COL 2:16 And The Sabbath - Are You Being Told The Truth?

[Rival]

Absolutely if scripture does not count

Aren't you the one saying scripture doesn't count when you literally throw out hundreds of laws that objectively exist? This isn't even a matter of interpretation or subjective bias, it is literally an objective fact that there are more than ten commandments. If I took out a book of English tort law and said, Oh yeah there are only ten laws the rest are just add-ons, you'd call me an imbecile.

 

[3rdAngel]

Aren't you the one saying scripture doesn't count when you literally throw out hundreds of laws that objectively exist? This isn't even a matter of interpretation or subjective bias, it is literally an objective fact that there are more than ten commandments. If I took out a book of English tort law and said, Oh yeah there are only ten laws the rest are just add-ons, you'd call me an imbecile.

Nope as I never said any other law in God's Word do not count. If I have never made these claims why pretend that I have or why pretend I have said things I have never said? You have not provided anything that is literal or objective scripture wise have you? If you have please post the link. If you havn't why pretend that you have? Only God's Word is true and we should believe and follow it over the teachings and traditions of men that break the commandments of God.

 

[Rival]

Nope as I never said any other law in God's Word does not count. If I have never made these claims why pretend that I have or why pretend I have said things I have never said? You have not provided anything that is literal or subjective. If you have please post the link. If you havn't why pretend that you have? Only God's Word is true and we should believe and follow it.

Then what in your mind differentiates the random ten you've chosen from the others?

 

[3rdAngel]

Then what in your mind differentiates the random ten you've chosen from the others?

There is no random 10. I have already posted the scriptures in relation to this question of yours before but you did not respond. Perhaps you should read what is shared with you as it seems you have not.

 

[The Anointed]

Your mathematics are in error, see the full chain here: Age of the Earth, a Chronological study

Just jump to the section you refer to, the scriptures are therein listed.

In Part:

"... Exodus 12:40 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.

Exodus 12:41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.

We have further confirmation of the 400+ year time span (400 years of being entreated evil, and the first 30 of being treated with kindness because of Joseph), as God had foretold this to Abraham:

Genesis 15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;

Genesis 15:14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.

Acts 7:6 And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat them evil four hundred years.

Acts 7:6 And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage will I judge, said God: and after that shall they come forth, and serve me in this place.

Galatians 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Genesis 47:4 proves that the famine in the land of Canaan was already in its second year (Genesis 41:30, 45:6; at which time Jacob was 130 years of age; Genesis 47:9; AM 2299), and Genesis 46:4 shows that it was God who commanded Jacob/Israel to go into Egypt, and that God would be with Him entering in, and leaving (with his children), for a promise of the future was given to Abraham, that the Egyptians would “afflict them” (Genesis 15:13), and “entreat them evil four hundred years” (Acts 7:6). Yet we know that Jacob/Israel and his children were not entreated evil or afflicted at the first (30 years), but received welcome into Egypt on behalf of Joseph by command of Pharaoh (Genesis 47:6,11,29, 50:22). It was only after the famine of 7 years was over (Genesis 41:30, 45:6; AM 2304), and after Jacob/Israel died (17 years later from speaking to Pharaoh, at the age of 147; Genesis 47:28, 49:33; Acts 7:15; AM 2316) and a few more years (AM 2329), that a change slowly began to take place, and all the moreso when Joseph himself died (Genesis 50:22,26; Exodus 1:6; AM 2370) and a new Pharaoh arose (Exodus 1:8-14). A slow transition had taken place, and didn't all take place in a day.

Therefore, if we take the date at which Jacob/Israel stood before Pharaoh (at age 130; Gen 47:9; AM 2299) and was invited into the land of Egypt, along with all his household, we can simply add the 430 years (Exodus 12:40-41; Galatians 3:17) to that date. AM 2299 + 430 = AM 2729, for the coming out of Egypt, “even the selfsame day” (Exodus 12:41). ..."

