Why is the day of worship controversial?

[ace of hearts]

Why do you ignore the fact that the 10 were the only ones written by God Himself and that they were the only ones kept in the Ark? God made a distinction--who are you to say otherwise?? Circumcision is part of the law of Moses, not mentioned in the 10.

Why do you ignore that God told Moses other things to tell and require of the people calling them the invention of Moses?

Now you think I ignore the famous 10. When the reality is you ignore the words of Jeremiah found in 31:31-33 and the words of Jesus found in Luke 22:20. It isn't that I ignore the famous 10 you only know about because of the Book of the Law. It's that I've accepted the New Covenant in full. The law isn't part and parcel to the New Covenant.

 

[BobRyan]

So your idea is Joshua wrote the Book of the Law on stone.

God wrote the TEN on stone and that LAW was placed inside the ark. Moses wrote the rest and placed them outside the ark.

Still "ALL scripture" not just that which is on stone "is inspired by God AND to be used for doctrine" 2 Tim 3:16 ... Bible details matter.

 

[BobRyan]

Why do you ignore that God told Moses other things to tell and require of the people .

As both the Sunday and the Bible-Sabbath affirm Christians freely admit - the ceremonial laws ended at the cross according to Hebrew 10:4-12 and 1 Cor 7:19 where circumcision is contrasted with the moral law of God - that all agree includes the TEN Commandments.

Why get stuck on the easy part - when both sides already agree to this simple and obvious Bible fact?

 

[mmksparbud]

Why do you ignore that God told Moses other things to tell and require of the people calling them the invention of Moses?

Now you think I ignore the famous 10. When the reality is you ignore the words of Jeremiah found in 31:31-33 and the words of Jesus found in Luke 22:20. It isn't that I ignore the famous 10 you only know about because of the Book of the Law. It's that I've accepted the New Covenant in full. The law isn't part and parcel to the New Covenant.

I didn't say you are ignoring the "famous 10"-- I said you ignore the fact that the law of God, the 10, were written by God Himself--the law of Moses was dictated by God and Moses wrote those on parchment. God differentiated the 2--not us. That is what you are ignoring! The reason He did them differently is plain, the law of Moses--the sacrificial laws, the ordinances would be done away with at the cross, when Jesus became the sacrificial Lamb and our High Priest. The new covenant in full---the law is written in the heart now. Again --whether in the heart or on stone--"THEY ARE WRITTEN" not done away with! circumcision--done away with--the killing of animals--done away with , all feasts that pointed to Jesus as the slain lamb--pone away with---none of them mentioned in the 10---all of them nailed to the cross---none of them written in the heart--the 10---written in the heart, not done away with.

 

[ace of hearts]

then it is a different agreement but it references the same law in both cases.

I agree it's a different agreement. So the new agreement references the old agreement. That doesn't mean it's actually the same agreement just moved. If that were the case there's no new covenant (agreement). From one side of your mouth you say new agreement while from the other side you claim it's the same agreement. How can that be? "Not according to..." means not the same in contents. It doesn't refer to place or method of conveyance.

The agreement is not the same.

Amen!

The LAW is the same. it is the one Jeremiah and his readers knew about "this IS the NEW Covenant.. I will write My LAW on their heart and mind" Jeremiah 31:31-33

The new has nothing to do with what Jeremiah and his readers already knew. Jeremiah says new as in unprecedented meaning never before.

So then it is STILL a sin to take God's name in vain. Even under the NEW Covenant.

I think your understanding of this is very limited.

 

[ace of hearts]

Hint: Hebrews 7 does not say Jesus is a sinner.

I'm glad you believe that. I also believe that. So the choice is the law has indeed changed. Remember not a jot nor tittle can or could change until all things were fulfilled. Evidently all things have been fulfilled. Or you have to chose Heb 7:12 is a lie because the priesthood has changed. That is a jot and tittle of the law. That makes your idea of Mat 5 error. Why should anyone believe someone that teaches opposing things to be true that cancel out the other? Indeed what Paul says in Galatians 5 holds water.

Heb 8
Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.

Like I said you really don't believe Mat 5 and admit jots and tittles of the law have indeed changed.

Hebrews 7 makes the case that Jesus is not a priest like the Levitical priest.. but rather is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek who was not a descendant of Aaron, or Levi or Jacob or Isaac nor even a descendant of Abraham -- yet "still" a priest. And Melchizedek is a "type" of Christ in that no data is recorded about his beginning or end of life (as the type) - just as God the Son has no beginning and no end in real life.

Like I said you really don't believe Mat 5 and admit jots and tittles of the law have indeed changed.

Hebrews 7 says that the law regarding priesthood is changed -- it does not say "it is ok to take God's name in vain now that Christ is high priest" -- as we all know.

Like I said you really don't believe Mat 5 and admit jots and tittles of the law have indeed changed.

