Our Fellowship Forum

Welcome to Our Fellowship Forum!
 
HomeGalleryRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath   Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:27 pm

Thanks, Chubb—we appreciate your comments. A careful study on the topic will reveal that the Sabbath was part of the now obsolete (Hebrews 8:13) old covenant. The Law of Moses consisted of 613 civil and religious laws and regulations for Israel (not gentiles) and existed in that national form only until its fulfillment (not abolishment) in the Messiah, Jesus Christ. It was a complete package ratified in animal blood at Sinai.

 The new covenant was prophesied in the Old Testament (Jeremiah 31:31-34, etc.). It is personal, spiritual, and relational in nature—a matter of the “circumcised” heart. There is only one covenant—the fulfilled covenant of Jesus Christ. Salvation is by grace through faith in his atonement alone—there can be no legalistic “additions” to grace, including keeping selected parts of the obsolete Law of Moses, or we would be earning it through human effort which is impossible. Saving grace is a gift to be received with thanksgiving and joy—it cannot be earned through law keeping.

 There is no legalism associated with the gospel of grace. There is no command in the New Testament to keep the Sabbath of Israel (see John 4:19-26). In fulfilling the old covenant, Jesus has become our true Sabbath rest—freedom from sin, death, evil, and our fallen alienation from God. He is the Reality to which the shadow pointed. Please see attachments for detailed biblical explanations. Blessings.


Last edited by boyscout on Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: my answer   Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:29 pm

A careful study of Hebrews 8-10 will reveal that it was the new covenant that replaced the old. No where in the context hinted that the commandments of God were replaced.

You quote Jeremiah 31. So did the writer of Hebrews. In fact he quoted twice. What was the context? This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. Does it look like He rendered the "law" obsolete? Does it mean it's for the house of Israel only? Be careful with your answer on the latter question.

He will put his laws in their minds and write them on their hearts because the Israelites failed to put His laws in their minds and write them on their hearts themselves as commanded by God in Deuteronomy 6, the way to show their love for God. I bet you are familiar with the greatest commandment i.e. love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. It's from the very context in Deuteronomy 6, followed by, guess what? These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. The same Deuteronomy also taught to circumcise one's heart (Deuteronomy 10:16) followed by, again, the greatest commandment "love the Lord your God and keep his requirements, his decrees, his laws and his commands always" (Deuteronomy 11:1).

Who is Jesus? He is the Word of God. I'm sure you agree with that. And if He is the Word of God, was He the one who spoke the world into existence? I'm sure you agree with that. Was He the one who spoke on Mount Sinai and gave the ten commandments? If He was, did He come to overturn what He said?

What did He fulfill? He took away the sins of the world. I'm sure you agree with that. How? He shed His blood. That's what the new covenant is about. His sacrifice replaces the old animal sacrifices which were not able to cleanse. That was Hebrews 8-10 was about.

You want to talk about grace? The Israelites in the "old" covenant praised His grace much. Do they seem to you that they were under the heavy burden of the law? Or were they under the heavy burden of sins?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: Re: answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath   Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:34 pm

The old covenant (Law of Moses), is obsolete in its national form to Israel. It was a reflection of God’s eternal law of love that defines his nature and character. Jesus is the only One to keep perfectly God’s eternal law of love. Israel didn’t keep the old covenant and Christians don’t keep the new covenant. As created beings, we will always sin and fall short of God’s perfection. There is only one covenant—the fulfilled covenant of Jesus Christ. As humans we have no righteousness of our own, it is all “filthy rags.” God imparts Christ’s righteousness to us on belief (faith/trust). God is now writing his eternal law of love in the “circumcised” hearts of believers in the new covenant of grace. We are in the age of grace and new creation, not the law. Jesus did for us what we could never do for ourselves. That’s why the new covenant and the gospel are truly good news. To add any form of legalism to grace (earning salvation through human effort) would make it bad news, because no one would be saved. Saving grace is a gift to be received with thanksgiving and joy—it cannot be earned. Much of what Jesus said prior to his death and resurrection was directed to his own people, still under the law, showing them the impossibility of earning their salvation through human effort at law keeping and pointing them to their need for a Redeemer. Jesus was the Reality to which the shadow pointed. The law could only condemn, the atonement brought life.
Believers are under the Law of Christ or “Royal Law” of love, expressed in love for God and fellow humans. But they are not under the obsolete Law of Moses (see Galatians, Romans, and Hebrews). There are negative consequences for sinful (unloving) behavior in this life, but our salvation is bound up in belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior—it is to him that we constantly look. He is our sufficiency, our “all in all.” Nothing can separate us from his love and assurance (Romans 8:1; 37-39). His atonement took care of the sin question—it made righteous provision for all sin (past, present, and future)—believers are free in him because their salvation doesn’t depend on them, rather his already completed work for us and the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit in us. Salvation is 100% Jesus Christ and 0% us—he both justifies and sanctifies us in the lifelong process of new creation.
God’s eternal law of love was not and cannot be overturned. The old covenant law for national Israel, however, was designed to separate them from the nations as God’s covenant people and lead them to faith in Christ. It was temporary and limited in scope. It was ratified in animal blood at Sinai. It did not offer eternal life, only physical blessings and cursings for a physical nation. The new (fulfilled) covenant is eternal in nature and open to all who believe. It was ratified in God’s own blood at Calvary. Fulfill does not mean abolish. Jesus kept God’s eternal law of love whereas we cannot. We are not taking on Christ’s own nature and becoming more Christ like in the new covenant age of grace and new creation.
By not keeping the law they were cursed and sent into exile. They had no hope in the world—they needed a Redeemer—the law could not save them. By rescuing them in his loving atonement, Jesus kept the law perfectly for them, paving the way to eternal life for all who believe. Blessings
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: my answer   Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:37 pm

By not addressing my comments on Hebrews 8-10 I suppose you admit the fact that the passage was not about replacing His commandments but rather the temple worship and animal sacrifices.

It's a very broad stroke to imply the whole Law is obsolete and it's wrong to put the ten commandments under the whole law. It was the Word of God who spoke the ten commandments to the Israelites directly, not Moses. And it was the Word of God who gave the promise that the Israelites will be His holy nation if they obey His words cf Exodus 19-20. Jesus Himself confirmed that the greatest commandant is to love your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength which is quoted from Deuteronomy 6:5, followed by "these commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts". So to speak of God's law of love but to say His commandments is obsolete is pulling His word out of context.

To say we will always sin is to neglect what Paul said in many of his epistles. Here are just some examples:

Romans 8:13 For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die, but if by the /spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.

Is the Holy Spirit not powerful enough?

Romans 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.

What is it to you to conform to the image of his Son?

2 Corinthians 13:7 Now we pray to God that you will not do anything wrong. Not that people will see that we have stood the test but that you will do what is right even though we may seem to have failed.
What is it to you to not do anything wrong?

Galatians 5:16 So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature.

Is it difficult to live by the Spirit?

You mentioned righteousness of our own is like "filthy rags". I trust you are quoting from Isaiah 64:6 but would you read the context there i.e. Isaiah 64:5-6 You come to the help of those who gladly do right, who remember your ways. But when we continued to sin against them, you were angry. How then can we be saved? All of us have become like one who is unclean,

and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags....

When we continued to sin against His ways, our righteous acts are like filthy rags. One can't ignore context.

You mentioned God's eternal law of love and the Law of Christ. Would you be able to quote bible verses that they are not regarding His commandments? I proved that they are in Deuteronomy 6.

You mentioned Romans8:1, 37-39. Did you not realize Paul said to uphold the law in Romans 3:31? Did you not realize 8:13 and 8;29 quoted above warn believers not to live in their sinful nature and to conform to the imagine of the Son?

You mentioned Galatians without specific verses but I quoted Exodus 19-20 to above to indicate that the promise was based on obedience to His ten commandments.

Your last paragraph said the old covenant law was temporary and limited in scope. You have to proof that the ten commandments was temporary and limited in scope.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: Re: answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath   Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:44 pm

His commandments were not replaced or abolished—they were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. It is important to make the proper distinction.

No, actually the Ten Commandments were part of the whole package that was ratified in animal blood at Sinai. Believers are now under the new covenant Law of Christ.

That covenant was for Israel, not gentiles, and was in force for that nation only until its fulfillment in the Messiah, Jesus Christ. He was the only One to perfectly keep God’s eternal law of love reflected in the Law of Moses.

See Romans 7 and 1 John 1:8. As humans we will always sin, but Christ’s atonement made righteousness provision for all sin—past, present, and future. We were called to holiness and sin under the new covenant is any behavior that hurts relationships, but our salvation is based on belief (faith/trust) in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, not obedience to the obsolete (Hebrews 8:13) Law of Moses.

It is important to make the proper distinction as to which law is being addressed in the New Testament. Sometimes it is the old law and sometimes it is the Law of Christ (love).

Absolutely—we are becoming new creations in Christ. It is not OK to sin (practice “unloving” behavior). We’re just saying that salvation is bound up in faith in Christ and not our own efforts at keeping the old law.

That promise was to Israel under the old covenant. Everything changed at the cross and resurrection—we are in the age of grace and new creation, not the law.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: my answer   Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:49 pm

Yet again you failed to address Hebrews 8-10 which was about the replacement of temple worship and animal sacrifices. Hebrews 8:13, which you quoted without considering the context, was exactly about the replacement of such.

There was not a hint of replacing the ten commandments.

Law of love or law of Christ: would you please quote from the bible where such came from other than the first and second great commandments on which all the law and the prophets hang? Did the Christ, the Word of God, teach something new rather than quoting from Deuteronomy 6, without explaining to His Jewish audience and believers, when he was answering the question of what the greatest commandment in the law is?

You said His commandments were fulfilled in Christ but the Christ said 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. Isn't it more important to understand the whole context?

You quoted Romans 7 and 1 John 1:8 to support your idea that human will always sin.

Romans 7: did you not read Romans 7:29 that when man is in his sinful nature he is a slave to sin and that's the reason Paul said by the Spirit to put to death the misdeed of the body i.e. Romans 8:13 I quoted? Do you see you failed to answer my question whether the Spirit is powerful enough?

1 John 1:8: did you not read 1 John 3:9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. What does this verse mean to you?

And while we are at 1 John, what does 3:4 mean to you i.e. Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness (KJV reads sin is transgression of the law)?

You said it's not OK to sin but you said earlier that we humans will always sin. Are you OK?

You said everything changed at the cross. Are you saying the teachings of Christ, before His sacrifice, were changed also?

I asked you to prove the ten commandments were temporary and limited in scope. You pointed me back to your webpages. Aren't your webpages the reason I wrote to you about?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: Re: answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath   Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:57 pm

The entire old covenant Law of Moses was a complete package that ended in its national form to Israel with the death and resurrection of Christ. The Ten Commandments were not abolished—they were a reflection of God’s eternal law of love that only Jesus kept perfectly. They were never intended as an end in themselves. They could only convict Israel of sin and condemn them—they and the world needed a Redeemer. God is now writing his eternal law of love in the hearts of believers through the lifelong process of new creation in the new covenant of grace. Please see first four attachments.

The New Testament says that love is the fulfilling of the law. Jesus fulfilled it and we are called to holiness. There are negative consequences for sinful (unloving) behavior in this life, but Christ’s atonement made righteous provision for all sin. We are saved by grace through faith (belief/trust) in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, not by our efforts to keep the obsolete Law of Moses. During the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus was showing his people, still under the law, the impossibility of earning their salvation through law keeping and pointing them to their need for a Redeemer.

See attachment on Matthew 5.

That’s correct—as humans we will always sin—only God is sinless.

Humans, even Christians with the help of the Holy Spirit, will sin in this life. But the old man was buried and resurrected in Christ—we are in the process of becoming more Christ like throughout our lives. Only in the Kingdom will we be sin free. We sin less and less as we mature in the faith as Christ lives in us through the Holy Spirit. But sin is more than breaking the Ten Commandments—it’s loving God with our whole being and our fellow humans as ourselves.

These passages are obviously a problem if they are to be understood literally as translated. First, our own experience contradicts what these verses seem to claim. All Christians know in their heart of hearts that they are not perfect in the sense of having no sin. We can look at other Christians and see that they also sin, no matter how one wants to define the word. Second, John would be contradicting what he himself wrote in his short letter and what the rest of the New Testament tells us. John says in 1:8-9, “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. But if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive our sins.” The “we” shows that John is including himself as one who needs forgiveness. He writes in 2:1-2, “I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous one.” The exhortations given in the letter, such as in 2:15 and 3:11, imply that the Christians to whom he is writing may be less than perfect in their thoughts and actions in the categories of life he describes.

Various attempts have been made to reconcile what John says in 3:6 and 9 with the rest of his letter, but we think only one answer is satisfactory. This is the one where Biblical exegetes suggest that the difficulty arises from there being only one tense available in Greek to describe present actions such as actions that are singular events, those that have continuing consequences and those present actions that continually occur, as in “He is always driving recklessly,” which is to say, he is a reckless driver by nature. In 1 John 3:6 and 9, the commentaries tell us, the verbs “sins” and “commits” are in the present tense. They could just as well be translated with the word “continually.” The New International Version translates 3:6, “No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him. 3:9 is translated, “No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.”

Even that translation may not be precise enough in giving us the right impression of what John meant. Something like, “No one who continually sins has either seen him or known him” may be preferable. Perhaps a paraphrase would capture John’s implication even better, such as, “No one who is born of God will live in sin.” The Message Bible translates one of the instances as, “No one who lives deeply in Christ makes a practice of sin.” Each Christian is a unique individual and only God know the whole story—he works with each one according to his divine timing, wisdom, and mercy.

John is not attempting to describe an ideal Christian life in 3:6, 9 per se or as such, but pointing out the belief and practice difference between those who are “in Christ” and those who are not (5:12). There is the godly, Christian way, which expresses God’s own Being of love (4:16) and there is the way of sin or the way of the world (2:15-17) that follows the “way of Cain” (3:12-13), led by the devil. Making this contract crystal clear to his hearer seems to be one of his major aims in writing his letter. There is a distinction between the believing “church” and the (not yet) believing “world.” God works with each but in different ways.

John is writing to Christians who are being assaulted by teachers not teaching the truth of the gospel about Christ, our Savior (4:1) and perhaps confusing them about how a Christian life will be expressed in the real world. He explains that the Christian will know God, believe Jesus Christ is Savior (5:1) and live in love (4:7-10), that is, will not be a “practicing sinner” as people of the world, who don’t know Christ. A Christian, he says, while finding himself in a struggle with his nature and the world, thus falling to sin here and there, has won the victory of Christ and is not what we might call one who is “living in sin.”

1 John is referring to people who have fallen out of a state of being in Christ and need to return. John is not creating a third group of people besides those who are either “in Christ” or of the world. For John, it is black or white, you are either “in Christ” or part of the world that does not know God. He is writing to people who are “in Christ” and he considers all to whom he is writing to be in this category. See Romans 8:1, 37-39—Christ’s atonement made righteous provision for all sin—nothing can separate believers from his love, grace, and assurance. Jesus came to save the world, not condemn it (John 3:17; 1 Timothy 2:40.

John is giving instruction to those who are presently abiding in Christ so that they will be aware of where the teaching of the false prophets is in error—who are antichrists and have left the Christian community (2:18-19; 4:1-3). They are denying that Jesus has come in the flesh, which may have included the claim that he does not come to us “in the flesh” through the Spirit. John denies this false claim and says that everyone who believes in Christ is “born of God” (5:1), which is to say, he is coming in them (5:1). “We know that we live in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit,” says 1 John 4:13-16. This echoes John 14:15-28.

John’s message is in all ways positive to all those to whom he writes and is explanatory of the truth of the gospel message. He says they know Christ by the indwelling Spirit (3:24), don’t need to “return” anywhere but stay where they are—in him. John writes to reassure them that they in a saved condition: “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.” Again, echoes of the Gospel of John (20:31). Remember that saving grace is a gift that cannot be earned through human efforts at law keeping—it can only be received with thanksgiving and joy. There is no legalism associated with the gospel of grace—it is good news.

When we have doubts about our “standing” in Christ, our salvation, or the condition of our lives, the solution is simply to go to the Word—like the book of 1 John—which testifies and points to the truth that is in Christ. What does it say? It tells us that we are in Christ, thus in a saved condition, and when we do sin we have forgiveness through the redemptive work and advocacy of Christ. We don’t need to stay in an ongoing state of fear and guilt. We go to Christ in prayer, confessing our sins in faith, knowing he has forgiven and purified us, whether seven times or seventy times seven, as he said.

I John 3:4 is often misunderstood because of the way the King James Version rendered the verse. The KJV translation of 1 John 3:4 says: “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” The KJV makes it seem plausible that the Law of Moses is being spoken of here. Those who want to believe this idea then go on to claim that Christians must keep that Law.

However, modern translations do not translate the phrase as does the King James Version. For example, The Revised Standard Version translates the verse this way: “Everyone who commits sin is guilty of lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.” The RSV obviously differs radically with the King James Version translation of 1 John 3:4. But the RSV is the correct way to translate this verse.

That’s because the Greek text of 1 John 3:4 has only a single word for what the King James translates as an entire phrase—“the transgression of the law.” That word is anomia. Lexicographers define this word as “­lawlessness.” The words “the law” and “transgression” simply do not appear in the Greek text. In 1 John 3:4 sin is anomia, that is, lawlessness.

1 John 3:4 is making the point that to sin is to be in a state of lawlessness. Christians should not be lawless. While they are under no ­obligation to the Law of Moses as a system of law or set of regulations given to old covenant Israel (Acts 15:5, 9‑11), they do obey the law, values or will of God. Under the new covenant, the “law” Christians obey is ultimately the expression of the nature of God through Jesus Christ and in the Holy Spirit.

When we read 1 John 3:4 in context, we find that John is actually speaking of not being disobedient or lawless as regards the commands of Christ. He explains it this way: “For this is the message you heard from the beginning: We should love one another” (verse 11). John admonishes us not to be like Cain, the ­murderer who hated righteousness. He says, “Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer” (verses 12, 15). It is Jesus who commanded the disciples to love one another (John 13:34).

