The Catholic Catechism comments on the 10 Commandments puts to shame Evangelicals.

[GladiatorforGod]

For example: Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

2075 "What good deed must I do, to have eternal life?" - "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments" (⇒ Mt 19:16-17).

2076 By his life and by his preaching Jesus attested to the permanent validity of the Decalogue.

2077 The gift of the Decalogue is bestowed from within the covenant concluded by God with his people. God's commandments take on their true meaning in and through this covenant.

2078 In fidelity to Scripture and in conformity with Jesus' example, the tradition of the Church has always acknowledged the primordial importance and significance of the Decalogue.

2079 The Decalogue forms an organic unity in which each "word" or "commandment" refers to all the others taken together. To transgress one commandment is to infringe the whole Law (cf ⇒ Jas 2:10-11).

2080 The Decalogue contains a privileged expression of the natural law. It is made known to us by divine revelation and by human reason.

2081 The Ten Commandments, in their fundamental content, state grave obligations. However, obedience to these precepts also implies obligations in matter which is, in itself, light.

2082 What God commands he makes possible by his grace.

 

[Nanopants]

2075 "What good deed must I do, to have eternal life?" - "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments" (⇒ Mt 19:16-17).

2076 By his life and by his preaching Jesus attested to the permanent validity of the Decalogue.

2077 The gift of the Decalogue is bestowed from within the covenant concluded by God with his people. God's commandments take on their true meaning in and through this covenant.

2078 In fidelity to Scripture and in conformity with Jesus' example, the tradition of the Church has always acknowledged the primordial importance and significance of the Decalogue.

2079 The Decalogue forms an organic unity in which each "word" or "commandment" refers to all the others

taken together. To transgress one commandment is to infringe the whole Law (cf ⇒ Jas 2:10-11).
​

I see no problems here so far.

2080 The Decalogue contains a privileged expression of the natural law. It is made known to us by divine revelation and by human reason.
​

Philosophy doesn't seem to mix with theology much better than oil with water, but that's just my opinion.

2081 The Ten Commandments, in their fundamental content, state grave obligations. However, obedience to these precepts also implies obligations in matter which is, in itself, light.
​

I'm not sure I know what this means. If I had to guess, the impossible obligations and the subsequent condemnation add strength to the law of liberty, since we would not be judged by ordinances if we had shown mercy and had ceased from judging others by those same ordinances. The two working together as a unit form a just and merciful law against merciless injustice. If we condemn others by a law that condemns us, we condemn ourselves, and if we set our hearts on the mercy and goodness of God in Christ (i.e. we believe on Him), then we receive mercy.

2082 What God commands he makes possible by his grace.
​

True. His own righteousness is an attribute of the gift given to us by His grace, which is Himself. All who are united to Him through faith are those who have kept His commands.

I don't see what the big deal is Gladiator.

 

[Adaephon]

For example: Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

2075 "What good deed must I do, to have eternal life?" - "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments" (=> Mt 19:16-17).

2076 By his life and by his preaching Jesus attested to the permanent validity of the Decalogue.

2077 The gift of the Decalogue is bestowed from within the covenant concluded by God with his people. God's commandments take on their true meaning in and through this covenant.

2078 In fidelity to Scripture and in conformity with Jesus' example, the tradition of the Church has always acknowledged the primordial importance and significance of the Decalogue.

2079 The Decalogue forms an organic unity in which each "word" or "commandment" refers to all the others

taken together. To transgress one commandment is to infringe the whole Law (cf => Jas 2:10-11).

2080 The Decalogue contains a privileged expression of the natural law. It is made known to us by divine revelation and by human reason.

2081 The Ten Commandments, in their fundamental content, state grave obligations. However, obedience to these precepts also implies obligations in matter which is, in itself, light.

2082 What God commands he makes possible by his grace.

Why do you have such a big chip on your shoulder against your Christian brothers and sisters? How many attack threads have you posted so far?

 

[GladiatorforGod]

2075 "What good deed must I do, to have eternal life?" - "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments" (⇒ Mt 19:16-17).

2076 By his life and by his preaching Jesus attested to the permanent validity of the Decalogue.

2077 The gift of the Decalogue is bestowed from within the covenant concluded by God with his people. God's commandments take on their true meaning in and through this covenant.

2078 In fidelity to Scripture and in conformity with Jesus' example, the tradition of the Church has always acknowledged the primordial importance and significance of the Decalogue.

2079 The Decalogue forms an organic unity in which each "word" or "commandment" refers to all the others

taken together. To transgress one commandment is to infringe the whole Law (cf ⇒ Jas 2:10-11).
​

I see no problems here so far.

2080 The Decalogue contains a privileged expression of the natural law. It is made known to us by divine revelation and by human reason.
​

Philosophy doesn't seem to mix with theology much better than oil with water, but that's just my opinion.

