Jesus abolished the entire Old Testament.

[bbbbbbb]

What if you explain them?
Who wrote the 10C's if not Jesus?

Ummmmm. Jehovah? Strangely enough, the Bible never states that Jesus wrote the 10 words, but gives the credit to Jehovah.

 

[listed]

What if you explain them?
Who wrote the 10C's if not Jesus?

Are you admitting you do not understand either word?

Why not submit some proof Jesus did? I do not believe you can. It has already been shown here that Jesus did not and ignored. I say ignored because I have never seen any discussion about the Scripture presented proving Jesus did not write them. For instance where is the refutation of John 1:17? It clearly states Jesus did not bring the law including the 10 Cs.

 

[listed]

Are SDAs not Christians?

Did I say they were not Christian or something? Are the SDA found on the list you refer to? Why are you displaying a generic Christian faith symbol if the SDA are Christian? To me and others you are saying they are not while confessing you are SDA. In refusing to identify with them by faith icon here would suggest you are either hiding or saying they are not. If it is to hide in order to get people to agree with you, you are intentionally trying to deceive. Only the wicked love cover (darkness) to hide. Even Adam did this very thing. My dogs do it too.

 

[VictorC]

Maybe because Jesus never abolished all of his fathers commands like its being stated on here.

The first covenant is treated as a unit, the same way it was conveyed to the children of Israel.

Hebrews 8:13
In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Hebrews 10:8-9
Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” - which are offered according to the law - then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second.

2 Corinthians 3
12 Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech— 13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15 But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. 16 Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.​

I was tempted to quote from the King James, where it renders 'passing away' as 'abolished' in verse 13 above.

 

[SAAN]

Are you fighting against the scripture that says;


Eph 2:15

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Your taking that out of context, the

Ephesians 2:14-15(NKJV)

Christ Our Peace
14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.


Paul defines what this "law of commandments contained in ordinances" is and it is "the enmity"—which he mentions twice in verses 15&16- between Jews and Gentiles (see verses 11-12). He also calls it "the middle wall of division" in verse 14. Whatever "the law of commandments contained in ordinances" is, it causes hatred and division. This rules out right away that it refers to God's law, for it, Paul writes in Romans 7:12, "is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good."


Scriptures dont contradict itself when read in context. If Paul said Jesus abolished the entire OT, then Jesus is a liar when he said he didnt come to abolish his fathers commands.

 

[SAAN]

Heb 8:13

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

They have to deny what the old covenant is, so that some would be confused what must vanish away.

Yes we are under a new covenant in which we are covered by the blood of Jesus for our sins instead of animals bloods and all the sacrificial offerings and such, but that doesnt mean everything God has taught to his followers for 4000 yrs was then now void.

It is still wrong to worship other Gods, lie, steal, kill, covet, sexual immorality, and much more. These are all out of the OT, so its clear the entire OT is not abolished except the ceremonial aspects of the law in which Hebrews explains are no longer needed as Jesus is now our high priest.

 

[VictorC]

What if you explain them?
Who wrote the 10C's if not Jesus?

I accept the premise that Jesus wrote the Ten Commandments, as well as declared it from Mount Sinai. That premise grants Him the authority to limit its jurisdiction as the King Who issued it, and declare His adopted children as free.

Matthew 17:24-26
When they had come to Capernaum, those who received the temple tax came to Peter and said, “Does your Teacher not pay the temple tax?”
He said, “Yes.”
And when he had come into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take customs or taxes, from their sons or from strangers?”
Peter said to Him, “From strangers.”
Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free". ​

The King does not convey the covenant from Mount Sinai to His children, exclusive to the children of Israel for a limited tenure.

Galatians 4:4-7
But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.
And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!” Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.​

 

[VictorC]

We are persuaded to honor the SDA's church's claim that it isn't a denomination, as codified within their own Fundamental Beliefs.
We have no reason to accept it as Christian, though.

Are SDAs not Christians?

This rhetorical question misrepresents the seventh-day Adventist church.

 

[listed]

Your taking that out of context, the

Ephesians 2:14-15(NKJV)

Christ Our Peace
14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.


Paul defines what this "law of commandments contained in ordinances" is and it is "the enmity"—which he mentions twice in verses 15&16- between Jews and Gentiles (see verses 11-12). He also calls it "the middle wall of division" in verse 14. Whatever "the law of commandments contained in ordinances" is, it causes hatred and division. This rules out right away that it refers to God's law, for it, Paul writes in Romans 7:12, "is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good."


Scriptures dont contradict itself when read in context. If Paul said Jesus abolished the entire OT, then Jesus is a liar when he said he didnt come to abolish his fathers commands.

Sorry but Paul is not trying to make a political peace between the Jew and the Gentile. Paul is talking about our relationship to and with God.

Paul is defining the enmity as the law against us.

 

[listed]

Yes we are under a new covenant in which we are covered by the blood of Jesus for our sins instead of animals bloods and all the sacrificial offerings and such, but that doesnt mean everything God has taught to his followers for 4000 yrs was then now void.

It is still wrong to worship other Gods, lie, steal, kill, covet, sexual immorality, and much more. These are all out of the OT, so its clear the entire OT is not abolished except the ceremonial aspects of the law in which Hebrews explains are no longer needed as Jesus is now our high priest.

Where does the NT promote doing what you say the law forbids? No I am not promoting doing that stuff. You present a straw man argument. Those kind of arguments are false. No one here promotes sin or the right to sin. BTW neither does Paul.