The Septuagint. Exodus 12:40 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Camaan and Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. Did you notice that mate; (IN CANAAN AND EGYPT)

Exodus 12:41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.

The Hebrew bible and the OT, which was translated in the 4th century by Jerome and others, mention the father of Shelah only twice: Genesis 11: 12; When Arpachshad was 35 years old he had a son, ’Shelah.’ And 1 Chronicles 1: 18; Arpachshad was the father of Shelah.

In the Septuagint…. Both verses state that Arpachshad is the father of Kainam/Cainan, and not the father of Shelah.

The book of Jubilees…[Chapter 8] 1 In the twenty-ninth jubilee, in the first week, [1373 A.M.] in the beginning thereof Arpachshad took to himself a wife and her name was Rasu’eja, the daughter of Susan, the daughter of Elam, and she 2 bare him a son in the third year in this week, [1375 A.M.] and he called his name Kainam. And the son grew, and his father taught him writing, and he went to seek for himself a place where he might seize for 3 himself a city. And he found a writing which former (generations) had carved on the rock, and he read what was thereon, and he transcribed it and sinned owing to it; for it contained the teaching of the Watchers in accordance with which they used to observe the omens of the sun and moon and 4 stars in all the signs of heaven. And he wrote it down and said nothing regarding it; for he was 5 afraid to speak to Noah about it lest he should be angry with him on account of it. And in the thirtieth jubilee, [1429 A.M.] in the second week, in the first year thereof, he took to himself a wife, and her name was Melka, the daughter of Madai, the son of Japheth, and in the fourth year [1432 A.M.] he begat a son, and 6 called his name Shelah; for he said: ’Truly I have been sent.’

Luke 3: 35-36; Shelah the son of Cainam/Kainan, the son of Arpachshad.

Which do you believe, the OT or the NT? Who do you believe is the father of Shelah?

Galatians 3: 17; “What I mean, is that God made a covenant with Abraham and promised to keep it. The law that was given 430 years later, cannot break that covenant and cancel God’s promise.”

The first covenant/promise that God made with Abraham, was when he told him to leave Haran and his family and travel into the land of Canaan, which the lord would give to him and his seed. The law was given though Moses 430 years after that promise. This would suggest that the Septuagint, which stated that the family of Abraham was in the land of Canaan and Egypt for 430 years is correct.

In my post to 3ridAngel, concerning the time that Abraham’s descendants spent in Egypt, which you saw fit to jump into the conversation...……. I asked the question….. “In what year do you suppose that the Israelites left Egypt?”

As you seem to have taken over, perhaps you can give your supposed date for the Exodus, in your support to 3rd Angels erroneous statement...... before I continue?

 

[Rival]

There is no random 10. I have already posted the scriptures in relation to this question of yours before but you did not respond. Perhaps you should read what is shared with you as it seems you have not.

Yea, not really friend. It is God that divided his LAW (10 Commandments) from the Mosaic book of the law. There are only 10 Commandments in God's 10 commandments nothing was to be added to them. How many commandments are there in God's 10 commandments 9; 10 or 613? *Deuteronomy 10:4? You do know that God's LAW (10 Commandments) were separated from the Mosaic book of the law in the Ark of the covenant right?

You said this.

 

[3rdAngel]

You said this.

Indeed did you answer the questions? The questions are already answered with scripture elswhere BTW. You just ignored the scriptures posted.

 

[Rival]

Indeed did you answer the question?

Tumah already answered that.

Where after the ten you list does it say that G-d made an end of giving commandments? He goes on after the interval with the Israelites to talk about not making idols, the kind of acceptable altar for sacrifices, and buying Hebrew servants.

 

[Crosstian]

The Septuagint ...

There is no such thing as "the septuagint". There are what are "called" septuaginta, which are also nothing of the sort, all based in various forms of Origen's Hexapla, Symmachus, Aquila and Theodotion, stemming from the corruption of Codex B, Vaticanus, etc, which is where Brenton's 'version' comes from, etc:

The Mythological Septuagint [PDF, click to read]

The Septuagint [LXX] as we presently know it, appears first in the writings of Origen [Hexapla] at near the end of the 2nd century AD, and the mention by the so-called "Letter of Aristeas", based on an unfounded and mostly discredited "legend", is seriously problematic.

