ARE GOD'S 10 COMMANDMENTS ABOLISHED?

[LoveGodsWord]

"LoveGodsWord, post: 73113675, member: 398970"]
The 2 words words I High lighted in your post [the law] may be just this example when in reference to The Law of Moses.... As opposed to the spiritual laws

Hi brother corinth, the example provided in the earlier post were only a few example showing that the subject matter and context determine what laws are being duscussed. In those examples of Hebrew and Romans they were discussing different law. The first being the Mosaic book of shadow laws (sin offerings) and the second example was Paul talking about the 10 commandments.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

The Law leads anyone who is still not in Christ to Jesus....once Faith comes one is no longer under The Law.

What does Paul mean when he is talking about being "UNDER THE LAW"?

The Law is no longer the source [old Covenant system] for righteousness. Yet one needs to recognize they are SINNERS and in need of a savior. So it's the course the way that leads one to Christ. But once Faith has come we are no longer under that tutor....
"
Let me ask you this one question: Did you receive the Holy Spirit by obeying the law of Moses? Of course not! You received the Spirit because you believed the message you heard about Christ"

Indeed well said this is what the scriptures teach

So why was this asked? Because they were doing what some SDA members seem to be doing. Trying to put us back under the law....

Ok here you are mixed up. You need to examine the context of what it means to be "UNDER THE LAW" as depending on how it is written can shows what the meaning of the scripture is.

For example to be "UNDER THE LAW" can mean to be under the CONDEMNATION of it because we have broken God's LAW and stand guilty before God as sinners because we are all under sin (Romans 3:9-20).

Paul says this is the purpose of God's LAW to give us a KNOWLEDGE of what sin is (Romans 3:20; 7:7) So in the CONTEXT of Galatians 3:25 when we come to Christ and are FORGIVEN by FAITH in God's promise we are no longer UNDER the CONDMNATION of the LAW as sinners for breaking it because God has FORGIVEN us of our sins (breaking God's LAW).

However if we continue to break God's LAW we are once again "UNDER THE LAW" and stand guilty before God of breaking it.

..............

Now Corinth, lets be honest here. Where have you ever seen me write
anywhere that we are saved by the works of the law? I corrected you for saying this yesterday in post # 401 linked here click me.

This post linked above was sent to you to clear any misunderstanding you may have had in relation to the purpose of God's LAW and what is being shared here in God's Word. As a brother in Christ, I suggest you read it and stop saying things no one has said or posted to you.

May God help you as you continue in his WORD

 

[Soyeong]

Hello Soyeong.

You gave me two contrary answers to whether the disciples were breaking the Sabbath?

The first reply.

You definitely stated that the disciples were not breaking the Sabbath.

Then you later replied with this.

Now you can't possibly have it both ways, either the disciples broke the letter of the Sabbath law. Or the disciples did not break the letter of the law.

Soyeong, make up your mind?

Work in general is prohibited on the Sabbath, however, therefore are some specific forms of work that it was not intend to prohibit. For example, a priest who performed their duties on the Sabbath would be doing work, so they would be profaning the Sabbath in violation of the letter of the Law, however, they were held innocent of breaking the Sabbath because they not violating the spirit of the law because the command to keep the Sabbath was never intended to prevent priests from performing their duties.

Some of the Pharisees saw that healing was work and reasoned that it was therefore unlawful to heal on the Sabbath. However, we are also commanded to love our neighbor, and it would not be loving our neighbor to refuse to help someone who needed medical attention. The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, so it was intended for our own good, not for our detriment. Jesus summarized the Law as being instructions for how to love God and our neighbor, so all of the commands are intended to be examples of how to do that are not intended to be used as an excuse to prevent us from obeying the greatest two commands, which is why Jesus ruled that it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath even though that was work that was prohibited by the letter of the law.

 

[corinth77777]

Hi brother corinth, the example provided in the earlier post were only a few example showing that the subject matter and context determine what laws are being duscussed. In those examples of Hebrew and Romans they were discussing different law. The first being the Mosaic book of shadow laws (sin offerings) and the second example was Paul talking about the 10 commandments.

You misunderstood....I was speaking of spiritual law verses the law...

 

[LoveGodsWord]

You misunderstood....I was speaking of spiritual law verses the law...

Your question was in relation to how to know what law is being discussed. It does not matter if it is the 10 commandments, the Mosaic book of the laws, law of sin and death, law of the spirit. To know which one is being discussed you have to look at the within scripture and chapter context and topic of discussion which will help to define what law is being discussed.

 

[Grand_Commander_Zhou_Ziyu]

Christians are no longer under the Law, but under Grace because Christ, as God in flesh, fulfilled the Law when He walked the earth.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Christians are no longer under the Law, but under Grace because Christ, as God in flesh, fulfilled the Law when He walked the earth.

Indeed but what does it mean to be "UNDER THE LAW" in your view? God's LAW is fulfilled in Christ it is not abolished or there would be no knowledge of sin to lead us to Christ that we might be saved by faith.

 

[expos4ever]

Let’s be clear about something. Galatians 3 is a history of what God has been doing over large time scales. It is frankly bizarre, and arguably disingenuous, to treat 3:24-25 as though it describes how, within the life of each believer, they reach a point where the Law has convicted them of sin and they are ready for faith.

It is CLEAR beyond doubt the reference to the Law no longer being a tutor is a reference to something that happened 2000 years ago, not something that happens in the life of each believer.

Contexts DEMANDS that 3:24-25 be interpreted this way and I am confident that no scholar who didn’t get his degree from the back of a cereal box would disagree.

There are, thankfully, rules in this forum against flaming. It is understandable, of course, but somewhat of a shame that outrageous abuses of exegesis are not likewise policed.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Let’s be clear about something. Galatians 3 is a history of what God has been doing over large time scales. It is frankly bizarre, and arguably disingenuous, to treat 3:24-25 as though it describes how, within the life of each believer, they reach a point where they don’t need a tutor. It is CLEAR beyond doubt the reference to the Law no longer being a tutor is a reference to something that happened 2000 years ago, not something that happens in the life of each believer.

Contexts DEMANDS that 3:24-25 be interpreted this way and I am confident that no scholar who didn’t get his degree from the back of a cereal box would disagree.

Sorry brother God's WORD disagrees with you. Please see the scriptures showing CONTEXT verse by verse with connecting scriptures posted in * Post # 440 linked click me

Only God's WORD is true and we should BELIEVE and FOLLOW it over the teachings and traditions of men that break the commandments of God. I know you do not want to accept this as you believe God's 10 commandments are ABOLISHED. However God's WORD does not teach lawlessness. It teaches rightouesness by faith.

ROMANS 3:31 [31], Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yes, we establish the law.

May God bless you as you seek him through his Word.

 

[corinth77777]

What does Paul mean when he is talking about being "UNDER THE LAW"?

Indeed well said this is what the scriptures teach


Ok here you are mixed up. You need to examine the context of what it means to be "UNDER THE LAW" as depending on how it is written can shows what the meaning of the scripture is.

For example to be "UNDER THE LAW" can mean to be under the CONDEMNATION of it because we have broken God's LAW and stand guilty before God as sinners because we are all under sin (Romans 3:9-20).

Paul says this is the purpose of God's LAW to give us a KNOWLEDGE of what sin is (Romans 3:20; 7:7) So in the CONTEXT of Galatians 3:25 when we come to Christ and are FORGIVEN by FAITH in God's promise we are no longer UNDER the CONDMNATION of the LAW as sinners for breaking it because God has FORGIVEN us of our sins (breaking God's LAW).

However if we continue to break God's LAW we are once again "UNDER THE LAW" and stand guilty before God of breaking it.

..............

Now Corinth, lets be honest here. Where have you ever seen me write
anywhere that we are saved by the works of the law? I corrected you for saying this yesterday in post # 401 linked here click me.

This post linked above was sent to you to clear any misunderstanding you may have had in relation to the purpose of God's LAW and what is being shared here in God's Word. As a brother in Christ, I suggest you read it and stop saying things no one has said or posted to you.

May God help you as you continue in his WORD

I'm learning as I am studying .......and must correct even some things I once believed.


But I do believe that passage: that one cannot put new wine into old wine skins....

At this time my views are as Such:
If you tell someone they must keep a command that has become absolete in Christ...you are basically trying to put new wine into old wineskins...which as said tries to bring one back under the law.

There is a difference between performance laws of the Old Covenant and Spiritual commands......[laws] The question I asked earlier was how do you know when one is speaking of spiritual law or works[performance] commands.[law]

And I said, the words [The Law] may be referencing [The old Cov.]

However
after Christ maybe we will see Spiritual commands. THINGS WE DO WHERE THE SOURCE OF KEEPING COMES FROM LOVING. I am still studying....But if Jesus states "keep the law" that's one thing....but does He?......He has to be speaking of the "commands" after the Spirit...We are in a new Covenant...If we go back to what were Shadows we will be confused and Christ Will not be formed in us.

The old ...leads us to Christ....
We are in Christ.....Do we not become part of a new creation...if a person is in Christ old things have passed away.....etc

 

[expos4ever]

Sorry brother God's WORD disagrees with you. Please see the scriptures showing CONTEXT verse by verse with connecting scriptures posted in * Post # 440 linked click me

Nonsense! Whether your post 440 has merit is another question. But to suggest Galatians 3 is not an extended history is either an outright lie, or incompetent exegisis of an almost unparalleled degree.

No qualified scholar believes such ridiculousness.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I'm learning as I am studying .......and must correct even some things I once believed.


But I do believe that passage: that one cannot put new wine into old wine skins....

At this time my views are as Such:
If you tell someone they must keep a command that has become absolete in Christ...you are basically trying to put new wine into old wineskins...which as said tries to bring one back under the law.

