Why keep the Ten Commandments? (2)

[fhansen]

The question remains - why?

The reason for keeping them is because, um, it's better than breaking them. Because, as Paul tells us, the Law is holy, spiritual, and good. And, again, as he tells us, it's not even those who hear the law that will be declared righteous, but those who obey it.

But as believers it's too late anyway; we've already heard it, we already know it. And since believers sometimes fall into sin again, it's good that we hear/know it; we show that we still need it if we're turning back away from God. Then, if we're willing we can have a change of heart, repenting and turning back to Him again whereby communion is restored.

Love is the core-the heart and soul of Christianity. Without it, regardless of our faith and how we've, personally, assessed it, we're nothing. Faith must lead to love or it hasn't moved towards it's purpose-we've refused to pick up our cross, to continue in following the Lord. And then love, a supernatural gift that God seeks to patiently mold us into the image of, fulfills the law, nearly effortlessly.

 

[from scratch]

The reason for keeping them is because, um, it's better than breaking them. Because, as Paul tells us, the Law is holy, spiritual, and good. And, again, as he tells us, it's not even those who hear the law that will be declared righteous, but those who obey it.

But as believers it's too late anyway; we've already heard it, we already know it. And since believers sometimes fall into sin again, it's good that we hear/know it; we show that we still need it if we're turning back away from God. Then, if we're willing we can have a change of heart, repenting and turning back to Him again whereby communion is restored.

Love is the core-the heart and soul of Christianity. Without it, regardless of our faith and how we've, personally, assessed it, we're nothing. Faith must lead to love or it hasn't moved towards it's purpose-we've refused to pick up our cross, to continue in following the Lord. And then love, a supernatural gift that God seeks to patiently mold us into the image of, fulfills the law, nearly effortlessly.

If you're not following the Spirit you need the law.

 

[from scratch]

So you agree that adultry is against God?

Absolutely. But that doesn't mean one is keeping the law. After all my unregenerate neighbor who will tell you where to stick your religion doesn't commit adultery.

 

[FredVB]

Assume the people on both islands were obeying their islands laws.
1) Are the People on the 3 law island obeying the laws of the 1 law island?
2) Are the People on the 1 law island obeying the laws of the 3 law island?

I do not see relevance in this as I am not saying something that seems to be assumed with suggestion from this. If the same things are involved in two places than I think there is the same obedience. But absolutely there is not the righteousness that is needed coming with obedience. There is that and salvation according to true faith, and that is of Christ. Obedience that there should be with our Lord is enabled in that as it had not been apart from that, without it working to our righteousness and salvation.

I requested Fred to Please say Yes the Ten Commandments are required for the Christian - or no the Ten Commandments aren't required of the Christian.

Fred responded with - For the redeemed there is no condemnation. But it is best to do what commandments from Yahweh show. May your conscience guide you to what God desires, what is central in his will for you. Jesus loves you, may you live for him.

I'm so curious I can't hardly stand myself. Why can't Fred respond as requested? What is so difficult about it? c&p is easy and only requires 5 or so key strokes. Instead he refuses to answer the question with well over 200 key strokes.

It appears Fred thinks a Christian is required to or should keep the law for some undisclosed reason. Personally I think it is disbelief requiring a back up system for salvation in case God really hasn't given us a free gift.

I've even asked Fred to say Yes or no. Only 3 key strokes at the most. Instead I get some obscure beat the bushes answer.

The Christian is required or isn't required to keep the law. There is no in between. A woman can't be kinda sorta pregnant. She is or she isn't.

I was sure I did answer the question. Let me answer again. I have to address assumptions. The redeemed are not obliged to keep the law. It should not be up to the redeemed to provide the sacrifice, the priesthood, and way to be clean. In fact, with modern circumstances and with bulk of humanity including those who would come to Christ, it is impossible and no one is clean from what is in the law. But the commandments, which show morality and the sin that one should be apart from, are right for us. So without saying it affects salvation, there is obligation in that. It is for individuals to learn that, no one and no institution would make it happen that you would learn that.

Fred says - For the redeemed there is no condemnation. But it is best to do what commandments from Yahweh show. May your conscience guide you to what God desires, what is central in his will for you. Jesus loves you, may you live for him.

His next post contains - I never said I was promoting the law.

To which I'm going to say - really? I must be very dense.

Right, the law is not promoted nor should be. Saying that apostles taught to not do what commandments say is an interpretation that would have them saying something different than what the Lord Jesus said for doing what is commended, so if apostles are right, as I say, they were not teaching against commandments.

 

[Sophrosyne]

It was an error on my part.... I fixed it.

Assume the people on both islands were obeying their islands laws.
1) Are the People on the 3 law island obeying the laws of the 1 law island?
2) Are the People on the 1 law island obeying the laws of the 3 law island?

I do not see relevance in this as I am not saying something that seems to be assumed with suggestion from this. If the same things are involved in two places than I think there is the same obedience. But absolutely there is not the righteousness that is needed coming with obedience. There is that and salvation according to true faith, and that is of Christ. Obedience that there should be with our Lord is enabled in that as it had not been apart from that, without it working to our righteousness and salvation.

Not a direct answer to my question here.... try again.

 

[from scratch]

I do not see relevance in this as I am not saying something that seems to be assumed with suggestion from this. If the same things are involved in two places than I think there is the same obedience. But absolutely there is not the righteousness that is needed coming with obedience. There is that and salvation according to true faith, and that is of Christ. Obedience that there should be with our Lord is enabled in that as it had not been apart from that, without it working to our righteousness and salvation.



I was sure I did answer the question. Let me answer again. I have to address assumptions. The redeemed are not obliged to keep the law. It should not be up to the redeemed to provide the sacrifice, the priesthood, and way to be clean. In fact, with modern circumstances and with bulk of humanity including those who would come to Christ, it is impossible and no one is clean from what is in the law. But the commandments, which show morality and the sin that one should be apart from, are right for us. So without saying it affects salvation, there is obligation in that. It is for individuals to learn that, no one and no institution would make it happen that you would learn that.



Right, the law is not promoted nor should be. Saying that apostles taught to not do what commandments say is an interpretation that would have them saying something different than what the Lord Jesus said for doing what is commended, so if apostles are right, as I say, they were not teaching against commandments.

So is it your opinion that one who does the things contained in the law is obedient to and observing the law?

 

[from scratch]

Scratch can't tap foot and scratch bald head at the same time. (shameless bump for my friend Fred.)

 

[FredVB]

Not a direct answer to my question here.... try again.

Clearly you want a certain answer, which I don't know. I do not think it applies, but why don't you just say what the answer you consider for it is to make your point?

So is it your opinion that one who does the things contained in the law is obedient to and observing the law?

Jesus Christ the Lord did the things contained in the law and he was obedient to and observing the law. I have already made the point that in times more recent to that it is not at all possible to do the things contained in the law.

 

[from scratch]

Clearly you want a certain answer, which I don't know. I do not think it applies, but why don't you just say what the answer you consider for it is to make your point?



Jesus Christ the Lord did the things contained in the law and he was obedient to and observing the law. I have already made the point that in times more recent to that it is not at all possible to do the things contained in the law.

Why did Jesus keep the law?

 

[FredVB]

Why did Jesus keep the law?

There is maybe a whole theology that is desired to have discussed. I would not have time for all of that. I can just come to give concise answers to what I can, and it is just for some things. As to the Lord Jesus keeping the law, he was perfect, that is how he came, and even though temptations came to him, as they do with any of us, he did not depart from that perfection. So he did all things of the law, and fulfilled the perfect will of Yahweh God. He himself fulfilled it all with it including himself for sacrifice, priesthood, and way to be clean, for which what the law has for that, which is no longer possible at all, are shadows as fore-types of what Jesus did for that.

Certainly there must be faith, hope, and love, and love is the greatest of these with importance for us, but with this, there are concrete results with growth in true believers with obedience to the Lord in that.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Clearly you want a certain answer, which I don't know. I do not think it applies, but why don't you just say what the answer you consider for it is to make your point?

No.. clearly you are just being evasive as usual. It is quite obvious what the answer is a simpleton could get it but you refuse because you know the answer is just as simple as the commandments given to Christians.

Jesus Christ the Lord did the things contained in the law and he was obedient to and observing the law. I have already made the point that in times more recent to that it is not at all possible to do the things contained in the law.

The problem is the point is not valid to Gentiles. Gentiles are not Jews born under the Law. Gentiles are not Jesus, born sinless not needing to obtain righteousness and keeping the Law not for his sake of being righteous but for the sake of those who are not. Jesus did a lot of things that YOU refuse to do yet you constantly say we must copy his example. If you aren't going to copy ALL of his life and deeds as an example then picking and choosing which parts without but your own opinion which to do is not a valid argument.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Why did Jesus keep the law?

Good luck on a straight answer. Seems law promoters here are not interested in direct debate they would rather talk about how many birds are in a bush than point out the ones that are in their hands.

 

[from scratch]

No.. clearly you are just being evasive as usual. It is quite obvious what the answer is a simpleton could get it but you refuse because you know the answer is just as simple as the commandments given to Christians.

The problem is the point is not valid to Gentiles. Gentiles are not Jews born under the Law. Gentiles are not Jesus, born sinless not needing to obtain righteousness and keeping the Law not for his sake of being righteous but for the sake of those who are not. Jesus did a lot of things that YOU refuse to do yet you constantly say we must copy his example. If you aren't going to copy ALL of his life and deeds as an example then picking and choosing which parts without but your own opinion which to do is not a valid argument.

I wonder when he's going to start walking on water.

Reminds me about 3 ministers that went fishing. A pentecostal, Baptist and say a Catholic (no slurs intended).

After being out on the lake for awhile the Pentecostal says he needs to do something on the shore. He gets up and steps off on the water and walks to the shore and comes back. The Baptist does the same bout a half hour later. The Catholic is going nuts and finally thinks if they can do it so can I. So he steps out of boat and is over his head in water gasping in surprise. The catholic is new to the lake while the other 2 aren't. The Pentecostal and Baptist knew where the stumps were.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I wonder when he's going to start walking on water.

