ARE GOD'S 10 COMMANDMENTS ABOLISHED?

[expos4ever]

I would like to talk about Romans 7. in Romans 7, Paul says we don’t serve the oldness of the letter. Referring to the oldness of the letter of the law implies that the time of the law has passed. Now clearly the 10 Commandments are part of that letter of the law which is referred to as old since a few verses later Paul explicitly refers to the commandment about not stealing as being part of that letter of the law.

Some here are clearly advocating following the oldness of the letter of the law! If we look to the law for moral guidance,how is it that we are not serving the oldness of the letter - this is a direct contradiction to what Paul is saying here in Romans 7.

 

[klutedavid]

Nope the Sadows are fulfilled in Christ

So breaking any ceremonial law is not sin?

One way the Bible defines sin is lawlessness.

1 John 3:4
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

This verse made no distinction between commandments and ceremonial law.

For example, below is a ceremonial law that you claim was fulfilled in Christ.

Exodus 21:16
He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death.

Your saying that kidnapping someone is not a sin.

Paul disagrees with you on this, Paul describes kidnapping as sin.

1 Timothy 1:10
And immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars...

Paul is employing the entire law in his definition of sin, your just using the ten commandments.

The scripture sharply disagrees with you!

 

[discipler7]

Some here are clearly advocating following the oldness of the letter of the law! If we look to the law for moral guidance,how is it that we are not serving the oldness of the letter - this is a direct contradiction to what Paul is saying here in Romans 7.

The way I understand ROMANS.7(6 But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.) is that Before Christ(= before 33AD = the Cross), the only way to be saved from hell was through the Law, ie the Jews had to keep the Law, in order to be saved from hell when they die = saved by the oldness of the letter of the Law.

After Christ(= after 33AD), this was no longer true. After Christ, to be saved from hell, the Jews now had to have faith in Jesus Christ, in order to be born-again of the Spirit(JOHN.3:5) = saved by the newness of the Spirit of Christ.
....... Jews who believed in Christ became born-again Jewish Christians. They had God's laws written on their hearts by the Spirit of God or Holy Spirit = walking in the Spirit like the Lord Jesus at MATTHEW.4:1-11(cf; GALATIANS.5:16-26).
....... Jesus Christ did not come down to earth to destroy the Law, but to fulfill the Law in all who believe in Him for salvation.

LUKE.16:19-31 said that the Old Testament(= Before Christ) figure, rich Jewish man, died young and ended up in hell/Hades because he had unrepentantly broken the Law at DEUT.15:11, ie by refusing to give charity to the poor during every Sabbath/7th year.
....... In contrast, the Old Testament figures, beggar Lazarus, Moses, Elijah, etc(MATTHEW.17:3 & 27:52) ended up in heaven or not in hell/Hades by keeping the Law.
....... But the actual process of this salvation of OT figures is mentioned at 1PETER.3:19 & 4:6. After Christ, law-keeping Jews who died, no longer had the opportunity to listen to the preaching of Jesus Christ and be saved from hell.

Today, the remnant Jews still wrongly believe that they will go to heaven or be saved from hell by keeping the Law or following the oldness of the letter of the Law, in order to be saved.
....... Similarly, Christians should not believe like today's Jews. OTOH, if they follow the bad example of the law-breaking and unrepentant rich Jewish man, they will also die young and may not be saved from hell, eg if they had lost faith or departed from the faith, renounced the faith, etc.

 

[expos4ever]

Hello discipler7. The problem is that Paul is not talking about being SAVED by the law, he is talking about SERVING according to the Law. Paul would have to be a dreadful writer to use the concept of “serving according to the Law”, to refer to matters of salvation.

 

[discipler7]

Hello discipler7. The problem is that Paul is not talking about being SAVED by the law, he is talking about SERVING according to the Law. Paul would have to be a dreadful writer to use the concept of “serving according to the Law”, to refer to matters of salvation.

ROMANS.7 = 6 But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. ...

is a continuation of ....

ROMANS.5 & 6 =
5:20 Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, 21 so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Dead to Sin, Alive to God
6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

You are not reading what is on page or at least you are not including what is in the passages your quoted in your summary.

Yes both the jew and gentile are under the law is so far as both need the law to prove they need another form of righteousness to enter Heaven because the law precludes EVERYONE from entering heaven. that is the only purpose of the law (pauls words not mine) once we have the law we then must seek freedom from it and that can only be found through the atonement Christ offers. once we accept this atonement, then the law ends as a means to determine who is worthy. because again according to the law none are worthy in word thought and deed.

Your question then should be why do christians still live by the law if we re no longer held to it. your answer then would be love.

Our love hold us to the want or will of God not obligation/trade for salvation. that is Ot jew stuff, and not a christian precept.

Hello brother drich0150, thanks for your post and thoughts and nice to see you again.

Yes I have indeed read what was on the page. I have posted nothing different to what you have posted above and agree with what you have posted. I have been sharing the same thoughts throughout this thread (e.g. CLCIK ME HERE).

No one is "UNDER THE LAW" once they have forgivness through faith, because they have been forgiven and are no longer condemned by the law as the law has done it's job in leading us to Christ that we might be forgiven by faith.

The purpose of God's LAW is only to reveal sin. It is only those who sin who fall under the laws jurisdiction and condemnation (Romans 3:19). Walking in the Spirit we do not fulfill the lusts of the flesh (Galatians 5:16; 25) and is why we need to be "Born again" * 1 John 3:9 to LOVE which is the NEW COVENANTS promise (Hebrews 8:10-12). Love is the fulfilling and establishing of the law in the heart of those who BELIEVE and FOLLOW God's WORD (Romans 13:8-12' Romans 3:31).

Nice post brother thanks for sharing.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

So breaking any ceremonial law is not sin?

One way the Bible defines sin is lawlessness.

1 John 3:4
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

This verse made no distinction between commandments and ceremonial law.

For example, below is a ceremonial law that you claim was fulfilled in Christ.

Exodus 21:16
He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death.

Your saying that kidnapping someone is not a sin.

Paul disagrees with you on this, Paul describes kidnapping as sin.

1 Timothy 1:10
And immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars...

Paul is employing the entire law in his definition of sin, your just using the ten commandments.

The scripture sharply disagrees with you!

Hello David nice to see you again

Now think about what you are saying above brother. How can something be a sin that is no longer required under the NEW COVENANT? You do not believe we are to continue offering animal sacrifices every time we sin in the temple under the Levitical priesthood do you?

If you were to continue offering animal sacrifices that the ceremonial shadow laws point to you would be commiting sin because those laws are fulfilled in Christ and point to him and God's plan of salvation under the NEW COVENANT. We are in the NEW COVENANT now the shadows are fulfilled in Christ.

Thanks for sharing brother.

Hope this helps

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Hello LGW,

I will no longer discuss this matter with you. I will continue to post, however, as I think getting this right is important. No hard feelings.

Hi brother expos4ever,

No problems, I enjoyed sharing God's WORD with you. I have never had any hard feelings towards you and have enjoyed our exchange.

May God bless you as you seek him through his WORD

 

[LoveGodsWord]

[Staff edit].

I am no one, simply a voice crying in the wilderness, the chiefest of all sinners, a blind man who cannot see and a deaf man who cannot here. I see now through the Word of God and I hear his voice so I can see in darkness walking a narrow way. When I was lame Jesus bid me arise take up your bed and follow me.

In discussion I only share God's WORD out of love and respect for all and all are my equal and are free to believe or not believe. Sometimes it seems some people get upset if the scriptures posted disagree with their teachings. So they simply either ignore the posts and the scriptures posted to them or try to make up arguments that have never been said or discussed to avoid the scriptures that may come their way.

If someone is sleeping on a railway track and another is walking by, when a train is coming, is it a sin not to wake the sleeper on the railway tracks up before the train comes?

I love God's WORD and love sharing it. Not all will receive it because it is written, men love darkness rather then light because their deeds were evil. Neither do they come to the light lest their deeds should be reproved.

Hope this helps

 

[klutedavid]

Hello David nice to see you again

I said, Paul disagrees with you on this, Paul describes kidnapping (a ceremonial law) as sin.

1 Timothy 1:10
And immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars...

There it is in black and white, the very words of Paul, kidnapping is sin.

Paul is employing the entire law in the definition of sin, your just using the ten commandments to define sin.

1 John 3:4
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

In reply, your now claiming that sin is not really lawlessness but that sin is only breaking the ten commandments. You are in deep error.

Now think about what you are saying above brother. How can something be a sin that is no longer required under the NEW COVENANT?

Which proves my point, your in direct conflict with Paul. For some strange reason you do not understand that sin is lawlessness.

I posted that kidnapping (a ceremonial law) was a sin. Obviously you do not recognize that kidnapping someone is sinful.

You do not believe we are to continue offering animal sacrifices every time we sin in the temple under the Levitical priesthood do you?

I will print the verse again, over and over again.

1 John 3:4
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

You must make sacrifices.

We establish the law and in it's entirety.

Hebrews 13:15
Through Him then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name.

We establish the law!

If you were to continue offering animal sacrifices that the ceremonial shadow laws point to you would be commiting sin because those laws are fulfilled in Christ and point to him and God's plan of salvation under the NEW COVENANT. We are in the NEW COVENANT now the shadows are fulfilled in Christ.

We establish the law!

1 Peter 2:5
You also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

We still offer sacrifices.

Kidnapping is prohibited in the law, kidnapping is a sin.

I wonder how long you will take to understand what I am saying?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I said, Paul disagrees with you on this, Paul describes kidnapping (a ceremonial law) as sin.

1 Timothy 1:10
And immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars...

There it is in black and white, the very words of Paul, kidnapping is sin.

Paul is employing the entire law in the definition of sin, your just using the ten commandments to define sin.

1 John 3:4
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

In reply, your now claiming that sin is not really lawlessness but that sin is only breaking the ten commandments. You are in deep error.

Which proves my point, your in direct conflict with Paul. For some strange reason you do not understand that sin is lawlessness.

I posted that kidnapping (a ceremonial law) was a sin. Obviously you do not recognize that kidnapping someone is sinful.

I will print the verse again, over and over again.

1 John 3:4
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

You must make sacrifices.

We establish the law and in it's entirety.

Hebrews 13:15
Through Him then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name.

We establish the law!

We establish the law!

1 Peter 2:5
You also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

We still offer sacrifices.

Kidnapping is prohibited in the law, kidnapping is a sin.

I wonder how long you will take to understand what I am saying?

Hello David

It seems you are confused in your interpretation of what ceremonial means. Perhaps you can look up the meaning before posting?

ceremonial
sɛrɪˈməʊnɪəl/
adjective
adjective: ceremonial

1. 1.
   relating to or used for formal religious or public events.
   "a ceremonial occasion"
   synonyms: formal, official, state, public;
   ritual, ritualistic, prescribed, set, stately, courtly, solemn, dignified, celebratory, sacramental, liturgical
   "a ceremonial occasion"
   antonyms: informal, unofficial
2. 2.
   (of a post or role) conferring or involving only nominal authority or power.
   "the largely ceremonial position of Lord Lieutenant of Kent"

noun
noun: ceremonial
1.
the system of rules and procedures to be observed at a formal or religious occasion.
"the procedure was conducted with all due ceremonial"

..............

You still have not adressed the post your trying to respond to as your interpretation of ceremonial is not correct. Only sent as a help brother.

May God help you as you seek him through his Word.

Hope this helps.

 

[expos4ever]

ROMANS.7 = 6 But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. ...

is a continuation of ....

ROMANS.5 & 6 =
5:20 Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, 21 so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

I think this is really pushing things.

No one is denying that the Law reveals sin and that Jesus delivers us from our sins. However, in what you post above, you make it impossible for Paul to say anything about the Law except that Jesus delivers us from the Law. In particular, you make it impossible for Paul to say what he actually does say:

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the [d]Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

The word "serve" is key: it is clearly not a verb about salvation - as your interpretation effectively demands - it is instead a word about how we live and order our lives.

It is, of course, possible that both the following are true:

- Jesus delivers us from the consequences of sin as revealed by the Law;
- The law has to come to an end as regards its role in ordering our lives.

You certainly appear to take the first truth - with which I agree, of course - and turn into an exegetical hammer with which you smash the second one to bits.

Surely you have to agree that the concept of serving has to do with our actions, not our state of salvation.

 

[James Richards]

We aren't claiming that only the Ten Commandments were abolished. The whole law was abolished.

There is only one reference in the new testament to the Ten Commandments as a whole. And it's not very complimentary.

2 Corinthians 3:6-11
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—
not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone,
came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily
at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was,
8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious?
9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious,
how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness!
10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory.
11 And if what was transitory came with glory,
how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

Righteousness of observing the law was abolished. The law as we all understand law to mean was abolished. For the law as we understand it comes with a penalty for transgression. Our penalty was paid by Christ. but what was written in the moral law has not been abolished, it is written in believers minds and placed on their hearts.
IE
In a believers heart they do not want to:
Steal
Murder
Covet
Commit adultery
Take the Lords name in vain
Etc.
And, when believers go against the law in their hearts they feel bad for doing so, for they have g0one against how they in their heart want to live.

 

[expos4ever]

There is something going on in this thread at several places that needs to be exposed. This is the pattern:

- Poster A makes a scriptural argument X based on text T1 to support a position P;
- Poster B responds by making a scriptural argument Y based on text T2 that challenges P.
- Poster A responds by dismissing Y, insisting instead that poster B has to critique argument X.

Here is the problem and why Poster A may appear to be in the right but, in fact, is not: Yes, Poster B has to ultimately critique argument X to make his entire position work. But - and this is key - unless Poster A can deal with argument Y, position P has not been established.

I think we all know what I am talking about. More specifically, and from my perspective at least:

LGW makes a scriptural argument for all being under Law. Fine, that argument, though arguably a tad on the longwinded side, needs to be dealt with. But I then respond with arguments based on Galatians 3 and Romans 7 that the law is ended. The actual content of those arguments is gently nudged off the table and dismissed, and I am, politely of course, invited to address LGW's argument. The old "that's impossible because in post 221, I established that all are actually under the law" trick.

Again, I do indeed need to address LGW's - once I figure out what he is saying. But it simply does not pass muster for LGW to dismiss my arguments, and perhaps those of others, out of hand the way he is doing.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Righteousness of observing the law was abolished. The law as we all understand law to mean was abolished. For the law as we understand it comes with a penalty for transgression. Our penalty was paid by Christ. but what was written in the moral law has not been abolished, it is written in believers minds and placed on their hearts.
IE
In a believers heart they do not want to:
Steal
Murder
Covet
Commit adultery
Take the Lords name in vain
Etc.
And, when believers go against the law in their hearts they feel bad for doing so, for they have g0one against how they in their heart want to live.

Hello brother James, welcome and nice to meet you here.

Well said. The purpose of God's LAW is to give us a knowledge of GOOD and EVIL; SIN and RIGHTOUESNESS, nothing more and nothing less (Romans 3:20; Psalms 119:172). It shows us that all are under sin and death to leads us to the foot of the cross that we might be justified by Faith in the precious blood of Jesus.

When we have faith we are no longer under the condemnation of the law as we have been forgiven and are free in Christ to walk in his Spirit of LOVE and as Paul says LOVE is the fulfilling of the LAW and is established in the heart under the NEW COVENANT promise to LOVE in all those who have faith (Galatians 3:24-25; Romans 13:8-10; Hebrews 8:10-12; Matthew 22:36-40; Romans 3:31).

Thanks for sharing James. Well said.

May God bless you as you seek him through his WORD.

