Is the fourth commandment done away with? (Moved)

[bugkiller]

bugkiller,

you get an "ataboy" for getting over to that other thread and answering that question. i'm impressed.

real standup!

Thanks. BTW 'ataboy' appreaciation is shown through that little light bulb in the top right corner.

And I am not asking for it, rather am interested in being a little more behind the scenes in such things.

But rather nice of you to mention it. And you're very welcome.

bugkiller

 

[YosemiteSam]

What say John? 1 Jn 2:6 "He that says he abides in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked."

So were you baptised like Jesus was - naked before a crowd? When did you wash anybodies feet with only a towel which you used to dry their feet? I don't think you do as Jesus did at all. You can't humble yourself that much in our society without being called a pervert.What commandments are you talking about? The 10? or the commandments of Jesus? They are different unless of course you don't subscribe to the doctrine of the trinity. You might argue that the word trinity isn't mentioned anywhere in scripture. And I will present you with scriptures stating God to be a plural Being in three distinct personalities even from the OT.

I do not think you comprehend the meaning of fulfil. Jesus indeed did not destroy the law He fulfilled it. I think you are also lacking in the understanding of some other terms commonly used in this argument to defend the law.

We have a new covenant. Since we have a new covenant (law) the old one is nothing more than a historical document having no jurisdiction. It has been replaced as testified by God Himself (Jesus) in Mat 26:28 as being current.

bugkiller

[/quote]



You, well know, that the church kept the Sabbath throughout all the New Testament. This was shown in another thread which you participated in. Man changed the day of worship, not God who gave it.

Secondly, works only brings death! Do you not remember that "Faith without works is dead." Abraham had works! The problem here is that you do not understand "works." <staff edit> Do you not understand "and by works was faith made perfect?...You see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." Js 2:24 Was not Abraham justified by works?

Second, it is obvious that you do not understand "grace." All are subject to die, but it is the mercy of the living God that grants eternal life, to those which obey him. How can he then give eternal life to a transgressor of the law, one who practices lawlessness, one who falls under the penalty by his works; which is stated numerous times in the New Testament that he will NOT. You might go read up on "lawlessness". They will not make it into the Kingdom of God.

Christ did not mention the Sabbath except to say he was "Lord of the Sabbath" and also to show the Pharisee where they where messing up in keeping the Sabbath. Even in his teaching on the mount he said, "Pray that your flight be not on Sabbath or in the winter." The latter, being an end time prophecy just before his coming. So he did not teach it? Why would he have to mention something that they were already keeping? He expounded, through his teachings, on "love thy neighbor" because this most often his the hardest thing to do. Physically and spiritually.

The Sabbath is probably one of the easiest of the commandments to keep out of them all. Rest and attend services.

Paul, an apostle of God, admonished us to walk as he walked. Throughout the New Testament it is proven time and time again that the law exist. "Those who have an ear, let them hear." Yes, there was a law abolished and that was covered in an earlier thread. Yes, there is a new covenant and it still includes obedience to God's law.

JohnRabbit, in another thread asked about a verse in Galatians. "if led by the spirit are not under the law." Why? Because of "grace" or "mercy" of God. All others are still under the law -- the penalty of it! Paul states that he serves the law and the law is holy just and good. If it did not exist, he could not serve it could he? He serves it by way of obeying it, and by grace he is not "under the law." Even though he still fights sin, which was in his flesh, just like ours, he fought against it overcoming it and he knew what sin was because of the law. We can't know what sin is if there is no law, correct? We are to grow in this way. In grace and knowledge.

If there is a law to do 55mph then those that break the law are subject to the fine and those who don't are not subject to the law. This would be correct!

All the commandments were taught by Christ, all 10, except you say 9. Where is your logic in this? Paul said walk as he walked, enough said. Christ kept the Sabbath, period. Either by doing or saying.

As far as washing the feet? Have you ever heard of a church that keeps the Passover? If so they will wash feet as commanded.

Christ wasn't naked when he was baptized! Bible says no such thing in all three accounts.

You might want to re-evaluate the teachings on law, faith, works, grace. The bible does not and cannot contradict itself. However, what you are saying one would conclude that it does.

Oh, and you might look into the trinity as well. <staff edit>

And how would washing someone's feet be perverted? It would show humbleness and isn't that which true Christians are to have?

 

[bugkiller]

You, well know, that the church kept the Sabbath throughout all the New Testament. This was shown in another thread which you participated in. Man changed the day of worship, not God who gave it.

Where is this evidence? I Cor 16 Paul is directly telling the church to recieve an offering on the first day of the week. Not only that he told the churches of Galatia to do the same also mentioned in the same chapter. I know of no church that recieves an offering on a day that they do not worship. Does anyone else?

Secondly, works only brings death! Do you not remember that "Faith without works is dead." Abraham had works! The problem here is that you do not understand "works." That's just what so called Christianity wants - Christianity without obedience! Do you not understand "and by works was faith made perfect?...You see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." Js 2:24 Was not Abraham justified by works?

And what works would these be? Observing the law? How does a dead man observe anything. I have heard that the dead know nothing. Is that true? We are dead to the law and alive in Chirst Jesus. (Romans 6) How does one throw out the law and observe it? (Gal 4:30) James is not talking about observing the law as the works. One can not get or retain salvation by observing the law. In fact works only bring death in relationship to the law. (Romans 6:23) But one can have the gift which is eternal life (salvation). I willing give my wages from works to anyone who will take them. I think the gift is a much better deal. That does not mean that I am idle.

Second, it is obvious that you do not understand "grace." All are subject to die, but it is the mercy of the living God that grants eternal life, to those which obey him. How can he then give eternal life to a transgressor of the law, one who practices lawlessness, one who falls under the penalty by his works; which is stated numerous times in the New Testament that he will NOT. You might go read up on "lawlessness". They will not make it into the Kingdom of God.

I find this quite condemning. I am accused of being ignorant. I am told that I will die when the Bible clearly says I have life. Romans 8:1, 2 for starters. I am not a transgressor any more. I have been redeemed from the law and its curse. I am righteous by declaration and imputation. My righteousness is God's righteousness. I have left the dirty rags of self righteousness behind. My righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and pharisees because it is God's righteousness by imputation.

I do not practice sin as a way of life. Gal 5:16- 25 I did not say that I never sin. Otherwise I John 1:9-2:1 would be a worthless statement.

Grace is unmerrited favor as I understand it. I accept it that way. I realize that I need it. I also understand the the covenant (Deut 4:13, 5:1-5) with the COI is just that and doesnot include anyone else. I live under the new covenant which is not the same one delivered to the COI Jer 31:31-34; Heb 8:8-13. The scripture clearly state new as in not before. It is argued that the new covenant is only made with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Where in the NT do you see evidence of this? The NT clearly shows the Gentiles are included as provided for in the promise to Abraham. The promise to Abraham is not the same as the covenant with the COI that was for a limited time. (Gal 3:19)

Christ did not mention the Sabbath except to say he was "Lord of the Sabbath" and also to show the Pharisee where they where messing up in keeping the Sabbath. Even in his teaching on the mount he said, "Pray that your flight be not on Sabbath or in the winter." The latter, being an end time prophecy just before his coming. So he did not teach it? Why would he have to mention something that they were already keeping? He expounded, through his teachings, on "love thy neighbor" because this most often his the hardest thing to do. Physically and spiritually.

I find no command mentioned to keep the sabbath in the above statement. I find no commandment by Jesus or anyone else in the NT to keep the sabbath. Does anyone else?

Who is Jesus talking to when He says pray that your flight be not on Sabbath? Why would Jesus say such a thing? Is it not because Jesus knew His audience? Jews. How far is a Sabbath day's journey? Less than a mile if I remember correctly. Jesus also says woe to the pregnant and those carrying infants. If I remember correctly Jesus also says don't go back to the house to get your clothes. The sabbath is not even remotely the focus of the statement. The sabbath is incidental to the statement.

The poster needs to answer their own rhetorical questions and leave no implied meaning or the reader to their imaginations. The question: So he did not teach it? is an implied statement not a question. The answer to the question is no. The desired and required response is yes.

The Sabbath is probably one of the easiest of the commandments to keep out of them all. Rest and attend services.

I agree the sabbath is one of the easiest commandment to observe or keep. That is not the reason for failure to keep. The reason for failure to keep is that the Christian is dead to and not under the law (Torah) including the 10 commandments. The Stone edition of the Tanak states in Hosea 2 that the Sabbath will be terminated. Yes it uses the word terminated. Jer 31:31-34 states that the new covenant will not be like the (old) covenant made with their fathers identified in Deut 4:13 as the stone tablets. And in Deut 5 as the ten commandments. This would include the seventh day sabbath.

Paul, an apostle of God, admonished us to walk as he walked. Throughout the New Testament it is proven time and time again that the law exist. "Those who have an ear, let them hear." Yes, there was a law abolished and that was covered in an earlier thread. Yes, there is a new covenant and it still includes obedience to God's law.

Again the poster makes a manipulative implied statement with no support. It is implied that Paul kept the sabbath because he was in the synagogue on the sabbath. No where in scripture does one find support for this idea. The Jew was commanded to worship only 3 times a year and that was to be at the Temple, not a synagogue. The synagogue and church are nothing alike. Since the poster implies that we are to walk (do) as Paul did, are they preaching Jesus in the synagogue to Jews on the sabbath? Probably not even assembling with the Jews in the synagogue. Synagogue and church are not the same. Jesus is not welcome in the synagogue as evidenced in both the bible and our current society. An assembly of Messianics is not done in a Jewish synagogue. They will not allow it.

JohnRabbit, in another thread asked about a verse in Galatians. "if led by the spirit are not under the law." Why? Because of "grace" or "mercy" of God. All others are still under the law -- the penalty of it! Paul states that he serves the law and the law is holy just and good. If it did not exist, he could not serve it could he? He serves it by way of obeying it, and by grace he is not "under the law." Even though he still fights sin, which was in his flesh, just like ours, he fought against it overcoming it and he knew what sin was because of the law. We can't know what sin is if there is no law, correct? We are to grow in this way. In grace and knowledge.

So not everyone is under the law according to the above statement.

Indeed Paul states the law is holy and good. Paul also tells us the law brings condemnation and death. Paul calls it the ministration of death in II Cor 3:7 - But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones...

The Gentiles not knowing (having the law) did by nature the things written in the law Rom 2:14. So one can not say that the Gentiles were obeying the law of Moses or the ten commandments in the same way as my unregenerate drunk neighbor does not to my knowledege steal, curse, murder, lie or commit adultery. It can not be said that they are obeying God even though they perform in accordance with the law. They are submitting to the laws of the state, not God. They seem to be the same laws.

If there is a law to do 55mph then those that break the law are subject to the fine and those who don't are not subject to the law. This would be correct!

That law applies only to those in its jurisdiction. For instance the law for 18 wheelers is 55 MPH in California and 75 MPH in Arazonia and New Mexico, 70 in Texas and Oklahoma. Is a truck doing 75 in Arazonia violating the 55 MPH law in California? No. why? It is because California has no jurisdiction in Arazonia even if the truck and driver is licenced in California.

All the commandments were taught by Christ, all 10, except you say 9. Where is your logic in this? Paul said walk as he walked, enough said. Christ kept the Sabbath, period. Either by doing or saying.

Where is this? I can't find it in my Bible.

As far as washing the feet? Have you ever heard of a church that keeps the Passover? If so they will wash feet as commanded.

The customary foot washing was not restricted to the Passover celebration or a part thereof. Foot washing is not a commandment, but a custom of courtesy because they wore sandals and had dirty feet. Note what Jesus told Peter.

Christ wasn't naked when he was baptized! Bible says no such thing in all three accounts.

This baptism John did was after the fashion of the mikveh. The mikveh was preformed in public by a priest at the Temple. It is not a Jewish custom butpart of the law. Furthermore at that time most if not all but the wealthy had only one garment. They even used it as a blanket for warmth at night. A lender was required to return the pledge of agarment for that purpose.

You might want to re-evaluate the teachings on law, faith, works, grace. The bible does not and cannot contradict itself. However, what you are saying one would conclude that it does.

Great advice and the poster should follow it.[/quote]

Oh, and you might look into the trinity as well. Two persons in the Godhead, not three. [/quote] Consider Luke 1:35, 3:22; Mat 3:16, 17. There are three entities mentioned in each all referring to God.

And how would washing someone's feet be perverted? It would show humbleness and isn't that which true Christians are to have?

This statement does not begin to touch on humility or the humility of God washing the disciples feet dressed as a servant. In the manner of Jesus Christ dressed in only a towel with which He dried their feet. Check into the clothing of a servant/slave. John 13:4 He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. Is it denied because it doesn't say Jesus stripped naked and then girded Himself with a towel? I read an inclusive statement in my verse. It wasn't the 21st century. Verse 17 indicates servant meaning slave. Jesus washed the disciples feet as a servant dressed as a servant.

Disclaimer: I in no way intend any of this to be against the poster or to modivate them to do or change anything they believe. I believe in free will and choice.

bugkiller

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

To interrupt or enter this conversation ...

Yes, &#8220;The handwriting of ordinances&#8221; in Colossians 2:14 indeed included &#8220;Gods sabbath day&#8221;; it really was, &#8220;God&#8217;s Sabbath Day&#8221;, but certainly not &#8220;Gods sabbath day as &#8220;many&#8221; claim&#8221;. Because &#8220;the handwriting of ordinances&#8221; in Colossians 2:14 included ALL &#8216;Law&#8217; of God which Christ without exception took upon Himself, and represented by Himself, and had been in Himself, and carried through in his own body and flesh and &#8220;blotted out&#8221; with his own life and blood through suffering, humiliation and death in having been &#8220;Crucified&#8221; and &#8220;Killed&#8221; &#8220;ON THE CROSS&#8221;.

But by the time Paul starts speaking of "these things" being &#8220;a shadow&#8221; in verse 17, he speaks of &#8220;a shadow of things-a-coming&#8212; indeed The Body of Christ&#8217;s Own &#8230; holding to the Head &#8230; nourishment being ministered &#8230; growing with the growth of God&#8221;, &#8220;to the full stature of Christ&#8221;, &#8220;in whom dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily&#8221;. (2:9). &#8220;Let no man beguile you of&#8230;&#8221; said Paul, THIS, &#8220;&#8230;your Reward&#8221;! (2:18)

 

[visionary]

Is the seventh commandment done away with?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Originally Posted by Duckybill
True, but there's still no NT Sabbath commands. Why would God send His Son to shed His holy Blood for a New Covenant if we are bound to the Old? The Law of Moses was only for Israel.
.............

QUOTE=bugkiller;54905293]Great point!

bugkiller
[/QUOTE]



GE:

I encounter this pseudo 'argument' wherever I go forum-crawling. It's the super-legalists' only string harped incessantly and monotonously because it’s their BEST defense-through-attack. Babies are spoon-fed; grown-ups accept ‘Law’ as a matter of life’s course. Believers are satisfied with Christ their Law in all things. And ‘Law’ for the Christian as far as the Day of Worship is concerned, is because of the plain and true-life fact of the Scriptures both Old and New Testaments : Jesus Christ WOULD and DID rise from the dead “In Sabbath Day’s-time”.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Is the seventh commandment done away with?

GE:

That exactly was the point I answered in my post you reacted to. Yes! it was. In Christ; in Himself; through Himself; once for all. He resurrected again; and in Him and through Him in and through Resurrection from the dead, Christ ORIGINALLY INSTITUTED the Christian, Seventh-Day-Sabbath-of-the-LORD-your-God", "The Lord's Day", 'Heh Kuriakeh Hehmera'.

 

[visionary]

The 10? or the commandments of Jesus?

Do you think there is a difference? after all the Father and Son are in complete agreement.. and the Son promised that not the tiniest bit of it would be done away with.. until heaven and earth pass away..

 

[visionary]

GE:

That exactly was the point I answered in my post you reacted to. Yes! it was. In Christ; in Himself; through Himself; once for all. He resurrected again; and in Him and through Him in and through Resurrection from the dead, Christ ORIGINALLY INSTITUTED the Christian, Seventh-Day-Sabbath-of-the-LORD-your-God".

Do you even know what the seventh commandment even says.....?? Clue.. it is not the fourth commandment..

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Do you even know what the seventh commandment even says.....?? Clue.. it is not the fourth commandment..

GE:

Ja sure, Now I see; sorry, but aren't we discussing the FOURTH now? Do you even have a clue what you are even speaking even yourself?

My argument still stands : ALL 'Law' 'moral' or 'ceremonial' so-called. All God's 'Law' in the Scriptures because it is Scripture, is 'moral'. There's no such thing as 'ceremonial' 'Law' because it is 'ceremonial' but not 'moral'.

Therefore yes, also the Seventh in Jesus Christ was "nailed to the cross" and in Him thus was "done away with", "abolished", brought to nought IN THAT HE, "WAS MADE SIN FOR US", and "IN HIMSELF, CARRIED OUR SINS" and "the plague" that should have scourged us, was "UPON HIM".

Most certainly therefore the Seventh Commandment too!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It's still just 'Law' you're proclaiming. Bring us the Good News of Jesus Christ which "is the power of God unto salvation". The Law even in and under the New Covenant is powerless to save. If not through and because of "the POWER OF HIS RESURRECTION" we regard the Sabbath Day of the LORD our God, IN VAIN we regard it!

 

[visionary]

It's still just 'Law' you're proclaiming. Bring us the Good News of Jesus Christ which "is the power of God unto salvation". The Law even in and under the New Covenant is powerless to save. If not through and because of "the POWER OF HIS RESURRECTION" we regard the Sabbath Day of the LORD our God, IN VAIN we regard it!

As long as sin remains, so also must the law define it... it shall remain.. and you are absolutely right the good news of Yeshua is the offer of salvation and His power over death by His resurrection...

 

[Frogster]

Do you think there is a difference? after all the Father and Son are in complete agreement.. and the Son promised that not the tiniest bit of it would be done away with.. until heaven and earth pass away..

The usage of law is often wide in scripture. Jesus called the psalms law, in John 10 and 15, so yes, there may be future things to come, from the prophets etc, however, Jesus surely knew the aspects of the Mosaic law, were going to the cross. Did you ever notice that respected Barnabas, travelled with Paul, and fought off judaizing, and preached Christ is the end of the law?


44 Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

Barn.


15:1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.

And please remember, that not only did Peter call the law an unbearable yoke, but even James did not want to burden the gentiles with torah life, inacts 15.

 

[Frogster]

As long as sin remains, so also must the law define it... it shall remain.. and you are absolutely right the good news of Yeshua is the offer of salvation and His power over death by His resurrection...

why were thos Jews in antioch, living as gentiles, no sabbath, or food laws?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The usage of law is often wide in scripture. Jesus called the psalms law, in John 10 and 15, so yes, there may be future things to come, from the prophets etc, however, Jesus surely knew the aspects of the Mosaic law, were going to the cross. Did you ever notice that respected Barnabas, travelled with Paul, and fought off judaizing, and preached Christ is the end of the law?


44 Then he said to them, &#8220;These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.&#8221;

Barn.


15:1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, &#8220;Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.&#8221; 2 And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.

And please remember, that not only did Peter call the law an unbearable yoke, but even James did not want to burden the gentiles with torah life, inacts 15.

GE:

You must speak precisely, or you do not speak the truth, here, especially.

Big disagreement arose, ABOUT WHAT? '&#8217;About torah life&#8217;? No! About : &#8220;circumcision&#8221; the law already to Abraham, &#8220;and to keep the law of Moses&#8221; containing the law to Abraham, the specific matter of &#8216;circumcision&#8217;. For circumcision was what the whole dispute &#8211; and sitting and disputation &#8211; was about after all as from the start.

Did Peter call &#8220;the law unbearable&#8221;? No! He said circumcision was an &#8216;unbearable yoke on the neck&#8217;, verse 24, &#8220;We gave no such command!&#8221; His innuendos was on the fleshly difficulties and un-necessities as over against and in opposition to things of the &#8220;heart&#8221; and &#8220;Holy Spirit&#8221;. If the Sabbath&#8217;s interests were at issue, Peter or James would have made it clear where the golden opportunity for such renunciation presented itself, where it is written that &#8220;Moses of old every Sabbath Day have them&#8221; : the New Christian Membership of the Synagogues : &#8220;that preach him being read every Sabbath Day.&#8221; The very opportunity the minutes of this synod was to be read to the Church of Christ!

&#8216;Remember&#8217; &#8230; these were the minutes of the synod written to be read before the Congregations in Antioch and all the world AFTER the sitting and decisions were arrived at! Certainly the Apostles would have declared &#8220;We gave no such command&#8221; if Believers no longer were supposed to listen to the Word of God being read and preached on Sabbath Days!

And, o yes, the 'things' the synod eventually did give verdict about, were none 'Torah' or anything of Moses' laws --- they were pagan atrocities warned against and strictly prohibited for Christian worship on Sabbath Days especially!

 

[RefCath]

yes we should keep the sabbath, Sunday is the Christian Sabbath.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

yes we should keep the sabbath, Sunday is the Christian Sabbath.

GE:

Empty talk; no thinking; no 'Gehorsamkeit' --- no 'hearing', no listening to the Scriptures, no 'obedience'!

Sunday is NOT the Christian Sabbath. It is the Sabbath now a days and for long has been the 'sabbath' of Christianity; but it is not 'Christian' because it did not originate with Christ or with the early Christian Church. Just a few truthful, facts. Do you love the Truth?

 

[Arthur57]

GE:

Ja sure, Now I see; sorry, but aren't we discussing the FOURTH now? Do you even have a clue what you are even speaking even yourself?

My argument still stands : ALL 'Law' 'moral' or 'ceremonial' so-called. All God's 'Law' in the Scriptures because it is Scripture, is 'moral'. There's no such thing as 'ceremonial' 'Law' because it is 'ceremonial' but not 'moral'.

Therefore yes, also the Seventh in Jesus Christ was "nailed to the cross" and in Him thus was "done away with", "abolished", brought to nought IN THAT HE, "WAS MADE SIN FOR US", and "IN HIMSELF, CARRIED OUR SINS" and "the plague" that should have scourged us, was "UPON HIM".

Most certainly therefore the Seventh Commandment too!

Romans 3:31o we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Seems your precept is against Paul's. Of course Paul would not be against him self.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

As long as sin remains, so also must the law define it... it shall remain.. and you are absolutely right the good news of Yeshua is the offer of salvation and His power over death by His resurrection...

GE:

Except I do not view Jesus' Resurrection an offer merely of Salvation, but Salvation absolutely.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Romans 3:31o we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Seems your precept is against Paul's. Of course Paul would not be against him self.

GE:

Ja, if you conveniently present halve my "precept".