 

[eleos1954]

Why are you attempting to foist this off on me? Do you have me saying that anywhere? Do you have me promoting that anywhere? Please quote it with reference. The law was given only to Israel. See Deut 5:1-3.

Can you explain how being in compliance with Luke 6:31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. and do any of the things you listed above? Maybe you want another committing adultery with you wife. Maybe you enjoy being lied to. Maybe you enjoy others taking your property. Do you really want someone to kill a member of your family? But hey many non religious people don't want that either. So are they keeping the law? Doesn't that make them Christian by your standards? I think you get the idea. Keeping the law has nothing to do with Christianity.I have a passage I want you to explain -

Jn 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.Maybe you could explain this passage too -

Luke 24:44 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.

45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

48 And ye are witnesses of these things.

Perhaps you could also explain this one too -

Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Remember you support the idea all things aren't fulfilled and the law can't change.

Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law (Moses law).

This verse is in regard to the ceremonial/sacrificial system (Moses laws) ... Jesus became our High Priest when He died on the cross that system (Moses laws) were no longer necessary, that was the law that was changed - eventually ended and done away with.

Hebrews 4

Jesus the Great High Priest

Hebrews 4

14 Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess.”

"Remember you support the idea all things aren't fulfilled and the law can't change."

Not so ... the laws of Moses were done away with ... that was the change.

God does not break His covenants ... people do. Israel broke covenant (the 10) with God.

Exodus 32

The Golden Calf

32 When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, “Come, make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we don’t know what has happened to him.”

Broke commandment #1 & #2

20Now may the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great Shepherd of the sheep, 21equip you with every good thing to do His will. And may He accomplish in us what is pleasing in His sight through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

If you love me keep my commandments. (This is His will)

Romans 6

15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law (the 10), but under grace (Jesus)? Certainly not! 16Do you not know that when you offer yourselves (accept Jesus) as obedient slaves, you are slaves to the one you obey, whether you are slaves to sin leading to death, or to obedience leading to righteousness?

obey who (Jesus)

who says over and over

If you love me keep my commandments.

Jesus had no sin ... He did not transgress the Law (the 10)

Again, it's the motive .... the motive is love .... and through His Love He will help us (through the Holy Spirit - and we respond out of love) to overcome our sins (life-long process) ... sin is transgression of the Law (the 10) without the Law there would not be any sin. So, obliviously the 10 are still in effect and not done away with.

Revelation 3:21

“To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.

 

[ace of hearts]

As both the Sunday and the Bible-Sabbath affirm Christians freely admit - the ceremonial laws ended at the cross according to Hebrew 10:4-12 and 1 Cor 7:19 where circumcision is contrasted with the moral law of God - that all agree includes the TEN Commandments.

Why get stuck on the easy part - when both sides already agree to this simple and obvious Bible fact?

You rely only on words when it comes to the truth. For you actions have no meaning when it comes to words. In practice what you claim isn't true. Your and their definitions of words don't agree.

 

[ace of hearts]

I didn't say you are ignoring the "famous 10"-- I said you ignore the fact that the law of God, the 10, were written by God Himself--the law of Moses was dictated by God and Moses wrote those on parchment. God differentiated the 2--not us. That is what you are ignoring! The reason He did them differently is plain, the law of Moses--the sacrificial laws, the ordinances would be done away with at the cross, when Jesus became the sacrificial Lamb and our High Priest. The new covenant in full---the law is written in the heart now. Again --whether in the heart or on stone--"THEY ARE WRITTEN" not done away with! circumcision--done away with--the killing of animals--done away with , all feasts that pointed to Jesus as the slain lamb--pone away with---none of them mentioned in the 10---all of them nailed to the cross---none of them written in the heart--the 10---written in the heart, not done away with.

I don't ignore that fact. The famous 10 are the covenant Jeremiah talks about in Jeremiah 31:31-33. He plainly says there is a new unprecedented covenant coming. Jesus proclaims this new and unprecedented covenant is now current. That voids the previous covenant Jeremiah said was given to their fathers after departure from Egypt given to no one else.

Both the stone tablets and the rest of what God told Moses to write are from God and are His (God's) law which you seem to deny. If you don't your argument holds no water.

Mat 5 says no jot or title of the law can pass until all things are fulfilled. Luke 24:44 says all things are fulfilled. If they weren't passages like Heb 7:12 are false. If you believe is true, you don't accept the all Scripture.

 

[ace of hearts]

Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law (Moses law).

This verse is in regard to the ceremonial/sacrificial system (Moses laws) ... Jesus became our High Priest when He died on the cross that system (Moses laws) were no longer necessary, that was the law that was changed - eventually ended and done away with.

Doesn't matter. The evidence is the law changed.

 

[ace of hearts]

The Father did not have Jesus appear to anyone who was an unsaved Jew nor gentile after the resurrection for instance.

He might have met the disciples in the Temple on Sabbath, or any day, as the Father directed Him to. This is not a recorded instance in Scripture, for instance.