"... Most of these fables focus on an infamous “book” 14 called the “Letter of Aristeas” 15 (hereafter called the Letter) and the alleged claims of the Letter’s documentation by authors who wrote before the first coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the first few centuries following His first sojourn on earth. 16 The only extant Letter is dated from the eleventh century. In addition, there is no pre-Christian Greek translation of the He-brew Old Testament text, which the Letter alleges, that has been found, in-cluding the texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls. ..." - http://www.theoldpathspublications.com/Downloads/Free/The Septuagint ebook.pdf

"... the story of Aristeas appears comparatively rational. Yet it has long been recognized that much of it is unhistorical, in particular the professed date and nationality of the writer. Its claims to authenticity were demolished by Dr. Hody two centuries ago (De bibliorum textibus originalibus, Oxon., 1705) ..." - The Septuagint, by H. St. J. Thackeray

De bibliorum textibus originalibus - Humfredi Hodii linguae graecae professoris regii et Archidiaconi Oxon. De bibliorum textibus originalibus, versionibus graecis, & latina vulgata libri 4..

Other sources, identifying the same - The Septuagint

"... Roman Catholics use the idea that Christ quoted the Septuagint to justly include the Apocrypha in their Bibles. ... Since no Hebrew Old Testament ever included the books of the Apocrypha, the Septuagint is the only source the Catholics have for justifying their canon. Many Reformers and Lutherans wrote at great length refuting the validity of the Septuagint. ..." - http://www.wcbible.org/documents/septuagint.pdf

"... [Page 46] Proponents of the invisible LXX will try to claim that Origen didn't translate the Hebrew into Greek, but only copied the LXX into the second column of his Hexapla. Can this argument be correct? No. If it were, then that would mean that those astute 72 Jewish scholars added the Apocryphal books to their work before they were ever written. (!) Or else, Origen took the liberty to add these spurious writings to God's Holy Word (Rev. 22:18). ...

... Is there ANY Greek manuscript of the Old Testament written BEFORE the time of Christ? Yes. There is one minute scrap dated at 150 BC, the Ryland's Papyrus, #458. It contains Deuteronomy chapters 23-28. No more. No less. If fact, it may be the existence of this fragment that led Eucebius and Philo to assume that the entire Pentatuech had been translated by some scribe in an effort to interest Gentiles in the history of the Jews. ... [page 46]

... [Page 47] If there was an Aristeas, he was faced with two insurmountable problems.

First, how did he ever locate the twelve tribes in order to pick his six representative scholars from each. Having been thoroughly scattered by their many defeats and captivities, the tribal lines of the 12 tribes had long since dissolved into virtual non-existence. It was impossible for anyone to distinctly identify the 12 individual tribes.

Secondly, if the 12 tribes had been identified, they would not have undertaken such a translation for two compelling reasons.

(1) Every Jew knew that the official caretaker of Scripture was the tribe of Levi as evidenced in Deuteronomy 17:18, 31:25,26 and Malachi 2:7. Thus, NO Jew of any of the eleven other tribes would dare to join such a forbidden enterprise. ..." - The Answer Book, By Sam Gipp, Page 46-47, selected portions, emphasis [bold] in original.

