God Disqualified Christians From Participating in the Mosaic Law Covenant

GDL · Sep 25, 2023

Doran said:
Ah...you beat me to it! But you did forget two

Didn't forget. He says 2 or 3 witnesses (likely still a valuable law BTW) and I already went beyond that!

Odd how some sticking up for the Law will disregard what the Law Covenant says about itself.

SabbathBlessings · Sep 25, 2023

GDL said:
Didn't forget. He says 2 or 3 witnesses (likely still a valuable law BTW) and I already went beyond that!

Odd how some sticking up for the Law will disregard what the Law Covenant says about itself.

Please give an example of what has not been shown by 2 or three witness. . .

GDL · Sep 25, 2023

SabbathBlessings said:
We could just follow what the Text says, which is what we are told to do Pro 30:5-6

Good verses. Applies to all of us.

SabbathBlessings said:
This is a direct quote from the Ten Commandments which the original is in God's heavenly Temple Rev 11:19

James 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.

Is James2:10 a direct quote from the 10C?
When James says "whole law" in 2:10, what does he mean - what whole law?
When James says "transgressor of the law" in 2:11 - does he mean the whole law since that's what he was talking about in immediate context? IOW, is this James saying the law is a unity? Is he saying the whole law is a unity?
Since 2:10 begins with "for" what is 2:10 saying - why does it begin with "for"?
Why does 2:12 being with "so"? Is it concluding something? What?

SabbathBlessings said:
It's called the law of liberty because one is no longer under the bondage of sin Rom 7:7, but free in Christ walking in His Spirit not being in rebellion to His holy law. Romans 8:4-8 but keeping through love and faith 1 John 5:3 Exo 20:6 John 14:15, Romans 3:31, Rev 14:12

Are you sure Rom7:7 says what you're saying it does? Or is this a typo?
Rom7:6 says we (Paul et.al.) were released [from the obligation] of the law because we died in what we were being held [by] so that we serve in newness of Spirit and not oldness/obsolescence of writing. What law was Paul released from being obligated to? Does oldness/obsolescence of writing help us to know what law?
In Rom8:4:
1. What is the righteous requirement of the law?
2. What law?
3. Is the righteous requirement of the law actively being fulfilled by us or passively in us?
4. Does walking in Spirit have to do with the fulfillment of the righteous requirement of the law?
5. Is being led in Spirit part of or the same as walking in Spirit?
6. If we're free in Christ, then what are we free from? Does this freedom have any connection to the release stated in Rom7:6.

I know you don't like the million questions syndrome, so I'll stop here for now.

GDL · Sep 25, 2023

SabbathBlessings said:
Please give an example of what has not been shown by 2 or three witness. . .

I don't understand your question. The context of my point was the 6 or so Scriptures I referenced with the various mentions of the "Book of".

SabbathBlessings · Sep 25, 2023

GDL said:
Good verses. Applies to all of us.

Is James2:10 a direct quote from the 10C?

When James says "whole law" in 2:10, what does he mean - what whole law?

When James says "transgressor of the law" in 2:11 - does he mean the whole law since that's what he was talking about in immediate context? IOW, is this James saying the law is a unity? Is he saying the whole law is a unity?

Since 2:10 begins with "for" what is 2:10 saying - why does it begin with "for"?

Why does 2:12 being with "so"? Is it concluding something? What?

Are you sure Rom7:7 says what you're saying it does? Or is this a typo?

Rom7:6 says we (Paul et.al.) were released [from the obligation] of the law because we died in what we were being held [by] so that we serve in newness of Spirit and not oldness/obsolescence of writing. What law was Paul released from being obligated to? Does oldness/obsolescence of writing help us to know what law?

In Rom8:4:

What is the righteous requirement of the law?

What law?

Is the righteous requirement of the law actively being fulfilled by us or passively in us?

Does walking in Spirit have to do with the fulfillment of the righteous requirement of the law?

Is being led in Spirit part of or the same as walking in Spirit?

If we're free in Christ, then what are we free from? Does this freedom have any connection to the release stated in Rom7:6.

I know you don't like the million questions syndrome, so I'll stop here for now.

We have been through everyone one of these texts previously and so the circle continues.

