Here is why the saints cannot ignore the Commandments of God - not even the TEN

[BobRyan]

I don't object to the texts

That is a good first step. Good answer.

Now how about answering 3 easy questions.

For those inclined to be at war with God's Ten Commandments --3 simple questions...

Christ argues this point about the "WORD of GOD" the "Commandments of God" .

Mark 7
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the Commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Christ said "it is a big deal" in Mark 7


1. Question 1 -- In your view - is Christ in Error in Mark 7??

2. Question 2: Eph 6:2 "What unit of LAW" is being upheld by Paul in Eph 5:2 where the 5th commandment "is the FIRST commandment with a PROMISE"?... easy answer.

3. Question 3: Heb 8:6-10 NEW COVENANT "I will write My LAW on their heart and mind" Jer 31:31-33 ---> what LAW?
what Law is Jer 31:31-33 referencing for Jeremiah and his readers??

I answered those questions and am awaiting your response.
bugkiller

really?? I didn't think you would do that in my life time.

(I notice you do not answer in your post - -and you provide no link to such an answer in your post)

 

[BobRyan]

The ROLE of the LAW for the SAVED:

"do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31


Jer 31:
31 “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—
32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord.
33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”


Heb 8
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—
9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord.
10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”
13 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete


"do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31
What law? The Law that condemns all mankind as sinners -

And 1 John 3:4 "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" even in the NT -- still

So then Romans 6 "Under the LAW" vs "Under Grace"

Rom 6
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?
..

12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

From Slaves of Sin to Slaves of God
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. 18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.

20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death.

1 John 5
2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and His Commandments are not grievous.

1John 2:
3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.


John says -
Rev 22:
14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Hello Bob.
You stated the following verse in this post.
Can you please explain, in ten lines or less, how you understand that verse?

Romans 6 is about not being under the condemnation of the law as a lost person. Rom 8:4-9 contrasts the lost person's view of the law (a POV that the Bible gives quite clearly - as do you.. repeatedly) vs the view of the same LAW that the saved person has -- so also does Romans 6. Since you only want to discuss the view that the lost person has of the law -- you may view Romans 6 and Romans 8 as a "bit confusing" --

 

[BobRyan]

Love works not against a neighbour, thus Love is the fulfilling of the law.

Overall this passage is clearly saying, loving others takes care of the law, and whatever that law may be,
i.e., 'if there be any other commandment'.

Indeed it is pretty easy to see how loving God is connected to keeping His Commandments.

"IF you Love Me KEEP My Commandments" John 14:16
"Love Me and KEEK My Commandments" Ex 20:6
'Saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12

1 John 5
2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and His Commandments are not grievous.

1John 2:
3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

 

[klutedavid]

​

Hello Bob.

Your heading off on a tangent Bob, please read this post carefully.

I will go through our conversation step by step, so that we do not misunderstand each other.

Here is the title of your first post.

Here is why the saints cannot ignore the Commandments of God

This is was the title of your first post Bob, was it not.

Then you supported this statement above, by including some quotations from the scripture.

This is very simple Bob.

Here is one of the quotations from Paul's letter to the Romans, that you quoted in your first post.

Romans 13
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this,Thou shalt not commit adultery,Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal,Thou shalt not
bear false witness,Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly
comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 10 Love worketh
no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

This is the passage from Romans we were discussing, this is the text that you quoted in post #1.

Your interpretation of this passage is unsound, I was drawing your attention to your faulty interpretation
of this passage. I made no mention of the sabbath, Bob.

Your three replies have nothing to do with this passage from the letter to the Romans.

Please reply to my previous post (#28), regarding how you read this particular passage.

 

[klutedavid]

Hello Bob.

I asked you how you understand the following verse that you quoted.

Romans 6 "SHALL we SIN because we are not UNDER (the condemnation of) the LAW but under grace.

Ok Bob, we will keep it very simple, in the first line of your reply you said.

Romans 6 is about not being under the condemnation of the law as a lost person

Is this explanation of yours correct?

Let me say Bob, your understanding of chapter six is incorrect.

Romans 6
14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Paul is talking about the reality of living the new life in grace, and why sin does not have
any dominion over you. You are not under the law, you are under grace!

Romans 6
15 What then? Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace?

Since we are not under the law but under grace, does that mean we can continue to sin?

Romans 6
18 and that you, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

Christ set you free, now live this new life, a life lived in grace.

Romans 6
22 But now that you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God, the advantage you
get is sanctification.

What more needs to be said, 'you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God'.

Bob, do not read the books written about the scripture, read the text yourself.

