Why the Sabbath is a moral commandment

Leaf473 said:

Yes. The idea is often presented that the 10 were inside the ark, and the rest on the outside.

This is a separation, but there is no scripture that says that things inside the ark are moral, while things outside are not moral.

The situation is compounded when seventh day observers keep some of the commandments on the outside of the ark. This seems to acknowledge that there is no inherent moral quality to being inside the ark.

Click to expand...

Yes I agree, a 10 commandment vacuum was never the intent plus in practice our motivations go well beyond the 10 (as they should). I feel like often a call to the 10 is more about highlighting the sabbath (and for something reason dietary laws)

Leaf473 said:

I like to end with a song, hynm, or spiritual song
Psalm 144:9
I will sing a new song to you, God. On a ten-stringed lyre, I will sing praises to you

Click to expand...

Taking time to pause and reflect is always beneficial and I appreciate the focus. I've been listening to a new song by river valley worship called "Testify". It's catchy and easy to listen to but I've been pulled in my the lyrics. chorus is:

"For all my days I'll sing Your praise as a testament to Your faithfulness

"For all my life I'll lift you high
Your the one who brought me back to life

JesusFollowerForever said:

I would like to respond by grounding the discussion in Scripture, highlighting that God’s law, including the Ten Commandments, is not simply a set of moral guidelines or civil laws but reflects the infinite wisdom of God and is integral to His holy and righteous nature.

First, it’s important to clarify that morality, as we understand it theologically, is not merely subjective or based on human preference. True morality is rooted in the nature and character of God. God is the standard of all that is good, righteous and perfect. Morality is not something that changes with human opinion or societal context. It is a reflection of God’s immutable nature, which is perfect, just, and Holy.

In this sense, all of God's commands—whether in the Ten Commandments or the broader Law of Moses—are expressions of His moral will. To speak of the Ten Commandments as more moral than other laws, or to isolate them as a separate category of morality, is problematic because it suggests that God’s law can be divided into moral and non-moral categories. All of God's law is moral because it reflects His perfect wisdom, justice, and holiness.

You mentioned the tendency to separate the Ten Commandments from the rest of the law, calling them a moral code while possibly dismissing other laws as less relevant. The Ten Commandments are foundational, yes, but they do not exist in isolation from the rest of God’s law. When God gave these commandments to Israel, He did not do so arbitrarily. These commandments are a part of the broader covenant law that governs the people of Israel in all aspects of life.

Click to expand...

JesusFollowerForever said:

The Ten Commandments reflect core moral principles of God's law,

Click to expand...

I'm not aware of a scripture that says this

Blessings!

JesusFollowerForever said:

...but they should not be seen as the full expression of God's moral will.

The moral law of God is not restricted to the Ten Commandments alone. In fact, the entirety of the Mosaic Law is moral because it all reflects God's will for His people. Whether it’s laws about justice, purity, compassion, or holiness, each command given by God reflects His perfect moral standard. Thus, to separate the Ten Commandments from the rest of the law would be to misunderstand the unity of God’s will. As we read in Psalm 119:172, “All Your commandments are righteousness.” This suggests that all of God’s commandments—whether found in the Ten Commandments or the Book of the Law—reflect His perfect and unchanging standard of morality.

Your point about the Ten Commandments not being a "complete moral code" is insightful. While the Ten Commandments are foundational to understanding God’s moral will, they are not an exhaustive treatment of morality. For example, the commandment "You shall not murder" (Exodus 20:13) teaches respect for life, but it does not address more subtle moral questions, like hatred or unforgiveness (which Jesus elaborates upon in the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5:21-22). Similarly, the commandment to honor the Sabbath (Exodus 20:8-11) teaches us to rest and keep the day holy, but it doesn’t address the nuances of how to care for others on the Sabbath—something Jesus Himself clarified (e.g., Matthew 12:9-14).

In this sense, the Ten Commandments are a starting point—a moral foundation—but they are not a comprehensive moral code. They establish fundamental principles that help define what is right and just, but they need to be interpreted in light of God’s fuller revelation of His will, especially as expressed through the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the apostles.

Some commandments, such as the one found in Deuteronomy 21:18-21—which prescribes the death penalty for a rebellious child who does not honor his father and mother—may seem harsh or even morally questionable by contemporary standards. However, these laws must be understood within the context of ancient Israel and the specific circumstances of the Israelite journey through the wilderness. At that time, the Israelites were a newly formed nation under God’s direct governance, called to be holy and set apart as a people reflecting His justice and authority.

The morality behind such commandments was not arbitrary but served as a safeguard against rebellion and disorder within the community. In an environment where Israel was forming its identity and God’s holiness was being established as the central value, obedience to authority was essential. In this specific situation, a disrespect for parental authority symbolized a deeper rebellion against the very structure of society and divine order. The law, in this case, was not merely about punishment but about preserving the moral and social fabric of the nation. If respect for parental authority could not be established, it was feared that the nation would descend into chaos and lawlessness, undermining its covenant with God and its future. We must not forget that God knows the hearts of men and, in His infinite wisdom, gave the Law of Moses in accordance with the unique spiritual and social needs of the Israelites at that time. The law was designed not only to guide them morally but also to shape their hearts and behavior, preparing them to be a Holy nation set apart for His purposes. While some aspects of the law may seem harsh or difficult to understand today, they were given by God to address the specific challenges faced by the Israelites as they wandered in the desert and formed their identity as God’s covenant people.