Your version of scripture does not reconcile with the very words of Jesus, that we can be lawless Mat 7:21-23 and scripture reveals what we cannot be lawless to and that is the 10C Rev 22:14-15. James is only contrasting with the Ten when he said you break one you break them all, that is the context, but if you want to believe that means something else than what it actually says, that's your free will. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

SabbathBlessings · Sep 25, 2023

GDL said:
I don't understand your question. The context of my point was the 6 or so Scriptures I referenced with the various mentions of the "Book of".

Oh, back to that again. Did you ever find through scripture if there were any other commandments aside from the Ten that were spoken and written personally by God and that were inside the ark of the covenant? I never did see your answer to that question.

GDL · Sep 25, 2023

Doran said:
GDL, I revised my Law of Liberty syllogism in 139. And I decided that since I state the syllogistic argument in the negative (stating what the Law of Liberty isn't), I started my argument from the perspective of Law rather than Truth. I also added two more premises.

A couple comments below based upon a cursory read of the revised.

Doran said:
And Jesus himself is the embodiment of all Truth (Jn 14:16)

Check reference - 14:6?

Doran said:
Therefore, the Law (or Principle) of Liberty cannot be the Law, or the Law of Moses, or the Mosaic Law Covenant because any of these can only enslave us to sin and bring us under its yoke of slavery; conversely it can only be Grace and Truth that came by Christ, and the Gospel Truth and the Spirit that came by His ministry that can set men free from the law of sin and death, and on the last day it will be this Truth that He preached and taught in his ministry that will judge all men.

I like what you said here re: the Law (or Principle) of Liberty. It leaves open a discussion of how to interpret nomos.
I assume when you say "cannot be the Law" the two following "or" phrases are elaborating. IOW Law & Law of Moses & Mosaic Law Covenant are essentially synonymous.
I think the revised is better than the original. As I read through apart from the critical energy (which is about gone for today) it takes to focus on these syllogisms of yours, I see your structure from beginning to end and conceptually agree with you.
IMO it would be interesting to see how someone would refute this and make the 10C the law of liberty or as the NIV you referenced before translates it 'the law that gives freedom.". There's much to discuss here but I don't think it intrudes on your work as to what the law of liberty is not.

Hope that helps. Nice work.

I wonder if others know they can ask questions for you to explain apart from throwing a bunch of repetitive arguments at you and at least better understand your thoughts before crucifying you.

GDL · Sep 25, 2023

Doran said:
Law doesn't always mean a command or injunction or imperative. In other words, the term isn't always used in the prescriptive sense. A law can be a principle, such as the Laws of Physics, or the Law of Gravity, or the Laws of Logic, or the "law of sin and death", etc.. The Gr. term "nomon", according to Strong, can be used figuratively, i.e. a principle. Which is how I see it being used. However, at the same time,sine everyone is commanded to believe the Gospel [truth], then I suppose it could be said that the Law of Liberty is used prescriptively.

I did see that, and I agree that nomos has some range, Translators and interpreters have been theorizing with this range for ages when looking at nomos in the Text. I've done the same thing in my studies.

My question was how you made the link between the 2 statements in the premise, but the syllogism is revised now so question withdrawn.

GDL · Sep 25, 2023

SabbathBlessings said:
We have been through everyone one of these texts previously and so the circle continues.

Par for the course.

Maybe some time we can all go through James Law of Liberty section verse by verse.

SabbathBlessings said:
Your version of scripture does not reconcile with the very words of Jesus, that we can be lawless Mat 7:21-23 and scripture reveals what we cannot be lawless to and that is the 10C Rev 22:14-15. James is only contrasting with the Ten when he said you break one you break them all, that is the context, but if you want to believe that means something else than what it actually says, that's your free will. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

These types of allegations are only opinion and basically pointless. I'm not going to challenge you to look at any of my posts, all or just in this thread to see if you can point out where I believe we can be lawless a.k.a sinning a.k.a. unrighteous. I'm simply going to tell you you'll never find such a statement made by me.

You're hard-pressed at best to find the word "Ten" in Rev22. But your freewheeling eisegesis of this word in Scripture is well understood.

SabbathBlessings said:
Oh, back to that again. Did you ever find through scripture if there were any other commandments aside from the Ten that were spoken and written personally by God and that were inside the ark of the covenant? I never did see your answer to that question.

Sorry, still don't know what you're talking about - back to that again. I guess you mean all the various "Book of" Scriptures I posted, @Doran added to, and you and others ignored. Also par for the course.

I did already answer you re: the stone and finger of God points you continually assert as having meaning now that He's writing His Law in minds and on hearts. I think He thinks minds and hearts are more valuable than stones that can't think or talk or walk or love, or... He put His Son on the cross to make something more valuable than stone tablets.

HIM · Sep 26, 2023

Doran said:
Where did God say his Ten was his covenant with Israel? You have chapter and verse?

Deut 4:13 And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.
Deut 4:14 And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.

HIM · Sep 26, 2023

GDL said:
Well, no it shouldn't. I can walk among leagues of schooled students of the Word who will automatically and immediately understand and identify bodies of Scripture if I were to say the Mosaic Law Covenant, or the Mosaic Law, or the Mosaic Covenant. They would immediately know I was speaking of the Covenant God made with Moses and Israel after He freed them from Egypt and gave them the 10C and entire body of law, statutes, judgments to do. It's you who should be coming up to speed on this. Honestly, I've never encountered anyone who has trouble with the word "Mosaic" before.

My sarcasm is responsive in your case. Get past the tiring methods of ignoring posts that refute your positions and pretending like your all-inclusive "you're wrong" statements are meaningful argumentation. And get past your claims that it's only human pride talking when others may well know more than you. Then, maybe you'll see more civility coming your way.

If we have that out of the way, please just use a little reasoning and get past this opposition to the term "Mosaic". It's basic English that can replace the phrase "of Moses". Look at those "Book of" statements posted right from Scripture. Add the verses @Doran just added to the ones I posted. Do your own search and you'll find there are more verses to add.

Do you not see that, if those "Book of" verses are speaking of the same Book, then all of these phrases are referring to the same thing? Whether we call it the Mosaic Law, or the Mosaic Covenant, or the Mosaic Law Covenant, it's all ultimately the same thing. There's a fluidity to this and such fluid parallels is one of the ways the Word speaks.

Additionally, there is another approach to the same thing. It's to read Ex-Deut and face the reality that the Mosaic Covenant and the Mosaic Law are one large and unified body of agreement between YHWH on the one hand, and Moses and Israel on the other. I've also noted @Doran asking you to explain which Covenant is being referred to in the NC as the old Covenant. Why aren't you answering (unless you did and I missed it)?

Honestly, @HIM, your inference about others' interpretations of Scripture being philosophy Jesus would rebuke is just another one of those empty arguments you keep making - then you add the word "pompous" - and then you ask others to be civil.

And yet there is no Mosaic law covenant in Scripture, none. The Mosaic law was given to Moses to teach it was not the covenant in which God gave at Horeb. Nor it is ever stated as a covenant at all. To say it is to say to much,
Deut 4:13 And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.
Deut 4:14 And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.

SabbathBlessings · Sep 26, 2023

GDL said:
Maybe some time we can all go through James Law of Liberty section verse by verse.

James 2:8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors.

The royal law is the greatest commandments - love God, love neighbor and that is shown by keeping the commandments of God. 1 John 5:2-3

The law of liberty is the Ten Commandments- James is only contrasting and quoting from the Ten, just like when God wrote and spoke the Ten Commandments- He added no more.... this is a direct reference to the Ten Commandments

10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty

The Ten Commandments is what we will be judged by and the law that defines sin Romans 7:7. The same law that is in God's heavenly temple Rev 11:19 under the mercy seat of Jesus. James was teaching the principle of what Jesus taught....not to break the least of the commandments. Jesus came to amplify the Ten Commandments, not destroy and the commandments that He personally wrote, personally spoke, kept as our example and condemned others for keeping their rules above these commandments Mat 15:3-9, defines sin and what we will be judged by are absolutely written in the heart of God's New Covenant believers- our salvation is from sin Mat 1:21, how can we overcome sin, if we do not have the law of God in our heart and mind, we can't and rebelling against God's holy commandments is not recommended. Rom 8:7-8

Mat 5:19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 21 “You have heard that it was said to those [d]of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother [e]without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’[f] shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, [g]‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of [h]hell fire. 23 Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison. 26 Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny. 27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

Not sure Jesus can be any clearer. Jesus is establishing important principles right from the Ten, that He warns not only should we not break the least of these commandments, but we are responsible for our teachings of others to not break the least of these commandments.

GDL said:
You're hard-pressed at best to find the word "Ten" in Rev22. But your freewheeling eisegesis of this word in Scripture is well understood.

