THE LAW OF MOSES FLOWS FROM THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

[Bob S]

Yes, we are to keep the commandments. Had Israel kept the commandments they would have received the promises God gave them in EX19:5-6. They failed in every attempt. God knew they would and in the plan of salvation formulated before the foundation of the Earth He made a way for mankind to have a second chance. When did this second chance take place? Jesus perfectly kept the commands man failed to keep, and He took all of those failures to the Cross and died that we might live. At Calvary Jesus gave mankind a new and better covenant with better promises. He kept all of the requirements and in Jn15:9-14 gave man a brand-new command to love others as He loves us. He loves us so much that He willingly gave His life for us. In return all He asks us to do is to believe in Him and love others as He taught us. This is how we KNOW we belong to the truth........believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. 1Jn3

So, JFF, we are to keep God's commands just as you wrote. I have quoted scripture as to which of all the commands God has ever given, we are responsible to keep. You like many others who write on the forum have no idea what those commands are.

Man tries to make Salvation so hard to achieve, Jesus made it so simple even a child can comprehend and achieve it.

 

[DamianWarS]

Damian, in English, the word Moral are principles and beliefs concerning right and wrong behaviour. this is used by theologians mostly and scholars mostly and many here on this forum use them also they are a point of reference but are they necessary, not really. the fact is GOD said clearly that the Ten Commandments are the Covenant. They all come together and are part of a whole, you can try to take them apart saying one is ceremonial sand does not belong in the Ten?? but it is not what God said. As for the sabbath day is also a test of Faith to see what we will do, Obey or disobey in this life. This is a serious matter and we should consider what GOD said and no one else. Are you afraid to obey God and do his will, How much Longer will you or any of us deny him? and try and find excuses like this commandment is Moral, no Ceremonial, it does not belong there and we should not obey it since it is ceremonial?

We can label the Commandments in different ways or not, but the fact remains, the Ten Commandments are the Covenant! God declared it! Labels men put on them is Nothing!

God's request is so simple, no labels required. He made the commandments known to man for a reason, Jesus was teaching the ten commandments for a reason and a very good one at that;

if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.(mat 19:17)

The Ten Commandments are written in our bibles for a reason, Psalms contains so many verses on their beauty perfection and purity. They are the way to eternal life, here is only one of these Psalms;
Psalm 19:7-10

"The law of the Lord is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the Lord is sure,
making wise the simple;
the precepts of the Lord are right,
rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the Lord is pure,
enlightening the eyes;
the fear of the Lord is clean,
enduring forever;
the rules of the Lord are true,
and righteous altogether.
More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
and drippings of the honeycomb."

Yes Jesus summarized the ten commandments in 2 parts but it is a summary, for the first part, Jesus Who is Never Wrong tells us the greatest commandment is to Love GOD with all our heart, it also means to follow the first 4 commandments if you Love HIM. Can you remove the ones that you do not like to follow? the second commandment to love our neighbour is described in the last six Commandments. Can you remove any of them and still love your neighbour?

The rest of the law of Moses are derived from the Ten commandments. Jesus our Lord, Went further and explained to all or us they are all from Love , Compassion, this must be taken in consideration when applying the concepts of these commandments First and above all else. this is what he came to do also to Magnify the Commandments and explain the core of the Commandments ls is LOVE. the link explains more ion how Jesus magnified the Commandments.

The 4th is a part of the 10, I've never said any differently but they do not innately describe moral behavior, the moral component is of obedience but the practice of resting or working does not describe moral behaviour.

Circumcision is an everlasting sign of the Abrahamic covenant explicitly in the flesh and for generations to come (see Gen 17) it is no less moral than sabbath is, it is no less a commandment. Near identical language is used for the Sabbath.

I do not reject the covenants, nor to a split apart law under categories. Christ instructs us of new lawful practice (or arguably old) in the two greats commandments, at other times he signals out specific laws of the 10 to show how they are lacking and how goodness/live is better way of keeping law.

This all boils down to faith in Christ living and breathing his works and being guided by the spirit in our steps. This is the intrinsic message of the gospel, these are the commandments that keep law.

Paul tells us in 1 Cor 7:19 that circumcision is nothing and to keep the commandments of God. So what are the commandments? We can conflate all sorts of stuff in there, in deed this was probably the motivation of asking Christ what the greatest commandment is. But there is no need to search for Paul's context of "commandments" as mirror versions of this verse are in Gal 5:6 and 6:15. They point to faith expressed through love (5:6) and the new creation (6:15). Context of the rest of galations helps, what Paul is describing is Christ's law. These are the "commandments" he says we should keep. And Christ says they are lawful in the sense they cover all the law and the prophets so their actions are not just lawful for do not murder, or do not lie, but in sabbath practice as well and circumcision. If we keep Christ's law, we are lawful, regardless how you may judge the action on the outside.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

How much Longer will you or any of us deny him? and try and find excuses like this commandment is Moral, no Ceremonial, it does not belong there and we should not obey it since it is ceremonial?

This is essentially saying God made a mistake and man knows better than God, since God accidently put in the Sabbath commandment with the other 9 moral commandments therefore man deems it's not moral to spend time with God on the day God set aside, blessed and sanctified the Sabbath for communion and worship. This is essentially breaking the first commandment to not have other gods before Me, obeying our own laws on what we feel is right or wrong. We are told who ever we obey is who we serve and if we are not obeying God the way He said, we are serving another breaking the very first commandment.

This mindset goes back to Cain and Abel.

Both believed in God. Both made a sacrifice. One according to what they felt, the other by faith how God said. God only accepted one sacrifice. This is what faith is all about obeying God even if it doesn't make sense to us.

Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous,

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Paul tells us in 1 Cor 7:19 that circumcision is nothing and to keep the commandments of God. So what are the commandments? We can conflate all sorts of stuff in there, in deed this was probably the motivation of asking Christ what the greatest commandment is. But there is no need to search for Paul's context of "commandments" as mirror versions of this verse are in Gal 5:6 and 6:15. They point to faith expressed through love (5:6) and the new creation (6:15). Context of the rest of galations helps, what Paul is describing is Christ's law. These are the "commandments" he says we should keep. And Christ says they are lawful in the sense they cover all the law and the prophets so their actions are not just lawful for do not murder, or do not lie, but in sabbath practice as well and circumcision. If we keep Christ's law, we are lawful, regardless how you may judge the action on the outside.

It seems what you have conveniently done is choose which one you think Gal 5:6 6:15 1 Cor 7:19 means and disregard God's own definition of the commandments of God. Exo 20:6

What did Jesus say were the commandments?

Mat 15: 3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; quoting directly from the Ten Commandments Exo 20:12

Mat 19:17 So He said to him, [e]“Why do you call Me good? [f]No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”
Quoting directly from the Ten Commandments which we are told breaking one we break them all James 2:10-12

Jesus said, “‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ 19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ ”

We know from God what are the commandments- He told us in His personal Testimony Exo 31:18 Deut 4:13 Exo 34:28


When Scripture shows things mean the same, like faith and becoming a new creation, it works forwards and backwards, not I get to pick which definition I like and delete the one I don't like. Like the finger of God is the Holy Spirit it works forwards and backwards, not I get to choose to redefine the other.

Scripture already tells us that faith establishes the law , not voids, Rom 3:31so best not to do this with 1 Cor 7:19 and if we become a new creation, one is not sinning Rom 6:1-4 and breaking God's law, 1 John 3:4 the way He said. Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13 Exo 20:1-17

So keeping the commandments of God (His version) i,e., to not have other gods, keep the Sabbath day holy, steal or covet etc. is faith and being a new creation and how we are reconciled back to Him Rev 22:14

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

The difference between moral and ceremonial is very simple. Morality has to do with how we treat our fellow man and our God. Ceremonial has to do with rites. It is an act that is to be accomplished at prescribed times or a prescribed duty. Not cutting a man's sideburns was a duty the Israelite men had abide by. It was a ritual or ceremonial act. Keeping new moons, feasts and weekly sabbath were acts, ceremonies or rituals. Marriage was and is a ceremonial act.

IF you did not see it Bob, see my reply, post no 79 of this thread, it is a reply for you also.

I will however add to it, can a commandment be labelled by us men, also as both Highly Moral and in part ceremonial at the same time? People have put also a number on lt, Number four, 4 !, does all these labels that we put on things change the Fact that Jesus One with GOD COMMANDS us to Follow the sabbath as HE intended? Are we not His Creation and God our Creator?

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

This is essentially saying God made a mistake and man knows better than God, since God accidently put in the Sabbath commandment with the other 9 moral commandments therefore man deems it's not moral to spend time with God on the day God set aside, blessed and sanctified the Sabbath for communion and worship. This is essentially breaking the first commandment to not have other gods before Me, obeying our own laws on what we feel is right or wrong. We are told who ever we obey is who we serve and if we are not obeying God the way He said, we are serving another breaking the very first commandment.

This mindset goes back to Cain and Abel.

Both believed in God. Both made a sacrifice. One according to what they felt, the other by faith how God said. God only accepted one sacrifice. This is what faith is all about obeying God even if it doesn't make sense to us.

Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous,

Absolutely correct on all points!
We may not always understand all God does or say right away but we can certainly follow all he asks of us. All He did is for us and we can only benefit from doing his will, that is certain. God's commandments are not a burden. He gave them to us so we may have eternal life! it is all over the Bible.

Blessings.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

Yes, we are to keep the commandments. Had Israel kept the commandments they would have received the promises God gave them in EX19:5-6. They failed in every attempt. God knew they would and in the plan of salvation formulated before the foundation of the Earth He made a way for mankind to have a second chance. When did this second chance take place? Jesus perfectly kept the commands man failed to keep, and He took all of those failures to the Cross and died that we might live. At Calvary Jesus gave mankind a new and better covenant with better promises. He kept all of the requirements and in Jn15:9-14 gave man a brand-new command to love others as He loves us. He loves us so much that He willingly gave His life for us. In return all He asks us to do is to believe in Him and love others as He taught us. This is how we KNOW we belong to the truth........believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. 1Jn3

So, JFF, we are to keep God's commands just as you wrote. I have quoted scripture as to which of all the commands God has ever given, we are responsible to keep. You like many others who write on the forum have no idea what those commands are.

Man tries to make Salvation so hard to achieve, Jesus made it so simple even a child can comprehend and achieve it.

Bob you wrote:"You like many others who write on the forum have no idea what those commands are."

then give me the details of the commands since I have no idea what those commandments are. why do you call them commands now? all over the bible they are called commandments? do you intend to diminish the Commandments of GOD?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Absolutely correct on all points!
We may not always understand all God does or say right away but we can certainly follow all he asks of us. All He did is for us and we can only benefit from doing his will, that is certain. God's commandments are not a burden. He gave them to us so we may have eternal life! it is all over the Bible.

Blessings.

Thankfully the Scriptures explains why people do this, because I certainly can't make heads or tails why anyone would not want to obey God and keep His Sabbath, as if spending quality time with God our Maker on the day He set aside for holy use should cause this much debate. No relationship can survive without quality time and God in His perfect wisdom, set up a standing date with mankind from the beginning to rest from our works and labors and be spiritually charged through spending time with Him.