I understand your concern about the motivation behind keeping the commandments, particularly in the context of the Sabbath. If one is obeying the command to rest simply out of fear of breaking the law, this is indeed an imperfect motivation. God’s laws, including the commandment to rest on the Sabbath, were never meant to be burdensome or joyless, Instead, the motivation for obeying God's commands should come from love for God and a desire to honor His holiness. Jesus clarified this deeper moral motivation when He spoke of the great commandment:
Matthew 22:37-40 (NKJV):
"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets."

The heart of the law is love—love for God and love for others. If we are motivated by a heart of love and devotion to God, then keeping His commands is not a burden but a joy. The Sabbath, for example, is meant to be a blessing for us, a time to rest in God’s presence and reflect on His goodness. God’s wisdom in commanding us to rest is for our good and His glory and also instructs us to remember his Holiness and How he provides for us..

Jeremiah’s prophecy of the New Covenant speaks of God’s transformative work: "I will put My law in their minds and write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be My people" (Jeremiah 31:33). This promise finds its fulfillment in Jesus, who came to inaugurate the New Covenant. First, He removed the penalty of sin, for God's people which was incurred by breaking the commandments. Then, He taught how to live according to God's commands, not just outwardly, but from the heart—emphasizing that true obedience stems from a transformed mind and spirit. Jesus showed us how to internalize the law, keeping it always in our hearts and minds, and living it out as a reflection of our intimate relationship with God.

Morality is not subjective, but is rooted in the infinite wisdom of God. The Ten Commandments are part of His moral will, but they are not the complete expression of that will. All of God’s law—whether it’s the Ten Commandments or the rest of the Mosaic Law—reflects God’s perfect and unchanging nature and in part His plans for humanity The moral code established by God in the Scriptures is a holistic and integrated reflection of His character, designed to guide His people in living according to His perfect will.

Ultimately, the fulfillment of the law is not found in merely following rules, but in living in a relationship with God that is characterized by love, humility, and obedience. The Sabbath, the moral commandments, and every other aspect of the law point us to God’s holiness and His desire for us to reflect His character in all aspects of our lives. We are called to live in a way that honors Him, and this will be marked by a moral life that reflects His love, justice, and mercy. God’s wisdom, as revealed in His law, shows us the path to true righteousness and life.

@Bob S This text replies in part to one of your last post to me regarding the "613" items of the law.

Click to expand...

JesusFollowerForever said:

I would like to respond by grounding the discussion in Scripture, highlighting that God’s law, including the Ten Commandments, is not simply a set of moral guidelines or civil laws but reflects the infinite wisdom of God and is integral to His holy and righteous nature.

Click to expand...

It's the "including the 10 commandments" parts that have historically been loaded in these discussions and carries a meaning closer to a 10 commandments vacuum. The 10 are a part of the torah. The Torah as a whole, and not an isolated part, reflects the nature of God.

JesusFollowerForever said:

First, it’s important to clarify that morality, as we understand it theologically, is not merely subjective or based on human preference. True morality is rooted in the nature and character of God. God is the standard of all that is good, righteous and perfect....

Click to expand...

JesusFollowerForever said:

In this sense, all of God's commands—whether in the Ten Commandments or the broader Law of Moses—are expressions of His moral will. To speak of the Ten Commandments as more moral than other laws, or to isolate them as a separate category of morality, is problematic because it suggests that God’s law can be divided into moral and non-moral categories. All of God's law is moral because it reflects His perfect wisdom, justice, and holiness.

Click to expand...

It indeed is problematic. The 10 commandments inherit the implicit morality of God which is the same for all laws so there is no cause to isolate the 10 by looking through this morality. This moral framework needs to be taken in context, some are universally moral and don't need a written law to be known. In contrast, others have deeper meaning, and their surface components do not describe moral action but need revelation to understand their role within a moral framework.

Laws of ceremonial, ritual, symbolic, etc.. in natural need further unpacking to understand their deeper meanings, where alone their moral counterpart is hidden. For example, separation laws like not mixing grains or threads or not breeding different species (like a horse or a donkey to make a mule). These do not involve moral action and if I take two grains and mix them together it is not a moral failing. Laws like this have purpose in a grander plan of salvation and a call for holiness. (but God doesn't actually care about mixing grains) If we put a blanket statement over all law and call it moral then this doesn't help to articulate morality well and is a non-critical way of approaching the subject because it doesn't qualify moral behaviour vs something like ritual or ceremonial acts.

The act of the ceremony or ritual do not describe moral action innately, they are deep with meaning and they point to something bigger with a moral base. Sabbath is such a law since ritual rest is not of moral action which is why the Sabbath must be understood spiritually to understand it's universal aspect and role in a larger plan.

JesusFollowerForever said:

You mentioned the tendency to separate the Ten Commandments from the rest of the law, calling them a moral code while possibly dismissing other laws as less relevant. The Ten Commandments are foundational, yes, but they do not exist in isolation from the rest of God’s law. ...

Click to expand...

I'm not trying to trap you but earlier you stated "But these commandments, as mentioned before are not replacements for the Ten Commandments; they are the foundation of them all." So, which is the foundation of which? Christ's says the law and the prophets hang upon these two commandments (Christ's law) and by these words I see Christ's law as foundational to all law even to the 10 commandments.

You're taking "arbitrarily" out of context (if it's a comment on my use of the word). God doesn't do anything arbitrarily, but we do all the time. The way we approach law may miss the point and not be aligned with God purpose. We may interpret arbitrary action or definition out of law that does not reflect its intent but is more agenda-driven.

The moral role of the 10 I would suggest is more driven at depaganising Israel by establishing core monotheistic principles and worldviews that align with God's character that were otherwise inconsistent with surronding cultures; it's a polemic to the surrounding cultural laws of the day. Moses essentially christens the 10 by destroying it in rage against violators of it. Christ, however wasn't trying to depaganize Israel, they were vehemently monotheistic by that time, but suffered from legalism and lost focus of the spirit of the law. Christ's law in its simplicity and heuristic approach can be a polemic to legalism and a return to core values of love and sacrifice. He does not highlight the 10 here and we should take pause at that, he instead indiscriminately lumps it together without hierarchy and says it all "hang upon these two commandments".

JesusFollowerForever said:

The moral law of God is not restricted to the Ten Commandments alone. In fact, the entirety of the Mosaic Law is moral because it all reflects God's will for His people. Whether it’s laws about justice, purity, compassion, or holiness, each command given by God reflects His perfect moral standard. ...

Click to expand...

I sense a "but" here...

JesusFollowerForever said:

Your point about the Ten Commandments not being a "complete moral code" is insightful. While the Ten Commandments are foundational to understanding God’s moral will, they are not an exhaustive treatment of morality. For example, the commandment "You shall not murder" (Exodus 20:13) teaches respect for life, but it does not address more subtle moral questions, like hatred or unforgiveness (which Jesus elaborates upon in the ...

Click to expand...

Christ law operates at a deeper foundation than the 10 do (by explicit definition) and they are more exhaustive than the 10 from their heuristic approach (the 10 are not a heuristic, it is black and white do or don't). Although the 10 might have been foundational to the Hebrews it is not to us, as we have deeper foundational revelation from Christ and it is the deeper that is better.

Christ speaks of the abstract of goodness as lawful action on the Sabbath. He could have said something more limiting like saving a life or healing (which is often the interpretation) but he chose an example of saving sheep that can have intentional wide application both physical and spiritual. Rescuing sheep is a major flag that we should recognize instantly as not about sheep but about people, and not about their physical state but their spiritual state. He calls it out himself saying "how much more valuable are people". I'll connect the dots... how much more valuable is the spiritual state than the physical too?

Sabbath rest is counter-productive when we hoard it, inbeded in the commandment is ensure all those under your care have rest. Christ took a localised expression of "neighbour" and essentially turn it into a meaning for all. When keeping Christ's law, we are not just concerned about our inner circle but should be concerned for those as wide and far as possible as to how we are called. A better goal is to share sabbath than to hoard it which is inline with NT teaching (even if it involves work). I'm not talking about physical rest, I'm talking about spiritual rest. Goodness is mechanism of lawful action that we cannot merely sweep under a rug. Trapped sheep is a metaphor for the lost so there is an implicit missional charge in this goodness on the sabbath. It is not just lawful, but it is a better way aligning with Christ's law over the letter of the 4th; Christ is showing us how the 4th looks through his lens.

It is about his kingdom and spreading the glory of God as far and wide as possible but some too busy resting to hear the bleating sheep trapped in pits that surround them. If those in a 50 m radius haven't experienced God's rest then this is a call to work, not a call to rest. We have physical limits and I don't mean to suggest at the cost of our health but if we can't justify helping our neighbour or instead avoid them on the Sabbath too fearful of turning them down because it would violate our practice of rest then we are prioritizing rest over being able to connect with people. I intentionally seek to help my neighbour (they are all Muslim) and if it's the sabbath and he asks me to help move a couch I'm happy to assist and praise God while doing so. My goal is missionally driven and is not to break rest (even if the latter is the product)

I'm not interested in how or if you rest, I'm interested in how you spread his glory. In this space there is no violation of any laws.

JesusFollowerForever said:

In this sense, the Ten Commandments are a starting point—a moral foundation—but they are not a comprehensive moral code. They establish fundamental principles that help define what is right and just, but they need to be interpreted in light of God’s fuller revelation of His will, especially as expressed through the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the apostles.

Click to expand...

Foundational principles to oppose competing pagan values of surrounding cultures. The moral goal of the 10 is less about love for neighbour, and more about a standard that is intentionally counter-cultural and separate from these competing cultures. This has to be established first as a framework for love to happen because if we killing each other, stealing, lying and having orgies, or if we have a stack of idols in our cloest this is a destructive environment where love cannot flourish. destructive but common in surrounding cultures (and apparently within Israel as well such as what we see demonstrated countless times). That destructive environment needs to be recalibrated before love can flourish and that's what the 10 do. Similar to the creation acount it is also a polemic of the Egyptian or Sumerian cosmology myths. It's designed to depaganise and to align with monotheistic values while also showing a plan for salvation. The literal details of it to me are the most uninteresting part of the account. Law has a similar focus.

JesusFollowerForever said:

Some commandments, such as the one found in Deuteronomy 21:18-21—which prescribes the death penalty for a rebellious child who does not honor his father and mother—may seem harsh or even morally questionable by contemporary standards. However, these laws must be understood within the context of ancient Israel and the specific circumstances of the Israelite journey through the wilderness. At that time, the Israelites were a newly formed nation under God’s direct governance, called to be holy and set apart as a people reflecting His justice and authority.

Click to expand...

JesusFollowerForever said:

The morality behind such commandments was not arbitrary but served as a safeguard against rebellion and disorder within the community. In an environment where Israel was forming its identity and God’s holiness was being established as the central value, obedience to authority was essential. In this specific situation, a disrespect for parental authority symbolized a deeper rebellion against the very structure of society and divine order. The law, in this case, was not merely about punishment but about preserving the moral and social fabric of the nation. ...

Click to expand...

I am not challenging the standard the law sets. I am challenging our motivation for keeping it and the way we value Christ's revelation of it.

JesusFollowerForever said:

I understand your concern about the motivation behind keeping the commandments, particularly in the context of the Sabbath. If one is obeying the command to rest simply out of fear of breaking the law, this is indeed an imperfect motivation. God’s laws, including the commandment to rest on the Sabbath, were never meant to be burdensome or joyless, Instead, the motivation for obeying God's commands should come from love for God and a desire to honor His holiness. Jesus clarified this deeper moral motivation when He spoke of the great commandment:
Matthew 22:37-40 (NKJV):
"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets."

Click to expand...

As should be the motivation behind all obedience

JesusFollowerForever said:

The heart of the law is love—love for God and love for others. If we are motivated by a heart of love and devotion to God, then keeping His commands is not a burden but a joy. The Sabbath, for example, is meant to be a blessing for us, a time to rest in God’s presence and reflect on His goodness. God’s wisdom in commanding us to rest is for our good and His glory and also instructs us to remember his Holiness and How he provides for us..

Click to expand...

It is the spiritual component of the Sabbath that is the blessing. Physical restoration has value indeed, and it is its own blessing. In the practice of Sabbath you're going to have the benefits of the physical aspects. But the spiritual blessing of the sabbath is greater and should be our focus over the physical. Some are not able to gain the physical benefits because of the a physical depraved state they are in, but they still are able to have access to the spiritual rest. If you already have the spiritual blessing, then we should share it. I like Paul's focus here "I do this all for the sake of the gospel that I might share in its blessing" (1 Cor 9:23). So yes, I missionally approach the Sabbath.

JesusFollowerForever said:

infinite wisdom of God. The Ten Commandments are part of His moral will, but they are not the complete expression of that will. All of God’s law—whether it’s the Ten Commandments or the rest of the Mosaic Law—reflects God’s perfect and unchanging nature and in part His plans for humanity The moral code established by God in the Scriptures is a holistic and integrated reflection of His character, designed to guide His people in living according to His perfect will.

Click to expand...

JesusFollowerForever said:

Ultimately, the fulfillment of the law is not found in merely following rules, but in living in a relationship with God that is characterized by love, humility, and obedience. The Sabbath, the moral commandments, and every other aspect of the law point us to God’s holiness and His desire for us to reflect His character in all aspects of our lives. We are called to live in a way that honors Him, and this will be marked by a moral life that reflects His love, justice, and mercy. God’s wisdom, as revealed in His law, shows us the path to true righteousness and life.

Click to expand...

I broadly agree, yet we do not practice all aspects of law. There seems to be an underlying "but" here and and an elevated value of the 10 over the others. Which part of the law are we to keep and which parts are we no longer under obligation to keep? Why are some this way and others that way? Because the measure still seems to be if it's the 10 commandments or not.

Let's start with circumcision as it is a mirror role of the Sabbath in the Abrahamic covenant. (Both are signs of everlasting covenants) What is our obligation to value the commandment of God to circumcise all males in the flesh? Or do we follow NT teaching and see ourselves not under the physical obligation, but instead view it as a spiritual obligation? Can this be applied to Sabbath.... I'm sure the answer that will be returned will amount to no... So why not? Why is circumcision revealed through spiritual means, with a greater focus on the spiritual and Sabbath not? What is more important? Physical rest or spiritual? So which should we value more, physical rest or the spiritual? What NT teaching reinforces sabbath law so that it shows us a continued obligation to this physical ritual of rest?

SabbathBlessings said:

I really like this video, they break down 5 reasons why the Sabbath is a moral commandment .

After watching the video let me know if you have any comments. This is not a video of just commentary, it is packed with Scripture.

Click to expand...

Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to embody God's likeness through being a doer of His character traits, so all of His laws are inherently moral laws. Legislators give laws in accordance with their understanding of what ought to be done, so to claim that any of God's laws are not moral laws is to claim that God made a moral error about what ought to be done when He gave those laws and is therefore to claim to have greater moral knowledge than God.

Are the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God?

A number of Christian denominations affirm that they are

[*]The Baptist Confession of Faith section 19
[*]The Westminster Confession of Faith section 19
[*]Voddie Baucham
[*]C.H. Spurgeon
[*]D.L. Moody
[*]Dies Domini by Pope John Paul II
[*]D. James Kennedy
[*]R.C. Sproul
[*]many others as well..

Soyeong said:

Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to embody God's likeness through being a doer of His character traits, so all of His laws are inherently moral laws.

Click to expand...

Amen. All of His non-ceremonial laws .

So that includes the TEN

Soyeong said:

Legislators give laws in accordance with their understanding of what ought to be done, so to claim that any of God's laws are not moral laws is to claim that God made a moral error

Click to expand...

1 Cor 7:19 "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matters , but what matters is keeping the Commandments of God".

the term "moral law" is used to refer to the Laws of God that are not based in ---- given in --- animal sacrifice as their origin.

For example The TEN are there before sin and specifically that Sabbath Gen 2:2-3 was there before the fall of man, having nothing at all to do with ceremony needed after the fall as if it only had application to the Jewish nation's ceremonies

BobRyan said:

Amen. All of His non-ceremonial laws .

So that includes the TEN


1 Cor 7:19 "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matters , but what matters is keeping the Commandments of God".

the term "moral law" is used to refer to the Laws of God that are not based in ---- given in --- animal sacrifice as their origin.

For example The TEN are there before sin and specifically that Sabbath Gen 2:2-3 was there before the fall of man, having nothing at all to do with ceremony needed after the fall as if it only had application to the Jewish nation's ceremonies

Click to expand...

The ceremonial law is such a bizarre concept. I’ve never seen anyone work through a list of all of God’s laws in order to create a list of which laws they think are part of the ceremonial law. If a group of people were to do that, then they would end up with a wide variety of lists, and none of those people should interpret the Bible as if its authors had in mind the same set of laws, especially when is no way to even establish that they considered that to be a category of law. There are no good grounds for anyone assume that the person that they are speaking to about the ceremonial law has in mind exactly the same set of laws, yet people act as if they are all referring to the same set of laws. It is not as though if something like marriage has a ceremonial aspect, then it does also have moral and civil aspects. Moreover, the only reason why it matters whether or not the Sabbath is a ceremonial law is that people have arbitrary decided that they are willing to obey God…unless He dares to command something that has an aspect that could be considered to be ceremonial, in which case He is crossing the line and shouldn’t be trusted to guide them in how to rightly live.

Morality is based on God's character traits and holiness is one of God's character traits, so it is a moral issue. In 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be holy for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, which includes laws that some arbitrarily consider to be part of the ceremonial law, such as keeping God's Sabbaths holy (Leviticus 19:2-3) and refraining from eating unclean animals (Leviticus 11:44-45).

Soyeong said:

The ceremonial law is such a bizarre concept. I’ve never seen anyone work through a list of all of God’s laws in order to create a list of which laws they think are part of the ceremonial law.

Click to expand...

Heb 10:4-12 says the all the laws regarding animal sacrifice and offerings end at the cross.
1 Cor 7:19 says "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matter , but what matters is keeping the Commandments of God"

So it appears that some distinctions existed according to the NT writers.

BobRyan said:

Heb 10:4-12 says the all the laws regarding animal sacrifice and offerings end at the cross.

Click to expand...

In Hebrews 8:4, it refers to offerings that were still being made in accordance with God's law, so they did not end with the cross. Likewise, in Acts 21:20-24, Paul planned the pay for the offerings of others who were under vow.

BobRyan said:

1 Cor 7:19 says "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matter , but what matters is keeping the Commandments of God"

Click to expand...

Paul referred to Jews as being "the circumcision" and Gentiles as being "the uncircumcision" and circumcision Is a command of God, so he was not making a distinction between the commands of God, but rather he was saying that being a Jew or Gentile is not what matters but what matters is obeying the commands of God.

BobRyan said:

So it appears that some distinctions existed according to the NT writers.

Click to expand...

While there are divisions in the commands of God, they do not correspond to the moral, civil, and ceremonial law. There is no way to establish a list of which laws the authors of the Bible considered to be part of the ceremonial law or even that they considered it to be. category of law.

SabbathBlessings said:

Yes, the original Greek shows this as well

For example, regarding the ceremonial annual sabbaths and other feast days and sacrifices

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

This is the definition of the word ordinances in Col 2:14

δόγμα
dogma
dog'-mah
From the base of G1380; a law (civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical): - decree, ordinance.

I believe God by design made a distinction between the Ten Commandments- and all the other laws, statues judgments and ordinances when He personally numbered and wrote the Ten Commandments and added no more to them and placed them inside the ark of His covenant or ark of His Testament. Deut 4:13 Deut 5:22 Exo 31:18

Click to expand...

In Matthew 27:37, they nailed a handwritten ordinance to Christ's cross that announce the charge that was against him that he was the King of the Jews. This fits perfectly with the concept of concept of the handwritten list of the charges that were against us being nailed to Christ's cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, but has nothing to do with nailing any of God's laws to the cross. The Bible never uses the Greek word "dogma" to refer to any of God's laws. Moreover, Colossians 2:14 is the justification for interpreting "dogma" as referring to ceremonial laws, so it is circular to say that the Greek shows it.