You don't need to find the word "Ten" to know which law is being referred to. The Ten Commandments came in its own unit that God placed together that no man has authority to add to or subtract from because man is not above God and His divine works Exo 32:16 Exo 31:18 Deut 4:13, Deut 4:22, Exo 34:28. The mention of one commandment in the Ten means its referring to this unit- the same one where James said you break one only quoting and contrasting from this unit of Ten you break them all and where Jesus said not to break the least of these commandments. This really shouldn't be a hard concept unless one is intentionally trying to miss it.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers (Breaking commandment #1Exo 20:3) and sexually immoral (breaking commandment #7 Exo 20:14) and murderers (breaking commandment #6Exo 20:13) and idolaters (breaking commandment #2Exo 20:4-6), and whoever loves and practices a lie (breaking # 9 Exo 20:16 or any of the commandments 1 John 2:4)

Servus · Sep 26, 2023

SabbathBlessings said:
James 2:8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors.

The royal law is the greatest commandments - love God, love neighbor and that is shown by keeping the commandments of God. 1 John 5:2-3

The law of liberty is the Ten Commandments- James is only contrasting and quoting from the Ten, just like when God wrote and spoke the Ten Commandments- He added no more.... this is a direct reference to the Ten Commandments

10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty

The Ten Commandments is what we will be judged by and the law that defines sin Romans 7:7. The same law that is in God's heavenly temple Rev 11:19 under the mercy seat of Jesus. James was teaching the principle of what Jesus taught....not to break the least of the commandments. Jesus came to amplify the Ten Commandments, not destroy and the commandments that He personally wrote, personally spoke, kept as our example and condemned others for keeping their rules above these commandments Mat 15:3-9, defines sin and what we will be judged by are absolutely written in the heart of God's New Covenant believers- our salvation is from sin Mat 1:21, how can we overcome sin, if we do not have the law of God in our heart and mind, we can't and rebelling against God's holy commandments is not recommended. Rom 8:7-8

Mat 5:19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 21 “You have heard that it was said to those [d]of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother [e]without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’[f] shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, [g]‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of [h]hell fire. 23 Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison. 26 Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny. 27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

Not sure Jesus can be any clearer. Jesus is establishing important principles right from the Ten, that He warns not only should we not break the least of these commandments, but we are responsible for our teachings of others to not break the least of these commandments.

You don't need to find the word "Ten" to know which law is being referred to. The Ten Commandments came in its own unit that God placed together that no man has authority to add to or subtract from because man is not above God and His divine works Exo 32:16 Exo 31:18 Deut 4:13, Deut 4:22, Exo 34:28. The mention of one commandment in the Ten means its referring to this unit- the same one where James said you break one only quoting and contrasting from this unit of Ten you break them all and where Jesus said not to break the least of these commandments. This really shouldn't be a hard concept unless one is intentionally trying to miss it.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers (Breaking commandment #1Exo 20:3) and sexually immoral (breaking commandment #7 Exo 20:14) and murderers (breaking commandment #6Exo 20:13) and idolaters (breaking commandment #2Exo 20:4-6), and whoever loves and practices a lie (breaking # 9 Exo 20:16 or any of the commandments 1 John 2:4)

Right when James quoted the 6th and 7th commandments that includes the entire 10. And when James says if one stubles on one point of the law, one breaks the whole law, he only meant the 10 commandments. Although of the 10 commandments, only the 4th commandment is the one that's ever debated in these threads.

SabbathBlessings · Sep 26, 2023

Ordinary Christian said:
Right when James quoted the 6th and 7th commandments that includes the entire 10. And when James says if one stubles on one point of the law, one breaks the whole law, he only meant the 10 commandments. Although of the 10 commandments, only the 4th commandment is the one that's ever debated in these threads.

We always need to carefully examine the context. James only quoted and contrasted from the Ten Commandments. We break one we break them all from this unit. James 2:10-12

Most people don't debate the other 9 commandments, just the one that involves our time. The Sabbath commandment God did not separate from the other 9 commandments they equally stand on the same foundation. Exo 32:16 Exo 31:18 Deut 4:13, Deut 5:22, Exo 34:28

GDL · Sep 26, 2023

SabbathBlessings said:
Not sure Jesus can be any clearer. Jesus is establishing important principles right from the Ten

Before I offer to open up the discussion of James, I'd like to note what you say here. "Jesus is establishing important principles right from the Ten".

I'm fine with this. Important things from the Ten then balanced with the Law is not valid for a righteous person but its lawful/proper use identifies the sinful. 1Tim2. We in Christ are dead to the Law and released from the Law Rom7. We in Christ are not under [subjection to] the Law (Rom6; 1Cor9; Gal3-5). All Scripture is God-breathed and beneficial for teaching for...and training in righteousness... (2Tim3:16). Not sure how Jesus in Paul could be any clearer (so the clarity is one view or the other or in some middle ground).

No more debate there for now, please. We simply differ in understanding. I think we're both OK with that when it boils down to the end of thinking we will convince one-another. I'm subordinate to Jesus Christ, not to Moses.

A couple basic questions re: James. If you don't want to answer them, then I don't want to proceed. I hope you'll see that they are very basic. I hope others will join in. Maybe we'll all (me included) learn something:

Was James writing before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, or after?
Are all of the following phrases referring to the same law & what law or laws are they referring to?
1. In a short span of writing, James speaks of law with these phrases (using just basic English translations - please feel free to retranslate if you'd like but please explain why so we can proceed with agreement - if possible). Are all of these referring to the same law?
  1. The perfect law of freedom (James1:25)
  2. The royal law according to the writing/Scripture (James2:8 reference Lev19:18).
  3. The law (that convicts) (James2:9)
  4. The whole law (James 2:10)
  5. The law that can be transgressed (reference is 2 of the 10C) (James 2:11).
  6. The law of liberty (James2:12).
Why does James call Lev19:18 the "royal law" - what doe "royal" mean - what do you think James is telling us with the word "royal"?

SabbathBlessings · Sep 26, 2023

GDL said:
Before I offer to open up the discussion of James, I'd like to note what you say here. "Jesus is establishing important principles right from the Ten".

I'm fine with this. Important things from the Ten then balanced with the Law is not valid for a righteous person but its lawful/proper use identifies the sinful. 1Tim2. We in Christ are dead to the Law and released from the Law Rom7. We in Christ are not under [subjection to] the Law (Rom6; 1Cor9; Gal3-5). All Scripture is God-breathed and beneficial for teaching for...and training in righteousness... (2Tim3:16). Not sure how Jesus in Paul could be any clearer (so the clarity is one view or the other or in some middle ground).

I don't think the concept Paul is trying to convey is being understood properly. We are not released from the law so we can break it. This is who the law is for:

1 Tim 2:9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.

The law is made for sinners, so we can see our sin. Unless you can say you do not sin, than the law is made for you.

Romans 6:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

God's law is meant for us, because all have sinned. What Paul is trying to say, that unfortunately people select a few out of context verses is that we are not under the condemnation of the law i.e. the wages of sin is death Romans 6:23 if one is keeping the law i.e. in Christ there is no penalty. Those who are keeping the law are free in Christ, those not are a slave to sin. The Ten Commandments is just like a mirror so we can see our sins Romans 7:7 and not cover them, because in doing so one cannot prosper Pro 28:13. If we find ourselves hostile to God's law, it would be a good time to prayerfully examine ourselves.

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh (sin), but according to the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be [b]carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. 8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

GDL said:
No more debate there for now, please. We simply differ in understanding. I think we're both OK with that when it boils down to the end of thinking we will convince one-another. I'm subordinate to Jesus Christ, not to Moses.

A couple basic questions re: James. If you don't want to answer them, then I don't want to proceed. I hope you'll see that they are very basic. I hope others will join in. Maybe we'll all (me included) learn something:

Was James writing before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, or after?

Well you will have to establish from scripture what this has to do with breaking the commandments of God and sinning. The commandments didn't end in 70AD as we can see from clear scripture they are kept by God's people until Jesus comes Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14-15

GDL said:
Are all of the following phrases referring to the same law & what law or laws are they referring to?

In a short span of writing, James speaks of law with these phrases (using just basic English translations - please feel free to retranslate if you'd like but please explain why so we can proceed with agreement - if possible). Are all of these referring to the same law?

The perfect law of freedom (James1:25)

Yes, just speaking of the Ten Commandments- which is why they are like a mirror Romans 7:7 so we can see our sins and not cover them.

GDL said:
The royal law according to the writing/Scripture (James2:8 reference Lev19:18).

Yes, the greatest commandments, but notice that when scripture only says love to man , does that means the other greatest commandment was deleted love to God? Of course not, not sure why some use a different standard to the Ten Commandments. We shouldn't. Another note- as we can plainly see, not all of the law of Moses ended in the NC.

