• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

The History of the “Two Laws” Theory in Romans 3:20

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The old commandments mentioned here, which are four moral commandments, are ingested into Christ commandments. This is direct evidence that the law of the old covenant has been fulfilled by Christ and is now no longer part of the new covenant. And before you go accusing everyone of now being allowed to commit murder etc., the command that we must obey from Christ already includes that in it. If I murder then I don’t love as I should.
So you decide what is moral and righteous or God.

You decide that God reduced His covenant by one of two commandments, or does the Word of God stand, because its settled in heaven Psa 119:89 where God's Testimony Exo 31:18 Deut 4:13 is that He promised not to alter Psa 89:45 Rev 11:19 Rev 15:5. is under His mercy seat where justice and mercy will come together soon. Exo 20:6 I personally would not want to stand before Jesus and tell Him which commandments that the Holy Spirit of Truth wrote are moral or not and which ones we are to keep or not keep. That would make one their own god breaking the very first commandment. Because whoever we obey is who we serve. Its why I believe its best to let God be God and define His own laws and righteousness which He did, so clearly. Written by God, not man.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The verse that I posted was not directed at the House of Israel but at the body of Christ.
Its the same thing. Even in the verse you quoted does not say to Gentiles,. It is Christ ratifying His covenant Heb8:10 at the Cross.

I am okay agreeing to disagree
 
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
36,378
4,814
On the bus to Heaven
✟127,095.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So you decide what is moral and righteous or God.
No. Christ did that for us and Jesus is
God,
You decide that God reduced His covenant by one of two commandments, or does he Word of God stand, because its settled in heaven Psa 119:89 where His Testimony Exo 31:18 Deut 4:13 is that He promises not to alter Psa 89:45 Rev 11:19 Rev 15:5. I personally would not want to stand before Jesus and tell Him which commandments that the Holy Spirit of Truth wrote are moral or not and we are to keep or not keep. That would make one their own god breaking the very first commandment.
You keep misting the point and your interpretation is still wrong. The Christian is not under the law.
 
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
36,378
4,814
On the bus to Heaven
✟127,095.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Its the same thing. Even in the verse you quoted does not say to Gentiles,. It is Christ ratifying His covenant Heb8:10 at the Cross.

I am okay agreeing to disagree
Really? Was He in the temple having communion with the Jews? These are Jesus instructions for having communion by the body of Christ that is practiced in Christian churches today. Is your church Jewish or Christian? Do you have communion in your church?
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Really? Was He in the temple having communion with the Jews? These are Jesus instructions for having communion by the body of Christ that is practiced in Christian churches today. Is your church Jewish or Christian? Do you have communion in your church?
Where does He say verbatim He made a covenant with the Gentiles. I am not talking about communion, which I understand why you would want to change the subject. I am talking about an agreement with God and Gentiles that God made. He only made those to Israel which represents God's people.


Exo 4:22 Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says the LORD: "Israel is My son, My firstborn.
Hos 11:1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son.

Israel is God's son, His firstborn. If Israel was literal it would mean Adam. Obviously its not literal as it represents God's people.

Who is the true Israel?

Mat 2:14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt,
Mat 2:15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, "OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON."

Christ is the true fulfillment of Israel.

Christ is the Vine, we are the branches and Gentiles are grafted into Christ or Israel (God's people) through faith

Gal 3:7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham.
Gal 3:26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.


Rom 11:11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles
Rom 11:12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!
Rom 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry,
Rom 11:14 if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them.
Rom 11:15 For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?
Rom 11:11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.
Rom 11:16 For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches.
Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree,
Rom 11:18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.
Rom 11:19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in."
Rom 11:20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear.
Rom 11:21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.

The only way we are part of God's Israel is through faith. Faith does not void the law Rom 3:31

Joh 15:1 "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.
Joh 15:2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit.
Joh 15:3 You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
Joh 15:4 Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.
Joh 15:5 "I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.
Joh 15:6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.
Joh 15:7 If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you.
Joh 15:8 By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples.
Joh 15:9 "As the Father loved Me, I also have loved you; abide in My love.
Joh 15:10 If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love.

Keep in mind, we are not more special than those who came before us. Unbelief is disobedience and rebellion to God's laws Rom 8:7-8 Heb 3:7-19 His version, not ours

Rom 11:20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear.
Rom 11:21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
36,378
4,814
On the bus to Heaven
✟127,095.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
No. Christ did that for us and Jesus is
God,
Yes, He does and Jesus is God made flesh who said these things we are told to live by

Doing justice and righteousness is moral and the foundation of God's Throne. Psa 89:14 Why we do not get to dictate to God what are His commandments or not or what is righteousness, which is moral- God does. He already did both written and spoken by God, not man and it includes the 4th commandment.

Isa 56:1 Thus says the Lord:

“Keep justice, and do righteousness,

For My salvation is about to come,
And My righteousness to be revealed.
2 Blessed is the man who does this,
And the son of man who lays hold on it;
Who keeps from defiling the Sabbath,

6 “Also the sons of the foreigner
Who join themselves to the Lord, to serve Him,
And to love the name of the Lord, to be His servants—
Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath,
And holds fast My covenant

No wonder why Jesus said:


Mark 3:4 Then He said to them, “Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?” But they kept silent.