How do we know if we are obeying the law of love set down by Jesus? John tells us that, as Jesus gave his life for us, “We ought to lay down our lives for our brothers” (1 John 3:16). Throughout 1 John we are pointed to Christ as our teacher and example.

In concluding his discussion, John writes: “This is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. Those who obey his commands live in him, and he in them” (1 John 3:23‑24). Those who wish to live in Christ do not live lawlessly. They believe in the name of Jesus Christ, obeying his commands and loving one another, following the lead of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:13-6:2).

The Law of Christ or “Royal Law” is expressed in love for God and fellow humans—it goes much further than the law engraved in stone—God’s eternal law of love is being written in the “circumcised” hearts of believers in the lifelong process of new creation. We are becoming more like Christ as we mature in the faith.

1) As humans, even with the help of the Holy Spirit, we will sin in this life. Only Jesus was without sin. 2) It is not OK to practice sinful (unloving) behavior because there are negative consequences for it in this life. But we are saved by grace through faith, not our attempts at law keeping. 3) Christ’s atonement took care of the sin question—his victory over all that oppose God (sin, death, evil, and our fallen alienation from God) is complete. Nothing that opposes God and his love for the creation will survive the “new heavens and new earth” in the Kingdom of God.

While Jesus was alive, being a Jew, he was still under the old law. He lived in a transition period between that national covenant with Israel and the new (fulfilled) covenant with all of humanity. Each statement he made prior to his death and resurrection has to be taken in light of the new covenant of grace.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: my answer   Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:57 pm

Remember you quoted Hebrews 8:13 to support your idea that the ten commandment, in particular regarding the Sabbath, is no more. I have been asking you to show me the exact verse but so far you are not able to.

Now you turned around and said the ten commandments were not abolished. I need you to clarify whether you meant "were not abolished" or "are not abolished". You don't need me to remind you that the heaven and earth have not passed away. None of what you've said nor on your website could deny that.

I didn't suggest that the ten commandments were an end in themselves so you may put this argument to rest.

No doubt Jesus kept the ten commandment perfectly. Now both the Word of God i.e. Jesus and Paul taught believers to follow Jesus and that the commandments are not difficult cf Deuteronomy 30:11-16; Romans 10:4-8. In fact, the Word of God taught that keeping the commandments is the way of life cf Deuteronomy 30:19. So is it a problem for you to remember the Sabbath and keep it holy?

Yes you argued that Jesus is our rest and Sabbath is spiritual. Do you mean one no longer has to remember the Sabbath physically? Using your argument, can one commit murder physically if he loves spiritually?

I asked you to quote from the Bible where you've got the idea of law of love or law of Christ. Where is your answer?

On the other hand, I provided Deuteronomy 6.  What is you answer to that?

Now you said Jesus was showing his people the impossibility of earning their salvation through law keeping during the sermon on the mount. Would you point me to the verses that said such?

You kept saying Christians are not able to stop sinning. Now you said even with the help of the Holy Spirit Christians will sin. What you said is contradictory to what Jesus, Paul, Peter, James and John taught. Which Jesus are you preaching?

You said sin is more than breaking the ten commandments. Now my questions for you are:

a. can you give me examples of sins outside the ten commandments without being legalistic on words?

b. can one love God with our whole being and our fellow humans as ourselves while breaking the ten commandments?

1 John 3:9 are you saying our own experience overrules what the Bible teaches?

John did not contradict himself nor the Holy Spirit who inspired him to write 1 John. The first chapter described believers who first came to Christ and the third chapter taught what believers should become. The teaching is in sync with that in the other books in new testament.

1 John 3:4: regarding of which translations one reads and how one plays with words legalistically, it's perfectly clear than sin is transgression of the law. What you are trying is to alienate the law given by the Word God, some directly from God and some through Moses, from the law of Christ. Is the Word of God not the Christ?

I asked if you are saying the teachings of Christ, before His sacrifice, were changed.

There are problems in your statement that He, Jesus, was under the old law.

a. Never in the bible said the ten commandments are old and replaced. The old were temple worship and animal sacrifice.

b. One is under the law when he sins i.e. offends the law. Jesus never sinned so He was never under the law.

c. The law is not the covenant and the covenant is not the law. The law is part of the content of the old covenant. The law is also part of the new covenant. One may see that His law is eternal cf Psalm 119:160.

d. God does not change. He has always been a gracious God. So when you say His new covenant of grace, are you implying that His old covenant was not of grace and He was a liar when He said He is the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: Re: answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath   Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:49 pm

We didn’t say they were “no more”—we said they were fulfilled in Christ. They were an expression of God’s eternal law of love that defines his nature and character. Jesus was the only One to keep it perfectly (beyond the letter—in its full spiritual intent) because he was God—humans cannot do it. In his fulfillment of the law, Jesus did for us what we could never do for ourselves. The old covenant law, as a complete package, was never intended as an end in itself—it was designed to bring Israel to faith in the Messiah (see Jeremiah 31:31-34 for example). All the Ten Commandments could do is condemn—Israel and the world needed a Redeemer. Again, it is important to understand the difference between “fulfill” and “abolish.” Saving grace is bound up in belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, not our attempts at old covenant law keeping. Jesus is our true Sabbath rest—freedom from sin, death, evil, and our fallen alienation from God. He was the Reality to which the shadow pointed. There is no command in the New Testament to keep the Sabbath of Israel (see John 4:19-26). If a believer kills, commits adultery, or steals, there are negative consequences in this life, but their salvation is based on Christ’s perfect obedience to God’s eternal law of love and nothing can separate the believer from his grace and assurance (Romans 8:1, 37-39). God is now writing his eternal law of love, the Law of Christ, or “Royal Law,” in the hearts of believers in the lifelong process of new creation. Christians are learning to love as God loves and are being made into real persons in Christ.

The biblical explanations were included in the attachments from previous correspondence. They can also be accessed on our website: www.gci.org/publications. Also, in biblical exegesis, the whole interprets the parts, not the parts the whole. Presuppositional “proof-texting” is not the way to do proper hermeneutics. There is only one covenant—the fulfilled covenant of Jesus Christ. Everything changed at the cross and resurrection—we are in the age of grace and new creation, not the law. If salvation could be earned through old covenant law keeping, the world would not have needed a Savior and Christ’s death was in vain.

They were not, but they were part of the old covenant package that was replaced by the new covenant of grace. As created beings, we simply cannot earn our salvation through law keeping. Israel did not keep the letter of the old covenant law and Christians, even with the help of the Holy Spirit, do not keep perfectly the Law of Christ. Salvation is a gift to be received with thanksgiving and joy, not something that can be earned. There is no legalism associated with the gospel of grace. The entire old covenant package (Law of Moses) was ratified in animal blood at Sinai. It was for the nation of Israel and served in that national form only until its fulfillment (not abolishment) in Christ. The new covenant is personal, spiritual, and relational in nature—a matter of the “circumcised” heart. It was ratified in God’s own blood at Calvary and is for all who believe in the atoning work of Jesus Christ for them. He was the vicarious human, the “new Adam” for all.

Do Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:17-19 tell Christians they must keep the seventh-day Sabbath? Some people believe these verses make Sabbath-keeping binding on Christians. Others conclude the Sabbath is not in view in this passage.

To discover the answer, let us begin by quoting the verses in question:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, 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. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

We see right away that Jesus did not mention the Sabbath or the Ten Commandments in these verses. To read Jesus’ statement as having these laws specifically in mind is to bring in ideas that were not stated by Jesus.

Nonetheless, there are certain phrases in this text that need further study: Jesus’ assertion that he did not come to abolish the Law; that he came to fulfill it; that not the smallest part of the Law would disappear till everything was accomplished; that whoever broke the commandments he was speaking about or taught others to break them would be of little reputation in the kingdom. What do all these things mean in terms of the Sabbath? By looking closely at the key phrases in this Scripture, we will learn some surprising things.
“Abolish Law and Prophets”

First, we see that Jesus spoke of “the Law and the Prophets” as not being abolished. What did he mean by this phrase? The “Law and the Prophets” was a regular expression Jews of Jesus’ day used to refer to the entire Old Testament. (See Matthew 7:12; 22:40; Acts 24:14; 28:23; Romans 3:21.) The Old Testament comprises the Holy Scriptures or the sacred writings of the Jewish faith. It was through these writings that Jews thought they could understand the will of God and have eternal life (John 5:39, 45).

What Jesus said, then, was the Old Testament as a body of “God-breathed” literature would not be set aside or abolished. His concern was not specifically the Sabbath or the Ten Commandments. It was the entire Old Testament.

Jesus also said he came not to abolish the Law or the Prophets, that is, the Holy Scriptures, but to “fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17). We should notice that Jesus did not tell Christians to “fulfill” these Scriptures down to the smallest letter and least stroke of a pen. He said he came to fulfill the Holy Scriptures.

What did he mean by this? The Greek word for “fulfill” is plerosai. According to Greek scholars, the nuance and meaning of this word is difficult to express in English, and several possibilities have been offered. These are summarized by four options:
1. Jesus came to accomplish or obey the Holy Scriptures,
2. to bring out the full meaning of the Holy Scriptures,
3. to bring those Scriptures to their intended completion,
4. to emphasize that the Scriptures point to him as Messiah and are fulfilled in his salvation work.

