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

Gregory Thompson · Sep 10, 2021

LoveGodsWord said:
Absolutely! Love is not separate from God's law. It is expressed in obedience to God's law and is why Jesus days on these two commandments hang all the law in Matthew 22:36-40; which is what Paul is demonstrating in Romans 13:8-10 and James in James 2:8-11.

This root of understanding is missed too often.

Thank you.

Soyeong · Sep 10, 2021

Michael Collum said:
Law singular, not plural.

The Hebrew word "Torah" refers to the Mosaic Law.

BobRyan · Sep 10, 2021

Michael Collum said:
Kind of makes me wonder why we don't move to kill people who sin the second we're born again then if it is written on our hearts. The law in Jeremiah must be the law of liberty spoken of in James.

It is the Law actually known to Jeremiah and his readers. They could not have been reading James 2.

Notice that even James 2 quotes from the Mosaic Law.

And in Matt 19 when Jesus says "keep the commandments" - he is asked "which ones" and He too quotes from the Mosaic law known to Jeremiah and his readers.

Paul tells us that this includes the "unit of Ten" having "' honor your father and mother' as the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2

BobRyan · Sep 10, 2021

Oscarr said:
There will be many in Hell who went to Saturday worship. .

1. That did not keep Christ from giving the Sabbath commandment at Sinai as we see in Heb 8:6-12
2. That did not keep Christ from saying "Keep the Commandments" in Matt 19 and then quoting from the Law of Moses.
3. That did not stop Paul from saying "there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God" in Heb 4.
4. That did not keep Paul from saying "what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19
5. That did not keep John from saying "the saints KEEP the commandments of God AND hold to their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12
6. That did not stop Paul from reminding us of the TEN having "' honor your father and mother' as the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2

The fact that someone "does not take God's name in vain" and still goes to Hell - is not an argument in favor of taking God's name in vain.

obviously.

Gregory Thompson · Sep 10, 2021

BobRyan said:
It is the Law actually known to Jeremiah and his readers. They could not have been reading James 2.

Notice that even James 2 quotes from the Mosaic Law.

And in Matt 19 when Jesus says "keep the commandments" - he is asked "which ones" and He too quotes from the Mosaic law known to Jeremiah and his readers.

Paul tells us that this includes the "unit of Ten" having "' honor your father and mother' as the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2

A literal law written on a physical heart would have resulted in death.

It's funny you would bring up Jeremiah however.

According to Jeremiah, the lying pen of the scribes corrupted a correct copying of the jewish bible in his era. So only Jesus would have known what was originally said or written, him being God.

BobRyan · Sep 10, 2021

Oscarr said:
<obligatory rant deleted here> and many who subscribed and subscribe to her teaching will join her in Hell.

Consider having a Bible based discussion. Name-calling and pejorative language alone is not a funny sort of substitute for an actual Bible point to be discussed.

BobRyan · Sep 10, 2021

Michael Collum said:
A literal law written on a physical heart would have resulted in death. .

Indeed. And yet scripture says it - in both OT and NT. The Law is literal - but how the Holy Spirit creates the "new creation" , the new heart of flesh and removes the stony heart (which is OT teaching) is not fully delineated test tube by test tube for analysis.

The point is "context matters" when exegeting a Bible text and the "terms" must conform to what the Bible writers intended to convey -- we can't simply make stuff up for them.

When Jeremiah says God writes the Law on the heart under the NEW Covenant - we see that the "term" for LAW has to fit within the context of what Jeremiah and his readers would have understood it to mean when it comes to the moral law of God.

This is a Bible detail so obvious that Bible scholars on both sides of the Sabbath topic freely admit to it as we can see in the case of the "Baptist Confession of Faith" sectn 19, and D.L. Moody's sermon on the Ten Commandments and even the RCC statements on the TEN Commandments at the moral law of God.

BobRyan · Sep 10, 2021

Michael Collum said:
According to Jeremiah, the lying pen of the scribes corrupted a correct copying of the jewish bible in his era. So only Jesus would have known what was originally said or written, him being God.

1. Jeremiah does not claim that he did not know what scripture is since it is all corrupt.
2. Jesus taught "from all of scripture" Luke 24 and Luke writes as if the reader knows what the term "all of scripture" means.

