What commandments is Jesus talking about?

BABerean2 said:

And at time 28:51 they changed the text of the verse below to make their doctrine work.

Act 15:24 Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law"—to whom we gave no such commandment—

.

Click to expand...

This is a screenshot of that point in the video. They didn't quote v 24 like that (so you're making a false accusation - although I don't understand your reasoning for doing so). First you stated that they ignore Acts 15:10 - and I showed you that they *don't* ignore it, in fact, they have an entire video about it. Now you're making accusations that they distort Scripture to fit their argument (which also isn't true).

But either way, their explanation "works" when the whole chapter is read - it doesn't stand on v 24 alone. It's verse 1 that introduces the reason for the council (and repeated in v 5). Judaizers were teaching that one must be circumcised in order to be saved. The argument was about legalism vs obedience. Legalism doesn't save a person (there is not one who hasn't sinned) but obedience flows from those who are saved.

Acts 15 Parallel Chapters

I don't really understand the opposition to this. This isn't say anything different than what Dr Michael Brown stated. I thought we ALL agreed with what was said in that video?

Another point made in the 119 Ministries video is that to conclude that Acts 15 abolishes the Law of God we would have to.....

BABerean2 said:

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

Click to expand...

The word translated there to "change" = metatithémi: to transfer from one place to another.

The priesthood transferred from the Levitical priests to our High Priest (in the order of Melchizedek). It's not the Law that changed - but our *relationship* to the Law. The Law is under the administration of God (through Christ). The earthly is only a reflection of the true image in the Heavens (Exodus 25:40; Hebrews 8:5; Revelation 11:19).

The same word (metatithémi) is used again, by the same author of Hebrews, in chapter 11:5. Enoch wasn't changed out and replaced - he was transferred up to the heavenlies:

Hebrews 7 - A Superior Priesthood

mkgal1 said:

That's a good question - and I'm working that out. I'm also confused by "glory as passing away" and wonder what was meant by that.

Paul also wrote:

Romans 7:12
Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.​

Click to expand...

Howdy mkgal1!

A few things on this passage:

2 Corinthians 3:

2 You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everyone. 3 You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

4 Such confidence we have through Christ before God. 5 Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God. 6 He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness!

10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

The reference to the glory fading is to the story of Moses in Exodus:


Exodus 34:29 When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands, he was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the Lord. 30 When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, his face was radiant, and they were afraid to come near him. 31 But Moses called to them; so Aaron and all the leaders of the community came back to him, and he spoke to them. 32 Afterward all the Israelites came near him, and he gave them all the commands the Lord had given him on Mount Sinai.


The old covenant came with glory. God's glory settled on the mount, in fire. The covenant was made with Moses the intermediary. Moses spoke to God which resulted in his face reflecting the glory of God in such as way that hte people could not look steadily at it.

However, the new covenant is more glorious, for several reasons. And the glory of the Holy Spirit living in human hearts is greater than the glory of Moses who was in God's presence for a time but then left. The fading presumably would be that once Moses left God's presence the glory would slowly fade over time, but be renewed when he went back to talk to God. In the new covenant God's Spirit lives in us.

The old COVENANT comes to have less glory because the old covenant is overshadowed by the new. Kind of like a flashlight is bright in the dark. But it pales in the sunlight. The new covenant is like the sun in this analogy.

As to ministry of death, that is because of the nature of the covenant with Moses. More on that in a moment.

tall73 said:

Howdy mkgal1!

Click to expand...

Hi Tall73! I'm SO glad to see you here

mkgal1 said:

Your argument here doesn't make sense to me. On one hand you're stating that the instruction in the Torah (the Old Testament first five books) is "bondage" and "the ministry of death" and gone.....and then seem to be arguing that Jesus' - even MORE stringent instruction - is freedom (but it's based on the foundation of the Law - the instruction given in the Torah).

Click to expand...

It is not the law that is a ministry of death. It is the old covenant that is the ministry of death. It results in death to those who do not do it.

tall73 said:

The old covenant came with glory. God's glory settled on the mount, in fire. The covenant was made with Moses the intermediary. Moses spoke to God which resulted in his face reflecting the glory of God in such as way that the people could not look steadily at it.

However, the new covenant is more glorious, for several reasons. And the glory of the Holy Spirit living in human hearts is greater than the glory of Moses who was in God's presence for a time but then left. The fading presumably would be that once Moses left God's presence the glory would slowly fade over time, but be renewed when he went back to talk to God. In the new covenant God's Spirit lives in us.