After reviewing several ways of looking at the word “fulfill,” the Expositor’s Commentary on Matthew concluded by saying: “The best interpretation of these difficult verses says that Jesus fulfills the Law and the Prophets in that they point to him, and he is their fulfillment. The antithesis is not between ‘abolish’ and ‘keep’ but between ‘abolish’ and ‘fulfill’” (page 143).

Let’s see how this possibility works out. It is certainly a proper understanding of Jesus’ intent to say that he came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets in himself – in his life and salvation work, and that the Scriptures pointed to him.

The book of Matthew was written to prove from the Jewish Scriptures that Jesus fulfilled the requirements of messiahship. Matthew often said Jesus acted “to fulfill” what was said through one prophet or another (Matthew 1:22; 2:5, 15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17, etc.). One can read through the book of Matthew and note all the times that a reference is made to the Old Testament as being fulfilled in Jesus. It is surprising, indeed.

Jesus said in Matthew 3:15 that “all righteousness” should be fulfilled in his actions. Luke 24:25-27, 44-45 and John 5:39-47 are also instructive on this point. These verses show that Jesus was interested in showing how the Hebrew Scriptures had himself as their object. He was the Messiah of whom all the Jewish holy writings had spoken.
The Tyndale New Testament Commentary on Matthew offers another view of “fulfill.” It emphasizes that Jesus was bringing the meaning of the Scriptures to their intended completion. It says: “Jesus is bringing that to which the Old Testament looked forward; his teaching will transcend the Old Testament revelation, but, far from abolishing it, is itself its intended culmination” (page 114).

But is the keeping of the “holy time” requirement of the Sabbath something Jesus meant to bring forward for Christians to follow? Since the context does not mention the Sabbath in Matthew 5:17-19, we would have no basis to insist that he did.

“Not the smallest letter”

Jesus also said that “not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen” from the entire body of the Jewish Holy Scriptures would disappear until “everything is accomplished.” Some believe that by saying this, Jesus was saying that Christians should keep the seventh-day Sabbath.

Let’s ask again what the context tells us, and where such a conclusion would lead us. As we saw, Jesus did not mention the Sabbath or the Ten Commandments in Matthew 5:17-19. In order to say that Jesus had the Sabbath in mind, we would be forced to say that he was commanding Christians to follow all the laws of the Law and Prophets, or the Old Testament. At the least, we would have to conclude he was making the entire Law of Moses binding on Christians.

Based on the argument above, we would have to take Jesus’ words as enjoining every single commandment and regulation in the Law of Moses on Christians! The reason is because Jesus said that “not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen” from the entire body of the Jewish Holy Scriptures would disappear until “everything is accomplished.”

To ask again: Did Jesus mean Christians had to keep all the regulations of the Law of Moses, including the “holy time” regulations of the Sabbath, or strict tithing, or the food laws? Consider what that line of reasoning would demand.

Christians would be obligated to keep all the sacrificial, ceremonial and civil laws described in the Law of Moses. They would have to keep every single law mentioned in Genesis through Deuteronomy – and the rest of the Old Testament. The Jews calculated that there were 613 laws in their Holy Scriptures. Christians, then, based on the idea that Jesus was telling his disciples to keep the regulations of the Law and the Prophets, would have to keep all 613 laws. No wonder the apostle Paul said that thinking in these terms was wrongheaded (Galatians 3:10).
To pick a few examples of this line of reasoning, Christian men would have to be physically circumcised. All Christians would have to offer sacrifices. Men, at least, would have to travel to Jerusalem to keep the annual festivals. Christians would have to keep the various purification rituals. One of these rituals specified that individuals who came in contact with dead bodies would be “unclean” for seven days. They would have to ceremonially wash themselves on the third and seventh day (Numbers 19:11-13). If any person failed to do this, he or she would be “cut off from Israel” (verse 13). There are many dozens of such laws in the Law of Moses that would have to be followed.

Obviously, when we see the implications, we have to conclude that Jesus’ words could not be telling Christians to keep the entire old covenant Law. But if he was not saying this, then we have no justification for saying his words demand we keep the Sabbath as “holy time,” because he did not specifically mention this command – or the Ten Commandments.

“Everything is accomplished”

Jesus said that until heaven and earth ceased to exist, nothing would disappear from the law “until everything is accomplished” (5:18). But heaven and earth will pass away, and by contrast, Jesus’ own words will remain forever (Matthew 24:35). They have a greater validity than the Law because Jesus is greater than Moses.

The meaning of “until everything is accomplished” has several possibilities. It is suggested by the Tyndale New Testament Commentary that the translation: “Until what it [the Law] looks forward to arrives” gives the best sense of this phrase. This links the thought with the idea of “fulfillment” in verse 17. This also seems to be the thrust of Paul’s comments regarding the relationship of the Law and Jesus’ earthly ministry (Galatians 3:19, 23-25).

The Tyndale New Testament Commentary expresses the interpretation of “accomplished” in these words:

“The law remains valid until it reaches its intended culmination; this it is now doing in the ministry and teaching of Jesus. This verse does not state, therefore, as it is sometimes interpreted, that every regulation in the Old Testament law remains binding after the coming of Jesus. The law is unalterable, but that does not justify its application beyond the purpose for which it was intended” (page 115).

The Tyndale commentary also makes the same point in these words:

“This passage does not therefore state that every Old Testament regulation is eternally valid. This view is not found anywhere in the New Testament, which consistently sees Jesus as introducing a new situation, for which the law prepared (Galatians 3:24), but which now transcends it. The focus is now on Jesus and his teaching, and in this light the validity of Old Testament rules must now be examined. Some will be found to have fulfilled their role, and be no longer applicable...others will be reinterpreted” (page 117).

This explanation must be the correct one, or else the early Christian church and the apostles violated Matthew 5:17-19 by telling gentile Christians that circumcision and keeping the Law of Moses was not necessary. The book of Galatians would also have been in error on this point. And the book of Hebrews would have been in extraordinary violation of Jesus’ words, too, since it states that the entire sacrificial system, the temple worship and Levitical priesthood had been annulled.

However, these books are in agreement with the principle mentioned above. They explain that some old covenant religious regulations have fulfilled their role and others need reinterpretation. This is the situation that holds with the ceremonial weekly Sabbath “holy time” regulation. It fulfilled its role in old covenant times and can be interpreted spiritually for Christians as the spiritual Sabbath rest we now have in Christ.

The simple answer to Jesus’ statement in Matthew 5:18 lies in the word “until” in the phrase, “Until everything is accomplished.”  The word tells us that there was an endpoint to the time when the Law would “disappear” – that is, when everything would be “accomplished.”  That is the answer to the puzzle.

Nothing of the Law could be made obsolete until Jesus accomplished “everything.”  Everything of what?  Why, everything that Jesus accomplished from his Incarnation to his resurrection and Ascension.  Jesus fulfilled his mission, the mission of the Father, to bring us saving grace.  This could not happen until Jesus fulfilled everything necessary for this to become a reality – including his death, resurrection, Ascension and sending of the Holy Spirit.  

Once Jesus fulfilled his mission, the old covenant Law became obsolete.  After all, the Mosaic covenant was originally planned to be in force only until Christ came and accomplished his work of salvation.  The apostle Paul speaks to this reality: “The law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith.  Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law” (Galatians 3:24-25).

“Least of these commandments”

In Matthew 5:19 Jesus also said that if anyone broke “one of the least of these commandments” and taught others to do so, that person would be called “least” in the kingdom. Those who practiced and taught these commands of which he spoke would be called “great” in that kingdom. How do these words fit into the discussion?

One explanation of this phrase is that “these commandments” refer to the teaching of Jesus in Matthew 5-7, and not to the Old Testament or its law. His reinterpretation of old covenant law was certainly the subject of much of the Sermon on the Mount.

After discussing the Law and the Prophets, Jesus went on to give six units of teaching, each introduced by the phrase, “You have heard that it was said... But I say to you” (Matthew 5:21-48). In those six units, Jesus gave varied examples of how the principles he was discussing should work out in practice among his disciples. He began each section with how Jews might have taught and applied a literal understanding of Old Testament law. Then Jesus gave his more discerning view – the real intent or aim of the law in general, and the six examples he chose in particular.
To summarize, he mentioned the following subjects: murder and anger, based on the sixth commandment (5:21-26); adultery, the seventh commandment (5:27-30); divorce, from Deuteronomy 24:1 (5:31-32); swearing and oaths, summarizing teaching from such scriptures as Leviticus 19:12 and Numbers 30:2 (5:33-37); legal rights, quoted from Exodus 21:24-25, Leviticus 24:20, and Deuteronomy 19:21 (5:38-42); and the principle of loving one’s neighbor, from Leviticus 19:18 (5:43-47).

What we notice is that the examples Jesus chose come from all five books of Moses. These six principles are then summarized as the greater righteousness of Jesus’ disciples (5:48). The disciples of Jesus, in contrast to the scribes and Pharisees, must be “perfect,” that is, have a life totally motivated by the will of God. Jesus contrasted this new and radical righteousness (5:20) with the scrupulous religious observance of old covenant demands practiced by Pharisees and other Jewish religious teachers (6:1-8. 16-18).

Jesus did not come to annul the Holy Scriptures as a body of holy writings since they were “God breathed” words of the Creator. But they were not an end in themselves, as many Jews thought. Jesus had come to bring the truth to which those Scriptures pointed (John 1:17).

The “law of Christ”

If we look carefully at the context of the verse in which Jesus spoke of fulfilling the Law, particularly at what follows Matthew 5:17-19, we will note that Jesus was redefining the teaching from the Law and the Prophets. He was pointing out which principles from the Holy Scriptures had an eternal validity and their intended purpose, and how both were to be understood.

In short, Jesus was creating a spiritual law, which we may call the “law of Christ” (John 13:33-35) – and this becomes the norm for Christian living, not the old covenant law. This is demonstrated by the fact that one cannot find in the teaching in Matthew 5-6 any discussion of ceremonial laws such as the Sabbath and annual festival “holy time” regulations – a hallmark of Jewish religious observance based on old covenant commands.

While Jews concerned themselves with what Moses and their traditions said, Jesus superseded that approach to God with his own instruction. He became the standard of truth (John 1:17). In referring to both the Law of Moses and the tradition of the elders, Jesus boldly proclaimed, “But I say to you” (Matthew 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44). At the end of the Sermon, Jesus told his hearers that the wise person is one “who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice” (Matthew 7:24).

The orientation of the new covenant is to Christ and the cross, not to Moses and the tables of stone. The great sermon of the new covenant is not the one given on Mt. Sinai, but by Jesus Christ (John 1:17). He explained the spiritual-moral principles of the new covenant that apply to Christians. These are amply discussed in several places in the New Testament (in Galatians 5:22-25, for example). We should note that these places do not contain any mention of such ceremonial regulations as keeping a specific day of the week.

Matthew concluded his gospel with the following words of Jesus: “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19-20). The disciples are to teach and do the commands Jesus gave, not legalistically follow the Law of Moses (John 15:12-13). Since Jesus did not command Sabbath-keeping in Matthew 5:17-19, we cannot use this Scripture to justify teaching it.

In the interest of fairness, we should point out that some scholars object to the view that Jesus was referring to his own commandments in Matthew 5:19. The word for “commandment,” entole, elsewhere in Matthew always refers to the Old Testament law. These scholars insist the expression “least of these commandments” would be better understood in the context as referring to the law as expounded in the Old Testament. If so, how are we to understand Jesus’ command to his disciples – to respect and teach the “least of these commandments”?
We have already seen that Jesus cannot be telling his disciples to keep each of the 613 regulations of the Law. That would lead to a logical absurdity, violate his teaching in Matthew 5, and stand in conflict with other New Testament teachings and writings. (Since Jesus didn’t mention the Sabbath in Matthew 5, we cannot use this Scripture to insist that one of “these commandments” was the Sabbath “holy time” regulation.)

It cannot be a literal observance of the Law of Moses that interests Jesus – this is seen by what he says in Matthew 5:21-48, where he radically reinterprets the commands of the Law. If it were a literal observance that Jesus wanted, the Gospel of Mark was in specific violation of Jesus’ command, because it interpreted Jesus’ view of the laws of “uncleanness” and said he had abrogated these Old Testament food regulations. (See Mark 7:19 in any modern translation.)

What such Scriptures show is that Jesus left the question of interpretation and application of the Law of Moses open to changing circumstances. We can see this in his teaching in Matthew 5:21-48 and elsewhere. Of course, the Old Testament must be respected, and it has value as the word of God, but it is also time-bound to a certain extent. This practical view of the Law is demonstrated in the rest of the New Testament. It allows, for example, the apostles to understand that the ceremonial and sacrificial laws are no longer binding.
Nonetheless, Christians are to respect the Old Testament as the Holy Scriptures of God. They are profitable, when used wisely, for “teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,” and can make one “wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 3:15-16). But no one should place faith in the Law itself, for while the Law came through Moses, grace and truth have come through Jesus. Under grace, Christians are not required to keep a specific “holy time,” go to a “holy place” such as the temple, or be under the authority of the holy Levitical priesthood (John 4:21-24). These were ceremonial regulations, and Christians do not need to keep them.

OK, as long as it’s understood that they cannot save anyone.

The old covenant Sabbath became obsolete in its fulfillment in Christ—there are no commanded worship or rest days in the new covenant—our true Sabbath rest is bound up in a relationship with Jesus Christ. That said, within Christian freedom, believers are free to worship and rest on the Sabbath if they choose. But they cannot do it in a legalistic way, thinking they are being more pleasing to God or in judgment of other believers who worship at other times. God is more interested in unity in the Body of Christ than an day of the week.

Many theologians divide Old Testament laws into three general categories: moral, ceremonial, and civil. The Bible itself does not divide the law into these categories (many of the laws overlap in their purpose), but this three-fold division is nevertheless useful when we talk about the Mosaic laws.

Defining types of laws

Moral laws are generally considered timeless, eternal, and universal, based on God’s own character, and therefore in force today. This is a good working definition of the category, but a problem arises when people assume they know what is in the category.

Some people claim that a certain law is moral, or a certain group of laws is moral, without attempting to see whether the laws are actually timeless, eternal, and based on God’s character. Instead, they seem to reason in a reverse direction: They take laws that they think are still in force, and from that, conclude that they are also a timeless reflection of God’s character.

This procedure, although incorrect, sometimes yields believable results. People’s assumptions about morality are often correct — but sometimes they are not. Before we claim that a law is “moral,” we should examine to see whether it is truly timeless, eternal, and universal, applicable to all.

For example, one law in the Old Testament says, Do not bear false witness. This law says that a witness in court must tell the truth. This law is a specific application of God’s desire that people tell the truth. This is based on God’s own character, his honesty — what he says can be counted on. He is utterly faithful; his word is always true. This principle is reaffirmed in the New Testament, too: people should tell the truth.

This law is universal — everyone, in every nation in every age, should be honest. Even angels should be honest. The principle is always true, and the specific application in a courtroom is also true: No one should give false testimony. This is a moral law.

Ceremonial laws

God gave his people ceremonial laws, too. These laws do not contradict God’s nature, but they reflect it only in a very general sense. For example, he told the Israelites to have a weekly offering of “showbread.” This offering, like other offerings, showed that God is holy and worthy of worship, but the Bible does not assign any theological significance to the details of the offering. The quantity of flour does not tell us much about God. With some ingenuity, some people may see symbolic significance in every detail, but other people may see different significance in the same details. And since the Bible itself does not tell us what the significance is, we cannot be sure.

A cleansing ritual is another illustration of ceremonial or ritual law: the priest was to touch the person’s right earlobe, right thumb, and right big toe (Leviticus 14:1-18). Although God gave these laws and expected them to be kept as written, these details do not reveal much about God’s character. Although God may have had a particular reason for specifying exact quantities and precise details, he has not told us the reason, so it therefore cannot tell us much about God himself.

Some aspects of the rituals and ceremonies, from our perspective, seem to be arbitrary. For all we know, God could have required the left cheek instead of the right earlobe. He could have required 10 percent less bread than he did. Some of these details do not seem to be based on anything intrinsic — they were simply what God specified. Since we do not know the divine significance of such details, they had to be given by special revelation.

The Israelites (like other peoples around them) might have invented a bread offering on their own, but they may not have used the precise quantities God specified. Even without God’s special revelation to them, they might have had a concept of religious impurity, and from that developed a religious cleansing ritual, but they probably wouldn’t have come up with the exact formula God gave them.

Although the ceremonial laws portray concepts like sacrifice and cleansing that are found in many cultures, the details of God’s ceremonial laws are given by special revelation, not by ideas that people could figure out for themselves.

What about the Sabbath?

Some people claim that the weekly Sabbath is a moral law, and therefore required today. They often claim this simply because they assume that the Ten Commandments are all moral laws.

But let us look at the evidence: God himself does not keep the Sabbath as a six-day-one-day cycle of work and rest. He did not before creation, and he does not now. Angels do not keep the weekly Sabbath, either. In the new heavens and the new earth, when there is no nighttime, no one will have to change their behavior according to days of the week. Everyone will be in God’s eternal rest all the time.

Although the seventh-day Sabbath has a basis in what God did once, the six-one cycle does not reflect what God is eternally. Although the weekly Sabbath rest looked forward to the eternal rest we have in salvation, the six-one cycle of work and rest is not an eternal one. The seventh-day Sabbath is not a universal or eternal law.

Instead, the Sabbath has characteristics of a ceremonial law. Although people might figure out that regular rest is good for us, it is not likely that they would figure exactly one day out of seven, and even more unlikely that they would naturally figure out that it must be the seventh. This specific detail had to be specially revealed. Of course, if God says that we have to keep this detail, then we do. That’s the same for any law, ceremonial or otherwise. The point is that the details of the Sabbath command are like ceremonial laws in that they have to be specially revealed.
The Sabbath law says that behavior that is perfectly acceptable one day is forbidden the next, merely because it is a different day of the week. But God’s morality does not change with the days of the week. If it is moral one day, it is moral on all others. God certainly has the right to require different things on different days, but we need to understand that this would be a ceremonial law, not a law about what is moral all the time.

Paul tells us that the gentiles, even without the written law, had a law written on their hearts (Romans 2:14-15). They could know by nature that honesty was proper. In contrast, they could not know from nature that they should anoint the right thumb instead of the elbow. They could not know by nature that they were to avoid work on the seventh day of each week.

God never required the gentiles to obey laws they did not have. They were required to obey the law written on their hearts, but they were not required to obey the ritual laws, for such laws have to be specially revealed, and God revealed them only to Israel, and they applied only to Israel.

God did not expect gentiles to celebrate the Israelites’ exodus, or to have harvest festivals on the exact dates that Israel did. He did not require them to have Levitical priests, nor to make the animal sacrifices he told Israel to offer. Nor did he command them to keep the Sabbath. They could if they wanted to, of course (Isaiah 56:4), but he did not require it.

Jesus categorizes the Sabbath

When Jesus talked about the Sabbath, he clearly grouped it with the ceremonial laws, not with the moral law. When it came to matters of morality, Jesus had a very strict standard, stricter than the Pharisees. When it came to ceremonial laws, however, he was more lenient than the Pharisees.

With the Sabbath, Jesus was more lenient. On several occasions, he noted that the Pharisees were too strict about the Sabbath. He is never recorded as giving any restrictions about the Sabbath. He never told anyone to avoid anything on that day. This in itself suggests that Jesus saw the Sabbath as a ceremonial law.

But even more clearly, Jesus compared the Sabbath to ceremonial laws. When his disciples were criticized for picking grain on the Sabbath, Jesus used the example of David eating the tabernacle showbread (Matthew 12:1-4). He said, if David could eat the showbread, my disciples can pick enough grain to eat.

Notice that the argument doesn’t work if the Sabbath is more important than showbread — the Pharisees could have said, It’s permissible to take liberties with the showbread, but the Sabbath is more important, so we have to be more careful about it. No, in order for the logic of the argument to work, the showbread has to be just as important as the Sabbath. Only then could the comparison carry any weight. The point is that Jesus deliberately used a ritual law as a point of comparison for the Sabbath.

Jesus also compared the Sabbath to the sacrificial laws (Matthew 12:5). The priests were allowed to work on the Sabbath because the requirement to sacrifice animals was more important than the requirement to rest on the Sabbath. The ritual law was more important than the Sabbath law. This again shows that there is nothing intrinsically wrong about working on the Sabbath. It was permitted for priests. It is not a universal law required for all peoples at all times. Rather, the Sabbath was a ritual law, specifying when certain kinds of work could or could not be done.
Jesus also compared the Sabbath to circumcision (John 7:22). Again, ritual work was allowed (even required) on the Sabbath, because the ritual law was more important than the requirement to rest on the seventh day. The ritual law was more important than the Sabbath. Again, Jesus is putting the Sabbath into the company of ritual laws.

Jesus never grouped the Sabbath with moral laws, or any other of the Ten Commandments. He always compared it to ceremonial laws. Jesus treated the Sabbath as a “lesser” law. The requirement to work on certain days and avoid work on other days was a ritual law. It was an important part of the covenant God gave Israel, but it was not given to other nations.

No doubt some of the first Christians were surprised that any of God’s laws could become obsolete when Jesus died. This had to be explained, as we see in the book of Hebrews. But once they realized that some of God’s laws were indeed superseded, that they had been given for a temporary reason, that their purpose had now been fulfilled by Jesus Christ, then they could also understand that God no longer required ritual, ceremonial laws.

Since Jesus clearly ranked the showbread as more important than the Sabbath, and the temple sacrifices as more important than the Sabbath, and circumcision as more important than the Sabbath, it should be no surprise that the Sabbath command expired at the same time as those other commands.

It is a historically demonstrable fact that Jews in the first century understood that God did not require gentiles to keep the Sabbath. When the barriers between Jews and gentiles were eliminated through Jesus’ death (Ephesians 2:13-16), the Sabbath was one of the barrier ordinances eliminated. It was a ritual law, not a timeless and eternal moral law.

It was included in the attachments and it is on our website. It is clear teaching from the New Testament—see gospel of John for example.
The Old Testament must be read through the lens of the New Testament. The Messiah had not appeared yet when God was dealing with the nation of Israel in Old Testament times. The incarnation changed everything. Christians are under a new and different covenant than ancient Israel’s.

We only have time and resources for brief responses here. We recommend the books, The Gospel Solution by Tom Weaver; Unlock Your Bible and Beyond an Angry God by Steve McVey for a more detailed study of this topic.

The New Testament is clear that Christians will sin in this life (see Romans 7 and 1 John 1:8 for example). But Christ’s atonement made righteous provision for all sin (past, present, and future). In Christ, we are considered free of sin because our faith is bound up in him, not ourselves (see Philippians 3:7-9).
Sin in the new (fulfilled) covenant of Jesus Christ is any behavior that hurts relationships—any “unloving” behavior, whether internal or external. The fulfilled covenant adds the spiritual dimension (the inner heart) to the old letter. The Ten Commandments were for a nation that did not generally have the Holy Spirit available to them. Christians go beyond the old blessings and cursings of the law toward the motives of the heart. They tried to keep the law to be blessed as a physical nation; believers in Christ always look to him, their Reconciler and Redeemer, knowing they can’t do it themselves. Beyond the do’s and don’ts of the old law, the spiritual relationship Christians have with Jesus affects their inner motive, the desire to become more Christ like—they obey the Royal Law of love as a response to what God has done for them in Christ, not to earn anything. Godly behavior is an overflow of the love relationship they enjoy in union and communion with Christ through the Holy Spirit.

See the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus was showing them that the old law could not save them and pointed them to their need for a Redeemer and the new law (of love) that was to come after his death, resurrection, ascension, and the coming of the Holy Spirit. The key to understanding this is bound up in the realization that it is Christ that did it all for us because we could not save ourselves through law keeping. It’s not OK to break the Ten Commandments, but they are now redefined according to their deeper spiritual intent. Not committing adultery is not sufficient; one must not lust either. Not killing is not enough; one must not hate, etc. The old Sabbath pictured the spiritual rest that was to come in Christ—Jesus is the true Sabbath that Israel failed to appreciate—they never got past the letter of the old law. That’s why there is a “veil” that prevents them from seeing Christ (see 2 Corinthians 3:12-16).

Of course not—we would never say that. This passage was explained in detail in the previous correspondence.

Believers do overcome in Christ (not through their own efforts)—he is our sufficiency, our “all in all.”  

Explained previously. The old law was given to Israel. We have the real thing now in Christ, who, through the Holy Spirit, is leading us into “all truth.” There can be no contradiction—the Christian is either under grace which is a gift of God or they must save themselves through their own efforts at law keeping. If it were not for Christ, no one would be saved.

Yes. While he was alive, he was still under the old law. It changed when he said, “It is finished.”

He was a Jew and a full human. He was also God. He lived in a transition period between the covenants. See N. T. Wright’s The Climax of the Covenant.

The Ten Commandments were part of the same complete package that was the old covenant, ratified in animal blood at Sinai. That covenant ended as a complete package with its fulfillment in Christ. No one is saying it is OK to break the commandments. But we are in the time of grace, not law, and are led by the Spirit, not legalism or fear.
As God, that is true. But he was also a human. He was paving the way for the new age that was about to come.  
God’s law of love that defines his nature and character is eternal. That is the new Law of Christ or Royal Law that Jesus brought. Believers are now experiencing the true love of God that brings life.

Absolutely. God is love.

No. We are saying that the old covenant ended in its national and religious form to Israel with its fulfillment in Jesus Christ—the Savior of the world. Blessings.

Jesus never grouped the Sabbath with moral laws, or any other of the Ten Commandments. He always compared it to ceremonial laws. Jesus treated the Sabbath as a “lesser” law. The requirement to work on certain days and avoid work on other days was a ritual law. It was an important part of the covenant God gave Israel, but it was not given to other nations.

No doubt some of the first Christians were surprised that any of God’s laws could become obsolete when Jesus died. This had to be explained, as we see in the book of Hebrews. But once they realized that some of God’s laws were indeed superseded, that they had been given for a temporary reason, that their purpose had now been fulfilled by Jesus Christ, then they could also understand that God no longer required ritual, ceremonial laws.

Since Jesus clearly ranked the showbread as more important than the Sabbath, and the temple sacrifices as more important than the Sabbath, and circumcision as more important than the Sabbath, it should be no surprise that the Sabbath command expired at the same time as those other commands.

It is a historically demonstrable fact that Jews in the first century understood that God did not require gentiles to keep the Sabbath. When the barriers between Jews and gentiles were eliminated through Jesus’ death (Ephesians 2:13-16), the Sabbath was one of the barrier ordinances eliminated. It was a ritual law, not a timeless and eternal moral law.

 It was included in the attachments and it is on our website. It is clear teaching from the New Testament—see gospel of John for example.

The Old Testament must be read through the lens of the New Testament. The Messiah had not appeared yet when God was dealing with the nation of Israel in Old Testament times. The incarnation changed everything. Christians are under a new and different covenant than ancient Israel’s.

We only have time and resources for brief responses here. We recommend the books, The Gospel Solution by Tom Weaver; Unlock Your Bible and Beyond an Angry God by Steve McVey for a more detailed study of this topic.

The New Testament is clear that Christians will sin in this life (see Romans 7 and 1 John 1:8 for example). But Christ’s atonement made righteous provision for all sin (past, present, and future). In Christ, we are considered free of sin because our faith is bound up in him, not ourselves (see Philippians 3:7-9).
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: my answer   Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:43 pm

You didn’t say the ten commandments were no more. Great, this is exactly what I want to hear from you.

Have the ten commandments become obsolete?

You said they, the ten commandments, were fulfilled in Christ. You used Hebrews 8:13 to support your argument. I asked you to read the context, i.e. Hebrews 8-10, which taught that the Christ came to fulfill the law, which required shedding of blood for forgiveness of sin, which is transgression of the law, by shedding his own blood. You have yet to find a verse in Hebrews to support your idea that the ten commandments were fulfilled.

You said Humans cannot keep the ten commandments perfectly. You have made God a liar because, as I said in my last post, the Word of God said the commandments are not difficult (Deuteronomy 30:11-16) and to keep the commandments is the way of life (Deuteronomy 30:19).

You said Jesus was the only one to keep the ten commandments perfectly because he was God. You neglected the fact that he came in the flesh and he overcame temptations in the desert as a human by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4). You also neglected the fact that believers are given a new life and are not to go on sinning (Romans 6 especially 6:15).

You said Jesus did for us what we could never do for ourselves. Is it impossible for you not to have only one God, not to worship idols, not to use God’s name in vain, to remember the Sabbath, to honor your parents, not to murder, not to commit adultery, not to steal, not to false witness, not to covet others’ wife and possession?

You said the old covenant law, as a complete package, was never intended as an end in itself. Perhaps you should try to read my words and respond accordingly instead of simply cutting and pasting from your library. In my last post I said I didn’t suggest that the ten commandments were an end in themselves so you may put this argument to rest. While towards the middle of this post you said OK, as long as it’s understood that they cannot save anyone, you repeated this straw man argument right here at the beginning of your answer.

You said the old covenant law, as a complete package, was never intended as an end in itself. The law, which required shedding of blood for the forgiveness of sin, was added because of transgression until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come (Galatians 3:19).

One cannot simply lump God’s commandments and God’s sacrificial laws together as one. The sacrificial laws were added for the forgiveness of unintentional sins against God’s commandments and were replacement by the sacrifice of the Christ. God did not replace His own commandments which are eternal and true cf Psalm 119:160.

You said all the ten commandments could do is condemn. Again you are contradicting to what the Word of God said i.e. to keep of commandments is the way of life (Deuteronomy 30:19).

You said Jesus is our true Sabbath rest – freedom from sin. Did you not say earlier that believers will sin?

You said Jesus is our true Sabbath rest. Does it replace physical rest that God commands one in every seven days? That Christians can exploit their employees by not giving them physical rest?

You said there’s no commandment in the new testament to keep the Sabbath of Israel. You neglected that the Christ taught the Sabbath is made for man, not just Israel. You neglected that the Christ taught it’s lawful to do good on the Sabbath. He didn’t teach not to keep the Sabbath. On the other hand, you quoted John 4:19-26. Did John 4:19-26 teach not to keep the Sabbath or did you read such into the text?

You said if a believer kills, commits adultery or steals, there are negative consequences in this life but salvation is based on Christ’s perfect obedience to God’s eternal law of love. You contradicted to what the bible taught. On that day the Christ will say to him: “'I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God's laws” (Matthew 7:23). In fact, the book of Hebrews, which you quoted to support your idea of Christ’s fulfillment of the law, taught that if a person continues to sin, he would face judgment and raging fire from God (Hebrews 10:26-27).

You quoted Romans 8:1, 37-39 but you skipped Romans 8:4-13 which taught believers to live in accordance with the Holy Spirit. You have yet to answer why you considered the Holy Spirit is not powerful enough for believers to resist temptations and thus to not to sin.

You said God is now writing his eternal law of love, the law of Christ, or “royal law” in the hearts of believers in the life long process of new creation. You failed again to show from the bible that this has replaced the ten commandments. If this law does not replace the ten commandments, why would you teach against them?

Would you be able to show me from the bible, the exact verse(s), that the ten commandments were fulfilled in Christ and that believers are saved without having to obey? You kept attaching the files from your library but none of your files could provide any verse to prove such. Instead, they are all man made words trying to convince but in fact contradictory to what the bible teaches.

You put up another straw man by saying we simply cannot earn our salvation through law keeping. Not once have I suggested salvation through law keeping so you may put such argument to rest, or remove from your file(s) prior to cutting and pasting as an answer.

Yet another straw man by asking “do Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:17-19 tell Christians they must keep the seventh day Sabbath?” It is as illogical as to question “do Jesus’ words tell Christians in Matthew 5:17-19 that they are saved by faith?” to prove that they are not saved by faith. You may put this straw man to rest.

You put up quite a long passage to explain away the word “fulfill”. I have yet to hear from you just one verse that the ten commandments are fulfilled and that Christians do not have to obey to have eternal life. To believe in Christ and yet not realizing he is the Word of God who gave the ten commandments is to believe in another Christ.

Yet another straw man by asking “did Jesus mean Christians had to keep all the regulations of the law of Moses, including the holy time regulations of the Sabbath, or strict tithing, or the food laws?” You lump everything written in the Torah and ask a yes or no answer. You argue that to obey any law one must obey every single law in the Torah. Do you realize that’s what the Pharisees insisted and what the Christ taught against in the gospels? You have to prove that the great commandment i.e. to love God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might is detached from the obedience of God’s commandments to make your argument work. Otherwise you may put this straw man to rest.

You quoted Tyndale. Is he over the teaching of Christ? Did he try in vain to translate the ten commandments not relevant to Christians? How about Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Jonathan Edwards, D L Moody, Charles Spurgeon and many more who taught Christians to obey the ten commandments? Are they over the teaching of Christ?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: Re: answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath   Sat Feb 18, 2017 6:18 pm

They were not abolished; they were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. He was the only One to keep them perfectly in their spiritual intent, something humans could never do. His loving atonement did for us what we could never do for ourselves. That’s why our salvation is bound up in belief (faith/trust) in him and not our own attempts at old covenant law keeping.
As part of the old covenant for Israel, they are obsolete in that civil and religious form for that nation. The new (fulfilled) covenant is not the only one in existence. It is based on God’s eternal law of love—loving God with our whole being and our fellow humans as ourselves. The entire old covenant package, ratified in animal blood at Sinai, is now obsolete in its national form to ancient Israel (see Galatians, Romans, and Hebrews). We are now under grace and new creation, not the old law. The new covenant is a matter of the “circumcised” heart and was ratified in God’s own blood at Calvary. The old was exclusive to Israel and temporary until its spiritual fulfillment in Christ; the new is open to all who believe in him as Lord and Savior and is eternal in nature.
The entire old covenant (Law of Moses) was fulfilled in Jesus Christ—he was the Reality to which the shadow pointed. The Ten Commandments were part of this package. Of course it’s still wrong to murder, commit adultery, steal, etc.—there are negative consequences for unloving behavior in this life. But it is critical to realize that our salvation is based on grace and faith; not law keeping. Christ’s atonement made righteous provision for all sin (past, present, and future)—nothing can separate us from his love and assurance (Romans 8:1; 37-39).
You’re lifting an Old Testament passage out of context to establish your point. The New Testament clearly teaches that Christians sin in this life (see Romans 7 and 1 John 1:8, etc.). The Deuteronomy passage was addressed to ancient Israel under the old covenant law, not to Christians under the Law of Christ. Things changed at the cross and resurrection. There is no legalism associated with the gospel of grace and our acceptance in Jesus Christ, the vicarious human and “new Adam” for all. As we mature in the faith, we sin less and less, love more, and become more Christ like. Sanctification is a lifelong process where we are learning to love as God loves. If we could earn our salvation through law keeping, Christ died in vain. In pure love, God did everything for us because no one would be saved otherwise (John 3:16-17).
That’s right, but sometimes they do sin, even with the Holy Spirit—that is the clear teaching of Scripture. Our sins are not counted against us, however, because of Christ’s atonement—we are free in him. There is no fear associated with the gospel of grace. We rest confidently in his assurance because our salvation does not depend on us, rather, his reconciling and redeeming work for us.
It’s not impossible, but no one except Jesus has ever done it. Ancient Israel didn’t even keep it in the letter engraved on stone—that’s why they went into captivity. Christians don’t keep it in the spirit—only God can do that. We’ll do it in the Kingdom of God after Christ’s return because we will have fully healed minds and resurrection bodies. Nothing that opposes God and his love for the creation will survive the “new heavens and new earth” in the Kingdom of God. Even now, believers experience the Kingdom, having “died” and been “resurrected” with Christ. When he returns, they will experience it in its fullness—there will be no more sin, death, evil, or alienation from God—only love, peace, and joy. We are living in the “between” period where sin, death, and evil, although conquered by Christ, are still active. They will not prevail and will be no more in the end.
Not sure what your point is here. If you are advocating that keeping the Ten Commandments can save a person, however, we have to disagree. Only belief in Christ’s atoning work for us can do that. The New Testament describes the las as holy, just, and good, but all it could do is convict people of sin and condemn—Israel and the world needed a Redeemer who could bring life.
The entire old covenant was a complete package, consisting of 613 civil and religious laws and regulations for Israel. It was ratified in animal blood at Sinai. The new covenant was prophesied in the Old Testament (Jeremiah 31:31-34, etc.). Believers are now under the new covenant that is personal, spiritual, and relational—we are in union and communion with God through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is how Christ lives in believers. Christ’s fulfillment of the old covenant rendered the entire old covenant package obsolete in its national form to ancient Israel. God is now writing his eternal law of love, expressed in love for God and fellow humans, in the hearts of believers. The old could only convict them of sin and condemn—the new reconciles, redeems, and brings life. It is based on belief (always looking to Christ), never our own efforts. Please see attachment for details.
That’s right. But the Ten Commandments were only an expression of God’s eternal law of love—the new covenant goes much further, into the spiritual fullness behind the letter. We are now learning to love as God loves, not merely obey a set of rules that brought blessings and cursings under the old system. Jesus took the penalty of sin on himself so we might have life.
That was given to Israel, not the Christian church. In the covenant’s fulfillment believers are now under grace and new creation, not the law.
Both statements are true.
The old Sabbath rest was for a physical nation; there are no commanded “rest days” in the new covenant of grace. Believers are free to rest and worship anytime and anyplace (John 4:19-26).
That is correct. There are no commanded rest or worship days in the New Testament. Within Christian freedom, if a person chooses to rest and worship on the Sabbath of Israel, they are free to do so as long as they don’t do it legalistically or in judgment of other Christians who worship at other times.
See attachment for explanation.
That was spoken prior to his death when the old covenant was still in force. When he died, it was “finished.”
A believer can worship anytime they choose.
It did not teach not to keep the Sabbath. It was looking forward to the time days would not matter because believers would enjoy their true (fulfilled) Sabbath rest in a relationship with Jesus Christ. He is much bigger than a day of the week. Blessings.
Matthew 7:23 is part of Jesus' general teaching in the Sermon on the Mount and is one verse of a specific unit of thought that stretches between verse 15-23. In this passage, the instruction to the disciples is about recognizing false prophets and people that claim to come in his name. Two of the ways that they might do that is to claim that they are followers of Christ (verse 21) and that they have preached in his name (verse 22). Since they aren’t truly his disciples, but fakes, Jesus will disown them (verse 23). This passage was not spoken against the Jewish religious leaders, the Pharisees and others, but is Jesus’ general admonition to his disciples who would be responsible, after Jesus’ death, for keeping the church spiritually healthy. The Jewish religious leaders would not have claimed to come in Jesus’ name or to follow him. That was precisely their problem—they publicly rejected Jesus! So far as the religious leaders of Israel casting out demons is concerned, since Jesus implied they did, we can only surmise that God honored his covenant promises in this way. Jesus himself pointed the people to the teachers of the law and the Pharisees as sitting in “Moses’ seat.” He told them to obey and do what they told people to do, except in those areas where they taught an abusive legalism (Matthew 23, especially verses 1-2). The Jews were still under the old Sinai covenant of Moses so long as Jesus was alive. The church did not begin until after his resurrection and sending of the Holy Spirit into human hearts. It is important to consider the context and time frame. Since so much changed with the incarnation, the Old Testament must be read through the lens of the New Testament and everything must be read through the lens of Jesus Christ.
This is speaking of apostasy—a willful and deliberate turning from the faith. In light of the atonement, this is the only was a person can alienate themselves from God’s kingdom—willfully rejecting the saving grace they have been given in Christ. It is not speaking of breaking old covenant laws—Jesus’ atonement took care of the sin question for humans. All have been accepted in Christ; not all will receive the salvation they have been given, however. God will not force it on someone who doesn’t want it. Our sins and failings as humans do not keep us out of the Kingdom, willful and persistent rejection is all that can do that.
It’s powerful enough, but humans are not. If you are honest, you will recognize that no human is without sin. In fact, the church serves as a spiritual hospital for sinners—it is not a museum for saints.
No one is teaching against them—if you want to try to keep them, go for it, that’s great. In fact, we are called to holiness, we are to strive to keep God’s eternal law of love. But, realistically, we will fail as humans in this life and when we do, we have an Advocate in the Holy Spirit who intercedes for us. God is in the business of saving the world, not condemning it (John 3:17; 1 Timothy 2:4). If it weren’t for Christ’s loving atonement, no one would be saved.
Read these carefully—it is explained in there: https://www.gci.org/bible/hebrews and https://www.gci.org/law/sct07. Briefly, it is bound up in the fact that the old covenant (the complete package in its national form to Israel) has given way to the new (fulfilled) covenant of Jesus Christ. He actually added the spiritual dimension to the letter of the law and is now writing it in the hearts of believers—a much better covenant.
That’s great if you don’t believe that. We agree completely. Sorry if we misunderstood.
We are saved by grace through faith (belief/trust) in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. That is the clear teaching of the New Testament.
He gave them, to Israel. When the fullness came the Christian church was given much more—their full spiritual intent, something Israel never had. It requires more than just not killing—we must not hate; more than not committing adultery—we must not lust. Even though we have been called to a much higher standard than Israel who just had the letter of the law, we will not always live up to it perfectly. Jesus lived up to it for us and we can rest in his peace and assurance. We will have it all in the Kingdom when he returns.
That’s because the entire Law of Moses was a complete package for Israel and ended in that national civil and religious form with the Messiah, Jesus Christ. There is only one covenant now—the fulfilled covenant of Jesus Christ—we are in the age of grace and new creation, not the law. The old law was designed to separate Israel from the nations as God’s covenant people and lead them to faith in Christ. We trust him for everything spiritual in life.
That’s what the New Testament says.
See attached articles.
No. No one is.
Of course not. Note, however, that none of them kept the Sabbath of Israel and it was never changed biblically. It was either fulfilled in Christ and no longer necessary or is still binding for salvation. Also, you misunderstand if you think we are teaching against the commandments—we are not. We are merely pointing out that Christians are not under the old covenant and that we now are under the new covenant of Jesus Christ. “Fulfill” and “abolish” are not the same thing. Blessings.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
boyscout



Number of posts : 339
Age : 105
Location : the 3rd rock
Registration date : 2009-03-10

PostSubject: my answer   Sat Feb 18, 2017 6:23 pm

Matthew 7:23: you used many words trying to change the meaning of the verse but you cannot change the meaning of “God’s law” which the audience knew exactly what the Christ was referring to.
You have again and again and again failed to quote just one verse from Hebrews to support your idea of “everything changed after the cross”,
Hebrews 10:26-27 clearly spoke of sinning and you said it’s speaking of apostasy. That’s the ongoing problem you have of reading your thoughts into the text.
Romans 8:4-13 you again and again said humans are not. That’s the mind of sinful nature. Only when one is willing to have the mind controlled by the Spirit can change that. It’s the scripture speaking. You are not being honest presenting the scripture.
You said no one is teaching against the ten commandments but then you teach believers do not have to remember the Sabbath by not doing any physical work, do you?
I asked you to show me from the bible, the exact verse(s), that believers do not have to obey the ten commandments. You kept bringing up your explanations from your library but not one single verse to support your idea.
Sabbath: so far you failed to quote just one verse from the bible i.e. from the teachings of the Christ, that believers don’t have to remember it.
You quoted Matthew 5:17-19. The Christ said in verse 18: I tell you the truth, 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.
Will by any means disappear. Any means.
Until everything is accomplished. Everything.
Where is your idea of “Christians do not have to obey the ten commandments” from in amongst these 3 verses?
You finally accept the fact that the Christ is the Word of God who gave the ten commandments. You said He gave them to Israel. You said the Christian church was given much more. Do you not remember that the new covenant is to be made with the house of Israel? That He will put His laws in their minds and write them on their hearts? Is the Christian church not God’s Israel? Does “given much more” mean one does not have to obey the ten commandments? If “given much more” mean one has to obey all the more, does it mean to do away with Sabbath rest?
You failed again to show, by the scripture, that the great commandment i.e. to love God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might is detached from the obedience of God’s commandments. All you pointed to was your own explanations. Your explanations are not the scriptures.
You said none of them i.e. Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Jonathan Edwards, D.I. Moody and Charles Spurgeon, kept the Sabbath of Israel. Did they not teach believers to obey the ten commandments? Do you call them legalists? Did they not teach to keep one day out of a week holy? Do you call them legalist?
I compared these men’s teachings with yours to show a rather big part of the down grade which began with not remembering His name, to not remembering His Sabbath, to not obeying the rest of the ten commandments, to completely lawlessness.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath   

Back to top Go down
 
answers from grace communion international canada regarding sabbath
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Canadian Veterans of Canada
» SABBATH STATEMENTS ~ PRESBYTERIAN
» GRACE E LONG
» Law and grace vs curses and blessings
» Getting Wrong Answers

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Our Fellowship Forum :: Our Fellowship :: Bible Discussion-
Jump to: