The law, the commandments, and Christians.

[DamianWarS]

The ancient churches and the ECFs retained the ten, and Jesus and Paul both spoke of the ten specifically, as being the commandments that fulfull the law, as the commandments that mean eternal life as they're obeyed. There's a reason for all that because, for one thing, contrary to some contrary theologies, man must be righteous/obedient and live accordingly in order to enter heaven. The fact that the only way to do that is by and with the Holy Spirit does not change the fact that it must be done. So the law, cut and paste or otherwise, remains handy. That's not by my authority but that's obviously what the churches received. The rest is speculation.

the early church kept an altered version of the 10 since the 4th was kept on the 1st day not the 7th which by letter violates the 4th. realignment to the 7th day is somewhat of a modern phenomenon that the ancient church did not participate in.

either they had authority to change it themselves, thus keeping the Sabbath (which then questions the motivations of modern day realignment to the 7th day) or they were violating the Sabbath commandment.

but there is a third option too, the 4th commandment through the lens of Christ is not about observing a day, it is about inward realignment on Christ. the early church can then be said to launch with 1st day keeping traditions (like what the Didache shows us) and contextualised the 4th commandment as a merged day focused for gathering and rest. by letter this still is in violation of the 4th but if the NC lens has nothing to do with a day then there is no violation, there is just contextually defined community practice that are anchored to biblical themes and priniples but not bound to specific form. the early church choose to cement it into a Sunday/Church building system which can be counter productive and cause confusion but the values should not be thought of as contained in any day or building. we need to ask ourselfs even if they used the 10 was was the alignment with the 10 or was it actually NC alignment.

He never committed adultery-that was part of the point because apart from his faith, which includes and is the object of knowledge received, which also includes the law, he'd probably never have resisted, he wouldn’t have had the presence of God with him, the grace with which to fight the battle.

this is better news of course and I'm thankful he didn't go through with it. his initial persuing however have the same self kingdom over God's kingdom focus. We either deny ourself or we deny Christ (a tension we all face daily) thankfully he had people like your to help realign him. however it is not 10 commandment alignment that is critical since they are only superficial plus they are surrounded by a value system that is no longer compatible with our faith in our modern context (like polygamy or slavery) so when we smuggle in the 10 like this we shouldn't be surprised wheb other values are smuggled in with it.

the 10 are contextual in form not universal. to start they are in a polemic framework contextualized for surrounding cultures of that day that was needed to be emphasized but don't have the same impact today. so their impact is contextually driven, not universally driven. if a 10-commandments was made today they would look different based on our modern day context.

often people will highlight the 4th as universal because it is anchored in creation. what's inconsistent with this view is the 7th day is of creation but the law of the Sabbath is contextually based on this. we know this because the law is not a Genisis law, and uniquely tied to the OC (it is the sign of the OC in fact). it also points to Christ, both the 7th day and aspects in the 4th foreshadow Christ. so it points forward, with a temporal focus that will yield itself at the right time. Heb 8:13 says the OC has been made obsolete and this is consistent with a contextually based system. that doesn't mean there are not good things in it that we can still align to, it just means there is something better.

if contextual and not universal then they are based on universal constructs, which is the very nature of God. they take contextual form in time and place but should not be regarded as verbatim code for eternity, for one they are very limited which makes sense for a contextual form but not one that stretches across the ages. the 4th is also ceremonial and points to much deeper truths then the superficial requirements, again makes sense in a contextual unfolding revelation but not one that is meant to never change.

there are indeed universal aspects, there are also temporal aspects, we have new revelation and the HS to help us sort out the differences. for example we know adultery, stealing, lying. murdering are all sinful (not many would disagree) but the revelation to this is God is far more interested in the heart posture then superficial actions so for alignment sake it's not the 10 we should be interested in, but alignment of the heart at much deeper levels then the 10 ever touch on. I may keep all of the 10 but have a hateful heart posture, and this is what Jesus addresses but the 10 do not.

so your right to pick up on the universal morals of the 10, they are there, but still in a contextual form. NC teaching is the revelation we should draw our doctrine from where the OC is in agreement as it points forward but it's original form have different goals.

 

[fhansen]

the 10 are contextual in form not universal. to start they are in a polemic framework contextualized for surrounding cultures of that day that was needed to be emphasized but don't have the same impact today. so their impact is contextually driven, not universally driven. if a 10-commandments was made today they would look different based on our modern day context.

I don't know about that. Strictures against lying, killing, stealing, coveting, adultery, and directives to place God first above all else seem quite universally true and valuable to me. And when the argument for polygamy, for exampe, raises its head, there's not necessarily an internal Spirit-raised red flag that pops up defintively warning against this option: the mind can be swayed.

 

[DamianWarS]

I don't know about that. Strictures against lying, killing, stealing, coveting, adultery, and directives to place God first above all else seem quite universally true and valuable to me. And when the argument for polygamy, for exampe, raises its head, there's not necessarily an internal Spirit-raised red flag that pops up defintively warning against this option: the mind can be swayed.

they are still very superficial and do not touch on critical heart values. I can do the 10 mechanically and still have no love for both my neighbour and God. Strict alignment with the 10 can risk a pure legal faith, exactly what Christ speaks against in the gospel. Christ's law is not a list, it is a heuristic approach and it is revealed that "all the law and prophets hang upon these two commandment" which makes them more foundational than the 10, and by logic it checks because it goes deeper than the 10 can addressing both inward as well as outward actions of love (not just 10 but millions) and not just to avoid harming each other, but to actively seek love.

the 10 are a polemic that challenge Israel's actions as well as their surrounding cultures. it is a curated list of points that cut to the core for ancient near East peoples thus contextualized. Even the 4th is designed to point to monotheistic creation which is important for pagan cultures that already have 7th day practices. when they saw the practice it proclaimed monotheisim. where if the 10 were done today it would be a different set for whatever cultural it is set in.

as the 4th pointed to monotheism for pagan cultures with existing 7 day practices, you can say that Sunday points to the resurrection of Christ which is a more useful polemic for cultures today but not as a legal code, instead a value of celebration, again a more useful polemic then values of the 4th. but it's not a one size fits all approach, our goal is to show people Christ and if Sabbath and or Sunday systems can't do that then we hang on to these forms loosely and use another one more effective to our mission. We are not violating the 10, because they are not legal code in the NC. as Paul says in 1 Cor 9:22-23 "To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings." this may look like something other than Sabbath/Sunday systems becuse the goal is missionally driven over alignment with the 10.

 

[fhansen]

they are still very superficial and do not touch on critical heart values.

They do touch on critical heart values, which is the very reason why the law and the prophets hang on the two greatest commandments. They simply tell us “what love would do” in some very basic ways and are valuable because the human mind and will and heart are weak; we’re not yet perfected in the love that the commandments reflect. We should actively seek love but that love is the ideal, the goal to be grown towards but not yet the moment by moment reality in each of our lives.

So we’re urged to walk by the Spirit, under grace, not under the law. If we’re breaking the law, then we’re not walking by the Spirit. So while it’s not those who hear the law who are declared righteous but those who do the law (Rom 2:13), hearing/knowing the law is beneficial, as a guide, as the tutor it was meant to be.

 

[DamianWarS]

They do touch on critical heart values, which is the very reason why the law and the prophets hang on the two greatest commandments. They simply tell us “what love would do” in some very basic ways and are valuable because the human mind and will and heart are weak; we’re not yet perfected in the love that the commandments reflect. We should actively seek love but that love is the ideal, the goal to be grown towards but not yet the moment by moment reality in each of our lives.

So we’re urged to walk by the Spirit, under grace, not under the law. If we’re breaking the law, then we’re not walking by the Spirit. So while it’s not those who hear the law who are declared righteous but those who do the law (Rom 2:13), hearing/knowing the law is beneficial, as a guide, as the tutor it was meant to be.

you're conflating the 10 with Christ's law. what hangs upon Christ's law? the law and the prophets. what is in the law and the prophets? the 10 commandments. Christ law sits at levels deeper and is more foundational than the 10, shown to be superior to the 10, or the 10 infeiror to Christ's law.

you say we are to walk by the spirit not under law which does not have a product of breaking the law. but what you really mean by "law" is the 10 commandments, not other aspects of the law we break all the time in how they were introduced like circumcision. circumcision is without ambiguity in the physical according the Gen 17 and is a sign of the everlasting covenant between Abraham, his descendants and God. but the NT spiritualizes it despite that this is in violation of the covenant agreement thus breaking it. never the less, circumcision is still valued and it is not considered dropped, this is because in the NT laws are not thrown out, they are fulfilled. but that's ok for circumsion but not ok for Sabbath?

being doers of the law is not about perfect adherence to the legal code. the rest of Romans pretty clearly shows that to such a degree this verse can be seen as a set up to show no one can perfectly keep the law. but being doers of it goes beyond merely the mimicry of the action (which is a product of an isolated 10) but it needs to touch on the core of what the law is trying to produce with us. not merely those who don't steal, murder, and lie but those that actively purpose love for each other so much so those issues never are given thought.

keep reading Romans 2 and we see this very thing articulated with circumcision. v29 "a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code" here Paul makes a distinction in the aforementioned context that qualifies "doers of the law" and it is not by written code, but by "of the Spirit" intervention, we may infact not be circumcised and be in violation of the legal code, but still be doers of the law producing in our hearts it's intended purpose.

this forces us to critically approach law in ways to address it's core values over its legal code and by keeping the core values we are doers of the law. with Sabbath, just like circumcision, it is a sign of an everlasting covenant, it points beyond itself, and is not about ritual/ceremonial percision. Jesus show us also how goodness is superior to the ritual legal code speaking of the Sabbath. in Mat 12:12 he says goodness is lawful Sabbath practice using the example of rescuing sheep form pits. a like passage in Luke 13 Jesus shows that releasing a bondage is also lawful. but the Sabbath is not about pulling sheep from pits of leading oxen to water, however packed in there is a loaded spiritual message and this mission of goodness and releasing spiritual bondages is lawful on the Sabbath (even if it involves work) because we are doers of the Sabbath by addressing it's core values.

In Romans Paul addresses his thoughts on special days in 14:5 “One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike." this is completly appropriate and logically consistent to align with Sabbath legal code based on what we know in Romans and how law is addressed. we do it for the entire law, but the 10 are untouchable? I get the 10 gets it right when it says murding, stealing, lying are sinful, but a host of other laws do the same thing so this is not unique to the 10. the elephant in the room however are not these laws, it really is only the 4th and as this is a ceremonial action it's core values can be separated into spiritual and physical counter parts. the physical need of rest may be deritualized and kept without a need for strict alignment and the spiritual may be a kept value of Sabbath in our hearts as circumcision is.