Any scriptural evidence that evangelized Gentiles are to keep the Sabbath?

Status
Not open for further replies.

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
There are many promises in Exodus before Ex 20:12
But no promises combined with a commandment. Paul did not wrote about the first promise, but about the first commandment with a promised. Your list proves that all promises before Ex 20 are not combined with a commandment, so the 4th commandment is the first with a promise (we have to left out the commandments to Abraham and Noah, i.e. Genesis).

The command:
--The Mission of Moses

Do you seriously count that commands to Mose under the commandments to Israel? Don't you see that you are using tricks?
 
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The command:
A command for a specific case is not a commandment. A commandment is lasting.

Or do you want to say that we should go and borrow things we are certain we will never bring back, as in your Example from Ex 11? Or that this is a commandment to the people of Israel? No Jew will agree to that ...
 
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
So this is the point here. You have been convinced that there is a difference between Jew and Gentile believers, but Peter says just exactly the opposite as I just posted.
Jews and Gentiles are saved by grace, there is no difference in that. But there is a difference regarding the past: Israel had a covenant with God, why the other people had not, but went their own ways without interference from God (Acts 14:16). And since God does not revoke his covenant, there is also a difference in respect to the law.

No, the commandments listed by James are explicitly also for the foreigners among you (Ex 17:7-16; 18,26).

This seems to confirm that there is no Jew or Gentile with the Christ. And that these Word's of the Christ are written to all men, not just the Jews as the popular religious philosophy of modern religions preach.
The question is not whether the words of Jessu are for all men (they are), but whether the demands of the law are also for those who are not in tzhe vovenant from Sinai.Does the Pope come in Christ's Name, and does he say Jesus is truly the Christ?

Does Benny Hinn come in Christ's Name, and preach that Jesus is truly the Christ? Does Ellen White come in Christ's Name, preaching that Jesus is truly the Christ?
Do you want to say that everybody who says Jesus is the Christ is a deceiver?

Saying Jesus is the Christ is no means of deception. The deception (the false teaching) lies other-where. For the examples you numbered, in quite different places.

But saying "I am" Jesus returned to earth, or I am the Messiah, this is deception. And of course, if you left out your bracketed "Jesus", saying "I am the most important prophet" or the like is deception (the only exception will be the case of Rev 11, but I doubt these figures - if we have to take them literally as men - will say they are most important).

Shouldn't we consider the warnings of the Christ regarding the religious philosophies of men who come in Christ's Name, teaching Jesus is truly the Christ?
You added a "Jesus" to the saying, and so gave the impression a deceiver can be recognized by saying "Jesus is the Christ".


I have heard this version before, but it doesn't make any sense. How does a man "come in Christ's Name", but at the same time claims to "be the Christ"?
Sing "I am the Christ" is misusing the name "Messiah". Where is the problem?

What about all the other warnings which warn of the same exact thing?
It's not exactly the same thing. There are many warnings before false teachers, and they are sometimes very different, e.g. the warning from the antichrists who will say Jesus is not the on of God.

This is why it's important to follow Paul's instructions, and reject all the "other religious voices" the Bible warns about over and over since Eve was convinced, by a voice that used "some" of God's Word, that God's Commandment made her blind.
Of course we have to give heed to every warning.

Certainly not the Mainstream Preachers of Paul and Peter's time's version of Circumcision and the Sabbath. They had led God's People astray with their doctrines and commandments of men for centuries, as the Scriptures show us over and over.
Does this mean that we both agree that is is wrong to put a Sabbath obeyance obligations on all believers?

The reality that you have been convinced by someone that God placed these burdens on men that caused them to fall
The "someone" is Mose (Deut 31:24-31), and this is confirmed by Paul (Rom 3:20).

The Jews who were bewitching the Gentiles were not teaching the Law of Moses.
In a way, you are right: The Law of Moses says it is a law for Israel, but they wanted to force it upon Gentile believers.

They might have claimed it was, but the Holy scriptures are clear that they were not.
The Holy Scriptures say they said:
“Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” (Acts 15:1)
“The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.” (Acts 15:5)

Their "philosophy" can be described as such:
  • The Law has not been abandoned (see Jesus' saying).
  • Believers in Christ are like proselytes, i.e. in receiving Christ they become Jews.
  • Therefore they have to obey the Law of Mose, including circumcision.
This can hardly be described as "not teaching the Law of Moses", as you did.
 
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
also knowing that at Sinai when He handed to ISRAEL (not just to the Jews one tribe of 12)
The Jews are from more than one tribe. The kingdom of Judah included the tribe of Judah (Together with the tribe of Simeon, who settled among Judah) and the land of Benjamin. We also see in the OT that the tribe Levi joined this kingdom, so we have at least four tribes among the people was was exiled into Babylon and returned from there.
In the NT, we have descendants from Judah (e.g. Joseph, the husband of Mary), Benjamin (Shaul, roman name Paullus, or Greek saulos/paulos), Levi (Barnabas) and Asher (Lk 2:26). We see three of the tribes I mentioned before (and there is no reasonable doubt that there were also Simeonites among the Jews), and another tribe, by no doubt because in the times of Hiskija and Josia people from the northern kingdom joined the kingdom of Juda. Rev 7 seems to indicate that descendants from 11 tribes (Dan is missing) are among the Jews.

as it was ONE LAW for native and foreigner alike
Not on all points, there are laws in the Pentateuch that are for Israelites and foreigners alike, but in principle it was a law for Israel, which sometimes explicitly states different rules for Israelites and Gentiles.

...and in the NT too...even as Paul repeated since IN HIM there be no more Jew...but a citizen of Israel...grafted in to match the other branches NOT cut off for unbelief...
But don't overlook that he says the branches cut off will be re-inserted, and in the end all Israel will be saved (though they are enemies by now).

