Proclaiming the Sabbath more fully at the End Time

[beam]

Says the ex SDA.

It is the truth Amo.    You and Hobie are the only SDAs posting that post what SDAs believe and yet when we present solid New Testament and even Old Testament facts you revert to unseemly tactics.  I am an ex not because I do not love my SDAs brothers and sisters.  I am an ex because of what I have presented here on this forum and other forums like it.  Only a couple of SDAs have ever taken a critical look at all the New Testament scripture I have presented.  Most of you revert to name calling or some other type of put down.  Yes, I take it with a grain of salt for myself, but it really does make me sad that another Christian would stoop to tactics like that instead of giving me a logical and truthful explanation of why you believe I am wrong.   

Case in hand.  I have presented Paul's writings from 2Cor3:7-11 several times on this board and never once has any SDA tried to explain away the fact that Paul is telling us we are not under the 10 commandments.  The king James version goes so far to tell us: 11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.  What does "done away" mean to you?  Why did Paul compare the Holy Spirit to the 10 commandments?  Why did Paul write these things in such a powerful manner'?

Why did Jesus expound on the law in Matt 5?  Why did He tell the Jews that the law would be enforce until all is fulfilled.  Why do SDAs ignore the fact that it was all the law, 613 of them.  Not one jot nor one tittle of any of them would be allowed to be excused until all was to be fulfilled.  SDAs tell us all has not been fulfilled and yet do not fulfill but just a full of them.   The fact is that Paul and other New Testament writers have told us like in 2Cor 3 and Gal 3 that the old covenant law has been fulfilled and Christians are not under it.   Now it comes down to making a choice, follow Ellen White and her insistence on 10 commandment observance or allowing the holy Spirit to guide you into a new relationship with God's plan.

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Beam:
I have presented Paul's writings from 2Cor3:7-11 several times on this board and never once has any SDA tried to explain away the fact that Paul is telling us we are not under the 10 commandments.  The king James version goes so far to tell us: 11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.  What does "done away" mean to you?  Why did Paul compare the Holy Spirit to the 10 commandments?  Why did Paul write these things in such a powerful manner'?

2Corinthians 3:7-11 does not 'present' the Ten Commandments. Try as you may with all your power, you will never explain or be able to show "'from 2Cor3:7-11 that Paul is telling us we are not under the 10 commandments'" even if you reduced the Ten with the two Commandments, the Fourth and the Ninth, which you so overtly and proudly reject like they are satanic junk.
And where "'did Paul compare the Holy Spirit to the 10 commandments?'" Ludicrous!

[beam]

2Corinthians 3:7-11 does not 'present' the Ten Commandments.

Oh!  Then what was Paul referring to in verse 7?   What then were "written and engraven in stones"?  Come on Gerhard and tell us what you believe Paul was referring to when he wrote that verse.   You are so "brilliant" give us the real facts.

Try as you may with all your power, you will never explain or be able to show "'from 2Cor3:7-11 that Paul is telling us we are not under the 10 commandments'" even if you reduced the Ten with the two Commandments, the Fourth and the Ninth, which you so overtly and proudly reject like they are satanic junk.

I don't have to "explain" anything Gerhard.  Paul wrote it and it is there either to believe or deny.   11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

And where "'did Paul compare the Holy Spirit to the 10 commandments?'" Ludicrous!

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?

9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

7 The Law was carved in letters on stone tablets, and God's glory appeared when it was given. Even though the brightness on Moses' face was fading, it was so strong that the people of Israel could not keep their eyes fixed on him. If the Law, which brings death when it is in force, came with such glory, 8 how much greater is the glory that belongs to the activity of the Spirit! 9 The system which brings condemnation was glorious; how much more glorious is the activity which brings salvation! 10 We may say that because of the far brighter glory now the glory that was so bright in the past is gone. 11 For if there was glory in that which lasted for a while, how much more glory is there in that which lasts forever!

Gerhard, If you even read 2Cor3:7-11 I doubt you were able to comprehend what Paul wrote.  Or maybe you did comprehend  are willing to try to deceive others to save face.   We will have to allow the reader to decide

[beam]

Hello Amo,  You have not replied to my last post to you.  Are you not willing to set us straight?

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Beam:
I don't have to "explain" anything.  Paul wrote it and it is there either to believe or deny.   11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

Paul wrote "'it'" : "the ministration of death was glorious"

The Beam wrote "'it'" : "'from 2Cor3:7-11 that Paul is telling us we are not under the 10 commandments'"

WHO LIES? YOU, Beam, or Paul?!

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Oh!  Then what was Paul referring to in verse 7?   What then were "written and engraven in stones"?  Come on Gerhard and tell us what you believe Paul was referring to when he wrote that verse.   You are so "brilliant" give us the real facts.

In verse 7 Paul refers to and writes of "the MINISTRATION of death written and engraven in [two tables of] stones" the Ten Commandments obviously TROUGH MOSES. Paul wrote it "was glorious", not what you claim, "'was done away'" with.

But first, you LIE claiming that I ever said the Law as well as its ministration as well as any glory connected with it was not done away with, or more exactly, was not "to be done away with" by and through and in JESUS CHRIST "nailed to the cross ... and taken out of the way". Man, how long have I been telling you Jesus is or rather was GOD crucified Lamb of God our Passover! You are STILL the SDA you used to be. You haven't changed one bit.

[current occupant2]

Paul wrote "'it'" : "the ministration of death was glorious"

The Beam wrote "'it'" : "'from 2Cor3:7-11 that Paul is telling us we are not under the 10 commandments'"

WHO LIES? YOU, Beam, or Paul?!

Yes Gerhard.  "WAS" makes the statement PAST TENSE in the CONTEXT of Paul's instructions. 

Further, Paul says that the glory of that ministration of death was fading away to be LESS GLORIOUS than something else. 

WHAT IS THAT "SOMETHING ELSE"?

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

CO2:
Yes Gerhard.  "WAS" makes the statement PAST TENSE in the CONTEXT of Paul's instructions. 
Further, Paul says that the glory of that ministration of death was fading away to be LESS GLORIOUS than something else. 
WHAT IS THAT "SOMETHING ELSE"?

I don't think what you think; else you would eagerly have told us what you think "'THAT "SOMETHING ELSE"'" is. But I am not scared or ashamed to tell what that 'SOMETHING ELSE' is. It is CHRIST IN HIS GLORY, THE GLORY OF HIS FATHER which is JESUS IN HIS SUFFERING, CRUCIFIED, KILLED, BURIED, AND "RAISED FROM THE DEAD". It is Jesus Christ the PRINCE OF PEACE regaining Paradise Lost ON THE BATTLEFIELD AND 'KINGDOM OF MY FATHER'. "THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS" WHO "IN IT TRIUMPHED", WHOM "GOD EXALTED AT HIS OWN RIGHT HAND HIS HEAVENLY MAJESTY", "BEING RESTED UP AGAIN HIS NAME : THE MOST HOLY PLACE".

