Things to consider about the Ten Commandments

[LarryP2]

27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?

We know that Gentiles were exempt from both circumcision and the Mosaic Law in Acts 15. Honest Sabbatarians admit that Chapter presents an insurmountable problem for their position, and have conceded that at BEST, Sabbath Keeping is optional for Christians.

Proof texters love taking things out of context. The text taken wildly out of context was clearly written to the Jews:

Romans 2:15-29
New International Version (NIV)
17 Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; 18 if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19 if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— 21 you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22 You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24 As it is written: “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”[a]

25 Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. 26 So then, if those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? 27 The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.

Although it is nice that you finally admit that without circumcision, the Mosaic Law cannot be kept.

So the Gentles kept the law!

Not without circumcision! And Acts 15 made it clear that Gentiles would not be circumcised! And here is what you were trying to hide by citing the out of context text that you used above:

14Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

And:

28 A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

 

[Frogster]

27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
What does fulfill mean?

2.
carry out (a task, duty, or role) as required, pledged, or expected.
"some officials were dismissed because they could not fulfill their duties"
synonyms:carry out, perform, accomplish, execute, do, discharge, conduct; So the Gentles kept the law!

No they did not, history shows that, those without the law, 2:12, and it even says 2 times in 2:14 they do not have the law.

Paul was just showing that even the gentile can do better than the Jewish person there, sure, sometimes the gentiles behaved better, look how Paul is going to rebuke the Jews in chapter 2, that is all he is saying. That even those without it, behaved better.

Who were those without the law in 2:12? How can they fulfill what they did not have?

Read 2:17, and 2:23, the Jewish people boasted in God, and the law, so paul was equalizing, just showing them that even the gentiles, sometimes did not do as the Jews and rob temples, stole, commited adultery, etc. Lets not turn text into what we want, that is called eisegesis, we want exegesis.

 

[Elder 111]

We know that Gentiles were exempt from both circumcision and the Mosaic Law in Acts 15. Honest Sabbatarians admit that Chapter presents an insurmountable problem for their position, and have conceded that at BEST, Sabbath Keeping is optional for Christians.

That is absolutely not the case. There is no mention of the Sabbath not being for the Gentles in Acts 15. Here is your chance to show it!

Proof texters love taking things out of context. The text taken wildly out of context was clearly written to the Jews:

Romans 2:15-29
New International Version (NIV)
17 Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; 18 if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19 if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— 21 you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22 You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24 As it is written: “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”[a]

25 Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. 26 So then, if those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? 27 The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.

What is your point?

 

[Frogster]

27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
What does fulfill mean?

2.
carry out (a task, duty, or role) as required, pledged, or expected.
"some officials were dismissed because they could not fulfill their duties"
synonyms:carry out, perform, accomplish, execute, do, discharge, conduct; So the Gentles kept the law!

You have to understand the flow of the 3 chapters. The Jewish people boasted, so Paul says heck, even the gentiles don't do what you guys sometimes do, he was showing the hypocrisy there, you have to read the narrative as a whole, and get the gist of what Paul was saying, and trying to show, that being, no one was justified or ever lived out the law, sure, sometimes the gentile might here and there, paul was showing something there, law futility, hypocrisy, etc, that's all.

Didn't Paul say to those without the law also in 1 Cor 9, about gentiles?

There are lot of verses that show gentiles did not live law, here are 2.


Acts 14:16 In past generations he allowed all the nations to walk in their own ways.


Acts 17:30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent

Above Paul said ignorance about the gentiles, so does Peter in 1 Peter 1, and Paul does again in Eph 4:18, so for you to act like Gentiles kept the law, or were under law in totally wrong.



1 Peter 1:14 As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance,

 

[LarryP2]

That is absolutely not the case. There is no mention of the Sabbath not being for the Gentles in Acts 15. Here is your chance to show it!


What is your point?

You are, of course, going to show me in that list of things that were required of Gentile converts that they were to keep the Sabbath, right? Gentiles were give four rules, none of which were the Sabbath in Acts 15. And of course, as has been repeated ad nauseum, Gentiles were subject to execution by the Sanhedrin if they tried Sabbath keeping.

What is your point?[/SIZE]

That you lied and were being deliberately misleading when you took that text out of context.

 

[Elder 111]

riginally Posted by Elder 111

27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
What does fulfill mean?

2.
carry out (a task, duty, or role) as required, pledged, or expected.
"some officials were dismissed because they could not fulfill their duties"
synonyms:carry out, perform, accomplish, execute, do, discharge, conduct; So the Gentles kept the law!
​

No they did not, history shows that, those without the law, 2:12, and it even says 2 times in 2:14 they do not have the law.

Paul was just showing that even the gentile can do better than the Jewish person there, sure, sometimes the gentiles behaved better, look how Paul is going to rebuke the Jews in chapter 2, that is all he is saying. That even those without it, behaved better.

Who were those without the law in 2:12? How can they fulfill what they did not have?

Read 2:17, and 2:23, the Jewish people boasted in God, and the law, so paul was equalizing, just showing them that even the gentiles, sometimes did not do as the Jews and rob temples, stole, commited adultery, etc. Lets not turn text into what we want, that is called eisegesis, we want exegesis.

That is your doing not mine. All Paul was saying is that the law was given to them by God not that it was only for them. What does fulfill mean!
Would you deny plain revealed biblical facts to main your view?

 

[LarryP2]

That is your doing not mine. All Paul was saying is that the law was given to them by God not that it was only for them. What does fulfill mean!
Would deny plain revealed biblical facts to main your view?

How many times does Paul need to say that the Gentiles did not have the law in one Chapter before you believe him? He said it twice blatantly.

Would three times convince you? Oops, I think he DID say it three times!

14Indeed, when

, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

And:

28 A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

Paul says:

1). "and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code."

2)."Gentiles, who do not have the law"

3).".....even though they do not have the law."

I think Paul is trying awfully hard to drive home the point that Gentiles are not under the law! Which of course, they never had been and never will be.

 

[from scratch]

That is absolutely not the case. There is no mention of the Sabbath not being for the Gentles in Acts 15. Here is your chance to show it!


What is your point?

You have a funny Bible.

 

[from scratch]

riginally Posted by Elder 111

27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
What does fulfill mean?

2.
carry out (a task, duty, or role) as required, pledged, or expected.
"some officials were dismissed because they could not fulfill their duties"
synonyms:carry out, perform, accomplish, execute, do, discharge, conduct; So the Gentles kept the law!
​

That is your doing not mine. All Paul was saying is that the law was given to them by God not that it was only for them. What does fulfill mean!
Would you deny plain revealed biblical facts to main your view?

Why does Paul need to say that when Moses did?

 

[Elder 111]

We know that Gentiles were exempt from both circumcision and the Mosaic Law in Acts 15. Honest Sabbatarians admit that Chapter presents an insurmountable problem for their position, and have conceded that at BEST, Sabbath Keeping is optional for Christians.

Proof texters love taking things out of context. The text taken wildly out of context was clearly written to the Jews:

Romans 2:15-29
New International Version (NIV)
17 Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; 18 if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19 if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— 21 you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22 You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24 As it is written: “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”[a]

25 Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. 26 So then, if those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? 27 The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.

Although it is nice that you finally admit that without circumcision, the Mosaic Law cannot be kept.



Not without circumcision! And Acts 15 made it clear that Gentiles would not be circumcised! And here is what you were trying to hide by citing the out of context text that you used above:

14Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

And:

28 A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

You are adding to God's word and adding statements that are not even implied.

 

[from scratch]

How many times does Paul need to say that the Gentiles did not have the law in one Chapter before you believe him? He said it twice blatantly.

Would three times convince you?

Not even if it were the only words of the chapter.

 

[from scratch]

You are adding to God's word and adding statements that are not even implied.

Where is this? What I saw was the same thing in my Bible.

 

[LarryP2]

You are adding to God's word and adding statements that are not even implied.

That is another lie you've told tonight. I cut and pasted the scripture without change and merely highlighted it and underlined it.

 

[Elder 111]

You are, of course, going to show me in that list of things that were required of Gentile converts that they were to keep the Sabbath, right? Gentiles were give four rules, none of which were the Sabbath in Acts 15. And of course, as has been repeated ad nauseum, Gentiles were subject to execution by the Sanhedrin if they tried Sabbath keeping.



That you lied and were being deliberately misleading when you took that text out of context.