2081 The Ten Commandments, in their fundamental content, state grave obligations. However, obedience to these precepts also implies obligations in matter which is, in itself, light.
​

I'm not sure I know what this means. If I had to guess, the impossible obligations and the subsequent condemnation add strength to the law of liberty, since we would not be judged by ordinances if we had shown mercy and had ceased from judging others by those same ordinances. The two working together as a unit form a just and merciful law against merciless injustice. If we condemn others by a law that condemns us, we condemn ourselves, and if we set our hearts on the mercy and goodness of God in Christ (i.e. we believe on Him), then we receive mercy.

2082 What God commands he makes possible by his grace.
​

True. His own righteousness is an attribute of the gift given to us by His grace, which is Himself. All who are united to Him through faith are those who have kept His commands.

I don't see what the big deal is Gladiator.

You missed my point. I was showing how Catholics have a more biblical position than Evangelicals, in that Catholics view the 10 Commandments as being binding on all professed Christians, but modern Evangelicals think that the 10 Commandments have been nailed to the cross and are non-binding to them, since they "have been saved"! While in fact, they are flagrant sinners duped by their misguided Pastors into thinking that they are not obligated to obey the 10 Commandments!

 

[GladiatorforGod]

Why do you have such a big chip on your shoulder against your Christian brothers and sisters? How many attack threads have you posted so far?

You missed my point. I was showing how Catholics have a more biblical position regarding the 10 Commandments than modern Evangelicals. Because they, for the most part have been duped into thinking that they can sin with impunity.

 

[winslow]

You missed my point. I was showing how Catholics have a more biblical position than Evangelicals, in that Catholics view the 10 Commandments as being binding on all professed Christians, but modern Evangelicals think that the 10 Commandments have been nailed to the cross and are non-binding to them, since they "have been saved"! While in fact, they are flagrant sinners duped by their misguided Pastors into thinking that they are not obligated to obey the 10 Commandments!

By your own level of judgement you declare the Catholic Church to be flagrant sinners. They claim that the 10 commandments are all binding and to break one is to break them all. This would also include the fourth commanment, which the Catholic Church disregards.

 

[NorrinRadd]

You missed my point. I was showing how Catholics have a more biblical position than Evangelicals, in that Catholics view the 10 Commandments as being binding on all professed Christians, but modern Evangelicals think that the 10 Commandments have been nailed to the cross and are non-binding to them, since they "have been saved"! While in fact, they are flagrant sinners duped by their misguided Pastors into thinking that they are not obligated to obey the 10 Commandments!

I'm curious -- How do you figure that the Catholic position is "more Biblical," given that the very expression you used -- "nailed to the Cross" -- itself comes from the Bible?

Those of us committed to the message of grace don't believe it because we were "duped" by our pastors. If we were "duped," it was Scripture itself that duped us by telling us that the law of Commandments and ordinances was abolished (Eph. 2:15), that the certificate of debts was cancelled and nailed to the cross (Col. 2:16), that we are redeemed from the curse that is the law because Christ became a curse and was hanged on the tree (Gal. 3:13), that neither sabbaths nor any other days are "holy" (Gal. 4:10, Rom. 14, Col. 2:16), that we have but one Commandment, the "royal" law of love (Rom. 13:8-10, Gal. 5:14, Jas. 2:8, John 13:34, 1 John 2:7-11, 2 John 1:5).

Now of course you believe this view is wrong, but given the abundance of Scriptural support for it, I can't see how you can argue against it except by saying it is TOO Biblical.

 

[GladiatorforGod]

By your own level of judgement you declare the Catholic Church to be flagrant sinners. They claim that the 10 commandments are all binding and to break one is to break them all. This would also include the fourth commanment, which the Catholic Church disregards.

Yes, that is true. But, at least the Catholics view the 10 Commandments as a whole as binding, whereas, Evangelicals and most mainline Protestants don't view all 10 of the Commandments as non-binding in the NT.

 

[GladiatorforGod]

I'm curious -- How do you figure that the Catholic position is "more Biblical," given that the very expression you used -- "nailed to the Cross" -- itself comes from the Bible?

Those of us committed to the message of grace don't believe it because we were "duped" by our pastors. If we were "duped," it was Scripture itself that duped us by telling us that the law of Commandments and ordinances was abolished (Eph. 2:15), that the certificate of debts was cancelled and nailed to the cross (Col. 2:16), that we are redeemed from the curse that is the law because Christ became a curse and was hanged on the tree (Gal. 3:13), that neither sabbaths nor any other days are "holy" (Gal. 4:10, Rom. 14, Col. 2:16), that we have but one Commandment, the "royal" law of love (Rom. 13:8-10, Gal. 5:14, Jas. 2:8, John 13:34, 1 John 2:7-11, 2 John 1:5).

Now of course you believe this view is wrong, but given the abundance of Scriptural support for it, I can't see how you can argue against it except by saying it is TOO Biblical.

Here is the weakness of your argument. The majority of the texts are referring to the ceremonial laws, not the 10 Commandments! The ceremonial laws were transitory, the 10 Commandments are not, they are purely moral laws, that define sin. If as you say, that the 10 Commandments were nailed to the cross, then I could steal your car, and commit adultery with your wife, and tell lies about your character with impunity? Do you now the how un-biblical your position is? Remember, the first humans got us into this mess by breading God's Law, because the Bible defines sin as the transgression of the law. No law=No sin.

 

[Albion]

You missed my point. I was showing how Catholics have a more biblical position than Evangelicals, in that Catholics view the 10 Commandments as being binding on all professed Christians, but modern Evangelicals think that the 10 Commandments have been nailed to the cross and are non-binding to them, since they "have been saved"! While in fact, they are flagrant sinners duped by their misguided Pastors into thinking that they are not obligated to obey the 10 Commandments!

I know who Catholics are; they belong to the Catholic Church. Who are the "Evangelicals" to whom you refer here?

 

[GladiatorforGod]

I know who Catholics are; they belong to the Catholic Church. Who are the "Evangelicals" to whom you refer here?

I'm referring to the theology of modern Evangelicals, whose origin was in the Reformation, but in modern times, as for the most part abandoned their biblical positions for a "watered down" gospel, that leaves things like "sin" out of the picture.

Here is a link to a very insightful article on the subject:

The State of Modern Evangelicalism

 

[Albion]

I'm referring to the theology of modern Evangelicals, whose origin was in the Reformation, but in modern times, as for the most part abandoned their biblical positions for a "watered down" gospel, that leaves things like "sin" out of the picture.

Here is a link to a very insightful article on the subject:

The State of Modern Evangelicalism

I'm just asking who is the object of that criticism. There could hardly be a less specific term than "Evangelicals" or "Evangelical community." Do you mean charismatics/Pentecostals?

 

[GladiatorforGod]

I'm just asking who is the object of that criticism. There could hardly be a less specific term than "Evangelicals" or "Evangelical community." Do you mean charismatics/Pentecostals?

The mainline Protestants denominations, charismatics, independent churches, etc, etc. The article defines the trend in very detailed fashion.

 

[Albion]

The mainline Protestants denominations, charismatics, independent churches, etc, etc. The article defines the trend in very detailed fashion.

Etc? You really don't have any idea whom you are denouncing, do you? Or is it just any church that isn't either SDA or RCC? The article doesn't identify the churches, either, in case you are thinking it did.

So this is the issue with your posts, as I see it. You make some very strong charges, but you attack in all directions at once, without identifying who it is that you think is doing wrong. And when you are asked to be specific, you change the subject, as you did here. I asked for which churches and you gave me an article that didn't name them. Then you said that the article "defines the trend in very detailed fashion." That may be, but I didn't question the trend. I asked who was involved in it.

 

[Nanopants]

You missed my point. I was showing how Catholics have a more biblical position than Evangelicals, in that Catholics view the 10 Commandments as being binding on all professed Christians, but modern Evangelicals think that the 10 Commandments have been nailed to the cross and are non-binding to them, since they "have been saved"! While in fact, they are flagrant sinners duped by their misguided Pastors into thinking that they are not obligated to obey the 10 Commandments!

Ok then! Since they are "flagrant sinners" as you call them, you must not be, and must not have any need of God's mercy. Good luck.

 

[bricklayer]

I was raised Roman Catholic, alter boy and the whole nine yards.
My first exposure to the bible was from a Roman Catholic perspective.

My father bought me a bible for my sixteenth birthday (2-6-79). I read it cover to cover by spring.
I have been a protestant since.

 

[NorrinRadd]

I'm curious -- How do you figure that the Catholic position is "more Biblical," given that the very expression you used -- "nailed to the Cross" -- itself comes from the Bible?

Those of us committed to the message of grace don't believe it because we were "duped" by our pastors. If we were "duped," it was Scripture itself that duped us by telling us that the law of Commandments and ordinances was abolished (Eph. 2:15), that the certificate of debts was cancelled and nailed to the cross (Col. 2:16), that we are redeemed from the curse that is the law because Christ became a curse and was hanged on the tree (Gal. 3:13), that neither sabbaths nor any other days are "holy" (Gal. 4:10, Rom. 14, Col. 2:16), that we have but one Commandment, the "royal" law of love (Rom. 13:8-10, Gal. 5:14, Jas. 2:8, John 13:34, 1 John 2:7-11, 2 John 1:5).

Now of course you believe this view is wrong, but given the abundance of Scriptural support for it, I can't see how you can argue against it except by saying it is TOO Biblical.

Here is the weakness of your argument. The majority of the texts are referring to the ceremonial laws, not the 10 Commandments! The ceremonial laws were transitory, the 10 Commandments are not, they are purely moral laws, that define sin. If as you say, that the 10 Commandments were nailed to the cross, then I could steal your car, and commit adultery with your wife, and tell lies about your character with impunity? Do you now the how un-biblical your position is? Remember, the first humans got us into this mess by breading God's Law, because the Bible defines sin as the transgression of the law. No law=No sin.

Pick any of the passages I cited and SHOW ME how it refers ONLY to "ceremonial" law.

Paul *explicitly* subsumes "do not steal," etc. under the single New Covenant law of "Love your neighbor," and explicitly declares sabbath-keeping obsolete. Demonstrate otherwise if you disagree.

 

[MoreCoffee]

2075 "What good deed must I do, to have eternal life?" - "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments" (⇒ Mt 19:16-17).

2076 By his life and by his preaching Jesus attested to the permanent validity of the Decalogue.

2077 The gift of the Decalogue is bestowed from within the covenant concluded by God with his people. God's commandments take on their true meaning in and through this covenant.

2078 In fidelity to Scripture and in conformity with Jesus' example, the tradition of the Church has always acknowledged the primordial importance and significance of the Decalogue.

2079 The Decalogue forms an organic unity in which each "word" or "commandment" refers to all the others

taken together. To transgress one commandment is to infringe the whole Law (cf ⇒ Jas 2:10-11).
​

I see no problems here so far.

2080 The Decalogue contains a privileged expression of the natural law. It is made known to us by divine revelation and by human reason.
​

Philosophy doesn't seem to mix with theology much better than oil with water, but that's just my opinion.

2081 The Ten Commandments, in their fundamental content, state grave obligations. However, obedience to these precepts also implies obligations in matter which is, in itself, light.
​

I'm not sure I know what this means. If I had to guess, the impossible obligations and the subsequent condemnation add strength to the law of liberty, since we would not be judged by ordinances if we had shown mercy and had ceased from judging others by those same ordinances. The two working together as a unit form a just and merciful law against merciless injustice. If we condemn others by a law that condemns us, we condemn ourselves, and if we set our hearts on the mercy and goodness of God in Christ (i.e. we believe on Him), then we receive mercy.

2082 What God commands he makes possible by his grace.
​

True. His own righteousness is an attribute of the gift given to us by His grace, which is Himself. All who are united to Him through faith are those who have kept His commands.

I don't see what the big deal is Gladiator.

I am answering the red text that related to the underlined text.

2072 Since they express man's fundamental duties towards God and towards his neighbour, the Ten Commandments reveal, in their primordial content, grave obligations. They are fundamentally immutable, and they oblige always and everywhere. No one can dispense from them. The Ten Commandments are engraved by God in the human heart.

2073 Obedience to the Commandments also implies obligations in matter which is, in itself, light. Thus abusive language is forbidden by the fifth commandment, but would be a grave offence only as a result of circumstances or the offender's intention. "Apart from me you can do nothing"​

The grave obligations are the contents of the actual commandments - or more specifically, the moral content of those commandments. The light (or lesser) matters are subsidiary obligations that can be deduced from or are indicated in other passages of scripture.

That's all I wanted to say, really. The underlined text is about the seriousness of the obligations ...

 

[Setyoufree]

Obedience to the Commandments also implies obligations....

You've missed the reason the law was given in the first place. The law was never given as a means of salvation.

Go to Galatians 3:19 "Why the Law then ? It was added because of transgressions....

What does that mean?

Romans 5:20 "The Law came in so that the transgression would increase"

In other words before the law was posted ignorance was indeed bliss, but after the law exposed you to be a sinner you were no longer ignorant - now you are a transgressor and you stood guilty/condemned.

So the law came into make matters worse.

Now some will braggingly say (for example) "I've never committed adultery - I've never cheated on my wife." Really?

"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery...." (Matt 5:27,28)

So the law looks not only at what you do externally, but rather it also examines the thoughts and intents of your mind & heart.

Now go to Matt 5:21 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment.

So according to the law if you are angry with a brother you are a murderer.

Now is the law making it easier or harder? Right, harder. The law was given to make matters worse!

Why?

Gal 3:22...the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. 23 Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed.

You see when the law turns ignorant sin into blatant transgression it then places you in prison awaiting execution (judgment day).

So no matter how well you think of yourself the law will find you out to be a sinner.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You've missed the reason ...

By 'you', I presume that you mean, 'The Catechism of the Catholic Church' (CCC) since the quote in your post is a fragment from the CCC and not from anything I authored.