Do you agree that christians should keep the 10 Commandments? (2)

[Isolation]

It sounds like if i obeyed the 10Cs i would be doing the opposite of works of flesh. It sounds like the 10 Cs are works of the Holy spirit. So whats the problem with learning and obeying the 10 Cs?

well for one, it has the sabbath in it

 

[from scratch]

What proof do you have that he was referring only to the Jews in Mark 2:27? You have produced none. I take the verse just for what it says. You induce into scripture that He is only referring to the Jews. I suppose Mark 2:27, somehow, does not take into account Isaiah 56. You haven't convinced me yet. I see no sound basis for your argument.

Who was Jesus talking to? Who brought up the subject? Jesus or the Pharisees?

It makes no sense whatsoever to say that the Sabbath was made for the Jew when it was made at Creation 2,000 years before any Jew existed.

In Exodus 20:11 we read that the seventh day of Genesis 2:3 is called “the Sabbath day.” Therefore, the Sabbath day has existed from creation. (Genesis 2:3.) That is when it was made, and Jesus said, “The Sabbath was made for man.” Since man has existed since creation week, it is easy to see that the Sabbath was made for man more than two thousand years before there was a Jew.

Where do you get sabbath from Gen 2:3? The word shabbat doesn't appear in Genesis anywhere.

Mark 2:27 still stands as I have presented it before.

That is an opinion basedon proof texting for the explicit purpose of fooling unknowledgable people. I have briefly touched on ths subject above once again.

Seems to me as though you are focusing on the person rather than the argument presented. This is a popular tactic, directed toward SDA's, rather than dealing with the arguments themselves. If you have a problem with Bob Pickle, you are free to email him. As for me, I could care less if he was a Hindu. His argument stands on its own two feet.

I'm sorry that you think I have bad mouthed your champion. I've asked you to show his credentials and you refuse. What am I to think. I can gather no significant information from the site to understand who he is. I can find no cause to believe anything he says. I asked you to provide such. You presented him. Defend him or withdraw him as a creditable source.

If it is to much for you to quote him here, he has nothing to add. I don't have time to go fetch your ideas and ain't the slightest bit interested in debating him.

Have to break this long post up sorry. I'll get to more of it later.

 

[11822]

well for one, it has the sabbath in it

Whats wrong with the sabbath? Jesus said it was lawful to do Good on the Sabbath. Is observing the Sabbath and doing Good on that day bad? I'm not saying If one does not observe the Sabbath one goes to Hell, I'm just saying God gave us that Day under the OC and Jesus observed it, Jesus is lord of the Sabbath and He said it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath. We observe Christmas and Easter which is not a biblical tradition, why not observe the Sabbath even more?

 

[11822]

Let's put Jesus commandment with 5 of Gods 10 Cs and see if they conflict with each other.

Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

You shall not murder.

You shall not commit adultery.

You shall not steal.

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

 

[Elder 111]

from Elder 111 post 997 previous thread
Please explain how the covenant was moved? I read new covenant different from the previous one. I don't see any movement of the first one in verses 31 or 32.

I am referring to your statement that the law was voided by God and making reference the Jeremiah to support the point made.
According to the word of God, the law is written on the heart, that would mean that it is still required, it is still in "play".
Secondly it is clear that the first covenant was voided because of disobedience, not the law. As a matter of fact it would be because they broke the law.
Eph. 5 is interesting
1Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;
2And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.
3But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
4Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
5For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
6Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
7Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

Israel lost because the disobeyed, because of unbelief. Rom 11

16For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
24For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
25For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

There was no new covenant to replace the ten commandments. Interesting that the roots remain. Same rules remain, same means of salvation

 

[IreneAdler]

I think you'd have to be a skell to not keep alot of them easily (like not committing murder, and if you don't keep the first one/second one who cares if you keep the rest... ). I mention though that these aren't the only commandments (just sayin).

I think if you're going to be Law observant, you need to be Law observant (all of the 613 that apply to you). If you're going to live a live of mitzvah and service to God without regard to earning your place, following the "rules" or anything but love and service and relationship with Him, then I think He will probably lead you in the right direction without the "rules" to "keep you in line" because it will be who you are.

 

[tall73]

I mention though that these aren't the only commandments (just sayin).

I think if you're going to be Law observant, you need to be Law observant (all of the 613 that apply to you.

Exactly.

Jesus in Matthew 5 referenced the whole law, oaths, eye for eye, etc.

Jesus in the two great commands quoted from Lev. and Deut. not just the ten.

James in chapter 2 referenced commands from the whole law, stating that the royal law was to love your neighbor as yourself, and referencing partiality as breaking the law.

The principles of the law go beyond the 10.

 

[MamaZ]

What are the lusts of the flesh?

It is in scripture what they are. I don't have an online bible app that I can quote the scripture.. Sorry. I wish I did

 

[from scratch]

I am referring to your statement that the law was voided by God and making reference the Jeremiah to support the point made.
According to the word of God, the law is written on the heart, that would mean that it is still required, it is still in "play".
Secondly it is clear that the first covenant was voided because of disobedience, not the law. As a matter of fact it would be because they broke the law.

First of all what is new is the covenant. The covenant with Israel is called the law. The 10 Cs are caled the covenant by Moses in Deut 4:13 - And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

Where do you get movement from verses 31 or 32? It clearly says make (cut stone) new (as in different not before - not refurbish). It further states that it won't be like the one covenant (law) before established with their fathers. It isn't referring to being cut on stone made clear by verse 33. It changes from covenant (divine ordinance with sign s or pledges) to My law (direction, instruction in Messianic age). The important thing to note is the difference in words.

Verse 33 also uses the word put (to give, bestow, grant, permit, ascribe, employ, devote, consecrate, dedicate, pay wages, sell, exchange, lend, commit, entrust, give over, deliver up, yield produce, occasion, produce, requite to, report, mention, utter, stretch out, extend ) opposed to make (to cut stone).

Eph. 5 is interesting
1Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;
2And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.
3But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
4Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
5For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
6Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
7Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

I sorry but your comments didn't come thru on my screen with the above verse. So I don't understand your point.

Israel lost because the disobeyed, because of unbelief. Rom 11

16For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
24For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
25For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

There was no new covenant to replace the ten commandments. Interesting that the roots remain. Same rules remain, same means of salvation

Not according to Jeremiah. Jesus is the Root that feed the tree. If there are no branches there is no tree. There may be a tree trunk though. Isn't it interesting that a Jew must be graft back into His tree just like a Gentile. Are we graft into Israel or Jesus? What is the relationship of the Jew? Is the relationship with Israel or is the relationship with God. Where do they get life from? the nation or God. What is the Root of a tree. Does a tree get life from the trunk or the root?

 

[Elder 111]

I don't think so. I certianly have never argued that it was legal to to sin. Where have I ever said God allows or OKs us to commit sin? I'm led by the Spirit and not the law Gal 5:18. Sin is the acts of the flesh and those led by the Spirit have no desire to preform those acts. I didn't say they weren''t tempted. Big difference there.

When you look at the acts of the flesh, don't they mirror the violation of the ten C'S?
Honestly do they or do they not?

 

[MamaZ]

5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law

 

[from scratch]

Let's put Jesus commandment with 5 of Gods 10 Cs and see if they conflict with each other.

Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

You shall not murder.

You shall not commit adultery.

You shall not steal.

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

So who is saying there is a net conflict? Is that the isssue?

 

[from scratch]

Whats wrong with the sabbath? Jesus said it was lawful to do Good on the Sabbath. Is observing the Sabbath and doing Good on that day bad? I'm not saying If one does not observe the Sabbath one goes to Hell, I'm just saying God gave us that Day under the OC and Jesus observed it, Jesus is lord of the Sabbath and He said it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath. We observe Christmas and Easter which is not a biblical tradition, why not observe the Sabbath even more?

Who said there is something wrong with the sabbath? That isn't the focus of the thread. I think arguing for the sabbath is the real purpose of the thread though. If it can be established that Christians are obligated to the other 9 it then can included obligation to the 4th through the back door approach.

Is it the principle that missery loves company the driving force behind the continual effort to enslave Christians to the law issued to the COI. If it weren't for the 10 Cs issued at Sinai there would be no issue at all. They were issued to a specific group of people for a time. Both issues are firmlly established in Scripture as has been shown in this thread and its predecessor.

I ask if this is a valid Scripture showing that one can't have both the law as a requirement and grace to secure and maintain salvation (eternal life) - Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

If it is a sin to not observe the sabbath, isn't one just by keeping the sabbath? IOW justified by the law.

Is it reasonable to say that if one doesn't murder, lie, steal, commit adultery (as promoted) that they're obeying the law? IOW one life is regulated by the law whether they like it or not. Is this the free will taught in the NT? Or is it force? Why then isn't the sabbath enforced the same way? Isn't it also one of the 10 Cs? Incidence isn't obedience.

 

[from scratch]

When you look at the acts of the flesh, don't they mirror the violation of the ten C'S?
Honestly do they or do they not?

Incidence isn't obedience. I really would love to give you a fuller answer but you would only miss use it to justify yourself and position.

 

[11822]

We are commanded to love one another but we don't obey this law perfectly, does this mean that we are free from Jesus commandment to love? Jesus told the women who committed adultery that he didn't condemn her and then He said go and sin no more. He did not say you are free to commit adultery, He said i forgive you, go and sin no more

 

[11822]

Maybe we are not bound to the law for salvation, but what about Holiness? Is Holiness required by God and are the 10 Cs acts of Holiness?

 

[MamaZ]

Maybe we are not bound to the law for salvation, but what about Holiness? Is Holiness required by God and are the 10 Cs acts of Holiness?

Holiness comes also from the Spirit of God and not the written law.

 

[Isolation]

Holiness comes also from the Spirit of God and not the written law.

do you beleive in incremental sanctification?

 

[Lysimachus]

Who was Jesus talking to? Who brought up the subject? Jesus or the Pharisees?

The Pharisees were trying to find fault with Christ's disciples for picking some corn on the Sabbath as they were passing through a field. Christ was trying to help them see their legalistic, staunch, rigid exactions which made the Sabbath burdensome. Jesus was talking to the Pharisees, but He answered them by saying the "Sabbath was made for man". In other words, Christ's point is...the Sabbath was not meant to be a burden. It was meant to be a blessing for man. It was meant to give relief to man. It was meant to be a delight.

To assume that because Jesus was speaking to Pharisees that He must have meant that "man" meant only the Jews or the Pharisees is, with all due respect, a ludicrous stretching of the obvious meaning of the text, and simply does not harmonize with Isaiah 56.

Where do you get sabbath from Gen 2:3? The word shabbat doesn't appear in Genesis anywhere.

Genesis 2 tells us that it was the Seventh-Day that was "sanctified".

Exodus 20 tells us that it was this "Seventh-Day" that was called "The Sabbath".

Are you suggesting that the day was sanctified, but it was not the Sabbath until 2000 years later?

Once again, with all due respect, this is ridiculous. If the Seventh-Day was sanctified, but not the Sabbath, then how what set it apart? A sanctified day went on for 2000 years without being named?

Brother, you need to go back to your mother's womb and start all over again. Your mind no longer appreciates simple theology.

That is an opinion basedon proof texting for the explicit purpose of fooling unknowledgable people. I have briefly touched on ths subject above once again.

And this is your opinion. But I disagree. Besides, most of these so called "knowledgeable" people cannot understand, comprehend, or appreciate the simple truths of the gospel. This is why Jesus chose humble fishermen over the learned elders of Israel. I suppose Jesus did this so he can "fool unknowledgeable people"?

When you quote Mark 2:27 to the simple, humble-minded person, the Spirit of God is able to talk to them and tell them "this text is telling me that the Sabbath is still important, and God expects me to enter into His rest on His day and keep it Holy".

But the learned elders will not grasp this spiritual richness. They will instead analyze the wording, phraseology, and syntax, so strenuously and extensively that they are no longer able to digest or appreciate the simple truths of the gospel.

I'm sorry that you think I have bad mouthed your champion. I've asked you to show his credentials and you refuse. What am I to think. I can gather no significant information from the site to understand who he is. I can find no cause to believe anything he says. I asked you to provide such. You presented him. Defend him or withdraw him as a creditable source.

Whoah! I did not catch that. But if you are asking for his credentials, this only lessons your credibility, for this tells me that had you been living in the days of the Apostles, you would have asked them for their credentials.

If it is to much for you to quote him here, he has nothing to add. I don't have time to go fetch your ideas and ain't the slightest bit interested in debating him.

Have to break this long post up sorry. I'll get to more of it later.

Trust me, had I quoted any Adventist Ph.D. scholars, you would have still found something wrong.

If you think one has to have a Ph.D. or any degree whatsoever in order to be credible, or to take their arguments seriously, then you have a lot to learn.

I have no reason to distrust the studious works of humble laymen. All one has to do is look in their concordances when an article addresses a Hebrew or Greek word and see if what they are saying lines up. Once again, Pickle's arguments stand on their own two feet, and you are focusing on the person rather than what is written.

Had I decided to quote his arguments without ever sourcing the man, what would you have done with the argument? That's what I'm looking forward to seeing.

 

[Lysimachus]

Holiness comes also from the Spirit of God and not the written law.

"The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether." (Psalms 19:7-9)

It is the Law of God that leads you to Christ, which in turn sanctifies you. Jesus is the Word, and the Word is Jesus. When you open your Bible and read the written law, it is the Words of the Spirit that are speaking to you. Do not separate the written law from the Spirit of God. They are ONLY different when the written words do not transfer from the pages to your heart. But if they do transfer to the heart, there is no difference.