He instructed them to go into ALL nations to teach them to observe ALL He commanded them to do...kinda exactly like what Moses taught from his seat...native and foreigner THE SAME...
There are counterexamples to "for all" (Deut 14:21), and even explicit statements that this law is for Israel, not the whole world (Deut 18:14).

I mean we didn't have the codified NT yet... right? To hear THAT every Sabbath in the synagogues...so Moses it was...until Paul started his letters
Forgot that the first deadly conflict was even before Paul was called by Christ?

many project the scope further down the future...to END TIMES of trouble...
We have a prophecy, we have a fulfillment. There may be another fulfillment (sometimes a prophecy has more than one fulfillment). But the "projection" you name has no evidence for it.

still does as per Heb 4:9 unless you are NOT His people...
Heb 4:9 is not about Sabbath, but about sabbatismos. This difference should not be overlooked.

notice it is NOT "have faith IN” but "here are they that...have the faith OF"
"Of" (or more precisely: the Genitive) in Greek has a somewhat different meaning than in German (my mother tongue), or English. See Rom 3:26, the verse that showed Martin Luther that "justice of God" does not only mean that God is just, but also that God makes just. And "Faith of" is a mistranslation, when in the Greek the Genitive has the meaning "face into". You are the victim by a literal (and hence wrong) translation (I studied linguistics, I know what I say).

well who knows for sure...I mean I ain't a Jew neither but I do know it is of Hebrew origin and NOT "Jesus"...
Well, The Hebrew form is "jhowshu`" ("Joshua"), the form we you have in mind is Aramaic. The Greek iesou(s) is a transcription as close as possible to the Aramaic (there is no [separate] sh-sound in Greek, the "ou" is to be pronounced as in English "through", the final s is a grammatical ending). The pronunciation of "Jesus" in my mother tongue (German) is rather close to the ancient Greek (the first s has got voiced, that's all), but the English pronunciation is rather far off.

But "yahoshua" also differs from the Aramaic, because the original form contained no a.

BTW: In the Greek Bible, iesous is used for "Joshua", so in the speech of Stephen, the only verse were the name of Jesus appears is Acts 7:45! This is no Christian invention, it is also so in the OT (translated into Greek by Jews).

Is what I am talking about...
"Name" sometimes stand for "person", one verse we can be sure is John 17:6 - Jesus was certainly not the first who revealed the name YHWH (and there is no evidence that he ever pronounced that name). And there are several other instances where the best translation seems to be "person", e.g. Acts 4:12.

I doubt that Jesus will be upset because you used a form with two a's, or because English people pronounce His name according to their language, or any other variant pronunciation used by people around the world.
 
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I thought when they omitted the 2nd in their public displays it was to avoid dealing with the image prohibition
This may have played a part.

again you miss that ALL of this was a description to what it was like where "I AM"...to a lifestyle which we will be restored to when this detour of sin is over...to our FACTORY DEFAULT SETTING...made in His IMAGE not just to look like but to live MORE like He does...
You have a tendency to write rather cryptic. I assume "I AM" is a reference to YHWH ... but I feel that I miss a point.

As to image: There are many opinions about the nature of "image". I don't think it has to do much with "looking alike". My favorite thought on this point is: We can see in the very verse, what "image" aims at: Man is created as male and female, and thus an image of the God who set "let us create man ...". But lest one things this means several Gods, let him notice that the first use of the word "one" that is not used as enumeration is in Gen 2:24 which states that man and woman are one flesh (same word as in Deut 6:4).
 
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I noticed you deleted all the scriptures from my previous post that show who God's ISRAEL is under the new covenant.
I focused on the crucial point. The interpretation of the verses you cited will gbe biased if you don't tke into account what I pointed to.

Romans 11:28 does not delete all the scripture provided to you in the previous post
Of course not. But they are not against what I said (though probably against what you perceived I have said).

When we read Romans 11:28 is simply says that they are still beloved by God even though they have been cast away and are now His enemies, because of the patriarchs who God made his covenant with (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). Those of physical ISRAEL who do not believe the Gospel in the new covenant according to Romans 11:28 are God's enemies and cast away, while Romans 11:13-27 says that those Jews and Gentile believers in the gospel are grafted in,
... and the branches that were cast off will be re-inserted, V.23-24, which will happen eẃhen the temporarly blindness will end (V.25). In spite of the fact that they are enemies by now (V.28) You have to look at the time sequence (V.30-31).

You construct a contradiction between this and the verses you cited, I say that contradiction does not exist.

Why do you say it is a trick to post scripture for everything I have shared with you here when you were the one asking for the scriptures you thought did not exist?
You did not provide the proof I asked for. You did not address the crucial question. Perhaps because you misperceived my thoughts. I never questioned that Jews and gentiles are saved by grace alike.

My reaction came from two reasons: (1) it was late night when I wrote it (2) I was reminded of something similar, but let me say aforehand that I don't want to compare the kind of error - when discussing with Jehova's witnesses I encountered heaps of Bible verses that showed that Jesus is not the Father "and therefore he Trinity is wrong in saying Jesus is YHWH". Sometimes served with the tone "oh, don't you know that the Bible teach Jesus is not the father?".

But (I said before) You are not JW, I didn't mention them because it would be unfair to compare you to them. But you asked why I was not impressed by a long list of verses who state what I already believe, and insist on discussing the point where we really differ.
 
Upvote 0

Studyman

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
2,115
618
65
Michigan
✟318,572.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Jews and Gentiles are saved by grace, there is no difference in that. But there is a difference regarding the past: Israel had a covenant with God, why the other people had not, but went their own ways without interference from God (Acts 14:16). And since God does not revoke his covenant, there is also a difference in respect to the law.

Mercy was always by Faith/Belief and then Grace. As the story or Rehab given in the examples God had written for our admonition.

