Are All Ten Commandments Binding on WHO?

[Ben Masada]

Very well said. Living the Christian life transcends following the Law.

++++++++++++++++++++

What do you mean by "transcends following the Law?" Does it mean Christians are
not bound by the Law of God?

Ben

 

[Dunemeister]

This is where one of the fundamental differences between Judaism and Christianity is.

Christians speak of "righteousness" as if it's a ticket of admission to get into heaven.

Jews speak of righteousness as a status of being an upright citizen, worthy of such blessings from God as long, healthy life, successful livelihood, many children, freedom from those who would plot to do evil against them.

we don't live to die. We live to live.

I don't believe that our sole purpose on this earth is to figure out how to get into heaven.

I refuse to believe that we humans are nothing more to God than rats trying to find the cheese at the end of the maze.

I share your concern. This is indeed how some Christians use the word, but it's not how I use the word. Nor is it the way the New Testament uses the word unless you're overly fond of Saint Augustine and perhaps Martin Luther. I agree that our sole purpose isn't to figure out how to get into heaven.

I like your analogy of an "upright citizen." If a person is righteous, he is a member in good standing of "the people of God." As a member in good standing, certain blessings accrue. Being out of that standing means a withholding of those blessings and perhaps the application of a curse or two.

The question I was thinking of when I made my post was the question how a person gets to be an "upright citizen". Christians hold that following the Ten Commandments isn't going to do it. Or perhaps, following the Ten Commandments WOULD do it but given the fallenness of the world it's practically impossible to do so. Therefore, it's practically impossible to obtain righteousness by following the law.

However, I don't want to get too sidetracked. The question is upon whom the Top Ten apply. I've already argued that it applies to Jews 100% and to Christians in a modified way, with the exact details of the modifications still pending (after 2000 years!).

 

[sandy whitelinger]

++++++++++++++++++++

What do you mean by "transcends following the Law?" Does it mean Christians are
not bound by the Law of God?

Ben

Christians are not bound by the Mosaic Law.

 

[Ben Masada]

Christians are not bound by the Mosaic Law.

++++++++++++++++++===

What's the difference between God's Law and Mosaic Law?

Ben

 

[sandy whitelinger]

++++++++++++++++++===

What's the difference between God's Law and Mosaic Law?

Ben

There are laws outside of the Mosaic Law.

 

[Ben Masada]

There are laws outside of the Mosaic Law.

+++++++++++++++++++++

The only God's laws outside of the Mosaic laws are the natural laws, and I am sure
those are not what you mean, because all of us are under them. Therefore, I am still
waiting for the difference between God's laws and the Mosaic laws.

Ben

 

[sandy whitelinger]

+++++++++++++++++++++

The only God's laws outside of the Mosaic laws are the natural laws, and I am sure
those are not what you mean, because all of us are under them. Therefore, I am still
waiting for the difference between God's laws and the Mosaic laws.

Ben

From Romans 7:
[22] For I delight in thelaw of God after the inward man:
[23] But I see anotherlaw in my members, warring against thelaw of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
[25] I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve thelaw of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

The law in the members of verse 23 and the law of sin in verse 25 are the Mosaic Laws.

From Romans 3:27:
"Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By whatlaw? of works? Nay: but by thelaw of faith."

From Romans 8:2:
"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from thelaw of sin and death."

From James 1:25:
"But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed."
and 2:12:
" So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by thelaw of liberty."


Hebrews 7 will tell you why a new law was instituted.

 

[Ben Masada]

From Romans 7:
[22] For I delight in thelaw of God after the inward man:
[23] But I see anotherlaw in my members, warring against thelaw of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
[25] I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve thelaw of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

+++Ben: - This is the best recipe to serve two masters. I think that when Jesus said that no one can serve two masters, he had forgotten that Paul would be an exception. In his mind he would serve God's Law, and in the flesh he would serve the law of sin. And the guy would even thank God for such a condition.

The law in the members of verse 23 and the law of sin in verse 25 are the Mosaic Laws.

+++Ben: - That's not how I see it. And mind you, that's not how Paul saw it either. The law of sin were his own passions or evil inclination fighting against his struggles
to serve God's Law.

From Romans 3:27:
"Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By whatlaw? of works? Nay: but by thelaw of faith."

+++Ben: - Where faith begins knowledge ends. For lack of knowledge people perish. (Hosea 4:6) Faith only leads to disappointments and ignorance. I prefer the dynamic of thought and action rather than the dead calm of ignorance and faith.

From Romans 8:2:
"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from thelaw of sin and death."

+++Ben: - When Jesus came the Law that he confirmed to the letter was the Mosaic Law. The Law and the Prophets. (Mat. 5:17-19)

From James 1:25:
"But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed." and 2:12: " So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by thelaw of liberty."

+++Ben: - There is no such a thing as law of liberty. All laws have to do with restrictions. You are too intoxicated with Pauline rhetorics.


Hebrews 7 will tell you why a new law was instituted.

+++Ben: - Jesus never established a new law. He rather confirmed the old one to the letter and warned us all to do the same. Paul was the one that in his vendetta against Judaism played with the minds of his followers with terminologies that even himself could not understand.

Ben :run:

 

[Dunemeister]

+++Ben: - Jesus never established a new law. He rather confirmed the old one to the letter and warned us all to do the same. Paul was the one that in his vendetta against Judaism played with the minds of his followers with terminologies that even himself could not understand.

Ben :run:

Gawd, not another one of those....

 

[Ben Masada]

Gawd, not another one of those....

++++++++++++++++++++

Wow! Was there another one? I thought I was unique.

Ben

 

[sandy whitelinger]

+++Ben: - Jesus never established a new law. He rather confirmed the old one to the letter and warned us all to do the same. Paul was the one that in his vendetta against Judaism played with the minds of his followers with terminologies that even himself could not understand.

Ben :run:

Wow, Obviously I need to explain plain English a little here. Let's start here in Romans 7:22-23:

" For I delight in the law [1] of God after the inward man: But I see another law [2] in my members, warring against the law [3] of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law [4] of sin which is in my members."

If you look at the law marked [2] and the law marked [3] it is obvious there are two different laws. This is futher backed up in Romans 8:2, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death."

Would you argue differently and do you question that the "law of sin" refers to the Mosaic law?

 

[Ben Masada]

Wow, Obviously I need to explain plain English a little here. Let's start here in Romans 7:22-23:

+++Ben: - I guess you do. Go ahead!

" For I delight in the law [1] of God after the inward man: But I see another law [2] in my members, warring against the law [3] of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law [4] of sin which is in my members."

+++Ben: - That's a description of a man who serves two masters: The Law of God in his mind, and his own passions of the flesh. If you have chosen to call the evil inclination in man, Mosaic laws, it's your prerogative. To me it sounds "Replacement Theology." In other words simply Antisemitism. The reference above in Romans 7:22,23 is metaphorical. To me Mosaic Laws and God's Laws are one and the same.

If you look at the law marked [2] and the law marked [3] it is obvious there are two different laws. This is futher backed up in Romans 8:2, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death."

+++Ben: - As I said above it's all metaphorical. There is just one Law. The other laws are an analogy to illustrate the evil inclination in man. There is no such a thing as "law of the Spirit of life in Christ." And the only Law that makes us free of something is God's Law that if we observe it we are free of punishment.

Would you argue differently and do you question that the "law of sin" refers to the Mosaic law?

+++Ben: - Of course, I would argue differently! As I said above the law of sin is the evil inclination in man, and it does not at all refers to the Mosaic Law which is sthe same as God's Law. Sorry Pal but I am vaccinated against Pauline rhetorics.

Ben :clap

 

[Dunemeister]

++++++++++++++++++++

Wow! Was there another one? I thought I was unique.

Ben

Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[Ben Masada]

Sorry to burst your bubble.

++++++++++++++++++++++

No problem; I have a lot more.

Ben

 

[sandy whitelinger]

sandy whitelinger[/B]
Wow, Obviously I need to explain plain English a little here. Let's start here in Romans 7:22-23:

+++Ben: - I guess you do. Go ahead!

" For I delight in the law [1] of God after the inward man: But I see another law [2] in my members, warring against the law [3] of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law [4] of sin which is in my members."

+++Ben: - That's a description of a man who serves two masters: The Law of God in his mind, and his own passions of the flesh. If you have chosen to call the evil inclination in man, Mosaic laws, it's your prerogative. To me it sounds "Replacement Theology." In other words simply Antisemitism. The reference above in Romans 7:22,23 is metaphorical. To me Mosaic Laws and God's Laws are one and the same.

If you look at the law marked [2] and the law marked [3] it is obvious there are two different laws. This is futher backed up in Romans 8:2, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death."

+++Ben: - As I said above it's all metaphorical. There is just one Law. The other laws are an analogy to illustrate the evil inclination in man. There is no such a thing as "law of the Spirit of life in Christ." And the only Law that makes us free of something is God's Law that if we observe it we are free of punishment.

Would you argue differently and do you question that the "law of sin" refers to the Mosaic law?

+++Ben: - Of course, I would argue differently! As I said above the law of sin is the evil inclination in man, and it does not at all refers to the Mosaic Law which is sthe same as God's Law. Sorry Pal but I am vaccinated against Pauline rhetorics.

It’s been a while since I’ve seen someone go to such lengths to avoid getting an answer to a question by confusing the issue with the introduction of unrelated topics, re. Replacement Theology, anti-Semitism, metaphors, inclination of man, Pauline rhetoric: it’s no wonder you are confused.

This is much simpler than that. Now for your English lesson combined with a simple lesson in how to read Scripture. The topic of any given chapter is usually found in the first verse or two. In the case of Romans 7 it’s found in the first verse. It is the dominion over man of the Mosaic Law. The next 13 mentions of the word “law” and one “commandment,” through verse 21, all refer to the Mosaic Law.

What Romans chapter 7 describes, in part, through analogy (1-4), is why a New Testament Christian is free from the Mosaic Law. The how is described adequately in chapter 6 (and elsewhere throughout the New Testament). It can be simply summed up in 6:6, “Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [Christ], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.”


By laying the foundation that the Mosaic Law was given because of sin (Romans 3:3, "Therefore by the deeds of the [Mosaic] law shall no man be justified in [God’s] sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.”), and that sin is a result of motions rooted in the flesh, the conclusion is that the Mosaic Law is the law of sin referred to in verses 23 and 25 of chapter 7. Your argument that this is not symbolic of the Mosaic Law but only describing the “evil inclination of man” is not justified by the text of the chapter. There is no foundation laid (as in explaining that the motions of sin refer to anything but the Mosaic Law) that would allow for the insertion of that concept in those verses or followed up in the next chapter. What the end of the chapter does, by inserting a separate law of God (ie. the law of the mind, verse 23; the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, 8:2; also known as the law of faith, Romans 3:27 or the law of liberty James 1:25 and 2:12), is to introduce what will be explained in chapter 8. This is that we are free from the Mosaic Law, and fall under the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.

While not specifically codified as is the Mosaic Law we know that this law is written on the hearts of men under a new covenant. The foundation for a new covenant was laid in Jeremiah 31:31-33. The need for a new covenant is established in Hebrews chapter 7, the foundation of which is laid down in the early chapters of Romans. What the tenants of the covenant written on the hearts of men are is testafied to throughout the New Testament but is summed up by loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself. The process is to live in the Spirit (a new commandment) and not in the flesh (the letter of the law). Galatians tells us that the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith meekness, temperance: against such there is no law (Galatians 5:22-23).

Now, to answer your original question as to why the behavior of the New Testament Christian transcends the Mosaic Law. It is actuated in the fruit of the Spirit and summed up by this: “…whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, if there be any praise, think on these things (Philippians 4:8)." The person who has accepted Christ, who is no longer servant to the flesh, who is led by the Spirit, is no longer under the Mosaic Law.

*All references come from the KJV

 

[Ben Masada]

It’s been a while since I’ve seen someone go to such lengths to avoid getting an answer to a question by confusing the issue with the introduction of unrelated topics, re. Replacement Theology, anti-Semitism, metaphors, inclination of man, Pauline rhetoric: it’s no wonder you are confused.

+++Ben: - Predictable answer this of yours. So far, no refutation to what I said.

This is much simpler than that. Now for your English lesson combined with a simple lesson in how to read Scripture. The topic of any given chapter is usually found in the first verse or two. In the case of Romans 7 it’s found in the first verse. It is the dominion over man of the Mosaic Law. The next 13 mentions of the word “law” and one “commandment,” through verse 21, all refer to the Mosaic Law.

+++Ben: - Very good! The first verse: "...that the Law has power over a man so long as he lives." Then, he compares the freedom from the Law as the freedom of a widow from her dead husband. If this is not Replacement Theology you are the one who need English lessons. Besides, there is no difference between God's Law and the Mosaic Law. The difference is made up by Paul's bickerings about the Law.

What Romans chapter 7 describes, in part, through analogy (1-4), is why a New Testament Christian is free from the Mosaic Law. The how is described adequately in chapter 6 (and elsewhere throughout the New Testament). It can be simply summed up in 6:6, “Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [Christ], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.”

+++Ben: - If he had applied his Christology to the Gentiles only, we would not be having this discussion. But he would preach agains Moses to the Jews themselves. (Acts 21:21)

By laying the foundation that the Mosaic Law was given because of sin (Romans 3:3, "Therefore by the deeds of the [Mosaic] law shall no man be justified in [God’s] sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.”), and that sin is a result of motions rooted in the flesh, the conclusion is that the Mosaic Law is the law of sin referred to in verses 23 and 25 of chapter 7. Your argument that this is not symbolic of the Mosaic Law but only describing the “evil inclination of man” is not justified by the text of the chapter. There is no foundation laid (as in explaining that the motions of sin refer to anything but the Mosaic Law) that would allow for the insertion of that concept in those verses or followed up in the next chapter. What the end of the chapter does, by inserting a separate law of God (ie. the law of the mind, verse 23; the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, 8:2; also known as the law of faith, Romans 3:27 or the law of liberty James 1:25 and 2:12), is to introduce what will be explained in chapter 8. This is that we are free from the Mosaic Law, and fall under the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.

+++Ben: - Give me an example of a law which is not given because of sin. That's what I call Pauline rhetoric. No man is justified by the deeds of the Law? Do you know how the Judge justifies one who is taken to Court? Only if he has satisfied the requirements of the Law. Break the Law and tell the Judge that you are one of the faithful who expects to be justified by grace. He will let you know what you need to hear. There is no such a thing as law of faith. Before the Judge there is no saying that you are a believer in the redeeming sacrifice of Christ. Only obedience to the Law will redeem yourself.

While not specifically codified as is the Mosaic Law we know that this law is written on the hearts of men under a new covenant. The foundation for a new covenant was laid in Jeremiah 31:31-33. The need for a new covenant is established in Hebrews chapter 7, the foundation of which is laid down in the early chapters of Romans. What the tenants of the covenant written on the hearts of men are is testafied to throughout the New Testament but is summed up by loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself. The process is to live in the Spirit (a new commandment) and not in the flesh (the letter of the law). Galatians tells us that the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith meekness, temperance: against such there is no law (Galatians 5:22-23).

+++Ben: - The only New Covenant mentioned in the Scriptures was made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. (Jer. 31:31) It does not matter where the Law is written, if in tables of stone or in the heart, as long as it is observed. As long as you observe the Law, the Law has no power over you. All the Pauline rhetoric of faith and grace is obsolete and dispensable.

Now, to answer your original question as to why the behavior of the New Testament Christian transcends the Mosaic Law. It is actuated in the fruit of the Spirit and summed up by this: “…whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, if there be any praise, think on these things (Philippians 4:8)." The person who has accepted Christ, who is no longer servant to the flesh, who is led by the Spirit, is no longer under the Mosaic Law.

+++Ben: - If one who walks and lives acording to the Law, he has no need to accept the Christ of Paul. What breaks the power of the Law over him is his honest behaviour. Again, try in real life before the Judge. Break the Law and tell him that you have accepted Christ to see if he will let you go.

*All references come from the KJV

My comments come in between your paragraphs above.

Ben :clap

 

[mikmik]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

On the ninth of this month. This coming Thursday. It's called Yom Kippur. I hope the
Arabs won't attack us as they did in 1973, thinking that by catching us hungry they would succeed to push us into the sea.

Ben :clap

We keep the Feast of Atonement, which is one of our annual Sabbaths. It is also on the 9th, and began at sunset this evening, as I am guessing would also be the beginning of Yom Kippur for you? What does this day represent for you?

mik

 

[sandy whitelinger]

My comments come in between your paragraphs above.

Ben :clap

Well, you really didn't say much to refute anything except that you don't believe Paul and offer a warped view of both Replacemt Theology and the mechanics of salvation but I think I'd be wasting my effort in trying to straighten you out. You seem obstinate in your beliefs. Perhaps Romans 11:11 is aplicable.

 

[Ben Masada]

Well, you really didn't say much to refute anything except that you don't believe Paul and offer a warped view of both Replacemt Theology and the mechanics of salvation but I think I'd be wasting my effort in trying to straighten you out. You seem obstinate in your beliefs. Perhaps Romans 11:11 is aplicable.

It's funny that Romans 11:11 is the epitomy of Replacement Theology. It proves that you did understand my post. "Through their fall (the fall of the Jews) salvation has
come to the Gentiles." Why does have to be that way? Why the Jews had to fall so that the Gentiles could be saved? I am sorry but this is Replacement Theology which is an euphemism for Antisemitism.

Ben

 

[idea]

There is a poll going on about the Ten Commandments with about 75% of those on the RF voting that the Ten Commandments are binding but they don't say they are binding on WHO. The question is WHO are they binding upon - is it the Jewish people only, the Christian, other religious people or the whole world?

They are binding on anyone who wants to live a decent life. That is like saying "WHO should go to school?" or "WHO should eat healthy food" or WHO should wear cloths or WHO is supposed to exercise. Of course, anyone WHO is smart and moral and wants to live a civilized life will do these types of things. If you want to live like some savage animal without following the basic rules of humanity? rationalize and justify all you want - nothing but excuses from someone who is too lazy or too _____ (you fill in the blank) to live a civilized life. What is so hard about a spiritual day of rest?

The laws build on one another – first don’t murder, then don’t hate, then love your enemies. You start with the easiest level, and then build on it from there. I don’t think it is about getting rid of the old, I think it is using the old as a foundation to build on. You can’t build without having a solid foundation in place.