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.
this is Paul's account by his own words. do you deny that Paul is not speaking about the same thing? they are mirror versions of each other, he even uses the same language. "what counts" is this:The interpretation is your words, not what the scriptures reveal. I have yet to come across a verse that says faith is the commandments of God.
I prefer to go by how the bible defines it.
And is written in the Book of the Law,James 2:8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well;
The Royal Law is the greatest commandments
The Greatest Commandments are the Ten summarized, never deleting the details. The first 4 commandments are love to God, the last 6 love to our neighbor, magnified as demonstrated by Jesus Mat 5:19-30
I’m sorry. I was not trying to be insulting, that was not my intention. You disagreed with my post, but only used your own reasoning, which is why I said that. I was talking about 1 specific post Jer 31:31-34 Not all of your posts as you can see my history I like and agree with many of them. You call me out when you disagree, I was saying, hey let’s look at what the scriptures say on this matter.Insult begats insult. In other word you are implying I don't.
The book of the law contains many writings, curses, blessing and laws, but that does not make it all the Royal Law as no scripture says this. A verse imho would be important that says the book of the law is the Royal law like James says quoting directly from the greatest commandments to define what he is referring to.And is written in the Book of the Law,
Lev 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
As is not having respect of person's position in life.
Lev 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.
And while we are at it lets consider verses 1:28 and 29 . These teachings are found also in the Old Testament. In Ps., Pro., and Is. to name a few.
James is quoting explicitly saying the Royal Law is the greatest commandments by directly quoting what he is referring to. We also have scripture showing the greatest commandments are the Ten summarized Rom 13:9 and always have to clarify not for you, but for others that the summary does not delete the details.Jas 2:8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
And then James explicitly only quotes and contrasts from the Ten Commandments calling them the law of Liberty and what we will be Judged by which reconciles in other scriptures like Ecc 12:13-14, Mat 5:19-30, Rev 22:14-15Jas 2:9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Jas 2:11 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.
Jas 2:12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
I gave you the facts as written in acts. It is for you to sort it out. Use discernment not your feelings.so you're saying Paul is lying? to get this straight this isn't a commentary from someone else, this is Paul writing a letter to the Galatians after the fact and by his own admission, he publically claims Peter is living like a Gentile. even if untrue, "living like a Gentile" is not Paul's issue, Paul's issue is that Peter is being 2 faced about it.
Still you refuse to see, apart from the 10 commandments, many laws given to moses cannot be followed today for different reasons, go througm them one by one snd see, the isrealites living for 400 years in captivity were worshipping egyptian gods before the exodus they were in need of a complete reform. The 10 commandments are the moral core, permanent, will never change and should be obeyed as given. The rest of the law of Moses, what can be applicable and good today should also be observed if possible, Why not..the tablets of stone are referenced as "the tablets of covenant law". they are put inside the "art of the covenant". The sabbath is a sign of the covenant, these all establish covenant boundaries not cause to remove them from their covenant for them to act alone. They were taken outside the ark essentially so Joshua could swear by them, the same way we do in a court of law swearing on a bible. Both Moses and Joshua were leaders within the boundaries of the old covenant. The tablets are indeed elevated, but they are elevated within their covenant and there is not one suggestion to remove them so they may act alone. I can see by your remarks that you see the 10 should act on their own, but where is your scriptural support for ripping them away from their covenant? when you evoke the 10 you invoke the entire law with it, that's what made pulling them out of the ark so much more powerful.
Paul motivation in acts for the vow he took be it narzarite or other was a contexalizing focus towards Jews. He says himself in 1 Cor 9 "to the Jew I become as a Jew... I do this all for the sake of the gospel..." So if his comments reflect his motivations he took the vow for the sake of the gospel so that he may better serve a Jewish community.I gave you the facts as written in acts. It is for you to sort it out. Use discernment not your feelings.
The 4th is ceremonial in natural not moral. It even starts off saying "remember the 7th day..." It's a memorial event of the 7th day celebrated through rest. This is not an example of critical moral code even if you call it that, it simply is not. Law always does not come labeled. There is no ceremonial law or moral law, this is just law. We have given them labels for various reasons, one of them is to separate law but law is never meant to be separated.Still you refuse to see, apart from the 10 commandments, many laws given to moses cannot be followed today for different reasons, go througm them one by one snd see, the isrealites living for 400 years in captivity were worshipping egyptian gods before the exodus they were in need of a complete reform. The 10 commandments are the moral core, permanent, will never change and should be obeyed as given. The rest of the law of Moses, what can be applicable and good today should also be observed if possible, Why not..
Paul motivation in acts for the vow he took be it narzarite or other was a contexalizing focus towards Jews. He says himself in 1 Cor 9 "to the Jew I become as a Jew... I do this all for the sake of the gospel..." So if his comments reflect his motivations he took the vow for the sake of the gospel so that he may better serve a Jewish community.
Damian, this is an interesting topic worth a post, please start a new post on this topic and I will gladly discuss this is too far off of the opening post,Paul motivation in acts for the vow he took be it narzarite or other was a contexalizing focus towards Jews. He says himself in 1 Cor 9 "to the Jew I become as a Jew... I do this all for the sake of the gospel..." So if his comments reflect his motivations he took the vow for the sake of the gospel so that he may better serve a Jewish community.
Regarding his rebuke toward Peter it is clear Peter is being spoken of as living like a gentile but being 2 faced about it with other Jews and causing problems, the later is Paul's concern not the former. The meaning is plainly understood, Peter was living like a gentile.
Damian, how can you say the 4th commandment is not moral? Is obeying a simple command from God immoral. this command is not just about rest it is a sign between you and GOD that you acknowledge His divinity and show also your respect by obeying.The 4th is ceremonial in natural not moral. It even starts off saying "remember the 7th day..." It's a memorial event of the 7th day celebrated through rest. This is not an example of critical moral code even if you call it that, it simply is not. Law always does not come labeled. There is no ceremonial law or moral law, this is just law. We have given them labels for various reasons, one of them is to separate law but law is never meant to be separated.
There may be many laws that don't work today based on modern living or geography but certainly not just the 10 are relevant. Circumcision is an example, millions across the 3 major religions still circumsize and it is a common enough practice that if you wanted it done it can happen, adult or child. But new covenant teaching reveals to us the meaning of circumsize and we don't need to perform this act physically for it to have meaning.
If obedience is the only measure we need to call something moral than the entire law is moral code and your argument falls apart. If we look at morally critically it is about how our actions effect others positively. the 10 commandments are not all moral in this way and 6-10 are more universally moral. Where 1-5 can be called regliously moral in that they require religious knowledge in order to obey them.Damian, how can you say the 4th commandment is not moral? Is obeying a simple command from God immoral.
why do you say obedience is the only measure, did I say this? why would one Obey GOD's commands? simply to obey? If you do not LOVE GOD enough to follow his lead it is on you. All God does is for us. it it a choice that is put before us as it is written;If obedience is the only measure we need to call something moral than the entire law is moral code and your argument falls apart. If we look at morally critically it is about how our actions effect others positively. the 10 commandments are not all moral in this way and 6-10 are more universally moral. Where 1-5 can be called regliously moral in that they require religious knowledge in order to obey them.
You don't need to be told a universal moral in order to understand it. So we don't need to be told to murdering, stealing or sleeping with your neighbor's wife are wrong, they are wrong because of how they effect others negatively. With the sabbath sure rest is positive and a natural thing, and so is routine rest but the sabbath has specific instructions for it be observable naturally without having the knowledge of the sabbath first.
We rest when it gets dark, this is natural and brought upon by the setting of the sun, there are lunar cycles we can naturally observe, and seasons in the year but there is no natural weekly cycle so that I know when Sabbath is upon me. In order to observe sabbath, I need to be told first how to observe it.
The truth is, your argument only works if the 10 is looked at in a vacuum. But the 10 should not be separated from the covenant they are created in, when we envoke obedience on the 10 as moral code we envoke obedience upon the entire law as moral code.
This still doesn't make the 4th commandment innately moral code. Again I'm looking at this critically, you seem interested in other measures.why do you say obedience is the only measure, did I say this? why would one Obey GOD's commands? simply to obey? If you do not LOVE GOD enough to follow his lead it is on you. All God does is for us. it it a choice that is put before us as it is written
I cannot find this in the scriptures that says the 4th commandment is not moral to keep. God has some strong words about not keeping the Sabbath and what it does to Him. Eze 22:26This still doesn't make the 4th commandment innately moral code. Again I'm looking at this critically, you seem interested in other measures.
The other measures you mention are the very few verses from the bible, defining the sabbath, yes the word of GOD, it is for you to decide what you do with the word of GOD, you have free will.This still doesn't make the 4th commandment innately moral code. Again I'm looking at this critically, you seem interested in other measures.
Isa 56:2 Blessed is the man who does this,The other measures you mention are the very few verses from the bible, defining the sabbath, yes the word of GOD, it is for you to decide what you do with the word of GOD, you have free will.
Like I mentioned before in full context, (post 91) for understanding this is an excerpt;
Deu 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
Why then are you separating the Word of God if you are so committed to it? It is not just the 10, it is the whole thing. What gives you authority to separate it?The other measures you mention are the very few verses from the bible, defining the sabbath, yes the word of GOD, it is for you to decide what you do with the word of GOD, you have free will.
Like I mentioned before in full context, (post 91) for understanding this is an excerpt;
Deu 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
I did not separate it, see below what I have mentioned to you before;Why then are you separating the Word of God if you are so committed to it? It is not just the 10, it is the whole thing. What gives you authority to separate it?
Good point!I did not separate it, see below what I have mentioned to you before;
The tablets of stone where the 10 commandments were written by the finger of GOD himself was originally placed inside the Ark of the Covenant, alongside in later times with other items such as a jar of manna and Aaron’s rod that budded. However, there is an instance in Deuteronomy 31:26 where Moses instructs to put the "book of the law" beside the Ark, not inside it: "Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee."
This placement of the book outside the Ark signifies a distinction between the tablets of the Ten Commandments, which were central and sacred, and the broader body of laws given to the Israelites. The tablets inside the Ark symbolize the core, eternal covenant between God and Israel, while the book of the law placed outside serves as a written witness or record of the laws, ensuring they are accessible to the people for guidance and instruction.
This arrangement reflects the relationship between the unchanging, foundational terms of the covenant represented by the tablets, and the dynamic aspects of the law and its application in daily life, as recorded in the book.
BTW I did say to you that if people want to follow the rest of the law of Moses that is still applicable, they certainly can.
You invent things again or never read my replies to you so we are done!
This is grasping at straws. it is all in an old covenant context. the ark did not contain the boundaries of the covenant, inside or outside it was still within that covenant, Moses pulled the tablets out as a sort of way to keep Joshua accountable passing leadership roles both bound by covenant laws so there is no part of this that is odd. This needs to be approached more critically if you want me to view it seriously. I value Torah too much to tear it apart on such baseless support.However, there is an instance in Deuteronomy 31:26 where Moses instructs to put the "book of the law" beside the Ark
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?