To me it shows just how powerful the controversy between light and dark is Eph 6:12 and how much the devil does not want us being sanctified by God. Eze 20:12. It also shows just how much God loves us and His Judgement is one of love. Can you imagine coming before the Lord for worship every Sabbath for eternity, when in this life you spend so much time arguing against it? One would be miserable. God would never want that for anyone of us. Why His commandments come from love John 14:15 Exo 20:6

 

[DamianWarS]

It seems what you have conveniently done is choose which one you think Gal 5:6 6:15 1 Cor 7:19 means and disregard God's own definition of the commandments of God. Exo 20:6

1 Cor 7:19, Gal 5:6, Gal 6:15 are all talking about the same thing. When Paul references the commandments of God he applies a new covenant context which by these references is addressing Christ's law. Christ tells us these commandments (Christ's law) that all the law and the prophets hang upon them, other references show Christ showing how goodness is above the letter. This is not about abolishing law, but that Christ gave a better way of keeping them which the NT authors affirm.

What did Jesus say were the commandments?

This isn't about negating commandments, but Christ does tell us a better way, using what is popularally referred to as Christ's law. If we keep Christ's law, we keep law. If we fail in Christ's law, we fail in keeping law.

Mat 19:17 So He said to him, [e]“Why do you call Me good? [f]No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”

Christ knew the answer, his point was not the commandments he kept, his point what what he still lacked. He draws out matters of the heart where this rich man seem to regard the superfical letter as enough... yet he still lacked.

Quoting directly from the Ten Commandments which we are told breaking one we break them all James 2:10-12

the context in James 2 (the part just before what you quote) in v8 says "If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right." James is trying to emphasize Christ's law as where our focus should be. He continues in v9 "But if you show favouritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers." so extracting a group of laws and calling them better than others, does not help us. Jesus says something similar in Mat 5 that not to side aside even the least of the commandments. Surely the 10 are regarded as the top, not the least. When we rank commandments and ignore others when the things we ignore and do not keep causes us to break the whole law. James's answer is simply, keep Christ's law and "you are doing right". Simple as that, Paul tells us in Galatians 5:14 "For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”" so James and Paul are in agreement and their message is of Christ. Christ's law is lawful practice that doesn't cover a few laws, but covers all the law.

When Scripture shows things mean the same, like faith and becoming a new creation, it works forwards and backwards, not I get to pick which definition I like and delete the one I don't like. Like the finger of God is the Holy Spirit it works forwards and backwards, not I get to choose to redefine the other.

I'm not redefining anything. Paul shows us what he meant and it is a consistent theme in the NT. Commandments of God alone is left undefined how are we to know what God meant? You want to quickly jump to the 10 but where is your support? Instead of guessing or just calling it the way we want it to go, we can contrast and compare the mirror verses to determine what Paul meant. When he says "what counts" it is the same thing across all 3 verses. His focus is one consistent with Christ's law and there is no reference to old covenant laws. Paul also reveals in the immediate context of Galations that Christ's law fulfilled the entire law. I don't know how it could be spelt out any clearer, Paul, as James is doing, is encouraging Christ's law as lawful practice over the letter of the law.

Scripture already tells us that faith establishes the law , not voids, Rom 3:31so best not to do this with 1 Cor 7:19 and if we become a new creation, one is not sinning Rom 6:1-4 and breaking God's law, 1 John 3:4 the way He said. Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13 Exo 20:1-17

verses are not to be taken in a cut and paste style. reading Galations as a whole shows Paul's intent quite clearly and he repeats himself to stress that point that Christ's law fulls law and Christ's law should be our practice over the letter of the law. 1 Cor 7:19 us a mirror verse to the same context, whatever Paul is saying in Galations he is saying in 1 Cor 7:19. Galations is the earliest letter we have from Paul and it can be used to established some of the points Pauls was passionate about and then used to understand similar contexts in his other letters.

So keeping the commandments of God (His version) i,e., to not have other gods, keep the Sabbath day holy, steal or covet etc. is faith and being a new creation and how we are reconciled back to Him Rev 22:14

Please be more respectful, by saying "His version" suggests that I am motivated by something else. Be aware my love for God and desire to serve and honor him is my soul reason for living in every breath I take and I take it very seriously. don't just dismiss this so quickly without considering its effect by these underhanded remarks.

The context of Christ's law is quite a dominate one in Galatians that is repeated in different ways to stress the point. Gal 5:6, Gal 5:14, Gal 6:2, Gal 6:15 are all very similar points. His focus is being spirit-led and faith in Christ (which is the new creation) practiced through Christ's law aka loving each other, love expressed through faith. I mean, "new creation" should be a giant flag to look at the Gen 1 creation. in Gen 1 there is a dark formless void, light is spoken into it and starts a transformation work that when complete users in rest. This is a salvation metaphor and these spiritual components are what the new creation is all about. "new creation" is only mentioned twice, the other referens is in 2 Cor. in 2 Cor 4:6 Paul uses the creation account to show the methpor as the light spoken into darkness and later in 5:17 he shows we are not a new creation. You will have to read the context yourself but Paul is intentionally drawing parallels from the new to the old. The new creation is from light spoken into darkness, that light is Christ and our focus should be keeping Christ, his law, Christ's law, which Christ has shown it covers all law, so is lawful.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

1 Cor 7:19, Gal 5:6, Gal 6:15 are all talking about the same thing. When Paul references the commandments of God he applies a new covenant context which by these references is addressing Christ's law.

Basically, you are implying, we should ignore what Jesus said, who is God, on what are the commandments of God for man's version instead, because we know better? So Jesus misspoke when He quoted from the Ten Commandments calling them the commandments of God and Paul on his own authority decided to eliminate God's definition and now faith means we can break God's commandments instead of establishing them Rom 3:31 and a new creation means to continue breaking God's law and sinning 1 John 3:4 despite Paul stating the opposite Rom 6:1-4.


God wrote His law in the New Covenant Heb 8:10 why it's still a sin to break the least of these commandments Rom 7:7 James 2:10-12 Mat 5:19-30

For those who think the law of Christ is different than the commandments of God automatically disqualifies themselves in the NC Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14.

Why we see the ark of the covenant that holds the Ten Commandments, God's personal Testimony Exo 31:18 that all man will be judged by James 2:10-12 Mat 5:19-30 Rev 22:14-15, His version, not mans at the last trumpet before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ Rev 11:19

verses are not to be taken in a cut and paste style.