 

[listed]

This rhetorical question misrepresents the seventh-day Adventist church.

Agreed

 

[Cribstyl]

Yes we are under a new covenant in which we are covered by the blood of Jesus for our sins instead of animals bloods and all the sacrificial offerings and such, but that doesnt mean everything God has taught to his followers for 4000 yrs was then now void.

Yeah, that's your explantion. Let the scripture explain what we should claim changed. Was it only the ceromonial ritual or was the law taken out if the equation?:
Col 2:13
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
It appears that all my sins and trespasses has been forgiven by nailing all the accusation of the law to His cross.

It is still wrong to worship other Gods, lie, steal, kill, covet, sexual immorality, and much more. These are all out of the OT, so its clear the entire OT is not abolished except the ceremonial aspects of the law in which Hebrews explains are no longer needed as Jesus is now our high priest.

Noone said that it is was ever right to do those things. This reasoning is designed to ignore the gospel and continue in the law.
With or without the law, sin is still sin. The victory comes by what Jesus did, not by my ability to keep the law.

 

[ananda]

I have just discovered that Jesus abolished the entire Old Testament, not just the law. Do anyone disagree, if so why?

If he abolished the Old Testament, then he abolished the need for himself (a sacrificial messiah) which was demanded in the Old Testament.

 

[SAAN]

Where does the NT promote doing what you say the law forbids? No I am not promoting doing that stuff. You present a straw man argument. Those kind of arguments are false. No one here promotes sin or the right to sin. BTW neither does Paul.

When you say the entire OT is invalid, you are promoting sin, because that is where God defined sin. The NT doesnt have its own separate laws, they are all command pulled from the OT.

 

[SAAN]

Yeah, that's your explantion. Let the scripture explain what we should claim changed. Was it only the ceromonial ritual or was the law taken out if the equation?:
Col 2:13
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
It appears that all my sins and trespasses has been forgiven by nailing all the accusation of the law to His cross.
Noone said that it is was ever right to do those things. This reasoning is designed to ignore the gospel and continue in the law.
With or without the law, sin is still sin. The victory comes by what Jesus did, not by my ability to keep the law.

No one is ignoring the Gospel. Like it not or Christians DO follow the law (outside of the ceremonial and sacrificial that were abolished). Dont lie, steal, kill, worship other Gods, refrain from sexual immorality, dont covet, Love one another, respect your parents are all part of the law. We are exempt from animal sacrifices and burnt offerings as they have been fulfilled and replaced by Christ.

The law cant save you and will never give Salvation, but ignoring it (the parts that apply to us) and saying you dont ned to follow any of Gods commands is where Jesus will tell many he didnt know them for being lawless. Jesus tells us to keep the commandments, which are summed up as Love God and Love one another, but they are a summary, not a cancellation of everything else.

 

[Cribstyl]

No one is ignoring the Gospel. Like it not or Christians DO follow the law (outside of the ceremonial and sacrificial that were abolished). Dont lie, steal, kill, worship other Gods, refrain from sexual immorality, dont covet, Love one another, respect your parents are all part of the law. We are exempt from animal sacrifices and burnt offerings as they have been fulfilled and replaced by Christ.

Paul explains how, what and why the law was abolished. You wont post the context to show "what is abolished, because it's not saying that you were dead in your sins because of ceorominal trespasses.

The law cant save you and will never give Salvation, but ignoring it (the parts that apply to us) and saying you dont ned to follow any of Gods commands is where Jesus will tell many he didnt know them for being lawless.

Your statement contradict scriptures that teaches; 'you're not under the law'. 'The law' is the old covenant. The law was given to save those who keep it, but no man can keep it.


By following God's commandments under the New Covenant, sin is not an option. The NT teaches that sin was in the world before the law.

Jesus tells us to keep the commandments, which are summed up as Love God and Love one another, but they are a summary, not a cancellation of everything else.

Most NT scriptures about commandments are not speaking about the commandments from the law. How easy it is to decieve people with word definiton games.

 

[listed]

Yeah, that's your explantion. Let the scripture explain what we should claim changed. Was it only the ceromonial ritual or was the law taken out if the equation?:
Col 2:13
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
It appears that all my sins and trespasses has been forgiven by nailing all the accusation of the law to His cross.
Noone said that it is was ever right to do those things. This reasoning is designed to ignore the gospel and continue in the law.
With or without the law, sin is still sin. The victory comes by what Jesus did, not by my ability to keep the law.

Celebrating is against us.

 

[BobRyan]

I have just discovered that Jesus abolished the entire Old Testament, not just the law. Do anyone disagree, if so why?

I would say that is total fiction --

 

[BobRyan]

If he abolished the Old Testament, then he abolished the need for himself (a sacrificial messiah) which was demanded in the Old Testament.

He even condemned the religionists of his day for daring to set aside 'The Word of God" - Mark 7:6-13.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

You know that you're contradicting the language of SDA Fundamental Belief #13 when you erroneously claim the seventh-day Adventist church is a Christian denomination.

Until you actually read our fundamental beliefs including 13.

While Christianity affirms salvation by Jesus Christ, Adventism adds to this compliance with the Mosaic covenant -

Until you actually read the statement of the majority of even pro-sunday keeping scholarship on the subject of the TEN commandments admitting to the obvious Bible fact that keeping the Ten Commandments is in perfect harmony with the Gospel of salvation taught by Christ and all the OT saints. As we ALL saw here - #1

Why do you continue to make stuff up to the point of even violating CF participation rules??

in Christ,

Bob