 

[SAAN]

Hello Bob.

I asked you how you understand the following verse that you quoted.

Ok Bob, we will keep it very simple, in the first line of your reply you said.

Is this explanation of yours correct?

Let me say Bob, your understanding of chapter six is incorrect.

Romans 6
14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Paul is talking about the reality of living the new life in grace, and why sin does not have
any dominion over you. You are not under the law, you are under grace!

Romans 6
15 What then? Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace?

Since we are not under the law but under grace, does that mean we can continue to sin?

Romans 6
18 and that you, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

Christ set you free, now live this new life, a life lived in grace.

Romans 6
22 But now that you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God, the advantage you
get is sanctification.

What more needs to be said, 'you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God'.

Bob, do not read the books written about the scripture, read the text yourself.

Define SIN and tell me if people have stopped sinning.

They are not set free from something everyone continues to do. That is what grace is for, when we sin, we repent.

 

[klutedavid]

Define SIN and tell me if people have stopped sinning.

They are not set free from something everyone continues to do. That is what grace is for, when we sin, we repent.

Hello Saan.

I would like to thank you for this outstanding question Saan.

Define SIN and tell me if people have stopped sinning.

Ultimately sin will be defined as the denial of the Christ, anyone who believes in Jesus will automatically receive
the righteousness of Christ. Anyone who denies the Christ, is simply unrighteous and wicked. All unrighteousness
is sin, sin is also lawlessness, but all humanity is given over to disobedience anyway. Is anyone better, more
righteous than anyone else, certainly not.

The Christ arrived to set us free from sin and death, only in Christ is freedom from the penalty of sin available.

John 15
22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin.
23 Whoever hates me hates my Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works that no one else did,
they would not have sin. But now they have seen and hated both me and my Father.

Once Jesus spoke to us, sin became very real and the destiny of everyone was decided, there is no excuse for
sin now.

1 John 3
8 The Son of God was revealed for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. 9 Those who have been
born of God do not sin, because God’s seed abides in them; they cannot sin, because they have been born
of God.

If you claim a believer in Jesus can sin, then your are contradicting what John stated.

To be honest Saan, if you do sin, then just ask Christ for forgiveness and remember.

Romans 10
4 For Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

 

[BobRyan]

Define SIN and tell me if people have stopped sinning.

1 John 3:4 - "sin IS transgression of the LAW"
Romans 3 "ALL have sinned"
Rom 3:19-21 "ALL the World accountable to God as sinners"

James 2
8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.

James says it is based on the authority of "HE WHO SAID" and "HE who SAID one of the TEN Commandments - is also the "HE WHO SAID" - the other nine.

 

[BobRyan]

Hello Bob.

A must give you credit where credit is due.

Your alternate interpretation of the scripture, is a near perfect alternate interpretation,

Alternate interpretation to what?? Alternate to whatever you might make up?? OR alternate to what a great many others in your own pro-sunday group have said about the TEN Commandment??

This?
Dies Domini pt 13 -
"the Sabbath ...is therefore rooted in the depths of God's plan. This is why unlike many other laws - it is not within the context of strictly cultic (Jewish) stipulations but within the Decalogue the "ten words" which represent the very pillars of moral life inscribed on the human heart!! In setting this commandment within the context of the basic structure of ethics, Israel and then the church declare that they consider it not just a matter of community religious discipline but a defining and indelible expression of our relationship to God, announced and expounded by biblical revelations.

Hello Bob.

Your heading off on a tangent Bob

on the contrary - you brought in the concept of "alternate interpretation" and I ask "alternate to WHAT?" - I then point out that it is YOU that have the "alternate interpretation" when it comes to the vast majority of even pro-sunday scholarship - including the "Baptist Confession of Faith", the "Westminster Confession of Faith", "D.L. Moody" (And I could have added R.C Sproul) - C.H Spurgeon....

You are simply sweeping that elephant in your living room under a rug at this point.

 

[BobRyan]

Here is one of the quotations from Paul's letter to the Romans, that you quoted in your first post.

Romans 13
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this,Thou shalt not commit adultery,Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal,Thou shalt not
bear false witness,Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly
comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 10 Love worketh
no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

This is the passage from Romans we were discussing, this is the text that you quoted in post #1.

Your interpretation of this passage is unsound,

well... not in real life.

I was drawing your attention to your faulty interpretation
of this passage. I made no mention of the sabbath, Bob.

The references I provided in response to your post are in regard to the TEN Commandments and their continued application EVEN to the saints today - ALL TEN.