No, the commandments listed by James are explicitly also for the foreigners among you (Ex 17:7-16; 18,26).

Ex. 12:49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.

If these 4 Commandments of God were explicitly only for foreigners, then James wouldn't have sent them to hear Moses, as Jesus did for them.

The question is not whether the words of Jessu are for all men (they are), but whether the demands of the law are also for those who are not in tzhe vovenant from Sinai.

That is the question. Did God inspire all these Holy Scriptures to be written, all thes examples for us of the Faithful and the unfaithful, which Paul said was written specifically for us, just so we can write them off as "just for the Jews"?

Does the Pope come in Christ's Name, and does he say Jesus is truly the Christ?
Do you want to say that everybody who says Jesus is the Christ is a deceiver?

Saying Jesus is the Christ is no means of deception. The deception (the false teaching) lies other-where. For the examples you numbered, in quite different places.

But saying "I am" Jesus returned to earth, or I am the Messiah, this is deception. And of course, if you left out your bracketed "Jesus", saying "I am the most important prophet" or the like is deception (the only exception will be the case of Rev 11, but I doubt these figures - if we have to take them literally as men - will say they are most important).


You added a "Jesus" to the saying, and so gave the impression a deceiver can be recognized by saying "Jesus is the Christ".

I can't tell if you are serious, or just mocking me. Jesus is warning of a future religion. One that comes in His Name, just as the children of devil, Pharisees, came in God's name. A religion that teaches Jesus is the Christ, just Paul warns about satan disguising itself into "Apostles of Christ".

Would an Apostle of Christ teach that Jesus is the Messiah? So then, satan, disguised as an Apostle of Christ would also teach Jesus is the Messiah. Are you a Jehovah Witness, or a Mormon? Maybe a Catholic? If not, why??? Is it because even though they come in Christ's name, and they teach that Jesus is the Prophesied Messiah, you still don't believe in their doctrines? And why is that? Because you don't believe they align with Scriptures?

All you guys who are waiting for the "Many" to come and claim to be Jesus in the Flesh are surely going to be surprised to find out that that is not what HE was warning about.

Jesus was speaking here. HE said "For many will come in My Name, saying I am Christ".

satan disguised as "Apostles of Christ", not as the Christ. How could a man who claims to be Jesus in the flesh deceive anyone? But a man who comes in Jesus name, preaching He is truly the Christ, now this man could deceive folks.

This is why I asked you why you were not a Catholic, or Mormon since both come in Christ's Name, and both teach Jesus was truly the Messiah. Yet neither are claiming to be Jesus in the Flesh.

Does this mean that we both agree that is is wrong to put a Sabbath obeyance obligations on all believers?

Jesus said HIS Sabbath, that HE is Lord of, was made for man. I am a man, and I am fully convinced in my mind that Jesus is my King and Savior. I would never pretend to tell you how to live your life. I simply want to point out the Scriptures and the reason for my faith in them. I'm with Paul on this one.

Rom. 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

I'm OK with that.


The "someone" is Mose (Deut 31:24-31), and this is confirmed by Paul (Rom 3:20).

So the examples of faith written for us don't count in your religion? Calab, Joshua, Rehab, Gideon, Zacharias, Simeon?

Heb. 11:1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Maybe we should not follow the examples of the men that fell, and follow the examples of Faith, and walk as Jesus walked.

1 Cor. 10:5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.

11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

In a way, you are right: The Law of Moses says it is a law for Israel, but they wanted to force it upon Gentile believers.

Jesus said the Jews "Taught for doctrines the Commandments of men". This is what they were trying to force on the Gentiles. They labeled it the Law of Moses, but Peter knew better, believing what Jesus and the Prophets said about their religion. Just as the Scriptures you posted from Duet. They were NOT trying to place God's Laws on the Gentiles, but their religious doctrines and traditions they claimed was God's Law. This is why Peter and James sent them to hear directly from Moses, and not from the Pharisees " For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers."

The Holy Scriptures say they said:
“Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” (Acts 15:1)
“The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.” (Acts 15:5)

The Pharisees were "uncircumcised of heart" and the Gentiles who repented and "turned to God" were considered circumcised, as Paul describes in great detail. As it is written in the Law and Prophets.

Duet. 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

Their "philosophy" can be described as such:
  • The Law has not been abandoned (see Jesus' saying).
  • Believers in Christ are like proselytes, i.e. in receiving Christ they become Jews.
  • Therefore they have to obey the Law of Mose, including circumcision.
This can hardly be described as "not teaching the Law of Moses", as you did.

I am believing what is written, and the Word's of the Christ Himself.

Zacharias taught and obeyed the Law of Moses, the Pharisees did not. You are free to show me even one place where Jesus accused them of obeying "the Law of Moses".

You have been convinced they were, but not by the Holy Scriptures. Even the verse you quote from Moses tells you most of these men will not follow God's Way.

In founding much of your religious philosophy on the falsehood that the Pharisees were promoting the Laws of Moses, you must ignore and reject the entire Law and Prophets, you must declare Jesus an outright tale bearer, and you must ignore the entire reason GOD Himself gave for rejecting them from HIS Kingdom.

And for what??? To Prove that the Yoke of Bondage the fathers couldn't bear was God's instruction?

Think about this, in this religious philosophy you are implying that God did works and wonders in Egypt to gain the Faith and Trust of the Children of Israel, who HE Loved, placed them at the edge of the Red Sea to show them HIS Power, and further gain their trust in Him, and when they finally trusted Him enough to follow Him across the Red Sea, He then placed Laws so Grievous, they were impossible to obey, then slaughtered them by the thousands for not obeying.

I know this is a popular religious philosophy and it has been taught by the religions of the land, who come in Christ's Name, for centuries.

