Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
No, you just don't understand the argument. Everybody in history sees that the 10 Commandments are part of the Law of Moses. It's foolish to say otherwise!
So what is Graham and others saying in whatever time they say it? They're saying that the 10 Commandments are representative of the fact that the Law is not just about sacrificing animals and bathing in water.
The 10 Commandments were part of the Law of Moses, and Sabbath Law was fulfilled *at the cross.* End of argument.
I'm just saying that your thought that this is an argument made in recent times is not accurate. I don't know anybody in the previous 20 centuries or so who would argue that the 10 Commandments are not part of the Law!
But morals remain, and I'm sure we agree on that. That's all people like Graham meant, though they didn't dig into the details enough to use perfect language.
Their perhaps "flawed" use of language may have misled you, but if they had been specifically queried on this point I think they would've agreed with me.
That's called gas-lighting brother. Anybody can see I'm not "quitting."
No, I've tried to honestly address your concern. People like Graham have said the 10 Commandments still stand--I get that. It's part of the New Testament.
God sanctified the Sabbath Day *of Creation!* We didn't create the world. We don't rest from creating the world.
But we can enter into something called "God's Rest." Our problem consists of defining what that "Rest" is, because the Bible indicates we can enter into it.
I suggest that God's Rest is not determined by "resting after the work of creation." Rather, it is resting any time that God rewards us with a job well done.
So being that we are not under the Law of Moses, we don't rest under that covenant. Rather, we enter into God's Rest with respect to the work of atonement, which Christ did for us. And we will "Rest" when the labors of this present life are done. It has nothing to do with a Sabbath Week that was associated with the Law of Moses, in my opinion.
Again, you are arguing what I believe is a false representation of what the 10 Commandments meant for these people, who believed that they represented the moral nature of the Law. That moral nature is, of course, still alive for us today. That's all they meant--not that the Sabbath Law is binding any longer. Requiring Sabbath observance is what's new--not the opposite!
Trying to work out..
If the children in the wilderness were so stubborn and hard hearted, why did God give them manna,and why give them rest.
It wasn't because they were good or evil. It was because God promised Abraham to bring his seed into the promised land.
So we got a bunch of disrespectful grumpy brats, and God uses Moses and Aaron and Miriam to lead them.
No matter what God does, these people are ungreatful, whiney, all they do is complain complain complain.
Moses is really inbetween the Rock and the hard place. He fears God, but he also fears the people.
The people are so wicked God has to literally drill laws into stone to make them listen, because their ears are closed to his voice.
They don't want to listen to God. They don't even want to listen to Moses. Who made you a judge over us?
So God says ok, you want to play that way, then this is what we'll do.
I'm going to give you a law that you have to follow and if you don't, You die.
I'm having a really hard time with God telling Moses to kill people after he wrote with his own finger, Thou shalt not kill.
Moses listen, Don't kill anybody. Ok Lord. Hey Moses, if they don't abide by this law, Kill them. Uh, ok Lord.
Somebody help me make sense of this. I understand punishment and consequences.
But if you die for not keeping the law, and the law says don't kill, murder, however you want to say it..
Which do you keep?
I hear the Pharisees.. It is not lawful for us to
Jhn 18:31
Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death:
Jhn 8:3
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
Jhn 8:4
They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
Jhn 8:5
Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
Act 7:37
This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.
Act 7:38
This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:
Act 7:39
To whom our fathers would not obey, but thrust him from them, and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt,
Act 7:40
Saying unto Aaron, Make us gods to go before us: for as for this Moses, which brought us out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.
Act 7:41
And they made a calf in those days, and offered sacrifice unto the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their own hands.
Act 7:42
Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness?
Act 7:43
Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.
Our God is not a God of confusion. So why the contradiction?
hmm
thinking..
hugs
The Ten Commandments etched in stone by the finger of God were kept inside the ark of the covenant and the writings of Moses (admittedly, most likely containing the transcription of the Ten Commandments as they appear in Exodus 20) were kept alongside the ark.
Why does that matter. I respond to public posts. You don't have to respond at all.So, here's the deal: You called me; I didn't call you.
You should care if the Lord considers your approach insulting.I don't care if you think the direct approach is insulting.
That is your judgment. If you don't think my points worth addressing, don't address them.Again, two long posts of deflecting and spitballing.
