Ten Commandments still valid so says Bible and pro-Sunday Scholars

[Albion]

Obviously, but are they, that's the question.

To be clear, your question was this--

"Why does violating 9 Commandments constitute sin and require repentance, but one is violated with impunity?"

They and I do not believe that one Commandment is, in fact, violated with impunity. Therefore I cannot answer your question in the form you've stated it, which is to presume that a violation is occurring.

 

[BobRyan]

To be clear, your question was this--

"Why does violating 9 Commandments constitute sin and require repentance, but one is violated with impunity?"

They and I do not believe that one Commandment is, in fact, violated with impunity. Therefore I cannot answer your question in the form you've stated it, which is to presume that a violation is occurring.

First of all - i think it is at least consistent with a great many pro-Sunday sources to argue that the TEN Commandments are still applicable and binding on all mankind.

So then a great many would agree with you --on that one detail.

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism.

And of course 7th day groups

Seventh-day Baptists
Seventh-day Adventists
(and 100's of others)

 

[BobRyan]

Where the remaining difference comes in is this - 'does man made tradition have the authority to edit the Word of God" --

in a sola scriptura test of that idea - we find Mark 7:6-13.

 

[Albion]

I for one, do not dispute that a Christian do not need to lead a Godly life if he's in the covenant of grace.

I do. I didn't say anything about a Christian not needing to lead a Godly life.

However, you still have not stated your purpose to your statement of "still valid".

Yes, I did.

For you give me the impression that if a Christian breaks a law, there's a possibility that he will lose his salvation.

I don't have any idea why you'd say that I gave you such an impression; I didn't say any such thing. Perhaps you are thinking of something that other people have said.

Please feel free to correct me if I have wrong your intention of saying that "the ten commandments is still valid".

They're valid! What's the big problem with understanding that? Why is it necessary to assume that there's something else being implied? These are God's commands.

Based on your thread 382, is one therefore saved through the covenant of grace or the covenant of works?

The question asked if the Commandments are valid. If you are interested in pursuing a discussion of salvation, security, grace, works, faith, or election, I'll be happy to participate in any thread that you start with one or more of these as its topic.

 

[Albion]

First of all - i think it is at least consistent with a great many pro-Sunday sources to argue that the TEN Commandments are still applicable and binding on all mankind.

Thank you.

So then a great many would agree with you --on that one detail.

Almost all, in fact.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
First of all - i think it is at least consistent with a great many pro-Sunday sources to argue that the TEN Commandments are still applicable and binding on all mankind.

.

So then a great many would agree with you --on that one detail.
Almost all, in fact.

.
Almost all, in fact.

True.

So then how is it - that when we come to a board like this - and 99.99% of the discussion is on that very point - we hear almost nothing from those "almost all" in defense of the still-valid still binding "Ten Commandments"??

It is left up to the 7th day Bible Sabbath keepers 'almost alone' to provide the answers - that in most cases almost all of the pro-sunday groups would also have given.

The strongest voices - the loudest that we get on this board are from those who think the Ten Commandments are 'dead or downsized'.

From Page 1 -

Here is an example of claims made by the pro-Sunday sources - and 6 of the 7 are actually correct according to the Bible!.


Yes that is right - 6 of the 7 are actually common ground between Sabbath keeping and Sunday keeping Christians.


1. That the Sabbath Commandment is first given to mankind in Gen 2:1-3
2. That all mankind was obligated by the TEN commandments in the OT and to this very day.
3. That the seventh day as the Sabbath was Saturday the seventh day of the week from Gen 2:1-3 until NT times - including at the cross.
4. That the Ten Commandments are the moral Law of God
5. That the moral law of God is written on the heart under the New Covenant
6. that the Ten Commandments as the moral law of God are in no way opposed to grace and the Gospel.
7. That the Sabbath commandment can rightly be BENT by man-made-tradition to point to week-day-1 after the cross.

I agree with 6 out of 7 as listed above - and yet many who post against God's TEN commandments object to all of the points listed above. And sometimes they will even go on to complain that so many of the points above are in agreement with my position and opposed to the war-against-the-Ten-Commandments position.

==========================

In that example I open a door to have discussion on point 7 - but in fact the great majority of the posting is all about defending the first 6 points against various opposing posts.

