|
Forums118
Topics9,216
Posts195,933
Members1,324
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
8 registered members (dedication, Karen Y, TheophilusOne, Kevin H, Daryl, 3 invisible),
2,178
guests, and 14
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52698
03/29/04 06:20 PM
03/29/04 06:20 PM
|
|
|
quote:
So from a scripture perspective, these are the only requirements required of Gentiles from the OT law.
So by that I guess you're saying that from a Scripture perspective it was okay for the Gentiles to steal, murder, dishonor their parents, covet, things like that? That's the logical conclusion of your statement.
quote:
Other moral laws are also mentioned later in the NT, but the sabbath is never mentioned.
Au contraire. Hebrews 4:9 says,
"There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God." We've already been over this in the "Truth about the Sabbath" topic. The Greek word translated "rest" here means literally, "a keeping of the seventh-day sabbath," so that a literal translation of Hebrews 4:9 would read, "There remaineth therefore a keeping of the seventh-day sabbath to the people of God."
quote:
Jesus here states that Israel is circumcising a child on the sabbath, which technically breaks the sabbath...
It does no such thing. Jesus wasn't using the circumcision rite as performed on the sabbath to say that it "technically breaks the sabbath," but instead to show that some things men might consider as work are okay to be performed on the sabbath, since they're the type of work that's part of God's holy service.
Similarly, the priests did more work on the sabbath day than on any other day of the week; but it was work performed in connection with the temple service, and so was not a breaking of the sabbath commandment. (Matthew 12:5)
God states that the work performed on the sabbath to honor Him is in keeping with the sabbath commandment. Isaiah 58:13,14 says
13 "If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on My holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour Him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words:
14 Then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." And Jesus said,
"It is lawful to do well on the sabbath days." Matthew 12:12. Doing God's work (and that includes the rite of circumcision, for the Jews in Christ's time) on the sabbath was not and is not a violation, technical or otherwise.
It's also absolutely ludicrous to claim that "circumcision was more important to Jews and Jesus than the sabbath."
The circumcision requirement was done away with at the cross. The sabbath commandment was not. The sabbath commandment is in the heart of the Ten Commandments. It was spoken by the voice of God at Sinai, written by the finger of God in stone, and placed inside the ark of the covenant, which rested in the Most Holy Place in the temple. The rite of circumcision had no such status. It was important, yes, but not as important as one of the Ten Commandments.
Paul wrote,
"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God." 1 Corinthians 7:19 That verse right by itself shows that the Commandments supercede the rite of circumcision, both in importance and endurance through time.
Jesus knew this too; it was His Spirit Who inspired Paul to write this passage.
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52699
03/29/04 10:54 PM
03/29/04 10:54 PM
|
|
|
quote:
So by that I guess you're saying that from a Scripture perspective it was okay for the Gentiles to steal, murder, dishonor their parents, covet, things like that? That's the logical conclusion of your statement.
Not sure why you stated this John, because you just answered it with your second quote of what I wrote. The other 9 moral laws are repeated in the NT for all believers.
quote:
Au contraire. Hebrews 4:9 says,
"There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God."
We've already been over this in the "Truth about the Sabbath" topic. The Greek word translated "rest" here means literally, "a keeping of the seventh-day sabbath," so that a literal translation of Hebrews 4:9 would read, "There remaineth therefore a keeping of the seventh-day sabbath to the people of God."
I’m sure people that don’t know what Hebrews 4 actually states will just take what you have posted at face value, but we know better don’t we John.
The actual Greek word used in this text is “sabbatismos”, which according to Stongs means; “a keeping sabbath, or the blessed rest from toils and troubles looked for in the age to come by the true worshippers of God and true Christians”. That is a direct quote from Storngs.
So we now see that John took liberties in saying that it was the “seventh-day” sabbath that was being referred to.
But the fact is that nowhere else in scripture is the term “Rest” or “seventh-day sabbath” come from the word “sabbatismos”. So based on usage, that would mean that it is highly unlikely that “sabbatismos” means 7th day sabbath.
Now if we actually look at the context, something John appears to have missed, we see that it cannot mean the 7th day sabbath. Let’s look at this text in context to see what it states:
“4And yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world. For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: "And on the seventh day God rested from all his work." 5And again in the passage above he says, "They shall never enter my rest." 6It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience. 7Therefore God again set a certain day, calling it Today, when a long time later he spoke through David, as was said before: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts." 8For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. 9There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; 10for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from his. 11Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience.”
So we must then ask John how the author can be referring to the 7th day sabbath when it is stated as “today” and “another day” other than the 7th-day sabbath mentioned in verse 4?
So since the Greek would used here for rest “sabbatismos” is not translated “seventh-day” and is not used for the sabbath in any other place in scripture, and the day in question is called “today” and “another day”, it seems very clear, based on good exegesis, that this “rest” in Hebrews 4 is clearly not the 7th day sabbath.
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52700
03/30/04 01:49 AM
03/30/04 01:49 AM
|
|
|
quote:
Not sure why you stated this John, because you just answered it with your second quote of what I wrote. The other 9 moral laws are repeated in the NT for all believers.
Well if that was your intent, you contradicted yourself within the selfsame paragraph. You did say, after all,
quote:
these are the only requirements required of Gentiles from the OT law.
I was going on the fact that you've stated that you somehow think that the repetition of 9 of the 10 commandments in the New Testament constitute Jesus' law, which has nothing to do with OT law, in your view; though they are of course identical. Just one of many confusing and illogical conclusions you've tried to push on the people here.
As for Hebrews 4:9, the word "sabbatismos" in 1st-century Greek has been conclusively shown to mean "a keeping of the seventh-day sabbath." That's how contemporary Greek secular writers used the term. 1st-century Greek is 1st-century Greek, whether in the Bible or outside it.
quote:
it seems very clear, based on good exegesis...
It's become pretty obvious that you don't know what "good exegesis" is. So you might as well stop throwing around the term. Good exegesis doesn't involve private interpretation and glaring bias.
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52701
03/30/04 02:27 AM
03/30/04 02:27 AM
|
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,332
BC, Canada
|
|
What law or laws did God's grace annul? I know that there are laws that have been done away with. Any thoughts?
God Bless,
Will
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52702
03/30/04 06:13 PM
03/30/04 06:13 PM
|
|
|
quote:
Well if that was your intent, you contradicted yourself within the selfsame paragraph. You did say, after all,
quote:
these are the only requirements required of Gentiles from the OT law.
That’s true John, I was trying to make a distinction between the universal moral precepts (repeated in the NT) and the OT law given to Israel. I know those repeated in the NT are in some form from the OT as well, but not killing someone has different moral implications than eating blood.
Maybe they are the same, but that is why I said that.
quote:
I was going on the fact that you've stated that you somehow think that the repetition of 9 of the 10 commandments in the New Testament constitute Jesus' law, which has nothing to do with OT law, in your view; though they are of course identical. Just one of many confusing and illogical conclusions you've tried to push on the people here.
They are the same precepts, but the OT law stated nothing about how one thinks, but Jesus did. Check Matt 5 and you will see how Jesus raised the bar on the law from just behavior to intent and thought. So in essence, Jesus' law is focused on thoughts, not deeds. And the OT law focuses on deeds, not thoughts.
THAT is the difference.
quote:
As for Hebrews 4:9, the word "sabbatismos" in 1st-century Greek has been conclusively shown to mean "a keeping of the seventh-day sabbath." That's how contemporary Greek secular writers used the term. 1st-century Greek is 1st-century Greek, whether in the Bible or outside it.
You are welcome to your opinion John, but that is NOT how Greek lexicons translate the word. In addition, that translation is contrary to the context which states that the sabbath or rest in questions was “Today” and “another day” than the 7th day. So you can believe what you want, but contextually your explanation is inaccurate.
I also noticed that you did not address in your post how it could be the 7th day when “Today” and “another day” was used to describe this rest? Maybe because you can’t?
As for exegesis, I have addressed the context of the passage and you have not. So it should be clear to unbiased readers who understands the process of exegesis and who doesn’t.
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52703
03/30/04 07:34 PM
03/30/04 07:34 PM
|
|
|
quote:
What law or laws did God's grace annul? I know that there are laws that have been done away with. Any thoughts?
God Bless,
Will
Great question Will, here is what I have been lead to believe.
1. The new covenant is NOT like the old covenant law:
Jeremiah 31:31-32
"I will make a new covenant...NOT like to covenant that I made with their fathers when I took them out of Egypt."
2. Upon Jesus Christ's death and resurrection the new covenant was ratified. Romans 7 makes it clear that under this new covenant we are:
Romans 7:1-6
"released from the law" v. 2, "dead to the law through the body of Christ" v. 4, and "Delivered from the law" v. 6
Some may ask which law Paul was referring to? Paul makes that clear in the very next verse (v 7):
Paul states; “For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said 'Thou shall not covet." (Compare to Exodus 20:17 & I Tim. 1:6-11)
So Paul was talking about the entire OT law including the tables of stone which 'Thou shall not covet” is command number 10.
3. 2 Cor 3:1-18 contrasts the OT covenant law with the NT covenant law:
Old Covenant
"on tables of stone" v. 3
"the letter kills" v. 6
"was glorious" v.7
"was passing away" v.14
"ministry of death and condemnation" v. 7,9
New Covenant
"on the heart" v. 3
"the Spirit gives life" v.6
"much more glorious" v. 11
"remains" v.11
"Ministry of righteousness" v.9
3. So you may say; “If the Old Covenant has been replaced by the New Covenant what about keeping the Commandments of God? as we read in Rev 12:17 and John 14:15”?
I John 3:22-24
"And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do things that are pleasing in His sight. And this is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave us commandment. Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him."
So even without the OT covenant law we can keep the commandments of God as mentioned in Rev 12 by following 1 John 3:22-24. Notice that it was John who wrote both these books. So the term “commandments of God” in rev 12 does not mean the OT covenant law.
So I think this answers your question Will as to what law was removed. It was the entire OT covenant law, which was replaced by the NT covenant law. .
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52704
03/30/04 10:02 PM
03/30/04 10:02 PM
|
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,332
BC, Canada
|
|
Hi Lobo, What differences are between the Old Testament Laws and the New Testament Laws? YOu stated: quote:
Paul states; “For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said 'Thou shall not covet." (Compare to Exodus 20:17 & I Tim. 1:6-11)
So Paul was talking about the entire OT law including the tables of stone which 'Thou shall not covet” is command number 10.
Paul didn't state that they were done away with. It is much like me wanting to make a sacrifice for my sins by making an altar and killing a lamb without blemish, so since Paul says that this is how he knew what sin was then there is something else that changed and not the 10 commandments.
There is something rather specific changed from the Old Testament of Jesus Christ in the New Testament of Jesus Christ. What are they?
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52705
03/31/04 12:18 AM
03/31/04 12:18 AM
|
|
|
quote:
What differences are between the Old Testament Laws and the New Testament Laws?
I already posted that in the last post, from Paul:
2 Cor 3:1-18 contrasts the OT covenant law with the NT covenant law:
Old Covenant
"on tables of stone" v. 3
"the letter kills" v. 6
"was glorious" v.7
"was passing away" v.14
"ministry of death and condemnation" v. 7,9
New Covenant
"on the heart" v. 3
"the Spirit gives life" v.6
"much more glorious" v. 11
"remains" v.11
"Ministry of righteousness" v.9
quote:
Paul didn't state that they were done away with. It is much like me wanting to make a sacrifice for my sins by making an altar and killing a lamb without blemish, so since Paul says that this is how he knew what sin was then there is something else that changed and not the 10 commandments.
No, Paul didn’t state in that text that the law was done away with, but he did in others:
Colossians 2
14having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.[6Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
Ephesians 2
15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace,
2 Corinthians 3
7Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, 8will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52706
03/31/04 12:25 AM
03/31/04 12:25 AM
|
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,332
BC, Canada
|
|
Hmm... Still not the answer I am thinking of that is in Scripture, and not even close as those verses have been used and abused by you many times.. I would think that someone with such a high caliber of Biblical study would have been able to pinpoint this one rather easily.
Here I will give you another hint.
What is the difference between the New Testament & the Old Testament covenant.
|
|
|
Re: Does God's Grace Annul His Law?
#52707
03/31/04 05:58 PM
03/31/04 05:58 PM
|
|
|
Will,
The texts I posted are accurate and appropriate for this conversation. They do support my points. However, if you have something on your mind, just come out and say it?
To answer your question, there are many differences between the covenants, and there was more than just the old and new. The biblical fact is that God has always dealt with man by making these “agreements” to clearly outline the expectations of man and the rewards involved. Every covenant given by God in scripture has three stipulations; a promise by God, a condition that man must fulfill, and a sign to seal the agreement.
Here are the major covenants given in scripture and there stipulations:
ADAM
Genesis 3:15
Original Promise
All Covenants are structured
* Promise
* Condition
* Sign
NOAH
Genesis 9:8-17
Promise—Never to destroy the earth by flood (Genesis 9:8-11,15)
Condition—Unconditional
Sign—Rainbow (Genesis 9:12-16)
ABRAHAM
Genesis 15-17 (Everlasting)
Promise—Father of Multitudes (Genesis 15:1-5)
Condition—Faith: Abraham believed (Genesis 15:6)
Sign—Circumcision (Gen. 17:10-13)
MOSES
Promise—A Great Land (Exodus 2:24-25)
Condition—Obedience (Exodus 19:7-8)
Sign—The Sabbath (Exodus 31:12-18 & Exodus 20:8-11)
NEW COVENANT OF JESUS
Promise - Eternal Life to all who believe (Jn 3:16)
Condition - Faith (Rom 3:21-28)
Sign - The Lord's Supper (I Cor 11:25, Luke 22:20, Mark 14:24)
So Will, I assume you are referring to the Mosaic covenant when you say “old”. So if you are asking what the difference is between the Mosaic covenant and the NT covenant, we first have to look at the stipulations of the two covenants to compare.
PROMISE:
The promise for the Mosaic covenant law was that Israel would gain the promised land, and the promise for the NT covenant is eternal life for all who believe.
CONDITION:
The condition of the Mosaic covenant was strict obedience, and for the NT covenant it is faith.
SIGN:
And the sign of the Mosaic covenant was the 7th day sabbath, and the sign of the NT covenant is the Lord’s supper.
So Will, based on how God gave the covenants and the stipulations of those covenants, these are the major differences.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