Also:

1 Jones, The Septuagint: A Critical Analysis, op. cit., pp. 10–54. The reader should, in all fairness, be apprised of the fact that very nearly all references in the literature which allude to the Septuagint in fact pertain to Origen's 5th column. That is, the real LXX from all citation evidence as to N.T. references – indeed, for all practical purposes – the Septuagint that we actually "see" and "use" is found to actually be only two manuscripts, Vaticanus B and Sinaiticus a. This is especially true of Vaticanus. Although this fact is difficult to ferret out from among the vast amount of literature on the subject, it may be verified by numerous sources. Among them, the reader is directed to page 1259 in The New Bible Dictionary op. cit., (Texts-Versions) where D.W. Gooding admits this when he relates that the LXX of Jer.38:40 (Jer.31:40 in the MT) as shown in figure 214 has been taken from the Codex Sinaiticus. Thomas Hartwell Horne is even more direct in An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, 9th ed., Vol. II, (London, Eng.: Spottiswoode and Shaw, 1846), fn. 1. p. 282 and fn. 3 p. 288. It has been established that both were produced from Origen's 5th column. Thus, the Septuagint which we actually utilize in practical outworking, the LXX which is cited almost ninety percent of the time, is actually the LXX that was written more than 250 years after the completion of the New Testament canon – and by a "Catholicized Jehovah's Witness" at that! Moreover, it must be seen that the testimony of these two corrupted manuscripts is almost solely responsible for the errors being foisted upon the Holy Scriptures in both Testaments by modern critics! - Footnote 1, Which Version?, by Floyd Nolen Jones, 20th edition page 129 [PDF]

Further:

The Truth About "the LXX" - Septuagint - Dr Phil Stringer

 

[Crosstian]

Is the exact number extremely important to her argument?...

Simply making a statement (unevidenced assertions), or questions which make no contact with the point made originally, after each number does not inherently refute each point. The assumptions made are ... well, ... not worth responding to. I think the points stand as they are written and haven't even been considered in what they said. I'm fine with my original reply still, if you are with yours. Advice, before entering into a conversation not between you, you might consider asking, before making assumptions and then making statements that don't mean very much to the points given.

 

[Crosstian]

*Wakes up, checks phone. Sees Tum winning argument.*

Aw yeah.

*Rates posts, turns over and goes back to sleep.*

If you think I need to respond to what Tumah ejected, then you will be asleep for a lot longer. Hit the snooze again. I'll go back to sleep as well, and await any kind of real reply, beginning with the one I actually addressed.

For instance, the sidetrack on "bani" as being of Arabic only, is just ridiculous. Arabic borrows it from the Hebrew, obviously.

One does not get RaMBaM, using ben, bene, as the shortened form uses Ba, from bane, or bani or even banim.

[1] banim

[2] ben, bane (alt. spell, bani, as pronounced)

etc.

Further, on just that, what Dynasty was the RaMBaM under as I pointed out? Under a Caliphate, in a muslim country. Also, go look at some old documents, please.

 

[3rdAngel]

Tumah already answered that.

Where after the ten you list does it say that G-d made an end of giving commandments? He goes on after the interval with the Israelites to talk about not making idols, the kind of acceptable altar for sacrifices, and buying Hebrew servants.

Nope he didn't. The scriptures say God made an end of making the 10 commandments (tables of stone) and nothing more was added to them (He (God) added; יָסָ֑ף (yā·sāp̄) nothing more וְלֹ֣א (wə·lō) *Deuteronomy 5:22.

As I posted earlier, I asked you for scirpture asking how many commandments are there in God's 10 commandments that God made and wrote with his own finger that was the work of God and spoken by God alone from Sinai on two tables of stone *Exodus 20:1-17; was it 7; 9; 10 or 613 *Exodus 32:16? Hint Deuteronomy 10:4.

As posted earlier God commanded the two laws to be separated in the ark of the covenant. God's LAW (10 commandments) written and spoken by God on two tables of stone were placed inside the ark of the covenant *Deuteronomy 10:5, while the book of the law was places in the side of the ark of the covenant *Deuteronomy 31:26.

You guys simply brushed off what the scripture said word for word as if it did not exist.

Ignoring God's Word does not make it dissappear.

 

[The Anointed]

There is no such thing as "the septuagint". There are what are "called" septuaginta, which are also nothing of the sort, all based in various forms of Origen's Hexapla, Symmachus, Aquila and Theodotion, stemming from the corruption of Codex B, Vaticanus, etc, which is where Brenton's 'version' comes from, etc:

The Mythological Septuagint [PDF, click to read]

The Septuagint [LXX] as we presently know it, appears first in the writings of Origen [Hexapla] at near the end of the 2nd century AD, and the mention by the so-called "Letter of Aristeas", based on an unfounded and mostly discredited "legend", is seriously problematic.

"... Most of these fables focus on an infamous “book” 14 called the “Letter of Aristeas” 15 (hereafter called the Letter) and the alleged claims of the Letter’s documentation by authors who wrote before the first coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the first few centuries following His first sojourn on earth. 16 The only extant Letter is dated from the eleventh century. In addition, there is no pre-Christian Greek translation of the He-brew Old Testament text, which the Letter alleges, that has been found, in-cluding the texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls. ..." - http://www.theoldpathspublications.com/Downloads/Free/The Septuagint ebook.pdf

"... the story of Aristeas appears comparatively rational. Yet it has long been recognized that much of it is unhistorical, in particular the professed date and nationality of the writer. Its claims to authenticity were demolished by Dr. Hody two centuries ago (De bibliorum textibus originalibus, Oxon., 1705) ..." - The Septuagint, by H. St. J. Thackeray

De bibliorum textibus originalibus - Humfredi Hodii linguae graecae professoris regii et Archidiaconi Oxon. De bibliorum textibus originalibus, versionibus graecis, & latina vulgata libri 4..

Other sources, identifying the same - The Septuagint

"... Roman Catholics use the idea that Christ quoted the Septuagint to justly include the Apocrypha in their Bibles. ... Since no Hebrew Old Testament ever included the books of the Apocrypha, the Septuagint is the only source the Catholics have for justifying their canon. Many Reformers and Lutherans wrote at great length refuting the validity of the Septuagint. ..." - http://www.wcbible.org/documents/septuagint.pdf

"... [Page 46] Proponents of the invisible LXX will try to claim that Origen didn't translate the Hebrew into Greek, but only copied the LXX into the second column of his Hexapla. Can this argument be correct? No. If it were, then that would mean that those astute 72 Jewish scholars added the Apocryphal books to their work before they were ever written. (!) Or else, Origen took the liberty to add these spurious writings to God's Holy Word (Rev. 22:18). ...

... Is there ANY Greek manuscript of the Old Testament written BEFORE the time of Christ? Yes. There is one minute scrap dated at 150 BC, the Ryland's Papyrus, #458. It contains Deuteronomy chapters 23-28. No more. No less. If fact, it may be the existence of this fragment that led Eucebius and Philo to assume that the entire Pentatuech had been translated by some scribe in an effort to interest Gentiles in the history of the Jews. ... [page 46]

... [Page 47] If there was an Aristeas, he was faced with two insurmountable problems.

First, how did he ever locate the twelve tribes in order to pick his six representative scholars from each. Having been thoroughly scattered by their many defeats and captivities, the tribal lines of the 12 tribes had long since dissolved into virtual non-existence. It was impossible for anyone to distinctly identify the 12 individual tribes.

Secondly, if the 12 tribes had been identified, they would not have undertaken such a translation for two compelling reasons.

(1) Every Jew knew that the official caretaker of Scripture was the tribe of Levi as evidenced in Deuteronomy 17:18, 31:25,26 and Malachi 2:7. Thus, NO Jew of any of the eleven other tribes would dare to join such a forbidden enterprise. ..." - The Answer Book, By Sam Gipp, Page 46-47, selected portions, emphasis [bold] in original.

