Removing the laws of God- what does it really mean?

[SabbathBlessings]

I'm not aware of a passage in the scriptures that talk about that, either.

When in the past I've asked people who favor keeping some parts of the law of Moses how they decide which parts, the answer is usually something like look for the intent, or it's obvious.

Sometimes I'll bring up the commandment that talks about when you want to use the toilet, take a spade and go outside the camp.

That's usually answered with well, the basic intent is to use modern sewage systems.

Seems like quite a stretch to me, also it requires the individual to understand God's intention.

if we're just going to go with the basic intent of the law of Moses, Jesus summed that up by saying treat other people the way you want to be treated.

Sounds good to me

God's commandments were separated from the other laws. The 10 are the only commandments that God personally both wrote and spoke. It's the only scripture in the entire Bible written by the hand of God! The laws of Moses was written by Moses and many were ceremonial like blood sacrifices, feasts that ended at the cross. God's commandments were always separated (in the most holy of holy in the ark, not outside) and each one applies as much today as they did yesterday and will be tomorrow.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I assumed, since you replied with the same kind of statements as before, that it was what you thought. You seem to put a lot of emphasis on Gods creation and law - not on the one thing He made after the image of Himself and actually breathed life into.

I’m sorry if that is a misunderstanding, it is sometimes very difficult to interpret what your saying.

Maybe you can clarify it when you get back.

If you're up for it maybe this will explain better, the seal of God in Revelations. Program Archives | Revelation Now

 

[Nathan@work]

If you're up for it maybe this will explain better, the seal of God in Revelations. Program Archives | Revelation Now

Thanks, but I will have to pass on listening to him.

I think I may have said it before, but maybe it got lost somewhere.

I've studied the in's and out's of the SDA. They actually had me hooked quite a few years back. It was with much pain and agony that God brought me out.

So I know what the general view is for most, but I also know that some within the ranks have different views. I thought I would ask you for yours, concerning what you believe God's greatest creation to be.

I know what the seal of God is. It is no different in Revelation than it is in the rest of the Bible. It's the same seal throughout the whole Bible - God's Spirit - not something we do, it is something He does.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Thanks, but I will have to pass on listening to him.

I think I may have said it before, but maybe it got lost somewhere.

I've studied the in's and out's of the SDA. They actually had me hooked quite a few years back. It was with much pain and agony that God brought me out.

So I know what the general view is for most, but I also know that some within the ranks have different views. I thought I would ask you for yours, concerning what you believe God's greatest creation to be.

I know what the seal of God is. It is no different in Revelation than it is in the rest of the Bible. It's the same seal throughout the whole Bible - God's Spirit - not something we do, it is something He does.

I see. I misunderstood the question you were asking. Or you misunderstood what I was saying. Either way wires were mixed up. I'm sorry about any pain you had previously. That is definitely the opposite of my experience. Sabbath keeping has brought me nothing but blessings. I honestly look forward to it every week.

If you have any other questions, please let me know.

God bless

 

[Nathan@work]

I see. I misunderstood the question you were asking. Or you misunderstood what I was saying. Either way sires were mixed up. I'm sorry about any pain you had previously. That is definitely the opposite of my experience. Sabbath keeping has brought me nothing but blessings. I honestly look forward to it every week.

If you have any other questions, please let me know.

God bless

Oh, the pain was not from Sabbath-keeping - it was from the removal from the false doctrines. It's hard to let go of something your flesh tells you is good.

I had a similar experience, albeit very mild in comparison, when I almost got trapped into false doctrines of Baptism.

I enjoy keeping the Sabbath Holy in my heart. When I think of Who God is, and what He has done - it never ceases to amaze me. Nothing but a blessing.

Yes, I still have the one question - What do you think is God's greatest creation?

 

[Leaf473]

God's commandments were separated from the other laws. The 10 are the only commandments that God personally both wrote and spoke. It's the only scripture in the entire Bible written by the hand of God! The laws of Moses was written by Moses and many were ceremonial like blood sacrifices, feasts that ended at the cross. God's commandments were always separated (in the most holy of holy in the ark, not outside) and each one applies as much today as they did yesterday and will be tomorrow.

Thanks for the nice response!

I see in exodus that God writes The ten commandments on the tablets, which Moses then breaks.

Then later in Exodus, God tells Moses to bring up stone tablets and he, God, will write the commandments on them. But that set of commandments is quite different.

Then in Deuteronomy, there's a list that is close to the first one in Exodus, but differs slightly.

In your opinion, which one is the one that God wrote originally, and which one is the one that was placed in the ark?

 

[pescador]

Hi there,

You originally left out the very first sentence of the 4th commandment and now accusing me of changing God's Words. That carries a heavy consequence in the Bible and not one I take lightly.

This is from the KJV. God both spoke and wrote these Words:

Exodus 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Yes, rest is part of the Sabbath commandment, not to do any work, but we are also told to keep it Holy. These are not my words, but God's.

Let's take these issues one by one...

You wrote, "You originally left out the very first sentence of the 4th commandment and now accusing me of changing God's Words. That carries a heavy consequence in the Bible and not one I take lightly." Every time but one that I have cited the commandment I have included the first sentence. So what? a) The rest of the time I cited it I included it. b) you added a bunch of numbers to the text and, by quoting from the King James translation, added a bunch of (italicized) words that aren't part of the Bible texts, but added to the Hebrew. More important, it doesn't say in Exodus 20 that God wrote those words; that doesn't occur until Exodus 31. Why are you adding to God's Word twice? That carries a very heavy consequence.

You also wrote, "Yes, rest is part of the Sabbath commandment, not to do any work, but we are also told to keep it Holy. These are not my words, but God's." God never wrote these words, they're your words!

In case you're not aware, God never spoke or wrote in English, so even the words that you cite aren't the actual words.

You see, anybody can be legalistic in an attempt to prove themselves right. It doesn't prove a thing. It just demonstrates one's attitude.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Let's take these issues one by one...



In case you're not aware, God never spoke or wrote in English, so even the words that you cite aren't the actual words.

You see, anybody can be legalistic in an attempt to prove themselves right. It doesn't prove a thing. It just demonstrates one's attitude.

Now you're saying the Words God spoke and wrote are not His Words? Does it matter what language they were in? By your theory how do we believe anything in the Bible.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Thanks for the nice response!

I see in exodus that God writes The ten commandments on the tablets, which Moses then breaks.

Then later in Exodus, God tells Moses to bring up stone tablets and he, God, will write the commandments on them. But that set of commandments is quite different.

Then in Deuteronomy, there's a list that is close to the first one in Exodus, but differs slightly.

In your opinion, which one is the one that God wrote originally, and which one is the one that was placed in the ark?

It was the same TEN that God re-wrote. Obviously the second set was in the ark since the first set was broken.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Oh, the pain was not from Sabbath-keeping - it was from the removal from the false doctrines. It's hard to let go of something your flesh tells you is good.

I had a similar experience, albeit very mild in comparison, when I almost got trapped into false doctrines of Baptism.

I enjoy keeping the Sabbath Holy in my heart. When I think of Who God is, and what He has done - it never ceases to amaze me. Nothing but a blessing.

Yes, I still have the one question - What do you think is God's greatest creation?

That's a tough question but obviously God's greatest creation was man-kind, but it wouldn't be the same without everything else God made in days one-five. We have an awesome God!

 

[Leaf473]

It was the same TEN that God re-wrote. Obviously the second set was in the ark since the first set was broken.

It looks to me that the version in Deuteronomy is a bit different than the one in Exodus. Does it look that way to you too?

Which is the one you believe God wrote with his finger?

 

[pescador]

Now you're saying the Words God spoke and wrote are not His Words? Does it matter what language they were in? By your theory how do we believe anything in the Bible.

I'm simply pointing out that your legalistic approach is flawed. The King James Bible is a translation not God's exact words. Therefore, the words translated into English are not God's words. They are an early 17th Century interpretation of what the Hebrew says. It matters a great deal what language the words are in, since all translations are an interpretation of what the Hebrew-Aramaic-Greek mean.

We believe what is written in the Bible with the assistance of the Holy Spirit... "But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth." John 16:13

You have been attacking me for several posts, using legalistic thinking instead of plain logic. I'm not sure what your intent is but you're not making much sense.

Your "signature" speaks volumes: "The only scripture written by God in the entire Bible is The 10 commandments. God asked us to obey all 10 commandments, not just 9. God bless"

So you're saying that the contents Bible books are not God's words? That the Holy Spirit did not flawlessly inspire the Bible? That Jesus, being a third of the Godhead, spoke words that were not of God? John 14:10, "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you, I do not speak on my own initiative, but the Father residing in me performs his miraculous deeds."

Also, "He said to me, “Son of man, go to the house of Israel and speak my words to them." Ezekiel 3:4

Ezekiel 12:28 "Therefore say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: None of my words will be delayed any longer! The word I speak will come to pass, declares the Sovereign Lord.’”

Hebrews 4:7, "So God again ordains a certain day, “Today,” speaking through David after so long a time, as in the words quoted before, “Oh, that today you would listen as he speaks! Do not harden your hearts.”

1 Peter 4:11a, "Whoever speaks, let it be with God’s words."

Again, your legalistic approach is leading you into serious error.

 

[BobRyan]

Earlier in this thread, people were talking about dividing the law into different parts, like ceremonial civil moral.

What is the standard for dividing the law up this way? How was it decided if a particular commandment is moral or ceremonial?

A couple of things -

Heb 7 - says there was a change in priesthood and a change in law - so we know something changed.

Heb 10:4-11 says "he takes away the first to establish the second" speaking of animal sacrifices and offerings - as compared to the once-for-all offering of Christ.

1 Cor 7:19 says that circumcision does not matter - but what matters is "keeping the Commandments of God"

so we know there is some sort of distinction and change being discussed by the NT writers where something is taken away and something remains - instead of lumping it all into one thing without any distinctions.

The "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 makes the case that the civil laws could not be applicable once the theocracy ended - which was the nation/government that was subject to those civil laws.

The animal sacrifice laws would not be in place once the shadows were fulfilled in the sacrifice of Christ. This means that the ceremonies with liturgy only specified in terms of animal sacrifice - had no more liturgy.

 

[BobRyan]

Again, here is that passage in its entirety, “Remember the Sabbath day to set it apart as holy. For six days you may labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; on it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, or your male servant, or your female servant, or your cattle, or the resident foreigner who is in your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth and the sea and all that is in them, and he rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and set it apart as holy."

The Sabbath is about a day of rest. God rested on the seventh day and we are to do the same.

And He said it is a day of "holy convocation" Lev 23:3
And He said that all mankind would come before God to worship "from Sabbath to Sabbath" Isaiah 66:23 for all eternity after the cross in the New Earth.

And we see that it is not a day for any secular activity at all Isaiah 58:13

And we see Paul in the synagogue preaching the Gospel "very Sabbath" Acts 18:4 to both believing Jews and gentiles and unbelieving Jews and gentiles.

 

[Leaf473]

A couple of things -

Heb 7 - says there was a change in priesthood and a change in law - so we know something changed.

Heb 10:4-11 says "he takes away the first to establish the second" speaking of animal sacrifices and offerings - as compared to the once-for-all offering of Christ.

1 Cor 7:19 says that circumcision does not matter - but what matters is "keeping the Commandments of God"

so we know there is some sort of distinction and change being discussed by the NT writers where something is taken away and something remains - instead of lumping it all into one thing without any distinctions.

The "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 makes the case that the civil laws could not be applicable once the theocracy ended - which was the nation/government that was subject to those civil laws.

The animal sacrifice laws would not be in place once the shadows were fulfilled in the sacrifice of Christ. This means that the ceremonies with liturgy only specified in terms of animal sacrifice - had no more liturgy.

Why would we regard the Baptist confession of faith?
Nothing at all against Baptists here, but why would we expect that a particular confession of faith in a Protestant group would be the way to divide up the law given by God? Assuming the law is supposed to be divided up?

What about laws like levirate marriage? imo, they are as much moral laws as any other law given through Moses.

 

[pescador]

Now you're saying the Words God spoke and wrote are not His Words? Does it matter what language they were in? By your theory how do we believe anything in the Bible.

In case you're not aware, 1) we don't have the original Bible "books", only copies and 2) our English Bibles are translations from three different ancient languages.

That has nothing to do with believing God's message. It's interesting to me that you conflate the two. Are you saying that God can't communicate to us through His written word?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

In case you're not aware, 1) we don't have the original Bible "books", only copies and 2) our English Bibles are translations from three different ancient languages.

That has nothing to do with believing God's message. It's interesting to me that you conflate the two. Are you saying that God can't communicate to us through His written word?

I'm not the one saying that. I said the opposite.

 

[pescador]

I'm not the one saying that. I said the opposite.

So did I. What I said in addition is 1) we don't have the original Bible "books", only copies and 2) our English Bibles are translations from three different ancient languages. That has nothing to do with believing God's message.

 

[Leaf473]

Taking as a given that the ten commandments listed in Exodus when the Israelites first enter the wilderness,

how would we get from that to the ten commandments being the only moral laws in the Law?

 

[Nathan@work]

Taking as a given that the ten commandments listed in Exodus when the Israelites first enter the wilderness,

how would we get from that to the ten commandments being the only moral laws in the Law?

As they say, "the journey of a thousand miles begins with one step".

I'm guessing there has been a lot of ground covered since Jesus went to be with the Father.