Endurance Of The Ten Commandments (incl. Sabbath)

[visionary]

No. Not only in religion. I've yet to read a definition of "establish" that includes "keep."

But I'm not appealing to dictionaries. Read the context of the passage we're discussing. Read Romans 3. There is no one righteous. None who understand. All have turned away.

Yep.. no one is righteous, and we all have gone astray, but we are to return to the order and established kingdom of God, and to live it according to His Will.. appealing to the incapability of humanity not being able to keep it perfectly is no excuse not to attempt to do it right.

If only this were true. Whether in religion or not, I may establish the business but this does not mean that I will keep it.

Failure to keep a relationship that you have established is whose fault. Not the purpose of establishing the relationship, but in your lack of efforts to keep it.

I don't know what you believe, but I believe that "fulfill" means that an obligation has been fully met. Once an obligation has been fully met, do I keep meeting it?

Is the marriage relationship ever suppose to be finished once it has been fulfilled? Are we, as the bride of Christ, suppose to stop "fulfilling" as He, as our example, "fulfilled". Are we not to emulate Him in all manners, including as was His custom, doing His Father's Will and keeping the Commandments.?

Why was a new covenant established? Was it established because the recipients of the old covenant demonstrated their ability to keep the commandments?

again who is at fault, was the covenant, or the recipients, and what was the Lord's remedy for that issue, but the coming of the Holy Spirit to enpower, enlightening, strengthen, and inspire so that //recipients\\ may be overcomers of their sins, because they now see with spiritual eyes the depth of sin, and hear the atrocities of sin, and understand better what is required of them in God's eyes. Nothing in that removes the law, but establishes it, sanctifies it by the Blood of our Savior, as a living testimony to be embedded into our heart and minds forever. Sealing us with Him in His Kingdom and His Righteousness.

"Establish" is not synonymous with "keep." You've made an assumption that contradicts of the passage you're discussing.

When I work hard to establish something, I also am very willing to work just as hard to keep it... maybe you are not.

 

[dragNdrop]

Anybody reading this thread is amazed at how BFA and Crib make an escape route from the simple gospel of Paul.

Heresy has always been to asume that due to faith lthe law is no longer binding.

BFA and Crib cannot answer my simple question which I re-iterate:


How do you establish the Law without keeping it ? See Rom 3:31

Will I ever get a straight answer or other dodging tactics ?

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Anybody reading this thread is amazed at how BFA and Crib make an escape route from the simple gospel of Paul. Heresy has always been to asume that due to faith lthe law is no longer binding.

Your statement is unnecessarily harsh. Let's discuss ideas; not insult one another.

BFA and Crib cannot answer my simple question which I re-iterate:How do you establish the Law without keeping it ? See Rom 3:31Will I ever get a straight answer or other dodging tactics ?

I have now answered your question several times. Most recently, I answered your question in this post:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7366815-8/#post51914451
​

In the above-referenced post, I wrote: "per Verse 28, we are justified by faith and not by works of the law; it is by this faith that we establish the law (not by works of the law)." I believe this to be the answer to your question.

Now, in the interest of answering one another's questions, can you please demonstrate the Biblical basis for concluding that to "establish the law" one must "keep the law?" Thanks for tacking this question directly.

BFA

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Yep.. no one is righteous, and we all have gone astray, but we are to return to the order and established kingdom of God, and to live it according to His Will.. appealing to the incapability of humanity not being able to keep it perfectly is no excuse not to attempt to do it right.

These are your thoughts, and you certainly have a right to your opinion. However, I have not seen a Biblical basis for concluding that I "establish the law" by keeping it. In reality, I do not keep it consistently. If "establish" means "keep," then I really haven't estabished anything.

Is the marriage relationship ever suppose to be finished once it has been fulfilled?

Do you believe your marriage commitment has been fulfilled? I don't. I am still meeting that commitment.

Are we, as the bride of Christ, suppose to stop "fulfilling" as He, as our example, "fulfilled".

Are we to rest in the work that He has already finished?

Are we not to emulate Him in all manners, including as was His custom, doing His Father's Will and keeping the Commandments.?

Do I? Do you? Does anyone?

again who is at fault, was the covenant, or the recipients,

According to Hebrews 8, it was both.

and what was the Lord's remedy for that issue, but the coming of the Holy Spirit to enpower, enlightening, strengthen, and inspire so that //recipients\\ may be overcomers of their sins, because they now see with spiritual eyes the depth of sin, and hear the atrocities of sin, and understand better what is required of them in God's eyes.

I agree with this. The Spirit is the basis of the new covenant. The old covenant law is not the basis of the new covenant.

Nothing in that removes the law, but establishes it, sanctifies it by the Blood of our Savior, as a living testimony to be embedded into our heart and minds forever.

So, in contrast with Romans 7, you believe that we are to die to the law so that we may be joined with another. Thereafter, you believe that--once dying to the law and being joined to another--we must enter into an adulterous affair with the same law to which we died? Help me understand the Biblical wisdom in such a conclusion.

When I work hard to establish something, I also am very willing to work just as hard to keep it... maybe you are not.

Is this what God has called us to? Are we to rest in Him, or are we to continue our labors? What does the Bible say?

BFA

 

[visionary]

Have you ever sat back and really thought about the position you have chosen.

Ask yourself, who are you defending? Your rights to continue as you wish with the rest of the world, or the Word of God and His Kingdom that is coming is up to you.

We know as the days draw nearer, the world will so mess up the plain teachings of truth, that the saints will be weary trying to show the way. We know that the world will be so deluded that they believe they have the truth, and there is no truth in them.

We know that God does not change. We know that He and His Kingdom will endure for all eternity, and those who conform into His righteousness, no matter how difficult, or how unlike it is to the rest of the world, the Lord will acknowledge as His.

So when we take a position, ask yourself, is this what God has been saying all along. Logically look at it...

Now ask yourself ,,... who are you really defending?

I have taken the position on this thread that God does not change, His course is set, His Son is fulfilling all things on the parchment, but that the TEN written on stone are to be engraved on our hearts for all eternity.

You have on the other hand taken the position that God has thrown out his laws because His Son died, and thus He doesn't need any laws any more, and by His love, grace, mercy, and forgiveness, through His Holy Spirit everything is good.

Again, I ask you to seriously take it all to the Lord in prayer and ask Him.. Ask Him to convict you. Acknowledge to Him that you will humble submit to His Will on this.. and I will also take it all to the Lord in prayer, humbly willing to submit both to the Lord for Him to weigh them in the balances and teach me that which is His... even if it is parts of both.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Ask yourself, who are you defending?

I am speaking of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. I am not appealing to my own abilities or obedience. My sole concern is glorifying that which HE has done.

Your rights to continue as you wish with the rest of the world, or the Word of God and His Kingdom that is coming is up to you.

Rights? If I claim to be without sin, there is no truth in me. I am not defending my rights as a sinner. I am acknowledging that which I truly am.

We know as the days draw nearer, the world will so mess up the plain teachings of truth, that the saints will be weary trying to show the way. We know that the world will be so deluded that they believe they have the truth, and there is no truth in them.

Drag-n-drop likes to talk about "full truth." I do not believe that I have "full truth." The Bible confirms that there is none who understand and I know that I too misunderstand aspects of who God is. Through the aid of the Spirit, I will continue to grow in my understanding of God. What I do know is that salvation is a free gift that is received by grace through faith, not by obedience or by knowledge of things that are true.

We know that God does not change.

Yes, God does not change. However, God has requested certain things of one group of people that He does not request of every person throughout all of time. This fact does not indicate that God changes. It only indicates that an omnipotent God is capable of tailoring His approach to meet the individual needs of men.

We know that He and His Kingdom will endure for all eternity, and those who conform into His righteousness, no matter how difficult, or how unlike it is to the rest of the world, the Lord will acknowledge as His.

The point of this is not to "conform to His righteousness," but to accept the gift of His righteousness as a covering for my own filthy rags. Praise Him for His amazing grace.

I have taken the position on this thread that God does not change,

As have I. It's nice when we can agree.

His course is set, His Son is fulfilling all things on the parchment, but that the TEN written on stone are to be engraved on our hearts for all eternity.

Yes, you've taken that position. Sadly, there is no Biblical basis for it.

You have on the other hand taken the position that God has thrown out his laws because His Son died,

That is not my position. The word "fulfilled" does not mean "thrown out." I have clearly articulated my understanding of "fulfilled."

and thus He doesn't need any laws any more, and by His love, grace, mercy, and forgiveness, through His Holy Spirit everything is good.

If the Spirit convicts with respect to sin and righteousness and judgment, and if the Spirit is God in us, what more do we need?

Again, I ask you to seriously take it all to the Lord in prayer and ask Him.

My positions weren't reached quickly and my statements in this forum are not meant to be flippant. I take these statements quite seriously. They result from much prayer and study. You may disagree and that's fine, but your disagreement is not evidence of my lack of sincerity.

Ask Him to convict you. Acknowledge to Him that you will humble submit to His Will on this..

You seem to assume that I have not done this. Why?

and I will also take it all to the Lord in prayer, humbly willing to submit both to the Lord for Him to weigh them in the balances and teach me that which is His... even if it is parts of both.

As you do, continue to note that we aren't saved based on the number of correct answers that we can offer on a theology exam. We are saved by grace through faith. This is even true for those of us who misunderstand parts of who He is.

BFA

 

[Cribstyl]

Anybody reading this thread is amazed at how BFA and Crib make an escape route from the simple gospel of Paul.

Heresy has always been to asume that due to faith lthe law is no longer binding.

BFA and Crib cannot answer my simple question which I re-iterate:


How do you establish the Law without keeping it ? See Rom 3:31

Will I ever get a straight answer or other dodging tactics ?

Straight answer without dodging: "The law is established by love."

Further comments: The ten commandments commands the actions of the outside of a man, it tells you how to act.
The New commandments "to love" commands the heart of a man. It What is on the inside controls the man

The ten commandment are not eternal, the bible say that it came because of transgression.
Text plainly explain that sin was in the world before the law.

CRIB

 

[visionary]

Straight answer without dodging: "The law is established by love."

Further comments: The ten commandments commands the actions of the outside of a man, it tells you how to act.
The New commandments "to love" commands the heart of a man. It What is on the inside controls the man

The ten commandment are not eternal, the bible say that it came because of transgression.
Text plainly explain that sin was in the world before the law.

CRIB

The ten was explained by Yeshua not to be the action of the outside of man, but the intent, or heart of man... Those eternal Ten were from Everlasting and without them you have no definition of sin.

It is like a chicken and egg story... you say sin first then the definition... I say the definition was always there and it reveals sin.

 

[Cribstyl]

The ten was explained by Yeshua not to be the action of the outside of man, but the intent, or heart of man... Those eternal Ten were from Everlasting and without them you have no definition of sin.

It is like a chicken and egg story... you say sin first then the definition... I say the definition was always there and it reveals sin.

Can you prove anything you say, you posted no text?? Nevermind, stick with the chicken/egg story.

Text say palinly that sin is not dependant on law.

ESV - Rom 5:13 -for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.

 

[visionary]

The point of this is not to "conform to His righteousness," but to accept the gift of His righteousness as a covering for my own filthy rags. Praise Him for His amazing grace.

How else do you imagine that you are going to be conformed into His image but by emulating His righteousness.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

How else do you imagine that you are going to be conformed into His image but by emulating His righteousness.

Your sentence set out above suggests that I have my own righteousness. And yet my own righteousness is as filthy rags (see Isaiah 64). I am credited with His righteousness, not my own (see Romans 4).

Your sentence set out above appears to be based on Romans 8, but it assumes things that Romans 8 does not teach:

"And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified." Romans 8
​

Do you notice how Romans 8 says nothing about emulating His righteousness?

Do you notice how Romans 8 indicates that the work is that of God in man and not that of man in himself?

Do you notice how the end result of God's process is glorification?

BFA

 

[visionary]

Be ye conformed into His likeness... how can you manifest that?

 

[dragNdrop]

BFA: "Now, in the interest of answering one another's questions, can you please demonstrate the Biblical basis for concluding that to "establish the law" one must "keep the law?" "

"He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." I Jh 2:4

"For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."Jam 2:10

Your question has been answered.


BFA and Crib: [Please answer these]


Question 1:

Are you saying that in the new covenant the convictions of the written law have been replaced by the convictions of the Spirit ?

Question 2:

Are you saying that in the new covenant the convictions of the written law have been replaced by the convictions of the Spirit ?


Question 3:

How does the Spirit convict without the Law ?

Question 4:


Why is James saying that he who breaks one breaks all is they''re not binding ?
_


I now need to zeroe down to the root of your mis-understanding other wise it won't help debating.

 

[Cribstyl]

How else do you imagine that you are going to be conformed into His image but by emulating His righteousness.

BFA is on point.

Being conformed to His image is accomplished by walking in the spirit.
Jesus Christ is the firstfruit and we conform by being born again in the spirit where we live as sons (children) of God.

Rom 12:1I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, [which is] your reasonable service.
Rom 12:2And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

 

[Cribstyl]

BFA: "Now, in the interest of answering one another's questions, can you please demonstrate the Biblical basis for concluding that to "establish the law" one must "keep the law?" "

"He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." I Jh 2:4

"For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."Jam 2:10

Your question has been answered.

Cant resist commenting on this;
LOL, by asking questions about 3 word and isolated text you throw out the context and peice together whatever is on your mind.
For example... saying "keep the law" is a command for those who are under the law. saying "establish the law" is being shamefully isolated from a statement that means....faith, establishes the law.

Is'nt obvious how you present less and less bible context with the sole intention to say....we're under the law?

1john 2:4, contexts proves that "His commandments" were not the 10 commandments given through Moses but rather, what Jesus was commanding at that times to His disciples. You're intentionally highjacking the word "commandments" to appear as the 10.com. Anyone can see the commandments spoken about is to love............This shameless practice of highjacking isolated words for commentary exposes false teachers.

1Jo 2:4He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 1Jo 2:5But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 1Jo 2:6He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked. 1Jo 2:7Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning. 1Jo 2:8Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth. 1Jo 2:9He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. 1Jo 2:10He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.

James 2:10 Same highjacking is being done...... John's conversation is to those with faith in Jesus Christ. John is teaching that, showing favortism breaks the commandment to love. These Christian could have been Jews and also keeping the law, who knows for sure?? The lesson is not about what you're using these words to teach.

BFA and Crib: [Please answer these]


Question 1:

Are you saying that in the new covenant the convictions of the written law have been replaced by the convictions of the Spirit ?

Question 2:

Are you saying that in the new covenant the convictions of the written law have been replaced by the convictions of the Spirit ?


Question 3:

How does the Spirit convict without the Law ?

Question 4:


Why is James saying that he who breaks one breaks all is they''re not binding ?
_


I now need to zeroe down to the root of your mis-understanding other wise it won't help debating.

Since you've concluded that we misunderstand and need correction of the word of God, why dont you post the facts for us to see your truth?

I'm not obligating myself to answer questions that are not based on scriptures because you already know it all. You win.... You're under the law.


CRIB

 

[Byfaithalone1]

BFA: "Now, in the interest of answering one another's questions, can you please demonstrate the Biblical basis for concluding that to "establish the law" one must "keep the law?" "

"He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." I Jh 2:4

"For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."Jam 2:10

Your question has been answered.

Sadly, my question has not been answered. But that's OK. I appreciate the dialogue nonetheless.

James 2, rather than confirming that we establish the law by keeping it, instead confirms that we do not establish the law because we do not keep it. Since all of us have offended in at least one point, we have shown that we are guilty of all. In that we are guilty of all, we have not established the law by keeping it.

I was hoping for a Biblical basis for believing that we establish the law by keeping it.

Question 1:Are you saying that in the new covenant the convictions of the written law have been replaced by the convictions of the Spirit ?

I am saying that the new covenant is not like the old. It is built on better promises. If I conclude that the new covenant is a carbon copy of the old, I misunderstand the new covenant.

Question 2: Are you saying that in the new covenant the convictions of the written law have been replaced by the convictions of the Spirit ?

How does Question 2 differ from Question 1?

Question 3: How does the Spirit convict without the Law ?

The Spirit is God, is He not? Do you mean to suggest that, without the law, God is incapable of conviction?

Question 4: Why is James saying that he who breaks one breaks all is they''re not binding ?

He is demonstrating the hopelessness that comes from trying to save yourself by keeping the law. He who is guilty in one point is guilty in all. Since all of us are guilty of one point, all of us are in need of a Savior.

I now need to zeroe down to the root of your mis-understanding other wise it won't help debating.

I am sure that there is much that I misunderstand.

BFA

 

[dragNdrop]

Crib. I am not running away from the context but opening other angles so that you guys may see that the New Covenant demands us to keep the Law. Let me expound on James before returning to Paul.


James is talking of favouritism. I agree that he talks of the law demanding that we love our brethren. However the context of the passage is clear.

"If ye fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor
as thyself, ye do well: [9] But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are
convinced of the law as transgressors.[10] For whosoever shall keep the whole
law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." Jam 2:8-10


Notice These Points:

- James is addressing these statements to Christians living under the
New Covenant.

- James here clearly sees Favouritism as breaking this Law which says,
'Love thy neighbour...'v8.

He then argues in verse 10 that if you break one law you are guilty
of breaking the whole law. Because if you break one you break all.

This statements addressed to Christians living under the new covenant,
far from removing Law obligation installs it.


Crib "I'm not obligating myself to answer questions that are not based on
scriptures because you already know it all. You win.... You're under
the law."

Sarcasm won't help. Answer my questions, else you have no ground to stand on.

 

[Cribstyl]

Crib. I am not running away from the context but opening other angles so that you guys may see that the New Covenant demands us to keep the Law. Let me expound on James before returning to Paul.


James is talking of favouritism. I agree that he talks of the law demanding that we love our brethren. However the context of the passage is clear.

"If ye fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor
as thyself, ye do well: [9] But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are
convinced of the law as transgressors.[10] For whosoever shall keep the whole
law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." Jam 2:8-10


Notice These Points:

- James is addressing these statements to Christians living under the
New Covenant.

- James here clearly sees Favouritism as breaking this Law which says,
'Love thy neighbour...'v8.

He then argues in verse 10 that if you break one law you are guilty
of breaking the whole law. Because if you break one you break all.

This statements addressed to Christians living under the new covenant,
far from removing Law obligation installs it.

There is a lot to consider about the book of James. The doctrines taught to gentiles by Paul is the gospel of uncircumcision. James was the elder at Jerusalem and evidence show that he taught the gospel to the circumcision (those under the law (Jewish Christians))
Gal 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;
Gal 2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles.
Gal 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we [should go] unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
Gal 2:10 Only [they would] that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

So my argument is, we can understand what James is teaching without being under the law. Your method of study is a word search about the commandment rather than accepting what is directly taught primarily by
Paul to Gentile christians.
The bottom line to consider is that James say we're under the law of liberty not under the law. Jam 2:12So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty. Peter and Paul also taught us about this "liberty" as being freed from the law of sin and death.
Rom 8:2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.


Gal 5:1Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
1Pe 2:16As free, and not using [your] liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

Crib "I'm not obligating myself to answer questions that are not based on
scriptures because you already know it all. You win.... You're under
the law."

Sarcasm won't help. Answer my questions, else you have no ground to stand on.

Oh really? The word of God is a sure foundation, I'll stand on that even when I dont understand some things.


CRIB

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Answer my questions, else you have no ground to stand on.

I answered your questions. Now what?

BFA

 

[dragNdrop]

Crib. The message of James has principles to be extracted by all Christians. I do not know on what authority do you exclude yourself on the clear message of James.

If you practice favouritism, you are guilty of breaking 'guilty of all' law breaking.

James is clear what he is talking about when he speaks of 'the guilty of all' . He mentions: ' For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also,
Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art
become a transgressor of the law.' Jam 2:11

So you see that James saw adultery, murder, etc as part of the law. Which must certainly include the Sabbath which comes along with these.

Crib. Your unsupported argument that there is a difference between 'the law' and the 'law of liberty' is clearly foreign to James passage.