And relates doing evil as profaning the Sabbath instead of keeping the Sabbath day holy Exo 20:8-11 as it is the Holy Day of the Lord thy God, thus saith the Lord Isa 58:13 made for mankind Mark 2:27 because God wants everyone to join themselves to Him, to love and serve Him and be in a covenant relationship with Him. And I am sure it saddens Him when we profane Him Eze 22:26 instead of allowing Him to be God and we be His people Eze 20:20

You keep misting the point and your interpretation is still wrong.
Perhaps its not me.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
36,378
4,814
On the bus to Heaven
✟127,095.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yes, He does and Jesus is God made flesh who said these things we are told to live by

Doing justice and righteousness is moral and the foundation of God's Throne. Why we do not get to dictate to God what are His commandments or not. He already did both written and spoken by God, not man and it includes the 4th commandment.
Where in the New Testament post crucifixion does it command the 4th commandment for the Christian? Need a verse from the New Testament not from the old covenant.
Perhaps it’s not me.
Yep. It’s you. I’m not the one promoting the law for the Christian.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Where in the New Testament post crucifixion does it command the 4th commandment for the Christian? Need a verse from the New Testament not from the old covenant.

Yep. It’s you. I’m not the one promoting the law for the Christian.
I'm going to repost this again

Those who are looking for a commandment in the New Covenant is missing what the New Covenant is about- faith.

Why do we need an explicit commandment to obey God when He wrote His laws in our hearts. While I believe the commandment of the 4th is repeated Luke23:56 Heb4:9NIV Mat12:12 Exo20:6 1John5:3 John14:15 1John5:3 Luke4:16 1 John2:6 there is not an explicit commandment to not vain God's name in the NC, but I do not believe we should do so.

The Sabbath is kept all throughout the NC by Jesus and the apostles (decades after the Cross) and continues on for God's saints in the New Heaven and New Earth. God said He wrote His laws in our hearts and the only change regarding His laws is the location 2Cor3:3 Heb8:10 as the NC is established, meaning the whole basis, is on better promises Heb8:6 because it still has God's laws- His version, now written in the heart and mind Heb8:10 for those who cooperate John 14:15-18 we are told not everyone does Rom8:7-8 . Who defines God's laws, God or us? God could not have done so more clearly, written by God, spoken by God, His Testimony, what the whole Bible is about- the testimony of God through His prophets and disciples, yet when it comes to God's own Testimony Exo 31:18 He promised not to alter Psa89:34, people cast it aside. This is not an example of faith or is reducing His commandments that God wrote and God spoke to an unbilical number Deut4:13 Exo 34:28.

I guess all will get sorted out in God's own time. I wish you all well.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
818
232
65
Boonsboro
✟95,254.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Usually people who won't answer questions, or address scriptures are not really interested in rebuttals.




Paul parsed the Law in Gal. 3. A Law "ADDED" that Abraham didn't have, even though it is said that Isaac was blessed "Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."

This Law Paul speaks to was ADDED "Because of Transgressions", but wasn't given to Israel before the Golden calf.

Jer. 7: 21 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh.

22 For I "spake not unto your fathers", nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning "burnt offerings or sacrifices": 23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, "that it may be well unto you".

24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.

And again;

Mal. 2: 4 And ye shall know that I have sent this commandment unto you, that my covenant might be with Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.

5 My covenant was with him of life and peace; and I gave them to him for the fear wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name.

(Ex. 32: 26 Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD'S side? let him come unto me. And "all the sons of Levi" gathered themselves together unto him.)

And it was Only to be in effect, "Till the SEED Should Come".

Duet. 18: 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

So I just showed you Paul, parsing the Law "in such manner". Jeremiah, parsing the Law "in such manner" and Moses, parsing the Law "in such manner".

But I fear it will make no difference, because it seems you are not here seeking to discuss scriptures, answer questions, or engage in honest discourse, rather, your posts are here to justify and promote an adopted religious philosophy, and therefore, are not allowed to address what is actually written, answer questions, or engage in discussion.

That is sad, but not uncommon in this world God placed me in. But you are free to engage in whatever traditions you wish.


Fascinating reply. Questioning popular religious philosophy, posting scriptures for discussion and examination, Asking relevant questions in search of Scriptural Truth concerning the topic at hand, is judged by you as, "those who pursue righteousness by their own works",

and judged by you as "will always end up Pharisees in spirit and attitude thinking themselves wiser than all the rest",

and judged by you as " judging everything that does not comport with their doctrine as evil and false",

and lastly, you judge men who ask questions and post scriptures for discussion, as "they do not rely on Grace".

Thank you for another spirit filled post.

I get the message.
Let’s walk through this carefully and show that Paul was not parsing or redefining the Law, but explaining its purpose and function within God’s covenant plan.


1. Paul did not “parse” the Law — he explained its place in salvation history

Galatians 3:17–19 is often misunderstood. Paul says:

“The law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God... Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the Seed should come to whom the promise was made.”
Paul is not saying the Law was “invented” at Sinai, nor that it contradicted Abraham’s obedience. Rather, he’s saying the Sinaitic covenant (codified law with national ordinances and sacrificial rituals) was added as a guardian or tutor (Gal. 3:24) to expose sin and restrain transgression until Christ — the promised Seed — arrived.

Abraham indeed “kept God’s commandments” (Gen. 26:5), but those were moral and covenantal principles, not the codified Mosaic system with Levitical priesthood, temple sacrifices, and national statutes. Paul’s argument is historical and covenantal, not dismissive or revisionist.


2. The “law added because of transgressions” means to reveal sin — not to create a new religion

Romans 5:20 explains Paul’s meaning:

“The law entered that the offense might abound.”
The Law was added to make sin visible — to expose human inability to attain righteousness through works — and thereby point everyone to the need for faith and grace in the promised Messiah (cf. Rom 3:19–24; Gal 3:22–25).

Thus, Paul is not “parsing” the Law; he is describing its divine purpose. The Law’s holiness and goodness are affirmed in Romans 7:12:

“So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.”

3. Jeremiah 7 and Malachi 2 do not contradict Paul — they support him

Jeremiah 7:22–23 says God did not originally command burnt offerings when He brought Israel out of Egypt, but commanded obedience. This is not a denial of the sacrificial system’s divine origin — it’s a rebuke of hypocrisy. God’s first command at Sinai (Ex. 19–20) indeed focused on obedience and faithfulness. Sacrifices were later codified because Israel sinned (the golden calf incident, Ex. 32).

Jeremiah’s point is: God desired heart obedience first, not mere ritual compliance — the same truth Paul emphasizes (Rom 2:28–29).

Malachi 2 likewise rebukes the Levites who corrupted the covenant. The priesthood was meant to preserve life and peace, but it too failed — demonstrating again that the Law, though holy, could not perfect the heart (Heb. 7:18–19). The writer to the Hebrews (echoing Paul) says the Levitical law was temporary “until the time of reformation” (Heb. 9:10). That’s exactly Paul’s “till the Seed should come.”


4. The “Prophet like Moses” in Deuteronomy 18 is Christ — the fulfillment, not a replacement

Paul affirms this same interpretation in Acts 13:32–39 and Romans 10:4:

“Christ is the end (Greek telos, goal or fulfillment) of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.”
Deuteronomy 18 prophesied that God would one day send a prophet who would reveal His will perfectly — and that those who rejected Him would be judged. That prophet, Peter declares, is Jesus (Acts 3:22–23). Thus, the Law leads to Him, not away from Him.


5. The “till the Seed should come” clause marks transition, not contradiction

When Paul says “till the Seed should come,” he is describing the Law’s appointed duration — not a dismissal of moral righteousness. The sacrificial, ceremonial, and national components of the Mosaic covenant were temporary scaffoldingleading to Christ, who fulfilled them (Matt 5:17).

But the moral and spiritual principles — love, justice, mercy, humility — remain eternal, because they reflect God’s character (Rom 13:8–10).
Usually people who won't answer questions, or address scriptures are not really interested in rebuttals.




Paul parsed the Law in Gal. 3. A Law "ADDED" that Abraham didn't have, even though it is said that Isaac was blessed "Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."

This Law Paul speaks to was ADDED "Because of Transgressions", but wasn't given to Israel before the Golden calf.

Jer. 7: 21 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh.

22 For I "spake not unto your fathers", nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning "burnt offerings or sacrifices": 23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, "that it may be well unto you".

24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.

And again;

Mal. 2: 4 And ye shall know that I have sent this commandment unto you, that my covenant might be with Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.

5 My covenant was with him of life and peace; and I gave them to him for the fear wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name.

(Ex. 32: 26 Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD'S side? let him come unto me. And "all the sons of Levi" gathered themselves together unto him.)

And it was Only to be in effect, "Till the SEED Should Come".

Duet. 18: 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

So I just showed you Paul, parsing the Law "in such manner". Jeremiah, parsing the Law "in such manner" and Moses, parsing the Law "in such manner".

But I fear it will make no difference, because it seems you are not here seeking to discuss scriptures, answer questions, or engage in honest discourse, rather, your posts are here to justify and promote an adopted religious philosophy, and therefore, are not allowed to address what is actually written, answer questions, or engage in discussion.

That is sad, but not uncommon in this world God placed me in. But you are free to engage in whatever traditions you wish.


Fascinating reply. Questioning popular religious philosophy, posting scriptures for discussion and examination, Asking relevant questions in search of Scriptural Truth concerning the topic at hand, is judged by you as, "those who pursue righteousness by their own works",

and judged by you as "will always end up Pharisees in spirit and attitude thinking themselves wiser than all the rest",

and judged by you as " judging everything that does not comport with their doctrine as evil and false",

and lastly, you judge men who ask questions and post scriptures for discussion, as "they do not rely on Grace".

Thank you for another spirit filled post.

I get the message.
Let’s walk through this carefully and show that Paul was not parsing or redefining the Law, but explaining its purpose and function within God’s covenant plan.


1. Paul did not “parse” the Law — he explained its place in salvation history

Galatians 3:17–19 is often misunderstood. Paul says:

“The law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God... Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the Seed should come to whom the promise was made.”
Paul is not saying the Law was “invented” at Sinai, nor that it contradicted Abraham’s obedience. Rather, he’s saying the Sinaitic covenant (codified law with national ordinances and sacrificial rituals) was added as a guardian or tutor (Gal. 3:24) to expose sin and restrain transgression until Christ — the promised Seed — arrived.

