Works Relation to Salvation

[Icyspark]

For a number of people there seems to be some confusion as to why they should observe the Sabbath. Aside from the fact that its part of the Ten Commandment covenant in which the command itself says we are to "Remember the Sabbath day"; Aside from the fact that the Sabbath provides all humans with a day of physical rest; Aside from the fact that each Sabbath is to be observed in honor of Jesus creating the heavens and the Earth; Aside from the fact that God says we're to call the Sabbath a delight; Aside from the fact that Jesus said that the Sabbath was "made for human beings"; Aside from the fact that Jesus, the apostles, Paul and Gentiles all observed the Sabbath; I guess there's really no reason at all ::shrugs::

But let's set all of that aside and consider what Jesus says about salvation:

Matthew 5:27-30​

“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.​

• Jesus quotes from the Ten Commandment covenant: "You shall not commit adultery."
• Jesus magnifies the law and equates adultery with looking lustfully at a woman.
• Jesus says it is better to pluck out your eye rather than to be guilty of adultery.
• Jesus says it is better to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (Translation: LOSS OF SALVATION)

The act of adultery (or murder, or theft, or +7) is not what denies salvation. It merely reveals your lack of love for the One you claim to love. God says, "Those that honor Me, I will honor." Do you know where that quote is found in the Bible? Go look it up sometime. It's very enlightening.

So, what do you think? According to Jesus, is there any correlation between what you do and your salvation?

For those of you who are inclined to reject, deny or abolish the words of Jesus I suggest you take the following text into account:

Mark 8:38​

If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.”​

And also these verses:

Luke 6:46-49​

“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say? As for everyone who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice, I will show you what they are like. They are like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built. But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete.”​

And this passage:

John 12:47-50​

“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.”​

But maybe you think that Paul will go easier on your belief? Let's see:

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 ​

Don’t you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? [Note that here Paul equates doing wrong with loss of salvation.]Don’t fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, [Look at that! One of the Ten Commandments! And if Paul mentions one, of necessity he includes all ten.] or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God. Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.​

Do you suppose Paul is a works-oriented legalist? Probably not, but could it be that if you've ever used that legalist term against someone I'm surmising you probably weren't applying it consistently. If you were I'd bet that Paul wouldn't pass your muster.

Again, works don't earn our salvation--works merely validate our claim that we love Jesus.

Paul says, "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?" Your works reveal whether your faith is real.

James very succinctly explains that faith without works is dead (James 2:14-26). If you claim you love Jesus, yet don't do what He says, then your faith is dead.

John 14:15-21 records Jesus saying the following:

“If you love me, keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.”​

Conversely, what about those who do not love Jesus? In verse 24 Jesus says, "Anyone who doesn't love me will not obey me."

It's amazing how many of the critics of Adventism have attempted to redact all of the commands of Jesus down to two commands which apparently they believe are open to interpretation. Love for your neighbor is not nebulous and left undefined. Jesus provided explicit commands in His Ten Commandment covenant which define how we are to love our neighbor. The covenant/agreement was canceled, but it was canceled based on the failure of the people to keep their end of the agreement. What they agreed to (ie. the law) was obviously not the problem. "God found fault with the people," not with His perfect law.

• Since most critics believe there is no law then they have no need to "stop sinning," as Jesus, Peter, John and Paul all admonish Christians;
• Since formers have no law to identify sin, then they are sinless;
• Since they are "sinless," they have no need for grace;
• Since they have no need for grace, then they have no need for forgiveness;
• Since they have no need for forgiveness, then they have no need for a Savior;
• Since they have no need for a Savior, then they have no need for Jesus;
• If they have no need for Jesus, then we see who's truly in a cult. A religion without Jesus is empty and devoid of any eternal value.

Let's review what we've learned today:

• We've established that Jesus says to cut out your eye rather than to look at a woman lustfully and go to hell. / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Jesus says to cut off your hand and throw it away rather than to go to hell. / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you worship idols you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you commit adultery you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you steal you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL

For which one of these established biblical beliefs do you wish to condemn me as being a legalist?

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[SabbathBlessings]

For a number of people there seems to be some confusion as to why they should observe the Sabbath. Aside from the fact that its part of the Ten Commandment covenant in which the command itself says we are to "Remember the Sabbath day"; Aside from the fact that the Sabbath provides all humans with a day of physical rest; Aside from the fact that each Sabbath is to be observed in honor of Jesus creating the heavens and the Earth; Aside from the fact that God says we're to call the Sabbath a delight; Aside from the fact that Jesus said that the Sabbath was "made for human beings"; Aside from the fact that Jesus, the apostles, Paul and Gentiles all observed the Sabbath; I guess there's really no reason at all ::shrugs::

But let's set all of that aside and consider what Jesus says about salvation:

Matthew 5:27-30
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

• Jesus quotes from the Ten Commandment covenant: "You shall not commit adultery."
• Jesus magnifies the law and equates adultery with looking lustfully at a woman.
• Jesus says it is better to pluck out your eye rather than to be guilty of adultery.
• Jesus says it is better to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (Translation: LOSS OF SALVATION)

The act of adultery (or murder, or theft, or +7) is not what denies salvation. It merely reveals your lack of love for the One you claim to love. God says, "Those that honor Me, I will honor." Do you know where that quote is found in the Bible? Go look it up sometime. It's very enlightening.

So, what do you think? According to Jesus, is there any correlation between what you do and your salvation?