But it is untrue. This is why Jesus warned of "men who come in His Name, who preach that HE is truly the Christ, who will deceive many.

Everyone has to choose between the religions of the land we are born into, and the Holy Scriptures written for our admonition. Jesus did, and so do we.
 
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Ok so the starting off God's spoken and written LAW in Exodus 20:1-17 does not say "thou shalt not" or "do not" in the first set of words. Yep I agree. How does that means that there are not 10 commandments in God's LAW?
There are ten words. According to Jewish counting, the first word is (i quote from Ex 20, using Deut 5 will make no important difference):
I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

The second word is
You shall have no other gods besides me. You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

You see the difference between the first word, which is no commandment, and the second word, which is a commandment?

How exactly is this relevant to our conversation exactly?
I don't know. I pointed to the fact that there is no term "10 commandments" in the Bible, this was a rather minor point in a chain of arguments which aimed at: The Sabbath is not the highest command as the term "heart of the law" suggests, Jesus has named two quite different commandments (not in the ten words) as such.

It was you who opposed to this fact (whether here are 9 or 10 commandments is not sure) and made a fuss about that, so it became a major point in our discussion.

Are you claiming there is not 10 commandments in God's 10 commandments in Exodus 20:1-17? Sorry for all the questions here but this section of your post does not make much sense to me.
The Jews "claim" this. I simply say there is no means to say whether the Jewish tradition (10 words, only 9 of them are commandments) or the Christian tradition (10 words, which are all commandments) is the better division of the texts.

Well you have provided an opinion here unsupported by any evidence.
The way the Jews look unto the 10 words is not my opinion, it is a fact, they do so indeed. And there is no evidence against that Jewish position. Hence you cannot dismiss it. You are free to choose another division (I also prefer the "reformed" division), but you can not say it is the only possible division, and every other is not Biblical.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
A command for a specific case is not a commandment. A commandment is lasting.

Well we have "the Ten Commandments" in Exodus 20 ... if that is what you mean.

And there it is a fact that "the first commandment with a promise" is the 5th one.
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The interpretation of the verses you cited will gbe biased if you don't tke into account what I pointed to.
Your claims above following all of our discussion was that Romans 11:28 disagrees with Romans 11:13-27 in which you were putting an interpretation on Romans 11:28 that God's ISRAEL in the new covenant have always been physical ISRAEL in the flesh and not those according to the scriptures shared with you that show that God's ISRAEL are all those who believe and follow God's Word to which I responded..
LoveGodsWord said: Romans 11:28 does not delete all the scripture provided to you in the previous post
Your response was...
Of course not. But they are not against what I said (though probably against what you perceived I have said).
What does this mean? Of course the context posts of Romans 11:13-27 are against what you said they are saying the opposite of what you said. They are not saying that physical ISRAEL in the flesh are still God's ISRAEL. They are saying unbelieving ISRAEL in the flesh has been cut off and that believing ISRAEL and believing Gentile believers are now one and that there is no more Jew or Gentile believer. Gentiles are now grafted in and all are one in Christ.

BTW we are have not even started talking about all the other scriptures provided in the first post here yet that you have simply hand waived away as a trick in post # 418 linked but we do not need to if all the context is considered in Romans 11:13-27. In the last post your error was ignoring context. The context of v28 was provided to prove that Romans 11:28 was not saying that "UNBELIEVING" physical ISRAEL in the flesh are God's people at all but that they are his enemies and are cut off and broken off and no longer a part of God's ISRAEL. Romans 11:28 does not delete all the scripture provided to you in the previous posts and neither does it say that physical ISRAEL is God's true ISRAEL in the new covenant as the scripture teach that unbelieving ISRAEL are God's enemies *Romans 11:28 and have been cast away *Romans 11:15 and are no longer ISRAEL (see also Romans 9:6-8).

When we read Romans 11:28 it simply says that they (physical unbelieving Israel) are still beloved by God even though they have been cast away and are now His enemies, because of the patriarchs who God made his covenant with (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). Those of physical ISRAEL who do not believe the Gospel in the new covenant according to Romans 11:28 are God's enemies and cast away, while Romans 11:13-27 says that those Jews and Gentile believers in the gospel are grafted in, while much of the other scriptures provided show there is now no more Jew or Gentile believer but all are one in Christ and a part God's true ISRAEL *Romans 9:6-8 of the new covenant and are described as all those who believe and follow God's Word *Ephesians 2:11-13; Galatians 3:28-29; Romans 9:6-8; Romans 2:28-29; Colossians 3:11; Romans 10:11-13.

Reading all the scripture contexts in Romans 11:13-28 we read that unbelieveing ISRAEL are cast out and enemies of God, while believers are grafted in and God is able to graft back in those who have been cast out (Unbelieving physical ISRAEL who are still beloved for the patriarchs sake).
... and the branches that were cast off will be re-inserted, V.23-24, which will happen eẃhen the temporarly blindness will end (V.25). In spite of the fact that they are enemies by now (V.28) You have to look at the time sequence (V.30-31). You construct a contradiction between this and the verses you cited, I say that contradiction does not exist.
Nonsense. It is you who is constructing a contradiction by claiming that "UNBELIEVING" ISRAEL will be grafted back in when it is the scriptures that teach that "UNBELIEVING" ISRAEL are the enemies of God and were cast off, broken off from ISRAEL because of their "UNBELIEF" and that God's true ISRAEL in the new covenant are all those who "BELIEVE AND FOLLOW GOD'S WORD" * Ephesians 2:11-13; Galatians 3:28-29; Romans 9:6-8; Romans 2:28-29; Colossians 3:11 Romans 10:11-13. Your interpretation of single scriptures do not agree with the contexts your disregarding in Romans 11:13-24.

Now lets examine your claims that "the branches that were cast off will be re-inserted, V.23-24". We have provided the context already in that it was through "UNBELIEF" that ISRAEL in the flesh were cast out or broken off and are no longer a part of God's ISRAEL as shown in Romans 11:13-22. What I have shared with you through the scriptures as to God's ISRAEL being all those who believe and follow God's Word is all present tense idicative (present tense application) meaning that as long as one believes and follows God's Word they are a part of God's ISRAEL in the new covenant and according to the new covenant scriptures. You claim that physical ISRAEL will be reinserted. There is even contradictions in your own words here as that fact you said physical ISRAEL will be "reinserted" means you agree with me that they are "CAST OFF and BROKEN OFF" and that they are no longer Gods ISRAEL! But let's not stop here as even the very scriptures you quote in v23-24 does not say that physical ISRAEL will be inserted in "UNBELIEF"!

Romans 11:23-24 says [23], And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.[24], For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? The scripture do not say what you have claimed above at all. As can be seen above v23-24 support Romans 11:13-22 and do not say that "UNBELIEVING ISRAEL" will be re-inserted. It says "IF THEY ABIDE NOT IN UNBELIEF THEY SHALL BE GRAFTED BACK" into ISRAEL! Looking at v30-31 is applied to the contexts your disregarding here and that is God's mercy is applied to if "UNBELIEVING" ISRAEL returns back to God by "BELIEVING" what God's Word says. As posted earlier everything shared with you stands. Gods' ISRAEL according to the new covenant scriptures are all those who "BELIEVE AND FOLLOW" God's Word. Gentiles "BELIEVERS" are now grafted in and all are one in Christ. According to the new covenant scriptures if we are now a part of God's ISRAEL we have no part in God's new covenant promise *Hebrews 8:10-12.

This is only meant to be helpful, constructive and a blessing as your interpretation of these scriptures are in error as proven and shown why through the scriptures above. My prayer dear friend is that you might be blessed and receive God's correction.

May God bless you as you seek him through his Word.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
well the issue there was that He rose...NOT how He was killed...they about tore the place up just on that issue...
What Issue do you mean? The point which caused the riot was the Lord telling Paul to leave and go the heathens. Either they were upset because Paul called Jesus LORD (YHWH) or because they couldn't stand the thought the Messiah was also for Gentiles.

oh He was present...just as when He was when they said "I DO" but well didn't and adulterated and were put away...
A Jew born in the 20th century was present when Jesus was crucified, so we can accuse him of killing Jesus? This is blatant anti-semitism, a slap into the face of Jews like Peter and Paul (who warned us not to despise Israel). I coukld even have named Jesus, who is a Jew.

They took it upon themselves...
Not he Jews in Alexandria, Rome, or Antioch at Pisidia.

And what dis the "take upon them"? the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.

Do you really want to say that Jesus, who prayed for forgiveness for those who crucified Him, will take revenge to the descendants almost 200 years (Approx. 40 Generations!) later?

yes yes...absolving you of keeping a day off...lol...
I don't need dispensationalism for that, I have Scripture (Rom 14:5).

well...if you claim His bride is NOT keeping ALL He commanded us to do...then you have Him married to another...from another gospel another christ?
Jesus never commanded to keep the Sabbath, what commandments did he give us? Love God above all, love the neighbor as yourself.

you seem to believe what Jews said of Stephen that he preached "Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered" Acts 6:13-14
No. The statement of the law that it is for the people of Israel was not changed.

Peter demonstrated the dietary Laws of Leviticus still binding and Acts 15 still applied to those "strangers within the gates" as per Moses...
And therefore he refused to visit the Gentiles who tried to invite him, and did not eat with them ... sorry, my Bible says otherwise (Acts 10, and chapter 11). Your description of Peter seems to have been true for a time (Gal 2:11-16). But he repented and later supported Paul (Acts 15:7-11).

BTW keeping His commandments is not burdensome...if you love Him...
Keeping Jesus' commands, yes. But you try to draw me into what we have been warned by the Holy Spirit. Read Galatians.
 
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
There is nothing wrong with the Law .... the Law stands.
The law has been given to the people of Israel. Nowhere in the NT it is said we Gentiles are bound by it. I do not say the Law has been abandoned.

Just for comparison: The US law is not abandoned just because I am not subject to it!

There are MANY sabbaths and feasts contained within the laws and ordinances associated with the earthly sanctuary system (no longer needed because of Jesus)
And all of them (including the weekly Sabbath are meant in Col 2:16.

I've made my points and you have made yours..... ;o)
I showed many distortions and even some blatant lies in your arguments. Enough reason not to trust you. I trust the whole Bible, not the portion you pick.
 
Upvote 0

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,696
5,613
Utah
✟713,367.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The law has been given to the people of Israel. Nowhere in the NT it is said we Gentiles are bound by it. I do not say the Law has been abandoned.

Just for comparison: The US law is not abandoned just because I am not subject to it!


And all of them (including the weekly Sabbath are meant in Col 2:16.


I showed many distortions and even some blatant lies in your arguments. Enough reason not to trust you. I trust the whole Bible, not the portion you pick.

Baloney on your accusations and insults .... I invite people to study out themselves in His Word. I don't ask people to trust me .... I ask them to compare ALL teachings and/or interpretations, viewpoints with His Word.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Studyman
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
There are ten words. According to Jewish counting, the first word is (i quote from Ex 20, using Deut 5 will make no important difference):
I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

The second word is
You shall have no other gods besides me. You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

You see the difference between the first word, which is no commandment, and the second word, which is a commandment?

I don't know. I pointed to the fact that there is no term "10 commandments" in the Bible, this was a rather minor point in a chain of arguments which aimed at: The Sabbath is not the highest command as the term "heart of the law" suggests, Jesus has named two quite different commandments (not in the ten words) as such.