The old COVENANT comes to have less glory because the old covenant is overshadowed by the new. Kind of like a flashlight is bright in the dark. But it pales in the sunlight. The new covenant is like the sun in this analogy.

Click to expand...

Thank you. That makes sense to me.

Also - wouldn't it tie in to this that the first Temple built by Solomon WAS filled with God's presense (His glory).....but the second Temple never was - that His glory had departed?

tall73 said:

As to ministry of death, that is because of the nature of the covenant with Moses. More on that in a moment.

Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to your post.

At times people think the ten commandments themselves are the covenant. They are at the heart of it, but there is a bit more to it.

Exo 34:27 And the LORD said to Moses, "Write these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel."
Exo 34:28 So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights. He neither ate bread nor drank water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.
Exo 34:29 When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand as he came down from the mountain, Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God.

It is very clear that the ten commandments on stone played an important role in the covenant. They are called the words of the covenant. They are like a covenant document.

Deu 4:13 And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments, and he wrote them on two tablets of stone.

A covenant is an agreement with promises on both sides between multiple parties. And the ten commandments are the covenant words, or document, but not the totality of the agreement.The initial covenant agreement happened at Sinai, and was re-affirmed at various times.

The description of the covenant agreement is found in Exodus 19 and 20.

Exo 19:3 while Moses went up to God. The LORD called to him out of the mountain, saying, "Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the people of Israel:
Exo 19:4 You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself.
Exo 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine;
Exo 19:6 and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel."

God sets forth promises for the people if they will obey the terms of His covenant.

Moses then relays this to the people who respond:

Exo 19:7 So Moses came and called the elders of the people and set before them all these words that the LORD had commanded him.
Exo 19:8 All the people answered together and said, "All that the LORD has spoken we will do." And Moses reported the words of the people to the LORD.

So we have promises on both sides. God will bless them and they will be His people. They agree to do all that the Lord commands.

This is the covenant. But it is spelled out in detail from there out.
The covenant agreement included a number of items. At the center of the covenant were the ten commandments which became the covenant contract document.

We know from near-eastern covenants of the time that God was doing something that would be familiar. The type of covenant in question is known as a suzerainty covenant. It was usually made between two nations, when a stronger kingdom conquered another. The Suzerain was the powerful king and benefactor (sometimes conquerer) the other king was his vassal.

The stronger king would impose the treaty upon the vassal king in order to make plain his requirements and how they were to serve him. He would make promises to them in return for their loyalty. Now of course in this case the great King is God and the vassal nation are His people. He delivered them from another nation and on this basis, and on the basis of creation, He demonstrates that He is their Sovereign. So He puts this in familiar terms, and we see a number of parallels to covenants of that time.

Here is a file that illustrates the key components of a suzerainty treaty in brief form. This is not my work. I just found it to be the simplest I could find online.

http://www.bethel.edu/~dhoward/classes/Ot101-111/SuzeraintyTreaty-Handout.pdf

Now if we look at the various components it outlines how the Sinai covenant is similar.

1. Preamble: Identifies author of the covenant.

Exo 20:2 "I am the LORD your God,

2. Historical Prologue: Mentions past relationship between the two parties; past benefactions by suzerain form the basis for the vassal's gratitude and future obedience.

Exo 19:3 while Moses went up to God. The LORD called to him out of the mountain, saying, "Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the people of Israel:
Exo 19:4 You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself.

Ex. 20:2 Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.


3. Stipulations: The obligations laid upon the vassal by the sovereign.

The ten commandments, and then also the book of the law, including all the laws of the nation, laws regarding worship, laws of a moral nature, laws instituting care for the poor, etc.

All of these were required of Israel under the covenant, and part of their agreement to do all the Lord commanded.

4. a. Deposition: A copy of the covenant is deposited in the vassal's sanctuary.

In the normal arrangement each party would place a copy of the covenant in the sanctuary of their god's temple. In this case one party IS God and the others worship at His temple. Therefore the covenant document is placed in stone, and placed in the temple of God, inside the ark. Many scholars now think the whole text was written on each, as a copy for God and a copy for the people, but this is not an essential element here and is not spelled out in the biblical text, so I don't think we can be dogmatic on the point. But it may explain the emphasis on the two tablets.

b. Public Reading: The covenant terms are periodically read to the people.