I've answered everything that I deem pertinent to the questions. My prerogative.I suppose I'm expected to respond to all of it even though, after calling me out, you won't answer two simple questions but, instead, prefer to "address" my "concern."
That's judgmentalism. You don't know my heart.That's somewhat insulting. You're dictating terms without any good faith, authority, or leverage to do so.
So I'm going to directly address a few points in hopes that you'll do me the same courtesy.
I understand the non-argument perfectly. Who is "everybody in history?" Cite testimony to support your claim from just one of these people. "It's foolish to say otherwise" is just a superfluous remark to shore up an argument from silence.
There is a difference between claiming a *distinction* between the Law of Moses and the 10 Commandments and saying they are unconnected or different. Obviously, we can distinguish the 10 Commandments from the Law as a whole by pointing out that it is a subset of the Law of Moses. This is a distinction without an overall difference.What we're talking about is the "commandments" to which Hebrews 7 and Romans 7 refer and whether they are synonymous or not—which they aren't and is made plain by the ceremonial and moral contexts, respectively.
Are you talking about the Book of Hebrews? If so, yes, that book calls for a change in the Law, referring to the Law of Moses. The assumption is naturally made that the Law of Moses includes the 10 Commandments, since the Pentateuch recites them twice. The only people who think otherwise are your Sabbath-keeping sources.You made the claim that Hebrews called for the changing of the law as if the Ten Commandments were included in that change and I've demonstrated by reasonable hermeneutics that your claim is false.
I'm not going to take your word on something that is patently ridiculous! The Jews have held to 613 Mitzvot for many centuries, and they reiterated or included the same 10 commands contained in the 10 Commandments.These are facts. You can dismiss them if you like and claim that people believed the "613" nonsense 50 years ago but I was there and I'm telling you that they believed no such thing unless they all somehow conspired to keep it from me.
I was confirmed a Lutheran. I was taught Luther's catechism and am aware of his support for the 10 Commandments. Again, Luther focused on the Moral Law represented by the 10 Commandments rather than treat them as they originally were, a subset contained in the Law of Moses.The ultimate argument from imagined silence. Have you read Luther, Wycliffe, Spurgeon, anyone?
Again, you don't understand. Billy G. was answering a moral question about whether we still have an obligation to moral commandments when we are no longer under the Law of Moses? So he said yes, without considering that some would see that as sanctioning observance of the Law of Moses and Sabbath Law. Where did Billy G. ever say we have to keep the Jewish Sabbath? Let me answer that for you: he didn't.We do not agree on that. Morals are eternal—they do not "remain." And you've got some nerve suggesting that someone with the credibility of a Billy Graham (to whom I truly have no particular loyalty) "didn't dig into the details enough to use perfect language."
Why does that matter. I respond to public posts. You don't have to respond at all.
You should care if the Lord considers your approach insulting.
That is your judgment. If you don't think my points worth addressing, don't address them.
I've answered everything that I deem pertinent to the questions. My prerogative.
That's judgmentalism. You don't know my heart.
I've already directly addressed your points. You can find your very points here on Richard Anthony's site--it's not like we have to state and restate them--you borrow them and recycle them: CLICK
I will make 2 points here, and back them up from history.
1) Early in Church History Christians believed that the 10 Commandments were part of the Law of Moses.
2) Early in Church History Christians did not believe Christians have to observe the Jewish Sabbath Day.
The earliest Christians were law-abiding Jews in Jerusalem, who attended Jewish festivals and observed Temple rituals (Acts 2:1; 3:1; 15:5; 21:20). They apparently observed the seventh-day Sabbath, too. However, in the second, third and fourth centuries we find that almost all Christians observed Sunday — sometimes as a Sabbath-like day of worship meetings and rest, sometimes as a day for worship and work, sometimes in addition to the Sabbath and sometimes instead of the Sabbath.
CLICK
Just Martyr thought Israel a followers of fleshly rules, whereas Christians had the Law of God in their heart.
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Galatians 3:24
For we too would observe the fleshly circumcision, and the Sabbaths, and in short all the feasts, if we did not know for what reason they were commanded you – namely, on account of your transgressions and the hardness of your hearts. Justin Martyr (A.D. 160) Ante-Nicene Fathers vol.1 pg.203
CLICK
The apostles ordained, that “we should not judge any one in respect to meat or drink, or in regard to a feast day, or the new moons, or the sabbaths.” Whence then these contentions? whence these schisms? We keep the feast, but in the leaven of malice and wickedness, cutting in pieces the Church of God; and we preserve what belongs to its exterior, that we may cast away these better things, faith and love. We have heard from the prophetic words that these feasts and fasts are displeasing to the Lord.
from FRAGMENTS FROM THE LOST WRITINGS OF IRENAEUS 38
Since Sabbath Law is in the 10 Commandments, focus on the Sabbath Law as part of the Law of Moses was self-evident. Naturally, all would argue in favor of observing moral laws contained in the 10 Commandments. But treating Sabbath Law separately from Moral Law and in the context of the Law of Moses indicates that the Church Fathers saw the 10 Commandments as part of the Law of Moses.
There is a difference between claiming a *distinction* between the Law of Moses and the 10 Commandments and saying they are unconnected or different. Obviously, we can distinguish the 10 Commandments from the Law as a whole by pointing out that it is a subset of the Law of Moses. This is a distinction without an overall difference.
Are you talking about the Book of Hebrews? If so, yes, that book calls for a change in the Law, referring to the Law of Moses. The assumption is naturally made that the Law of Moses includes the 10 Commandments, since the Pentateuch recites them twice. The only people who think otherwise are your Sabbath-keeping sources.
As I said, all Christians would determine that the Moral Law is still applicable, as I myself have argued. But it is not part of the Law of Moses. The 10 Commandment contain that Moral Law, and as such, it is often recited as something we keep, it being that it represents the Moral Law, with the exception of the Sabbath Law.
I'm not going to take your word on something that is patently ridiculous! The Jews have held to 613 Mitzvot for many centuries, and they reiterated or included the same 10 commands contained in the 10 Commandments.
Where would any Christian in history challenge the Jewish sense that the Torah contained the 10 Commandments? A separate list of 10 Commandments is simply a different container for an exclusive set that is also contained in the total set.
I was confirmed a Lutheran. I was taught Luther's catechism and am aware of his support for the 10 Commandments. Again, Luther focused on the Moral Law represented by the 10 Commandments rather than treat them as they originally were, a subset contained in the Law of Moses.
In other words, he was reinterpreting the 10 Commandments in light of the New Covenant, and not establishing the Jewish Sabbath Law!
Again, you don't understand. Billy G. was answering a moral question about whether we still have an obligation to moral commandments when we are no longer under the Law of Moses? So he said yes, without considering that some would see that as sanctioning observance of the Law of Moses and Sabbath Law. Where did Billy G. ever say we have to keep the Jewish Sabbath? Let me answer that for you: he didn't.
Billy G. was sanctioning morality, not observance of the Law of Moses--not observance of Sabbath Law. He didn't anticipate when he said "Yes" to the 10 Commandments that some would see that as sanctioning Legalism. It was not a perfect response, nor are any of us perfect.
You're a very hostile, insulting person, Barney F. Your "apologies" aren't worth much, it seems?
Weird,actually.Oh they can erase it.....A Christian forum where you cannot talk about the Trinity.....ironic or just wierd?
You are not going to find this in the scriptures. The only Ten Commandments that the scriptures say were written on the Tablets of the Testimony were the ones that God called the Ten Commandment in Exodus 34 and instructed Moses to write them on the Tablets. The actual Ten Commandments are listed in Exodus 34:10-28
27 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.” 28 Moses was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant—the Ten Commandments.
You're the lone wolf on this, GH—we've been over it before—NO SALE. :)
.
You're just proving my point. I think we're done? Do you realize that turning to carnal responses is a form of quitting? It's a capitulation to your very worst extinct, which is to stop caring what other think or to stop caring about what God Himself thinks.Exo 20:8-11 KJV 8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
My apology only served to ratchet up your sophistry and passive aggressive verbosity.
And you are a pompous windbag, Randy K. :)
I don't mean to sound offensive, but I believe what Israel was worshipping for forty years in the wilderness wasn't the God we know today.The Old Testament is the history of the Hebrews/Israelites/Jews and try as we might it is hard to put ourselves back in that ancient time period and under the conditions that existed. I am not going to judge God on why He set up the Mosaic Law so as to allow fathers to sell their daughters into sexual slavery or allow them to practice polygamy in as much as women were property…and if there was a need for that. The whole kill all that breath thing and kill the women that were not virgins and even the male children ….and take the virgins for yourselves…..which is rape by our standards....