 

[klutedavid]

Hello David

It seems you are confused in your interpretation of what ceremonial means. Perhaps you can look up the meaning before posting?

ceremonial
sɛrɪˈməʊnɪəl/
adjective
adjective: ceremonial

1. 1.
   relating to or used for formal religious or public events.
   "a ceremonial occasion"
   synonyms: formal, official, state, public;
   ritual, ritualistic, prescribed, set, stately, courtly, solemn, dignified, celebratory, sacramental, liturgical
   "a ceremonial occasion"
   antonyms: informal, unofficial
2. 2.
   (of a post or role) conferring or involving only nominal authority or power.
   "the largely ceremonial position of Lord Lieutenant of Kent"

noun
noun: ceremonial
1.
the system of rules and procedures to be observed at a formal or religious occasion.
"the procedure was conducted with all due ceremonial"

..............

You still have not adressed the post your trying to respond to as your interpretation of ceremonial is not correct. Only sent as a help brother.

May God help you as you seek him through his Word.

Hope this helps.

Gee LGW, you know so much.

Is kidnapping a ceremonial law?

 

[James Richards]

Hello brother James, welcome and nice to meet you here.

Well said. The purpose of God's LAW is to give us a knowledge of GOOD and EVIL; SIN and RIGHTOUESNESS, nothing more and nothing less (Romans 3:20; Psalms 119:172). It shows us that all are under sin and death to leads us to the foot of the cross that we might be justified by Faith in the precious blood of Jesus.

When we have faith we are no longer under the condemnation of the law as we have been forgiven and are free in Christ to walk in his Spirit of LOVE and as Paul says LOVE is the fulfilling of the LAW and is established in the heart under the NEW COVENANT promise to LOVE in all those who have faith (Galatians 3:24-25; Romans 13:8-10; Hebrews 8:10-12; Matthew 22:36-40; Romans 3:31).

Thanks for sharing James. Well said.

May God bless you as you seek him through his WORD.

Ah, if only we every minute of every day faultlessly followed after the Holy Spirit and loved perfectly, without slip or deviation we would never commit sin would we? I've never met any Christian who could honestly claim that. . Hence, we all need a saviour, during our Christian walk

 

[Saint Steven]

Righteousness of observing the law was abolished. The law as we all understand law to mean was abolished. For the law as we understand it comes with a penalty for transgression. Our penalty was paid by Christ. but what was written in the moral law has not been abolished, it is written in believers minds and placed on their hearts.
IE
In a believers heart they do not want to:
Steal
Murder
Covet
Commit adultery
Take the Lords name in vain
Etc.
And, when believers go against the law in their hearts they feel bad for doing so, for they have g0one against how they in their heart want to live.

Do you feel guilty for breaking the Sabbath?

 

[James Richards]

Do you feel guilty for breaking the Sabbath?

If you mean, do I feel guilty for not observing a set Saturday sabbath, no! Never have done. I have felt much guilt/remorse at much shortcomings in my life, but never that.

 

[James Richards]

Do you feel guilty for breaking the Sabbath?

Let us not get stuck in the letter of the commandment. What was the intent of the fourth commandment? To meditate/contemplate on God and his goodness to you. To be thankful for what he has done, and does for you. Under the new covenant
The Holy Spirit dwells in believers. The Spirit of Christ is in them. Thanksgiving to God for what he does in believers lives should well up in them every day of their lives. Believers instinctively meditate on Father and Son every day of their lives, for they dwell in them through the Spirit. And believers are grateful every day for what God did for them by sending his son to die for them, and they praise him for it. The true intent of the fourth commandment is(or should be) upheld in born again believers every day, including Saturday.

As for the real question here:

Through the law we become conscious of sin Rom 3:20


Would a believer be conscious they sinned if they committed adultery? Through the law we become conscious of sin.

Would a believer be conscious they sinned if they stole something?

Through the law we become conscious of sin

Would a believer be conscious they sinned if they took the Lords name in vain?

Through the law we become conscious of sin.

Etc