Clarifying the Debate "basics" on Sabbath and the TEN Commandments

[BobRyan]

Like all sects you are majoring..

How does 'non-denom' put you in a position to belittle all Christian denominations?

Acts 24:14
But this I admit to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets;

 

[Leaf473]

The prediction they made was fulfilled so the obligation to perform the act passed away.

"He TAKES AWAY the first to establish the second" Heb 10.



Agreed and fulfilling animal-sacrifice predictions - takes away the obligation to keep performing them... and does not delete/abolish prescriptive commands like "do not take God's name in vain".



Only predictive laws can be fulfilled - by doing that which they predict.

So notice that Adam and Eve are given the Sabbath in Eden but are NOT given animal sacrifices because sinless perfect beings are not looking for future redemption from the penalty of sins. They don't have that need - just as sinless angels in heaven do not need animal sacrifice.

I like that phrase "the obligation to perform the act passed away."

So, the list we're working on. It's basically a list of those laws you feel the obligation to perform the act has not passed away:

The Ten Commandments
Don't murder (included in the Ten)
Eat only clean animals -- and don't eat a diseased animal even if it is clean
Don't eat meat with blood in it

Lev 19:18 Love your neighbor as yourself
Deut 6:5 Love God with all your heart

Tithe

And all that pertains to morally right living.


After Genesis 9:4 then, what is the next law that we come to that we are "obligated to perform the act"?

 

[BobRyan]

I like that phrase "the obligation to perform the act passed away."

So, the list we're working on. It's basically a list of those laws you feel the obligation to perform the act has not passed away:

This groups I am working on -- are those categories of Law that forwhatever reason are no longer active.

The the ones we have so far are:
1. Laws regarding animal sacrifices and offerings
2. Civil laws that are commands "to the government" of a theocracy. So when that theocracy (government) no longer exists - they continue to 'not apply' at the individual level just as before.

As you note - these are beyond question in any case but our job is not to define "the universe of what exists" -- rather those things that end :
The Ten Commandments
Eat only clean animals -- and don't eat a diseased animal even if it is clean
Don't eat meat with blood in it

Lev 19:18 Love your neighbor as yourself
Deut 6:5 Love God with all your heart

Tithe

And all that pertains to morally right living.

After Genesis 9:4 then, what is the next law that we come to that we are "obligated to perform the act"?

I have a bigger question -- how are you doing with the list that falls in the "easy part" above??
Do you accept or reject what you have posted?

And of course "the big question" when it comes to this thread - what did you answer regarding the "3 points" as listed?

 

[Leaf473]

This groups I am working on -- are those categories of Law that forwhatever reason are no longer active.

The the ones we have so far are:
1. Laws regarding animal sacrifices and offerings
2. Civil laws that are commands "to the government" of a theocracy. So when that theocracy (government) no longer exists - they continue to 'not apply' at the individual level just as before.

As you note - these are beyond question in any case but our job is not to define "the universe of what exists" -- rather those things that end :
The Ten Commandments
Eat only clean animals -- and don't eat a diseased animal even if it is clean
Don't eat meat with blood in it

Lev 19:18 Love your neighbor as yourself
Deut 6:5 Love God with all your heart

Tithe

And all that pertains to morally right living.

Sure, we can talk about catagories of the Law that you see as no longer active. After we have a list of the catagories, I would like to consider some individual laws and see how they fit. Anything in a "no longer active" catagory would then be something still active today, I looks to me.

I have a bigger question -- how are you doing with the list that falls in the "easy part" above??
Do you accept or reject what you have posted?

I don't think the law can be reasonably divided up into Active and Not Active catagories. My impression is that you feel you can do that. My main reason for being on this thread is to discuss how you personally go about the process.

And of course "the big question" when it comes to this thread - what did you answer regarding the "3 points" as listed?

The OP survey is unclear, imo. When you ask "I agree with point 1" you asking for me to agree that "they all affirm the SDA interpretation" or are you asking me to agree with them and "affirm the SDA interpretation"?

 

[BobRyan]

Sure, we can talk about catagories of the Law that you see as no longer active. After we have a list of the catagories,

1. Moral laws -- define what sin is
2. Ceremonial laws - with animal sacrifice and that require a priesthood that no longer exists Heb 7.
3. Civil laws - that are commands given to the civil government of a theocracy regarding penalties for law breaking - that end when that theocratic government no longer exists.

So the question remains - can you really say something of the form "I refuse to accept the command to not take God's name in vain until I have divided the entire Bible into lists"?

 

[BobRyan]

So, the list we're working on. It's basically a list of those laws you feel the obligation to perform the act has not passed away:

The Ten Commandments
Don't murder (included in the Ten)
Eat only clean animals -- and don't eat a diseased animal even if it is clean
Don't eat meat with blood in it

Lev 19:18 Love your neighbor as yourself
Deut 6:5 Love God with all your heart

Tithe

And all that pertains to morally right living.

And how do you "feel" about laws that apply to moral living? Laws that define what sin is according to Paul in Rom 7 and Rom 3:19-20 or are we just trying to find out if I believe the Ten Commandments are the ones having "honor your father and mother" as the "First commandment with a promise" Eph 6:1-2??

If we are trying to find what I believe on that point we can just read the first two posts on this thread.

Are you still not sure if Paul and James were correct in pointing to 'the TEN' in James 2 and Eph 6:1-2?

 

[BobRyan]

If you look at the details in the sources I give regarding the topic of the TEN Commandments

1. they all affirm the SDA interpretation as to what the Bible said about the TEN... every one of them. Agree on the TEN as "God gave them" and their application to all mankind from Eden to the Cross -- full agreement.

2.There is also full agreement that the Ten continue to be written on heart and mind under the New Covenant and continue to apply to all mankind

3. Where the differences come in is when those groups claim that church tradition edited the Sabbath commandment to re-point it to week-day-1 -- SDAs and many others - say that tradition was in error whereas the groups I listed , choose tradition at that dividing point.​

The OP survey is unclear, imo. When you ask "I agree with point 1" you asking for me to agree that "they all affirm the SDA interpretation" or are you asking me to agree with them and "affirm the SDA interpretation"?

1. I am asking if you see them agreeing to the basic Bible detail.
2. I am glad to have you state why you think all Bible scholarship is wrong for having that agreement if you wish.

 

[Leaf473]

1. Moral laws -- define what sin is
2. Ceremonial laws - with animal sacrifice and that require a priesthood that no longer exists Heb 7.
3. Civil laws - that are commands given to the civil government of a theocracy regarding penalties for law breaking - that end when that theocratic government no longer exists.

Are you saying that we can divide up the law into those three catagories? If so, I think from previous posts that you probably place the Moral laws in the Active catagory, and Ceremonial and Civil laws in the Not Active catagory.

If so, cool!

Then we can move on to looking at individual laws and see which catagories they fit into.

So the question remains - can you really say something of the form "I refuse to accept the command to not take God's name in vain until I have divided the entire Bible into lists"?

Yes, something similar to that.
I think the entire law is designed to work as a unit.

It's kind of like a recipe to make a cake. If a person can't get half of the ingredients, it doesn't mean they should just go ahead and bake what they have. They'll probably just end up with a pile of goo.

So if God has taken away about half of the "ingredients" of the Law for about 2,000 years, what does that tell us?

 

[Leaf473]

And how do you "feel" about laws that apply to moral living?

I'm not sure what you mean by "moral living". "Moral" is usually used to talk about Right and Wrong, Good and Evil, imo. So in one way or another, all of the laws in Genesis to Deuteronomy are about moral living.

Or do you mean this:
"In a special sense, relating to the private and social duties of men as distinct from civil responsibilities: specifically so used in the Hegelian philosophy."
moral - definition and meaning

Again, this will be easier to talk about when I know which particular laws you include in the Moral laws catagory.

Laws that define what sin is according to Paul in Rom 7 and Rom 3:19-20 or are we just trying to find out if I believe the Ten Commandments are the ones having "honor your father and mother" as the "First commandment with a promise" Eph 6:1-2??

Rom 7 and Rom 3:19-20 are referring to the entire law, imo.
I assume you believe there are more Active laws than just the Ten.

If we are trying to find what I believe on that point we can just read the first two posts on this thread.

I'm interested in seeing if you can reasonably place particular laws into Active and Not Active catagories.

Are you still not sure if Paul and James were correct in pointing to 'the TEN' in James 2 and Eph 6:1-2?

Are you asking if I agree that Paul and James were pointing to the Ten only?
Or are you assuming they were pointing to the Ten only and asking if I then agree with them?

 

[BobRyan]

I'm not sure what you mean by "moral living".

It was a term in your list where you listed the ten commandments ...

Did you see your list?

"Moral" is usually used to talk about Right and Wrong, Good and Evil, imo.

Paul says it defines what sin is - Rom 3:19-20
John says it defines what sin is - 1 John 3:4

All those Bible scholars mentioned in post #1, and #2, agree.

Paul says it includes the TEN where "the first commandment with a promise" is the one that says "honor your father and mother".

Is this "still" pretty difficult?

 

[BobRyan]

Are you still not sure if Paul and James were correct in pointing to 'the TEN' in James 2 and Eph 6:1-2?

Are you asking if I agree that Paul and James were pointing to the Ten only?
Or are you assuming they were pointing to the Ten only and asking if I then agree with them?

I am asking if you agree that "whatever else they may be thinking of" it is pretty obvious they have the TEN as the distinct unit of law that has "as the first commandment with a promise" the command to honor parents.

I keep calling this - the super easy part.

 

[BobRyan]

Rom 7 and Rom 3:19-20 are referring to the entire law, imo.
I assume you believe there are more Active laws than just the Ten

Did you already forget what you agreed to in Heb 10:4-12 regarding animal sacrifices and "He takes AWAY the first to establish the second"?

Did you already forget what you agreed to in 1 Cor 7:19 where Paul contrasts circumcision to the "Commandments of God"?

Is that now - no longer clear?

 

[Leaf473]

1. I am asking if you see them agreeing to the basic Bible detail.
2. I am glad to you have you state why you think all Bible scholarship is wrong for having that agreement if you wish.

I see. Looking at the two that I saw details about, the Baptist Confession of Faith, the Westminster Confession of Faith,

Yes, they agree with what you wrote on all three points.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
1. I am asking if you see them agreeing to the basic Bible detail.
2. I am glad to have you state why you think all Bible scholarship is wrong for having that agreement if you wish.

I see. Looking at the two that I saw details about, the Baptist Confession of Faith, the Westminster Confession of Faith,

Yes, they agree with what you wrote on all three points.

So also does D.L.Moody, C.H.Spurgeon, R.C.Sproul and many other denomination scholars that are not Bible-Sabbath keeping.

What about #2 above?

 

[Leaf473]

It was a term in your list where you listed the ten commandments ...

Did you see your list?

The lists I have posted are what I believed to be your lists, or what we had arrived at so far as to what your list was.

Paul says it defines what sin is - Rom 3:19-20

Paul says what defines what sin is? The Ten or the entire law? I think he is talking about the entire law.

John says it defines what sin is - 1 John 3:4

Again, the entire law or just the Ten?

All those Bible scholars mentioned in post #1, and #2, agree.

Paul says it includes the TEN where "the first commandment with a promise" is the one that says "honor your father and mother".


Is this "still" pretty difficult?

Yes, the entire law includes the Ten. It isn't difficult to understand if only the Ten are meant above, or if the entire law is meant. If it's the Ten plus some others, my question is: Which others, specifically?

 

[BABerean2]

Are you still not sure if Paul and James were correct in pointing to 'the TEN' in James 2 and Eph 6:1-2?

Why did Paul tell the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant of "bondage" in Galatians 4:24-31?

Why are we not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18, but we are come instead to the New Covenant of Mount Zion in Hebrews 12:22-24?

Based on Deuteronomy 5:3, and Galatians 3:16-19, the Sinai Covenant was temporary in nature.
Paul said the law was "added" 430 years "after" the promise was made to Abraham "until" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made.

.

 

[BABerean2]

Should we not let God define when His Sabbath day is?

Col 2:16 Let no one, then, judge you in eating or in drinking, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,
Col 2:17 which are a shadow of the coming things, and the body is of the Christ;
(YLT)


Heb 8:13 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

.

 

[BABerean2]

But this I admit to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect

1Co 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.


One Gospel, One Church, One people of God.

.

 

[Leaf473]

I am asking if you agree that "whatever else they may be thinking of" it is pretty obvious they have the TEN as the distinct unit of law that has "as the first commandment with a promise" the command to honor parents.

I keep calling this - the super easy part.

I think they are pointing to the entire law which includes the Ten. Does that answer your question?

 

[Leaf473]

Did you already forget what you agreed to in Heb 10:4-12 regarding animal sacrifices and "He takes AWAY the first to establish the second"?

Paul is writing to the Roman church at a time when it is in transition. There were no doubt many Jewish Christians, some of whom probably still made trips to Jerusalem for Temple activities. We know that in Jerusalem at a later date there were many Jewish believers who were zealous for the law, and did things like ritual purifications and shaved their heads for vows.

In chapter 2, Paul writes "If you bear the name of a Jew and rest on the law". What law did the Jews think they were resting on? The entire law, imo.

Did you already forget what you agreed to in 1 Cor 7:19 where Paul contrasts circumcision to the "Commandments of God"?

Is that now - no longer clear?

I believe you had asked me what law I thought Paul was referring to in Romans 3 and 7. 1 Corintians is a different context, imo.