Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Can anyone tell me what are the commandments of God if not the Ten commandments?
.....
If there is no Ten Commandments, what is the definition of sin?
So your solution is to follow in the footsteps of the Jews you posit crucified Jesus. That, and your rhetorical question doesn't even consider the Biblical definition applied to the Ten Commandments: "the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones". You don't even have a choice of rejecting or obeying the Ten Commandments. The "logic" you applied to the Word of God results in rejecting what He said, and leads to disobedience on your part.Have you considered your reply carefully? Which is death? Rejecting the Ten commandments or or obeying it?
To follow your premise would mean that to worship God only is death. Why is it so hard for you to see how illogical and ridiculous your position is? But the truth is plain. Once one reject truth, anything is possible even the crucifixion of Christ as demonstrated by the Jews.
What's illogical is your claim that God didn't ordain the Ten Commandments, concurrent with a claim that He did. The bondwoman was defined as the covenant from Mount Sinai in v.24, which is the Ten Commandments.God did not ordain the bondwoman, that was man's doings: Sarah and Abraham. The ten Commandments on the other hand is directly from God.
If the law is not for us, it would mean that the commandment to worship God only, will not be applicable now nor in heaven. I am certain that you would not entertain any idea that we can worship any other but God in Heaven. If how do you justify removing the command that says so? Illogical again.
It is obvious that the covenant from Mount Sinai is disqualified and rendered obsolete, only to be taken away later in this epistle. That's the Ten Commandments. That's not what God means when He promises "My law", and it becomes evident that you have a misplaced morbid hatred for God's "My law" that isn't from Mount Sinai.Why do you reject or ignore scripture. "16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;"
The "not according" is not in reference to the law is it?
Yes, it was - the reason God took the Law from Mount Sinai away (v.10:9) after rendering it obsolete (v.8:13). God didn't take away the people; He addressed the Law in His disposition.7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
The problem was not the law was it?
The same inspired author who wrote Revelation 22:14 above defined God's commandments in his first epistle:What are the commandments of God, if not those that He wrote with His own hand? If not those that we will be excluded from the kingdom of heaven for breaking? Rev. 22:
14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
And yet defining sin doesn't prevent you from habitually repeating the same sins over and over again, does it?You will agree that those sins mentioned are violations of the Ten commandments.
How callous can one be when they can't distinguish 'transgression' from 'sin'? Like your inability to explain how sin existed thousands of years before the Ten Commandments existed. Like your incompetence that doesn't recognize the tense of the verb 'is' in the present tense, which doesn't include 'was' in the past tense. As it is Written, "For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law".If there is no Ten Commandments, what is the definition of sin?
They impose wholesale rejection of the Law's testimony as well, when they attempt to spin their theology in contradiction to the Law. That their practice extends to the Gospel shouldn't come as a big surprise.The total inability of Seventh Day Adventists to read and comprehend the New Testament never ceases to amaze.
Oh the many ways I could and should respond to this post. First I have to gather myself together from laughing and the absurdity of this post. I'll answer it when I can quite laughing. Hope I didn't hurt myself.Originally Posted by Elder 111
To follow your premise would mean that to worship God only is death. Why is it so hard for you to see how illogical and ridiculous your position is? But the truth is plain. Once one reject truth, anything is possible even the crucifixion of Christ as demonstrated by the Jews.
Originally Posted by Elder 111
God did not ordain the bondwoman, that was man's doings: Sarah and Abraham. The ten Commandments on the other hand is directly from God.
If the law is not for us, it would mean that the commandment to worship God only, will not be applicable now nor in heaven. I am certain that you would not entertain any idea that we can worship any other but God in Heaven. If how do you justify removing the command that says so? Illogical again.
Originally Posted by Elder 111
Why do you reject or ignore scripture. "16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;"
The "not according" is not in reference to the law is it?
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
The problem was not the law was it?
Originally Posted by Elder 111
What are the commandments of God, if not those that He wrote with His own hand? If not those that we will be excluded from the kingdom of heaven for breaking? Rev. 22:
14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
You will agree that those sins mentioned are violations of the Ten commandments.
If there is no Ten Commandments, what is the definition of sin?
Yes I fail to comprehend. There is a definition I have seen, Is this it? If not give me one!The definition of sin is outlined for gentiles in the Noahide commandments and for Christians throughout the New Testament. The total inability of Seventh Day Adventists to read and comprehend the New Testament never ceases to amaze.
Does this mean there is OTHER standards of sin besides the Law?Originally Posted by Elder 111Can anyone tell me what are the commandments of God if not the Ten commandments?
.....
If there is no Ten Commandments, what is the definition of sin?
Yes I fail to comprehend. There is a definition I have seen Is this it? If not give me one!
4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Of course I can not. Look like John can not either.How callous can one be when they can't distinguish 'transgression' from 'sin'? Like your inability to explain how sin existed thousands of years before the Ten Commandments existed. Like your incompetence that doesn't recognize the tense of the verb 'is' in the present tense, which doesn't include 'was' in the past tense. As it is Written, "For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law".
I asked the question "Doesn't anything God said convey the slightest meaning to you?". You didn't answer it. However, your response provides the answer when you showed that you only question Scripture and don't accept what God said.
I will accept "as well". When you sin you break the law "as well" at the same time.Does this mean there is OTHER standards of sin besides the Law?
What does the world ALSO mean to you?
I can't forgive your ignorance when your post is this facetious. You admitted up front that you can't accept Scripture, followed by blithe contradiction to what both John and Paul wrote in their epistles.Of course I can not. Look like John can not either.
4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
but sin is not imputed when there is no law". In other words no law no sin! Forgive my ignorance!
So you agree that the scripture equates that the Law was NOT the only standard of sin..... right?I will accept "as well". When you sin you break the law "as well" at the same time.
Do you promise to listen and accept God's word as the truth?Can anyone tell me what are the commandments of God if not the Ten commandments?
If and when they read what's there they will no longer be SDA like many that have read it.The definition of sin is outlined for gentiles in the Noahide commandments and for Christians throughout the New Testament. The total inability of Seventh Day Adventists to read and comprehend the New Testament never ceases to amaze.
I DO NOT Agree.So you agree that the scripture equates that the Law was NOT the only standard of sin..... right?
The problem is the word ALSO could have been left out of the verse and it would have meant what you are equating by adding it into the mix it puts doubt in what you desire it to mean because it raises the question is there other standards of sin or not?
If sin is breaking of the Law then saying also is making the scripture superfluous. Logically speaking the writers of the Bible aren't agreeing with your premise.
That is what I always try to do by the grace of God.Do you promise to listen and accept God's word as the truth?
I have read the whole bible already. What did I miss?If and when they read what's there they will no longer be SDA like many that have read it.
Evidently quite a bit. That's probably because of your reading glasses.I have read the whole bible already. What did I miss?
The bondwoman covenant from Mount Sinai. (Galatians 4:21-31)I have read the whole bible already. What did I miss?
Good. Fix your previous mistake.That is what I always try to do by the grace of God.Do you promise to listen and accept God's word as the truth?
See your own contradiction: your claim that God didn't ordain the Ten Commandments, concurrent with a claim that He did. The bondwoman was defined as the covenant from Mount Sinai in v.24, which is the Ten Commandments. Those retained by it have no claim to eternal life, as they are outside God's redemption.God did not ordain the bondwoman, that was man's doings: Sarah and Abraham. The ten Commandments on the other hand is directly from God.First of all, you once again reversed the relationship of what kept whom until the time appointed by God.
Second of all, those retained by the bondwoman covenant from Mount Sinai have absolutely no claim to eternal life with the Heir: Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” (Galatians 4:30)
Exactly what I thought you might say. Its not worth the time of day to tell you what you've missed because its already been done and you refuse to listen. Your most recent post containing part of Jer 31:32 that I repeatedly post shows that very plainly. BTW I'm still so much appalled I can't respond to it yet.That is what I always try to do by the grace of God.
The cat on my shoulder carries a conversation better than him-of-whom-we-shall-not-speak.Exactly what I thought you might say. Its not worth the time of day to tell you what you've missed because its already been done and you refuse to listen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?