Which is really strange given that those six points are where there is the most agreement!

 

[Albion]

So then a great many would agree with you --on that one detail.
Almost all, in fact.

True.

So then how is it - that when we come to a board like this - and 99.99% of the discussion is on that very point - we hear almost nothing from those "almost all" in defense of the still-valid still binding "Ten Commandments"??

Because we have answered it repeatedly. There really isn't much more to say that we haven't already said many times, and nothing new has been added from your side. It's just the same old same old. I might also say that it's not an dispute that divides Christendom in the way that many other issues we debate here do. It's basically a one-denomination concern, and hardly anyone other than the members of that denomination raise it here on CF.

 

[Chris Tan]

I get that you're not a Catholic. Fair enough. Only a little over a billion Christians are.

I have news for you. I was a cradle Catholic for a good 43 years until the wonderful light of God shone into my once dead heart. And since then, after reading the Holy Bible, I will tell you this, the doctrines of the Vatican has nothing to do with Christianity. They may look like they are to the rest of the world, but they are definitely not Christians. Numbers means nothing. The simple question is, has God elected you to salvation in His Son Jesus Christ.

Man was created. Man fell, (by bad choices.....acts of free will).

"acts of free will"? Does the Holy Scriptures even say that Adam disobedience to God's one and only command given to him was an "act of free will"? Seriously? Not even Paul taught of such a doctrine in his epistles. And why? Did Paul decided by "his free will" that he will believe in Christ? Go check out Acts 9 before you even try to answer that question about "acts of free will".

I understand that in all Christian teaching that we are justified by living faith which itself is a grace of God, but man chooses as an act of will whether to accept grace, or even faith.

Again and again, more assertions. Firstly, it is called "justification by faith". You saying "but man chooses as an act of will whether to accept grace, or even faith." I assure you that such a teaching is not found in the Holy Bible. But this is, "Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6). See anywhere that Paul says "but man chooses as an act of will whether to accept grace, or even faith."?

Well honestly, without free will (the freedom to choose to love one another. the freedom to choose to hate one another. To love God, to hate God, why does anyone need any instruction by anyone, including God, on doing or not doing anything? Why have the incarnation? Why scripture? Why a church? Why heaven? Why hell? I'm just not tracking. I'm afraid it goes beyond my ability to understand or reason. In any even, thank you for your comments. I will take them to prayer and see if anything pops. I'm afraid I just don't get it. Sorry.

I will only show you this, "As it is written, There is NONE righteous, NO, NOT ONE: There is NONE that understandeth, there is NONE THAT SEEKETH AFTER GOD." (Romans 3:10,11)

What you "free will" is saying, no, it's not true, I can seek after God of my own free will.

Even after the Spirit of God explicitly declared, "there is NONE THAT SEEKETH AFTER GOD".

And be assured that the "NONE" is without exception!

 

[FredVB]

Yet it was a law of righteousness, as such it is good. Yahweh our God gave the new covenant, so all the old covenant isn't needed, as Christ, through whom there is the new covenant, is the truly needed priesthood, effective sacrifice, and provision of the way to be made clean in the necessary way before God. This is what is fulfilled, and Christ fulfilled perfect obedience for righteousness from him [covering everything for the commandments] to be applied to those that are his, enabling them, with them being freed from judgment which was borne for them instead, not freeing them to not live righteously.

Your post is interesting, and if you believe that all the law has not been fulfilled yet then your statement is not true. You said: "God gave the new covenant, so all the old covenant isn't needed" (emphasis mine) and "This is what is fulfilled....." You have to be discounting Jesus statement in Matt 5 "until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (old covenant) until everything is accomplished." He says the whole law will remain in effect until all is finished. You, on the other hand have removed lots of small letters and pen strokes.
I believe Jesus finished what He set out to do. He came to save mankind when there is no other way. He accomplished His goal. The remainder, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is up to us.
I will not even be judged. Claim the Promises!