As Christians we are not going to understand the morality of all that and I don’t think we are suppose to, but it sets up the conditions for Christ’s ministry. The holy seed comes forward; they are violent, arrogant, and cruel by our standards. But yet from that violent holy seed the Savior of the world was born.
Some Christians do not like Jews but usually it is because they do not understand the orthodoxy that they knew and lived by. And there is a certain religious political aspect to this but that is another topic. Yeshua wanted to convert the Jews but He was behind the eight ball from the start. Yet there were Pagans that saw the good in Christ and His ministry.
Matthew 15:21-28
Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.” Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said. He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.
Of course this brings up some questions….another topic.
The Jews by no fault of there own came face to face with Christ’s ministry with some serious preset problematic beliefs. They were looking for a human warlord king to be the Messiah and He would take out there oppressors and put them in power….a very violent event. Instead what they got was a God that preached love, forgiveness, and salvation. The Jews were not looking for salvation or being saved from Hell. Most of them if Yeshua told them He was going to save them from Hell….they would reply what is Hell? God never threatened the Israelites with Hell in the Old Testament and they still do not believe in Hell or the Devil to this day. As far as Heaven, for the Jews that is where God lived and it was never offered to them in the Old Testament. And for them for a person to say they were the Son of God…a God.....was the worst sacrilegious transgression in their religion and execution was their only option. So what the Jews did was not surprising.
Matthew 26:63-66
The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.” “You have said so,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?” “He is worthy of death,” they answered.
God’s love is hard to understand….But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. That goes for the Jews to….the holy seed. That connection is hard for us to understand and I think that God still loves the Jews. No matter how you cut it….the Mosaic Law was not a loving and forgiving Law and the Law was their life and it shaped every aspect of their culture. And you can see it in how they reacted to Christ and the Apostles.
But still the question is was it completely their fault. After millenniums of living the harsh reality of the Mosaic Law…was it entirely their fault that they could not understand what was going on and make the change. They brought an adulterous woman before Him and the Mosaic Law required for them to kill her….they would be in violation of the Mosaic Law if they did not kill her….it was not an option. Yet Christ had mercy on her and forgave her. That had to set them on their ear.
And along with everything else this set the Jewish leaders against Christ…and a lot them were not saved….and that is sad.
I don't think so, but I can hear the frustration.
Huh?You're obsessed with getting people banned when they disagree with your interpretations of the scriptures, I see. That is, when you are not abusing the Jews by using the horrible reality of the antisemitism they have to face in order to make yourself available to the accuser of the brethren and repeatedly accuse all and sundry of antisemitism just because they disagree with your interpretation of the scriptures.
Well, God sees. And God knows that it's a form of antisemitism in itself abusing the Jews by using the horrible reality of the antisemitism they have to face in order to make yourself available to the accuser of the brethren and repeatedly accuse all and sundry of antisemitism.
Be careful that your obsession with getting people banned, and your disgraceful insults of all who disagree with your interpretation of the scriptures, and your own sick form of antisemitism does not eventually get you banned from these forums - because you would deserve that banning.
As we look around ourselves for the last several years, the oft-repeated phrase still rings true; "Truth does not need protection, but lies do." Banning any topic reveals something.
I asked for a repeal, I'm still waiting for an answer.As we look around ourselves for the last several years, the oft-repeated phrase still rings true; "Truth does not need protection, but lies do." Banning any topic reveals something.
This wicked thing coming will be far worse than being blocked from a forum, I think.I asked for a repeal, I'm still waiting for an answer.
It's all just mathematics anyways.
Eventually it all comes out in the wash.
But for now, If we don't want to be banned or have something we talk about locked,
I guess we aught to obey the Law of the forum.
Just one more law to add to the world's myriad list of laws...
There's more coming too. Watch and see.
Something about a new Patriot's Act in the works.
We see how well the last one worked, lol
Enjoy the forum while we have it. Something wicked this way comes.
Hugs
I don't mean to sound offensive, but I believe what Israel was worshipping for forty years in the wilderness wasn't the God we know today.
I been reading about Moloch and the star of Remphan, and I remember Jesus saying he saw Satan fall as lightening...
Satan appears as an angel of light and bramble bush's.
It's 5am working on my first cup of mojo here,
The middle east is a powder keg ready to explode. It will be interesting to see what is born out of it.
Will it be Peace or Destruction?
Heaven knows.
Come out of her my people.
hugs