Reminds me about 3 ministers that went fishing. A pentecostal, Baptist and say a Catholic (no slurs intended).

After being out on the lake for awhile the Pentecostal says he needs to do something on the shore. He gets up and steps off on the water and walks to the shore and comes back. The Baptist does the same bout a half hour later. The Catholic is going nuts and finally thinks if they can do it so can I. So he steps out of boat and is over his head in water gasping in surprise. The catholic is new to the lake while the other 2 aren't. The Pentecostal and Baptist knew where the stumps were.

I thought about mentioning that... and healing the sick, casting out demons, raising the dead... making wine out of water. Jesus never married so by example anyone who marries is not obeying him.

 

[from scratch]

I thought about mentioning that... and healing the sick, casting out demons, raising the dead... making wine out of water. Jesus never married so by example anyone who marries is not obeying him.

My he's got some very tough road to haul.

 

[Sophrosyne]

My he's got some very tough road to haul.

You forget he spent I think 3 years dedicated to proclaiming the Gospel to the Jews also. I don't see anyone here packing their bags and going to Israel and spending 3 years evangelizing the Jews. He turned a 2 piece fish dinner into a meal for 5000 and made a blind man see.

 

[from scratch]

You forget he spent I think 3 years dedicated to proclaiming the Gospel to the Jews also. I don't see anyone here packing their bags and going to Israel and spending 3 years evangelizing the Jews. He turned a 2 piece fish dinner into a meal for 5000 and made a blind man see.

I'd love to see him do either of those 2 things. I hear they still stone (or kill) those who preach about Jesus over there.

 

[plmarquette]

I come not to abolish, but to fulfill the Law
the Law , given by Moses, is the first 5 books of the bible (Torah)
Leviticus ... ministers and ministry
Deuteronomy... social behavior , health, and dietary laws
the commentary on the Torah (Law) is the Talmud (by Rabbi's)
they made 200 daily things to do and 300 things not to do from 10 commandments
Jesus said if we love as God loves, we fulfill the intent of the Law
If we love we will not steal, lie, deceive, covet, kill

 

[from scratch]

I come not to abolish, but to fulfill the Law
the Law , given by Moses, is the first 5 books of the bible (Torah)
Leviticus ... ministers and ministry
Deuteronomy... social behavior , health, and dietary laws
the commentary on the Torah (Law) is the Talmud (by Rabbi's)
they made 200 daily things to do and 300 things not to do from 10 commandments
Jesus said if we love as God loves, we fulfill the intent of the Law
If we love we will not steal, lie, deceive, covet, kill

So is your intent we are required to observe the law?

 

[FredVB]

Clearly you want a certain answer, which I don't know. I do not think it applies, but why don't you just say what the answer you consider for it is to make your point?

Jesus Christ the Lord did the things contained in the law and he was obedient to and observing the law. I have already made the point that in times more recent to that it is not at all possible to do the things contained in the law.

No.. clearly you are just being evasive as usual. It is quite obvious what the answer is a simpleton could get it but you refuse because you know the answer is just as simple as the commandments given to Christians.

The problem is the point is not valid to Gentiles. Gentiles are not Jews born under the Law. Gentiles are not Jesus, born sinless not needing to obtain righteousness and keeping the Law not for his sake of being righteous but for the sake of those who are not. Jesus did a lot of things that YOU refuse to do yet you constantly say we must copy his example.

I wonder when he's going to start walking on water.

I thought about mentioning that... and healing the sick, casting out demons, raising the dead... making wine out of water. Jesus never married so by example anyone who marries is not obeying him.

My he's got some very tough road to haul.

You forget he spent I think 3 years dedicated to proclaiming the Gospel to the Jews also. I don't see anyone here packing their bags and going to Israel and spending 3 years evangelizing the Jews. He turned a 2 piece fish dinner into a meal for 5000 and made a blind man see.

I'd love to see him do either of those 2 things. I hear they still stone (or kill) those who preach about Jesus over there.

I did not even say things ever of which I am accused in this discussion, and contrary to what i asked for nothing is shown with quotes of what I said for those accusations. Abusive comments can be seen, when I post for what others say including here, I never do make personal remarks, or judgments, ever, it can't be found. I stick to a standard and it is consistent with guidelines. I also have been only saying things that are within orthodoxy. This is always so, though I do see a good number of posts that depart in some way from that, though I am not saying it for any in this discussion. There is irony though that love is said to fulfill all the commandments, yet I do not see it in communication from those claiming it, though I am certainly not so sensitive, I still deal with it and do not respond with comments that are in any way personal or abusive.

We have our Lord as example to us as well as our help and our hope, but we do not need to do all that he did nor can we nor should we, and no where have I said that we should. We should do the things that we can do that Yahweh enables us for with his Spirit.

In post 70 I actually responded to the previous post from Scratch adequately.