Abraham indeed “kept God’s commandments” (Gen. 26:5), but those were moral and covenantal principles, not the codified Mosaic system with Levitical priesthood, temple sacrifices, and national statutes. Paul’s argument is historical and covenantal, not dismissive or revisionist.


2. The “law added because of transgressions” means to reveal sin — not to create a new religion

Romans 5:20 explains Paul’s meaning:

“The law entered that the offense might abound.”
The Law was added to make sin visible — to expose human inability to attain righteousness through works — and thereby point everyone to the need for faith and grace in the promised Messiah (cf. Rom 3:19–24; Gal 3:22–25).

Thus, Paul is not “parsing” the Law; he is describing its divine purpose. The Law’s holiness and goodness are affirmed in Romans 7:12:

“So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.”

3. Jeremiah 7 and Malachi 2 do not contradict Paul — they support him

Jeremiah 7:22–23 says God did not originally command burnt offerings when He brought Israel out of Egypt, but commanded obedience. This is not a denial of the sacrificial system’s divine origin — it’s a rebuke of hypocrisy. God’s first command at Sinai (Ex. 19–20) indeed focused on obedience and faithfulness. Sacrifices were later codified because Israel sinned (the golden calf incident, Ex. 32).

Jeremiah’s point is: God desired heart obedience first, not mere ritual compliance — the same truth Paul emphasizes (Rom 2:28–29).

Malachi 2 likewise rebukes the Levites who corrupted the covenant. The priesthood was meant to preserve life and peace, but it too failed — demonstrating again that the Law, though holy, could not perfect the heart (Heb. 7:18–19). The writer to the Hebrews (echoing Paul) says the Levitical law was temporary “until the time of reformation” (Heb. 9:10). That’s exactly Paul’s “till the Seed should come.”


4. The “Prophet like Moses” in Deuteronomy 18 is Christ — the fulfillment, not a replacement

Paul affirms this same interpretation in Acts 13:32–39 and Romans 10:4:

“Christ is the end (Greek telos, goal or fulfillment) of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.”
Deuteronomy 18 prophesied that God would one day send a prophet who would reveal His will perfectly — and that those who rejected Him would be judged. That prophet, Peter declares, is Jesus (Acts 3:22–23). Thus, the Law leads to Him, not away from Him.


5. The “till the Seed should come” clause marks transition, not contradiction

When Paul says “till the Seed should come,” he is describing the Law’s appointed duration — not a dismissal of moral righteousness. The sacrificial, ceremonial, and national components of the Mosaic covenant were temporary scaffoldingleading to Christ, who fulfilled them (Matt 5:17).

But the moral and spiritual principles — love, justice, mercy, humility — remain eternal, because they reflect God’s character (Rom 13:8–10).
 
Upvote 0

RandyPNW

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2021
3,693
834
Pacific NW, USA
✟171,428.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
God never made a covenant with the Gentiles. Only with Israel.
Then you will have to call God a liar.
Gen 17.3 Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, 4 “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. 5 No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham for I have made you a father of many nations."

It is also a covenant of faith in what Christ would do--not in what Israel would do under the Law.

Rom 4.16 Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. 17 As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.” He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed—the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.
18 Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”


This is also called a "promise."

Gal 3.15 Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

Since you begin your argument with a false premise, I will have to begin with my assumption--not yours.
And God, defined His laws, written and spoken by God. Gentiles are only grafted into God's covenant promise through faith and then part of the promises (and laws) Gal; 3:26-29
Now, you're admitting that God does have a covenant with the Gentiles/nations? And you proceed to acknowledge that this covenant is based on both faith and promise?
No Christ is not a set of laws, but they do reflect His character and ours.
So what is it--does Christ reflect a set of laws consisting of his own moral record, or not? If the requirements to live *like him* reflect his character, then this is indeed a "set of laws."

The set of laws consist of being loyal to his character and record of righteousness, as he fulfilled the Law of Moses. This righteousness of Christ was not a duplication of the Law of Moses, nor even of the 10 Commandments, which with the Law showed Israel's flawed record. Rather, Christ's record was apart from the Law, since he had no need of redemption under the Law and its ceremonies.
Maybe one day you will give God credit for His covenant Deut 4:13, His commandments Exo 20:6, His works Exo 32:16 that HE took credit for, not Moses. Moses is not God, Moses was a servant of God, God is the Creator of Moses and everyone else.
This is a silly argument, in my opinion. Arguing that it was God's Law simply argues that God originated His covenant with Israel. But that Law was designed to expose Israel's sin and need for His mercy and forgiveness. It was designed to lead Israel to Christ, which after the NT era will result in Israel's national restoration, I believe.
His commandments started way before Moses Exo 20:11 according to the Testimony of God. I find it hard to understand how do we believe in God, but not what He says. Guess that is for God to sort out.
Before Moses people were sinners still in need of a temporary means of showing they could be in covenant with God and rely on His mercy until final satisfaction could be found.

Righteousness was not the exclusive domain of the Law. Nor was the Law the only reminder that the world needed help in maintaining a relationship with God until Christ came.

Christ exceeds the Law in the display of righteousness because the Law was for flawed Israel, whereas Christ exhibited a flawless righteousness. Let us follow Christ and his righteousness. He is the fulfillment of Abraham's covenant on behalf of all the nations and also of Israel. It is a promise, and it is by faith in Christ and what his righteousness consists of.

The difference between the covenants is integral. Paul argued, and Hebrews argued to explain this enormous difference, one preparing for the reception of Eternal Life and the other guaranteeing and sealing Eternal Life. If you mix them up, or confuse their different examples of righteousness, you will confuse people. The Sabbath was Old Covenant and displayed human failure under the principle of Sabbath Law. We simply follow Christ, the Lord of the Sabbath.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Then you will have to call God a liar.
Gen 17.3 Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, 4 “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. 5 No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham,[c] for I have made you a father of many nations.

It is also a covenant of faith in what Christ would do--not in what Israel would do under the Law.

Rom 4.16 Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. 17 As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.” He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed—the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.
18 Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”

This is also called a "promise."

Gal 3.15 Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

Since you begin your argument with a false premise, I will have to begin with my assumption--not yours.

Now, you're admitting that God does have a covenant with the Gentiles/nations? And you proceed to acknowledge that this covenant is based on both faith and promise?

So what is it--does Christ reflect a set of laws consisting of his own moral record, or not? If the requirements to live *like him* reflect his character, then this is indeed a "set of laws." The set of laws consist of being loyal to his character and record of righteousness, as he fulfilled the Law of Moses. This righteousness of Christ was not a duplication of the Law of Moses, nor even of the 10 Commandments, which with the Law showed Israel's flawed record. Rather, Christ's record was apart from the Law, since he had no need of redemption under the Law and its ceremonies.

This is a silly argument, in my opinion. Arguing that it was God's Law simply argues that God originated His covenant with Israel. But that Law was designed to expose Israel's sin and need for His mercy and forgiveness. It was designed to lead Israel to Christ, which after the NT era will result in Israel's national restorationk, I believe.

Before Moses people were sinners still in need of a temporary means of showing they could be in covenant with God and rely on His mercy until final satisfaction could be found. Righteousness is not the exclusive domain of the Law. Christ exceeds the Law in the display of righteousness because the Law was for flawed Israel, whereas Christ exhibited a flawless righteousness.

The difference between the covenants is integral. Paul argued, and Hebrews argued to explain this enormous difference, one preparing for the reception of Eternal Life and the other guaranteeing and sealing Eternal Life. If you mix them up, or confuse their different examples of righteousness, you will confuse people.
Abraham was the father of Jews and this covenant was of circumcision which don't you claim was for Jews only? Are you claiming it was for Gentiles too? Isn't that the argument of the NT? Acts 15:1 Gal 2:3 1Cor7:19 etc God's great nations came through this bloodline and His grandson Jacob, which He renamed to Israel. God only made one covenant with a whole nation that represents God's people and that is with Israel. Your post does not disprove this. You will not find a verse that say this is the covenant I make with Gentiles. By the way your first sentence is your words, not mine and I would be careful what we accuse others of as God will not hold one guiltless.

One cannot separate faith with obedience to God's commandments. According to Jesus revealed through John His saints need both

Rev 14:12 Here is the [a]patience of the saints; here[b] are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

It does not say the faith in Jesus but the faith of Jesus which is how Jesus lived and what He taught. You previously said Jesus taught for "other people" and His example is Old Covenant for other people. Not what the Bible teaches.

This is the faith that reconciles us

Revelation 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 #1 Exodus 20:3) and sexually immoral (breaking commandment #7 Exodus 20:14) and murderers (breaking commandment #6 Exodus 20:13) and idolaters (breaking commandment #2 Exodus 20:4-6), and whoever loves and practices a lie (breaking # 9 Exodus 20:16 or any of the commandments 1 John 2:4) Breaking one we break them all James 2:11-12 Exo 20:1-17 .


Guess we will all find out soon enough.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
36,378
4,814
On the bus to Heaven
✟127,095.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm going to repost this again and end with it.

Those who are looking for a commandment in the New Covenant is missing what the New Covenant is about- faith.
The new covenant is indeed about faith not about the law.
Why do we need an explicit commandment to obey God when He wrote His laws in our hearts.
No we don’t. The commandments that God wrote in our hearts are the commandments if God which summarizes the earlier commandments.


While I believe the commandment of the 4th is repeated Luke23:56 Heb4:9NIV Mat12:12 Exo20:6 1John5:3 John14:15 1John5:3 Luke4:16 1 John2:6 there is not an explicit commandment to not vain God's name in the NC, but I do not believe we should do so.
Luke 23:56- Christ is in the grave. He had not yet fulfilled the OC.

Heb 4:9- verse 3 tells you what that rest is and is not the 4th commandment. The rest is in Christ.

Matt 12:12- pre crucifixion. He was explaining that the Pharisees were being legalistic and it was ok to do good on the sabbath. Again, nothing here about the Christian commanded to keep the sabbath.

Exidus 20:6- audience was Jewish not Christian. Old covenant not new.

1John 5:3- the commandments here are the commandments of Jesus not the ones of the law.

John 14:15- “my” commandments. Jesus is the one talking here. Jesus summarized the whole law in 2 commandments.

Luke 4:16- pre crucifixion. Jesus followed the Jewish law perfectly. The new covenant began after the cross.

1 John 2:6- Again the commandments are those of Jesus not those of the law.

We have discussed these verses ad naseum and I have explained them to you before. Unless you can post a post crucifixion verse that requires the Christian to keep the 4th commandment the fact then remains that the 4th commandment is not commanded if the Christian.
The Sabbath is kept all throughout the NC by Jesus and the apostles (decades after the Cross) and continues on for God's saints in the New Heaven and New Earth.
No verse? The Apostles preached the gospel of good news to the Jews. The Jews gathered at the temple on the Sabbath. The apostles went to the temple on the sabbath.

“To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might gain Jews; to those who are under the Law, I became as one under the Law, though not being under the Law myself, so that I might gain those who are under the Law;”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭9‬:‭20‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

You probably missed this verse since it doesn’t work with your theology.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The new covenant is indeed about faith not about the law.

No we don’t. The commandments that God wrote in our hearts are the commandments if God which summarizes the earlier commandments.



Luke 23:56- Christ is in the grave. He had not yet fulfilled the OC.

Heb 4:9- verse 3 tells you what that rest is and is not the 4th commandment. The rest is in Christ.

Matt 12:12- pre crucifixion. He was explaining that the Pharisees were being legalistic and it was ok to do good on the sabbath. Again, nothing here about the Christian commanded to keep the sabbath.

Exidus 20:6- audience was Jewish not Christian. Old covenant not new.

1John 5:3- the commandments here are the commandments of Jesus not the ones of the law.

John 14:15- “my” commandments. Jesus is the one talking here. Jesus summarized the whole law in 2 commandments.

Luke 4:16- pre crucifixion. Jesus followed the Jewish law perfectly. The new covenant began after the cross.

1 John 2:6- Again the commandments are those of Jesus not those of the law.

We have discussed these verses ad naseum and I have explained them to you before. Unless you can post a post crucifixion verse that requires the Christian to keep the 4th commandment the fact then remains that the 4th commandment is not commanded if the Christian.

No verse? The Apostles preached the gospel of good news to the Jews. The Jews gathered at the temple on the Sabbath. The apostles went to the temple on the sabbath.

“To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might gain Jews; to those who are under the Law, I became as one under the Law, though not being under the Law myself, so that I might gain those who are under the Law;”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭9‬:‭20‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

You probably missed this verse since it doesn’t work with your theology.
The covenant is what is ratified by Christ’s death. The Sabbath is still a commandment after His death kept by His faithful. He saw His faithful first at His resurrection never once told them they no longer needed to keep the Sabbath commandment. He would have needed to ratify His covenant all over again to do so.

I do not believe God is not Jesus and God's commandments are not the commandments of Jesus is a good one. God laws and Jesus laws are against each other instead of being One that He said quoting from the same commandments He said to keep for eternal life Mat 19:17-19 the same ones He said not to break or teach others to break the least of these commandments Mat 5:19-30, the same ones He said when laying them aside for our own manmade commandments one worships Him in vain Mat 15:3-14 Mark 7:7-13 the same ones He said leaves one outside of heaven Rev 22:14-15. The commandments that God wrote in our heart are the same ones He wrote on stone Deut 4:13 2Cor3:3 Heb8:10 because God promised He would not alter the words of His covenant Psa 89:34 not a jot or tittle Mat5:18 His Word is settled in heaven Psa 119:89 where His Law and Testimony Rev 11:19 Rev 15:5 is as if a human can edit God.

Guess we will find out soon enough.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,422
11,957
Georgia
✟1,103,914.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married

Romans 3:20 declares, “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.” Some interpreters have argued that Paul is speaking of two distinct laws: the ceremonial law, which could not justify, and the moral law, which continues to bind believers. This reading, however, is a later development in Christian history rather than Paul’s own intent.


In the early church, figures like Irenaeus, Origen, Chrysostom, and Augustine typically read Paul’s reference to “the law” (nomos) as the Mosaic law in its entirety. They emphasized that the law reveals sin but does not bring righteousness, and they did not suggest that Paul was distinguishing between two different laws.

A more formal distinction emerged in medieval theology. Thomas Aquinas articulated a tripartite division of the Mosaic law: moral, ceremonial, and judicial. The moral law expressed timeless ethical principles, the ceremonial law governed Israel’s worship and sacrifices, and the judicial law regulated Israel’s civic life. Although Aquinas did not claim Paul himself made this division, his framework shaped subsequent readings of Romans.

During the Reformation, Martin Luther and John Calvin emphasized justification by faith apart from works of the law. To preserve the ongoing authority of the Ten Commandments while rejecting salvation by works, they leaned on the moral/ceremonial distinction. Calvin in particular stressed that the moral law still bound believers, while the ceremonial law had been fulfilled in Christ. This approach encouraged Protestants to interpret Romans 3:20 as if Paul were distinguishing between different kinds of law.

In the centuries that followed, Protestant confessions such as the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) codified this division, and it became common for preachers and commentators to read Romans 3:20 through that lens. The two-law theory thus served as a theological tool in debates over antinomianism, allowing Christians to affirm both salvation by grace and the necessity of obedience.

Modern scholarship, however, has largely set aside the two-law framework as an anachronism. Studies of Second Temple Judaism have shown that Jews of Paul’s day viewed Torah as a unified covenant, not as divisible into moral and ceremonial parts. Scholars such as E.P. Sanders and proponents of the “New Perspective on Paul” argue that Paul’s concern was not with distinguishing kinds of laws but with showing that Torah as a whole cannot justify. For Paul, the law in its entirety reveals sin, but righteousness comes only through faith in Christ.

In sum, the theory that Paul spoke of two laws in Romans 3:20 reflects later theological developments, especially medieval and Reformation attempts to reconcile Paul’s teaching with the continuing role of God’s commands. While historically influential, it does not appear to be what Paul himself meant.
Heb 10:4-11 makes it very clear that the ceremonial law of "animal sacrifices and offerings" ended at the cross. It then contrasts it to the "once for all" atonement of Christ saying "He takes away the first, to establish the second" Heb 10:9.

(So much for the -- no mention of two distinct forms of Law--suggestion)

In Rom 3:31 we have "What then? Do we make void the LAW of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the Law of God".

That is the same reference to the moral law of God that we see all through Romans 2 and 3.

Romans 3 makes the case that all have violated the moral law of God, and so all are sinners.

Romans 3 also makes the case that perfect obedience to the moral law of God as a means for salvation is impossible since even one violation places one in a doomed condition. The idea that we can "not take God's name in vain" until we finally all coveting, lying, stealing etc that we ever did in the past - is nonsense. Paul makes it clear that only the cross will save. But that is not Paul's way of saying "do go ahead and take God's name in vain all you like. It is not longer a problem God cares about"

Justification by faith alone , literally means that the lost sinner comes to God without any merit and claiming the blood of Christ , receives full and complete pardon without first having to be a missionary in Africa (or in Washington D.C.) to gain acceptance.

Paul says to honor parents in Eph 6:1 but then ADDs to his own statement this "honor your father and mother" command in Ex 20 is STILL in the TEN as the "first commandment WITH a promise" Eph 6:2. HE adds OT commandments to his own statement as added force of law, force of God's Word to the point.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

RandyPNW

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2021
3,693
834
Pacific NW, USA
✟171,428.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Abraham was the father of Jews and this covenant was of circumcision which don't you claim was for Jews only? Are you claiming it was for Gentiles too? Isn't that the argument of the NT?
You denied that God has a covenant with the Gentiles/nations. I proved that to be false. You are denying God said this. He did.

Beyond this I can explain your confusion, but not unless you admit you're wrong to deny God's covenant with Abraham on behalf of the nations. Otherwise, you will begin with a false premise and end up in confusion.

God's covenant of circumcision was with Abraham's family--not with the nations, which came much later through Christ. The covenant of circumcision was prior to Christ, and so, was annulled and fulfilled in the work of Christ. His death made circumcision no longer applicable to the Jews, unless they wish to do so for cultural or other non-legal reasons.

Put another way, Sabbath Law was not part of the "promise" of God's covenant on behalf of the nations. It was ceremonial, and as such, preparatory and preliminary to the covenant of Christ. God's covenant with the nations, by contrast, would take place after the works of Christ, which no longer needed preparatory ceremonial observances such as Sabbath Law.
One cannot separate faith with obedience to God's commandments.
Nobody is separating faith from obedience to God's commandments. I've been saying, all along, that faith expresses itself *through obedience* to God's laws.

The difference between what you're saying and what I'm saying is the difference between the covenants, whether what is done is done under aegis of the Old Covenant or done under aegis of the New Covenant. One includes moral values but lacks the finished works of Christ. The other includes moral values but requires works done in Christ.

The Law was moral law but included, as part of the whole package, works done in preparation for Christ. Now that Christ has come, the Law has no value in our preparing for Christ. We live moral laws apart from the package of the Law of Moses, which required along with its moral law ceremonial law, including Sabbath Law.

Again, I don't define faith as the opposite of Divine Law. I define faith as devoted to Divine Law and dependent upon Divine help. The Law didn't have the help it needed to cross the line to Eternal Life. But it did express faith on the way there.

When we live moral lives it must not be done under a package that includes both moral law and ceremonial law. It must be done in devotion to Christ alone, since the former was all done for the latter.
 
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
36,378
4,814
On the bus to Heaven
✟127,095.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So God is not Jesus and God's commandments are not the commandments of Jesus.
Jesus is God. Jesus is the alpha and the omega. The commandments if the old covenant are the commandments of Jesus which He changed to two commandments in the new covenant. You need to study the essence and attributes of God.
So God laws and Jesus laws are against each other instead of being One that He said quoting from the same commandments He said to keep for eternal life Mat 19:17-19 the same ones He said not to break or teach others to break the least of these commandments Mat 5:19-30, the same ones He said when laying them aside for our own manmade commandments one worships Him in vain Mat 15:3-14 Mark 7:7-13 the same ones He said leaves one outside of heaven Rev 22:14-15. The commandments that God wrote in our heart are the same ones He wrote on stone Deut 4:13 2Cor3:3 Heb8:10 because God promised He would not alter the words of His covenant Psa 89:34 not a jot or tittle Mat5:18 His Word is settled in heaven Psa 119:89 where His Law and Testimony Rev 11:19 Rev 15:5 is as if a human can edit God.
I have already replied and debunked your understanding of the verses you posted above. I’m not repeating myself. Why don’t you get creative and stop the c&p?
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
You denied that God has a covenant with the Gentiles/nations. I proved that to be false. You are denying God said this. He did.

Beyond this I can explain your confusion, but not unless you admit you're wrong to deny God's covenant with Abraham on behalf of the nations. Otherwise, you will begin with a false premise and end up in confusion.

God's covenant of circumcision was with Abraham's family--not with the nations, which came much later through Christ. The covenant of circumcision was prior to Christ, and so, was annulled and fulfilled in the work of Christ. His death made circumcision no longer applicable to the Jews, unless they wish to do so for cultural or other non-legal reasons.

Put another way, Sabbath Law was not part of the "promise" of God's covenant on behalf of the nations. It was ceremonial, and as such, preparatory and preliminary to the covenant of Christ. God's covenant with the nations, by contrast, would take place after the works of Christ, which no longer needed preparatory ceremonial observances such as Sabbath Law.

Nobody is separating faith from obedience to God's commandments. I've been saying, all along, that faith expresses itself *through obedience* to God's laws.

The difference between what you're saying and what I'm saying is the difference between the covenants, whether what is done is done under aegis of the Old Covenant or done under aegis of the New Covenant. One includes moral values but lacks the finished works of Christ. The other includes moral values but requires works done in Christ.

The Law was moral law but included, as part of the whole package, works done in preparation for Christ. Now that Christ has come, the Law has no value in our preparing for Christ. We live moral laws apart from the package of the Law of Moses, which required along with its moral law ceremonial law, including Sabbath Law.

Again, I don't define faith as the opposite of Divine Law. I define faith as devoted to Divine Law and dependent upon Divine help. The Law didn't have the help it needed to cross the line to Eternal Life. But it did express faith on the way there.

When we live moral lives it must not be done under a package that includes both moral law and ceremonial law. It must be done in devotion to Christ alone, since the former was all done for the latter.
You still have not posted one verse that says this is the covenant I will make with Gentiles. The covenant through Abraham (the father of Jews) was with Israel.

If you do not think the Sabbath was part of the promise, than I guess this promise is not for you.

Isa 66:22 “For as the new heavens and the new earth
Which I will make shall remain before Me,” says the Lord,

“So shall your descendants and your name remain.
Isa 66:23 And it shall come to pass
That from one New Moon to another,
And from one Sabbath to another,
All flesh shall come to worship before Me,” says the Lord.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,856
5,612
USA
✟729,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Jesus is God. Jesus is the alpha and the omega. The commandments if the old covenant are the commandments of Jesus which He changed to two commandments in the new covenant. You need to study the essence and attributes of God.

I have already replied and debunked your understanding of the verses you posted above. I’m not repeating myself. Why don’t you get creative and stop the c&p?
Sounds like the same ones according to Jesus (Mat5:17-30, Mat19:17-19 Mark2:27 Isa 66:23 Mat15:3-14 Mark7:7-13)

And a lot more than two commandments

Revelation 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 #1 Exodus 20:3) and sexually immoral (breaking commandment #7 Exodus 20:14) and murderers (breaking commandment #6 Exodus 20:13) and idolaters (breaking commandment #2 Exodus 20:4-6), and whoever loves and practices a lie (breaking # 9 Exodus 20:16 or any of the commandments 1 John 2:4) Breaking one we break them all James 2:11-12 Exo 20:1-17 .

Jesus said He came not to destroy the law, not a jot or tittle will pass from the law, My covenant I will not alter Psa 89:34 that does not equate to Jesus changed the law, it says the opposite. :) The summary of God’s law does not delete the details.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,422
11,957
Georgia
✟1,103,914.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The new covenant is indeed about faith not about the law.
until you read the New Covenant in Jer 31:31-33 and Heb 8 "I will make a NEW Covenant.. this IS the Covenant.. I will write MY LAW on their heart and mind..."

Turns out... God's Law is there.

"what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 1:19
"this IS the LOVE of God that we KEEP His Commandments" 1 John 5:3-4
"saints KEEP the Commandments of God and their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12
where "Honor your father and mother .. is the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:1-2

No we don’t. The commandments that God wrote in our hearts are the commandments if God which summarizes the earlier commandments.
Jer 31 says "I will write My Law" on their heart and mind.
Deut 5:22 says God wrote the TEN "and added no more".

Jeremiah's readers knew full well that one cannot delete the Ten Commandments from the term "the Law of God" or the "Commandments of God"

Luke 23:56- Christ is in the grave. He had not yet fulfilled the OC.
How so?
Heb 4:9- verse 3 tells you what that rest is and is not the 4th commandment. The rest is in Christ.
John 6 says Jesus is the bread yet we still have real bread. One thing can be used as a symbol for something else without deleting the primary purpose of it.
Matt 12:12- pre crucifixion. He was explaining that the Pharisees were being legalistic and it was ok to do good on the sabbath. Again, nothing here about the Christian commanded to keep the sabbath.
Is 66:23 "from one Sabbath to another shall all mankind come before Me to worship" is what God says for that future day after the cross, after the church during the "New Heavens and New Earth" ,... for all eternity.

So then EVERY time in the New Testament that we see Paul preaching the Gospel in a worship service called "Sabbath" it is the Bible Sabbath of Gen 2:3. In fact "every Sabbath" preaching in Acts 18:4 is specifically every seventh day Sabbath.
 
Upvote 0