Bend it, break it or discard it?

[from scratch]

What do you do with the law and why? The focus should be the Ten Commandments.

 

[from scratch]

What no one wants to get into the real world on how they keep, what they keep or don't keep about the law?

 

[SAAN]

If it is just the 10C's you are referring to, I think we should keep them, but I think the spirit of the law is, give God one day out of the week in regards to the 4th Command, more than it must me sunset to sunset Fri-Sat, like many people come on here to argue over.

 

[LarryP2]

Any argument that Christians must keep any part of the Mosaic Law is just dishonest about the structure and implementation of the Old Testament law, and indicates a severe ignorance about its applications. There are 613 Commandments, all of which are equally important, and all of them must be kept. Or none of them. There is NO distinction in the Mosaic Law between "ritualistic" and "moral" law. Sabbattarian Christians conjure up that self-serving distinction purely out of convenience. They have picked a few of the 613 Commandments at random, based on the ones that happen to tickle their fancy. That is willfully dishonest to the intent of the Law.

If you were to approach an rabbinical expert on the Mosaic Law, and announce self-righteously that you are "keeping the Ten Commandments," they would look on you as though you are mentally deranged. Under Mosaic Law, there is no such a thing as the "Ten Commandments." What we know as the "Decalogue" is subsumed into the overall structure of the 613 Commandments. Judaism does not regard the ten commandments as anything particularly unique or special in relationship to the other 603 Commandments. They are merely ten among many other laws of equal importance.

Out of the mandatory 613 Mosaic laws, Sabbattarians pick and choose a tiny handful that happily coincide with their overall goals of preening self-righteousness over other Christians. They flatter themselves all too easily. If you understand the way the Mosaic law works, all they have merely done is make themselves looks bizarre and foolish. The Apostles repeatedly denounced such behavior as "Judaizing." The Apostles were experts on the Mosaic Law. Sabbattarians are not.

For Christians, Colossians 2:16-17 means what it says.

For Christians, the AD 50 Council of Jerusalem emphatically means what it says: Gentile Christians shall not be bound by the Mosaic law.

Any argument that the Sabbath is a memorial of Creation indicates an profound ignorance of the original Hebrew that both Genesis and Exodus were written in. The writer of the book of Genesis took great pains to make it clear that the Sabbath did not begin at the 7th day of Creation. Hebrew scholars have made that point absolutely clear. The Sabbath commandment was not given to the Children of Israel until at least a month after their delivery from Egyptian slavery. Meanwhile, they would have unintentionally broken the Sabbath at least four times during their crossing of the Sinai. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that anyone kept the Sabbath prior to Sinai. NONE!

Christians began worshiping on Sunday no later than 1 week after the Resurrection. Christ then Ascended on a Sunday. The Day of Pentecost, the Church's Birthday was on a Sunday. It would have been BIZARRE if the early Christians had continued to keep the Sabbath, given the impact those three events clearly would have had on them. Why were all the early Christians in one place on a Sunday when the Day of Pentecost took place? Because they had started doing so in honor of the Resurrection. By the Day of Pentecost, it was an entrenched Christian custom already.

The argument for keeping just one pet commandment out of the 613 of the Mosaic Law simply denigrates the obvious meaning of the crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension and the Day of Pentecost. It is a Salvation by Works theory of "Partial Atonement." It is an argument that one must keep the entirety of the Mosaic Law, because Christ's sacrifice is not enough. Fortunately for Christians, even Christians who keep the Sabbath aren't even CLOSE to meeting that burden.

If you want to keep the Sabbath and have some integrity, you need to go through the full-scale conversion process to Judaism that is mandatory. It is extremely highly-unlikely any Sabbattarian Christian would do that. For an unconverted Gentile to keep the Sabbath is such a serious offense against God, an observant Jew is required the impose of the Death Penalty. Christians who keep the Sabbath are as bizarre as if they suddenly developed a yen to sacrifice some animals in their backyard temple.

 

[maco]

Any argument that Christians must keep any part of the Mosaic Law is just dishonest about the structure and implementation of the Old Testament law, and indicates a severe ignorance about its applications. There are 613 Commandments, all of which are equally important, and all of them must be kept. Or none of them. There is NO distinction in the Mosaic Law between "ritualistic" and "moral" law. Sabbattarian Christians conjure up that self-serving distinction purely out of convenience. They have picked a few of the 613 Commandments at random, based on the ones that happen to tickle their fancy. That is willfully dishonest to the intent of the Law.

If you were to approach an rabbinical expert on the Mosaic Law, and announce self-righteously that you are "keeping the Ten Commandments," they would look on you as though you are mentally deranged. Under Mosaic Law, there is no such a thing as the "Ten Commandments." What we know as the "Decalogue" is subsumed into the overall structure of the 613 Commandments. Judaism does not regard the ten commandments as anything particularly unique or special in relationship to the other 603 Commandments. They are merely ten among many other laws of equal importance.

Out of the mandatory 613 Mosaic laws, Sabbattarians pick and choose a tiny handful that happily coincide with their overall goals of preening self-righteousness over other Christians. They flatter themselves all too easily. If you understand the way the Mosaic law works, all they have merely done is make themselves looks bizarre and foolish. The Apostles repeatedly denounced such behavior as "Judaizing." The Apostles were experts on the Mosaic Law. Sabbattarians are not.

For Christians, Colossians 2:16-17 means what it says.

For Christians, the AD 50 Council of Jerusalem emphatically means what it says: Gentile Christians shall not be bound by the Mosaic law.

Any argument that the Sabbath is a memorial of Creation indicates an profound ignorance of the original Hebrew that both Genesis and Exodus were written in. The writer of the book of Genesis took great pains to make it clear that the Sabbath did not begin at the 7th day of Creation. Hebrew scholars have made that point absolutely clear. The Sabbath commandment was not given to the Children of Israel until at least a month after their delivery from Egyptian slavery. Meanwhile, they would have unintentionally broken the Sabbath at least four times during their crossing of the Sinai. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that anyone kept the Sabbath prior to Sinai. NONE!

Christians began worshiping on Sunday no later than 1 week after the Resurrection. Christ then Ascended on a Sunday. The Day of Pentecost, the Church's Birthday was on a Sunday. It would have been BIZARRE if the early Christians had continued to keep the Sabbath, given the impact those three events clearly would have had on them. Why were all the early Christians in one place on a Sunday when the Day of Pentecost took place? Because they had started doing so in honor of the Resurrection. By the Day of Pentecost, it was an entrenched Christian custom already.

The argument for keeping just one pet commandment out of the 613 of the Mosaic Law simply denigrates the obvious meaning of the crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension and the Day of Pentecost. It is a Salvation by Works theory of "Partial Atonement." It is an argument that one must keep the entirety of the Mosaic Law, because Christ's sacrifice is not enough. Fortunately for Christians, even Christians who keep the Sabbath aren't even CLOSE to meeting that burden.

If you want to keep the Sabbath and have some integrity, you need to go through the full-scale conversion process to Judaism that is mandatory. It is extremely highly-unlikely any Sabbattarian Christian would do that. For an unconverted Gentile to keep the Sabbath is such a serious offense against God, an observant Jew is required the impose of the Death Penalty. Christians who keep the Sabbath are as bizarre as if they suddenly developed a yen to sacrifice some animals in their backyard temple.

Man counts 613, God counts 10 and writes them with His own finger. The interesting thing is that the Ten Commandments are the only part of the Bible written with God's own finger.

 

[BobRyan]

What do you do with the law and why? The focus should be the Ten Commandments.

James 2 says that he who is guilty of one is guilty of all.

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

And of course the actual Bible calls the TEN Commandments the "Commandments of God" (posted so many times now that even the moderators get the point).

here is how Christ treats fellow religionists - who try to find ways to break one of the TEN Commandments (which he calls the Commandment of God and the Word of God)

6 He answered and said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
7 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

8 For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men —the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.”
9 He said to them, “All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ 11 But you say, ‘If a man says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban”—’ (that is, a gift to God), 12 then you no longer let him do anything for his father or his mother, 13 making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.”


Now some may argue that this is all wayyy tooo complicated and no way to study the Bible and understand such a complex set of calculus and physics as we have here. But others will see it instantly.



in Christ,

Bob

 

[maco]

James 2 says that he who is guilty of one is guilty of all.

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

And of course the actual Bible calls the TEN Commandments the "Commandments of God" (posted so many times now that even the moderators get the point).

in Christ,

Bob

I think we need to kick the dust off our heels. Remember what God said, "In the last days good will be evil and evil will be good."

 

[bbbbbbb]

I think we need to kick the dust off our heels. Remember what God said, "In the last days good will be evil and evil will be good."

Yep, just as in the days of Noah, where God had not specified any commandments.

 

[BobRyan]

What do you do with the law and why? The focus should be the Ten Commandments.

New Covenant - Jer 31:31-33 the law of God written on the heart.

 

[BobRyan]

Yep, just as in the days of Noah, where God had not specified any commandments.

The wild imagination that Noah and Abraham were "free to take God's name in vain" misses the Genesis 4 fact that it was "sin" to murder even though no "thou shalt not murder" was written in stone in Genesis 3

No wonder almost all Christian denominations agree with the "Westminster Confession of faith" Sectn 19 and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" sectn 19 and the Catholic Catechism on the TEN Commandments.. that the moral law of God written on the heart under the NEW Covenant - includes the TEN Commandments.

 

[DamianWarS]

What do you do with the law and why? The focus should be the Ten Commandments.

the focus should be on Christ's law

 

[BobRyan]

the focus should be on Christ's law

Paul says it is Christ speaking His Law at Sinai - in Heb 8:6-11

 

[DamianWarS]

Paul says it is Christ speaking His Law at Sinai - in Heb 8:6-11

you mean the same Heb 8 that says the covenant established through Jesus is superior to the old one?