It was you who opposed to this fact (whether here are 9 or 10 commandments is not sure) and made a fuss about that, so it became a major point in our discussion.

The Jews "claim" this. I simply say there is no means to say whether the Jewish tradition (10 words, only 9 of them are commandments) or the Christian tradition (10 words, which are all commandments) is the better division of the texts.

The way the Jews look unto the 10 words is not my opinion, it is a fact, they do so indeed. And there is no evidence against that Jewish position. Hence you cannot dismiss it. You are free to choose another division (I also prefer the "reformed" division), but you can not say it is the only possible division, and every other is not Biblical.

I am sorry dear friend God's Word disagrees with you here. Perhaps if we look directly at the scriptures it will help the conversation...

The TEN commandments as shown in Exodus 20:2-17

1. I am the LORD your God, V.2.
2. You shall have no other gods or any image before me. v3-6
3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain v7
4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy... v8-11
5. Honor your father and your mother v12
6. You shall not kill v13
7. You shall not commit adultery v14
8. You shall not steal v15
9. You shall not bear false witness v16
10. You shall not covet... v17

Now how many commandments are there in the 10 "sayings" of God in Exodus 20:2-17; is there 9; 10 or 613?

Let's look to the scriptures to find our answer.......

Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote on the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Deuteronomy 4:13 And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them on two tables of stone.

Deuteronomy 10:4 And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the LORD spoke to you in the mount out of the middle of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the LORD gave them to 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 *Romans 3:4; Matthew 15:3-9.

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I am sorry dear friend God's Word disagrees with you here. Perhaps if we look directly at the scriptures it will help the conversation...

The TEN commandments as shown in Exodus 20:2-17
.. and in Deut 5:6-21.

You did not quote the full text, but rather a heavy abbreviation. There is no numbering of the words in the text, if you have a Bible that provides a numbering, this is an additions by the editors, not in the original.

We do not differ on the text, the questions are:
  • Can we omit verse 2, as you have done in starting with "You shall have no other gods"?
  • Where is the delimitation between the first and the second saying? Is it after verse 2 (as the Jews insist), or later?
There are Bible editions which count e.g. "You shall not kill" as the fifth commandment, not as the sixth. This can be refuted, for such a systems leads to two different 9th commandments in Exodus and Deuteronomy. But as to the questions above, there is no indication in the text which helps to answer them.

Now how many commandments are there in the 10 "sayings" of God in Exodus 20:2-17; is there 9; 10 or 613?
Lets have a fresh look at it:
  1. I am the Lord your God. v.2
  2. You shall have no other gods before me. v.3-6.
  3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain v7
  4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy... v8-11
  5. Honor your father and your mother v12
  6. You shall not kill v13
  7. You shall not steal v14
  8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor v15
  9. You shall not steal v16
  10. You shall not covet... v17
How many commandments do you see now?

As to 613: No one in this world says there are 613 commands in Ex 20. There are 613 commandments in thwe Pentateuch, according to the rabbis (I doubt that any Non-Jew took up the labor and counted again).

Let's look to the scriptures to find our answer.......

Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote on the tables the words of the covenant, the ten words.
I mended the "mistranslation" you used. The Hebrew word for "commandment" is מצוה, not דבר as in Ex 34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4. You may translate with commandments, that this means begging the question whether the Jews are right to count V.2 as the first word or not.

Luther translated "words", so do the more literal German translation. "Commandment" is an interpretation.

It is good to look into the original, if anything is unclear.No translation is perfect, and if you misunderstand the intention of the translators, even a rather correct translation may be misleading.

Only God's Word is true
And God word says 10 words, not 10 commandments. This is the literal translation, "saying" may be the most natural one (but since English is not my mother tongue, I leave this to native speakers).
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The Jews are from more than one tribe. The kingdom of Judah included the tribe of Judah (Together with the tribe of Simeon, who settled among Judah) and the land of Benjamin. We also see in the OT that the tribe Levi joined this kingdom, so we have at least four tribes among the people was was exiled into Babylon and returned from there.

In the NT, we have descendants from Judah (e.g. Joseph, the husband of Mary), Benjamin (Shaul, roman name Paullus, or Greek saulos/paulos), Levi (Barnabas) and Asher (Lk 2:26). We see three of the tribes I mentioned before (and there is no reasonable doubt that there were also Simeonites among the Jews), and another tribe, by no doubt because in the times of Hiskija and Josia people from the northern kingdom joined the kingdom of Juda. Rev 7 seems to indicate that descendants from 11 tribes (Dan is missing) are among the Jews.
this has nothing to do with the ONE tribe from the ONE son of Jacob which stood at Sinai to receive the Living Oracles from Him...ONE tribe of 12 and now including many NOT of Jacob...ALL receiving the Sabbath the ONE commandment that includes these NOT of Jacob...prolly WHY Yahushua said it was made for Man and not just Jews or those of Jacob

Not on all points, there are laws in the Pentateuch that are for Israelites and foreigners alike, but in principle it was a law for Israel, which sometimes explicitly states different rules for Israelites and Gentiles.
so Moses LIED when Yah LIED about ONE law for natives and strangers THE SAME?

Passover meat was only to the circumcised...so one NOT of Jacob could partake IF circumcised...and the same of one able to eat of an animal “died of itself”

You miss the Law was STILL for them...as they were still saved and part of His people...ALL on condition they have faith and obey

But don't overlook that he says the branches cut off will be re-inserted,
on condition they have faith IN HIM not the Law...which remains only to point out sin and the One Who saves...NEVER having saved or perfected them itself

and in the end all Israel will be saved (though they are enemies by now).
again on condition...faith and obedience in Him not their Temple...as it is written “He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob”

Because in the end ALL who are saved are His People ISRAEL...and will come to worship Sabbath to Sabbath..

