• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is following the 10 commandments required for salvation?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What do you mean by place yourself under the law ?

Also, is it possible to place yourself under grace ?

Is YHWH gracious, or mean spirited and unforgiving ?

There is a difference between having something written on your heart and going back into a system of works.

Jesus took the Decalogue and the 613 "laws" boiled them down to two, and sadly...we can't even do them.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ArmenianJohn
Upvote 0

VanillaSunflowers

Black Lives Don't Matter More Than Any Other Life
Jul 26, 2016
3,741
1,733
DE
✟26,070.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Married
I don't think so. (but don't remember)
Could you quote what you're referring to please.
Your post #29
Did not the MESSIAH Y'SHUA say that those outside the ekklesia were for YHWH to judge, not for the ekklesia to judge ?
It that sense, whatever the unsaved persons do is not the concern of those of us who are born again -- whether the unsaved persons keep the commandments or not doesn't matter to us.

Except as Y'SHUA warned "beware the leaven of the Priests and Pastors and Bishops"//"Scribes and PHarisees" .....
who might indeed keep the commandments (or appear to) , but we are not to live like they live.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Does grace then give us license to sin?

No it does not. So says Paul.

However, name one person other than the Savior, who even after the point of salvation that did not sin.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ArmenianJohn
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,946
11,096
okie
✟222,536.00
Faith
Anabaptist
QUOTE="yeshuaslavejeff, post: 70201960, member: 96665"]Did not the MESSIAH Y'SHUA say that those outside the ekklesia were for YHWH to judge, not for the ekklesia to judge ?
It that sense, whatever the unsaved persons do is not the concern of those of us who are born again -- whether the unsaved persons keep the commandments or not doesn't matter to us.
.......QUOTE
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The thief on the cross.

Ah hahaha.

He died not hours after being saved, and since he was on the cross, did he have time to sin?

Your argument is a "red herring".

That is the same thing as the person who is saved in prison just minutes before their execution.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ArmenianJohn
Upvote 0

VanillaSunflowers

Black Lives Don't Matter More Than Any Other Life
Jul 26, 2016
3,741
1,733
DE
✟26,070.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Married
No it does not. So says Paul.

However, name one person other than the Savior, who even after the point of salvation that did not sin.

God Bless

Till all are one.
It is sort of a step process isn't it? 1 John 3:4 . Sin is the transgression of the law. If the law did not exist then sin would not exist. If sin did not exist then Gods grace through faith that saves us from sin would not exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Palesa
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,946
11,096
okie
✟222,536.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Jesus took the Decalogue and the 613 "laws" boiled them down to two, and sadly...we can't even do them.

I don't think so, although traditionally that has been taught a lot.
Y'SHUA did not take the Decalogue and the 613 "laws" and do anything with them to change them.
YHWH'S WORD never says so.

If anything, Y'SHUA showed it is harder than before, because Y'SHUA pointed out that
if anyone lusts in their heart they have committed sin, where-as TORAH did not have anything to say about punishing someone for lusting, as far as I can recall.

Y'SHUA also told the disciples that HE would show them how to live. HE never said they could go on sinning. Then, IF they did sin, HE provided a remedy - HE told what to do then.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,946
11,096
okie
✟222,536.00
Faith
Anabaptist
He died not hours after being saved, and since he was on the cross, did he have time to sin?

You asked a question,
and I answered the question with the answer the FATHER IN HEAVEN gave me.

[Staff edit]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It is sort of a step process isn't it? 1 John 3:4 . Sin is the transgression of the law. If the law did not exist then sin would not exist. If sin did not exist then Gods grace through faith that saves us from sin would not exist.

Here again, you must, must look at the context in which John wrote that.