The only days mentioned after the cross is the first day of the week. Why no sabbath?

 

[ace of hearts]

Brother you may need to re-visit the scriptures. God's eternal law (10 commandments) that gives us the KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL; SIN AND RIGHTEOUSNESS *ROMANS 3:20; ROMANS 7:7; 1 JOHN 3:4; PSALMS 119:172 are not the Shadow laws of MOSES written in the book of the Covenant *EXODUS 24:7. The MOSIAC BOOK of the COVENANT *EXODUS 24:7 was kept separate from God's eternal Law (10 commandments) written by God on the tables of stone in the ARK (house) of the COVENANT *DEUTERONOMY 31:26. DEUTERONOMY 10:2

Visit Jeremiah 31:31-33.

 

[ace of hearts]

Enoch kept the law, i.e.from the heart he lived righteously, lived right without sinning, before TORAH was given to Moses.

Enoch didn't keep the law that came 430 years after Abraham. Moses says so in Deut 5.

 

[ace of hearts]

You seem to be confused. Your question was...



Why does there need to be a mention of the name ISRAEL in GALATIANS 3:28-28? Maybe you forgot your own question.

What does GALATIANS 3:28-28 talk about? Is it about Israel or Jesus?

 

[ace of hearts]

Your response above is to sharing these scriptures below that disagreed with an earlier statement you made about what Evil means. So I do not understant what you are talking about in your statement above.

It is God's LAW (10 Commandments) that give us the KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL; SIN and RIGHTEOUSNESS *ROMANS 3:20; ROMANS 7:7; 1 JOHN 3:4; PSALMS 119:172.

EVIL is breaking God's LAW.

MATTHEW 12:34-35
[34], O generation of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
[35], A good man out of the good treasure of the heart brings forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things.

Let's get a bit more specific...

MATTHEW 15:18-19
[18], But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
[19], For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

Yep the 10 commandments. This is why the world was destroyed with a flood *GENESIS 6:5-6

Hope this helps.

Yes those passages are aimed at me. You resort to this type of response when your other posts aren't accepted as truth for Christians. In my personal experience all cult members do this sort of thing. Your issue is I don't practice the covenant given to Israel and reject the Gospel. So you try to gain compliance by threatening with eternal damnation. Religion stinks.

 

[ace of hearts]

Well that simply has no truth in it whatsoever. Where does it say in the post you are quoting from that we have to fulfill God's LAW ourselves by doing God's LAW? If I have never said such things why are you making claims here that I have never made? If I have never made these claims why pretend that I have? This is simply sad for you brother if you feel the need to make claims that I have never said here or anywhere else on CF.

I will repost the post and let others make up their mind.

The post and the scriptures show that OBEDIENCE to God's LAW is fulfilled by faith that works by LOVE. Those who continue in SIN do not LOVE and need to be Born again to LOVE. This is the NEW COVENANT promise *HEBREWS 8:10-12; JOHN 3:3-7; 1 JOHN 3:3-9; 1 JOHN 2:3-4' ROMANS 3:31.

ROMANS 13:8-10 [8], Owe no man anything, but to love one another: for he that loves another has fulfilled the law. [9], For this, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, You shall not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, namely, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. [10], Love works no ill to his neighbor: therefore, love is the fulfilling [DOING] of the law.

What you posted was not what I was saying at all.

Hope this helps.

Denial of the record will get you no where.

 

[ace of hearts]

God wrote the TEN on stone and that LAW was placed inside the ark. Moses wrote the rest and placed them outside the ark.

Still "ALL scripture" not just that which is on stone "is inspired by God AND to be used for doctrine" 2 Tim 3:16 ... Bible details matter.

Doesn't address Joshua.

 

[ace of hearts]

As both the Sunday and the Bible-Sabbath affirm Christians freely admit - the ceremonial laws ended at the cross according to Hebrew 10:4-12 and 1 Cor 7:19 where circumcision is contrasted with the moral law of God - that all agree includes the TEN Commandments.

Why get stuck on the easy part - when both sides already agree to this simple and obvious Bible fact?

So you claim no jots and tittles of the law can pass with Mat 5 and claim some have with Hebrews 10. Make up your mind.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Enoch didn't keep the law that came 430 years after Abraham. Moses says so in Deut 5.

'from the heart' Read Romans 2.

Enoch OBEYED Yahweh, just as disciples /followers of Jesus are expected to DO.

 

[BobRyan]

So you claim no jots and tittles of the law can pass with Mat 5 and claim some have with Hebrews 10. Make up your mind.

As both the Sunday and the Bible-Sabbath affirm Christians freely admit - the ceremonial laws ended at the cross according to Hebrew 10:4-12 and 1 Cor 7:19 where circumcision is contrasted with the moral law of God - that all agree includes the TEN Commandments.

Matthew 5 is in reference to the moral law of God and Christ expands on it in that very same chapter.


Why get stuck on the easy part - when both sides already agree to this simple and obvious Bible fact?