Yet you did this to Paul writings in Corinthians to his writings in Galatians

reading Galations as a whole shows Paul's intent quite clearly and he repeats himself to stress that point that Christ's law fulls law and Christ's law should be our practice over the letter of the law. 1 Cor 7:19 us a mirror verse to the same context, whatever Paul is saying in Galations he is saying in 1 Cor 7:19. Galations is the earliest letter we have from Paul and it can be used to established some of the points Pauls was passionate about and then used to understand similar contexts in his other letters. His focus is being spirit-led and faith in Christ (which is the new creation) practiced through Christ's law aka loving each other, love expressed through faith. I mean, "new creation" should be a giant flag to look at the Gen 1 creation. in Gen 1 there is a dark formless void, light is spoken into it and starts a transformation work that when complete users in rest. This is a salvation metaphor and these spiritual components are what the new creation is all about. "new creation" is only mentioned twice, the other referens is in 2 Cor. in 2 Cor 4:6 Paul uses the creation account to show the methpor as the light spoken into darkness and later in 5:17 he shows we are not a new creation. You will have to read the context yourself but Paul is intentionally drawing parallels from the new to the old. The new creation is from light spoken into darkness, that light is Christ and our focus should be keeping Christ, his law, Christ's law, which Christ has shown it covers all law, so is lawful.

So Paul is teaching to break the letter of the law and we can now dishonor God and sin? Rom 2:21-23 Rom 7:7 But yet said those who do so will not inherit eternal life? Gal 5:19-21 And we can now literally worship other gods, steal, break God's holy Sabbath day, covet and murder? Is this what you think Paul is teaching? This is how someone who is Spirit-led is living?

Not according to Christ owns Testimony.

If we are Spirit-led, we would be keeping His commandments abiding in His love John 15:10 and if we are abiding in Him, we are following in His example 1 John 2:6 (so same commandments) who kept the commandments including the Sabbath Luke 4:16

No one who is Spirit-let is breaking God's commandments, the Spirit is given to help us keep them, not break them, all of them just the way God said, because the Spirit leads us to remember what God said, not forget.

John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

John 14:15 15 “If you love Me, [d]keep My commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another [e]Helper, that He may abide with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

1 John 3:24 Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

the context in James 2 (the part just before what you quote) in v8 says "If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right." James is trying to emphasize Christ's law as where our focus should be. He continues in v9 "But if you show favouritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers." so extracting a group of laws and calling them better than others, does not help us. Jesus says something similar in Mat 5 that not to side aside even the least of the commandments. Surely the 10

The second greatest commandment to love our neighbor is summed up by the commandments from the Ten showing us how to love our neighbor Rom 13:9 James is referring what we are going to be Judged by, but since you left it out, I'll quote it for you

James 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.
What whole law is James only quoting and contrasting from

11 For He who said,
Who is the He (God). So still God’s commandments in the NC breaking one we break them all

“Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.

Where do these commandments come from that James is only quoting and contrasting? Directly from the Ten Commandments Exo 20:1-17 God's personal Testimony written by God Himself Exo 31:18

Was God wrong to separate the Ten Commandments from all the other laws that was not under His mercy seat, placed outside the ark as a witness against? This is not an argument with me.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Christ knew the answer, his point was not the commandments he kept, his point what what he still lacked. He draws out matters of the heart where this rich man seem to regard the superfical letter as enough... yet he still lacked.

Are you saying the rich young ruler who went away sad because he had great riches the reason he didn't follow Jesus, did not break the first commandment to not have other gods before Me. That is what the rich ruler lacked. He may have loved his fellow neighbor but he was lacking how to love God shown in the first 4 commandments. The Ten Commandments were never the Ten suggestions or multiple choice.

 

[DamianWarS]

Basically, you are implying, we should ignore what Jesus said, who is God, on what are the commandments of God for man's version instead, because we know better? So Jesus misspoke when He quoted from the Ten Commandments calling them the commandments of God and Paul on his own authority decided to eliminate God's definition and now faith means we can break God's commandments instead of establishing them Rom 3:31 and a new creation means to continue breaking God's law and sinning 1 John 3:4 despite Paul stating the opposite Rom 6:1-4.


God wrote His law in the New Covenant Heb 8:10 why it's still a sin to break the least of these commandments Rom 7:7 James 2:10-12 Mat 5:19-30

For those who think the law of Christ is different than the commandments of God automatically disqualifies themselves in the NC Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14.

Why we see the ark of the covenant that holds the Ten Commandments, God's personal Testimony Exo 31:18 that all man will be judged by James 2:10-12 Mat 5:19-30 Rev 22:14-15, His version, not mans at the last trumpet before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ Rev 11:19

Paul's message and authority is of Christ not of his own. He is explicated with this in Gal 1:11-12 "I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ." so at the very least what he says in Galatians we can receive it as though it was from Christ. I am not ignoring what Christ said. you have a habit of conflating terms with little support to back it up.

Mat 15:3-4 says "Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother' and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’"

Christ here is referencing the 5th commandment as a commandment of God. There is no argument here. What he is not doing is isolating the 10 commandments and calling only the 10 the commandments of God. This is where your conflation is lacking support. Paul uses this term the commandment of God too in 1 Cor 7:19 and based on it mirror versions in Gal 5:6 and Gal 6:15 his meaning is more analogous with Christ's law. Do Christ and Paul conflict with each other? no, because "commandment of God" is ambiguous and we can't just lump them all together and say they point to the same context. We can say Christ and Paul both are referencing the commandments of God but based on it's use we cannot isolate the commandments of God to just the 10, since Paul clearly is not referencing the 10.

