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

[Soyeong]

That's right now we do because we want to not because we have to. That which was on stone and parchment is now on the fleshly tables of our hearts through Christ. That is the faith in which we preach.

God is sovereign, so we are still obligated to obey what He has commanded regardless of whether or not we want to, but we should also obey because we want to and we have faith in God to correctly divide between right and wrong rather than leaning on our own understanding.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

God is sovereign, so we are still obligated to obey what He has commanded regardless of whether or not we want to, but we should also obey because we want to and we have faith in God to correctly divide between right and wrong rather than leaning on our own understanding.

I follow what God says, but hard pass on people's misunderstandings of what God is saying.

 

[Soyeong]

When you form sentences, your intents are included in that action, so it actually does. It's like cutting out words from a magazine and gluing them together into sentences. You're saying what you want, just using phrases in the bible.

Furthermore, language is vile, and each re-translation of the bible adds more intents to the sentences that were mostly unintended.

So it's not really your fault per se, but I just wasn't experiencing the voice of the shepherd in your message. But keep at it, not only do we believe in Him, but He has faith in us that we can do what He has called us to do also.

God bless.

There is no avoiding that we all have a personal understanding of what we read when we read God's word, so let's discuss it. For example, you said:

the letter kills, but the spirit gives life .. the way God gives His message to us, really does matter.

So you referenced a verse and spoke about your understanding of that verse, which is the same thing that I was doing. I didn't agree with your understanding of that verse because it is contrary to my understanding of a number of other verses, so we should seek to have an understanding of all of these verses in a way where they are not contrary to each other. When God gave the law to Moses, He did not give that message in a way that brings death to His children, but rather God is a loving Father who knows how to give good gifts to His children.

 

[Soyeong]

I follow what God says, but hard pass on people's misunderstandings of what God is saying.

It is not the case what only you follow what God is saying while everyone else is following their personal understanding of what God is saying, but rather we all have an understanding of what God is saying that may or may not be correct. I gave reasons what I do not agree with your understanding of what saying, so please interact with what I said, and if you think that I've misunderstood what God is saying, then by all means please explain why you think that.

 

[HIM]

God is sovereign, so we are still obligated to obey what He has commanded regardless of whether or not we want to, but we should also obey because we want to and we have faith in God to correctly divide between right and wrong rather than leaning on our own understanding.

LIke binding our only son and sacrificing him. Or leaving everything behind and starting over. At the end of the day because God is God We want to even when we don't.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

There is no avoiding that we all have a personal understanding of what we read when we read God's word, so let's discuss it. For example, you said:

So you referenced a verse and spoke about your understanding of that verse, which is the same thing that I was doing. I didn't agree with your understanding of that verse because it is contrary to my understanding of a number of other verses, so we should seek to have an understanding of all of these verses in a way where they are not contrary to each other. When God gave the law to Moses, He did not give that message in a way that brings death to His children, but rather God is a loving Father who knows how to give good gifts to His children.

It is not the case what only you follow what God is saying while everyone else is following their personal understanding of what God is saying, but rather we all have an understanding of what God is saying that may or may not be correct. I gave reasons what I do not agree with your understanding of what saying, so please interact with what I said, and if you think that I've misunderstood what God is saying, then by all means please explain why you think that.

Looks like you get the point I was trying to make, no more needs to be said.

God bless.

 

[DamianWarS]

In the laws contained in the first 5 books of the bible, it is mentioned at certain intervals that people must be put to death for committing particular sins.

There are also examples of characters in the scripture killing transgressors and God giving the heavenly thumbs up to their actions.

However, whenever people talk about mandatory commandments to follow - stoning people with stones or putting people to death is not regarded as a command.

I think this is an example of how the whole law cannot be practiced today.

However, for discussion kindly advise why that is. Why is mandatory law observance when being preached, is the death penalty associated not also explained as mandatory? This phrasing is part of the commands, so an answer for this has eluded me.

the sabbath commandment is as much about resting for yourself as it is about giving rests to others... even animals. yet in modern living flicking a switch creates a workforce demand. Yes, there is an argument about essential services, but I'm not talking about hospitals I'm not about non-essential use of electricity. (please don't let me repeat this)

but in truth, we all engage in many beyond essentials that create a workforce demand for that day. The electric grid is one, phone, internet, and even emergency services when we take a car out on the road. If we are honest essential services can be reduced to a very small amount and I doubt anyone goes to that level (nor would I expect them too). I would even say it would be extremely difficult to not participate in non-essential services during the sabbath that contributes to workforce demand. if we had a mule turning a mill to produce electricity that would be an easy no... but apparently it doesn't matter when we don't see the workforce turning the proverbial hamster wheel.

 

[FredVB]

Yes, we cannot practice the whole law. But Jesus lived it just right, and is the real priesthood, needed sacrifice, and the whole way for being clean in the needed way before God, for any of us who are repentant believers, who are then in Christ. We with repenting might do what we can for rest and observing relationship with Yahweh on Sabbath still, while we don't have condemnation with being in Christ. If flipping switches can be avoided than that can be done. I Iearn to avoid it right where I stay, and now avoid cooking then, but still flip a switch for light in a bathroom so nothing in there would crawl on me as would happen if it is left dark. We can just do what we can manage.

 

[BobRyan]

God Himself is the only one that can declare an end to one of His commands.

Heb 10:4-11 says the animal sacrifices and offerings ended at the cross
Heb 7 says the earthly priesthood ended at the cross

But the moral law of God that includes the TEN remains as James 2 points -- he who is guilty of breaking one is guilty of breaking all
Deut 5:22 "he spoke these ten commandments and added no more" - so it "at least" includes the TEN where "honor your father and mother is the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2

These basic points are affirmed by almost all Christian denominations on planet Earth as we see in their confessions of faith, doctrinal statements etc.

Another point that almost all denominations on planet Earth affirm when it comes to the TEN included in the moral law of God applicable to all mankind. Including the command "do not take God's name in vain" Ex 20:7 that is never quoted in the NT

 

[trophy33]

God Himself is the only one that can declare an end to one of His commands.

Heb 10:4-11 says the animal sacrifices and offerings ended at the cross
Heb 7 says the earthly priesthood ended at the cross

But the moral law of God that includes the TEN remains as James 2 points -- he who is guilty of breaking one is guilty of breaking all
Deut 5:22 "he spoke these ten commandments and added no more" - so it "at least" includes the TEN where "honor your father and mother is the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2

These basic points are affirmed by almost all Christian denominations on planet Earth as we see in their confessions of faith, doctrinal statements etc.

Another point that almost all denominations on planet Earth affirm when it comes to the TEN included in the moral law of God applicable to all mankind. Including the command "do not take God's name in vain" Ex 20:7 that is never quoted in the NT

"Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law...
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
Gal 3:23-25

This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath,
but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
John 5:18

 

[BobRyan]

"Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law...
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
Gal 3:23-25

Gal 3:23-25
23 But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the Law, being confined for the faith that was destined to be revealed. 24 Therefore the Law has become our guardian to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

Faith comes when one accepts the Gospel. The one and only Gospel Gal 1:6-9 that was "preached to Abraham" Gal 3:8 such that the giants of faith in Heb 11 - are all OT saints. IT is not just a NT thing. No wonder the NEW Covenant is OLD Testament Jer 31:31-34

BEFORE Faith comes the person is condemned "under the law".

19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin. Rom 3:19-20

For "by definition" even in the NT "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4

No wonder Paul says "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19
Where "The first commandment with a promise is - Honor your father and mother" Eph 6:2

No wonder James 2 only references "the Law of Moses" when speaking to NT Saints about the Law they are under.
No wonder Rom 13 only references "the law of Moses" when speaking to NT saints about the Law they are to fulfill.

No wonder Jesus only references the "Law of Moses" in Matt 19 when he is asked which commandments Christians are to follow
No wonder Jesus only references "the Law of Moses" in Matt 22 when asked - which is the greatest commandment.

 

[trophy33]

Gal 3:23-25
23 But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the Law, being confined for the faith that was destined to be revealed. 24 Therefore the Law has become our guardian to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

Faith comes when one accepts the Gospel. The one and only Gospel Gal 1:6-9 that was "preached to Abraham" Gal 3:8 such that the giants of faith in Heb 11 - are all OT saints. IT is not just a NT thing. No wonder the NEW Covenant is OLD Testament Jer 31:31-34

BEFORE Faith comes the person is condemned "under the law".

19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin. Rom 3:19-20

For "by definition" even in the NT "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4

No wonder Paul says "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19
Where "The first commandment with a promise is - Honor your father and mother" Eph 6:2

No wonder James 2 only references "the Law of Moses" when speaking to NT Saints about the Law they are under.
No wonder Rom 13 only references "the law of Moses" when speaking to NT saints about the Law they are to fulfill.

No wonder Jesus only references the "Law of Moses" in Matt 19 when he is asked which commandments Christians are to follow
No wonder Jesus only references "the Law of Moses" in Matt 22 when asked - which is the greatest commandment.

It seems you have quite a problem dealing with Gal 3:23-25. You must leave it immediately after few weak attempts to explain it out and use your favorite out of context verses to support your view.

So, lets try again:
"Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law...
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
Gal 3:23-25

You may also try to deal with:
This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath,
but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
John 5:18

 

[SabbathBlessings]

It seems you have quite a problem dealing with Gal 3:23-25. You must leave it immediately after few weak attempts to explain it out and use your favorite out of context verses to support your view.