 

[Bob S]

I have been told that Eph 2:15 (15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace is not referring to the laws contained in the old covenant. When I asked for an explanation there was complete silence. Paul didn't break down the law into segments like the Sabbath group tries to do. He just wrote the law of commandments contained in ordinances.

Why do some think that when Jesus ratified the new covenant with His own blood that he was just ratifying the warmed-over old one? New should mean different from the previous one. Better should mean changed and made more favorable. Jesus even told us that He kept the laws He was under and asks us to keep the ones He has made for us. Jn 15. Paul tells us that the 10 commandments have faded away and that they were only Israel's guide temporarily in the first place. 2Cor3 Why do some not believe that the Holy Spirit is now the gift Jesus has given to us as our guide?

Why is it some believe that the 10 commandments cover all sins man can commit? Of course that is not true. Read Gal 5:
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like:

"Such like" meaning many more. Yes, hundreds of ways we can hurt our fellow man, ourselves and God. Jesus gave each of us the solution to the sin problem in which Israel failed. We are to love each other as Jesus loves us. Jesus loves us so much that He was willing to give His life up and is now wearing the scars from His sacrifice to save mankind. Did the 10 commandments ask Israel to do what Jesus asks?

 

[BobRyan]

you mean the same Heb 8 that says the covenant established through Jesus is superior to the old one?

Yep - because it points out Jesus is the one giving His Commandments and writing them on the heart under the New Covenant... same law...different Covenants.

 

[BobRyan]

Why do some think that when Jesus ratified the new covenant with His own blood that he was just ratifying the warmed-over old one? asks?

Nope... different covenants - same moral law of God as even the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the "Westminster Confession of faith " freely admit.

Hence it is "still a sin" to take God's name in vain - even for saints.

so then... "the obvious"

 

[bbbbbbb]

Paul says it is Christ speaking His Law at Sinai - in Heb 8:6-11

Paul did not write the epistle to the Hebrews,

 

[Bob S]

Nope... different covenants - same moral law of God as even the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the "Westminster Confession of faith " freely admit.

Hence it is "still a sin" to take God's name in vain - even for saints.

so then... "the obvious"

I sure don't know how you could possibly put your faith in what the Baptists tell us. After all your church teaches that all other Protestantism is Babylon. And furthermore, I don't give one hoot concerning what churches proclaim, I go by what scripture says. Your continual Baptist example doesn't impress me one iota.

Taking the name of God in vain was a sin long before the 10 commandments were given to Israel only. It is a sin according to the Royal Law of Love in the new covenant. We certainly do not need the ministry of death written on stone to tell us what is a sin.

 

[BobRyan]

Yep, just as in the days of Noah, where God had not specified any commandments.

The wild imagination that Noah and Abraham were "free to take God's name in vain" misses the Genesis 4 fact that it was "sin" to murder even though no "thou shalt not murder" was written in stone in Genesis 3

No wonder almost all Christian denominations agree with the "Westminster Confession of faith" Sectn 19 and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" sectn 19 and the Catholic Catechism on the TEN Commandments.. that the moral law of God written on the heart under the NEW Covenant - includes the TEN Commandments.

Even Paul reminds us that the 5th commandment is the "first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2 in that unit of TEN - still valid for all mankind to this very day.

I sure don't know how you could possibly put your faith in what the Baptists tell us

I never claim that Baptists wrote Eph 6:2.

Why do some think that when Jesus ratified the new covenant with His own blood that he was just ratifying the warmed-over old one? asks?

Nope... different covenants - same moral law of God as even the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the "Westminster Confession of faith " freely admit.

Hence it is "still a sin" to take God's name in vain - even for saints.

Taking the name of God in vain was a sin long before the 10 commandments were given to Israel

Commandments of God including "do not take God's name in vain" Ex 20:7 were there long before Sinai as the "Westminster Confession of faith" Sectn 19 and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" sectn 19 and the Catholic Catechism and D.L. Moody and now "even you" appear to admit.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The wild imagination that Noah and Abraham were "free to take God's name in vain" misses the Genesis 4 fact that it was "sin" to murder even though no "thou shalt not murder" was written in stone in Genesis 3

No wonder almost all Christian denominations agree with the "Westminster Confession of faith" Sectn 19 and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" sectn 19 and the Catholic Catechism on the TEN Commandments.. that the moral law of God written on the heart under the NEW Covenant - includes the TEN Commandments.

Even Paul reminds us that the 5th commandment is the "first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2 in that unit of TEN - still valid for all mankind to this very day.

I never claim that Baptists wrote Eph 6:2.

Nope... different covenants - same moral law of God as even the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the "Westminster Confession of faith " freely admit.

Hence it is "still a sin" to take God's name in vain - even for saints.

Commandments of God including "do not take God's name in vain" Ex 20:7 were there long before Sinai as the "Westminster Confession of faith" Sectn 19 and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" sectn 19 and the Catholic Catechism and D.L. Moody and now "even you" appear to admit.

So, why is it that your own denomination vehemently disagrees with the "Westminster Confession of faith" and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the Catholic Catechism if, in fact, they are your own sources of TRUTH?