There is a difference between performance laws of the Old Covenant and Spiritual commands......[laws] The question I asked earlier was how do you know when one is speaking of spiritual law or works[performance] commands.[law]

And I said, the words [The Law] may be referencing [The old Cov.]

However
after Christ maybe we will see Spiritual commands. THINGS WE DO WHERE THE SOURCE OF KEEPING COMES FROM LOVING. I am still studying....But if Jesus states "keep the law" that's one thing....but does He?......He has to be speaking of the "commands" after the Spirit...We are in a new Covenant...If we go back to what were Shadows we will be confused and Christ Will not be formed in us.

The old ...leads us to Christ....
We are in Christ.....Do we not become part of a new creation...if a person is in Christ old things have passed away.....etc

Hello Corinth, most of this post is discussed in post # 401 linked here click me.
I posted this to you yesterday on the purpose of God's 10 commandments and the NEW COVENANT. Please take the time to hava a read brother as it will help the conversation. It is not a very long post.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Nonsense! Whether your post 440 has merit is another question. But to suggest Galatians 3 is not an extended history is either an outright lie, or incompetent exegisis of an almost unparalleled degree. No qualified scholar believes such ridiculousness.

For me brother expos4ever, I see the scriptures as God's WORD that we are to live by (1 Timothy 3:16; Matthew 4:4). There is no reason to be argumentive or angry as such as we are all brothers and sisters in Christ and are free to discuss God's WORD.

If you disagree with * Post # 440 linked click me then adress the post and prove your points. So far you are only providing your own words and repeating what has already been addressed with God's WORD in other posts.

I have never disagreed with you that certain parts of the scriptures are narrative unfolding God's plan of salvation.

 

[klutedavid]

Work in general is prohibited on the Sabbath, however, therefore are some specific forms of work that it was not intend to prohibit. For example, a priest who performed their duties on the Sabbath would be doing work, so they would be profaning the Sabbath in violation of the letter of the Law, however, they were held innocent of breaking the Sabbath because they not violating the spirit of the law because the command to keep the Sabbath was never intended to prevent priests from performing their duties.

Some of the Pharisees saw that healing was work and reasoned that it was therefore unlawful to heal on the Sabbath. However, we are also commanded to love our neighbor, and it would not be loving our neighbor to refuse to help someone who needed medical attention. The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, so it was intended for our own good, not for our detriment. Jesus summarized the Law as being instructions for how to love God and our neighbor, so all of the commands are intended to be examples of how to do that are not intended to be used as an excuse to prevent us from obeying the greatest two commands, which is why Jesus ruled that it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath even though that was work that was prohibited by the letter of the law.

Did you read my previous post?

 

[corinth77777]

Your question was in relation to how to know what law is being discussed. It does not matter if it is the 10 commandments, the Mosaic book of the laws, law of sin and death, law of the spirit. To know which one is being discussed you have to look at the within scripture and chapter context and topic of discussion which will help to define what law is being discussed.

It does matter because Jesus would not teach one to keep a command that is absolete...

 

[LoveGodsWord]

It does matter because Jesus would not teach one to keep a command that is absolete...

You misunderstand what is being said to you corinth. When posted "it does not matter", this was in relation to how to identify what law is being discussed which is known by within scripture context and topic of discussion within the chapter. I was not saying it does not matter to know what laws are being discussed. Of course this matters brother.

 

[corinth77777]

...delete

 

[expos4ever]

There is no reason to be argumentive....

Ah but there is.

Greater minds than mine have argued compellingly that ridicule is a legitimate response to abject stupidity. For example, if you don’t ridicule the notion of a flat earth, you tacitly send the message that there is a legitimate debate to be had about the shape of the earth.

But there isn’t- the idea of a flat earth is dazzlingly moronic, and needs to be named as such.

As is the idea that Galatians 3 does not contain an extended treatment of what God has been doing through history.

I am not saying you, or others are stupid. But you certainly hold at least one stupid idea. As do I - probably many.

But there is no debate about Galatians 3 - it clearly incorporates an extended treatment of redemption history.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Ah but there is.

Greater minds than mine have argued compellingly that ridicule is a legitimate response to abject stupidity. For example, if you don’t ridicule the notion of a flat earth, you tacitly send the message that there is a legitimate debate to be had about the shape if the earth.

But there isn’t- the idea of a flat earth us dazzlingly moronic, and neees to be named as such.

As is the idea that Galatians 3 does not contain an extended treatment of what God has been doing through history.

I am not saying you, or others are stupid. But you certainly hold at least one stupid idea. As do I - probably many.

But there is no debate about Galatians 3 - it clearly incorporates an extended treatment of redemption history.

I can see you are a bit upset. No problems let's chat latter when you have some scriptures to share.

 

[Grand_Commander_Zhou_Ziyu]

The Law I believe refers to God's Commandments given to the Hebrews on top of Mt. Sinai, as well as much of the content in the Old Testament such as Deuteronomy, Leviticus etc. Due to the impossibility of humans to fulfill the Law by our own mortal strength, God came and fulfilled it for us. I believe perhaps we could say the Law has been Fulfilled?