1 John 3 was written to combat "antinomianism".

It makes no sense to write what he did in chapter 3 when in chapter one, he says if we sin, all we have to do is ask for forgiveness.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ArmenianJohn
Upvote 0

VanillaSunflowers

Black Lives Don't Matter More Than Any Other Life
Jul 26, 2016
3,741
1,733
DE
✟26,070.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Married
Matthew 5:19
“Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”


1 John 2:2-6 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our’s only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that said, I know him, and keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoever keeps his word, in him truly is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 6 He that said he stays in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim Langston
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,946
11,096
okie
✟222,536.00
Faith
Anabaptist
It makes no sense to write what he did in chapter 3 when in chapter one, he says if we sin, all we have to do is ask for forgiveness.
I never had trouble understanding it as YHWH explains it.
It's too late to start on this one tonight though. YHWH WILLING,maybe tomorrow if you want.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I don't think so, although traditionally that has been taught a lot.
Y'SHUA did not take the Decalogue and the 613 "laws" and do anything with them to change them.
YHWH'S WORD never says so.

Scripture says so.

Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.” -Mark 12:30-31 (NIV)

And Matthew's recording is even stronger:

"Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." -Mt. 22:36-40 (KJV)

On these two laws, hung the law and the prophets.

If man could have done just these two, there would have been no need of the Savior.

Jesus took the Decalogue and all 613 "Laws" boiled them down to two, and sadly, we can't even do these.

"Not that all that is contained in the five books of Moses, and in the books of the prophets, and other writings of the Old Testament, is comprehended in, and is reducible to these two precepts; for there are many things delivered by way of promise, written by way of history which cannot, by any means, be brought into these two general heads: but that everything respecting duty that is suggested in the law, or is more largely explained and pressed in any of the writings of the prophets, is summarily comprehended in these two sayings: hence love is the fulfilling of the law; see ( Romans 13:8 Romans 13:9 ) ( Galatians 5:14 ) . The substance of the law is love; and the writings of the prophets, as to the preceptive part of them, are an explanation of the law, and an enlargement upon it: hence the Jews have a saying F3, that "all the prophets stood on Mount Sinai", and received their prophecies there, because the sum of them, as to the duty part, was then delivered. Beza thinks, that here is an allusion to the "phylacteries", or frontlets, which hung upon their foreheads and hands, as a memorial of the law. And certain it is, that the first of these commands, and which is said to be the greatest, was written in these phylacteries. Some take the phrase, "on these hang all the law and the prophets", to be a mere Latinism, but it is really an Hebraism, and often to be met with in the Jewish writings: so Maimonides says,

``the knowledge of this matter is an affirmative precept, as it is said, "I am the Lord thy God"; and he that imagines there is another God besides this, transgresses a negative, as it is said, "thou shalt have no other Gods before me"; and he denies the fundamental point, for this is the great foundation, (wb ywlt lkhv) , "on which all hang":''


and so the word is used in many other places. The sense is plainly this, that all that are in the law and prophets are consistent with, and dependent on these things; and are, as the Persic version renders the word, "comprehended" in them, and cannot be separated from them."

Source

Sorry dude.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ArmenianJohn
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I never had trouble understanding it as YHWH explains it.
It's too late to start on this one tonight though. YHWH WILLING,maybe tomorrow if you want.

You challenged my post, give me 5 minutes to complete my lab work, and we'll debate this all night if you wish.

Are you sure your an Anabaptist? You sure don't speak like one.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ArmenianJohn
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,946
11,096
okie
✟222,536.00
Faith
Anabaptist
You challenged my post, give me 5 minutes to complete my lab work, and we'll debate this all night if you wish.

Are you sure your an Anabaptist? You sure don't speak like one.

God Bless

Till all are one.
I told you the truth. I don't plan to debate you ever. (maybe though, YHWH knows).
I'm tired and
tomorrow morning comes early for me with what I have to do, (unless there's an earthquake big enough to change things)
and with the other things I'm finishing up, and sleep tonight,
it will be tomorrow like I said before I can continue on this topic , YHWH willing.

It is simple, not complicated.

Shalom in Y'SHUA.

When I signed up, Anabaptist was the closest of the 'labels' available to ekklesia (I think it still is; even if the modern day ones are not).
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,632
4,676
Hudson
✟343,402.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
I am a Christian, I am not Jewish. I am not under the Mosiac Law according to what Jesus said. I read the new testament and read what Jesus said and Jesus tells me to Love the lord my God with all my heart, all my mind and all my soul and love my neighbor as myself. I only have 2 laws to worry about. All the others fall under those. Basically if it doesn't hurt God and it doesn't hurt anyone else then it's not sin. If it hurts god or it hurts anyone else then it's sin. Easy to remember. Easy to know when I fail and have to ask God for forgiveness.

Maybe it's a cop out for me to simply state that it's because I'm not Jewish because Jews aren't under the Mosaic law anymore either. It's easier to not be told to do something then to be told to do something then be told to stop. But since I'm not Jewish for me personally I don't have to worry about it. The Mosaic law saved the Jews, not the Gentiles so they never applied to me at any time since the beginning of creation. Maybe if I live some point in the past before Jesus came I might have to worry about following the Mosiac law or not being a gentile but it's a none issue today. Jesus never said I had to follow them, Paul never did, no one in the bible I can find ever said that me, a gentile, ever had to follow the Mosaic law.

In Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus was not asked about what commands we are under, but about what the greatest command was. All of the 613 commands in the OT and the 1,050 commands in the NT can be summarized as instructions for how to love God and for how to love our neighbor, so through obeying all the other commands, we are obeying the greatest two commands, which is what Jesus was saying when he said that all of the other commands hang on those two. If you say we just need to follow God's commands to love Him and our neighbor, so we don't need to follow God's commands for how he wants us to love Him and our neighbor, then you are missing the point because if you love God, then you will obey His commands (John 14:15).

Romans 6:14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

The law of sin is the law where sin has dominion over us, so it should be clear from this verse that the law that we are not under is the law of sin. If Paul were saying that we weren't under the Mosaic law, then he would be equating the law with sin, but in Romans 7:7, he made it clear that the law is not sin, but rather the law is what reveals to us what sin is. How can Romans 6:15 say that being under grace doesn't mean that we are permitted to do what God has revealed to be sin if we no longer under the law that reveals to us what sin is? In Romans 7:12-23, Paul said that God's law is holy, righteous, and good, that it was the good that he sought to do and delighted in doing, but contrasted that with a law of sin that was working within him to stir up sin and to cause him to not to do the good that he wanted to do, so the law of sin is the opposite of the Mosaic law.

Likewise, in Galatians 5:16-24, everything that is listed as being against the Spirit is against what the Mosaic law teaches and all of the fruits of the Spirit are in accordance with what the Mosaic law teaches, so what sense does it make to say that verse 5:18 is talking about not being under the Mosaic if we are led by the Spirit, especially when Ezekiel 36:26-27 says that the Spirit has the role of leading us in obedience to God's law? Rather, it is again talking about us not being under the law of sin, which is stirring up all those things that are against the Spirit.

The Mosaic law was never given to anyone as instructions for what to do in order to become saved. God did not require the Israelites to obey His law before He saved them out of Egypt, but rather He saved them by faith, then gave them instructions for how to live by faith. According to Romans 4:1-8, Abraham and David were justified by faith, and the one and only way to become justified is by faith, so Moses was justified by faith apart from the law, which means that the law was never given nor needed for that purpose. It does not follow that because we should obey God's commands for a purpose for which they were never given that therefore we shouldn't obey God's commands for the purpose for which they were given. When God has said that His commands were given for His people's own good (Deuteronomy 10:13) and they believed what God said was true and trusted it it to be true, then demonstrating that to be the case through living in obedience to God's commands is the way to live by faith, for the righteous shall live by faith (Habakkuk 2:4). Living by faith does not refer to any way of living that is not in obedience to God's commands.

According to Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness, so if the law has never applied to Gentiles since the beginning of creation, then Gentiles have never needed a Savior to come and give himself to redeem them from lawlessness in the first place. Rather, God has always been holy, righteous, and good, so the way to act in line with God's character has existed from the beginning before God made any covenants with man, which means that it is not dependent on any covenant, but the way was later revealed in the law of Moses (Romans 7:12). So anyone who wants to find out how to act in line with God's character can find out by reading the Mosaic law regardless of what covenant, if any, they are under, but as part of the New Covenant, we are still told to do what God has revealed to be holy, righteous, and good (1 Peter 1:14-16, 1 John 3:10, Ephesians 2:10). For example, in 1 Peter 1:14-16, we are told to have a holy conduct not because we should be like Jews or because we are under the Mosaic Covenant, but because God is holy, so having what God has revealed to be a holy conduct is about identifying with God's holiness. Furthermore, verse 16 references Leviticus, where God was giving instructions for how to have a holy conduct.

When Jesus was telling people to repent, he was telling them to repent of their disobedience to the Mosaic law, so repentance from our disobedience to the law is a central part of the gospel message. Jesus gave a perfect example of how to walk in obedience to the law and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:3-6). Furthermore, Jesus taught obedience to the law by both word and example and 1 John 2:3-6 associates telling us to obey his commands with telling us to walk as he walked, so if you think Jesus practiced what he preached and preached what he practiced, then you should think that he taught full obedience to the Mosaic law. Jesus fulfilled the law in the same sense that Romans 15:18-19 says that Paul fulfilled the gospel, namely that he taught full obedience to it, not that he did away with it.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: Palesa
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Matthew 5:19
“Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

Here again, in seminary I was taught to read things in context.

To whom was Jesus addressing?

John Gill comments:

"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments

Which are to be understood not of the beatitudes in the preceding verses, for these were not delivered by Christ under the form of commandments; nor of any of the peculiar commands of Christ under the Gospel dispensation; but of the precepts of the law, of which some were comparatively lesser than others; and might be said to be broke, loosed, or dissolved, as the word here used signifies, when men acted contrary to them.

And shall teach men so;

not only teach them by their example to break the commandments, but by express orders: for however gross and absurd this may seem to be, that there should be any such teachers, and they should have any hearers, yet such there were among the Jews; and our Lord here manifestly strikes at them: for notwithstanding the great and excellent things they say of the law, yet they tell us, that the doctors of the sanhedrim had power to root anything out of the law; to loose or make void any of its commands, for a time, excepting in the case of idolatry; and so might any true prophet, or wise man; which they pretend is sometimes necessary for the glory of God, and the good of men; and they are to be heard and obeyed, when they say, transgress anyone of all the commands which are in the law. Maimonides says, that the sanhedrim had power, when it was convenient, for the time present, to make void an affirmative command, and to transgress a negative one, in order to return many to their religion; or to deliver many of the Israelites from stumbling at other things, they may do whatsoever the present time makes necessary: for so, adds he, the former wise men say, a man may profane one sabbath, in order to keep many sabbaths. And elsewhere he affirms,
``if a prophet, whom we know to be a prophet, should order us (twum lkm txa le rwbel) , "to transgress anyone of the commands", which are mentioned in the law, or many commands, whether light or heavy, for a time, we are ordered to hearken to him; and so we learn from the former wise men, by tradition, that in everything a prophet shall say to thee (hrwt yrbd le rwbe) , "transgress the words of the law", as Elias on Mount Carmel, hear him, except in the case of idolatry.''


And another of their writers says,

``it is lawful sometimes to make void the law, and to do that which appears to be forbidden.''


Nay, they even say, that if a Gentile should bid an Israelite transgress anyone of the commands mentioned in the law, excepting idolatry, adultery, and murder, he may transgress with impunity, provided it is done privately. You see what reason Christ had to express himself in the manner he does, and that with resentment, saying,"

Source

At that time, the "Law" and the Commandments had not yet been fulfilled.


1 John 2:2-6 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our’s only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that said, I know him, and keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoever keeps his word, in him truly is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 6 He that said he stays in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

Again, context, context, context.

To whom was John addressing and what was he addressing?

John Gill comments:

"He that saith I know him

God or Christ, as the Gnostics did, who pretended to great, even perfect, knowledge of divine things:

and keepeth not his commandments;

which the above persons had no regard to, and as many who profess great light and knowledge in our days show no concern for:

is a liar;

he contradicts what he says, and gives the lie to it; for though in words he professes to know God, in works he denies him, and which betrays his ignorance of him:

and the truth is not in him;

there is no true knowledge of God and Christ in him; nor is the truth of the Gospel in his heart, however it may be in his head; nor is the truth of grace in him, for each of these lead persons to obedience. The Ethiopic version renders it, "the truth of God is not with him"; (See Gill on 1 John 1:8)."

Source

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ArmenianJohn
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,632
4,676
Hudson
✟343,402.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
So could there be an agreement that it is not bondage of the Law or Commandments to keep from doing wrong, but freedom in Christ desiring to do right?
It's pretty simple that the outward observance of the Law is fulfilled by the inner intentions of God. The Law is fulfilled (Rom 13:10) in us (Rom 8:4) because of Romans 5:5 (the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit).

Sin is defined as the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4) and it is sin that puts us in bondage, not obedience to the law, but rather God's law is a law of liberty (Psalms 119:45, James 1:25). The freedom that we have in Christ is the freedom to do what God has revealed in His law to be holy, righteous, and good. According to Titus 2:11-14, our salvation involves being saved from the penalty of our lawlessness Jesus giving himself to redeem us from all lawlessness, but our salvation also involves being trained by grace to do what God has revealed to be godly, righteous, and good, and trained to renounce doing what God has revealed to be ungodly, sinful, and lawless. So in Romans 8:4, Christ imputes his righteousness into us so that we will do what God has revealed to be righteous and thereby meet the righteous requirement of the law. Jesus fulfilled the law in the same sense that Romans 15:18-19 says that Paul fulfilled the gospel, namely that he taught full obedience to it, not that he did away with it.

Yeah, remember what God said about putting His Law in our minds and writing it on our hearts (Jer 31:33).

No, we are no longer under the Law. We no longer have to work for our rightiousness (as by the Law). Instead we do rightious works (as by Christ). Christ is our rightiousness (1Cor 1:30), and we rest in Him (Heb 4:3,10). We now rest in Christ as He is our sabbath (rest) in fulfilling the Law.

For what purpose do you think that God is putting His law in our minds and writing it on our hearts if we are no longer under it? Rather, according to Romans 6:14, the law we are not under has to do with sin no longer having dominion over us, so the law that we are no longer under is the law of sin. According to Romans 7:12-23, Paul said that God's law is holy, righteous, and good, it is the good he sought to do and delighted in doing, but contrasted that with a law of sin that was stirring up sin and causing him not to do the good that he wanted to do, so the law of sin is the opposite of God's law. At no point has God's law ever required anyone to work for our righteousness, but rather it has always been instructions for how we are to live by faith because we have been declared righteous by faith, for the righteous shall live by faith (Habakkuk 2:4). The law is the good way where we will find rest for our souls (Jeremiah 6:16-19, Matthew 11:28-30).

*Rom 13:10 ...love is the fulfillment of the law.

Jesus summarized the law as being about how to love God and how to love our neighbor (Matthew 22:36-40), so love fulfills the law because that is essentially what the law is about how to do.

*Rom 5:5 ...the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.

The Spirit has the role of leading us to obey God's law (Ezekiel 36:26-27).

*1Cor 1:30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God--and righteousness and sanctification and redemption--

Those who are in Christ ought to follow his commands and to walk in the same way that he walked, which was in obedience to the law (1 John 2:3-6).
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.