IS it your claim that these sources do NOT accept the TEN Commandments as part of the moral law of God binding on all the saints to this very day??

Your three replies have nothing to do with this passage from the letter to the Romans.

Except that they point to the LAW of God still binding upon the saints - as including the TEN Commandments.

Were we "simply not supposed to notice?"??

 

[BobRyan]

1 Cor 7:19 .. "what matters is keeping the Commandments of God"

Rom 13
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this,
Thou shalt not commit adultery,
Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal,
Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Thou shalt not covet;

and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Lev 19:18)
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

or this --??

James 2
8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, ou shall love your neighbor as yourself, (Lev 19:18) you are doing well.
9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.
11 For He who said, [/FONT]
Do not commit adultery
also said,
Do not commit murder.
Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.
12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty

If you read the passage line by line and don't highlight anything, you get the exact opposite meaning from this passage.

8 Owe no man anything, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

Loving others is what Paul is teaching, loving others hath fufilled the law.

9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery,Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment...

Paul says 'if there be any other commandment', Paul is not placing any importance on the commandments themselves.
Paul is not even providing a full list, 'if there be any other' he says, Paul knows fullwell what the other commandments are.
Paul does not even bother to mention them, 'if there be any other..' just about nails the commandments to the cross.

9... it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Again the instruction is to love others, the commandments are summarized by 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself'.
If you love your neighbour, God is love, you have all the laws taken care of.

10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law

Love works not against a neighbour, thus Love is the fulfilling of the law.

Overall this passage is clearly saying, loving others takes care of the law, and whatever that law may be,
i.e., 'if there be any other commandment'.

Let's decompose that one line at a time.

1. You ask for no highlighting - but I have highlighted the very parts of the text your are most likely to completely ignore. Instead of dealing with the highlighted details - your request is that we ignore them.
2. The reason your own personal view is so far out of step with even your OWN pro-sunday scholarship is that you are willingly ignoring details that they cannot get by with ignoring.
3. "Fulfilling the LAW" in Rom 13 is something WE as the saints are STILL obligated to do according to the text. So all the fluff about "no need to fulfill the law" as in "comply with it" -- totally "out the window"
4. Paul quotes actual commandments of God - FROM the TEN commandments - you conveniently ignore this detail as well.
5. Paul does NOT quote the first 4 commandments - nothing about not worshipping other Gods, nothing about not taking God's name in vain, and nothing about honoring God's own Holy Day in Rom 13. You appear to take this as license to toss whatever commandment you wish - out the window as long as it is not explicit in Rom 13. That does not work.
6. James 2 says the authority is based on "HE WHO SAID" and you have tried to turn this into "Rom 13 that downsizes all of scripture to 2 verses" -- that simply does not work and even your own pro-Sunday scholars know it.
7. Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" already existed in the OT and did NOT delete the first 4 commandments or the last 6 by "existing". It is not a mutually exclusive "either-or" but rather an all-encompassing "both AND" as Christ points out in Matt 22.

At the very least - you need to come up with a system/model not totally rejected by the majority of your own pro-Sunday scholars, how else can we take your alternative interpretation seriously??

 

[BobRyan]

Hello Bob.
I asked you how you understand the following verse that you quoted.

Ok Bob, we will keep it very simple, in the first line of your reply you said.

Is this explanation of yours correct?

Indeed. And in post #2 I show how it all fits perfectly.

Romans 3 had already defined the term as "under the condemnation" of the LAW - for the lost world.

Rom 3
19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

Wait a minute what about being "under the condemnation of the LAW"?? If we have the New Covenant -- then are we under the "condemnation of the LAW"? (As some might argue).

All those "under the LAW" - under the "condemnation of the LAW" are condemned as sinners.

Rom 3
19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;


And 1 John 3:4 "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" even in the NT -- still

So then Romans 6 "Under the LAW" vs "Under Grace"

Rom 6
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?
..

12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

From Slaves of Sin to Slaves of God
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. 18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.

20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death.

Let me say Bob, your understanding of chapter six is incorrect.

You are free to say it - but you would be incorrect to do so.

Romans 6
14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Paul is talking about the reality of living the new life in grace, and why sin does not have
any dominion over you. You are not under the law, you are under grace!

That is not an explanation of anything you are simply re-stating what you apparently hope to explain "later"?
Paraphrase is not "explain" unless you add details for "explain".

Romans 6
15 What then? Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace?

Since we are not under the law but under grace, does that mean we can continue to sin?

Romans 6
18 and that you, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

You carefully omitted the verses - highlighted, that point out your error.

From Slaves of Sin to Slaves of God
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.

Christ set you free, now live this new life, a life lived in grace.

Romans 6
22 But now that you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God, the advantage you
get is sanctification.

What more needs to be said, 'you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God'.

Because...? now your sinning does not follow the rule of Rom 6:15-17?? And the reason it doesn't is because you omitted it from your post??

Seriously???

I am going to have to stick with the Bible on this one.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[bugkiller]

Hello BugKiller.

Yes BugKiller, you have obviously read and studied Romans, so few understand what
Paul was saying in this letter.

Paul in Roman's chapter one, is addressing the Gentiles in the Roman church. Then halfway
through Roman's chapter two, Paul changes tack and starts addressing the Jews in Rome.
Paul knows the Jews in Rome will destroy the church, and he is directly addressing them.

Have a look at these lines below from chapter two of Romans.

Romans 2
17 But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast of your relation to God
18 and know his will and determine what is best because you are instructed in the law...
24 For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”

Now have a look at the start of chapter three, same target audience the Jews.

Romans 3
3 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?

When Paul talks about the law, Paul is speaking directly to the Jews in Rome.

Paul is not talking to the Gentiles, the Gentiles are without the law, the Gentiles are the uncircumcised.

The way you understand what is written in Paul's letter, is shaped by whom Paul is addressing.

If you understand Paul's letter to the Romans, you will see through every false interpretation
of the scripture. The letter to the Romans, is the core doctrinal letter, every interpretation
will quote from Romans repeatedly. It is the letter that must be understood above all the other
letters.

Context is only one of the things ignored by the pro law contingency.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

The whole circumcision debate was about saying Circumcision is mandatory to be saved, when God told them to circumcise their hearts. What good was physical circumcisions if they had rotten hearts and could care less about God.

If one goes by the law - yes. Its an all or nothing deal. No parts.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

No wait - by "Alternate interpretation" you must mean "Alternate to this" interpretation...

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

Notice how they both fit that 7 point summary already posted on page 1?
Baptist Confession of Faith Section 19
Section 19:

C.H. Spurgeon's edition of the "Baptist Confession of Faith"
-- CH Spurgeon

The Perpetuity of the Law of God

Very great mistakes have been made about the law. Not long ago there were those about us who affirmed that the law is utterly abrogated and abolished, and they openly taught that believers were not bound to make the moral law the rule of their lives. What would have been sin in other men they counted to be no sin in themselves. From such Antinomianism as that may God deliver us. We are not under the law as the method of salvation, but we delight to see the law in the hand of Christ, and desire to obey the Lord in all things. Others have been met with who have taught that Jesus mitigated and softened down the law, and they have in effect said that the perfect law of God was too hard for imperfect beings, and therefore God has given us a milder and easier rule. These tread dangerously upon the verge of terrible error, although we believe that they are little aware of it.​

Section 19 of the "Baptist Confession of Faith" ​

. The Law of God ​

• God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience which was written in his heart, and He gave him very specific instruction about not eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. By this Adam and all his descendants were bound to personal, total, exact, and perpetual obedience, being promised life upon the fulfilling of the law, and threatened with death upon the breach of it. At the same time Adam was endued with power and ability to keep it.

• The same law that was first written in the heart of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness after the Fall, and was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, and written in two tables, the first four containing our duty towards God, and the other six, our duty to man.

• Besides this law, commonly called the moral law, God was pleased do give the people of Israel ceremonial laws containing several typical ordinances. These ordinances were partly about their worship, and in them Christ was prefigured along with His attributes and qualities, His actions, His sufferings and His benefits. These ordinances also gave instructions about different moral duties. All of these ceremonial laws were appointed only until the time of reformation, when Jesus Christ the true Messiah and the only lawgiver, Who was furnished with power from the Father for this end, cancelled them and took them away. ​

• To the people of Israel He also gave sundry judicial laws which expired when they ceased to be a nation. These are not binding on anyone now by virtue of their being part of the laws of that nation, but their general equity continue to be applicable in modern times.

The moral law ever binds to obedience everyone, justified people as well as others, and not only out of regard for the matter contained in it, but also out of respect for the authority of God the Creator, Who gave the law. Nor does Christ in the Gospel dissolve this law in any way, but He considerably strengthens our obligation to obey it ​

Baptist Confession of Faith

Section 22.