[Amo]

Hello Amo,  You have not replied to my last post to you.  Are you not willing to set us straight?

I've set this exact issue straight many times over on these very threads years before you ever arrived. It gets tiresome going through the same issues again and again with different people who think they have brought something new to the table. Your arguments are old news. I will get to them again as time allows, by addressing them anew, or simply finding where I addressed them previously and copying and pasting one of those replies. This after addressing other issues of a more prominent and present nature.

[current occupant2]

I've set this exact issue straight many times over on these very threads years before you ever arrived. It gets tiresome going through the same issues again and again with different people who think they have brought something new to the table. Your arguments are old news. I will get to them again as time allows, by addressing them anew, or simply finding where I addressed them previously and copying and pasting one of those replies. This after addressing other issues of a more prominent and present nature.

Nothing is more important than the issues "beam" has raised in his post yet you continue to avoid them while presenting lofty claims for previous words from you. 

Here they are again. 

Beam said:

It is the truth Amo.    You and Hobie are the only SDAs posting that post what SDAs believe and yet when we present solid New Testament and even Old Testament facts you revert to unseemly tactics.  I am an ex not because I do not love my SDAs brothers and sisters.  I am an ex because of what I have presented here on this forum and other forums like it.  Only a couple of SDAs have ever taken a critical look at all the New Testament scripture I have presented. 

Most of you revert to name calling or some other type of put down.  Yes, I take it with a grain of salt for myself, but it really does make me sad that another Christian would stoop to tactics like that instead of giving me a logical and truthful explanation of why you believe I am wrong.   

Case in hand.  I have presented Paul's writings from 2Cor3:7-11 several times on this board and never once has any SDA tried to explain away the fact that Paul is telling us we are not under the 10 commandments. 

The king James version goes so far to tell us: 11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

What does "done away" mean to you? 

Why did Paul compare the Holy Spirit to the 10 commandments?

Why did Paul write these things in such a powerful manner'?

Why did Jesus expound on the law in Matt 5? 

Why did He tell the Jews that the law would be enforce until all is fulfilled. 

Why do SDAs ignore the fact that it was all the law, 613 of them.

Not one jot nor one tittle of any of them would be allowed to be excused until all was to be fulfilled. 

SDAs tell us all has not been fulfilled and yet do not fulfill but just a full of them.   

The fact is that Paul and other New Testament writers have told us like in 2Cor 3 and Gal 3 that the old covenant law has been fulfilled and Christians are not under it.   

Now it comes down to making a choice, follow Ellen White and her insistence on 10 commandment observance or allowing the holy Spirit to guide you into a new relationship with God's plan.

[Amo]

Nothing is more important than the issues "beam" has raised in his post yet you continue to avoid them while presenting lofty claims for previous words from you. 

Here they are again. 

Beam said:

It is the truth Amo.    You and Hobie are the only SDAs posting that post what SDAs believe and yet when we present solid New Testament and even Old Testament facts you revert to unseemly tactics.  I am an ex not because I do not love my SDAs brothers and sisters.  I am an ex because of what I have presented here on this forum and other forums like it.  Only a couple of SDAs have ever taken a critical look at all the New Testament scripture I have presented. 

Most of you revert to name calling or some other type of put down.  Yes, I take it with a grain of salt for myself, but it really does make me sad that another Christian would stoop to tactics like that instead of giving me a logical and truthful explanation of why you believe I am wrong.   

Case in hand.  I have presented Paul's writings from 2Cor3:7-11 several times on this board and never once has any SDA tried to explain away the fact that Paul is telling us we are not under the 10 commandments. 

The king James version goes so far to tell us: 11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

What does "done away" mean to you? 

Why did Paul compare the Holy Spirit to the 10 commandments?

Why did Paul write these things in such a powerful manner'?

Why did Jesus expound on the law in Matt 5? 

Why did He tell the Jews that the law would be enforce until all is fulfilled. 

Why do SDAs ignore the fact that it was all the law, 613 of them.

Not one jot nor one tittle of any of them would be allowed to be excused until all was to be fulfilled. 

SDAs tell us all has not been fulfilled and yet do not fulfill but just a full of them.   

The fact is that Paul and other New Testament writers have told us like in 2Cor 3 and Gal 3 that the old covenant law has been fulfilled and Christians are not under it.   

Now it comes down to making a choice, follow Ellen White and her insistence on 10 commandment observance or allowing the holy Spirit to guide you into a new relationship with God's plan.

Some people never learn to stop making false accusations. I say again, I have already addressed these issues over and over, over the years. Unfortunately for you, I save many of my posts in a file, in order to refer to them if or when necessary, or sometimes just use them instead of writing new ones again regarding that which I have already addressed. In fact, there are so many posts in that file, that I rarely use it any more. It ends up being easier to just write something new, than search all through them to find what I've already written but have not saved in a manner conducive to easily find and or identify the topic addressed in them. Just for you though, when time affords, I will not write anything in response to beam's arguments. I'll find old posts to address these moot arguments that I have already addressed in the past. 

[beam]

Some people never learn to stop making false accusations. I say again, I have already addressed these issues over and over, over the years. Unfortunately for you, I save many of my posts in a file, in order to refer to them if or when necessary, or sometimes just use them instead of writing new ones again regarding that which I have already addressed. In fact, there are so many posts in that file, that I rarely use it any more. It ends up being easier to just write something new, than search all through them to find what I've already written but have not saved in a manner conducive to easily find and or identify the topic addressed in them. Just for you though, when time affords, I will not write anything in response to beam's arguments. I'll find old posts to address these moot arguments that I have already addressed in the past.

Might I just suggest that you look at the verses you already claim as being false accusations.  Since you know that they are then just hit the keys with that information.  It should not take but a few lines and you have already written more lines than it would take to explain what Paul really wrote there in 2Cor3:7-11 and The whole chapter of Gal 3 where Paul writes that we are not under the law with its 10 commandments.

May I also remind you that Matt 5: 18 says For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.  So, I ask you to explain why SDAs, who believe Jesus didn't fulfill ALL of the law, can and do disregard even the smallest tittle or jot of the law?    A few sentences should do the trick.   You should be able to do all of the right off the top of your head and settle it all once and for all.   Remember fulfill or accomplish means to bring to an end

[Amo]

Might I just suggest that you look at the verses you already claim as being false accusations.  Since you know that they are then just hit the keys with that information.  It should not take but a few lines and you have already written more lines than it would take to explain what Paul really wrote there in 2Cor3:7-11 and The whole chapter of Gal 3 where Paul writes that we are not under the law with its 10 commandments.

May I also remind you that Matt 5: 18 says For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.  So, I ask you to explain why SDAs, who believe Jesus didn't fulfill ALL of the law, can and do disregard even the smallest tittle or jot of the law?    A few sentences should do the trick.   You should be able to do all of the right off the top of your head and settle it all once and for all.   Remember fulfill or accomplish means to bring to an end

Your may of course suggest whatever you wish. Your suggestion that a web of tangled misinformation and misapplications can be undone with a few words off the top of my or anyone else's head, is grossly inaccurate. The battle between the father of lies, and Jesus Christ our Lord who is the "way, the truth, and the life," has been going on now for about six thousand years. It cost the life of the Son of God to save the deceived, and will continue until our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ returns and sets all things straight and proper. The false gospel you ascribe to, is just one of the endless manifestations of lying spirits and wonders supported and propagated by the father of lies himself.

You know as well as I do, that no few words I write here and now, are going to end your battle against what I believe and promote as scriptural truth. You will simply twist them to your own ends, or deny their significance if you actually address them at all. Nevertheless, if you want just a few words off the top of my head for now, before I more thoroughly address your twisted beliefs once again, sure.

The bible does not contradict itself, nor does one scripture negate the testimony of another unless of course it is specifically designated to do so. God's ten commandments are held up as the standard for God's people until the last book and chapter of the bible, which truth you have yet to address at all. Please do address why the scriptures do this, if in fact their real intention is to reveal that they are no longer a standard for God's people.

The bible itself clearly delineates the difference between God's ten commandments and the many laws more specific to the literal nation of Israel given to Israel by God through Moses. The purveyors of the false gospel do always compound the two, that they might do away with God's law along with those specific to Israel that were meant to end with that literal nation. Nevertheless, as already mentioned, though the scriptures clearly and specifically do address the fulfillment and end of those laws specific to the nation of Israel, they do also clearly and specifically uphold the standard and validity of God's ten commandments to the last book and chapter of the same. The false gospel ignores and or rejects these latter scriptures, and compounds the two, for the purpose as already stated, of being able to reject the authority of the ten.

The ministration of death engraved in stone was just that. The ten commandments condemn all of humanity to death. The false gospel claims that the commandments must be done away with unto salvation, the true gospel proclaims that the sinner must be done away with unto salvation. Thus Jesus Christ perfectly fulfilled the demands of the law in both His life and death. In His life He kept them perfectly, and in His death He took the sins of the world upon Himself, that all who choose by faith to be in Him might secure their salvation by the same. This, as the Apostle Paul clearly points out, was for the purpose of establishing the law within human flesh, not dong away with the law. The false gospel maintains that the law must change or go away, the true gospel maintains that sinners must change and go away. The purpose of the law remains the same, to drive the sinner to Jesus Christ for the salvation of their soul. This, as the law itself, will not and cannot change until Christ returns and fulfills all things relating to the salvation of humanity and the eradication of sin altogether. The sacrifice of Christ at the cross was complete and is finished. The salvation of souls by choosing to enter into that sacrifice with their Lord and Savior unto salvation cannot be complete until the harvests of the world in relation to the same reach maturity and are harvested by Jesus Christ Himself at His return. I guess I'll stop here, since I've already spoken more than a few words.

[Amo]

The following is taken from an old post addressing some of the issues at hand brought forth by beam. Since I have been accused of never addressing such things before, I post it as evidence to the contrary, and of course to address some of beams as I see it moot points.

Number Four defines the time frame of the Sabbath, but I think I covered that in my OP.  

I appreciate the responses, but I wonder how many SDA REALLY practice the Sabbath.  I get the impression that you folk want some wiggle room.  Frankly you are showing the fallacy of the burden you put on yourselves and onto others.  You can't follow the demands of the Sabbath.

The New Covenant is clear.  You can't mix Law and Grace.  You folk ought to quit trying because you are denouncing Christ's finished work on the cross.  Finished means finished.  That means the end of the Law.  If you're going to follow the Law you should pull out the entire Mitzvoh, the 613, and follow all of them.   The Law was never meant to be a smorgasboard from which one could pick what he wanted to observe and discard what he didn't want to deal with.

So says notreligious.  The scriptures though, give a different testimony.  The NT while continuing to admonish all to obey the ten commandments of God to the very end, certainly also addresses changes regarding many of the 613 laws referred to by notreligious.  Which testimony of course, must be ignored or uninvestigated by notreligious in order that he or she may bring false accusations against those who still believe we should keep the commandments of God.

The following scriptures are quite clear concerning the fact that many of the 613 laws notreligious is referring to, have indeed been done away with, or are no longer pertinent to ones salvation.

37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. Matt 23:37-38 (KJV)

34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! 35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: Luke 13:34-35 (KJV)

21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. 22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:21-24 (KJV)

From the above words of our Lord and Savior, it can be easily deduced, that all the laws of Israel pertaining to the sanctuary and it's services would no longer be, or need to be practiced when in fact that sanctuary no longer existed.  Which very thing Christ predicted in the above verses.  First the sanctuary became desolate, that is void of God's presence and purpose, once Christ had been sacrificed for sin, and was rejected by most of Israel.  Second in fact it was destroyed altogether by Roman armies. 

Heb 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. 13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. 15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, 16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. 17 For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. 18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. 19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. 20 And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest: 21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:) 22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: 24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. 25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. 26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. 28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.

Obviously, the priesthood and the high priest and all the laws and regulations pertaining to the same, were no longer applicable.

Her 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Nor were there to by anymore rules or regs concerning animal sacrifices.

Acts 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. 2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. 3 And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. 4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them. 5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.................................................................................................
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.....................
22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: 23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: 24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: 25 It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Now we see that circumcision was also done away with as a necessity for God's people.  In fact, all the laws of Moses were brought into question.  What are the laws of Moses?  Are they not the laws which God allowed to be written by the hand of Moses, as apposed to the hand of God?  Those in fact which were subject to change, and even meant to change once our Lord and Savior fulfilled those things which the sanctuary and it's services pointed to, and the blessings upon the nation of Israel were thus conferred upon all nations and peoples of humanity.  Yet still, the gentiles were commanded to abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.  All things associated with the many false forms of worship prevalent in their day.

God calls the ten commandments His many times over (Deut 11:13, Deut 5:29, Deut 5:10, Num 15:40, Lev 26:3, Exod 20:6, Exod 16:28,)

Gal 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. 9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? 10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. 11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.

The ten commandments do not deal with days, and months, and times, and years.  Though they do address the Sabbath day, it would be a stretch at best to associate the above with one of the ten commandments.  The above is an obvious reference to the days, months, times, and years associated with the ceremonial laws.  Of course those who wish to invalidate the pertinence of the ten commandments today, claim they are a part of the ceremonial laws as well.  Or at least they claim, the Sabbath commandment is.

Gal 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. 6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. 7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? 8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. 9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. 10 I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. 11 And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased. 12 I would they were even cut off which trouble you.

Again circumcision is no longer required.  Nor is all of the law to be kept again, but for those who also demand circumcision.  Why then do so many say that one who believes they should keep the ten commandments according to the many NT scriptures which admonish us to do so, must also keep all the rest of the law.  This is not scriptural.  The NT clearly points out that the ten commandments are still to be kept, but the laws of Moses, that is those written by the hand of Moses instead of the hand of God, are no longer all required.

Eph 2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: )

Though many like to make the above scriptures in reference to the ten commandments, that they may support their rejection of the fourth, the context of the same proves otherwise.  The contrast brought forth in verse eleven is again between those of Circumcision, and those of Uncircumcision.  Thus again, these scriptures are not addressing the ten commandments, which say nothing about circumcision. 

Verse fifteen itself, being the verse many claim is referring to the ten commandments, specifically states, "the law of commandments contained in ordinances".  A look at the Strong's Concordance definition of the word ordinance will shed more light on the subject.

Greek Strong's Number: 1378
Greek Word: d??µa
Transliteration: dogma
Phonetic Pronunciation:dog'-mah
Root: from the base of <G1380>
Cross Reference: TDNT - 2:230,178
Part of Speech: n n
Vine's Words: Decree, Ordinance

Usage Notes:

English Words used in KJV:
decree 3 
ordinance 2 
[Total Count: 5]

from the base of <G1380> (dokeo); a law (civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical) :- decree, ordinance.

The ten commandments are never referred to as ordinances in the bible.  Even if they had been, the context introduced in verse eleven between those circumcised, and those uncircumcised reveals the ordinances in question to be concerning ceremonial law, and not the ten commandments.  Without question, all pertaining to the sanctuary and it's services drastically changed when our Lord and savior became the literal sacrifice to which all the symbolic sacrifices, services, and ordinances of the same only pointed to.  To make the above apply to the moral law, the ten commandments, not only takes the verses in question out of context, but makes the scriptures themselves contradictory.

Even if the above verses were in relation to the moral law, they would not mean that the moral law had been done away with, but rather that the enmity caused by the same had been done away with in Christ, which as a matter of fact it was.  Paul clearly addresses this issue in other scriptures.  Nevertheless, the context of the above is set between those of the circumcision, and those not of the circumcision. 

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. 18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. 20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, 21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? 

The above is of course a favorite of those who wish to deny the validity of the fourth commandment, since Sabbath days are mentioned among those things which were simply shadows of things to come.  Of course, once again, context reveals the error of this claim.

The ten commandments are not mentioned at all in the above scriptures.  Nor is Paul admonishing us to ignore the significance of any one of them here, when he clearly taught they should be kept elsewhere (Rom 2:13-15, 3:31, 7:14, 8:3-4, 1 Cor 7:19).  There were many Sabbaths connected to the ceremonial laws.  Since the Sabbath days mentioned above are right in the middle of other ordinances concerning the ceremonial, and not the moral law, the Sabbaths being referred to are obviously those of ceremonial significance.  To suggest otherwise is once again to pull them out of context, and contradict other plain testimonies of scriptures regarding the keeping of the commandments of God.

Nevertheless, this is exactly what those who wish to deny the validity of the fourth commandment do, and must do in order to continue to believe their lie.  They care not, that what they believe makes the bible contradict itself, but only that they are able to continue believing as they wish, instead of as the bible teaches.  Verse twenty one and twenty two though, finalize the issue.  Pointing out that the ordinances being referred to include things such as touch not, taste not, handle not, "after the commandments and doctrines of men".  Which statement definitely excludes the ten commandments from that which is being discussed.  Unless of course those who deny the validity of the fourth commandment will go so far as to say that the ten commandments are of man, and not God. 

We are admonished to keep the ten commandments of God from one end of scripture to the other.  Anyone who teaches or preaches otherwise will be condemned as a liar in the end.

Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. 14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. 15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

[beam]

Thanks for nothing Amo.  Nothing about 2Cor3:7-11, Gal 3, Matt 5 and your commandment reference in Revelations doesn't have a 10 in it nor does 10 appear in any New Testament reference to commandments.  You and your church only assume there is a 10 there.

[Amo]

Thanks for nothing Amo.  Nothing about 2Cor3:7-11, Gal 3, Matt 5 and your commandment reference in Revelations doesn't have a 10 in it nor does 10 appear in any New Testament reference to commandments.  You and your church only assume there is a 10 there.

I'm not done addressing your false gospel yet. It is as I have suggested though, no number of words be it small or great is going to settle this matter between us. Jesus Christ will settle this matter and all others when He returns. When His judgement of living and dead is over, He will return to execute His judgement regarding the same. So be it.

[beam]

I'm not done addressing your false gospel yet. It is as I have suggested though, no number of words be it small or great is going to settle this matter between us. Jesus Christ will settle this matter and all others when He returns. When His judgement of living and dead is over, He will return to execute His judgement regarding the same. So be it.

You call it a false gospel and have not addressed it as of yet?  You seem to be pretty sure of yourself.  How did you come to the conclusion what I have presented is false if you have not addressed it yet?   That seems to be the trend nowadays,  guilty until proven innocent.

[Amo]

You call it a false gospel and have not addressed it as of yet?  You seem to be pretty sure of yourself.  How did you come to the conclusion what I have presented is false if you have not addressed it yet?   That seems to be the trend nowadays,  guilty until proven innocent.

I have and will continue to address it, you simply reject that which I present and claim I have not addressed it. You may believe as you wish, but you will not control what or how I address your beliefs and or false accusations. Nor are you the only person I am addressing, there are several others on this and other threads. You will just have to be patient beam, I only have so much time. You can demand I address you before everyone and everything else I am also working on, but the ultimate decision is of course mine. I'll take a look at one of the points you are so excited about in the next post.

[Amo]

Let's take a closer look at the first verses you submitted as supposed evidence that the commandments of God have passed away or are done away with.

2 Cor 3:7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious. 12 Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech— 13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15 But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. 16 Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.(NKJV)

It is quite obvious from the above emphasized verses, that it is not the commandments of God that are being referred to as passing away. Even if it was though, it would be the condemnation or ministry of death that was passing away in and through Jesus Christ for those saved, not the commandments themselves. Paul's testimony elsewhere clarifies this truth, as we will examine shortly.

Sometimes it is necessary to step outside of the tunnel vision incorporated when attempting to use scripture to prove this or that point, rather than simply comprehending what is actually being said. If in fact the reference to something passing away was the ten commandments themselves, then as pointed out in verse 13 they would have passed away along with the glory on Moses face immediately after being given to Israel by God. We know this not to be the case, therefore do we also know that that which was passing away was not the ten commandments of God. Rather it was the glory of God which still shone upon Moses face that was passing away. Which glory was far greater and unfading in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, not by way of fading glory from ones countenance, but by the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit of God.