In Colossians 2:16-23, the Colossians were keeping God's feasts in obedience to His commands, they were being judged for doing that by pagans who were promoting human precepts and traditions, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone prevent them from obeying God. Those promoting asceticism and severity to the body would be judging people for celebrating feasts, not for refraining from doing that.

While you are free to argue that there is a distinction between the Ten Commandments and the other commandments, the Bible does not state that this is because they are moral while the other commandments are ceremonial instead.

SabbathBlessings said:

The Greek definition shows there are different categories -some being ceremonial.

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

This is the definition of the word ordinances in Col 2:14

δόγμα
dogma
dog'-mah
From the base of G1380; a law (civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical): - decree, ordinance.

Click to expand...

Again, Colossians 2:14 is the reason why the Greek definition shows that there're different categories - some being ceremonial, so it is circular to then quote that definition to try to show that Colossians 2:14 is speaking about ceremonial laws. "Dogma" does not refer to ceremonial laws, but an error was made to interpret Colossians 2:14 as referring to ceremonial laws being nailed to the cross, so another error was made in thinking that "dogma" can refer to ceremonial laws because of how it is interpreted as being used in Colossians 2:14 and the definition does not justify the error. The other uses of "dogma" in the Bible do not refer to any of the commands of God ceremonial or otherwise.

SabbathBlessings said:

While I agree the debt was cancelled because Jesus took the penalty for sin at the Cross - Amen!

But Paul goes on to say, that the feast days- that some were annual sabbaths, meat offerings etc all ended at the Cross- I mean why would anyone want to make an animal sacrifice for sin, which could never take away sins it was always a placeholder, but with the blood of Christ He can cleanse us of all sin and unrighteousness when we go to Him and repent and turn from our sins. If we are still making animal sacrifices, it is saying Jesus blood was not enough. The Bible does not teach this.

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Paul is quoting Ezekiel all of the sacrifices and offerings.

Eze 45:17 And it shall be the prince's part to give burnt offerings, and meat offerings, and drink offerings, in the feasts, and in the new moons, and in the sabbaths, in all solemnities of the house of Israel: he shall prepare the sin offering, and the meat offering, and the burnt offering, and the peace offerings, to make reconciliation for the house of Israel.

These were all shadows pointing forward to Christ

Heb 9:10 concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.
Redemption Through the Blood of Christ
Heb 9:11 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.
Heb 9:12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.
Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh,
Heb 9:14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Heb 10:1 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect.
Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins.
Heb 10:3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.
Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.
Heb 10:5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING YOU DID NOT DESIRE, BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME.
Heb 10:6 IN BURNT OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES FOR SIN YOU HAD NO PLEASURE.
Heb 10:7 THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME—IN THE VOLUME OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME—TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.' "
Heb 10:8 Previously saying, "SACRIFICE AND OFFERING, BURNT OFFERINGS, AND OFFERINGS FOR SIN YOU DID NOT DESIRE, NOR HAD PLEASURE IN THEM" (which are offered according to the law),
Heb 10:9 then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD." He takes away the first that He may establish the second.
Heb 10:10 By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.


This is exactly what was predicted Jesus would do.


Dan 9:27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate."

Col 2:10 and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.
Col 2:11 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ,
Col 2:12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses,

Jesus is our circumcision and He is our Passover, why these were all shadows pointing to Jesus - the seventh day Sabbath that is in the Ten Commandments is part of God's law and Testimony that defines what sin is 1 John 3:4 James 2:11 Mat 5:19-30 Rom 7:7 and can't be a shadow of anything because it was given before sin at Creation Exo 20:11 and is part of God's perfect will before the disease of sin at that was allowed when our first parents choose to listen to the other spirit instead of God. .

The OT prescription for sin, which was the animal sacrifices and the only way to get access which caused a wall of separation was to be circumcised is what was nailed to the Cross. So therefore, not all the laws are the same. The law that was given for the forgiveness of sins can't be the same law that defines what sin is. Therefore some laws were ceremonial and some laws are God's moral law, written personally by God - His own Testimony under His mercy seat, that is also revealed in His heavenly temple Rev 11:19

Click to expand...

No, what was nailed to the cross was not any of God's laws, but the list of the charges that were against us because of our lawlessness. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Jesus gave himself to free us from any of God's laws, but in order to free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works. Paul was encouraging the Colossians not to let anyone judge them for keeping God's feasts and was emphasizing the importance of continuing to keep them because they are foreshadows that point to Christ. We should live in a way that points to Christ by following his example of obedience to God's law rather than a way that points away from him. In 1 Corinthians 5:6-8, Paul spoke in regard to how Passover foreshadows Christ by drawing the connection of him being our Passover lamb, however, instead of concluding that we now no longer need to celebrate Passover, he concluded by saying that we should therefore continue to celebrat it. Someone is celebrates Passover in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow is testifying about who God is, what He has done, what He is doing, and what He will do while someone who does not celebrate Passover is bearing false witness against these things.