Christ and Paul's goals are different in both accounts. Christ is rebuking, Paul is teaching. Christ's point is to call out the Pharisees and trap them in their own game. He does this in response to them accusing the disciples of breaking tradition by not washing their hands so in like he accuses them of use tradition to overstep law. His point is to expose their hearts, it is not to isolate the 10 commandments and call them God's commandments. With Paul is point to show what is important in Christian living, he does not cancel law but instead emphasizes Christ's law, in doing so it fulfills all law (Gal 2:14). This is Christ's law, which is a heuristic approach to keeping law. Instead of looking at a check list we are to approach circumstances by how we can show love, the outcome of which is lawful so we can put the check list away.

So Paul is teaching to break the letter of the law and we can now dishonor God and sin? Rom 2:21-23 Rom 7:7 But yet said those who do so will not inherit eternal life? Gal 5:19-21 And we can now literally worship other gods, steal, break God's holy Sabbath day, covet and murder? Is this what you think Paul is teaching? This is how someone who is Spirit-led is living?

Not according to Christ owns Testimony.

If we are Spirit-led, we would be keeping His commandments abiding in His love John 15:10 and if we are abiding in Him, we are following in His example 1 John 2:6 (so same commandments) who kept the commandments including the Sabbath Luke 4:16

No one who is Spirit-let is breaking God's commandments, the Spirit is given to help us keep them, not break them, all of them just the way God said, because the Spirit leads us to remember what God said, not forget.

John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

John 14:15 15 “If you love Me, [d]keep My commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another [e]Helper, that He may abide with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

no law is broken, the outflow of Christ's law is only lawful practice. We do not murder, steal, or sleep with our neighbour's wife in the name of Christ's law. these are direct immoral behaviours that are incompatible with Christ's law and it would be silly to say otherwise. When it comes to our behaviour towards God, like idolatry or taking his name in vain then the same applies as Christ's law is regarding loving God as our priority, so no love of God would include idolatry or taking his name in vain. Sabbath is not as easy to know who we are loving by resting, despite the call to obedience, the action called for is not innately moral in action, so it is a bit obscure in how we should approach it (by loving God or loving our neighbour?) most recognize a trend that the first part of the 10 is action towards God, and the last part is action towards each other but the 4th on the boundary so even in this trend it is not clear and we are to conclude that obedience only is the loving part. But Christ tells us that doing good on the Sabbath is lawful (Mat 12:12) so ceasing work is lawful but so is doing good and our labour may be justified through our goodness. In doing this, Christ shows us the goal of the 4th commandment is regarding action to God through obedience as well as action to each other through loving. So there is no breaking commandments, there is only lawful action.

The second greatest commandment to love our neighbor is summed up by the commandments from the Ten showing us how to love our neighbor Rom 13:9 James is referring what we are going to be Judged by, but since you left it out, I'll quote it for you

James 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.
What whole law is James only quoting and contrasting from

11 For He who said,
Who is the He (God). So still God’s commandments in the NC breaking one we break them all

“Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.

Where do these commandments come from that James is only quoting and contrasting? Directly from the Ten Commandments Exo 20:1-17 God's personal Testimony written by God Himself Exo 31:18

Was God wrong to separate the Ten Commandments from all the other laws that was not under His mercy seat, placed outside the ark as a witness against? This is not an argument with me.

Christ's law does not merely "sum" up the 10. Christ says "all of the law and the prophets hang upon these two commandments" (Mat 22:40) such a statement cannot be reduced to the 10 commandments and as Christ's words state include all the law and the prophets.

James says
IF you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right. (v8)
BUT if you show favoritism, you sin... (v9)
FOR whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles... (v10)

the focus is keeping the royal law. The preposition after v9 "for" (also in v11) shows a relation with the last statement regarding "if you show favouritism" it is intended to expose those who feel they are exempt from certain conditions or that because they so good with one then it covers them with the others which is an inherent risk of numerating a list. The answer is keeping Christ's law, in doing so we don't get trapped into thinking we got most of the laws so should be good but rather if we are calibrated on one law, Christ's law, then there is no balancing act with law.

Let's call a spade a spade here, the issue is not how this relates to commandments 1-3 regarding clear instruction to love God nor is it 5-10 regarding clear instruction on how to love each other, but on the 4th commandment. Because Jesus shows us that doing good on the Sabbath is lawful (Mat 12:12) then we can conclude that a goal of doing good on the sabbath over a goal of ceasing work is also lawful. I get that to you the Sabbath looks a very specific way, but hypothetically if on your way to church on the Sabbath there was a sheep trapped in a pit would it be lawful to pull it out? of course, since Christ tells us this exact scenario. Would it be lawful to turn around and find another way to avoid helping the trapped sheep? If we use the good Samaritan to calibrate our goodness, then avoiding helping others is not an example of loving our neighbour, thus a violation of Christ's law. If we violate Christ's law to keep a law-keeping task list, then we are not actually keeping law, we violate it, which is what James's point is.

So on the Sabbath, if there is a trapped sheep, our duty is to help and in doing so we keep Christ's law, but in ignoring it we violate Christ's law (so it's best to keep it). This is a limited context of pulling sheep out of pits, but is goodness so limited? if there is goodness to be done, we should not avoid it in the name of "ceasing work" as we are also bound by keeping Christ's law to not ignore or avoid goodness. This doesn't mean our action on the Sabbath changes, it just means we shouldn't close our curtains or shut our door to avoid being distracted by doing good things. If we are aligned with Christ's law, then our motivation for all things is also aligned with Christ's law and in that space no law can be violated and all our action inherit lawful action.

 

[DamianWarS]

Are you saying the rich young ruler who went away sad because he had great riches the reason he didn't follow Jesus, did not break the first commandment to not have other gods before Me. That is what the rich ruler lacked. He may have loved his fellow neighbor but he was lacking how to love God shown in the first 4 commandments. The Ten Commandments were never the Ten suggestions or multiple choice.

Christ does not unpack the deception in this heart. certainly any violation of love, also is a violation towards God and is tantamount to putting something over God aka idolatry, whether it is direct or indirect. The specific charge of surrendering his money over to the poor may not immediately invoke the 1st/2nd commandment as gods/idolatry was probably less about abstract things like the love of money and relating more to physical objects.

I don't know how the rich man received or applied Jesus's instruction to the 10, the suggest is that he kept the commandments, even though only a few are mentioned but I would think it also applied to the other 10 because I think it's implied he didn't worship other gods, have wooden idols, using God's name in vain, etc.. as those are would be easy areas to identify as his issue. These are the superficial aspect of the law that the letter is concerned with, the rich man thought it was good enough yet he still lacked. Certainly we can conclude that his issue was a love a money then say that was a 2nd commandment issue but I don't think that really is the point to invoke the 2nd commandment, as it may have been too abstract to challenge in that way, Christ seem to always circle back to conclusions that are analogous with Christ's law and with abstracts like this it's easier to see how putting money at such a high value does not love God even if you don't call it idolatry. Christ's law wasn't the direct suggestion with the rich man either (nor was invoking the 2nd) and although the rich man left sad we really don't know what he ended up doing.

I think it is better to show how this passage relates to what Christ taught then it is to say Christ was teaching to keep the letter of the 10 commandments since the latter is only infered and can be heavily biased. Does the passage agree with Christ's law? certainly, so I see no reason why not to continue promoting Christ's law as the focus. You read the same and see it declaring the 10 as our focus. I see that, however a conflict with his other teachings, not the Christ deleted the 10 but he did show a better way of keeping them through Christ's law, and it is lawful. NT authors highlight the same thing.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Paul's message and authority is of Christ not of his own. He is explicated with this in Gal 1:11-12 "I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ." so at the very least what he says in Galatians we can receive it as though it was from Christ. I am not ignoring what Christ said. you have a habit of conflating terms with little support to back it up.

Paul never said the Ten Commandments are no longer the commandments of God, he in fact said he would not know what sin is had God not said the law quoting directly from the Ten Commandments Rom 7:7 it seems you are making a doctrine not based on what is written in the Scriptures. This is what Jesus taught,, so when we see 1 Cor 7:19 John 14:15 1 John 5:3 Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14 etc etc we know from the Testimony of Jesus what they include, the Ten Commandments, the way He said, so my faith is in what Jesus said plainly, not the teachings of man this very passage if you keep reading warns us of


Mat 15:3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’

Only found in God's personal Testimony Exo 31:18 The Ten Commandments Deut 4:13 Exo 34:28 Exo 20:1-17 written personally by the God of the Universe, that there is no greater authority than He.

not the Christ deleted the 10 but he did show a better way of keeping them through Christ's law, and it is lawful. NT authors highlight the same thing.

So now God and Christ are two different entities and so are their laws. And somehow the law of Christ is leading us away from keeping the commandments of God to sin Rom 7:7 dishonor God Rom 2:21-23 not keep the greatest commandments James 2:8 Rom 13:9 Deut 5, Deut 6 and is leading us to be an enmity to God Rom 8:7-8 and be left outside the gates of heaven Mat 7:23 Rev 22:14-15 Not a chance.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Christ does not unpack the deception in this heart. certainly any violation of love, also is a violation towards God and is tantamount to putting something over God aka idolatry, whether it is direct or indirect. The specific charge of surrendering his money over to the poor may not immediately invoke the 1st/2nd commandment as gods/idolatry was probably less about abstract things like the love of money and relating more to physical objects.

I don't know how the rich man received or applied Jesus's instruction to the 10, the suggest is that he kept the commandments, even though only a few are mentioned but I would think it also applied to the other 10 because I think it's implied he didn't worship other gods, have wooden idols, using God's name in vain, etc.. as those are would be easy areas to identify as his issue. These are the superficial aspect of the law that the letter is concerned with, the rich man thought it was good enough yet he still lacked. Certainly we can conclude that his issue was a love a money then say that was a 2nd commandment issue but I don't think that really is the point to invoke the 2nd commandment, as it may have been too abstract to challenge in that way, Christ seem to always circle back to conclusions that are analogous with Christ's law and with abstracts like this it's easier to see how putting money at such a high value does not love God even if you don't call it idolatry. Christ's law wasn't the direct suggestion with the rich man either (nor was invoking the 2nd) and although the rich man left sad we really don't know what he ended up doing.

I think it is better to show how this passage relates to what Christ taught then it is to say Christ was teaching to keep the letter of the 10 commandments since the latter is only infered and can be heavily biased. Does the passage agree with Christ's law? certainly, so I see no reason why not to continue promoting Christ's law as the focus. You read the same and see it declaring the 10 as our focus. I see that, however a conflict with his other teachings, not the Christ deleted the 10 but he did show a better way of keeping them through Christ's law, and it is lawful. NT authors highlight the same thing.

So keeping ones great possessions in your opinion, over following Jesus, is not in violation of the first commandment to not have other gods before Me. And this notion was somehow lost by the Author of His own law who just told the rich young ruler (notice the emphasis on his wealth and great possessions) that if he wanted to enter into life keep the commandments and started quoting directly from the Ten. Do you really think Jesus is not including the greatest commandment of all how to love God with all our heart, might and soul? Jesus knew before he asked what he was lacking, love to God, the rich young ruler wanting both the treasures of the world and the blessings of God, but not really wanting God hence why he went away instead of following Jesus. The rich young ruler wanted to keep the commandments based on his terms, the ones he was okay with and not based on all of what God said. James 2:10-12 This is a good example for us all, not to make up our own laws, but lets let God be God and define sin and love to Him, which He does Exo 20:6 John 14:15 1 John 5:3 Obeying His law, on His terms through love and faith reconciles us Rev 22:15

 

[Bob S]

Bob you wrote:"You like many others who write on the forum have no idea what those commands are."

then give me the details of the commands since I have no idea what those commandments are. why do you call them commands now? all over the bible they are called commandments? do you intend to diminish the Commandments of GOD?

No, I do not diminish God's commands for new covenant believers, but apparently you have. When I quote John in 1Jn 3:19-24 and ask you to comment all I get is IGNORE. John was not Paul, yet they were one in writing that we are not under the commands of the old covenant. John writes we are of the TRUTH if we believe in the One God sent, Jesus Christ, and LOVE one another as He loves us. Apparently, you believe another gospel with a bunch of ritual commands that had no bearing on anyone except the Israelites.

I really do not need to know which commands you think are important to observe because I have scripture that Jesus has left us and the power of the Holy Spirit to guide me into knowing the real truth. Your way is hard and fruitless. Jesus' way is so simple even a little child comprehends it.

 

[DamianWarS]

Paul never said the Ten Commandments are no longer the commandments of God, he in fact said he would not know what sin is had God not said the law quoting directly from the Ten Commandments Rom 7:7 it seems you are making a doctrine not based on what is written in the Scriptures. This is what Jesus taught,, so when we see 1 Cor 7:19 John 14:15 1 John 5:3 Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14 etc etc we know from the Testimony of Jesus what they include, the Ten Commandments, the way He said, so my faith is in what Jesus said plainly, not the teachings of man this very passage if you keep reading warns us of

Paul emphasises keeping Christ's law. He is not in competition with law nor. Christ's law is lawful and it covers all law so I don't know what the issue is here. Paul's use of "God's commandments" reveals a meaning of Christ's law, this just shows us he uses the terms synonymously, since Christ's law fulfills all law (Gal 5:14) this should not be an issue of terminology.

Mat 15:3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’

Only found in God's personal Testimony Exo 31:18 The Ten Commandments Deut 4:13 Exo 34:28 Exo 20:1-17 written personally by the God of the Universe, that there is no greater authority than He.

What is your point here? Christ law fulfills law, if we keep Christ law, we keep law. Split up law however you want and call it whatever you want, Christ's law still fulfills it.

So now God and Christ are two different entities and so are their laws. And somehow the law of Christ is leading us away from keeping the commandments of God to sin Rom 7:7 dishonor God Rom 2:21-23 not keep the greatest commandments James 2:8 Rom 13:9 Deut 5, Deut 6 and is leading us to be an enmity to God Rom 8:7-8 and be left outside the gates of heaven Mat 7:23 Rev 22:14-15 Not a chance.

What is it you disagree with? Is it goodness? Is it not lawful? I'm not sure what you are fighting for. Christ's law fulfills all the law, nothing is canceled, nothing is in competition or at odd with another. Nothing is leading us away from anything. Christ laws fulfills law, if we practice it we keep law.

So keeping ones great possessions in your opinion, over following Jesus, is not in violation of the first commandment to not have other gods before Me. And this notion was somehow lost by the Author of His own law who just told the rich young ruler (notice the emphasis on his wealth and great possessions) that if he wanted to enter into life keep the commandments and started quoting directly from the Ten. Do you really think Jesus is not including the greatest commandment of all how to love God with all our heart, might and soul? Jesus knew before he asked what he was lacking, love to God, the rich young ruler wanting both the treasures of the world and the blessings of God, but not really wanting God hence why he went away instead of following Jesus. The rich young ruler wanted to keep the commandments based on his terms, the ones he was okay with and not based on all of what God said. James 2:10-12 This is a good example for us all, not to make up our own laws, but lets let God be God and define sin and love to Him, which He does Exo 20:6 John 14:15 1 John 5:3 Obeying His law, on His terms through love and faith reconciles us Rev 22:15

It's not my opinion that matters. you seem to be disputing something we both value. Do you have an issue with Christ's law? Can you tell me how doing goodness or loving your neighbour is not lawful? Yes we love God first, but what exactly do you think I'm suggesting here? That loving your neighbour means dishonoring God? I don't know why you jump to these conclusions, your process is confusing and border line disrespectful.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

. Do you have an issue with Christ's law? Can you tell me how doing goodness or loving your neighbour is not lawful? Yes we love God first, but what exactly do you think I'm suggesting here? That loving your neighbour means dishonoring God? I don't know why you jump to these conclusions, your process is confusing and border line disrespectful.

The issue is not the law, the issue is trying to separate Christ law as if its different than God's commandments. You do know that Christ is God and all their laws are the same? The commandments of God have always been fulfilled by love. No one loves God by worshipping other gods, or not using His name in a holy manner, or bowing to idols or breaking God's holy Sabbath day, no one loves their fellow man by stealing, lying, committing adultery etc. Why the love of God is keeping the commandments of God 1 John 5:3

 

[Bob S]

Paul's message and authority is of Christ not of his own. He is explicated with this in Gal 1:11-12 "I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ." so at the very least what he says in Galatians we can receive it as though it was from Christ. I am not ignoring what Christ said. you have a habit of conflating terms with little support to back it up.

Mat 15:3-4 says "Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother' and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’"

Christ here is referencing the 5th commandment as a commandment of God. There is no argument here. What he is not doing is isolating the 10 commandments and calling only the 10 the commandments of God. This is where your conflation is lacking support. Paul uses this term the commandment of God too in 1 Cor 7:19 and based on it mirror versions in Gal 5:6 and Gal 6:15 his meaning is more analogous with Christ's law. Do Christ and Paul conflict with each other? no, because "commandment of God" is ambiguous and we can't just lump them all together and say they point to the same context. We can say Christ and Paul both are referencing the commandments of God but based on it's use we cannot isolate the commandments of God to just the 10, since Paul clearly is not referencing the 10.

