An example of how the whole law cannot be practiced today (discussion)

[Gregory Thompson]

Death penalty civil laws under a theocracy cannot be applied when the theocracy no longer exists. Both the "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 , and the Westminster Confession of Faith section 19 - also affirm this fact - so it is not just Sabbath keeping groups like SDAs that admit to it.

Once Greece and Rome became rulers over Israel - it was no longer a theocracy and could not simply enforce all of its civil laws as if it had no other earthly ruler that now dictated what could be viewed as a death-penalty offense. Christ did not "change" that when He came - He simply left it as is. Even the Jews at Christ's trial complained that they had no authority to issue a death sentence only Rome could do that.

When Christ was put on trial before Pilate He was challenged on this very point as to whether He was "King" of the Jews - the theocratic head/ruler of Israel. And He rejected that office saying that IF it were true that He was actually the king of the nation on this Earth - ruling as He wills over the nation in earthly matters - then His earthly soldiers/servants would fight to protect Him from capture.

Under a theocracy God is literally the earthly ruler of the nation, he sets the laws and administers justice in day to day affairs as He did in the wilderness for Israel -- with Urim and Thumim rendering yes/no decisions day by day, and fire come down from God to destroy evil doers in the camp when the Earth was not opening up and swallowing those evil-doers alive.

To this very day there is no longer a God-ordained theocracy on Earth.

I get what you're saying. However, there being no theocracy in Israel at the time of Roman occupation did not stop regular citizens from picking up stones to stone someone.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Col 2 does not say "God's Law was nailed to the cross" it says "our certificate of DEBT was nailed to the cross".

Doubtful, since the following follows that passage

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:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

However, the point remains, the scripture says to not let anyone judge me in regards to the dietary laws or set days on the Jewish calender, including the sabbath.

 

[Soyeong]

Non-responsive regarding all the Mosaic ceremonial laws.

The Bible never refers to the category of ceremonial law, so the Bible itself is non-responsive regarding ceremonial laws.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

1. He does not delete or downsize the Law of God - He always magnifies and upholds it.

2. In Matt 22 He says all of scripture ("the Law of God and the prophets") is firmly founded on Law of Moses found in Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart" and Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" - and the Jews agree with Him on that point.

3. In Matt 19 Jesus said to "KEEP THE Commandments" and is asked "which ones"? His answer comes directly from the Law of Moses (related to "Love your neighbor as yourself")

4. Heb 8:6-12 says it is Christ speaking His commandments at Sinai

The problem is that you can't keep them. For example:
1. If you have ever taken something that doesn't belong to you, regardless of the value (ie: an office pen).
2. If you have ever told a white lie, even a small one.
3. If you have ever disobeyed your parents.
4. If you have ever looked on someone with lust.
5, If you have done even the most minor work on the Sabbath (be honest).
6. If there have been times where you haven't loved God with your whole heart, mind, and strength.
7. If you thought more of a pastor, Bible teacher, movie star, more than of Christ (idolatry).
8. If you have ever said [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], or "God knows", or any exclamation involving God's name.
9. If you have ever felt that you need to "keep up with the Jones's" and have what they have (coverting).
10. In summary, have you ever done or said anything that was not total loving to anyone ever.

If you are honest with yourself, you have say that you have broken all of these commandments at different times in your life. And the Scripture says that if you break even one, you have broken your own law. Doesn't Paul says that even those who said to the Galatians that they must be circumcised and keep the Mosaic Law don't even keep the Law themselves?

Isn't that the same with you? You say "keep the Mosaic Law", but can you keep it yourself? I put it to you that you are like the rest of us. You can't. If you say you can perfectly keep the Law, then you are lying.

Not keeping the Law is sin, and John says that the person who says they have no sin is lying and the truth is not in him.

So, after a lifetime of trying to keep the Law, and you come up for Judgment and it is revealed to you that you didn't keep the Law in spite of your efforts, what are you going to do then?

 

[Clare73]

When Christ was put on trial before Pilate He was challenged on this very point as to whether He was "King" of the Jews - the theocratic head/ruler of Israel. And He rejected that office saying that IF it were true that He was actually the king of the nation on this Earth - ruling as He wills over the nation in earthly matters - then His earthly soldiers/servants would fight to protect Him from capture.

NIV:
But Jesus remained silent. The High Priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God."
"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. (Matthew 26:63-64)

He replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70-71)

Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him,
"Are you the king of the Jews?"
"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied (Matthew 27:11).

So Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?
"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. (Luke 23:3-4)

Pilate. . .asked him, "Are you the king of the Jews?"
"Is that your own idea," Jesus asked, "or did others talk to you about me?"
. . .Pilate replied, "It was. . .your chief priests who handed you over to me, what is it you have done?"
"My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight (strive) to prevent my arrest by the Jews. Bt now my kingdom is from another place." (heaven, Revelation 21:2)
"You are a king, then!" said Pilate
"You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me." (John 18:33-37)

Where do you see Jesus rejecting the office of king?

What he does is clarify that it is a spiritual office, of a spiritual kingdom, invisible and within (Luke 17:2-21), in the hearts of those where he reigns and rules, and where, according to authoritative NT teaching, he is reigning and ruling now. Jesus earthly, eternal and everlasting kingdom (Luke 1:33; Hebrews 1:8) is now.

There is no second kingdom in addition to his everlasting kingdom where he reigns now (Ephesians 1:20-23), and we reign with him (Ephesians 2:6).

That notion is from personal interpretation of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8), which personal interpretation contradicts authoritative NT teaching, and which makes it erroneous and contra-Biblical.

 

[Soyeong]

If one part of scripture means the opposite of what it says, then you cannot be assured the rest of your interpretation has any integrity whatsoever.

Colossians 2:14 (ESV) by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.

I did not say that it means the opposite of what it says, but spoke in regard to how what it says should be interpreted. Cancelling the record or debt that stood against us with its legal demands refers to our penalties for breaking God's law, not to the laws themselves. Likewise, other translations say "having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness" (NIV), "He canceled the record of the charges against" (NLT), "having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us." (BSB), or "having blotted out the handwriting in the decrees against us, which was adverse to us" (BLB), or "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us," (KVJ). It is your interpretation that the handwriting or ordinances that was against us is referring to laws while the interpretation that I have made the case for is that it is it is referring to the list of our violations of God's law, not the law themselves, so I'm not trying to say that it means something other than what it says.

In Romans 13 it is explained that the law is summed up. Anything that causes harm is a sin, that would include murder. In Romans 14 it is further explained that anything that does not come from faith is sin also.

A sum is inclusive of all of its parts, so if what someone is doing is not inclusive of all of its parts, then what they are doing is not the sum of those parts. In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the law, so whatever is not of faith is sin (Romans 14:23), whatever is in transgression of God's law is not of faith, and sin is defined as the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4).

There is no need for long lists of rules, the principles provided have given us plenty of coverage.

The greatest two commandments are lot easier said than done, so thankfully God gave us a long list of rules in order to paint us a picture of what that looks like and send Jesus as a sinless example of obedience to those rules to show us how to obey them. For instance all of God's righteous laws are examples of how to do what is righteous, so they teach us a deeper spiritual principle of righteousness, so if we correctly understand that principle, then it will lead us to take actions that are examples of that principle in accordance with those listed laws. Furthermore, that principle will also guide us in how to do what is righteous in situations where there is not an example from the law that prescribes what we should do, however, correctly understanding a spiritual principle will never lead us away from doing things that are examples of that principle in accordance with the laws that God has listed. Even if Jesus hadn't been born under God's law, then he still would have live in accordance with what it lists because that would have still been the same way to express his righteousness. We should be thankful that God has given many laws because He has given us many opportunities to connect with Him by expressing His nature in every aspect of our lives.

 

[Clare73]

The Bible never refers to the category of ceremonial law, so
the Bible itself is non-responsive regarding ceremonial laws.

So all laws are to be obeyed since "the Bible is non-responsive regarding ceremonial laws."

So. . .you're offering sacrifices (ceremonial laws) over at your church and
observing all the (ceremonial) laws regarding sexual intercourse, menstruation, bodily discharges and childbirth over at your church, and
observing the (ceremonial law of the) Day of Atonement for the sins of the church leadership and the people over at your church, and
as the royal priesthood of the New Covenant, observing the (ceremonial) law of not defiling yourselves by touching dead bodies of any kind, or entering the home of anyone who died there, and
if so, observing the (ceremonial) law of triple purification of yourselves by sprinkling with water of cleansing, washing your clothes and bathing with water?

Really?

So are you practicing what you preach regarding the Law of Moses?

That's what I thought. . .

 

[Soyeong]

So all laws are to be obeyed since there is "no Biblical distinction" among them.

So. . .you're offering sacrifices (ceremonial laws) over at your church and
observing all the (ceremonia)l laws regarding sexual intercourse, menstruation, bodily discharges and childbirth over at your church, and
observing the (ceremonial law of the) Day of Atonement for the sins of the church leadership and the people over at your church, and
as the royal priesthood of the New Covenant, observing the (ceremonial) law of not defiling yourselves by touching dead bodies of any kind, or entering the home of anyone who died there, and
if so, observing the (ceremonial) law of triple purification of yourselves by sprinkling with water of cleansing, washing your clothes and bathing with water?

Really?

So are you practicing what you preach regarding the Law of Moses?

The laws that people consider to be ceremonial range widely depending upon whom I ask, so if we are to correctly understand the authors of the Bible, then we need to derive our understanding of which laws are ceremonial based on which laws they described as being ceremonial rather than listing laws that we consider to be ceremonial, however, none of the authors of the Bible listed which laws that they consider to be ceremonial. In other words, if we think that an author of the Bible said something about all of the laws within a specific category of law, then we need to establish that we share the same concept of which laws belong to that category in or to establish that we are correctly understanding what they said.

If I wanted, then I could categorize God's laws based upon which part of the body is most commonly used to obey/disobey them, such as the law against theft being a hand law, however the fact that I can categorize God's laws in this manner would not establish that any of the authors of the Bible categorized them in the same manner, or agreed with me about which categories I decided to place each of God's laws. If I were then to create my own doctrine out of my categories, such as deciding that a verse was referring to hand laws being obsolete, then I would quickly run into the same sort of error as people who create their own doctrines out of ceremonial laws.

The Bible makes distinctions between different categories of law, but never uses the distinctions of ceremonial or moral law. I'm not a Levite, so it is not clear for me to why you you think that I would be laws given to govern the conduct of Levites. In 1 Peter 2:9-10, Gentiles are included as part of God's chosen people, a holy nation, a royal priesthood, and a treasure of God's own possession, which are terms use to describe Israel (Deuteronomy 7:6), so Gentiles also have the delight of getting to obey the laws that God gave for how to fulfill those roles.

 

[Clare73]

The laws that people consider to be ceremonial range widely depending upon whom I ask, so if we are to correctly understand the authors of the Bible, then we need to derive our understanding of which laws are ceremonial based on which laws they described as being ceremonial rather than listing laws that we consider to be ceremonial, however, none of the authors of the Bible listed which laws that they consider to be ceremonial. In other words, if we think that an author of the Bible said something about all of the laws within a specific category of law, then we need to establish that we share the same concept of which laws belong to that category in or to establish that we are correctly understanding what they said.

If I wanted, then I could categorize God's laws based upon which part of the body is most commonly used to obey/disobey them, such as the law against theft being a hand law, however the fact that I can categorize God's laws in this manner would not establish that any of the authors of the Bible categorized them in the same manner, or agreed with me about which categories I decided to place each of God's laws. If I were then to create my own doctrine out of my categories, such as deciding that a verse was referring to hand laws being obsolete, then I would quickly run into the same sort of error as people who create their own doctrines out of ceremonial laws.

The Bible makes distinctions between different categories of law, but never uses the distinctions of ceremonial or moral law. I'm not a Levite, so it is not clear for me to why you you think that I would be laws given to govern the conduct of Levites. In 1 Peter 2:9-10, Gentiles are included as part of God's chosen people, a holy nation, a royal priesthood, and a treasure of God's own possession, which are terms use to describe Israel (Deuteronomy 7:6), so Gentiles also have the delight of getting to obey the laws that God gave for how to fulfill those roles.

Non-responsive to my questions.

 

[BobRyan]

Choosing the lesser of two evils consistently for centuries, doesn't sound promising. I must say.

But I understand what you mean.

I am not sure what you mean.

In Rev 13 and 14 the saints are warned against this --
9 Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”

And it is contrasted with this --

12 Here is the perseverance of the saints who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.

 

[BobRyan]

At His trial Christ was questioned on two key points.

1. Are you the Son of God? -- and Christ would not deny that no matter the cost.
2. Are you the King of the Jews - and since they had reject Him - He said He was not the Earthly ruler king - theocratic head of Israel - rather the theocracy had ended.

BobRyan said: ↑
When Christ was put on trial before Pilate He was challenged on this very point as to whether He was "King" of the Jews - the theocratic head/ruler of Israel. And He rejected that office saying that IF it were true that He was actually the king of the nation on this Earth - ruling as He wills over the nation in earthly matters - then His earthly soldiers/servants would fight to protect Him from capture.

NIV:
But Jesus remained silent. The High Priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God."
"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. (Matthew 26:63-64)

He replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70-71)

So there we have His clear stated answer to the first question (one not asked by Pilate -- but still asked at His 3 part Trial).

The Jews cared about that part - the Romans would not care about that one. For them the Theocracy and "King of the Jews" was their only interest - a competing kingdom.


John 18:33-36 NKJV
33 Then Pilate entered the Praetorium again, called Jesus, and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?”
34 Jesus answered him, “Are you speaking for yourself about this, or did others tell you this concerning Me?”
35 Pilate answered, “Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered You to me. What have You done?”
36 Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.”

As the Son of God - He was king.

Pilate then asks if Jesus is a KING in any sense of the word - at any level at all --

37 Pilate therefore said to Him, “Are You a king then?”

Jesus answered, “You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”


Pilate concludes that without a claim to be the Earthly ruler of Israel in direct competition with Rome - there is no conflict between Christ and Rome regarding the rule over the nation of Israel. The civil laws of Israel still owned by Rome in that case.

38 Pilate said to Him, “What is truth?” And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews, and said to them, “I find no fault in Him at all.

 

[BobRyan]

The commandments of Jesus are different than the law though. When Jesus re-iterates the law, he also expounds upon how our hearts commit sins before the hands move. A good example of this is Matthew 5:28, another example from Apostolic teaching is 1 John 3:15.

1. He does not delete or downsize the Law of God - He always magnifies and upholds it.

2. In Matt 22 He says all of scripture ("the Law of God and the prophets") is firmly founded on Law of Moses found in Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart" and Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" - and the Jews agree with Him on that point.

3. In Matt 19 Jesus said to "KEEP THE Commandments" and is asked "which ones"? His answer comes directly from the Law of Moses (related to "Love your neighbor as yourself")

4. Heb 8:6-12 says it is Christ speaking His commandments at Sinai

The problem is that you can't keep them. For example:
1. If you have ever taken something that doesn't belong to you, regardless of the value (ie: an office pen).

All HAVE sinned - but "what matters" for the saved saints who under the New Covenant of Jer 31:31-34 have "The Law written on the heart"?

"what MATTERs is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19
"This IS the LOVE of God - that we KEEP His Commandments" 1 John 5:3
"the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12

By contrast in Rom 8:4-12 we find that the unsaved "do NOT submit to the Law of God neither indeed CAN they"

 

[BobRyan]

If one part of scripture means the opposite of what it says, then you cannot be assured the rest of your interpretation has any integrity whatsoever. .

Col 2 does not say "God's Law was nailed to the cross" it says "our certificate of DEBT was nailed to the cross". NASB

13 And when you were dead in your wrongdoings and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our wrongdoings, 14 having canceled the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. NASB

So then "do not take God's name in vain" is not a "decree against us" nor "hostile to us" it is God's Law. But the PENALTY (certificate of DEBT) for breaking that LAW is hostile to us since "the wages of sin is DEATH" Rom 6:23 and all have sinned.

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

"what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19

Doubtful,

On the contrary that IS scripture!! And therefore absolutely certain!!

 

[BobRyan]

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:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

However, the point remains, the scripture says to not let anyone judge me in regards to the dietary laws or set days on the Jewish calender, including the sabbath.

Matt 7 - before the cross says "Judge not that you be not judged"
Col 2 - also says not to judge...

So no change in that command before the cross or after.

Col 2 is not signaling the end of meat, or the end of drink or the end of an annual or weekly holy day.

It is declaring that judging others is still wrong even after the cross not just before the cross in Matt 7.

What is more - it specifically singles out the "shadows" that point forward to Christ in animal sacrifice and offerings - which Heb 10:4-12 informs us - ended at the cross.

By contrast the Creation Sabbath of Gen 2:1-3 quoted from directly in Ex 20:11 at the end of the weekly Sabbath commandment - is not a part of that shadow system. Adam and Eve were not killing animals on their first Sabbath.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The problem is that you can't keep them. For example:
1. If you have ever taken something that doesn't belong to you, regardless of the value (ie: an office pen).
2. If you have ever told a white lie, even a small one.
3. If you have ever disobeyed your parents.
4. If you have ever looked on someone with lust.
5, If you have done even the most minor work on the Sabbath (be honest).
6. If there have been times where you haven't loved God with your whole heart, mind, and strength.
7. If you thought more of a pastor, Bible teacher, movie star, more than of Christ (idolatry).
8. If you have ever said [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], or "God knows", or any exclamation involving God's name.
9. If you have ever felt that you need to "keep up with the Jones's" and have what they have (coverting).
10. In summary, have you ever done or said anything that was not total loving to anyone ever.

If you are honest with yourself, you have say that you have broken all of these commandments at different times in your life. And the Scripture says that if you break even one, you have broken your own law. Doesn't Paul says that even those who said to the Galatians that they must be circumcised and keep the Mosaic Law don't even keep the Law themselves?

Isn't that the same with you? You say "keep the Mosaic Law", but can you keep it yourself? I put it to you that you are like the rest of us. You can't. If you say you can perfectly keep the Law, then you are lying.

Not keeping the Law is sin, and John says that the person who says they have no sin is lying and the truth is not in him.

So, after a lifetime of trying to keep the Law, and you come up for Judgment and it is revealed to you that you didn't keep the Law in spite of your efforts, what are you going to do then?

Here is something I do not think you are taking in consideration. Yes, we are all sinners, but what is impossible for us is possible with God. Matthew 19:26 I do not believe our sins are more powerful than our God. We are given the Holy Spirit to help us obey God’s commandments John 14:15-18, Acts 5:32

Yes we have all sinned, but when we sin we have an Advocate with Jesus who promises to forgive us of our sins when we repent. True repentance means turning from sin and walking with Jesus. Obeying God because we want to and His law is written in our hearts, which is fulfilled when we obey.

What I think you are confusing is a life of perpetual sin. When we deliberately sin after learning the truth and do not want to overcome that sin according to scripture there remains no more sacrifice. Hebrews 10:26. We all sin, the difference is when we stumble we repent from our sins and ask God to help us overcome that sin with the help of the Holy Spirit that He promises when we obey.

God bless

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Col 2 does not say "God's Law was nailed to the cross" it says "our certificate of DEBT was nailed to the cross".

That's an interesting new translation, but I'm not seeing that in the strongs words. I'm not sure if quoting the ESL bible is really a good scholarly resource.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Appreciate you guys laying out why you believe what you do. There isn't nearly enough consistency in the interpretative method to be convincing to me.

To bring things back on topic, this is about why the death penalty verses are not expounded as mandatory, when the law precepts in posts such as most of the above are expounded as mandatory.

 

[Soyeong]

Appreciate you guys laying out why you believe what you do. There isn't nearly enough consistency in the interpretative method to be convincing to me.

To bring things back on topic, this is about why the death penalty verses are not expounded as mandatory, when the law precepts in posts such as most of the above are expounded as mandatory.

If you got a parking ticked with a $100 fine, but a friend paid it in your place, then would the law still require you to pay the fine?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Here is something I do not think you are taking in consideration. Yes, we are all sinners, but what is impossible for us is possible with God. Matthew 19:26 I do not believe our sins are more powerful than our God. We are given the Holy Spirit to help us obey God’s commandments John 14:15-18, Acts 5:32

Yes we have all sinned, but when we sin we have an Advocate with Jesus who promises to forgive us of our sins when we repent. True repentance means turning from sin and walking with Jesus. Obeying God because we want to and His law is written in our hearts, which is fulfilled when we obey.

What I think you are confusing is a life of perpetual sin. When we deliberately sin after learning the truth and do not want to overcome that sin according to scripture there remains no more sacrifice. Hebrews 10:26. We all sin, the difference is when we stumble we repent from our sins and ask God to help us overcome that sin with the help of the Holy Spirit that He promises when we obey.

God bless

So, why did Ellen White say that those who do not keep the Saturday Sabbath are not saved?

 

[guevaraj]

So, why did Ellen White say that those who do not keep the Saturday Sabbath are not saved?

Brother, I read the call to keep the Sabbath in Hebrews chapter 3 and 4. My comment on these two chapters is in my thread titled: "Hebrews 3 and 4 is God's weekly Sabbath for everyone!" United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge