Should Christians Keep the Ten Commandments Today???

[shad]

Wavy,

You are not a Christian; why are you butting into Christians' dispute? It is just strange.

.

 

[wavy]

Wavy,

You are not a Christian; why are you butting into Christians' dispute? It is just strange.

I don't have to be a Christian to highlight the flaws of SDAism.


Finis,
Eric

 

[Drew]

Ok, so after Jesus died, why did those who buried Him keep the Sabbath?

Luk 23:52-56 This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid. And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on. And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid. And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

The fact that people kept the Sabbath means nothing. The question is what Jesus and Paul taught about the Sabbath. Many people do many things that deviate from the teachings of Paul and / or Jesus.

We have already seen from Colossians 1 that the Sabbath law is considered "repealed" by Paul.

 

[Drew]

And what about this one???

Act 13:13, 15 - Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia: and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem. But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down. And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.

Why would you think that the fact that Jews - who presumably reject Jesus as Messiah and probably considered Paul to be a turncoat - continued to observe the Sabbath is evidence that Paul did not teach the end of the Sabbath law?

Would you say that since Jews continued to deny the Messiahship of Jesus, that Paul, therefore, did not teach that Jesus was Messiah?

 

[Drew]

So Jesus and Paul, as Jews, went to synagogue services on the Sabbath. And?

Exactly. Although I suspect you and I differ on the status of Jesus as Messiah, the following needs to be said:

1. The fact that Jesus went to Sabbath services is entirely consistent with the hypothesis that it is only at cross - afterJesus' pre-resurrection life - that the Sabbath law is retired:

2. Even after the resurrection, the fact that Paul went to the synagogue does not support the assertion that he believed the law about Sabbath observance was to be honoured after the resurrection.

Jesus also broke the Sabbath according to Jn v.18, a point I brought up earlier in this thread I believe and has gone unaddressed.

I agree - there is every reason to believe that Jesus broke the Sabbath. He also endorsed violation of the Levitical food laws in Mark 7. This, again, is exactly what one would expect if Jesus work includes ending the "age of the Law".

 

[Drew]

Wrong, to say this my friend would mean Jesus sinned which is blasphemy, careful now... They accused Jesus of a lot of things, but a sinner He was not...

Well I agree with wavy's take on this and I am certainly a Christian.

Your assertion that it would be blasphemous to suggest that Jesus brok the Sabbath is based on the implicit belief that the Sabbath was established a timeless law, never to be ended. Now perhaps wavy and I will disagree on the question of whether the Sabbath was instituted as a "permanent" law - I do not beleive that it was.

But if Jesus is God, and if God never really promised that Sabbath was forever, then there is no problem in asserting that Jesus brought the Sabbath law to an end, and symbolically enacted this by violating the Sabbath.

Remember - Jesus clearly endorsed breaking the Levitical food law.

Does that make Jessus a sinner? Of course not. It means that He has authority over the Law and can abolish it if He wishes.

 

[Drew]

There are plenty of laws in the Hebrew bible that I could demonstrate Jesus breaking,...

You are correct. Though you do not share my view on who Jesus was (is), it is very clear that Jesus broke all sorts of the 613 element of what is sometimes referred to as the Torah. Some examples, apart from the Sabbath:

1. In Mark 7, Jesus clearly endorses violation of the kosher food purity laws;
2. He intentionally violated cleanliness laws with his contact with lepers;
3. He intentionally violated cleanliness laws with his contact with the woman with menstraul flow.

Now you (wavy) and I almost certainly disagree on the meaning of these violations, but Jesus clearly does violate all sorts of Old Testament laws.

To say this makes Him a sinner is, of course, to beg the very important question as to whether the Torah was an eternal, timeless law.

I believe that is was never established as such.

 

[Brother Lionel]

Your assertion that it would be blasphemous to suggest that Jesus brok the Sabbath is based on the implicit belief that the Sabbath was established a timeless law, never to be ended. Now perhaps wavy and I will disagree on the question of whether the Sabbath was instituted as a "permanent" law - I do not beleive that it was.

Ok, then could you please expound on what God states here?

Exodus 31:16, 17 - Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

But if Jesus is God, and if God never really promised that Sabbath was forever, then there is no problem in asserting that Jesus brought the Sabbath law to an end, and symbolically enacted this by violating the Sabbath.

The previous verse says that He did. Furthermore, could you please explain this verse?:

Deut 5:29 - O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!

Remember - Jesus clearly endorsed breaking the Levitical food law.

Where???

 

[Drew]

Drew, you are leading people astray with your preaching. Jesus did not die so we have permission to sin..

I am doing no such thing. If, as I have argued, Jesus and Paul both believe that the Torah has come to an end, this critique of yours fails.

You are essentially begging the question.

 

[Brother Lionel]

Drew, you are leading people astray with your preaching. Jesus did not die so we have permission to sin..

I am doing no such thing. If, as I have argued, Jesus and Paul both believe that the Torah has come to an end, this critique of yours fails.

You are essentially begging the question.

Jesus and Paul both believe the Torah has come to an end???

Mat 5:17-19 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

1Ti 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

Jam 2:12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.


What is your understanding of these verses???

 

[Drew]

Deleted own post

 

[Drew]

Jesus and Paul both believe the Torah has come to an end???

Mat 5:17-19 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

I have repeatedly addressed this text from Matthew 5 in grisly detail. If you can find a problem in my argument, please identify it.

 

[Drew]

Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

I will get to the Romans 3:31 verse later.

I am pretty sure I have already argued in a recent thread that this is Paul's reflection on the status of the unbelieving Jew under Torah. It is therefore not about the experience of a believer and therefore does not hurt my argument that, for the believer on this side of the cross, the law is retired.

In any event, here is a definitive argument that shows that the person described in Romans 7 cannot be a Christian:

1. The person described in Romans 7 is experiencing a "law" of sin that leads to death:

but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?

2. The Christian in Romans 8 is described as having been set free from from this law of sin and death.

2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death

3. If the position that the person in Romans 7 is a Christian is correct, - then we have the following statements:

a. The Christian is subject to the law of sin that produces death (clear statement from Romans 7)

b. The Christian is set free from the law of sin that produces death (clear statement from Romans 8)

These statements are inconsistent. Therefore, assuming we agree that the statement from Romans 8 is about the Christian, the Romans 7 cannot be descriptive of the experience of the Christian - one cannot be both subject to the effects of a law and yet also released from its effect.

Now please argue fairly - either find an error in this argument or accept that the Romans 7 texts do not assert antything about how the Christian is to obey the Law.

 

[Drew]

Jam 2:12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

Further evidence that you are not reading my posts. I have been clear that it is specifically the Torah - the whole set of Old Testament laws - that is retired.

True, I have echoed Paul in asserting that the new informing source of our actions is to be the Holy Spirit. But this does not mean that a writer like Paul cannot talk about a "law" or "principle" of liberty to describe the leadings of the Spirit.

But this "law of liberty" is not part of the 613 rules that make up the Torah, and is therefore not "part" of what Paul is saying has been retired.

 

[Brother Lionel]

Ok so drew, if the whole law is "abolished" then what standard do we live by??

 

[Brother Lionel]

Its amazing how people can twist the scriptures to support their beliefs. Jesus clearly said that the law will never fail as long heaven and earth is here and yet some still refuse to accept this basic truth. Amazing!

 

[Drew]

Exodus 31:16, 17 - Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

The Hebrew word translated as "perpetual" and "forever" is the word "owlam". Note how the following definition of this word is fluid – embracing the eternality that would support your reading of this text (that the Sabbath is forever) as well as my reading that it is not.

Definition (from Net Bible): 1) long duration, antiquity, futurity, for ever, ever, everlasting,
evermore, perpetual, old, ancient, world

And here we have an example from Isaiah 42 of this same word used in a context where eternality is certainly not intended:

The LORD emerges like a hero,
like a warrior he inspires himself for battle;
he shouts, yes, he yells,
he shows his enemies his power.
I have been inactive for a long time;
I kept quiet and held back. Like a woman in labor I groan;
I pant and gasp.
I will make the trees on the mountains and hills wither up;
I will dry up all their vegetation.
I will turn streams into islands,
and dry up pools of water.

Clearly God is talking about talking action after a long period of “inactivityâ€Â. So here, the word “owlam†does not denote an everlasting period of time – it denotes a limited duration of time.

So one cannot simply assume that Genesis 31 text entails the eternality of the Sabbath law. Clearly the translators have interpreted it in a way that supports your position. But the translation is very much an open question.

 

[shad]

Ok so drew, if the whole law is "abolished" then what standard do we live by??

Drew, would you answer this? I am curious how you answer too.

.

 

[Drew]

Furthermore, could you please explain this verse?:

Deut 5:29 - O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!

Same idea as the Exodus text - the Hebrew word rendered here as "forever" does not always denote an eternal interval of time. It is the word "owlam" and, as already shown, it can indeed denote a limted time interval.

Let's remember, most Christians, myself included, believe in the divine inspiration of the original documents. Variious translators then make very human, and therefore possibly mistaken, interpretations as to how to translate these texts.

So all these texts that you have given show is that translators have made certain choices. And those choices could be mistaken.

 

[Drew]

Ok so drew, if the whole law is "abolished" then what standard do we live by??

You are not reading my posts - please show me the respect that I am showing you.

For others that are actually reading, I will repost what I have already written - the Law is replaced by the Holy Spirit:

I think that the reason you find this confusing is that, for some reason that I cannot make sense of, you seem to believe that a written code of prescriptive rules - such as the Law of Moses - is the only possible "guide" to "clean living".

Well Paul tells us that with the retirement of the Law of Moses, we are given another guide - the Holy Spirit.

Now I suspect that you would agree with this and suggest the Holy Spirit simply "whispers the written code of the Law of Moses" into our ear. I understand that thinking but suggest that the Spirit operates at a different level, a level that, in a sense, transcends "rules".

I love my dog. Do I need to look at a list of rules to keep me from murdering my dog? Of course not. I would not dream of murdering my dog because I love her, not because of some set of "rules". Does that clarify things at all?