No wonder you were confused and seeing a problem. You are mixing issues that are discussed, with bringing the topic of how we would be saved, which wasn't being discussed and actually are contrary to the rules in this forum, and would need to be addressed in another thread in a different forum. What was said isn't about getting saved. What was said was just for what is left for being obedient. And to say the commandments are not for that, actually you and not I have to remove letters and pen strokes, of what Christ said. Matthew 5:17-18 "Do not think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." Of course then there is Matthew 5:19. He said it was till heaven and earth pass away, this is avoided, or at least simply overlooked. If it is not really until heaven and earth pass away, why did the Lord say it, even if mentioning all is to be fulfilled? It would be needless and even confusing to some, to lead to divisiveness among us, if there wasn't real substance to it. And it could only mean something true if it were in fact for those to remain until heaven and earth pass away. And indeed I can find it still written, with not any of it being said anywhere in scriptures that God eliminates any of it. If we are believers, and in Christ, indeed through him we are not to be under judgment.

But the deal is not a jot or tittle shall pass from the law. Therefore its impossible for Jesus to be a priest as He's not from the tribe of Levi.

There is evidently such ignorance of scriptures that can come into these discussions. Christ is the only effective priesthood of scriptures and the only effective high priest, all the levitical priesthood was for symbolic types with everything included for what is in Christ, for effective faith generally among the people called to be the people of God, while those things were in place and Christ was still to come among those people of God. Will it be missed that scriptures show that the levitical priesthood is not the only one? And Christ is effective for the law in that, and also for all righteousness that through him believers are not under judgment with the commandments in place. If those commandments were done away, that wouldn't be needed.

I might also say that it's not an dispute that divides Christendom in the way that many other issues we debate here do. It's basically a one-denomination concern, and hardly anyone other than the members of that denomination raise it here on CF.

That isn't exactly right. True I don't bring up the issue with starting threads for it, and I don't say things telling others what to do, as I see some doing. But the Seventh Day Adventist believers are certainly meant with this, and I am not counting myself as one of them while still speaking to this one single topic in which I say some of them have a better perspective, compared to some of what is being posted to counter that perspective.

 

[Albion]

That isn't exactly right. True I don't bring up the issue with starting threads for it, and I don't say things telling others what to do, as I see some doing. But the Seventh Day Adventist believers are certainly meant with this, and I am not counting myself as one of them while still speaking to this one single topic in which I say some of them have a better perspective, compared to some of what is being posted to counter that perspective.

I did say that it's basically a one-denomination concern, and that's true, even if there are other Saturday Sabbath church bodies, all of them rather small.

It was asked of me why there is an apparent lack of interest existing on the part of the majority to leap to answer the SDA prodding, over and over and over again, and I think this is the main reason. The issue is not a general concern among Christians.

There is also the fact that, once the question has been answered, there's isn't anything new to deal with, unless you count "but we don't see it that way." Newsflash: We already knew that.

 

[stevenfrancis]

I have news for you. I was a cradle Catholic for a good 43 years until the wonderful light of God shone into my once dead heart. And since then, after reading the Holy Bible, I will tell you this, the doctrines of the Vatican has nothing to do with Christianity. They may look like they are to the rest of the world, but they are definitely not Christians. Numbers means nothing. The simple question is, has God elected you to salvation in His Son Jesus Christ.




"acts of free will"? Does the Holy Scriptures even say that Adam disobedience to God's one and only command given to him was an "act of free will"? Seriously? Not even Paul taught of such a doctrine in his epistles. And why? Did Paul decided by "his free will" that he will believe in Christ? Go check out Acts 9 before you even try to answer that question about "acts of free will".




Again and again, more assertions. Firstly, it is called "justification by faith". You saying "but man chooses as an act of will whether to accept grace, or even faith." I assure you that such a teaching is not found in the Holy Bible. But this is, "Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6). See anywhere that Paul says "but man chooses as an act of will whether to accept grace, or even faith."?





I will only show you this, "As it is written, There is NONE righteous, NO, NOT ONE: There is NONE that understandeth, there is NONE THAT SEEKETH AFTER GOD." (Romans 3:10,11)

What you "free will" is saying, no, it's not true, I can seek after God of my own free will.

Even after the Spirit of God explicitly declared, "there is NONE THAT SEEKETH AFTER GOD".

And be assured that the "NONE" is without exception!

Okay,...thank you. I am no more enlightened than I was regarding the point of creation, the Bible, churches, communities, friendships, enemies, peace, war, music, love, art, prayer, or any other interpretation of scripture that I have read. What I'm HEARING.......(and please, it could be that I honestly don't understand what you' take on these scriptures are, so don't take offense), is that we are meat puppets, some of whom God has given the grace of eternal life, and some whom are damned from birth, and given no grace of God. We don't choose sin, so in fact there can be no sin, because intent would be a choice. Choices involve free will to choose. Automatons don't make choices. They are programmed. So there is no sin in them. They are incapable of murder, lust, theft, coveting etc.. because there is no forethought or intent. Neither would they seek God. I don't have a dead heart. I am filled with love. Love of God. Love of my family, Love of my friends, Love of my neighbors, Love for the poor. I'm simply on fire for Jesus Christ. I know that it is grace that allows this. I know the grace was always offered and freely available to me from birth. I didn't choose to enter into that grace, and communion with Jesus Christ until I was in my late 40's, having first been somewhat of a heathen. God always called. I didn't respond. I was saved by grace, and given faith by grace, because I finally understood the passage, "Behold I stand at the door and knock", and I GOT UP AND ANSWERED THE DOOR finally, thanks be to God. I'm sure the Holy Spirit of God led me, because of my prayers, to Jesus, and to the grace of salvation that He offers. But, many unfortunates don't EVER accept it, and hence we have hell.

For the purposes of this thread, forget about the Catholic Church. I'm sorry you felt dead in it. That's between you and God. To disparage others who still have their faith and love of Christ and are living a beautiful, and sacramental life, is not in the spirit of love, which is the first essence of God's grace. God is love. Those who live in God, live in love. Personal insults were never required by my posts or by this thread. Peace to you my brother in Christ. I am glad you are on fire for the Lord. So am I. Please pray for me, and I will pray for you as well. I leave you with just a handful of scriptures regarding choice, (which requires free will). There are sincerely hundreds more. And I'm sure that with some type of eisegesis you can come back with many more that you feel make us incapable of choice.

My apologies to the OP, since this is straying quite a bit away from the 10 commandments, (which, by the way, are only valid if there is choice. God, in His mercy, gave us the law. He didn't accompany the law with programming for and against it. He said this is it. Follow it, and live. Don't follow it, and you lose your place with me.)

Josh 24:13 And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” (This man, offered the choice of the various pagan gods, and The Lord God, chooses the Lord God)

John 7:17 If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. (We know we are on the right track when we choose to conform our will to the will of God)

Rev. 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me. (If you don't open your door to Him, He won't come in. Jesus does not force us to love Him. We choose whether or not to open the door. )

1 Cor 10:13 No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it. (When bombarded with lust and temptation, God will always leave a way out because of His love and grace. We should definitely choose to take that out when it is offered)

Isa 55:6-7 “Seek the Lord while he may be found; call upon him while he is near; let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. (Pardon what? Sin. Bad choices freely made)

Rom 14:12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. (account of what of himself? His choices, of course. What else would he be accounting for to God. If there is no free will, there is simply nothing to account for at the judgement. We are judged from the foundations of the world. There is really no point in anything whatsoever, frankly. But God says differently. We have to make an account of what we chose to at each turn in our lives)

It goes on and on like this throughout Holy Writ.

If you want to go farther on the free-will question, open a thread in theology or philosophy, and I'll go participate with you, if you'd like.

Yours in Christ

Steve

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
First of all - i think it is at least consistent with a great many pro-Sunday sources to argue that the TEN Commandments are still applicable and binding on all mankind.

.

So then a great many would agree with you --on that one detail.
Almost all, in fact.

.
Almost all, in fact.

True.

So then how is it - that when we come to a board like this - and 99.99% of the discussion is on that very point - we hear almost nothing from those "almost all" in defense of the still-valid still binding "Ten Commandments"??

It is left up to the 7th day Bible Sabbath keepers 'almost alone' to provide the answers - that in most cases almost all of the pro-sunday groups would also have given.

The strongest voices - the loudest that we get on this board are from those who think the Ten Commandments are 'dead or downsized'.

From Page 1 -

Here is an example of claims made by the pro-Sunday sources - and 6 of the 7 are actually correct according to the Bible!.


Yes that is right - 6 of the 7 are actually common ground between Sabbath keeping and Sunday keeping Christians.


1. That the Sabbath Commandment is first given to mankind in Gen 2:1-3
2. That all mankind was obligated by the TEN commandments in the OT and to this very day.
3. That the seventh day as the Sabbath was Saturday the seventh day of the week from Gen 2:1-3 until NT times - including at the cross.
4. That the Ten Commandments are the moral Law of God
5. That the moral law of God is written on the heart under the New Covenant
6. that the Ten Commandments as the moral law of God are in no way opposed to grace and the Gospel.
7. That the Sabbath commandment can rightly be BENT by man-made-tradition to point to week-day-1 after the cross.

I agree with 6 out of 7 as listed above - and yet many who post against God's TEN commandments object to all of the points listed above. And sometimes they will even go on to complain that so many of the points above are in agreement with my position and opposed to the war-against-the-Ten-Commandments position.

==========================

In that example I open a door to have discussion on point 7 - but in fact the great majority of the posting is all about defending the first 6 points against various opposing posts.

Which is really strange given that those six points are where there is the most agreement!

Because we have answered it repeatedly. There really isn't much more to say that we haven't already said many times, and nothing new has been added from your side. It's just the same old same old. I might also say that it's not an dispute that divides Christendom in the way that many other issues we debate here do. It's basically a one-denomination concern, and hardly anyone other than the members of that denomination raise it here on CF.

The idea that the 7th point is the most commonly discussed "many times" subject on this section of the board - is not supported in the actual threads. In the actual thread the "many times brought up" debates are all about the first 6 points. And those opposing it - are not just "from one denomination" they are from various pro-sunday groups -- as they oppose the other pro-sunday positions on the first six points.

But they only do that - when the pro-Seventh-day Sabbath posts from Messianic Jews, and SDAs and others are brought up.

So then we have two pro-Sunday positions.

A. That the 4th commandment was never changed at all- and is nailed to the cross along with the other nine under the "Ten Commandments".
B. That the 4th commandment now applies to 'week day 1" after the cross - and the TEN Commandments still apply to all mankind.

And almost all of the debate on this board is about the differences between those two positions. We almost never get to the one that I mentioned. The 7th point in that list.

And usually it is left to Sabbath keeping Christians to defend "That part" of position "B" that insists that the TEN Commandments still apply.

And it is not because it is being discussed so much more often than the debate between the 6 points listed above.

 

[BobRyan]

I did say that it's basically a one-denomination concern, and that's true, even if there are other Saturday Sabbath church bodies, all of them rather small.

This misses the key detail - that the debates here in general are not about the 4th commandment pointing to week-day-1 or week-day-7... they are about the TEN Commandments either applying to Christians or not.

This is irrefutable if you look at the volume of posts here.

It was asked of me why there is an apparent lack of interest existing on the part of the majority to leap to answer the SDA prodding, over and over and over again,

Here again - lack of attention to detail. The prodding that you see on this area of the board is more often about the Ten Commandments still applying to Christians -- or not. (Hence the title of this thread).

Even when I post a thread designed to bring up the issue of editing-wrenching the 4th commandment to point to "week day 1" - it invariably gets shifted to "Ten Commandments not for Christians" arguments.

Which IS the point that even the majority of pro-Sunday scholarship affirms - while their followers refuse to defend that position here in equal representation as the pro-seventh-day-Sabbath groups.

the "reason" the issue is not a general concern among Christians who oppose each other on whether the Ten Commandments are still valid or not -- is that they have one common agreement.

"God's seventh-day Sabbath is to be ignored - as given in scripture"

Thus - no matter that they argue entirely opposite views on whether the TEN Commandments are still binding -- that "value" PALES in significance for the two groups as compared to not accepting God's seventh-day Sabbath as given in actual scripture -- sola scriptura.

There is also the fact that, once the question has been answered, there's isn't anything new to deal with, unless you count "but we don't see it that way." Newsflash: We already knew that.

News flash - "Sola scriptura" debate threads are not following that "so then we never discuss it" rule.
News flash - "apocrypha not scripture" debate threads are not following that same "so then we never discuss it" rule.
News flash - "Catholic church tradition not correct" debate threads not following that same 'so then we never discuss it" rule.
News flash - "Ten commandments no longer apply" debate threads not following that same "so then we never discuss it" rule.

Rather they come up over and over -- same texts, same points raised

 

[BobRyan]

"acts of free will"? Does the Holy Scriptures even say that Adam disobedience to God's one and only command given to him was an "act of free will"? Seriously? Not even Paul taught of such a doctrine in his epistles. And why? Did Paul decided by "his free will" that he will believe in Christ? Go check out Acts 9 before you even try to answer that question about "acts of free will".

No text says Adam was forced to sin by God.
No text says Adam was created with a sinful nature.
No text says that God cannot know the future unless he forces people to sin or not sin.

Calvinism does not survive John 1:11

 

[bugkiller]

Where the remaining difference comes in is this - 'does man made tradition have the authority to edit the Word of God" --

in a sola scriptura test of that idea - we find Mark 7:6-13.

Neither does woman made tradition have the authority to edit the Word of God.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

So then a great many would agree with you --on that one detail.
Almost all, in fact.



True.

So then how is it - that when we come to a board like this - and 99.99% of the discussion is on that very point - we hear almost nothing from those "almost all" in defense of the still-valid still binding "Ten Commandments"??

It is left up to the 7th day Bible Sabbath keepers 'almost alone' to provide the answers - that in most cases almost all of the pro-sunday groups would also have given.

The strongest voices - the loudest that we get on this board are from those who think the Ten Commandments are 'dead or downsized'.

From Page 1 -

Here is an example of claims made by the pro-Sunday sources - and 6 of the 7 are actually correct according to the Bible!.


Yes that is right - 6 of the 7 are actually common ground between Sabbath keeping and Sunday keeping Christians.


1. That the Sabbath Commandment is first given to mankind in Gen 2:1-3
2. That all mankind was obligated by the TEN commandments in the OT and to this very day.
3. That the seventh day as the Sabbath was Saturday the seventh day of the week from Gen 2:1-3 until NT times - including at the cross.
4. That the Ten Commandments are the moral Law of God
5. That the moral law of God is written on the heart under the New Covenant
6. that the Ten Commandments as the moral law of God are in no way opposed to grace and the Gospel.
7. That the Sabbath commandment can rightly be BENT by man-made-tradition to point to week-day-1 after the cross.

I agree with 6 out of 7 as listed above - and yet many who post against God's TEN commandments object to all of the points listed above. And sometimes they will even go on to complain that so many of the points above are in agreement with my position and opposed to the war-against-the-Ten-Commandments position.

==========================

In that example I open a door to have discussion on point 7 - but in fact the great majority of the posting is all about defending the first 6 points against various opposing posts.

Which is really strange given that those six points are where there is the most agreement!

The answers have been provided. Yet you say no and repeat just like Hitler and with the same mind set. Repeat something enought and it becomes the truth. Unfortunately we're not in that same era as Hitler. However it will soon be worse. I've no idea why my SDA neighbor was worried about me reporting him to the authorities. It not qute how I read endtime events. All in all I find the SDA mind set predisposed to report those not submitting to the coming authority.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

No wonder you were confused and seeing a problem. You are mixing issues that are discussed, with bringing the topic of how we would be saved, which wasn't being discussed and actually are contrary to the rules in this forum, and would need to be addressed in another thread in a different forum. What was said isn't about getting saved. What was said was just for what is left for being obedient. And to say the commandments are not for that, actually you and not I have to remove letters and pen strokes, of what Christ said. Matthew 5:17-18 "Do not think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." Of course then there is Matthew 5:19. He said it was till heaven and earth pass away, this is avoided, or at least simply overlooked. If it is not really until heaven and earth pass away, why did the Lord say it, even if mentioning all is to be fulfilled? It would be needless and even confusing to some, to lead to divisiveness among us, if there wasn't real substance to it. And it could only mean something true if it were in fact for those to remain until heaven and earth pass away. And indeed I can find it still written, with not any of it being said anywhere in scriptures that God eliminates any of it. If we are believers, and in Christ, indeed through him we are not to be under judgment.



There is evidently such ignorance of scriptures that can come into these discussions. Christ is the only effective priesthood of scriptures and the only effective high priest, all the levitical priesthood was for symbolic types with everything included for what is in Christ, for effective faith generally among the people called to be the people of God, while those things were in place and Christ was still to come among those people of God. Will it be missed that scriptures show that the levitical priesthood is not the only one? And Christ is effective for the law in that, and also for all righteousness that through him believers are not under judgment with the commandments in place. If those commandments were done away, that wouldn't be needed.



That isn't exactly right. True I don't bring up the issue with starting threads for it, and I don't say things telling others what to do, as I see some doing. But the Seventh Day Adventist believers are certainly meant with this, and I am not counting myself as one of them while still speaking to this one single topic in which I say some of them have a better perspective, compared to some of what is being posted to counter that perspective.

According to this I've already passed the judgment -

24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. JN 5

You have my condolences if you haven't.

All has been fulfiled according to Jesus -

44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. LK 24

Those words are a direct reference to Mat 5:17-18.

If all things haven't been fulfiled then Heb 7:12 is a lie.

Jesus also said -

This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. LK 22:20

For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Mat 26:28

And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. MK 14:24


bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

This misses the key detail - that the debates here in general are not about the 4th commandment pointing to week-day-1 or week-day-7... they are about the TEN Commandments either applying to Christians or not.

This is irrefutable if you look at the volume of posts here.



Here again - lack of attention to detail. The prodding that you see on this area of the board is more often about the Ten Commandments still applying to Christians -- or not. (Hence the title of this thread).

Even when I post a thread designed to bring up the issue of editing-wrenching the 4th commandment to point to "week day 1" - it invariably gets shifted to "Ten Commandments not for Christians" arguments.

Which IS the point that even the majority of pro-Sunday scholarship affirms - while their followers refuse to defend that position here in equal representation as the pro-seventh-day-Sabbath groups.

the "reason" the issue is not a general concern among Christians who oppose each other on whether the Ten Commandments are still valid or not -- is that they have one common agreement.

"God's seventh-day Sabbath is to be ignored - as given in scripture"

Thus - no matter that they argue entirely opposite views on whether the TEN Commandments are still binding -- that "value" PALES in significance for the two groups as compared to not accepting God's seventh-day Sabbath as given in actual scripture -- sola scriptura.



News flash - "Sola scriptura" debate threads are not following that "so then we never discuss it" rule.
News flash - "apocrypha not scripture" debate threads are not following that same "so then we never discuss it" rule.
News flash - "Catholic church tradition not correct" debate threads not following that same 'so then we never discuss it" rule.
News flash - "Ten commandments no longer apply" debate threads not following that same "so then we never discuss it" rule.

Rather they come up over and over -- same texts, same points raised

I've participated here for years. Its the common practice of SDA people to start a thread with a supposed innocent question only to be directed by that OP to the 10 Cs and specifically the 4th. This is fully intentional as they are taught to do this. My personal experience in the real here and now world is exactly the same. I've read about the fraud of the SDA even in their own forum by their evanglists about it. The same has even been brought up in this section (most likely GT prior to the opening of this section) of the forum, not by me either. The same hammer is delivered again and again as though its never bee responded to and by the same few people. The verses we point to them are disregarded.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

No text says Adam was forced to sin by God.
No text says Adam was created with a sinful nature.
No text says that God cannot know the future unless he forces people to sin or not sin.

Calvinism does not survive John 1:11

Then how did Adam come to this choice if he didn't have a free will?

I reject calvinism.

bugkiller

 

[Chris Tan]

No text says Adam was forced to sin by God.
No text says Adam was created with a sinful nature.
No text says that God cannot know the future unless he forces people to sin or not sin.

Calvinism does not survive John 1:11

Goodness! Your knowledge of the Holy Bible or who God is, is being called to questioned.

Who said anything about "Adam was forced to sin by God"? Did I?

And who said "Adam was created with a sinful nature"? Did I?
Adam was most definitely created sinless. Are we?
However, when Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became sinners.
And we who are born through Adam and Eve since after the fall, are now born sinners, comprehend?
That is, we sin because we are sinners, comprehend?

"No text says that God cannot know the future unless he forces people to sin or not sin."
Is your god a fortune teller that he has to look into time to know anything?
Well, my God knows everything and that's because He purposed and willed it. And that's because He says so:

"Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it." (Isaiah 46:10,11)

"Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?" (Amos 3:6)

"Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain... For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done." (Acts 2:23; Acts 4:27,28)

God has to look into the future? Seriously? Even after what He tells us He has done?
You had better re-look at the god you are worshiping.
That's my sincere advice to you.