For those of you who are inclined to reject, deny or abolish the words of Jesus I suggest you take the following text into account:

Mark 8:38
If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.”

And also these verses:

Luke 6:46-49
“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say? As for everyone who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice, I will show you what they are like. They are like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built. But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete.”

And this passage:

John 12:47-50
“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.”

But maybe you think that Paul will go easier on your belief? Let's see:

1 Corinthians 6:9-11
Don’t you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? [Note that here Paul equates doing wrong with loss of salvation.]Don’t fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, [Look at that! One of the Ten Commandments! And if Paul mentions one, of necessity he includes all ten.] or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God. Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Do you suppose Paul is a works-oriented legalist? Probably not, but could it be that if you've ever used that legalist term against someone I'm surmising you probably weren't applying it consistently. If you were I'd bet that Paul wouldn't pass your muster.

Again, works don't earn our salvation--works merely validate our claim that we love Jesus.

Paul says, "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?" Your works reveal whether your faith is real.

James very succinctly explains that faith without works is dead (James 2:14-26). If you claim you love Jesus, yet don't do what He says, then your faith is dead.

John 14:15-21 records Jesus saying the following:

“If you love me, keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.”

Conversely, what about those who do not love Jesus? In verse 24 Jesus says, "Anyone who doesn't love me will not obey me."

It's amazing how many of the critics of Adventism have attempted to redact all of the commands of Jesus down to two commands which apparently they believe are open to interpretation. Love for your neighbor is not nebulous and left undefined. Jesus provided explicit commands in His Ten Commandment covenant which define how we are to love our neighbor. The covenant/agreement was canceled, but it was canceled based on the failure of the people to keep their end of the agreement. What they agreed to (ie. the law) was obviously not the problem. "God found fault with the people," not with His perfect law.

• Since most critics believe there is no law then they have no need to "stop sinning," as Jesus, Peter, John and Paul all admonish Christians;
• Since formers have no law to identify sin, then they are sinless;
• Since they are "sinless," they have no need for grace;
• Since they have no need for grace, then they have no need for forgiveness;
• Since they have no need for forgiveness, then they have no need for a Savior;
• Since they have no need for a Savior, then they have no need for Jesus;
• If they have no need for Jesus, then we see who's truly in a cult. A religion without Jesus is empty and devoid of any eternal value.

Let's review what we've learned today:

• We've established that Jesus says to cut out your eye rather than to look at a woman lustfully and go to hell. / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Jesus says to cut off your hand and throw it away rather than to go to hell. / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you worship idols you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you commit adultery you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you steal you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL

For which one of these established biblical beliefs do you wish to condemn me as being a legalist?

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Great post Icy. Nice to see you and Happy Sabbath!

 

[Bob S]

Let's review what we've learned today:

• We've established that Jesus says to cut out your eye rather than to look at a woman lustfully and go to hell. / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Jesus says to cut off your hand and throw it away rather than to go to hell. / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you worship idols you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you commit adultery you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you steal you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL

For which one of these established biblical beliefs do you wish to condemn me as being a legalist?

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Every one of what we learned today deal with morality, moral issues which are part of Jesus command to us in Jn 15:9-14, LOVE. Morality commands are forever and are known to all mankind. All moral commands deal with our fellow man, ourselves and God. The Sabbath command the SDAs deem to be salvational was a ritual command dealing with a day and only given to one nation, Israel. No other nation has ever been commanded to observe a day.

 

[Gary K]

Every one of what we learned today deal with morality, moral issues which are part of Jesus command to us in Jn 15:9-14, LOVE. Morality commands are forever and are known to all mankind. All moral commands deal with our fellow man, ourselves and God. The Sabbath command the SDAs deem to be salvational was a ritual command dealing with a day and only given to one nation, Israel. No other nation has ever been commanded to observe a day.

So the fact that God placed the 4th commandment inside His moral law means nothing?

 

[Soyeong]

For a number of people there seems to be some confusion as to why they should observe the Sabbath. Aside from the fact that its part of the Ten Commandment covenant in which the command itself says we are to "Remember the Sabbath day"; Aside from the fact that the Sabbath provides all humans with a day of physical rest; Aside from the fact that each Sabbath is to be observed in honor of Jesus creating the heavens and the Earth; Aside from the fact that God says we're to call the Sabbath a delight; Aside from the fact that Jesus said that the Sabbath was "made for human beings"; Aside from the fact that Jesus, the apostles, Paul and Gentiles all observed the Sabbath; I guess there's really no reason at all ::shrugs::

But let's set all of that aside and consider what Jesus says about salvation:

Matthew 5:27-30​

“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.​

• Jesus quotes from the Ten Commandment covenant: "You shall not commit adultery."
• Jesus magnifies the law and equates adultery with looking lustfully at a woman.
• Jesus says it is better to pluck out your eye rather than to be guilty of adultery.
• Jesus says it is better to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (Translation: LOSS OF SALVATION)

The act of adultery (or murder, or theft, or +7) is not what denies salvation. It merely reveals your lack of love for the One you claim to love. God says, "Those that honor Me, I will honor." Do you know where that quote is found in the Bible? Go look it up sometime. It's very enlightening.

So, what do you think? According to Jesus, is there any correlation between what you do and your salvation?