GDL said:
The law (that convicts) (James2:9)

The greatest commandments which is a summary, the details for love to God and love to man which is keeping the commandments of God 1 John 5:2-3 as James further explains.

GDL said:
The whole law (James 2:10)

The whole law in this context is the Ten as that is the only law he is contrasting and quoting from. Adding anything else is adding to His Word.

GDL said:
The law that can be transgressed (reference is 2 of the 10C) (James 2:11).

He is giving an example of these two commandments. People understood the Ten Commandments, one means them all as James tells as well as Jesus. Mat 5:19 Only more recently have people become more hostile to God's law as predicted in the scriptures. Rev 12:17

GDL said:
The law of liberty (James2:12).

Yes, the Ten Commandments and James quotes from explicitly.

GDL said:
Why does James call Lev19:18 the "royal law" - what doe "royal" mean - what do you think James is telling us with the word "royal"?

The royal law is the greatest commandments- love to God, love to man and love to God/man does not go undefined, it is keeping the commandments of God 1 John 5:2-3 which is why James quotes directly from the Ten as it gives the details to the greatest commandments. God's perfect law and testimony Psa 19:7 written personally by our Creator and Savior.

Leaf473 · Sep 26, 2023

GDL said:
Before I offer to open up the discussion of James, I'd like to note what you say here. "Jesus is establishing important principles right from the Ten".

I'm fine with this. Important things from the Ten then balanced with the Law is not valid for a righteous person but its lawful/proper use identifies the sinful. 1Tim2. We in Christ are dead to the Law and released from the Law Rom7. We in Christ are not under [subjection to] the Law (Rom6; 1Cor9; Gal3-5). All Scripture is God-breathed and beneficial for teaching for...and training in righteousness... (2Tim3:16). Not sure how Jesus in Paul could be any clearer (so the clarity is one view or the other or in some middle ground).

No more debate there for now, please. We simply differ in understanding. I think we're both OK with that when it boils down to the end of thinking we will convince one-another. I'm subordinate to Jesus Christ, not to Moses.

A couple basic questions re: James. If you don't want to answer them, then I don't want to proceed. I hope you'll see that they are very basic. I hope others will join in. Maybe we'll all (me included) learn something:

GDL said:
Was James writing before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, or after?

I don't think there's a definitive answer, it sounds like it's before 70 AD to me.

GDL said:
Are all of the following phrases referring to the same law & what law or laws are they referring to?

In a short span of writing, James speaks of law with these phrases (using just basic English translations - please feel free to retranslate if you'd like but please explain why so we can proceed with agreement - if possible). Are all of these referring to the same law?

The perfect law of freedom (James1:25)

The royal law according to the writing/Scripture (James2:8 reference Lev19:18).

The law (that convicts) (James2:9)

The whole law (James 2:10)

The law that can be transgressed (reference is 2 of the 10C) (James 2:11).

The law of liberty (James2:12).

I think he's referring to the same law in all those places, all of the instructions that came through Moses.

GDL said:
Why does James call Lev19:18 the "royal law" - what doe "royal" mean - what do you think James is telling us with the word "royal"?

I think Royal law is just a term of Honor for the law. If it's the same James that's leading the church in Jerusalem in Acts, his community is really into keeping all of the instructions from Moses.

If we include this as part of the "keep the whole law but stumble in one part" passage, then James is quoting from Leviticus as well as the Ten Commandments. So, context indicates that "the whole law" is all of the instructions from Moses, not just the 10.

Bible Gateway passage: James 2:8-10 - New King James Version

If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well; but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.

www.biblegateway.com

GDL · Sep 26, 2023

HIM said:
And yet there is no Mosaic law covenant in Scripture, none.

Your opinion is noted and disagreed with.

HIM said:
The Mosaic law was given to Moses to teach it was not the covenant in which God gave at Horeb. Nor it is ever stated as a covenant at all. To say it is to say to much,

Are you now OK with the word "Mosaic" to refer to the Law of Moses?

Are you still not OK with the word "Mosaic" to refer to the Covenant God mad with Moses and Israel?

Did you ever answer my question about the correlation to the "Book of..." verses - whether they were speaking of different Books or the same Book?

The Book of the Law 2Kings22:11; Deut28:61
The Book of the Covenant 2Kings23:2; Ex24:7
The Book of the Law of YHWH 2Chron17:9
The Law in the Book of Moses 2Chron25:4

Do you see any connections between Law and Covenant in these verses?

NKJ 2Kings 17:13-17 Yet the LORD testified against Israel and against Judah, by all of His prophets, every seer, saying, "Turn from your evil ways, and keep My commandments and My statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by My servants the prophets." 14 Nevertheless they would not hear, but stiffened their necks, like the necks of their fathers, who did not believe in the LORD their God. 15 And they rejected His statutes and His covenant that He had made with their fathers, and His testimonies which He had testified against them; they followed idols, became idolaters, and went after the nations who were all around them, concerning whom the LORD had charged them that they should not do like them. 16 So they left all the commandments of the LORD their God, made for themselves a molded image and two calves, made a wooden image and worshiped all the host of heaven, and served Baal. 17 And they caused their sons and daughters to pass through the fire, practiced witchcraft and soothsaying, and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke Him to anger.

NKJ Psalm 78:10 They did not keep the covenant of God; They refused to walk in His law,

NKJ Hosea 8:1 "Set the trumpet1 to your mouth! He shall come like an eagle against the house of the LORD, Because they have transgressed My covenant And rebelled against My law.

NKJ Malachi 2:8 But you have departed from the way; You have caused many to stumble at the law. You have corrupted the covenant of Levi," Says the LORD of hosts.

NKJ Galatians 3:17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ1, that it should make the promise of no effect.

HIM said:
Deut 4:13 And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.
Deut 4:14 And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.

The Tablets are also called the Tablets of the Testimony (Ex31:18). The ark is called the Ark of the Testimony (Ex30:26). The Tabernacle is called the Tabernacle of the Testimony (Num1:50). In Ex31:7 the Hebrew says Ark of the Testimony and the LXX says the Ark of the Covenant which terminology is used extensively and into the NC Writings.

I have no disagreement with the importance of the Tablets to the [old, obsolete, vanished) Covenant God made with Moses and Israel (a.k.a the Mosaic Covenant).

What I do disagree with is the theory that the Tablets stand on their own and are not the basic treaty documents detailed in laws, judgments, statutes in Ex-Deut. As I pointed out before, even retaining context in Deut14:13-14 the tablets and the statutes and judgments are together. The same is seen in the verses I posted above. The s&j explain and elaborate the decalogue. You apparently seem them all as separate. IMO that's simply ripping the chapters out from under the TOC. It's like taking a couple verses out of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy and throwing out the majority of the Pentateuch, let alone the entire Tanakh.

The manna, the Decalogue on stones, and Aaron's rod are all part of the vanished Covenant. From there is a discussion of the Mosaic Law (we're dead to, released from, not under subjection to, and which is not valid for righteous men) vs. the Messianic Law - the Law of our King Priest Jesus Christ in the New Covenant era.

GDL · Sep 26, 2023

SabbathBlessings said:
Well you will have to establish from scripture what this has to do with breaking the commandments of God and sinning. The commandments didn't end in 70AD as we can see from clear scripture they are kept by God's people until Jesus comes Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14-15

No, I won't. All I really did was ask a question to get some idea of the thoughts of others re: James being written prior to or after the destruction of Jerusalem. You did not answer my question.

Leaf473 said:
I don't think there's a definitive answer, it sounds like it's before 70 AD to me.

Thank you. I agree with you. My agreement is mostly based upon reading the research of others that have dug into this way deeper than I have and care to do if I could.

GDL · Sep 26, 2023

SabbathBlessings said:
Yes, just speaking of the Ten Commandments

OK.

So, all of these verses quoted from James are speaking only of the 10C.

Leaf473 said:
I think he's referring to the same law in all those places, all of the instructions that came through Moses.

OK.

So all of these verses quoted from James are speaking of all of the instructions that came through Moses.

By "instructions" do you mean all the laws, commandments, statutes, judgments, God gave to Moses and Israel within the Covenant God made with Moses and Israel? Or would you like to restate this?

FWIW, I'm not taking the position yet that I agree or disagree that all the quoted phrases are speaking of the same thing. I've had my interpretations and am attempting to set them aside and just read and understand what James is saying.

Also, FWIW, you two seem to be in disagreement already and my leaning just from these verses so far is towards the way you @Leaf473 see this. I also have in mind what @Doran says his syllogism shows re: how the old covenant Law, whether it be the 10C or all of that Law cannot be the Law of Liberty. So, already a few things to consider.

God Disqualified Christians From Participating in the Mosaic Law Covenant

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Friend

Friend

Well-Known Member

<><

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads