Did all the laws end at the cross- Part 2

[Leaf473]

Brother, Jesus wants us to obey 11 commandments in the new covenant with the addition of "one thing you haven't done", which was not possible before Jesus, His "new commandment"!

Once a religious leader asked Jesus this question: “Good Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?” “Why do you call me good?” Jesus asked him. “Only God is truly good. But to answer your question, you know the commandments: ‘You must not commit adultery. You must not murder. You must not steal. You must not testify falsely. Honor your father and mother.’” The man replied, “I’ve obeyed all these commandments since I was young.” When Jesus heard his answer, he said, “There is still one thing you haven’t done. Sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” (Luke 18:18-22 NLT)

Obedience to all the above 11 "commandments" is what shows God's love toward Him and others.

Those who accept my commandments and obey them are the ones who love me. And because they love me, my Father will love them. And I will love them and reveal myself to each of them. (John 14:21 NLT)

Yes, only 11 commandments according to Jesus, but that eleventh commandment includes a lot, because it makes Jesus an example to "follow".

So now I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other. Your love for one another will prove to the world that you are my disciples.” (John 13:34-35 NLT)

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

guevaraj, my man, let's see if I'm following you here:

Yes, only 11 commandments according to Jesus, but that eleventh commandment includes a lot, because it makes Jesus an example to "follow".

So... Jesus went up to Jerusalem for the Festival of Shelters. Are you saying we should do that, too?

 

[expos4ever]

According to the scriptures, Jesus rose on the first day of the week (Mark 16:9). There are only seven days in a week not eight (Genesis 1:31 - Genesis 2:1-3).

The point, of course, is that Jesus rises on the first day of the new week! This is not a coincidence - new creation has begun. The Sabbath was there to honor the "first round" of God's work. We are now in round two.

To continue to honour the Sabbath is to, at least symbolically, deny where we are in God's evolving narrative of redemption.

 

[expos4ever]

There is no scripture in all the bible that says Gods' 4th commandment of the 10 commandments has now been abolished and we are now commanded to keep Sunday as a holy day of rest.

I suggest that Scripture does teach that we are to move on from the Sabbath.

Any reader who is following this thread carefully will know that you have evaded my argument about how Jesus rises on the first day of a new week and that this signals new creation and that this, in turn, implies that to keep honouring the Sabbath amounts to denying that God's plan has, in fact, moved on.

You guys do this often - refuse to engage arguments that are challenging for you. For example, I believe no one has even attempted to refute detailed argument that Jesus uses not-to-be-taken-literally, apocalyptic, "end-of-the-world" language in Matthew 5 when he sets an expiration date for the law.

 

[expos4ever]

What did Jesus think about keeping the Sabbath? From Greg Boyd (Jesus Refuted Old Testament Laws - Greg Boyd - ReKnew)

Although it’s clear that Jesus regarded the Old Testament as the inspired word of God, he also directly challenged aspects of the Old Testament law. To illustrate, Jesus was repudiating Sabbath law when he defended his disciples’ harvesting of food on the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; cf. Ex. 34:21). Some scholars argue that the disciples were merely violating a Pharisaical tradition surrounding the Sabbath, not any actual OT law regarding the Sabbath. In this view, Jesus was trying to bring out the true meaning of Sabbath (i.e., showing that the Sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the Sabbath) and to demonstrate his authority as Lord of the Sabbath. While I grant that this was certainly part of Jesus’ intent, I do not see how this absolves his disciples from the charge of Sabbath-breaking. After all, according to the OT—not merely a Jewish tradition—people were to be executed merely for picking up sticks on the Sabbath (Nu 15:32-36). Moreover, Moses’ prohibition against doing work on the Sabbath explicitly included a prohibition on gathering food (i.e., manna) (Ex. 16:23-29). Hence, in this particular instance it seems the Pharisee’s had some biblical basis for their criticism of Jesus.

 

[Leaf473]

The point, of course, is that Jesus rises on the first day of the new week! This is not a coincidence - new creation has begun. The Sabbath was there to honor the "first round" of God's work. We are now in round two.

To continue to honour the Sabbath is to, at least symbolically, deny where we are in God's evolving narrative of redemption.

Eighth Day: new priesthood, new covenant.

 

[expos4ever]

In Biblical discussions, it is always important to avoid slipping into an overly simplistic "I will prove my point with single verses" strategy.

In this thread, for example, we see Romans 3:20 quoted with no context and used to argue that if we did not have the 10, how could we know what sin is?

Well, ripped out of broader context, that seems compelling. But as has been shown, when the context of the whole chapter is accounted for, we see that Paul is talking about what was the case in the past.

And there's more. Our ears need to be attuned to "big themes" that are there in the Bible even if one cannot find "a verse" to articulate that theme. One of these themes is that all of Scripture is an evolving redemption narrative, not a set of timeless truths. Defenders of the 10 here systematically refuse to acknowledge this fact that is rather obvious to the Biblically literate.

Another is the theme of new creation in the New Testament - God is "redoing Genesis 1" through Jesus. And this means that the markers of the "first" round of creative activity, such as the Sabbath, are now obsolete.

 

[expos4ever]

According to the scriptures all the Mosaic shadow laws that point to Jesus as the coming Savior from sin were made and given to mankind after the sin had entered into the world and after the fall of mankind. There was no "shadow laws" before sin and the Sabbath was made before sin when mankind was sinless. There is no need for "shadow laws" pointing to Jesus as the coming Savior from sin when there is no sin because there is nothing that the sinless need saving from (Genesis 1:26-31; Genesis 2:1-3).

Again, how does any of this make the case that God cannot retire the Sabbath? Of what relevance is the fact that the Sabbath was instituted before man sinned? Why, and please be precise, does this particular feature of the Sabbath preclude its later retirement?

I do not even know what a "shadow law" is, and have never appealed to such a thing in any of my arguments.

Again, very simple question: how does any of all this support the notion that God cannot elect to retire the Sabbath?

 

[expos4ever]

Once a religious leader asked Jesus this question: “Good Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?” “Why do you call me good?” Jesus asked him. “Only God is truly good. But to answer your question, you know the commandments: ‘You must not commit adultery. You must not murder. You must not steal. You must not testify falsely. Honor your father and mother.’” The man replied, “I’ve obeyed all these commandments since I was young.” When Jesus heard his answer, he said, “There is still one thing you haven’t done. Sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” (Luke 18:18-22 NLT)​

​

We have been through this before. We all know that Jesus instruct His contemporaries to follow the 10. But this does not preclude the possibility that the Law will be retired later, for example at the cross.

I am curious, what do you think Paul means here:

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 Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

 

[Leaf473]

What did Jesus think about keeping the Sabbath? From Greg Boyd (Jesus Refuted Old Testament Laws - Greg Boyd - ReKnew)

Although it’s clear that Jesus regarded the Old Testament as the inspired word of God, he also directly challenged aspects of the Old Testament law. To illustrate, Jesus was repudiating Sabbath law when he defended his disciples’ harvesting of food on the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; cf. Ex. 34:21). Some scholars argue that the disciples were merely violating a Pharisaical tradition surrounding the Sabbath, not any actual OT law regarding the Sabbath. In this view, Jesus was trying to bring out the true meaning of Sabbath (i.e., showing that the Sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the Sabbath) and to demonstrate his authority as Lord of the Sabbath. While I grant that this was certainly part of Jesus’ intent, I do not see how this absolves his disciples from the charge of Sabbath-breaking. After all, according to the OT—not merely a Jewish tradition—people were to be executed merely for picking up sticks on the Sabbath (Nu 15:32-36). Moreover, Moses’ prohibition against doing work on the Sabbath explicitly included a prohibition on gathering food (i.e., manna) (Ex. 16:23-29). Hence, in this particular instance it seems the Pharisee’s had some biblical basis for their criticism of Jesus.

That's an interesting way of looking at it. A common objection is that if Jesus broke the Sabbath then he couldn't be the sinless sacrifice for us.

One possible answer is that Jesus and his Father are not concerned about the letter of the law, but the larger ideals behind it.

 

[expos4ever]

We should never take the opinions of man over the Word of God.

Does these "opinions of man" include the rewriting of Romans 7:7 so that it reads that we are no longer subject to the Law's condemnation when, in fact, the text clearly says we no are no longer subject to the law with respect to how we serve.

Since you pontificate on the merits of the word of God, here is one part of it:

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 Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Now then, please explain to us all how it is not an "opinion of man" to transform this rather clear statement about not needing to follow (serve) the law into an entirely different statement - that we will not be condemned by the Law?

 

[Bob S]

When I say "you" I mean everyone myself included. I am referring to the Ten Commandments and of course the Sabbath is included in that and God doesn't not want us to "forget" the one commandment that He told us to "remember". I am going with God on this and not the teachings of man that lead people to break one of the commandments of God.

Might I remind you once again that God didn't give "us" the ten commandments He gave them to Israel. If you would consider the following verses you, too, would realize the even the Jews are not under the ten commandment law.
" 6 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.

The Greater Glory of the New Covenant
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!" 2Cor3

When we accept Jesus we rewarded with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as our guide. The ten commandments were transitory, meaning temporary, and only the Israelites were subject to those laws as their guide.

When I was SDA I never heard 2Cor3:6-11 spoken because those verses are incriminating to the SDA belief system. According to the writings of E. G. White we cannot be saved unless we "keep" the Sabbath command of the ten commandments. 2Cor3:6-11 refutes her writings on the topic. Worship any day you please, just don't tell others we are in sin because we don't observe a day God never intended us to observe.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

In Biblical discussions, it is always important to avoid slipping into an overly simplistic "I will prove my point with single verses" strategy.

In this thread, for example, we see Romans 3:20 quoted with no context and used to argue that if we did not have the 10, how could we know what sin is?

Well, ripped out of broader context, that seems compelling. But as has been shown, when the context of the whole chapter is accounted for, we see that Paul is talking about what was the case in the past.

And there's more. Our ears need to be attuned to "big themes" that are there in the Bible even if one cannot find "a verse" to articulate that theme. One of these themes is that all of Scripture is an evolving redemption narrative, not a set of timeless truths. Defenders of the 10 here systematically refuse to acknowledge this fact that is rather obvious to the Biblically literate.

Another is the theme of new creation in the New Testament - God is "redoing Genesis 1" through Jesus. And this means that the markers of the "first" round of creative activity, such as the Sabbath, are now obsolete.

I always prefer the scriptures when speaking about God's Word, because that is what is pure and if we follow His Word, He will be our shield to guide us of the deception of the world that is controlled by Satan. John 12:31 We are warned to never add to God's Word. Proverbs 30:5-6

According to the clear God's Word, there is NO scripture saying that the seventh day Sabbath commandment has been changed, altered or deleted. In fact Jesus says quite the opposite.

Jesus kept the Sabbath as our example and all of the commandments of God John 15:10 which is why Jesus was at the Temples on the Sabbath reading scriptures from the Word of God. Luke 4:16

Luke 4:16 So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. 17 And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written:

The disciples kept the Sabbath long after Jesus rose because Jesus commanded the apostles to teach the things that He commanded. Matthew 28:19-20

Just a few examples

And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.
- Acts 13:44

And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
- Acts 13:42

And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
- Acts 18:4

There is no where in scripture where God said we can forget the 4th commandment and now the first day is the new holy day for God and for man. Jesus kept the Sabbath even in death and rose on the first day back to His work. There is no scripture where Jesus tells anyone that one of the commandments of God changed, if one of the commandments of God changed there would have been uproar not silence.

Jesus warns us about keeping traditions over the commandments of God and quotes directly from the Ten. There is no Sunday keeping commandment, but there is for Sabbath keeping and we should listen to Jesus when He says those who keep traditions over the commandments of God worship in vain. Matthew 15:3-9, Mark 7:6-8

The Sabbath was a commandment after Jesus died. Luke 23:56

Jesus excepted the Sabbath to be kept right until His Second Coming Matthew 24:20

The Sabbath will continue to be the Lords chosen day of worship for eternity Isaiah 66:23

The scripture is what we can Trust, only Gods Word is pure and He has spoken His will through the scriptures. It's up to us to follow the narrow path, or create our own that is not inline with the holy Word of God.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Might I remind you once again that God didn't give "us" the ten commandments He gave them to Israel. If you would consider the following verses you, too, would realize the even the Jews are not under the ten commandment law.
" 6 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.

The Greater Glory of the New Covenant
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!" 2Cor3

When we accept Jesus we rewarded with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as our guide. The ten commandments were transitory, meaning temporary, and only the Israelites were subject to those laws as their guide. According the writings of Paul you are on this forum teaching falsehood.

When I was SDA I never heard 2Cor3:6-11 spoken because those verses are incriminating to the SDA belief system. According to the writings of E. G. White we cannot be saved unless we "keep" the Sabbath command of the ten commandments. 2Cor3:6-11 refutes her writings on the topic. Worship any day you please, just don't tell others we are in sin because we don't observe a day God never intended us to observe.

Bless you, God knows the Truth, no one can fool Him and soon this gets all sorted out. Take care.

 

[expos4ever]

That's an interesting way of looking at it. A common objection is that if Jesus broke the Sabbath then he couldn't be the sinless sacrifice for us.

Here is a thought for your consideration: When scripture teaches, as it certainly does, that Jesus was obedient, it was not the Law that Jesus was obedient to, but rather He was obedient to Israel's mandate to be the means by which the world would be rescued from sin.

There is a whole line of thinking that runs like this:

- God gives Israel the mission of being the means by which "the nations will be blessed".
- Israel is "faithless"; she fails in this mission
- Jesus enters the picture on Israel's behalf and He is the one who is "obedient" to this mission.