Sin is the transgression of any of God's laws, not just ten of them. Someone can continue to be a doer of God's law even after they have transgressed it by continue to follow the instructions that it gives for when we transgress it, but if someone does not follow those instructions, then they are compounding their sin and immorality.

SabbathBlessings said:

I really like this video, they break down 5 reasons why the Sabbath is a moral commandment .

After watching the video let me know if you have any comments. This is not a video of just commentary, it is packed with Scripture.

Click to expand...

The 4th cannot be a universal moral as it needs to be told to understand it. Without knowledge of the 4th commandment there is no reason why you would keep it and you would rest as is socially appropriate. I get there are natural rhythms that can follow lunar activity, maybe even roughly a per week event but this can not be finely calibrated to the 7th day, it may hit the mark occasionally but most of the time it would be out of sync. Days follow solar activity and months follow lunar activity but they do not align with each other. So if we are calibrated naturally through lunar activity this does not inform us of Sabbath requirement.

I have no issue with keeping the 4th provided it gives glory to God. But it is the glory to God part that should be our moral focus. Christ himself tells us that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath (Mt 12:12) morality is by definition goodness so by contrasting these Christ implicitly reveals that Sabbath requirement itself is about a moral goal (outside of obedience which all laws fall under). Christ reminds others that morality/goodness is always lawful so don't let your non-moral obligations get in the way of your moral duties.

SabbathBlessings said:

Are you saying the Greek definition I provided is wrong?

Click to expand...

The basis for the ceremonial law being included as part of the definition of "dogma" is a misinterpretation of how it is used Colossians 2:14, so that part of the definition is wrong.

SabbathBlessings said:

Do you think we still need to make sin offerings and animal sacrifices despite, the blood of Jesus cleansings us of all sin and unrighteousness?

Click to expand...

We should live in a way that points to Christ rather than a way that points away from him, and all of God's laws were given to in order to teach us how to point to Christ, include the sacrificial system.

In Acts 18:18, Paul took a vow involving shaving his head and the only vow prescribed by the Bible that involves doing that is a Nazarite vow, which involves making offerings (Numbers 6). Likewise, in Acts 21:20-24, Paul planned the pay for the offerings of others who were under vow. In Hebrews 8:4, it refers to offerings that were still being made in accordance with God's law, so offerings did not cease with the death or resurrection of Jesus but only ceased because of the destruction of the Temple and there are prophesies about when the Temple will be rebuilt and offerings will resume.

SabbathBlessings said:

Again, the law that was given as the OT prescription when one sins cannot be the same law that defines sin.

Click to expand...

That is still incorrect. Do you think that if an Israelite would have been doing nothing wrong if they disobeyed what God's law commands in Leviticus 4? No, they would have been compounding there sin by increasing their transgressions of God's law.

SabbathBlessings said:

In all of the Scriptures that discuss the law that defines sin, points to the Ten Commandments. Such as 1 John 3:4 James 2:11 Mat 5:19-30 Rom 7:7. Of course anything that is not of faith is sin. I do not see anywhere in Scripipture that animal sacrifices is the law that defines sin, It was added because of sin. It was the prescription for sin, so can't be the same law that is the description for sin i.e. the Ten Commandments.

Click to expand...

While sin is the tragressions of the Ten Commandments it is by no means limited to just them. For example, in James 2:1-11, he was encouraging them to repent from the sin of committing favoritism. Likewise, there are sins spoken against beyond the Ten Commandments in places like in Romans 1:26-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Galatians 5:19-21, Titus 3:1-3, and Acts 15:19-21. It is also a sin to transgress the greatest two commandments.

SabbathBlessings said:

Description of sin

1Jn 3:4 Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.
Jas 2:11 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.
7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”

All quoting from the Ten Commandments that God added no more Deut 5:22

Click to expand...

In Deuteronomy 5:31-33, Mose wrote down everything that God commanded him without departing from it.

SabbathBlessings said:

1 Cor 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 7 Therefore [a]purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed [b]for us. 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.


Where does it say we are to keep the annual feast days?

Click to expand...

Bolded in verse 8:

1 Cor 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 7 Therefore [a]purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed [b]for us. 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

SabbathBlessings said:

I think it important to look at all of the Scriptures on how God mandates us to keep the Sabbath, not isolate a verse and try to use it against the rest of what God said on how to keep the Sabbath.

Click to expand...

This is a very biased remark and you should work on improving neutrality in your language, as it is very pointed and accusatory which leads to insult. It was enough to say "not isolate a verse" as the point is clear but inappropriate to add the very biased and accusatory remark of "against the rest of what God said" I deeply value and respect the entire bible, let's not accuse each other of something less.

SabbathBlessings said:

Its lawful to good on the Sabbath which means we can do things that are unlawful on the Sabbath, as shown in the plethora of Scripture spoken by God.