You did not show where the Gentles were not to keep the Sabbath from Acts 15. The point is that they knew the Sabbath was being kept and said nothing about it. WHY? There is a list of what not to do and the is no DO NOT KEEP THE SABBATH! WHY?
Where is the lie in my quotation? Fulfill does not mean what is means? Or Paul was Lying?

 

[from scratch]

That is another lie you've told tonight. I cut and pasted the scripture without change and merely highlighted it and underlined it.

Now you know that's changing God's Word which only the sabbatarians are allowed to do. They've special permission.

 

[LarryP2]

You did not show where the Gentles were not to keep the Sabbath from Acts 15. The point is that they knew the Sabbath was being kept and said nothing about it. WHY? There is a list of what not to do and the is no DO NOT KEEP THE SABBATH! WHY?
Where is the lie in my quotation? Fulfill does not mean what is means? Or Paul was Lying?

The letter in Acts 15 was written to newly-converted Pagans, who obviously had NO experience keeping the Sabbath. They were not Jews. In the context of the Chapter, the Pharisees were arguing that the Gentiles must be circumcised and keep the Mosaic Law. If you cannot comprehend that the letter to the Antioch Christians strongly ruled against those Pharisees, then you really DO have a learning disability or are illiterate.

You DO understand that Pagans did not keep the Sabbath before they converted to Christianity, right? You must have a vivid imagination if you think newly-converted Pagans were already keeping the Sabbath in Antioch, when there is NOTHING in either the Bible or history that says they were! NOTHING! Nor is there anything in the Bible that says they kept the Sabbath AFTER the letter in Acts 15. NOTHING! And there is certainly no record of any Gentiles being put to Death for keeping the Sabbath in Antioch, so I think it is safe to say that NO Gentiles kept the Sabbath in Antioch, before or after the letter in Acts 15.

Honest Sabbatarians simply conceded that, at best, Sabbath Keeping might be permissible for Christians today, NEVER mandatory, NEVER more important than the Resurrection, NEVER having anything to do with Salvation, NEVER being a sin to not keep it.

 

[Elder 111]

How many times does Paul need to say that the Gentiles did not have the law in one Chapter before you believe him? He said it twice blatantly.

Would three times convince you? Oops, I think he DID say it three times!

14Indeed, when

, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

And:

28 A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

Paul says:

1). "and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code."

2)."Gentiles, who do not have the law"

3).".....even though they do not have the law."

I think Paul is trying awfully hard to drive home the point that Gentiles are not under the law! Which of course, they never had been and never will be.

You are so blinded by your own prejudice that you can not see. Exactly what Jesus asked us to do, see and hear. They do by nature the things required by the law. Again they fulfilled or did or kept or obeyed or performed the LAW (Ten Commandments for Paul mentioned things of the same). I do not have a PHD but that is plain enough for illiterate to understand.

 

[LarryP2]

You are so blinded by your own prejudice that you can not see. Exactly what Jesus asked us to do, see and hear. They do by nature the things required by the law. Again they fulfilled or did or kept or obeyed or performed the LAW (Ten Commandments for Paul mentioned things of the same). I do not have a PHD but that is plain enough for illiterate to understand.

Please point out ANYWHERE in that chapter in Romans where either the Ten Commandments OR the Sabbath is mentioned. He speaks of the Law that Jews were under before Christ, and that is all 613 NOT just the Ten Commandments. You are just being dishonest when you think he was talking about only the Ten Commandments. They come as a package, all or none. Paul was a Pharisee, so he knew how the Law worked, and the Ten Commandments cannot be separated from all of the rest of it.

"According to Jewish tradition, G-d gave the Jewish people 613 mitzvot (commandments). All 613 of those mitzvot are equally sacred, equally binding and equally the word of G-d. All of these mitzvot are treated as equally important, because human beings, with our limited understanding of the universe, have no way of knowing which mitzvot are more important in the eyes of the Creator."

"But what about the so-called "Ten Commandments," the words recorded in Exodus 20, the words that the Creator Himself wrote on the two stone tablets that Moses brought down from Mount Sinai (Ex. 31:18), which Moses smashed upon seeing the idolatry of the golden calf (Ex. 32:19)? In the Torah, these words are never referred to as the Ten Commandments. In the Torah, they are called Aseret ha-D'varim (Ex. 34:28, Deut. 4:13 and Deut. 10:4). In rabbinical texts, they are referred to as Aseret ha-Dibrot. The words d'varim and dibrot come from the Hebrew root Dalet-Beit-Reish, meaning word, speak or thing; thus, the phrase is accurately translated as the Ten Sayings, the Ten Statements, the Ten Declarations, the Ten Words or even the Ten Things, but not as the Ten Commandments, which would be Aseret ha-Mitzvot."
....
"But there is an additional aspect of this controversy that is of concern from a Jewish perspective. In Talmudic times, the rabbis consciously made a decision to exclude daily recitation of the Aseret ha-Dibrot from the liturgy because excessive emphasis on these statements might lead people to mistakenly believe that these were the only mitzvot or the most important mitzvot, and neglect the full 613 (Talmud Berakhot 12a). By posting these words prominently and referring to them as "The Ten Commandments," (as if there weren't any others, which is what many people think) schools and public buildings may be teaching a message that Judaism specifically and consciously rejected.

http://www.jewfaq.org/10.htm

That is what Paul was thinking whenever he said anything about the Law. The above goes back thousands of years before Paul was born.

 

[Elder 111]

That is another lie you've told tonight. I cut and pasted the scripture without change and merely highlighted it and underlined it.

Here is my bible 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
This is yours.
No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.
I was also making reference to what you said I admitted to not the biblical quote alone.
When the text is closely examined it is saying that those who "do" are the ones that are truely circumcised not those who have it in writing.

 

[LarryP2]

Here is my bible 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
This is yours.
No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.
I was also making reference to what you said I admitted to not the biblical quote alone.
When the text is closely examined it is saying that those who "do" are the ones that are truely circumcised not those who have it in writing.

Obviously your entire theology is based on translation errors in the King James Version. Grow up and start using the NIV or one of the modern translations.

"and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code."

You REALLY cannot see that it says not by the written code, can you? You really cannot see he is describing circumcision of the heart, by the spirit and not by the written code? I helpfully boldfaced the not by the written code so that you might comprehend that its means not by the written code.

That is just remarkable!

And I reposted the following, since I know how you like to dodge and evade the obvious:

"According to Jewish tradition, G-d gave the Jewish people 613 mitzvot (commandments). All 613 of those mitzvot are equally sacred, equally binding and equally the word of G-d. All of these mitzvot are treated as equally important, because human beings, with our limited understanding of the universe, have no way of knowing which mitzvot are more important in the eyes of the Creator."

"But what about the so-called "Ten Commandments," the words recorded in Exodus 20, the words that the Creator Himself wrote on the two stone tablets that Moses brought down from Mount Sinai (Ex. 31:18), which Moses smashed upon seeing the idolatry of the golden calf (Ex. 32:19)? In the Torah, these words are never referred to as the Ten Commandments. In the Torah, they are called Aseret ha-D'varim (Ex. 34:28, Deut. 4:13 and Deut. 10:4). In rabbinical texts, they are referred to as Aseret ha-Dibrot. The words d'varim and dibrot come from the Hebrew root Dalet-Beit-Reish, meaning word, speak or thing; thus, the phrase is accurately translated as the Ten Sayings, the Ten Statements, the Ten Declarations, the Ten Words or even the Ten Things, but not as the Ten Commandments, which would be Aseret ha-Mitzvot."
....
"But there is an additional aspect of this controversy that is of concern from a Jewish perspective. In Talmudic times, the rabbis consciously made a decision to exclude daily recitation of the Aseret ha-Dibrot from the liturgy because excessive emphasis on these statements might lead people to mistakenly believe that these were the only mitzvot or the most important mitzvot, and neglect the full 613 (Talmud Berakhot 12a). By posting these words prominently and referring to them as "The Ten Commandments," (as if there weren't any others, which is what many people think) schools and public buildings may be teaching a message that Judaism specifically and consciously rejected.

http://www.jewfaq.org/10.htm

In case you missed it, Paul was operating in Talmudic times. He would have been thinking of ALL 613 Commandments whenever he thought of "The Law." No Gentile has EVER kept ANY of the Law, before during or after Christ. The written code has 613 Commandments, and it is all or none.

And because I know you Adventists love to dodge, evade, and deflect, I am asking you once again where "The Ten Commandments" and "the Sabbath" is mentioned in that Chapter out of Romans that you cited.