Point 7
7. As it is the law of nature that in general a proportion of time, by God's appointment, should be set apart for the worship of God, so He has given in His Word a positive, moral and perpetual commandment, binding upon all men, in all ages to this effect. He has particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath to be kept holy for Him. From the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ this was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ it was changed to the first day of the week and called the Lord's Day. This is to be continued until the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week having been abolished.
​

One thing I've noticed here in this section of the forum is the pro grace contingency rarely if ever quotes religious leaders to make their point. I wonder why the pro law contingency needs them so much?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

1 Cor 7:19 .. "what matters is keeping the Commandments of God"

Rom 13
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this,
Thou shalt not commit adultery,
Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal,
Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Thou shalt not covet;

and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Lev 19:18)
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

or this --??

James 2
8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, ou shall love your neighbor as yourself, (Lev 19:18) you are doing well.
9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.
11 For He who said, [/FONT]
Do not commit adultery
also said,
Do not commit murder.
Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.
12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty




Let's decompose that one line at a time.

1. You ask for no highlighting - but I have highlighted the very parts of the text your are most likely to completely ignore. Instead of dealing with the highlighted details - your request is that we ignore them.
2. The reason your own personal view is so far out of step with even your OWN pro-sunday scholarship is that you are willingly ignoring details that they cannot get by with ignoring.
3. "Fulfilling the LAW" in Rom 13 is something WE as the saints are STILL obligated to do according to the text. So all the fluff about "no need to fulfill the law" as in "comply with it" -- totally "out the window"
4. Paul quotes actual commandments of God - FROM the TEN commandments - you conveniently ignore this detail as well.
5. Paul does NOT quote the first 4 commandments - nothing about not worshipping other Gods, nothing about not taking God's name in vain, and nothing about honoring God's own Holy Day in Rom 13. You appear to take this as license to toss whatever commandment you wish - out the window as long as it is not explicit in Rom 13. That does not work.
6. James 2 says the authority is based on "HE WHO SAID" and you have tried to turn this into "Rom 13 that downsizes all of scripture to 2 verses" -- that simply does not work and even your own pro-Sunday scholars know it.
7. Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" already existed in the OT and did NOT delete the first 4 commandments or the last 6 by "existing". It is not a mutually exclusive "either-or" but rather an all-encompassing "both AND" as Christ points out in Matt 22.

At the very least - you need to come up with a system/model not totally rejected by the majority of your own pro-Sunday scholars, how else can we take your alternative interpretation seriously??

Bob one thing you might notice about our side is we don't rely on religious leaders for our faith.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Indeed. And in post #2 I show how it all fits perfectly.

Romans 3 had already defined the term as "under the condemnation" of the LAW - for the lost world.

Rom 3
19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;






You are free to say it - but you would be incorrect to do so.



That is not an explanation of anything you are simply re-stating what you apparently hope to explain "later"?
Paraphrase is not "explain" unless you add details for "explain".



You carefully omitted the verses - highlighted, that point out your error.

From Slaves of Sin to Slaves of God
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.



Because...? now your sinning does not follow the rule of Rom 6:15-17?? And the reason it doesn't is because you omitted it from your post??

Seriously???

I am going to have to stick with the Bible on this one.

in Christ,

Bob

Maybe you should be posting on an evangelizing forum.

bugkiller

 

[BobRyan]

Bob one thing you might notice about our side is we don't rely on religious leaders for our faith.

bugkiller

What I notice is that the Ten-Commandments-denying doctrines you promote - are so obviously and transparently flawed that even your OWN pro-sunday scholars refute them.

It just does not get any easier than that.

 

[BobRyan]

One thing I've noticed here in this section of the forum is the pro grace contingency rarely if ever quotes religious leaders to make their point.
bugkiller

Because a few of them are also anti-God's-Commandments and they know that the majority of even pro-Sunday scholarship refutes such fluff.

 

[bugkiller]

That is a good first step. Good answer.

Now how about answering 3 easy questions.

For those inclined to be at war with God's Ten Commandments --3 simple questions...

Christ argues this point about the "WORD of GOD" the "Commandments of God" .

Mark 7
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the Commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Christ said "it is a big deal" in Mark 7


1. Question 1 -- In your view - is Christ in Error in Mark 7??

2. Question 2: Eph 6:2 "What unit of LAW" is being upheld by Paul in Eph 5:2 where the 5th commandment "is the FIRST commandment with a PROMISE"?... easy answer.

3. Question 3: Heb 8:6-10 NEW COVENANT "I will write My LAW on their heart and mind" Jer 31:31-33 ---> what LAW?
what Law is Jer 31:31-33 referencing for Jeremiah and his readers??





really?? I didn't think you would do that in my life time.

(I notice you do not answer in your post - -and you provide no link to such an answer in your post)

I take it you're reading all posts that respond to anything you say.

bugkiller