This occurred during the invasion into Canaan, and later during the time of the restoration from exile, etc.

5. Witnesses: A list of gods invoked to witness the covenant.

God, being the only true God, calls upon the creation in Deut.:

Deu 30:19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,

6. Curses invoked on the vassal if he breaks the covenant, and blessings invoked on the vassal if he keeps the covenant.

Leviticus 26 etc. spells these out in detail. A brief version of the benefits of being God's people occurs in Ex. 19:

A google search on suzerainty covenant will bring up a number of other resources for further study on the subject.

The reason the old covenant was the ministry of death was because those who did them lived by them, but they did not do them. They promised to do everything in the book of the law, but broke the law and became guilty.

Hebrews spells out that the new covenant is superior and is based on better promises:

6 But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises.

In the old covenant the promises were

God: Make you of all nations a special people, make you a nation of priests, etc.
People: We will do all the Lord has said.

God kept His promises. The people did not. Therefore the weakness of the old covenant was in the fact the people did not keep their promises.

However, while the old covenant is a suzerainty covenant with imposed regulations on the people, the new covenant is not based on the promises of the people. It is unilateral. God is the one who writes the law on the heart and in the mind. It is not dependent on the people's ability to do it.

In this way it is far better. The law is still involved. But it is not the law on the stone tablets, but Christ Himself living in us by His Spirit to do in us what our sinful flesh could never do. Now to Romans 7 where this is spelled out in more detail.


7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people and saidb]">[b]:

“The days are coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
and with the people of Judah.
9 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them,
declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11 No longer will they teach their neighbor,
or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”c]">[c]


13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

mkgal1 said:

Thank you. That makes sense to me.

Also - wouldn't it tie in to this that the first Temple built by Solomon WAS filled with God's presense (His glory).....but the second Temple never was - that His glory had departed?

Click to expand...

Sort of. God's glory filled the temple during Solomon's time. But the glory also entered in later--in the person of Jesus. This in fact ties in to Palm Sunday.

Jesus predicted the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD at His triumphal entry. And the reason was that they did not recognize the day of their visitation:

41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”


And:

37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left to you desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’

Now on to Romans 7:

7 Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2 For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3 So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.

He starts with an illustration. The law only has power over someone as long as they live. Once they are dead, they are free from the law. In marriage if the spouse dies you are free from the spouse.

Next he is going to say we died to the law:

4 So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

We died. Therefore the law no longer has power over us. Now keep in mind, he is not saying that the law is bad. He says the opposite later in this chapter, which you already noted. But what he is saying is that we died with Christ. Romans 6 talked about this in regards to Baptism. Those who are baptized are baptized into his death. And we are raised to new life. Baptism then is a picture of death, burial and resurrection to new life. We participate in that spiritually.

In Romans 6 he emphasized that we died to sin. Now he goes on in Romans 7 to spell out another aspect of dying with Christ--we died to the law. The law no longer has power over us. Now we no longer, as Christians, have the law as our standard of righteousness. Instead we belong to another (carrying on the example of someone who's old spouse died and is now married to another). We died to the law, to be married to Christ. Christ, the only one to live out the law without sin, lives in us, and we serve in the Spirit, not the old written code. The old written code said what to do, but we did not do it. In fact, he is going to say shortly that we could not do it in our sinful flesh. But Christ now lives in us and we are able to bear fruit for God which we could not before.


5 For when we were in the realm of the flesh,the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

We are free from the law, joined to Christ, and Christ by His Spirit, helps us to serve in a new way that we could not by just the written code. This is why the new covenant is better. Our sinful flesh does not please God. But life in the Spirit does.

Continuing in Romans 7, now that he has said we died to the law, he has to give an explanation because many would feel this is attacking the law. The problem is not the law, but us. So he goes on to defend the law, and why God did this:


7 What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”

So he first notes that the law is not sin. In fact the law points out sin. This goes back to what he said in Chapter 3. From Romans 1:18 - 3:20 Paul is spelling out how the whole world is alike under sin. This culminates in the following:

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.
20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

The law cannot declare us righteous because we are all alike under sin. He then from 3:21-the end of chapter 5 spells out that righteousness is by faith, not from the law.

So the law points out sin, and points out what we should do. It is righteous. But it cannot make us righteous. That is because in our weakness of our sinful flesh we cannot keep it.