If in fact Paul was telling us in 2 Corinthians that the commandments of God have passed away, then why did he state the following in his first letter to the Corinthians?

1 Cor 7:19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.(NKJV)

There is no contradiction in Paul's testimony, save the contradictions created by those wishing to use his words to prove their predetermined points, over and above the harmony of Paul's complete testimony. The purpose of the ten commandments of God remains the same today as it ever has been, to convict the sinner of their guilt before God, and lead them to the cross of Jesus Christ for salvation. It is God's standard which cannot be changed, and was and is fulfilled only in Christ Jesus our Lord. Who Himself provided the spiritual life, death, and resurrection necessary to our salvation through His literal life death and resurrection as our perfect example and leader unto the same.
(Rom 6-8)

Rom 7:12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. 13 Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

According to Paul, during his day after the establishment of the new covenant in Christ Jesus our Lord, the commandments were still holy, just, good, and spiritual. They have not passed way, but are still an important element of the conviction of sin, and the need of the sinner to change. In this new covenant era it is still the sinner that needs to change, not God's law. They have not passed away, but rather have been fulfilled and established in Christ Jesus. These truths are part of the true gospel of Jesus Christ, and of course exist in contradiction to the false gospel's declarations to the opposite effect.

Rom 8:1There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who[a] do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7 Because the [c]carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. 8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. 10 And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies [d]through His Spirit who dwells in you 12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 

It is the carnal mind and nature that we are to be saved from, because is not subject to the law of God and cannot be. These are not the words of one who believes the commandments of God are no longer as the false gospel declares. As the true gospel and the Apostle Paul himself testify, Jesus Christ came to deliver us from the condemnation of God's law, not its standard which He exalted.

[beam]

7 Now 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, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

First of all Amo the 10 commandments were given to the Israelites, verse 7.   Those commandments were never given to gentiles.  Secondly you conveniently omitted the fact that in verse 9 the 10 commandments are said to be superseded by the Spirit which does not bring death.  The Spirit brings righteousness.  Verse 10 explains that the 10 commandments have no glory because the Spirit surpasses the 10's glory.  Verse 11 tells us that the 10 that came with glory wer transitory.  Transitory means temporary.  The Spirit will be with us through eternity.

There were 9 commands that dealt with morality and one that dealt with ceremonial or ritual observance of a day.  Nine commands about morality were just a drop in the bucket.   Morality commands would reach into the hundreds.  The greates command to love our fellow man isn't even part of the nine moral laws of the ten.

You quote 1Cor7:19 and I assume you are trying to tell us that commandments means the 10 commandments.  Well the verse does not say that does it.  No verse in all of the New Testament ever say ten commandments.    If we didn't already know that Jesus fulfilled all the old covenant the verses you quote would have to mean every command that God has ever given to Israel and to the gentiles.

I have no problem with Paul telling us that the law was holy, just, and good, but Paul never sys we are under it.  We can glean much from the law because it contains many commands about morality which are certainly included in the law of love.  Even you know we are not under the ritual laws found in that same covenant.  Gentiles never have been, so show us where He imposes them upon us now.

You didn't address Gal 3:19.  I would like to add another one of Paul's texts on the same subject  Eph 2:14-15 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations.

When Paul writes "the law" to what do you think he is referring?     What does "setting aside" mean to you?  What does Matt 5:18 mean?   18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.  To me it means that no one can add or take even the smallest law from the old covenant and void it until Jesus fulfills that law.   I believe He did just that at Calvary and so did Paul.

[Amo]

7 Now 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, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

First of all Amo the 10 commandments were given to the Israelites, verse 7.   Those commandments were never given to gentiles.  Secondly you conveniently omitted the fact that in verse 9 the 10 commandments are said to be superseded by the Spirit which does not bring death.  The Spirit brings righteousness.  Verse 10 explains that the 10 commandments have no glory because the Spirit surpasses the 10's glory.  Verse 11 tells us that the 10 that came with glory wer transitory.  Transitory means temporary.  The Spirit will be with us through eternity.

There were 9 commands that dealt with morality and one that dealt with ceremonial or ritual observance of a day.  Nine commands about morality were just a drop in the bucket.   Morality commands would reach into the hundreds.  The greates command to love our fellow man isn't even part of the nine moral laws of the ten.

You quote 1Cor7:19 and I assume you are trying to tell us that commandments means the 10 commandments.  Well the verse does not say that does it.  No verse in all of the New Testament ever say ten commandments.    If we didn't already know that Jesus fulfilled all the old covenant the verses you quote would have to mean every command that God has ever given to Israel and to the gentiles.

I have no problem with Paul telling us that the law was holy, just, and good, but Paul never sys we are under it.  We can glean much from the law because it contains many commands about morality which are certainly included in the law of love.  Even you know we are not under the ritual laws found in that same covenant.  Gentiles never have been, so show us where He imposes them upon us now.

You didn't address Gal 3:19.  I would like to add another one of Paul's texts on the same subject  Eph 2:14-15 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations.

When Paul writes "the law" to what do you think he is referring?     What does "setting aside" mean to you?  What does Matt 5:18 mean?   18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.  To me it means that no one can add or take even the smallest law from the old covenant and void it until Jesus fulfills that law.   I believe He did just that at Calvary and so did Paul.

Same old twisted junk. I'll untwist your tangled web and expose the deception of the same as time allows. You can of course believe whatever you wish, this will never of course make what you believe true. This is part of what the judgment of those who profess to be Christ's followers is all about beam. Many will be found to have used God's word to support lies. God will judge between you and I and all who have claimed to know truth, and preached and debated the same. It will be found at that time, that God's word has never been a thing for any to trifle with. May we all tread upon this holy ground, very carefully and with due respect of the self existing one who has established and preserved this testimony.

[Amo]

7 Now 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, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

First of all Amo the 10 commandments were given to the Israelites, verse 7.   Those commandments were never given to gentiles.  Secondly you conveniently omitted the fact that in verse 9 the 10 commandments are said to be superseded by the Spirit which does not bring death.  The Spirit brings righteousness.  Verse 10 explains that the 10 commandments have no glory because the Spirit surpasses the 10's glory.  Verse 11 tells us that the 10 that came with glory wer transitory.  Transitory means temporary.  The Spirit will be with us through eternity.

Let's get the facts straight, both ministries being referred to had glory. The glory of the former was superseded by the glory of the latter which was meant to last by the bringing in of righteousness. If you will read the account of the giving of the ten commandments by God to Israel you will understand that there is no denying the glory of God which attended the same. This not to mention the fading glory on Moses' face as well.