Also:

1 Jones, The Septuagint: A Critical Analysis, op. cit., pp. 10–54. The reader should, in all fairness, be apprised of the fact that very nearly all references in the literature which allude to the Septuagint in fact pertain to Origen's 5th column. That is, the real LXX from all citation evidence as to N.T. references – indeed, for all practical purposes – the Septuagint that we actually "see" and "use" is found to actually be only two manuscripts, Vaticanus B and Sinaiticus a. This is especially true of Vaticanus. Although this fact is difficult to ferret out from among the vast amount of literature on the subject, it may be

verified by numerous sources. Among them, the reader is directed to page 1259 in The New Bible Dictionary op. cit., (Texts-Versions) where D.W. Gooding admits this when he relates that the LXX of Jer.38:40 (Jer.31:40 in the MT) as shown in figure 214 has been taken from the Codex Sinaiticus. Thomas Hartwell Horne is even more direct in An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, 9th ed., Vol. II, (London, Eng.: Spottiswoode and Shaw, 1846), fn. 1. p. 282 and fn. 3 p. 288. It has been established that both were produced from Origen's 5th column. Thus, the Septuagint which we actually utilize in practical outworking, the LXX which is cited almost ninety

percent of the time, is actually the LXX that was written more than 250 years after the completion of the New Testament canon – and by a "Catholicized Jehovah's Witness" at that! Moreover, it must be seen that the testimony of these two corrupted manuscripts is almost solely responsible for the errors being foisted upon the Holy Scriptures in both Testaments by modern critics! - Footnote 1, Which Version?, by Floyd Nolen Jones, 20th edition page 129 [PDF]

Further:

The Truth About "the LXX" - Septuagint - Dr Phil Stringer

Yea! We have heard all that before, but we know from Acts 17: 10-11, that every day the people studied the scriptures to see if what Paul preached, was true according to those scriptures. What scriptures did they study? Was it in Greek, or was it in Hebrew? And what is the oldest extant Hebrew bible?

But still you continue to dodge the question, what is your date for the Exodus?

 

[Rival]

Nope he didn't.

Yes he did (we can do this all day).

The scriptures say God made an end of making the 10 commandments

He made an end of making those particular commandmandments, he didn't stop giving commandments. The Israelites begged Moshe to speak on G-d's behalf as they were afraid. G-d then continues giving commandments.

and nothing more was added to them (He (God) added; יָסָ֑ף (yā·sāp̄) nothing more וְלֹ֣א (wə·lō) *Deuteronomy 5:22.

So what comes after Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5:22 in your Bible? Because in mine it's more commandments.

As I posted earlier, I asked you for scirpture asking how many commandments are there in God's 10 commandments that God made and wrote with his own finger that was the work of God and spoken by God alone from Sinai on two tables of stone *Exodus 20:1-17; was it 7; 9; 10 or 613 *Exodus 32:16? Hint Deuteronomy 10:4.

The Commandments are the scripture. You can go ahead and count them if you have that kind of free time, for some reason. You agree that Jewish males must be circumcised and are commanded to wear tzittzit? These are not in the 10 you cite, but surely you would not tell me they are irrelevent?

As posted earlier God commanded the two laws to be separated in the ark of the covenant. God's LAW (10 commandments) written and spoken by God on two tables of stone were placed inside the ark of the covenant *Deuteronomy 10:5, while the book of the law was places in the side of the ark of the covenant *Deuteronomy 31:26.

There are not two laws, and as I said; Tum already answered this - if you don't like what he said, I can't really do much for you by way of explanation.

 

[Rival]

If you think I need to respond to what Tumah ejected, then you will be asleep for a lot longer. Hit the snooze again. I'll go back to sleep as well, and await any kind of real reply, beginning with the one I actually addressed.

For instance, the sidetrack on "bani" as being of Arabic only, is just ridiculous. Arabic borrows it from the Hebrew, obviously.

One does not get RaMBaM, using ben, bene, as the shortened form uses Ba, from bane, or bani or even banim.

[1] banim

[2] ben, bane (alt. spell, bani, as pronounced)

etc.

Further, on just that, what Dynasty was the RaMBaM under as I pointed out? Under a Caliphate, in a muslim country. Also, go look at some old documents, please.

It's ben. It's Moses ben Maimon. Moses son of Maimon.

 

[Crosstian]

I'm pretty sure that the weakest rebuttal, is one where someone simply makes an assertion without any evidence at all...

... wrong, so this entire citation is as well. ...

Did anyone else just see that?