There are counterexamples to "for all" (Deut 14:21),
good to see you know what you disinherit...this law remains INCLUSIVE of the alien...

As does the seventh day Sabbath remain for MAN...or you claim the Lord of the Sabbath lied too...

and even explicit statements that this law is for Israel, not the whole world (Deut 18:14).
right His people do NOT listen to another but Him...ironic MOST of these died in the wilderness...His people remain a remnant faithful of mankind and those of Jacob...to Him His ways...

you miss this is NOT about Israel but a covenant to bless the WORLD by Abraham’s descendants....

Forgot that the first deadly conflict was even before Paul was called by Christ?
what that Saul chased believing Jews of “the Way” OUT of the synagogues?

We have a prophecy, we have a fulfillment. There may be another fulfillment (sometimes a prophecy has more than one fulfillment). But the "projection" you name has no evidence for it.
sure it does...as Sabbath remains into the next times of trouble...

Heb 4:9 is not about Sabbath, but about sabbatismos. This difference should not be overlooked.
sabbatismos is about a keeping of Monday’s? He never entered His rest after six days of work on a Monday...

It remains a Hebrew-Greek mashup word for a mashed up Jew-Greek people known as Israel...His people...you know those that love Him and keep His Living Oracle He handed down at Sinai...He having removed the dividing wall and destroyed in His flesh the Jew’s enmity against unclean goyim...

"Of" (or more precisely: the Genitive) in Greek has a somewhat different meaning than in German (my mother tongue), or English. See Rom 3:26, the verse that showed Martin Luther that "justice of God" does not only mean that God is just, but also that God makes just. And "Faith of" is a mistranslation, when in the Greek the Genitive has the meaning "face into". You are the victim by a literal (and hence wrong) translation (I studied linguistics, I know what I say).
oh yeah? So nevermind “faith OF” everywhere else....

So faith IN what? but His faithfulness to the faith He authored and completed...that we might FOLLOW HIM and do the same IN HIS IMAGE...have the same faith...DO the same faith lifestyle...how else to represent Him?

Well, The Hebrew form is "jhowshu`" ("Joshua"), the form we you have in mind is Aramaic. The Greek iesou(s) is a transcription as close as possible to the Aramaic (there is no [separate] sh-sound in Greek, the "ou" is to be pronounced as in English "through", the final s is a grammatical ending). The pronunciation of "Jesus" in my mother tongue (German) is rather close to the ancient Greek (the first s has got voiced, that's all), but the English pronunciation is rather far off.
Ja ja...und?

But "yahoshua" also differs from the Aramaic, because the original form contained no a.
and Paul heard answered to his question “who are you” in the Hebrew/Aramaic...which Luke notes TWICE in his retelling

BTW: In the Greek Bible, iesous is used for "Joshua", so in the speech of Stephen, the only verse were the name of Jesus appears is Acts 7:45! This is no Christian invention, it is also so in the OT (translated into Greek by Jews).
“Jesus” is NOT Joshua or His Name...

"Name" sometimes stand for "person", one verse we can be sure is John 17:6 -
wut? He manifested His PERSON?...wow ok...

Jesus was certainly not the first who revealed the name YHWH (and there is no evidence that he ever pronounced that name). And there are several other instances where the best translation seems to be "person", e.g. Acts 4:12.
seems to be eh? The disciples were asked by what power or NAME they “done this” included healing...Acts 4:7 and were strictly forbidden to SPEAK or teach in His name...verse 18 but they persisted verse 30 which was still annoying Acts 5:28,40 but they continued daily teaching Yahushua is the annointed one 42

I doubt that Jesus will be upset because you used a form with two a's, or because English people pronounce His name according to their language, or any other variant pronunciation used by people around the world.

That is certainly less threatening than the Pharisees’ prohibition for sure...but I stand with Peter...”we ought to obey Yah rather than Helmet”
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

helmut

Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,813
349
Berlin
✟71,057.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
As to 613:
One more remark: According to you the commandments to God above above all and to love the neighbor are not among the commandments referred to in the NT verses which contain phrases like "do the commandments of God". But what did Jesus say:

Mt 22:37 “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

So the most important commandments are in Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18. How dare you to change this to Ex 20:2-17? Do you think you can correct Jesus?
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
10,019
4,232
USA
✟470,460.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
.. and in Deut 5:6-21.

You did not quote the full text, but rather a heavy abbreviation. There is no numbering of the words in the text, if you have a Bible that provides a numbering, this is an additions by the editors, not in the original.

We do not differ on the text, the questions are:
  • Can we omit verse 2, as you have done in starting with "You shall have no other gods"?
  • Where is the delimitation between the first and the second saying? Is it after verse 2 (as the Jews insist), or later?
There are Bible editions which count e.g. "You shall not kill" as the fifth commandment, not as the sixth. This can be refuted, for such a systems leads to two different 9th commandments in Exodus and Deuteronomy. But as to the questions above, there is no indication in the text which helps to answer them.


Lets have a fresh look at it:
  1. I am the Lord your God. v.2
  2. You shall have no other gods before me. v.3-6.
  3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain v7
  4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy... v8-11
  5. Honor your father and your mother v12
  6. You shall not kill v13
  7. You shall not steal v14
  8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor v15
  9. You shall not steal v16
  10. You shall not covet... v17
How many commandments do you see now?

As to 613: No one in this world says there are 613 commands in Ex 20. There are 613 commandments in thwe Pentateuch, according to the rabbis (I doubt that any Non-Jew took up the labor and counted again).




I mended the "mistranslation" you used. The Hebrew word for "commandment" is מצוה, not דבר as in Ex 34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4. You may translate with commandments, that this means begging the question whether the Jews are right to count V.2 as the first word or not.

Luther translated "words", so do the more literal German translation. "Commandment" is an interpretation.