For those of you who are inclined to reject, deny or abolish the words of Jesus I suggest you take the following text into account:

Mark 8:38​

If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.”​

And also these verses:

Luke 6:46-49​

“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say? As for everyone who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice, I will show you what they are like. They are like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built. But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete.”​

And this passage:

John 12:47-50​

“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.”​

But maybe you think that Paul will go easier on your belief? Let's see:

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 ​

Don’t you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? [Note that here Paul equates doing wrong with loss of salvation.]Don’t fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, [Look at that! One of the Ten Commandments! And if Paul mentions one, of necessity he includes all ten.] or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God. Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.​

Do you suppose Paul is a works-oriented legalist? Probably not, but could it be that if you've ever used that legalist term against someone I'm surmising you probably weren't applying it consistently. If you were I'd bet that Paul wouldn't pass your muster.

Again, works don't earn our salvation--works merely validate our claim that we love Jesus.

Paul says, "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?" Your works reveal whether your faith is real.

James very succinctly explains that faith without works is dead (James 2:14-26). If you claim you love Jesus, yet don't do what He says, then your faith is dead.

John 14:15-21 records Jesus saying the following:

“If you love me, keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.”​

Conversely, what about those who do not love Jesus? In verse 24 Jesus says, "Anyone who doesn't love me will not obey me."

It's amazing how many of the critics of Adventism have attempted to redact all of the commands of Jesus down to two commands which apparently they believe are open to interpretation. Love for your neighbor is not nebulous and left undefined. Jesus provided explicit commands in His Ten Commandment covenant which define how we are to love our neighbor. The covenant/agreement was canceled, but it was canceled based on the failure of the people to keep their end of the agreement. What they agreed to (ie. the law) was obviously not the problem. "God found fault with the people," not with His perfect law.

• Since most critics believe there is no law then they have no need to "stop sinning," as Jesus, Peter, John and Paul all admonish Christians;
• Since formers have no law to identify sin, then they are sinless;
• Since they are "sinless," they have no need for grace;
• Since they have no need for grace, then they have no need for forgiveness;
• Since they have no need for forgiveness, then they have no need for a Savior;
• Since they have no need for a Savior, then they have no need for Jesus;
• If they have no need for Jesus, then we see who's truly in a cult. A religion without Jesus is empty and devoid of any eternal value.

Let's review what we've learned today:

• We've established that Jesus says to cut out your eye rather than to look at a woman lustfully and go to hell. / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Jesus says to cut off your hand and throw it away rather than to go to hell. / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you worship idols you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you commit adultery you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL
• We've established that Paul says if you steal you "WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God" / SALVATIONAL

For which one of these established biblical beliefs do you wish to condemn me as being a legalist?

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Jesus was not magnifying the law by saying that looking at a woman with lust in our hearts, but rather that is just the correct understanding of what is becoming commanded by the 7th and 10th Commandments against adultery and coveting in our hearts. Jesus taught more than just the Ten Commandments, such as the greatest two commandments, and all of God's commandments define how to obey the greatest two commandments, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that all of the Law and the Prophets hang on them. In John 15:10, Jesus used a parallel statement to equate his commands with those of the Father, so they both taught the same commands. Likewise, Paul referred to more than just the Ten Commandments in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and the Mosaic Law is how we know what sin is (Romans 3:20), so while we do not earn our salvation as a wage by obeying it, living in obedience to it through faith in Jesus is nevertheless intrinsically part of the concept of him saving us from not living in obedience to it. For example, keeping the Sabbath holy is intrinsically part of the concept of Jesus saving us from not keeping the Sabbath holy. Indeed, if God was a legalist for commanding the Mosaic Law and Jesus was a legalist setting a sinless example for how to follow of how to walk in obedience to it, then we should all be legalists, but that is not what I think that legalism refers to.

 

[Soyeong]

Every one of what we learned today deal with morality, moral issues which are part of Jesus command to us in Jn 15:9-14, LOVE. Morality commands are forever and are known to all mankind. All moral commands deal with our fellow man, ourselves and God. The Sabbath command the SDAs deem to be salvational was a ritual command dealing with a day and only given to one nation, Israel. No other nation has ever been commanded to observe a day.

The Bible never lists which laws are moral and never even refers to the category of moral law, so if a group of people were to create lists of which of God's laws they thought were moral laws, then they would end up with a wide variety of lists that have not been derived from the Bible, and those people should not interpret the authors of the Bible as referring to something that they had just created.

The existence of the subcategory of moral law implies that the laws that are not in that category are not moral laws and are moral to disobey, however, there is not a single example in the of one of God's laws being considered by the Bible as not being immoral to disobey, and I see no justification for thinking that it can ever be moral to disobey God. For someone to claim that any of God's laws are not moral laws is to claim that God was morally wrong to command them and to claim that they have greater moral knowledge than God. The reality is that morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws.

God's law was given to Israel to teach them how to be a light to the nations, so there is no sense in the nations rejecting the light because Israel was given that role instead of them.

 

[Bob S]

The Bible never lists which laws are moral and never even refers to the category of moral law, so if a group of people were to create lists of which of God's laws they thought were moral laws, then they would end up with a wide variety of lists that have not been derived from the Bible, and those people should not interpret the authors of the Bible as referring to something that they had just created.

The existence of the subcategory of moral law implies that the laws that are not in that category are not moral laws and are moral to disobey, however, there is not a single example in the of one of God's laws being considered by the Bible as not being immoral to disobey, and I see no justification for thinking that it can ever be moral to disobey God. For someone to claim that any of God's laws are not moral laws is to claim that God was morally wrong to command them and to claim that they have greater moral knowledge than God. The reality is that morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws.

God's law was given to Israel to teach them how to be a light to the nations, so there is no sense in the nations rejecting the light because Israel was given that role instead of them.

So Soy, you don't believe there are differences we are able to discern in the laws God gave to Israel? Let me further explain my beliefs on why some laws differ from others. Nine of the ten commandments delt with how each Israelite was to treat his fellow man. One was not to steal from another etc. the one commandment, the Sabbath command did not deal with how one treated his fellow man. Its purpose was to instruct each Israelite in the keeping of a special day and why it was given to them. It was given to them as a remembrance of creation and also for remembrance of God's leading them out of bondage in Egypt. The Sabbath command was different than the other commands as anyone can see. I cannot fathom why anyone would argue that point.

Your argument that all laws are moral does not take away the fact that some do not deal with morality. Certainly, God would not have given Israel an immoral law. There is absolutely no need to even mention that fact in trying to ignore the fact that some laws deal with ceremonial issues, some with civil issues, some with health issues, some with financial issues and some with spiritual issues.

Do you not think that God knew that Israel would not be a light to the remainder of the World? They were very inclusive to begin with. They never reached out to other nations with the belief system God gave them. And the fact is that God never gave any other nation all the Laws He gave Israel, the Sabbath law included.

The question is where did God in all of scripture ever demand that the Gentiles were subject to the ceremonial laws that He gave Israel. If you can answer that question then I would consider my views as needing more study. Otherwise perhaps yours need more study.

 

[Bob S]

So the fact that God placed the 4th commandment inside His moral law means nothing?

It meant everything to those He gave it to. The fact is God gave laws dealing with morality to all of his children. Not all laws deal with morality. See my post #7.

 

[Gary K]

It meant everything to those He gave it to. The fact is God gave laws dealing with morality to all of his children. Not all laws deal with morality. See my post #7.

I don't see how you can say that. We finite beings are dealing with an infinite God and when we can't understand why He did something we just need to bow our heads in submission and accept that His ways are beyond our ability to understand. It's called worshiping God rather than ourselves. So when God placed the 4th commandment inside the 10, which is His moral law, we juist need to bow and accept that He is infinitely wiser and more knowledgeable than we are. That He knew what He was doing.

 

[Soyeong]

So Soy, you don't believe there are differences we are able to discern in the laws God gave to Israel? Let me further explain my beliefs on why some laws differ from others. Nine of the ten commandments delt with how each Israelite was to treat his fellow man. One was not to steal from another etc. the one commandment, the Sabbath command did not deal with how one treated his fellow man. Its purpose was to instruct each Israelite in the keeping of a special day and why it was given to them. It was given to them as a remembrance of creation and also for remembrance of God's leading them out of bondage in Egypt. The Sabbath command was different than the other commands as anyone can see. I cannot fathom why anyone would argue that point.

There are any number of ways that we can discern differences in the laws that God gave to Israel. For example, I could categorize God's laws bases on which part of the body are most commonly used to obey/disobey them, such as the law against theft being a hand-law, but the fact that I can do that does not establish that any of the authors of the Bible categorized God's laws in the same manner. As such, I should not try to insert the categories of law that I just created back into the Bible by interpreting its authors as referring to them in order to make doctrine out of them, such as saying that hand laws were done away with on the cross. If someone wanted, they could disagree with my categories, such as whether a head should be counted as one part of the body or divided into smaller parts, or they could disagree with which category a law best fits Into, but we would be discussing our own opinions and not something that comes from what is directly stated in the Bible.

I see the first five of the Ten Commandments as being in regard to our relationship with our creators while the last five parallel the same principles in regard to our relationship with our neighbors, such as the principle of the command against idolatry being in regard to our relationship with our creator what the command against adultery is in regard to our relationship with our neighbor, but the fact that you categorize the Ten Commandments differently than I do by you seeing the first five as dealing with how each Israelite was to treat his fellow man only emphasizes that we have the freedom to categorize God's laws however we want in accordance with our opinions, but not in accordance with what is directly stated in the Bible.

Your argument that all laws are moral does not take away the fact that some do not deal with morality. Certainly, God would not have given Israel an immoral law. There is absolutely no need to even mention that fact in trying to ignore the fact that some laws deal with ceremonial issues, some with civil issues, some with health issues, some with financial issues and some with spiritual issues.

Morality is in regard to what ought to be done and every legislator creates laws in regard to what they think ought to be done, including God, and no one knows better than God what ought to be done. If God did not think that something ought to or ought not to be done, then He wouldn't have commanded it, so all of the laws that God chose to command are inherently moral laws and it is false to think that someone His laws do not deal with morality. If God thought that something ought to be done and gave law instructing people to do that, then for you to claim that it is not a moral law is to disagree with God about whether it ought to be done, to claim that God made a moral error by thinking that something ought to be done when in reality it ought not to be done, and in order to know that to be the case you would be claiming to have greater moral knowledge than God. For example, the the law against committing rape is both moral and a civil issue, so the fact that we have the freedom to categorize God's laws into other issues does not mean that they are not also a moral issue.

Do you not think that God knew that Israel would not be a light to the remainder of the World? They were very inclusive to begin with. They never reached out to other nations with the belief system God gave them. And the fact is that God never gave any other nation all the Laws He gave Israel, the Sabbath law included.

Israel is a light to the nations either by being an example that we should follow or by being an example that we should avoid following. In 1 Corinthians 10:1-13, Israel's disobedience to God's law should be taken as an example that we should avoid following, not as an example for us to emulate.

The question is where did God in all of scripture ever demand that the Gentiles were subject to the ceremonial laws that He gave Israel. If you can answer that question then I would consider my views as needing more study. Otherwise perhaps yours need more study.

In Romans 6:15, Gentiles are not permitted to do what God has revealed to be sin, and in Romans 3:20, it is by God's law that we have knowledge of sin.

Likewise, the Bible never lists which laws are the ceremonial law and never even refers to that as being a subcategory of law. If you asked a group of people to create lists of which of God's laws are part of the ceremonial law, then you would end up with a wide variety, so you have your own nebulous concept of ceremonial law that you created that is most likely different from the concept of others. For example, I've seen people claim that everything but the Ten Commandments are ceremonial laws or disagree about whether or not the command to keep the Sabbath holy is a ceremonial law, but all of that is people's opinions and not something is directly stated in the Bible.

 

[Icyspark]

Every one of what we learned today deal with morality, moral issues which are part of Jesus command to us in Jn 15:9-14, LOVE. Morality commands are forever and are known to all mankind. All moral commands deal with our fellow man, ourselves and God. The Sabbath command the SDAs deem to be salvational was a ritual command dealing with a day and only given to one nation, Israel.

Hi Bob S,

Your responses almost always ignore the substance of the post to which you respond and instead attempt to reframe the discussion to something nebulous and undefined. This is a tactic of people who adhere to a postmodern mindset whereby absolute truth is rejected in favor of a "truth" that based on the feelings of the individual. This is cultic behavior.

There is nothing in the Bible which identifies a moral law in the manner in which you are attempting to pour new meaning into God's word. This is an object lesson in how people reject the main and plain meaning of Scripture and instead attempt to redefine it in light of their own finite and fallible opinion.

No other nation has ever been commanded to observe a day.

I love how you retooled this assertion after being confronted with the error of your previous nonsense

Seems very exclusive when we look at history and find that even today much of the Earth' population has not an inkling of knowledge of Saturday being special. As far as I know of all the artifacts man has discovered there is NOT AN INKLING of mankind showing they had any knowledge of Sabbath. Some nations had an eight-day week. Some may have not even recognized such a cycle.

Would you like to explain to your readers why you've adjusted your above assumption? Icy that you see that your position was untenable and even a postmodern redefining of terms wouldn't be a satisfactory explanation for a such an obvious error. But hey, maybe that's just me? I'll let you explain away why your "not an inkling" premise needed to be substantially modified.

I pray this helps.

 

[Leaf473]

There are any number of ways that we can discern differences in the laws that God gave to Israel. For example, I could categorize God's laws bases on which part of the body are most commonly used to obey/disobey them, such as the law against theft being a hand-law, but the fact that I can do that does not establish that any of the authors of the Bible categorized God's laws in the same manner.

I've thought much the same thing. Yes, we can divide up the law into laws that use the word "priest" and those that don't, but it doesn't follow that the scriptures do the same thing.

Two common terms used on this subject, "moral law" and "ceremonial law", are not found in the scriptures.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 4:4 - New International Reader's Version

Jesus answered, “It is written, ‘Man must not live only on bread. He must also live on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’ ” (Deuteronomy 8:3)

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Bob S]

Hi Bob S,

Your responses almost always ignore the substance of the post to which you respond and instead attempt to reframe the discussion to something nebulous and undefined. This is a tactic of people who adhere to a postmodern mindset whereby absolute truth is rejected in favor of a "truth" that based on the feelings of the individual. This is cultic behavior.

Hi spark, your responses are almost always full of venom with no actual response to the contents of my posts. Your initial post is in defense of the ten commandments and of course especially the Sabbath command. I happen to be privy to what SDAs really believe. If I do not keep the old covenant Sabbath given to only one nation and if I am aware of the old covenant Sabbath given only to Israel, there is no hope for salvation for me. My response to your thread is to let others know that we are not under the Old Covenant and the Sabbath of that covenant doesn't concern New Covenant Christians or anyone else which makes the content of your thread void to begin with.

There is nothing in the Bible which identifies a moral law in the manner in which you are attempting to pour new meaning into God's word. This is an object lesson in how people reject the main and plain meaning of Scripture and instead attempt to redefine it in light of their own finite and fallible opinion.

I know you would like to persuade everyone into believing there is no difference in the laws and we cannot categorize them, but that is nothing but deceivery. SDAs are masters at segregating laws.

I love how you retooled this assertion after being confronted with the error of your previous nonsense

I notice that you never proved what I believe as being wrong. Your tactic is just to put me down without ever addressing the issue. Too bad.

Would you like to explain to your readers why you've adjusted your above assumption?

Whould you like to explain why you deem what I wrote as an "assumption"?

Icy that you see that your position was untenable and even a postmodern redefining of terms wouldn't be a satisfactory explanation for a such an obvious error. But hey, maybe that's just me? I'll let you explain away why your "not an inkling" premise needed to be substantially modified.

Lots of accusations without any correction. Par for your posts to those that disagree with your premises.

 

[Icyspark]

Hi spark, your responses are almost always full of venom with no actual response to the contents of my posts. Your initial post is in defense of the ten commandments and of course especially the Sabbath command. I happen to be privy to what SDAs really believe. If I do not keep the old covenant Sabbath given to only one nation and if I am aware of the old covenant Sabbath given only to Israel, there is no hope for salvation for me. My response to your thread is to let others know that we are not under the Old Covenant and the Sabbath of that covenant doesn't concern New Covenant Christians or anyone else which makes the content of your thread void to begin with.

Hi Bob S,

The above appears to be a postmodern attempt at deflection.

Proverbs 9:8 says, "Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you."

In 2 Timothy 4:2 Paul says, "Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction."

From your numerous derogatory and inflammatory comments about teachers over the years, you don't seem to want to be taught. Oddly though, you think that you should be accepted as a teacher for your mostly false, postmodern teachings. So apparently I should just blindly accept whatever strange doctrines you advocate and not subject your teachings to the word of God? Um, no. That's not how this works. Your "rebuttal" to the opening post was a nebulous appeal to Jn 15:9-14, which for you means that you can reject or deny all the innumerable texts by Jesus and Paul quoted in the opening post by your nebulous appeal to love. For those who are Bible believing Christians we know that Jesus doesn't leave love undefined. He specifically ties love to the keeping of His commandments. And no, it's not just left to a postmodern belief of doing whatever is right in your own eyes (i.e. your "truth," vs. my "truth"). There is only one truth.

Below is the text you quoted in your first response to this thread, which apparently you believe allows you to reject all the other quotes of Jesus in the opening post:

John 15:9–14​

As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. 10 If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command.​

Thus you illustrate the premise of the opening post that there are people who are ashamed of Jesus and His words. This is not a smorgasbord where one gets to pick and choose what words of Jesus work for their predetermined personal opinion theology. I'd hope that if one truly loved Jesus that ALL HIS WORDS would be cherished and embraced. I'd hope that those who claim to love Jesus would be afraid to be on the receiving end of His disapproval and shame.

The reality is that the postmodern belief in personal "truth" is actually an ancient belief. In Judges 17:6 we read, "Everyone did what was right in his own eyes." So what was old is new again.

I know you would like to persuade everyone into believing there is no difference in the laws and we cannot categorize them, but that is nothing but deceivery. SDAs are masters at segregating laws.

You know Who else is a Master at "segregating laws"? Oh, that's right, Jesus

Deuteronomy 5:31​

But you stay here with me so that I may give you all the commands, decrees and laws you are to teach them to follow in the land I am giving them to possess.”​

And here's a question I've asked you and other critics of Adventism innumerable times, but invariably everyone attempts to side-step the question. Let's see how many times I need to ask you this same question before I get an answer.

How many commandments are in the Ten Commandment covenant?​

I know you prefer to lump the Ten Commandments in with the other 603 decrees and laws, but there is no biblical authority for you to do so. Jesus put a numeral on this set of commandments. He wrote it; with His own finger; in stone; twice; and commanded it be kept segregated from all the other decrees and laws. I wonder why that is?

Regardless of your personal "truth," you don't get to add and subtract from what Jesus says in favor of a predetermined, but provably false teaching.

Also, for someone who rejects the obvious implications of the biblical use of the numeral ten in association with the commandments written on stone I find it the height of absurdity for you to appeal to an unbiblical number (613) and attempt to swallow up the Ten Commandment covenant which Jesus obviously set apart. Why do you do that? On what biblical authority do you get to add "decrees and laws" to a limited set of commandments which after they were given we're told that God "added nothing more." How audacious does one need to be to think that they can add to something which God did not?

In Deuteronomy 4:2 Moses says, "Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you." But you seem to say, "Nah, bruh! Imma do what I want. Imma desegregate what God segregated."

I notice that you never proved what I believe as being wrong. Your tactic is just to put me down without ever addressing the issue. Too bad.

Ha! That's exactly what I did do and you can click here to see how I responded such that you had to change your made up "there is NOT AN INKLING of mankind showing they had any knowledge of Sabbath," to "No other nation has ever been commanded to observe a day." This is how it goes with you. When one false teaching is nailed to the wall another shaky belief is brought out to replace it. Why not rather acknowledge the correction and prove that you are one of the "wise" instead of just reconstituting your false belief to some new jello-y substance?

I pray this helps.

 

[Icyspark]

Jesus was not magnifying the law by saying that looking at a woman with lust in our hearts, but rather that is just the correct understanding of what is becoming commanded by the 7th and 10th Commandments against adultery and coveting in our hearts.

Hi Soyeong,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

That not lusting is "the correct" understanding of what was becoming commanded by the 7th and 10th Commandments against adultery and coveting in our hearts" may or may not be the case. To me, the fact that Jesus had to address it in such a specific manner indicates a magnification of an issue He saw needed to be addressed.

Jesus taught more than just the Ten Commandments, such as the greatest two commandments, and all of God's commandments define how to obey the greatest two commandments, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that all of the Law and the Prophets hang on them. In John 15:10, Jesus used a parallel statement to equate his commands with those of the Father, so they both taught the same commands.

The two greatest commandments--left to themselves--would be nebulous and open to interpretation.

Here's how icy how God's will is expressed in the following pyramid:

Love
Love for God & man
The Ten Commandment Covenant
The other 603 decrees and laws written on paper​

Love, at the top of the pyramid is not left undefined. It goes down one level and adds that God expects that His creatures express their love to Him as well as to their neighbors. God drops it down another level and provides ten commandments which succinctly identify how our love should be manifest to God (the first four commands) and to man (the last six). Then He provided 603 additional decrees and laws which further delineated how humans should reveal love for God and love for their neighbor.

I agree that Jesus and His Father both taught the same commands.