 

[Rival]

Did anyone else just see that?

If her premise is wrong, the rest of her argument can be ignored.

 

[3rdAngel]

Yes he did (we can do this all day).

No he didn't. We can do this all day, but the difference between us is that he did not prove anything he stated he only disagreed with the scripture proofs that were provided by the other poster.

He made an end of making those particular commandmandments, he didn't stop giving commandments. The Israelites begged Moshe to speak on G-d's behalf as they were afraid. G-d then continues giving commandments.

Your argument falls down here as it does not address the fact that God also wrote the 10 Commandments on two tables of stone and nothing more was added to them. God spoke and wrote 10 commandments and nothing more was added to them it was the work of God alone and God's LAW. The book of the law was only to support God's LAW (10 commandments) that is the standard of righteousness if obeyed and the knowledge of sin if broken. God's LAW (10 commandments) according to God's Word is different and separate to the Mosaic book of the law. Both come from God given to man but only the 10 commandments were made, written and spoken by God alone and given to God's people.

3rdAngel said: ↑ and nothing more was added to them (He (God) added; יָסָ֑ף (yā·sāp̄) nothing more וְלֹ֣א (wə·lō) *Deuteronomy 5:22.

Your response...

So what comes after Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5:22 in your Bible? Because in mine it's more commandments.

Your trying to side step the point being made. Do you agree that God only made 10 commandments on two tables of stone? No one is disagreeing that God through Moses made other laws that support God's Law. God's LAW and the Mosaic book of the law according to God's command was to be separated for a reason do you not know what that reason is?

3rdAngel said: ↑ As I posted earlier, I asked you for scirpture asking how many commandments are there in God's 10 commandments that God made and wrote with his own finger that was the work of God and spoken by God alone from Sinai on two tables of stone *Exodus 20:1-17; was it 7; 9; 10 or 613 *Exodus 32:16? Hint Deuteronomy 10:4.

Your response...

The Commandments are the scripture. You agree that Jewish males must be circumcised and are commanded to wear tzittzit? These are not in the 10 you cite, but surely you would not tell me they are irrelevent?

No I do not agree but you will not understand as you missed the coming of the Messiah. These are shadow laws that have their fulfillment in the new covenant. They are not irrelavent but have their fulfillment in the new covenant scriptures. For example in circumcision in the new covenant Romans 2:28-29, [28] For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:[29], But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. This is in fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:31-34; Ezekiel 36:24-27.

3rdAngel said: ↑ As posted earlier God commanded the two laws to be separated in the ark of the covenant. God's LAW (10 commandments) written and spoken by God on two tables of stone were placed inside the ark of the covenant *Deuteronomy 10:5, while the book of the law was places in the side of the ark of the covenant *Deuteronomy 31:26.

Your response...

There are not two laws, and as I said; Tum already answered this - if you don't like what he said, I can't really do much for you by way of explanation.

No he simply disagreed with it without proving why and ignored the scriptures posted. Kind of what your doing right now. Ignoring God's Word does not make it dissappear.

 

[3rdAngel]

Did anyone else just see that?

Yep I read it all and commented on it earlier. Ignoring Gods' Word does not make it dissappear.

 

[Crosstian]

God spoke and wrote 10 commandments and nothing more was added to them it was the work of God

They don't even admit that it was the Son of God the Father physically on that Mountain speaking, and that the Holy Spirit of God wrote in blazing fire.

Exo_33:23 And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.

Exo_24:10 And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.

Exo_24:11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

Deu_4:12 And the LORD spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice.

Deu_4:33 Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live?

Deu_5:23 And it came to pass, when ye heard the voice out of the midst of the darkness, (for the mountain did burn with fire,) that ye came near unto me, even all the heads of your tribes, and your elders;

Deu_5:24 And ye said, Behold, the LORD our God hath shewed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire: we have seen this day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth.

Deu_5:26 For who is there of all flesh, that hath heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived?

Neh_9:13 Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:

Just like at 'the last supper'.