8 But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of coveting. For apart from the law, sin was dead. 9 Once I was alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. 11 For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. 12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

Here he says the law intended to bring life brought death--because we couldn't keep it. The law says we should do it. We don't do it, resulting in death. This is not the fault of the law. The law is still holy, righteous and good.

tall73 said:

Sort of. God's glory filled the temple during Solomon's time. But the glory also entered in later--in the person of Jesus. This in fact ties in to Palm Sunday.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Thanks for clarifying what I'd posted (I'd stopped at the desolation of the second Temple)....but I'm glad you added this important detail.

tall73 said:

The reason the old covenant was the ministry of death was because those who did them lived by them, but they did not do them. They promised to do everything in the book of the law, but broke the law and became guilty.

Click to expand...

Well said.

I think King David is a good example of that. He knew he was guilty when he sinned - and he knew what his "sentence" should have been (literal death).....and, because he realized God's mercy in dealing with him.....he repented and was contrite.

The way I see it is that the Law (God's instruction) still has a place in our lives. It's not to be legalistic about it - it's not about salvation - but it is critical in our santification process.

He then continues his defense of the law, nothing that he, not the law, is the problem:

13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! Nevertheless, in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it used what is good to bring about my death, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.

14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me.

The law makes sin utterly sinful--we recognize how bad sin is by the law, and it puts us to death--condemns us for breaking the law. The reason is that we are sinful.


Romans 7 spells out the problem--we are slaves to sin, and cannot keep the law. It condemns us. Therefore the old covenant is a ministry of death because it can only condemn us, as we are sinful and do not keep the law.

Romans 8 spells out the solution in the new covenant--life in the Spirit:

8 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh,God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

The law was powerless because it was weakened by the flesh. The law is holy, but we are not. Therefore the law cannot make us righteous, because we sin continually. But God sent His Son to now do what the law could not. He became a sin offering for us. And the righteous requirements of the law are now fully met in us (fulfilled) who live not according to the flesh sin nature, but the Spirit.

So in short, we could not keep the law. Hence it became a ministry death to us. But the new covenant is that God lives in us and fulfills the righteous requirements of the law through the Spirit. He writes the law in our minds and in our heart. He is able to do what the law could not. So our focus is now not on the law, but on Christ. We bear the fruit of the Spirit "against which there is no law" (Galatians 5).

mkgal1 said:

Well said.

I think King David is a good example of that. He knew he was guilty when he sinned - and he knew what his "sentence" should have been (literal death).....and, because he realized God's mercy in dealing with him.....he repented and was contrite.

The way I see it is that the Law (God's instruction) still has a place in our lives. It's not to be legalistic about it - it's not about salvation - but it is critical in our justification process.

Click to expand...

Well Paul notes something interesting about the role of the law in our life in I Timothy. While we are dead to the law and joined to another in Romans 7, the law itself still has a role. But it is primarily to point out sin to convict the sinner:


3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith. 5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 Some have departed from these and have turned to meaningless talk. 7 They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.

8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

tall73 said:

The law cannot declare us righteous because we are all alike under sin. He then from 3:21-the end of chapter 5 spells out that righteousness is by faith, not from the law.

So the law points out sin, and points out what we should do. It is righteous. But it cannot make us righteous. That is because in our weakness of our sinful flesh we cannot keep it.


8 But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of coveting. For apart from the law, sin was dead. 9 Once I was alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. 11 For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. 12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

Here he says the law intended to bring life brought death--because we couldn't keep it. The law says we should do it. We don't do it, resulting in death. This is not the fault of the law. The law is still holy, righteous and good.

Click to expand...

Thank you, Tall, for taking the time to share all of this. Maybe this will help to clarify this discussion.

Now since by the Spirit the righteous requirements of the law are fully met in us Paul can still quote the command regarding honoring fathers and mothers in Ephesians 6:

6 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— 3 “so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.”

Paul still refers to the law, and points out its righteous requirements. However, notice that the nature of the promise is slightly different. In the ten commandments, a covenant made with Israel, the result of obedience is that they would live long in the land the Lord God gave them. In other words, they would long remain in the holy land that He had given them in His promises to Abraham. Here Paul is speaking to a primarily gentile audience in Ephesus and indicates long life, rather than long covenant participation in the holy land.

The righteous requirements are the same. The particulars of the covenant and its blessings are slightly different.

mkgal1 said:

Thank you, Tall, for taking the time to share all of this. Maybe this will help to clarify this discussion.

Click to expand...

Well it will at least provide more to discuss!