Likewise, Paul referred to more than just the Ten Commandments in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and the Mosaic Law is how we know what sin is (Romans 3:20), so while we do not earn our salvation as a wage by obeying it, living in obedience to it through faith in Jesus is nevertheless intrinsically part of the concept of him saving us from not living in obedience to it. For example, keeping the Sabbath holy is intrinsically part of the concept of Jesus saving us from not keeping the Sabbath holy. Indeed, if God was a legalist for commanding the Mosaic Law and Jesus was a legalist setting a sinless example for how to follow of how to walk in obedience to it, then we should all be legalists, but that is not what I think that legalism refers to.

What do you mean when you say, "keeping the Sabbath holy is intrinsically part of the concept of Jesus saving us from not keeping the Sabbath holy"? I'm not following.

God bless!

 

[Icyspark]

There are any number of ways that we can discern differences in the laws that God gave to Israel. For example, I could categorize God's laws bases on which part of the body are most commonly used to obey/disobey them, such as the law against theft being a hand-law, but the fact that I can do that does not establish that any of the authors of the Bible categorized God's laws in the same manner. As such, I should not try to insert the categories of law that I just created back into the Bible by interpreting its authors as referring to them in order to make doctrine out of them, such as saying that hand laws were done away with on the cross. If someone wanted, they could disagree with my categories, such as whether a head should be counted as one part of the body or divided into smaller parts, or they could disagree with which category a law best fits Into, but we would be discussing our own opinions and not something that comes from what is directly stated in the Bible.

Hi Soyeong,

Excellent analogy!

Bob is appealing to his opinion rather than the word of God to dismiss one of God's Ten. The Bible says not to add or subtract from what He commands, yet some people like to play with both sides of this imperative. On the one hand they want to subtract from the one law which actually has a specific title and coincidentally has a numeral integrated in the title. On the other hand they add to the Ten Commandment covenant by throwing it into a number which is nowhere located in Scripture--613. All the while claiming that there is no biblical justification for a separation of God's laws (See for example, "I know you would like to persuade everyone into believing there is no difference in the laws and we cannot categorize them, but that is nothing but deceivery. SDAs are masters at segregating laws.").

God bless.

 

[Studyman]

Hi spark, your responses are almost always full of venom with no actual response to the contents of my posts. Your initial post is in defense of the ten commandments and of course especially the Sabbath command. I happen to be privy to what SDAs really believe. If I do not keep the old covenant Sabbath given to only one nation and if I am aware of the old covenant Sabbath given only to Israel, there is no hope for salvation for me. My response to your thread is to let others know that we are not under the Old Covenant and the Sabbath of that covenant doesn't concern New Covenant Christians or anyone else which makes the content of your thread void to begin with.

Now Bob,

The Old/New Covenant as defined by the God who created it, has nothing to do with the abolition or destruction of any of God's 10 commandments. This teaching you are promoting, is a doctrine of men promoted by "many" religious businesses which exist in this world God placed us in, not by the God of Abraham. Jesus warned us of these "many" who come in Christ's Name.

The term "Old Covenant Sabbath" is your creation or a doctrine you have adopted, but it doesn't come from the Scriptures anywhere.

What the God "of the Bible" says, is that HE writes His Laws on the hearts of His People. And according to the Apostle of the Christ of the Bible, this is how a person knows if they know God or have been snared by one of these religions, who come in Christ's Name.

1 John 2: 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

I don't advocate for adopting any religious business of this world or supporting them. The Pharisees created a huge religious business that claimed God's Sabbath as their own. But Jesus said about them, "Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition." So then God's Sabbath Commandment, although important and created by God for man, is not greater than other Commandments of God.

If religious men work 24/7 to build a religious business worth billions, how is that honoring God in His Sabbath?

The truth is, God's Sabbath was created by God, not Gamaliel or Ellen White. And was created for men, not the SDA religion or other religious sects of this world. And Jesus said "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Not Valentinus or Wesley or Calvin or Russell, or Hastings or Copeland.

If you trusted the Scriptures for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: you would not be promoting the manmade doctrine of "Old Covenant Sabbath" as there is no such thing, at least not according to the Holy scriptures.

 

[Soyeong]

Hi Soyeong,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

That not lusting is "the correct" understanding of what was becoming commanded by the 7th and 10th Commandments against adultery and coveting in our hearts" may or may not be the case. To me, the fact that Jesus had to address it in such a specific manner indicates a magnification of an issue He saw needed to be addressed.|

I agree that Jesus and His Father both taught the same commands.

Hello and thank you.

Everything taught in the Sermon on the mount was rooted in the OT and there has never been a person other than Jesus whose teachings were more thoroughly rooted in the OT. Magnifying the law refers to its importance, not to making changes to its content in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2. If you agree that Jesus and His Father taught the same commands, then that does not allow room to think that speaking against looking at a woman with lust in our hearts is different from what the Father has commandment

The two greatest commandments--left to themselves--would be nebulous and open to interpretation.

Here's how icy how God's will is expressed in the following pyramid:

Love
Love for God & man
The Ten Commandment Covenant
The other 603 decrees and laws written on paper​

Love, at the top of the pyramid is not left undefined. It goes down one level and adds that God expects that His creatures express their love to Him as well as to their neighbors. God drops it down another level and provides ten commandments which succinctly identify how our love should be manifest to God (the first four commands) and to man (the last six). Then He provided 603 additional decrees and laws which further delineated how humans should reveal love for God and love for their neighbor.

I agree with the pyramid. In Matthew 24:12-14, Jesus said that because of lawlessness the love of many will grow cold, so it is not good for someone to focus just on the top of the pyramid apart from the instructions that God has given for how to do that. However, I consider the first five of the Ten Commandments to be teaching five principles in regard to how to love our creators and the last five to be following the same five principle in regard to how to love our neighbor. For example the 2nd Commandment against idolatry is to our relationship with God what the 7th Commandment against adultery is to our relationship with our neighbor.

What do you mean when you say, "keeping the Sabbath holy is intrinsically part of the concept of Jesus saving us from not keeping the Sabbath holy"? I'm not following.

God bless!

The content of a gift can itself be the experience of doing something, such as giving someone the opportunity to experience driving a Ferrari for an hour, where the gift requires them to do the work of driving it, but where doing that work has nothing to do with trying to earn the gift as a wage. Similarly, the content of God's gift of eternal life is the experience of knowing God and Jesus (John 17:3) and the gift of God's law is His instructions for how to have that experience (Exodus 33:13, Matthew 7:23), not for how to earn eternal life as a wage. Likewise, our salvation is an experience where we are being saved from having the experience of living in a way that is contrary to God's nature by graciously being taught how to have the experience of living in accordance with God's nature, for example, God saves us from experiencing unrighteousness by graciously teaching us how to experience His righteousness in obedience to His law. The way that God saves us from having the experience of not honoring our parents is by teaching us to have the experience of honoring our parents, and so forth for God's other laws.

Hi Soyeong,

Excellent analogy!

Bob is appealing to his opinion rather than the word of God to dismiss one of God's Ten. The Bible says not to add or subtract from what He commands, yet some people like to play with both sides of this imperative. On the one hand they want to subtract from the one law which actually has a specific title and coincidentally has a numeral integrated in the title. On the other hand they add to the Ten Commandment covenant by throwing it into a number which is nowhere located in Scripture--613. All the while claiming that there is no biblical justification for a separation of God's laws (See for example, "I know you would like to persuade everyone into believing there is no difference in the laws and we cannot categorize them, but that is nothing but deceivery. SDAs are masters at segregating laws.").

God bless.

Thank you.

There are various ways to count how many laws are in the OT, such as whether a command to do multiple things should be counted as one command or whether each part counts as its own command, or whether multiple commands to do similar commands should be counted as the same command or unique commands. So the count of 613 commandments is a tradition, which is related to Gamatria, and not something directly stated in the Bible, but it is not itself a command, so it is not adding to what God has commanded.

The Bible does use Hebrew words to categorize God's laws, such as in Ezekiel 36:26-27, the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the mishpatim and the chukim, which are the two main categories of law in the Torah, though most Christians don't trust the Spirit's guidance farther than just the mishpatim.

 

[Gary K]

Hello and thank you.

Everything taught in the Sermon on the mount was rooted in the OT and there has never been a person other than Jesus whose teachings were more thoroughly rooted in the OT. Magnifying the law refers to its importance, not to making changes to its content in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2. If you agree that Jesus and His Father taught the same commands, then that does not allow room to think that speaking against looking at a woman with lust in our hearts is different from what the Father has commandment


I agree with the pyramid. In Matthew 24:12-14, Jesus said that because of lawlessness the love of many will grow cold, so it is not good for someone to focus just on the top of the pyramid apart from the instructions that God has given for how to do that. However, I consider the first five of the Ten Commandments to be teaching five principles in regard to how to love our creators and the last five to be following the same five principle in regard to how to love our neighbor. For example the 2nd Commandment against idolatry is to our relationship with God what the 7th Commandment against adultery is to our relationship with our neighbor.


The content of a gift can itself be the experience of doing something, such as giving someone the opportunity to experience driving a Ferrari for an hour, where the gift requires them to do the work of driving it, but where doing that work has nothing to do with trying to earn the gift as a wage. Similarly, the content of God's gift of eternal life is the experience of knowing God and Jesus (John 17:3) and the gift of God's law is His instructions for how to have that experience (Exodus 33:13, Matthew 7:23), not for how to earn eternal life as a wage. Likewise, our salvation is an experience where we are being saved from having the experience of living in a way that is contrary to God's nature by graciously being taught how to have the experience of living in accordance with God's nature, for example, God saves us from experiencing unrighteousness by graciously teaching us how to experience His righteousness in obedience to His law. The way that God saves us from having the experience of not honoring our parents is by teaching us to have the experience of honoring our parents, and so forth for God's other laws.


Thank you.

There are various ways to count how many laws are in the OT, such as whether a command to do multiple things should be counted as one command or whether each part counts as its own command, or whether multiple commands to do similar commands should be counted as the same command or unique commands. So the count of 613 commandments is a tradition, which is related to Gamatria, and not something directly stated in the Bible, but it is not itself a command, so it is not adding to what God has commanded.

The Bible does use Hebrew words to categorize God's laws, such as in Ezekiel 36:26-27, the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the mishpatim and the chukim, which are the two main categories of law in the Torah, though most Christians don't trust the Spirit's guidance farther than just the mishpatim.

I think you mean the Gamara as it is part of both Talmuds, the Jerusalem and the Babylonian. and there are thousands of laws in it concerning every aspect of a devout Jew's life.

 

[Soyeong]

I think you mean the Gamara as it is part of both Talmuds, the Jerusalem and the Babylonian. and there are thousands of laws in it concerning every aspect of a devout Jew's life.

Thanks, but no, the numerical value of 613 has significance in Gamatria.