It is good to look into the original, if anything is unclear.No translation is perfect, and if you misunderstand the intention of the translators, even a rather correct translation may be misleading.


And God word says 10 words, not 10 commandments. This is the literal translation, "saying" may be the most natural one (but since English is not my mother tongue, I leave this to native speakers).

Hey there,

I am going to chime in if that's okay....

Here is the entire scripture taken Exodus 20 from NKJV

The Ten Commandments
20 1 And God spoke all these words, saying:

2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. (This is not a commandment, this is a statement)

3 “You shall have no other gods before Me. (1st commandment)

4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. In this 2nd commandment God Himself establishing these as "My commandments" and that's how it is referred throughout the rest of the Bible in both OT and NT.

7 “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain. 3rd commandment

8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it. 4th commandment

12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you. 5th commandment

13 “You shall not murder. 6th commandment

14 “You shall not commit adultery. 7th commandment

15 “You shall not steal. 8th commandment

16 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. 9th commandment

17 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.” 10th commandment


I hope this helps.

Blessings,
imge
 
  • Agree
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
10,019
4,232
USA
✟470,460.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
One more remark: According to you the commandments to God above above all and to love the neighbor are not among the commandments referred to in the NT verses which contain phrases like "do the commandments of God". But what did Jesus say:

Mt 22:37 “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

So the most important commandments are in Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18. How dare you to change this to Ex 20:2-17? Do you think you can correct Jesus?
God is unchanging
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
That means His law can not be changed.

The commandments were written on two tablets of stone by the finger of God. The first 4 commandments written on one tablet the last 6 on the other. The first 4 commandments are how we are to love, obey and worship God and last 6 are how we are to treat one another. There is nothing contradictory in the scriptures you quoted to the 10 commandments.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
.. and in Deut 5:6-21.
You did not quote the full text, but rather a heavy abbreviation. There is no numbering of the words in the text, if you have a Bible that provides a numbering, this is an additions by the editors, not in the original.

We do not differ on the text, the questions are:
  • Can we omit verse 2, as you have done in starting with "You shall have no other gods"?
  • Where is the delimitation between the first and the second saying? Is it after verse 2 (as the Jews insist), or later?
There are Bible editions which count e.g. "You shall not kill" as the fifth commandment, not as the sixth. This can be refuted, for such a systems leads to two different 9th commandments in Exodus and Deuteronomy. But as to the questions above, there is no indication in the text which helps to answer them.

Lets have a fresh look at it:
How many commandments do you see now?
1. I am the LORD your God, V.2.
2. You shall have no other gods or any image before me. v3-6
3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain v7
4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy... v8-11
5. Honor your father and your mother v12
6. You shall not kill v13
7. You shall not commit adultery v14
8. You shall not steal v15
9. You shall not bear false witness v16
10. You shall not covet... v17

As to 613: No one in this world says there are 613 commands in Ex 20. There are 613 commandments in thwe Pentateuch, according to the rabbis (I doubt that any Non-Jew took up the labor and counted again).
Not really dear friend. You would have to deny what God's Word says in Exodus 20:2-17 to claim there is only 9 commandments written there when it is God's Word (not mine) that says there are ten commandments in Exodus 34:28; Deuteronomy 4:13 and Deuteronomy 10:4 and you can literally count ten commandments as you were shown in the previous post from Exodus 20:2-17. You were even quoted the scriptures directly where the 10 commandments are located from Exodus 20:2-17 and asked how many commandments do you count and even given the answer to this question from other supporting scripture from *Exodus 34:28; Deuteronomy 4:13 and Deuteronomy 10:4 giving you the direct answer from God's Word as to how many commandments there are in God's ten commandments but it seems you do not believe the scripture provided that show why your claims are not biblical. Are you really trying to argue that Exodus 20:2-17 are not ten commandments from God's Word?

The TEN commandments as shown in Exodus 20:2-17

1. I am the LORD your God, V.2.
2. You shall have no other gods or any image before me. v3-6
3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain v7
4. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy... v8-11
5. Honor your father and your mother v12
6. You shall not kill v13
7. You shall not commit adultery v14
8. You shall not steal v15
9. You shall not bear false witness v16
10. You shall not covet... v17

I mended the "mistranslation" you used. The Hebrew word for "commandment" is מצוה, not דבר as in Ex 34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4. You may translate with commandments, that this means begging the question whether the Jews are right to count V.2 as the first word or not.
Luther translated "words", so do the more literal German translation. "Commandment" is an interpretation.
There is nothing to amend your making a straw-man argument no one is making or talking about. For this I refer to you post # 420 linked. I was talking about the Hebrew words used for "ten commandments" as used in Exodus 34:28; Deuteronomy 4:13 and Deuteronomy 10:4 and quoted them. So why are you trying to pretend I was talking about something different and you have corrected me? As shown through the scriptures already, there are 10 commandments in Exodus 20:2-17 as shown above. Are you seriously trying to argue that there are not 10 commandments in Exodus 20:2-17? What do you think Exodus 34:28; Deuteronomy 4:13 and Deuteronomy 10:4 is referring to? You were already provided each of the 10 commandment abbreviated scripture locations in Exodus 20:2-3; Exodus 20:4-6; Exodus 20:7; Exodus 20:8-11; Exodus 20:12; Exodus 20:13; Exodus 20:14; Exodus 20:15; Exodus 20:16 and Exodus 20:17. Not sure why your trying to argue against the scriptures provided in Exodus 20:2-17. They are God's Word not mine. So I guess your argument is with God not me and we will have to agree to disagree. For me only God's Word is true *Romans 3:4 and we should believe and follow it *Acts of the Apostles 5:29 over the teachings and traditions of men that break the commandments of God *Matthew 15:3-9.

May God bless you as you seek him through his Word.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.