This is only a rough sketch of the idea.

In any event, I think it is clear Jesus was not obedient to the Law of Moses - he violates the Sabbath, repeals the purity laws about food, and refuses to stone a woman caught in adultery (as the law required).

 

[expos4ever]

It's always best when trying to speak as an authoritative on the Word of God to actually use scripture to make ones point.

I always prefer the scriptures, because that is the Word of God that is pure and if we follow His Word, He will be our shield to guide us of the deception of the world that is controlled by Satan. John 12:31 We are warned to never add to God's Word. Proverbs 30:5-6

Nice sermon.

Who is adding to God's word when they take this:

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 Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

...and change it to this:

But now we have been released from the condemnation of the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter are no longer condemned by the Law but still need to follow it.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Nice sermon.

Who is adding to God's word when they take this:

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 Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

...and change it to this:

But now we have been released from the condemnation of the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter are no longer condemned by the Law but still need to follow it.

Did you notice you did not address anything in the post you are responding to and instead going back to what has already been addressed multiple times with scriptures? You micro quoting me does not prove your point. The scriptures do not teach lawlessness, so you have a great misunderstanding of this one verse and this verse does not contradict God. Jesus, Paul or the other disciples as proven here here here and throughout the whole bible.

 

[expos4ever]

" 6 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.

Indeed. And this text echoes a theme that I have touched on - that Paul actually thinks the law energizes and amplifies our inner sinful tendencies - in short, at least pre-cross, it made the Jew more sinful, not less.

I know this is not a popular view since it casts the Law in the very counterintuitive light of having a negative impact on those who try to follow. Nevertheless, I think there is evidence that this is what Paul, at least, believes to be the case.

 

[expos4ever]

Did you notice you did not address anything in the post you are responding to and instead going back to what has already been addressed multiple times with scriptures?

I am aware that I did not address your post - I will when time permits. If I fail to follow through, please remind me. Just as I will continue to remind you that you have not addressed, for example, this arguments I have repeatedly provided: Jesus uses apocalyptic, not-to-be-taken-literally language in Matt 5

The scriptures do not teach lawlessness, so you have a great misunderstanding of this one verse and this verse does not contradict God. Jesus, Paul or the other disciples as proven here here here and throughout the whole bible.

You continue to promote the falsehood that I support lawlessness, when you have to know that I do not. I only support "lawlessness" with respect to the Law of Moses.

Other readers will know this, so I suggest you stop misrepresenting me - it only hurts your credibility.

Now then, if I have such a misunderstanding of Romans 7:6, why not enlighten us all of exactly what Paul is saying in that verse?

But beware: if you change "we are not to serve according to the letter" into "we are not condemned according to the letter", I will be sure to call you on this.

 

[Bob S]

Indeed. And this text echoes a theme that I have touched on - that Paul actually thinks the law energizes and amplifies our inner sinful tendencies - in short, at least pre-cross, it made the Jew more sinful, not less.

I know this is not a popular view since it casts the Law in the very counterintuitive light of having a negative impact on those who try to follow. Nevertheless, I think there is evidence that this is what Paul, at least, believes to be the case.

Actually, the old covenant with its 613 laws ( according to our Jewish friends) Was not a salvational covenant. It was a covenant of how the Israelites were to live in the desert and then in Canaan. Ex 19:5-6 tells us why God gave that covenant to the Israelites: 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.” Salvation has never been what we do, it is what Jesus has done.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I am aware that I did not address your post - I will when time permits. If I fail to follow through, please remind me. Just as I will continue to remind you that you have not addressed, for example, this arguments I have repeatedly provided: Jesus uses apocalyptic, not-to-be-taken-literally language in Matt 5


You continue to promote the falsehood that I support lawlessness, when you have to know that I do not. I only support "lawlessness" with respect to the Law of Moses.

Other readers will know this, so I suggest you stop misrepresenting me - it only hurts your credibility.

Now then, if I have such a misunderstanding of Romans 7:6, why not enlighten us all of exactly what Paul is saying in that verse?

But beware: if you change "we are not to serve according to the letter" into "we are not condemned according to the letter", I will be sure to call you on this.

I didn't address the opinion about Matthew 5 because you provided no scripture to support your theory. Our opinions do not matter only God's Word does.

The wages of sin is death (penalty- condemnation) Romans 6:23. Eternal life is God's gift, through our faith. Our faith upholds the law Romans 3:31 and obedience is a fruit of our faith Revelation 14:12. The Spirit is given those who obey as the Spirit and God's law is not in conflict. Acts 2:38, John 14:15-18 Acts 5:32

Rom 8:4 .. the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who are in accord with the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are in accord with the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,