Click to expand...

it means we can do good on the sabbath which may violate the sabbath law by letter. Pulling/pushing a heavy object out of a pit is unlawful on the sabbath, but when the heavy object is an animal in distress, the motivation changes from a goal of work to a goal of saving/goodness thus the work needed to accomplished the task inherits the goodness and is deemed lawful. Sheep are widely used as a metaphor for the lost, and this application should be seen as no different. saving sheep in physical distress may be akin to saving people in spiritual distress. A deeper question we should be pondering is regarding work needed to save the spiritual lost because whatever it is, we can be sure it is lawful through application of this verse as well as general NT teaching

SabbathBlessings said:

There is no Scripture that says it has to be natural for us in order for it to be moral. That is depending on our own heart and righteousness, which is deceitful Jer 17:9 instead of living by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God Mat 4:4 and depending on what He deems righteous, which is moral Psa 119:172 Isa 56:1-2

Click to expand...

Morality, in some cases, can be reduced to obedience. When I was a child my mother told me not to touch the stove so by not touching the stove I was obedient to her and this can be called moral. However today I touch the stove all the time, the difference is I'm mature enough to know how to touch the stove and use it correctly, where when I was a young child I didn't. The stove itself is not a moral thing, nor is touching or staying away for it. The moral thing is the obedience which today extends to using the stove now as that obedience each appropriate in its time. Every law can have moral components at the very least obedience driven but that doesn't make the action innately moral, but rather looking at morality in a vacuum.

It was moral for Abraham to get circumsiced but NT shows us the act of circumsicion is not of moral substance and broadly discourages it unless missional driven.

You mentioned "living by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God" but it would seem you have a descriminary approach to this identify some parts of the law as universal using verses like this to support it while at the same time calling other parts of the law as complete.

This is an inconsistent methodology and in the end verses like Mat 4:4 do not inform us how we should descriminate the law but that's how you're using it. the law instead needs to be approached as a whole rather than divided parts. How we approach the 4th commandment needs to be consistent with how we approach things like circumcision or if we shouldn't mix our threads, etc... These are not random disconnected laws, all can have a universal heuristic that binds them together and shows us our continued focus on them. If we really want to rank law Christ already settled that and tells us the greatest that all the law and the prophets hang on. This is very much not the 10 commandment vacuum, it is the entire thing including the prophets and this is the heuristic we should be using to approach all law.

When I see arbitrary classification of laws to support descriminary values of them then what's the support to treat 1 law with a higher respect than another? Mat 4:4 tells us we need to value all the words from God so why is it in practice you're using this to support a descriminary approach to law? This is a major flaw in your approach using broad platitudes and conflating like God's commandments/laws/words to always support only a small part and not the whole thing.

SabbathBlessings said:

Paul needed the law to understand what sin is, so its not like we do not have the word of God, just as Paul did

Click to expand...

SabbathBlessings said:

Rom 7:What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”

Click to expand...

If we look at the 10 we can quickly separate laws directed as moral action to God and moral action to each other (with the exception of the 4th) Under a monotheistic system no other gods, idolatry, and taking Gods name in vain (commandments 1-3) should be implied and are naturally understood under monotheism and going against them would be counter-monotheism. Likewise 5-10 are similar but are about moral action to each other (in the perspectives often of what not to do) but are broadly moral action to one another, but in themselves are innately understood as good and their opposite as against good. We don't have to be told murdering, stealing, or sleeping with our neighbour's wife causes harm or that the opposite of prevention is a better focus.

So why did they need to be etched in stone when it should be obvious? We need to look at it critically to understand the 10s impact and role. Because it wasn't obvious in ancient people groups like these and these needed to be told this to understand it. surrounding cultures widely practiced polytheism as well as included immoralties as a part of their rites and customs so it would be natural to fall into their customs instead.

What the 10 do is act as a polemic to surrounding cultures of the day contrasting cultural norms with a different way of thinking. It calibrated the Hebrews into a system aligning with God's over a system that was always off the mark. Without the 10 the Hebrews would have fallen into the same habits of those that surrounding them so the 10 acted as a type teacher or shepherd to align cultural norms that would otherwise stray. In this way the law is needed not to understand that murdering is wrong but to ingrain in cultural practice these core values.

So what of the 4th? A 7 day week where the 7th day is venerated has Babylonian origins that dominated the ancient world practices. The 4th is a system to pull it back to monotheism from competing polytheistic values (7 days corresponds to the 7 visible plantes include sun and moon). The 4th has redeemed an otherwise pagan value into one deeply rooted into monotheism and pointing to the creation of the world through 1 God not to mention foreshadows salvation under Christ.

This is the aspect Paul is addressing. Although I admit he does not unpack it that way it is however consistent through his other letters that also address this like Galatians 3:24-26. The laws role in this case is as a guardian/teacher to focus on core alignment and without it we would not no any better but under Christ we are no longer under the teacher role. It's not the Paul himself needed it, these things were very natural to him, it has a more macro understandng applied to Israel guidance under the law that leds up to the covenant under Christ.

SabbathBlessings said:

So we know God's will by His word, no need to depend on our own reasoning, something Scripture tells us not to. Pro 3:5-6

Click to expand...

Indeed, which means we shouldn't descriminate the law in anyway but I don't see that as a high value in your perspective of law. Show me how we can view Sabbath and circumcision the same way, and on top of that all the laws, rather than try and cut up law and treat each part differently which would be based on a biased reasoning.