The idea of "scripture so corrupt before Christ that nobody knew what it was " is not something that even Jewish historians will claim as anything like a fact.

Josephus (who was not a follower of Christ) states in the first century A.D. that the Jews had a canonized Hebrew text unchanged for over 350 years.

Freth · Sep 10, 2021

Oscarr said:
...

This post addresses your statements made in post #112 about Ellen White and the Adventist church. I'm keeping it brief as this is a departure from the subject matter of the thread.

William Miller started the Millerite Movement. He was a Baptist.
Ellen was 12 years old when her family joined the Millerite movement in 1840. Ellen White's family were Methodists.
The Millerite movement was a national movement with tens of thousands of members.
Adventism came out of the Millerite movement.
Adventism is Biblical Christianity, not a new religion.
The church name was decided by vote three years before actual formation, by delegates representing Adventists across the United States. The general conference officially formed in 1863 with a meeting of even more delegates than three years before.
Early Adventist pioneers, of their own volition, authored and published nearly 600 books of scriptural study and exposition. (This outside of Ellen's writings.)
While Ellen played a prominent role in the church, she was a member of a movement of tens of thousands of people who shared common beliefs through the study of scripture.
Scripture defines how to determine if someone is a prophet.
Only God knows who is condemned.

If you would like to discuss your statements further, create another thread and we can discuss the truth.

Bob S · Sep 11, 2021

SabbathBlessings said:
It actually does not tell us the Ten Commandments are temporary. Paul is contrasting the two covenants - the tables of stone versus the tables of the heart. The letter versus the Spirit and the ministration of condemnation vs the ministration of righteousness.

Yes, in those verses Paul did contrast the ministry of death with the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Then comes the verse that clinches the fact that the ten commandments were temporary. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts! Transitory means temporary. It means that Israelites to whom the ten were given are no longer subject to them. They are subject to the Holy Spirit as their guide. When you read those verses notice all the verbs are in the past tense meaning the subject no longer is.

The application of the law is what changed written in the heart, not the law itself.

Where do you see that in all of those verses? Do you really believe the ministry of death is written on our hearts?

Paul also tells us what matters is keeping the commandments of God 1 Cor 7:19 so Paul is not contradicting himself or Jesus when He tells us If we love Him keep My commandments John 14:15, John 15:10, 1 John 5:3 and you can clearly see it's not the case shown in Revelations that God's saints keep the commandments of God. Rev 14:15

Somehow you have been made to believe all those verses are referring to the ten commandments. Somehow, I too was led to believe that. No, Paul is not contradicting himself because he was not referring to the ten in any of the verses you provided. You choose Jn15:10 as one of your "proof texts". I use the same verse to prove Jesus commands are not the ten commandments. Notice in verse 12 Jesus reveals what His commandment is 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. That is not the ten that you would like for Him to have said. That is a brand-new command that is not to be found anywhere else. jn13: 34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 1Jn 3:19-24 reiterates the exact fact. Verse 19 states we, you and I, belong to the TRUTH. How do we belong to the truth? Verse 23 believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us.

It is love that is written on our hearts. Love above every other command ever written reveals the true nature of our God. If, and I pray you are, wanting to emulate our Savior Jesus Christ then allow love to shine forth. It is Love, not the keeping of old covenant days that were for one nation, Israel, that is the key to eternity.

Gregory Thompson · Sep 11, 2021

BobRyan said:
Indeed. And yet scripture says it - in both OT and NT. The Law is literal - but how the Holy Spirit creates the "new creation" , the new heart of flesh and removes the stony heart (which is OT teaching) is not fully delineated test tube by test tube for analysis.

The point is "context matters" when exegeting a Bible text and the "terms" must conform to what the Bible writers intended to convey -- we can't simply make stuff up for them.

When Jeremiah says God writes the Law on the heart under the NEW Covenant - we see that the "term" for LAW has to fit within the context of what Jeremiah and his readers would have understood it to mean when it comes to the moral law of God.