Your points are moot though. The ten commandments were not given as a means of obtaining righteousness, and have never been capable of producing such apart from inspiring God's own to keep them the only way possible, by the power of the indwelling Spirit of God. The commandments condemn the sinner, and point them to salvation in Christ alone.  This is why the commandments were given to Israel first, with great power and glory, and afterwards they were given the instructions concerning the temple and sacrifices which all typified salvation in Christ alone the LAMB OF GOD.  The commandments were never meant to be the power to produce righteousness or salvation. They are and have always been the standard of righteousness which condemns the sinner to either death for breaking them, or death by faith in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ unto salvation. Of course the ministry and power of the Spirit of God are meant to supersede the condemnation of the law. It is the exact purpose of the law to produce the longing of such through the inescapable condemnation they bring upon all. Which condemnation can be avoided only by salvation in Christ alone. It is the exact purpose of the power of the law to condemn, to be superseded by the power of Christ to save from that condemnation. This that the glory of the former might pass away in light of the glory of the latter unto salvation, as did the glory on Moses face which was by association in the presence of God, and not established by the power of the Spirit of God within.

Doing away with the ten commandments as the false gospel teaches, destroys this entire process. No law, no condemnation, no need of a Savior. False gospel. Again and again, and again beam, accepting the gospel does not do away with God's commandments it does away with the condemnation of such for the saved in Christ Jesus. The testimony of scripture and the Apostle Paul on this are crystal clear maintaining the standard of the ten commandments from cover to cover. Your false gospel simply refuses this truth and all scripture that declares it.

There were 9 commands that dealt with morality and one that dealt with ceremonial or ritual observance of a day.  Nine commands about morality were just a drop in the bucket.   Morality commands would reach into the hundreds.  The greates command to love our fellow man isn't even part of the nine moral laws of the ten.

Misrepresentation and lies. Love is the fulfillment of the law, which embodies the principles of the law in action. The Sabbath was established at creation before there was ever a need of ceremonial or ritual observance of anything pertaining to salvation of fallen beings. The Sabbath commandment refers back to that exact time and place as the reason for its observance. God Himself separated His sabbath from the ceremonial sabbaths by declaring His personally by mouth and in written form, and then giving ceremonial sabbaths to be written by Moses and attached to the same. You simply refuse these distinctions according to your rejection of this testimony of scripture. It is necessary to the dictates of the false gospel which substitute the works of man made tradition, for resting in God's ability alone to sanctify the sinner. The two days of rest each representing one of the above mentioned. Which is why observing God's command is by faith in the scriptures alone, but observing mans command in place of God's includes forcing their day upon all through human legislation.

You quote 1Cor7:19 and I assume you are trying to tell us that commandments means the 10 commandments.  Well the verse does not say that does it.  No verse in all of the New Testament ever say ten commandments.    If we didn't already know that Jesus fulfilled all the old covenant the verses you quote would have to mean every command that God has ever given to Israel and to the gentiles.

Yes I do. I do this because the scriptures themselves make this distinction which you deny when convenient to your false gospel. The New Testament addresses many of the laws apart from the ten commandments which you are referring to and plainly states that they are no more. At the same time in holds up the standard of the commandments of God to the very end of the book. You simply refuse these distinctions according to a need in maintaining the false gospel. Even 1 Cor 7:19 under examination makes this distinction which you refuse even though it is right in front of your face.

Was it not God who commanded circumcision? What sense does Pauls statement in the verse under examination make, if there is no difference between any laws or commandments identified in scripture? If circumcision no longer matters, but the commandments of God do, and circumcision is one of the commands of God being referred to, then what kind of confusion is Paul preaching. He is not preaching any confusion, you are through your support of a false gospel, you are denying the facts right in front of your face. You have been blinded to the truth in front of your face by your determination to accept what is false as the truth.

The civil and ceremonial laws of old covenant literal Israel are no more according to New Testament scripture itself. Why do you insist they are part of the commandments of God all are admonished to keep in the New Testament? Is it not because this is necessary to your false goepel which rejects the observance of one commandment only?

I have no problem with Paul telling us that the law was holy, just, and good, but Paul never sys we are under it.  We can glean much from the law because it contains many commands about morality which are certainly included in the law of love.  Even you know we are not under the ritual laws found in that same covenant.  Gentiles never have been, so show us where He imposes them upon us now.

I have never contended anywhere that we are under the ceremonial laws of literal old covenant Israel. Neither are the saved under the condemnation of the ten commandments of God. This is the false claim of those who preach the false gospel and will make no separation between the laws given to the literal nation of Israel, and the ten commandments of God. This though scripture itself does make this separation and distinction.

Gentiles who choose to remain Gentiles are all under the condemnation of God's law. Only the saved in Christ who have become fellow citizens with the saints, children of Abraham by faith, and of the new covenant Israel of God are freed from the condemnation of God's law.

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

All the world is guilty before God having broken His law. Those in Christ alone are no longer under the law. This is so, because the standard of the law still remains and will do so until this heaven ad earth pass away at Christ's second coming. We will either accept Christ's salvation from the just demands of the law, or we will die according to those demands. This would not be so of course, if God's law was no more.

You didn't address Gal 3:19.  I would like to add another one of Paul's texts on the same subject  Eph 2:14-15 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations.

When Paul writes "the law" to what do you think he is referring?     What does "setting aside" mean to you?  What does Matt 5:18 mean?   18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.  To me it means that no one can add or take even the smallest law from the old covenant and void it until Jesus fulfills that law.   I believe He did just that at Calvary and so did Paul.

I will address your other verses as time allows. You may of course believe whatever you wish, but heaven and earth have not passed away. The bible tells us when they will, but it is not at Christ's first coming.

After Jesus said what He did in the verse you quoted He then went on in the same chapter to address two of the ten commandments of God, expounding upon their true and deeper meanings. This of course is highly suggestive that it was in fact the ten commandments he was referring to as well in the verses immediately preceding which you quoted. I understand of course your need to reject the same conclusion in order to support a false gospel which cannot allow for the same. 

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Amo:
the new covenant Israel of God are freed from the condemnation of God's law.

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

Quite the opposite!
"All" includes the New Covenant Israel of God; and Romans 3:19 states
"we know that what things soever the Law saith, it saith ... that every mouth (all) may be stopped, and all the world (every mouth) may become guilty before God."
Which means NONE "'are freed from the condemnation of God's law'" and "that the Law has dominion over (all and every) man as long as he lives". Romans 7:1.

Amo, you are inconsistent!

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Beam:
Why did Paul compare the Holy Spirit to the 10 commandments?  Why did Paul write these things in such a powerful manner'?

Paul did not "'compare the Holy Spirit to the 10 commandments'" as though it or any Law(s) of God is are against the Spirit of God. You do, against Paul who says, "the Law is spiritual".

Why do you write these things in such a deceitful manner? To get rid of the Fourth the Sabbath Commandment. Paul never did anything comparable!

[beam]

Hi Amo, first of all thanks for taking the time to answer my posts.  You certainly are a special person.  Most just give me personal attack or off the wall comments.   The Bible and our beliefs are serious, not only to our present life, but to our eternal life.

Let's get the facts straight, both ministries being referred to had glory.

Quite true.  Of the ministry of the Holy Spirit Paul writes:   9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

The glory of the former was superseded by the glory of the latter which was meant to last by the bringing in of righteousness. If you will read the account of the giving of the ten commandments by God to Israel you will understand that there is no denying the glory of God which attended the same. This not to mention the fading glory on Moses' face as well.

I agree.

Your points are moot though. The ten commandments were not given as a means of obtaining righteousness,

Did I mention righteousness?  My point is that the covenant was never meant to be salvational.  Ex 19:5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you[a] will be for me  a kingdom of priests and a holy nation." These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.'
Actually, if Israel had observed and obeyed the covenant they surely would have been a righteous people.   The covenant was the way God would have had them live.  It was the covenant's rules that should have been their guide.

This is why the commandments were given to Israel first, with great power and glory, and afterwards they were given the instructions concerning the temple and sacrifices which all typified salvation in Christ alone the LAMB OF GOD.  The commandments were never meant to be the power to produce righteousness or salvation.

Thanks for emphasizing my point.  The Sinai covenant was not about salvation.

They are and have always been the standard of righteousness which condemns the sinner to either death for breaking them, or death by faith in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ unto salvation.

Here is where we start to differ.  You tell me the 10 commandments ARE the standard of righteousness and also were the standard.  How could they have been the standard?  They didn't even contain the greatest command to love God and to love our fellow man.  There are hundreds of thou shalt nots and only eight in the 10 commandments.  Their being the standard of righteousness in very much a misnomer.  I do not know where the cliche came from, but it is very misleading and totally wrong.   Then there is the writings of Paul in which you agree that the 10 have lost their glory to the surpassing glory of the Holy Spirit which was a gift of Jesus to every living soul and manifested at Pentecost.

Of course the ministry and power of the Spirit of God are meant to supersede the condemnation of the law. It is the exact purpose of the law to produce the longing of such through the inescapable condemnation they bring upon all. Which condemnation can be avoided only by salvation in Christ alone. It is the exact purpose of the power of the law to condemn, to be superseded by the power of Christ to save from that condemnation. This that the glory of the former might pass away in light of the glory of the latter unto salvation, as did the glory on Moses face which was by association in the presence of God, and not established by the power of the Spirit of God within.

I absolutely disagree with your statement.  Your reference to the law means the 10 commandments.  Paul wrote that the 10 commandments were temporary.  Christians do not come under the condemnation of the 10 commandments and then saved by Christ's shed blood for those sins.  Jesus forgives sinners who believe in Him as the Savior.  Christians live to a much higher command than the 10 commandments.   Our goal is to love others as Jesus loves us.  The moral aspects of the nine commands are just a start for Christians.  Israel's fourth command was a ritual command just as all of the special days by which God required them to live.   Our new covenant has but one ritual command and that is communion.

Doing away with the ten commandments as the false gospel teaches, destroys this entire process. No law, no condemnation, no need of a Savior. False gospel. Again and again, and again beam, accepting the gospel does not do away with God's commandments it does away with the condemnation of such for the saved in Christ Jesus. The testimony of scripture and the Apostle Paul on this are crystal clear maintaining the standard of the ten commandments from cover to cover. Your false gospel simply refuses this truth and all scripture that declares it.

Is that what Paul wrote in 2Cor 3:7-11?   What does transitory mean, in the King James what does done away mean?   What does "not have any glory now" mean?

Doing away with law is chaos.    Jesus didn't do away with law and I have never advocated I believe that.  You are constantly misrepresenting me with lies.   Jesus took away a system that only condemned and gave us a new covenant.  You say new covenant, but you don't believe.  You want to live, in part, under the defunct old covenant denying the fact that the new covenant is not about keeping days, paying tithe or eating only certain things.

Misrepresentation and lies. Love is the fulfillment of the law,

What law Amo?  The law given to Adam, Noah, Abraham, Israel?   Israel had 613 laws they were required to observe.  If you  are referring to the 10 commandments then you need to know there was nothing about love in any of them.  They were all about duty to their God and to their fellow Jew.   One could keep laws and not love one iota.   Laws can be kept out of fear or duty.   Your description of love is just another cliche that is and has always been wrong.

which embodies the principles of the law in action. The Sabbath was established at creation before there was ever a need of ceremonial or ritual observance of anything pertaining to salvation of fallen beings.

Thinking that is true and actually proving such a thing is two different things.   God rested and made that day holy.  He never mentioned succeeding days.

The Sabbath commandment refers back to that exact time and place as the reason for its observance.

Remember what I just gave you.  There is no evidence that remember had anything to do with the past.

God Himself separated His sabbath from the ceremonial sabbaths by declaring His personally by mouth and in written form, and then giving ceremonial sabbaths to be written by Moses and attached to the same.

Holy is Holy no matter when the rule was given or how it was written.  The Bible does not distinguish between the two.

You simply refuse these distinctions according to your rejection of this testimony of scripture.

I never indicated one way or the other that I can remember.   It certainly does not make my case any plainer either way.

It is necessary to the dictates of the false gospel which substitute the works of man made tradition, for resting in God's ability alone to sanctify the sinner. The two days of rest each representing one of the above mentioned. Which is why observing God's command is by faith in the scriptures alone, but observing mans command in place of God's includes forcing their day upon all through human legislation.

Bologna Amo.  Where there is no law there is no sin.  The law of Sabbath observance is a defunct law and was given only to the nation of Israel.

Yes I do. I do this because the scriptures themselves make this distinction which you deny when convenient to your false gospel. The New Testament addresses many of the laws apart from the ten commandments which you are referring to and plainly states that they are no more. At the same time in holds up the standard of the commandments of God to the very end of the book. You simply refuse these distinctions according to a need in maintaining the false gospel. Even 1 Cor 7:19 under examination makes this distinction which you refuse even though it is right in front of your face.

If you proclaim that there is a 10 in front of commandments anyplace in any New Testament scripture it is because you personally have added to scripture.  You have absolutely no authority to add a 10 anyplace.  Commandments mean the new commandments Jesus gave new covenant Christians .  It couldn't mean the 10 commandments because Paul wrote that they were transient or done away

Was it not God who commanded circumcision? What sense does Pauls statement in the verse under examination make, if there is no difference between any laws or commandments identified in scripture? If circumcision no longer matters, but the commandments of God do, and circumcision is one of the commands of God being referred to, then what kind of confusion is Paul preaching.

I suggest you take that up with Paul.

He is not preaching any confusion, you are through your support of a false gospel, you are denying the facts right in front of your face. You have been blinded to the truth in front of your face by your determination to accept what is false as the truth.

I only quote what scripture says.  It says the 10 commandments are no longer anyone's guide.  Our guide is the Holy Spirit.  He is the Guide that will last.

The civil and ceremonial laws of old covenant literal Israel are no more according to New Testament scripture itself. Why do you insist they are part of the commandments of God all are admonished to keep in the New Testament? Is it not because this is necessary to your false goepel which rejects the observance of one commandment only?

Jesus said it, I quoted Jesus own words.  Not one jot nor one tittle can be removed from the 613 laws of the old covenant until all is fulfilled.  You do not believe all has been fulfilled yet you have removed thousands of jots and tittles picking and choosing the ones your prophet chose.

I have never contended anywhere that we are under the ceremonial laws of literal old covenant Israel.

Oh yes you have.  Your church and you stand on the premise that we have to keep the ceremonial law of Sabbath keeping.   If the law has yet to be fulfilled then the jot and tittle part remains and you are under the whole law.  If Jesus fulfilled the law then we are not under any part of it.  Fulfil means to bring to an end Amo.

Neither are the saved under the condemnation of the ten commandments of God.

No one is under the condemnation of the 10 because there are no 10 to be under.  They (the ministry of death) ended at the Cross as per scripture.

This is the false claim of those who preach the false gospel and will make no separation between the laws given to the literal nation of Israel, and the ten commandments of God. This though scripture itself does make this separation and distinction.

Pure blather

Gentiles who choose to remain Gentiles are all under the condemnation of God's law.

God's law certainly is not the 10.  They were transitory or done away as per the King James version.

Only the saved in Christ who have become fellow citizens with the saints, children of Abraham by faith, and of the new covenant Israel of God are freed from the condemnation of God's law.

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

All the world is guilty before God having broken His law. Those in Christ alone are no longer under the law. This is so, because the standard of the law still remains and will do so until this heaven ad earth pass away at Christ's second coming. We will either accept Christ's salvation from the just demands of the law, or we will die according to those demands. This would not be so of course, if God's law was no more.

I will address your other verses as time allows. You may of course believe whatever you wish, but heaven and earth have not passed away. The bible tells us when they will, but it is not at Christ's first coming.

After Jesus said what He did in the verse you quoted He then went on in the same chapter to address two of the ten commandments of God, expounding upon their true and deeper meanings. This of course is highly suggestive that it was in fact the ten commandments he was referring to as well in the verses immediately preceding which you quoted. I understand of course your need to reject the same conclusion in order to support a false gospel which cannot allow for the same.

Bed time Amo.  The law could not be the 613 laws of the old covenant.  Jesus fulfilled those laws.  Fulfil means to bring to an end.  Nice try though.   I appreciate the debate.

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

CO2 #149
The fact is that Paul and other New Testament writers have told us like in 2Cor 3 and Gal 3 that the old covenant law has been fulfilled and Christians are not under it.   

Duplication after duplication of the same absolute nonsense lies! There's NO fact whatsoever in what YOU, LIE, that Paul "'told us in 2Cor 3 and Gal 3 that the old covenant law has been fulfilled and Christians are not under it'". The whole Bible contains no "'the old covenant law'". Neither does the whole New Testament have "'the old covenant law'" which "'has been fulfilled'".
Only fact in all the Word of God--contrary your declaration--is that Christians are under the old covenant law which tells us MAN stays faithful to his own nature of Self for as long as he lives.

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Whole threads of endless paragraphs of verbal rubbish JUST BECAUSE people like Beam (like all of us and every man) stand condemned under the single specific Fourth of the Ten Commandments and WILL NOT submit. Once a man submitted to the Law and admits the Law of GOD is right and he is wrong, there is hope for his predicament and a cure for his sickness. Otherwise he shall have to suffer under the condemnation of the Law of God for as long as he lives PLUS FOREVER AFTER. Because then he has not received the grace of Christ. Or do you think it's just the other way round? Even if you're right, that's how it is mate; no one of us is crossing the lake of fire in another boat.

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Fulfil means to bring to an end.

Yes, only when Christ fulfilled. And when Christ fulfilled the Law, it meant He did not leave it nullified, but brought it up and elevated it to its Goal and Purpose, indeed "Christ the All in all fulfilling Fullness of God". That's why and that's how "when God raised Christ from the dead BY THE EXCEEDING GREATNESS OF HIS POWER, He RESTED Him at his own Right Hand His Heavenly Majesty ... and exalted Him", "I-AM-COME to magnify thy Law, o God", "LORD AND CHRIST".
And only the Sabbath implying its Commandment out of the Ten receives MENTION "when IN SABBATH'S FULLNESS being in the mid-afternoon daylight before the First Day of the week there was a great earthquake and the angel of the Lord from heaven descending with bright as lightning appearance CAST THE STONE FROM THE TOMB AWAY!" From now on the Sabbath shall be holy unto the LORD no longer because of cast away word-of-stone, but because of RESURRECTED WORD OF DEED OF GOD. Then obediently the angel "went and sat on it" ... even the angel, just imagine the heavenly creature, "sat"!

With this, I pray I may believe That Day the Sabbath OF THE LORD GOD the Seventh Day of the week BECAUSE OF CHRIST. Come on, who condemns me "of Sabbaths' Feast of Christ the Substance eating and drinking"? WHO?!

[Shubee]

beam:
Fulfil means to bring to an end.

So you believe that John the Baptist was a willing co-conspirator with Jesus to bring all righteousness to an end?

Matthew 3:15
But Jesus answered and said to him, "Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." Then he allowed Him.

[beam]

Boy, mention that Jesus fulfilled the law is like stepping on a ground bee's nest.  Reading the truth of Jesus bringing the law to an end brings up the hackles.  You just cannot stand to hear the truth.   Gentiles never have been under the law.
Christians are not under the law.

[Shubee]

beam:
Boy, mention that Jesus fulfilled the law is like stepping on a ground bee's nest.

To the best of my knowledge, all Adventists believe that Jesus fulfilled the law.

[Shubee]

Romans 2:5-8
Because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.
He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury.

[current occupant2]

To the best of my knowledge, all Adventists believe that Jesus fulfilled the law.

On the one hand, SDA's teach that the law has changed - so the law must have been fulfilled.  (Matt. 5:17)

On the other hand, SDA's also teach that the law will never change so the Law the law hasn't been fulfilled .  (Matt. 5:17)

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Beam:
Gentiles never have been under the law.
Christians are not under the law.

How the hell can we believe you. . . then no one ever has been under the Law and God is a tyrant no-god who has so far killed all despite they have not been under the Law.

[beam]

To the best of my knowledge, all Adventists believe that Jesus fulfilled the law.

If all SDAs believe the law has been fulfilled why do they believe that if we do not keep the Sabbath of that fulfilled law that we will not inherit eternal life?