So, lets try again:
"Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law...
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
Gal 3:23-25

You may also try to deal with:
This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath,
but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
John 5:18

If one were to believe the Pharisees that Jesus was breaking the Sabbath over Jesus’s owns Words that He didn’t John 15:10 one could come to this conclusion, same conclusion the Pharisees made that Jesus is not equal to God. My faith is in Jesus and trust His Words over the Pharisees, who falsely accused Him and crucified Him without a cause.

There are lots of laws in scripture and there is no one size fits all with the laws- you would need to prove by the context the law being referred to in Gal is the Ten Commandments- context in Gal does not agree with this. Especially when we see the Ten Commandments being kept before and after the cross and is in God’s heavenly Temple Revelation 11:19. There is a law that fits Galatians that all pointed to Jesus and His great Sacrifice, but sin is still defined by breaking the Ten Commandments Romans 7:7 and what we will be judged by James 2:10-12 which is why it sits under His mercy seat. Exodus 40:20 Hebrews 9:4-6

 

[trophy33]

If one were to believe the Pharisees that Jesus was breaking the Sabbath over Jesus’s owns Words that He didn’t John 15:10

You did not read the text properly, again. Its not a comment of Pharisees, but of the writer of the Gospel, i.e. of John.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

You did not read the text properly, again. Its not a comment of Pharisees, but of the writer of the Gospel, i.e. of John.

I’m pretty sure John knows Jesus is God.

John is recording what happened, not what he believes. John knows Jesus was the Savior and without sin, which means no Sabbath breaking.

 

[trophy33]

I’m pretty sure John knows Jesus is God.

John is recording what happened, not what he believes. John knows Jesus was the Savior and without sin, which means no Sabbath breaking.

This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath,
but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
John 5:18

John says - they wanted to kill him because he was breaking the Sabbath and making himself equal with God.

John does not say - they wanted to kill him because they wrongly thought he was breaking the Sabbath.

Let us just stick to what is written and let us not add to it.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath,
but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
John 5:18

John says - they wanted to kill him because he was breaking the Sabbath and making himself equal with God.

John does not say - they wanted to kill him because they wrongly thought he was breaking the Sabbath.

Let us just stick to what is written and let us not add to it.

So I take it you believe Jesus is not equal to God either or believe the Words of Jesus stating He kept the commandments. John 15:10. I’m not sure if you thought this through or what the implications are if Jesus did what He was accused of. John was showing why the Jews were seeking to kill Him, not what actually happened because Jesus was falsely accused- unless you want to take the side of the Pharisees and believe Jesus was a sinner over His own Words that He kept the commandments. I believe Jesus- He did not break the Sabbath or any of the commandments, He was falsely accused and how many professed Christians today would believe Jesus if they lived during that time. People don't believe Him now over His false accusers, which is heartbreaking.

Luke 6:7 So the scribes and Pharisees watched Him closely, whether He would heal on the Sabbath, that they might find an accusation against Him.

 

[expos4ever]

For "by definition" even in the NT "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4

This is misleading.

The majority of translations have "sin is lawlessness", or something equivalent. Lawlessness is a general concept, with no required specificity to the Law of Moses.

 

[BobRyan]

This is misleading.

The majority of translations have "sin is lawlessness"

Which is not the opposite of what we find in more than a dozen translations that have 1 John 3:4 as "Sin IS transgression of the LAW"

You can't simply cancel the translation of over a dozen Bibles because you prefer a different wording - that shows a weakness , a "need" for something about the text seen in a dozen translations to "not exist" for your view to survive the details.

1 John 2 makes it clear that this is in the context of "His Commandments"
1 John 5:3 says it is more specifically "the Commandments of God"

Quoted by Christ in Matt 19 - exclusively from the "Law of Moses"
Just a we see in James 2.
Just as we see in Rom 13
Just as we see in Eph 6:2
Just as we see in Romans 7

 

[trophy33]

So I take it you believe Jesus is not equal to God either or believe the Words of Jesus stating He kept the commandments. John 15:10. I’m not sure if you thought this through or what the implications are if Jesus did what He was accused of. John was showing why the Jews were seeking to kill Him, not what actually happened because Jesus was falsely accused- unless you want to take the side of the Pharisees and believe Jesus was a sinner over His own Words that He kept the commandments. I believe Jesus- He did not break the Sabbath or any of the commandments, He was falsely accused and how many professed Christians today would believe Jesus if they lived during that time. People don't believe Him now over His false accusers, which is heartbreaking.

Luke 6:7 So the scribes and Pharisees watched Him closely, whether He would heal on the Sabbath, that they might find an accusation against Him.

Jesus was breaking the Sabbath and was saying He is equal to God and so Jews wanted to kill Him. Thats what John says. The rest are your opinions/bias.

Jesus cannot be a sinner for breaking the Sabbath, because He is greater than Sabbath.

Sabbath was a symbol/reminder for Israel that Christ will give them rest. Of course Christ is not sinner if He does not keep the temporary shadow of Himself, that would be really quite a wild thinking. As He said in another occasion - "I am Lord over Sabbath".