Christ and Paul's goals are different in both accounts. Christ is rebuking, Paul is teaching. Christ's point is to call out the Pharisees and trap them in their own game. He does this in response to them accusing the disciples of breaking tradition by not washing their hands so in like he accuses them of use tradition to overstep law. His point is to expose their hearts, it is not to isolate the 10 commandments and call them God's commandments. With Paul is point to show what is important in Christian living, he does not cancel law but instead emphasizes Christ's law, in doing so it fulfills all law (Gal 2:14). This is Christ's law, which is a heuristic approach to keeping law. Instead of looking at a check list we are to approach circumstances by how we can show love, the outcome of which is lawful so we can put the check list away.




no law is broken, the outflow of Christ's law is only lawful practice. We do not murder, steal, or sleep with our neighbour's wife in the name of Christ's law. these are direct immoral behaviours that are incompatible with Christ's law and it would be silly to say otherwise. When it comes to our behaviour towards God, like idolatry or taking his name in vain then the same applies as Christ's law is regarding loving God as our priority, so no love of God would include idolatry or taking his name in vain. Sabbath is not as easy to know who we are loving by resting, despite the call to obedience, the action called for is not innately moral in action, so it is a bit obscure in how we should approach it (by loving God or loving our neighbour?) most recognize a trend that the first part of the 10 is action towards God, and the last part is action towards each other but the 4th on the boundary so even in this trend it is not clear and we are to conclude that obedience only is the loving part. But Christ tells us that doing good on the Sabbath is lawful (Mat 12:12) so ceasing work is lawful but so is doing good and our labour may be justified through our goodness. In doing this, Christ shows us the goal of the 4th commandment is regarding action to God through obedience as well as action to each other through loving. So there is no breaking commandments, there is only lawful action.


Christ's law does not merely "sum" up the 10. Christ says "all of the law and the prophets hang upon these two commandments" (Mat 22:40) such a statement cannot be reduced to the 10 commandments and as Christ's words state include all the law and the prophets.

James says
IF you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right. (v8)
BUT if you show favoritism, you sin... (v9)
FOR whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles... (v10)

the focus is keeping the royal law. The preposition after v9 "for" (also in v11) shows a relation with the last statement regarding "if you show favouritism" it is intended to expose those who feel they are exempt from certain conditions or that because they so good with one then it covers them with the others which is an inherent risk of numerating a list. The answer is keeping Christ's law, in doing so we don't get trapped into thinking we got most of the laws so should be good but rather if we are calibrated on one law, Christ's law, then there is no balancing act with law.

Let's call a spade a spade here, the issue is not how this relates to commandments 1-3 regarding clear instruction to love God nor is it 5-10 regarding clear instruction on how to love each other, but on the 4th commandment. Because Jesus shows us that doing good on the Sabbath is lawful (Mat 12:12) then we can conclude that a goal of doing good on the sabbath over a goal of ceasing work is also lawful. I get that to you the Sabbath looks a very specific way, but hypothetically if on your way to church on the Sabbath there was a sheep trapped in a pit would it be lawful to pull it out? of course, since Christ tells us this exact scenario. Would it be lawful to turn around and find another way to avoid helping the trapped sheep? If we use the good Samaritan to calibrate our goodness, then avoiding helping others is not an example of loving our neighbour, thus a violation of Christ's law. If we violate Christ's law to keep a law-keeping task list, then we are not actually keeping law, we violate it, which is what James's point is.

So on the Sabbath, if there is a trapped sheep, our duty is to help and in doing so we keep Christ's law, but in ignoring it we violate Christ's law (so it's best to keep it). This is a limited context of pulling sheep out of pits, but is goodness so limited? if there is goodness to be done, we should not avoid it in the name of "ceasing work" as we are also bound by keeping Christ's law to not ignore or avoid goodness. This doesn't mean our action on the Sabbath changes, it just means we shouldn't close our curtains or shut our door to avoid being distracted by doing good things. If we are aligned with Christ's law, then our motivation for all things is also aligned with Christ's law and in that space no law can be violated and all our action inherit lawful action.

May I comment on your very wise and thought-out post? My comment is that God never intended for Gentile nations to adhere to the covenant He gave to those who came out of Egypt. There is no indication that God ever changed the covenant to include any other nation. The Law of the covenant was specifically for Israel.

Jesus' rebuke was entirely with the Jews much of which was over Sabbath issues. Jesus never rebuked Gentiles for not observing any of the rituals including the weekly Sabbath. Not one letter in the New Testament ever spoke of anyone having to observe a day. Instead, we find just the opposite, Paul especially wrote that we are not under the dictates of the Law of the old covenant. SB's church prophet wrote that all are subject to Sabbath observance, tithing and food laws of the old covenant. If members do not tithe, they lose their eternal inheritance. If anyone has ever heard of Sabbath keeping and refuse to observe it, they are lost. This is drilled into them and hence we see it in SB's posts.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

May I comment on your very wise and thought-out post? My comment is that God never intended for Gentile nations to adhere to the covenant He gave to those who came out of Egypt. There is no indication that God ever changed the covenant to include any other nation. The Law of the covenant was specifically for Israel.

Jesus' rebuke was entirely with the Jews much of which was over Sabbath issues. Jesus never rebuked Gentiles for not observing any of the rituals including the weekly Sabbath. Not one letter in the New Testament ever spoke of anyone having to observe a day. Instead, we find just the opposite, Paul especially wrote that we are not under the dictates of the Law of the old covenant. SB's church prophet wrote that all are subject to Sabbath observance, tithing and food laws of the old covenant. If members do not tithe, they lose their eternal inheritance. If anyone has ever heard of Sabbath keeping and refuse to observe it, they are lost. This is drilled into them and hence we see it in SB's posts.

Please do not speak for me or the reasons I obey God. You are not God so would have no idea what I do or why I do it. EGW is not the reason I keep God's commandments. God is.

I have only ever quoted the Scriptures for the reason I obey God's commandments, because God gave them, both written and spoken by God, His personal Testimony. Exo 31:18 If one takes issue with it, the argument needs to be addressed with Him. I am just a servant of His, trying to live by His every Words instead of following man-made ideas and traditions Jesus warned us about Mat 15:3-14