This is a Bible detail so obvious that Bible scholars on both sides of the Sabbath topic freely admit to it as we can see in the case of the "Baptist Confession of Faith" sectn 19, and D.L. Moody's sermon on the Ten Commandments and even the RCC statements on the TEN Commandments at the moral law of God.

Indeed.
The law of sin in Romans is like the Law of Liberty in James, both live inside us. Not a classical concept of law. So in this sense, the law of God being carved onto our hearts, is the indwelling of God, the Holy Spirit who leads us into all truth.

Gregory Thompson · Sep 11, 2021

BobRyan said:
Josephus (who was not a follower of Christ) states in the first century A.D. that the Jews had a canonized Hebrew text unchanged for over 350 years.

I'd agree with that, but Jeremiah was a little further back than 350 though.

SabbathBlessings · Sep 11, 2021

Michael Collum said:
Indeed.
The law of sin in Romans is like the Law of Liberty in James, both live inside us. Not a classical concept of law. So in this sense, the law of God being carved onto our hearts, is the indwelling of God, the Holy Spirit who leads us into all truth.

Yes and we can test the Truth by this:

Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Many think the Holy Spirit will lead them to breaking a law of God, but that is not what scriptures teach us. John 14:15-18, Acts 5:32 The Holy Spirit helps convict us when we break God's law and given to those who obey. God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all joined in the same holy laws.

SabbathBlessings · Sep 11, 2021

Bob S said:
Yes, in those verses Paul did contrast the ministry of death with the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Then comes the verse that clinches the fact that the ten commandments were temporary. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts! Transitory means temporary. It means that Israelites to whom the ten were given are no longer subject to them. They are subject to the Holy Spirit as their guide. When you read those verses notice all the verbs are in the past tense meaning the subject no longer is.

Where do you see that in all of those verses? Do you really believe the ministry of death is written on our hearts?

Somehow you have been made to believe all those verses are referring to the ten commandments. Somehow, I too was led to believe that. No, Paul is not contradicting himself because he was not referring to the ten in any of the verses you provided. You choose Jn15:10 as one of your "proof texts". I use the same verse to prove Jesus commands are not the ten commandments. Notice in verse 12 Jesus reveals what His commandment is 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. That is not the ten that you would like for Him to have said. That is a brand-new command that is not to be found anywhere else. jn13: 34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 1Jn 3:19-24 reiterates the exact fact. Verse 19 states we, you and I, belong to the TRUTH. How do we belong to the truth? Verse 23 believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us.

It is love that is written on our hearts. Love above every other command ever written reveals the true nature of our God. If, and I pray you are, wanting to emulate our Savior Jesus Christ then allow love to shine forth. It is Love, not the keeping of old covenant days that were for one nation, Israel, that is the key to eternity.

I do not think you can separate obedience from love and love is expressed by our obedience to obey God and His holy commandments. John 14:15, John 15:10, 1 John 5:3, Exodus 20:6

Reading the New Testament Jesus refers to many more commandments than the ones you have quoted. Jesus never came to destroy the holy law of God but to magnify. God bless

guevaraj · Sep 11, 2021

Bob S said:
It is Love, not the keeping of old covenant days that were for one nation, Israel, that is the key to eternity.

Brother, happy Sabbath! Hebrews 3 and 4 close your escape route to evade the Sabbath. God has continued in the new covenant the Sabbath in Hebrews 3 and 4 as I highlight in my thread titled: "Hebrews 3 and 4 is God's weekly Sabbath for everyone!". Those before Jesus "whose corpses lay in the wilderness" could not have entered what was still future. We must enter the "rest" in which they had not entered for 40 years by "oath" due to their disobedience. The only "rest" available to them as for us is the "rest" on the Sabbath.

And who made God angry for forty years? Wasn’t it the people who sinned, whose corpses lay in the wilderness? And to whom was God speaking when he took an oath that they would never enter his rest? Wasn’t it the people who disobeyed him? So we see that because of their unbelief they were not able to enter his rest. (Hebrews 3:17-19 NLT)

The "rest" they could have entered into as we "can" is the Sabbath "rest".

For only we who believe can enter his rest. As for the others, God said, “In my anger I took an oath: ‘They will never enter my place of rest,’” even though this rest has been ready since he made the world. We know it is ready because of the place in the Scriptures where it mentions the seventh day: “On the seventh day God rested from all his work.” (Hebrews 4:3-4 NLT)

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

Studyman · Sep 11, 2021

Michael Collum said:
As expressed earlier, my mind has moved on and I will not be compelled to discuss further.

Yes, I see this. Like a drive by shooting. A man throws his religious philosophies out the window, then drives off, not caring about their legitimacy, nor for the influence they exert on those who are hit by them.

In this way they protect their religious philosophy, while not taking any responsibility for their legitimacy.

A popular practice among the religious men of this world, but one that seems less than honorable, in my view.

Studyman · Sep 11, 2021

Bob S said:
Your whole post doesn't make one bit of sense. First of all "your "old covenant""??? is nonsense. It was God's covenant to one nation on this Earth. Israel broke that covenant and Jesus gave us a new and better covenant with better promises, eternal life for starts. The remainder of your post is not worth correcting.

That is your religious philosophy Bob. Just like your religious philosophy that God saved Israel from Egypt only to place 613 laws on their necks impossible to obey, then killed them when they didn't obey.

Both your version of God's Covenant that changed, and your teaching that God placed unbearable laws on the backs of those who placed their trust in Him is false. If the Bible is the standard to which we discern.

"Eternal Life" was always the promise.

Duet. 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

And even though you don't believe, I still think we should follow God's definition of HIS Own New Covenant.

The Covenant that changed was God's Priesthood Covenant HE made with Levi on Israel's behalf. This Covenant dealt with

#1. The manner in which the people received God's Law.

Heb. 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

#2. The manner in which sins are forgiven.

26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;

27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

A new and Better Ministry, an eternal Priesthood.

21(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec

22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.

It is you who need correcting in this matter Bob. Your unbelief in the Scriptures doesn't make them void.

Gregory Thompson · Sep 11, 2021

Studyman said:
Yes, I see this. Like a drive by shooting. A man throws his religious philosophies out the window, then drives off, not caring about their legitimacy, nor for the influence they exert on those who are hit by them.

In this way they protect their religious philosophy, while not taking any responsibility for their legitimacy.

A popular practice among the religious men of this world, but one that seems less than honorable, in my view.

I think I see the issue here. I'm sensing less than honorable intentions from you and my brain intentionally shuts down. It doesn't happen too often.

Gregory Thompson · Sep 11, 2021

SabbathBlessings said:
Yes and we can test the Truth by this:

Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Many think the Holy Spirit will lead them to breaking a law of God, but that is not what scriptures teach us. John 14:15-18, Acts 5:32 The Holy Spirit helps convict us when we break God's law and given to those who obey. God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all joined in the same holy laws.

There's a difference between breaking laws and following a higher principle than the law. When following the higher principle, the lower principle does not apply much like when the sun is bright in the sky the moon and stars are not visible.

Studyman · Sep 11, 2021

Michael Collum said:
I think I see the issue here. I'm sensing less than honorable intentions from you and my brain intentionally shuts down. It doesn't happen too often.

Actually I was replying to your very own words.

"The way he obeyed the sabbath was unorthodox, in the days of Moses, he would have been stoned."

As instructed, I am "Testing the spirit" and "proving all things". I asked you where this understanding came from, what Scriptures brought you to this religious philosophy.

I asked this in honesty, because Jesus warns over and over of religious men who come in His Name to deceive. And about religious philosophies of men that are not from God. Dangers that we both are to "take heed of".

You made a statement which teaches that Moses, or the God of Abraham, wouldn't have Approved of Jesus, or worse yet, would have had HIM Stoned to death, or murdered just like the children of the devil had Him murdered.

This is a serious accusation against Moses and the God Moses took instructions from, and one Jesus never made. Actually Jesus said just the opposite.

John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

So my reason for asking for something, anything from Scriptures which can support this religious philosophy of yours was prudent, honorable, and honest.

But like the question you asked before this, it seems you simply make statements, then move on whenever anyone challenges them.

So I have shown you my intentions, and the reasons for them. Perhaps you can also show what motivates you to make questions and statements that you do not seem willing to even discuss.

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

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Junior Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

an oil seller in the story of the ten virgins

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency