) The law was God doings. Where is the contradiction?

That too was ordained by God. It plays a very prominent role in our world today and shows the possibilities of the end times. They'll come to prominence and persecution will be something never seen before in the first world countries. I guessing bout 20 more years minimum. I hear reports indicating such currently happening on a very small scale.

 

[VictorC]

That too was ordained by God. It plays a very prominent role in our world today and shows the possibilities of the end times. They'll come to prominence and persecution will be something never seen before in the first world countries. I guessing bout 20 more years minimum. I hear reports indicating such currently happening on a very small scale.

What on earth are you talking about?
The topic is the bondwoman defined as the covenant from Mount Sinai in Galatians 4:24.

 

[from scratch]

You don't understand! Romans 7:
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
The problem is not the Ten Commandments but our relation ship to it!

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

I'm drawn to the phrase you didn't emphasize in verse 10. What does it mean to you?

 

[from scratch]

What on earth are you talking about?
The topic is the bondwoman defined as the covenant from Mount Sinai in Galatians 4:24.

I'm certainly not talking about our relationship with God. I'm talking about the war of the half brothers and its effect on the world.

 

[Elder 111]

Read what Moses testified:

Deuteronomy 4
7 “For what great nation is there that has God so near to it, as the Lord our God is to us, for whatever reason we may call upon Him? 8 And what great nation is there that has such statutes and righteous judgments as are in all this law which I set before you this day? 9 Only take heed to yourself, and diligently keep yourself, lest you forget the things your eyes have seen, and lest they depart from your heart all the days of your life. And teach them to your children and your grandchildren, 10 especially concerning the day you stood before the Lord your God in Horeb, when the Lord said to me, ‘Gather the people to Me, and I will let them hear My words, that they may learn to fear Me all the days they live on the earth, and that they may teach their children.’
11 “Then you came near and stood at the foot of the mountain, and the mountain burned with fire to the midst of heaven, with darkness, cloud, and thick darkness. 12 And the Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of the words, but saw no form; you only heard a voice. 13 So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone. 14 And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that you might observe them in the land which you cross over to possess.​

The Ten Commandments was the proper name Moses called the covenant from Mount Sinai. The covenant also includes the Book of the Law (Exodus 24:7) which is what you quoted to show the Ten Commandments.
This is the only covenant that came from Mount Sinai.
And this is what you claimed was the product of man when you rejected Paul's definition of the symbolic bondwoman in Galatians 4:21-31.

I shouldn't need to keep showing how you've contradicted yourself. Attempting to change Biblical terminology illustrates your rejection of Scripture.

You here also admit that the covenant is not the Ten commandments only.
I will accept that it was so important that it took first place, then and now.

 

[VictorC]

I'm certainly not talking about our relationship with God. I'm talking about the war of the half brothers and its effect on the world.

You're referring to the posterity of Hagar the human.
That isn't the topic.
We're talking about Hagar the covenant from Mount Sinai.

 

[from scratch]

The Ten commandments are not the covenant, There are part thereof, part of the conditions under which the covenant would remain valid. Just like circumcision was not the covenant with Abraham but a one of the conditions of maintaining that covenant. You keep missing the mark.

Not when you read Jer 31:31-33. Oh yeah that's right the not according to the covenant made with their fathers isn't the law according to you.

 

[Elder 111]

Originally Posted by Elder 111

You don't understand! Romans 7:
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 and the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
​

Emphasis changed in your own quote.

Your adversity to the old covenant is wholly contrary to your quote describing its effect on those retained by it. Notice the pronoun "it" refers to the Law, not your alleged relationship.

Your changed emphasis changes the meaning of the text? The law is still ordained to life.

 

[VictorC]

You here also admit that the covenant is not the Ten commandments only.
I will accept that it was so important that it took first place, then and now.

You didn't read my post, which pointed out your quote from the Book of the Law. The Ten Commandments is in the book and on the tablets of stone. They are the same covenant. It isn't possible for one to have a status greater than the other.

I notice that you're hoping someone will forget your contradiction with yourself and with Scripture.
Review your contradiction again:

First of all, you once again reversed the relationship of what kept whom until the time appointed by God.
Second of all, those retained by the bondwoman covenant from Mount Sinai have absolutely no claim to eternal life with the Heir: Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” (Galatians 4:30)

God did not ordain the bondwoman, that was man's doings: Sarah and Abraham. The ten Commandments on the other hand is directly from God.

See your own contradiction: your claim that God didn't ordain the Ten Commandments, concurrent with a claim that He did. The bondwoman was defined as the covenant from Mount Sinai in v.24, which is the Ten Commandments. Those retained by it have no claim to eternal life, as they are outside God's redemption.

 

[Elder 111]

I'm drawn to the phrase you didn't emphasize in verse 10. What does it mean to you?

That because I sin death is my reward.

 

[VictorC]

Originally Posted by Elder 111

You don't understand! Romans 7:
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 and the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
​

Your changed emphasis changes the meaning of the text? The law is still ordained to life.

That's a nice way to disregard the author's conclusion of the Law's effect on those retained by it. It is clear that added emphasis doesn't help your comprehension.

It also disregards the author's declaration "now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter", followed by a quote found only in the Ten Commandments to identify the Law he addresses.

Context has never been the Adventist's friend.

 

[Elder 111]

That's a nice way to disregard the author's conclusion of the Law's effect on those retained by it. It is clear that added emphasis doesn't help your comprehension.

It also disregards the author's declaration "now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter", followed by a quote found only in the Ten Commandments to identify the Law he addresses.

Context has never been the Adventist's friend.

Is that a joke? LOL.
Yes Paul speaks of the ten being ordained to life, and because he broke them he was subject to death. So?

 

[VictorC]

Is that a joke? LOL.
Yes Paul speaks of the ten being ordained to life, and because he broke them he was subject to death. So?

So...
You rejected Romans 7 where Paul explains that being bound to the Law and Jesus concurrently is akin to adultery, we have been delivered from the Ten Commandments that held the recipients in the past tense, and you aren't aware of the larger context that includes the Law working wrath and excluding those bound by it from eternal life.

Romans 4
13 For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect, 15 because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression.​

This is the same message Paul presents in Galatians 4.
You've now rejected the message conveyed in both epistles, and you still haven't reconciled your contradiction with yourself, or with Scripture.

Review the many posts we've exchanged on this topic.
You can't reconcile your views with this inspired author's epistle that consistently explain our deliverance from the Ten Commandments on one hand, and instruct us to cast off the Ten Commandments on the other. The paradigm you operate within is totally incompatible with the Gospel of God's redemption in Jesus Christ.

 

[Jesse2014]

He announced the change, in jer 31, right during the old cov.

Besides, he used to not justify the ungodly, but now he does as per rom 4.

The oath came later than the law, Heb 7:28, chronolgical information is important.

Ex 23:7 Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent and righteous, for I will not acquit the wicked.


Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

 

[Dunbar]

Is that a joke? LOL.
Yes Paul speaks of the ten being ordained to life, and because he broke them he was subject to death. So?

Paul speaks of the Law as a curse and Peter refers to it as a yoke of bondage. We are not under the old covenant anymore so the ten commandments are not binding on believers. They are under a new covenant where the Holy Spirit teaches us right from wrong and the law of love (agape) is written in the fleshy tables of the heart.

There are only two commandments in the NT which are faith and love. The entire duty of the Christian us summed up in these two words. Faith and love are nothing like the old law. I cannot do faith or love no matter how hard I try. Both are the gifts of God and are received when we realize that all our good works are as filthy rags. If you believe you can keep the ten commandments you are under the curse and spiritually blind.

 

[mercy1061]

You completely ignore Paul's words.... he calls it a ministry of death, it is equated as bondage/slavery and a burden. One has to truly read Paul and the New Testament without preconceived notions about the Law to see this but too many totally ignore it. The Law is Holy but Jesus is Holier than it will be because apart from God the Law is meaningless and in God the Law isn't needed (in the spirit).

2 Corinthians 3:6-8

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

6 who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
7 But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came [a]with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?

This scripture contradicts your claim entirely, and yet you either didn't read it or purposely ignored it.
We have the Law (the letter that kills) and the spirit compared to each other and contradict each other.

Pharisee Shaul calls himself a bondservant, what is a bondservant? A bondervant is no different than a slave, yet it was the slavewoman that bore Abraham's firstborn. The purpose of the law was to give life, to be fruitful and multiply. A slave could only be free by death or banishment. The spirit gave the law to Adam when he walked around in the garden.

 

[Dunbar]

Pharisee Shaul calls himself a bondservant, what is a bondservant? A bondervant is no different than a slave, yet it was the slavewoman that bore Abraham's firstborn. The purpose of the law was to give life, to be fruitful and multiply. A slave could only be free by death or banishment. The spirit gave the law to Adam when he walked around in the garden.

The purpose of the law was show us that we are sinners and lead us to God. That is the one and only purpose of the Law. Paul said it better than most when he said the law was our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Once I figure out that I am in fact a sinner the law has no more purpose in my life. I am to live by the faith of the son of God from that point on. The law has an expiration date and it has expired. Time to chuck it before it stinks.

 

[from scratch]

Pharisee Shaul calls himself a bondservant, what is a bondservant? A bondervant is no different than a slave, yet it was the slavewoman that bore Abraham's firstborn. The purpose of the law was to give life, to be fruitful and multiply. A slave could only be free by death or banishment. The spirit gave the law to Adam when he walked around in the garden.

Good hoodwinkem. Doesn't agree with the Book of the Law though.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Pharisee Shaul calls himself a bondservant, what is a bondservant? A bondervant is no different than a slave, yet it was the slavewoman that bore Abraham's firstborn. The purpose of the law was to give life, to be fruitful and multiply. A slave could only be free by death or banishment. The spirit gave the law to Adam when he walked around in the garden.

Paul says a lot of things that you apparently are taking just the opposite. There is no scripture supporting a spirit giving the law to Adam whatsoever as it equates to anything you are trying to connect it to. God only gave Adam a few commands, such as don't eat of the fruit, name the animals, and when he was kicked out go forth and multiply. There was no mention of adultery, killing, honoring parents, etc... especially NO mention of the Sabbath being kept on a cyclical basic either in or out of the garden. In other words simply..... You've got NOTHING nowhere as proof to back up your claims.... just a bunch of opinions that are worthless when it comes to a debate.