| 5 years ago :: Oct 21, 2008 - 7:30PM #1 | |
|
All,
Sincerely, in another thread showed me a couple of verses I never noticed before:
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 22, 2008 - 5:20PM #2 | |
|
Use common logic. Is it okay to steal? Is it okay to worship idols? Is it okay to lie? To kill? To commit adultery? To covet? To have false Gods before God? Then why would they be nailed to the cross, or done away with? Why would the fourth commandment be any different? it still is not okay to break the ten commandments, as they are moral, and deal with our relationship between man and God, and man and man.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 22, 2008 - 5:30PM #3 | |
|
Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Heb 9:1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary. 2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary. 3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; 4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant; [B]STONE never vanishes away, or waxes old. Stone is always there. Stone is forever binding. The ten commandments are part of the old covenant, but not the entire old covenant. They were not the ordinances of the law( which was contained in the book of the law, or Mosaic law) that were nailed to the cross. Nowhere does it say the ten commandments were nailed to the cross. Not the tables of stone, nothing, it does say, though, where you are quoting, that they were part of the OC. But because the OC is no longer binding, does not mean the ten commandments no longer are just because they were a part of that OC. We are still to morally uphold our relationship to God, and man. The ten commandments were IN the ark, not on the side. They are obviously esteemed as higher than all else. /B] |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 22, 2008 - 6:51PM #4 | |
|
Hi Christ07,
[QUOTE=Christ07;843435]Use common logic. Is it okay to steal? Is it okay to worship idols? Is it okay to lie? To kill? To commit adultery? To covet? To have false Gods before God? Then why would they be nailed to the cross, or done away with? Why would the fourth commandment be any different? it still is not okay to break the ten commandments, as they are moral, and deal with our relationship between man and God, and man and man.[/QUOTE] OK, Lets use common logic... You are only taking about the shadows: - Steal is the shadow of - give everything to the poor and follow him... - Lie is the shadow of "We must not even do an "I swear" or make an oath, but just let your yes mean yesy and your no mean no" - Kill is a shadow of - do not hate for you kill the one you hate in your heart... - Adultery is a shadow of - do not even look lustfully at another, for you have commited adultery in your heart... All the decalogue is a shadow... Even love the Lord your God is a shadow of lving and worshipping in his very presence. Now that we are done with common sense, can we get back to the actual verse that includes the decalogue in the "first (OLD) covenant"? Peace, Bob |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 22, 2008 - 7:08PM #5 | |
|
[QUOTE=PassingTheTest;843638]Hi Christ07,
OK, Lets use common logic... You are only taking about the shadows: - Steal is the shadow of - give everything to the poor and follow him... - Lie is the shadow of "We must not even do an "I swear" or make an oath, but just let your yes mean yesy and your no mean no" - Kill is a shadow of - do not hate for you kill the one you hate in your heart... - Adultery is a shadow of - do not even look lustfully at another, for you have commited adultery in your heart... All the decalogue is a shadow... Even love the Lord your God is a shadow of lving and worshipping in his very presence. Now that we are done with common sense, can we get back to the actual verse that includes the decalogue in the "first (OLD) covenant"? Peace, Bob[/QUOTE] " But the ministry of death, written on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? For if the ministry and condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness has more glory. For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorius " 2-cor. 7-11 The ministry of death, written on stones, the ministry of condemnation, was glorious. But that glory has passed away. The ministry of death and condemnation, which was written on stones, the ten commandment part of the law is gone. Replaced by the ministry of righteousness which has infinitely more glory, Jesus Christ. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 22, 2008 - 8:55PM #6 | |
|
Very good, very good. But good luck convincing them that they don't view the gospel message as presented in the NT.
BTW, Stone wears away with the simple washing or dropping of water on it's surface over time. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 22, 2008 - 10:19PM #7 | |
|
These scriptures clearly point to the covenant that already was in place prior to the decalogue being given. It was the covenant of the passover and the sacrificing of lambs for protection.
Hbr 8:7 For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. Hbr 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Hbr 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 23, 2008 - 9:00AM #8 | |
|
Hello son of Reason,
[QUOTE=son of Reason;843761]You're interpretation appears to be consistent with what you have quoted. One question though: If the "mosaic law" that supposedly does not contain the Ten Commandments was put in the side of the ark, why is it not listed by the author of Hebrews in his list? Just curious.[/QUOTE] Upon further research I do not think the Moses written mosaic law was actually in the ark.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 23, 2008 - 10:04AM #9 | |
|
You are correct, PTT. the book of the Laws of Moses was not placed in the Ark. The Ten Commandments, the tablets of stone were in the Ark. That is how we know that the Ten Commandments are forever, and for ALL people. The purpose of the law of Moses was to make the people know and understand all the details of God's Law. God had chosen the Israelites for the purpose of teaching all the rest of the world His way, and they needed to be taught clearly in order to be able to teach others. They needed to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. But the Ten Commandments are the basis for everything else. That is the part that God promised to write in our hearts. When it is written in our hearts, it won't be necessary to have it written on stone or on anything else:
"Rom 3:19-25 19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, that every mouth may be closed, and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. 21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; NAS or, as the KJV puts it: "Rom 3:19-24 19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: KJV This passage clearly shows that the law is for all people, and shouldn't be discarded, either the whole or in part. It is clear that when we accept Jesus Christ as our personal Savior, the Law (Ten Commandments) should be written in our hearts. Nowhere does it say that the Law is for the Israelites only. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Oct 23, 2008 - 10:24AM #10 | |
|
Hi Spudette,
[QUOTE=spudette;844842]You are correct, PTT. the book of the Laws of Moses was not placed in the Ark. The Ten Commandments, the tablets of stone were in the Ark. That is how we know that the Ten Commandments are forever, and for ALL people. The purpose of the law of Moses was to make the people know and understand all the details of God's Law. God had chosen the Israelites for the purpose of teaching all the rest of the world His way, and they needed to be taught clearly in order to be able to teach others. They needed to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. But the Ten Commandments are the basis for everything else. That is the part that God promised to write in our hearts. When it is written in our hearts, it won't be necessary to have it written on stone or on anything else:[/QUOTE] Please reread the first post again. The decalogue is literally described as contents in the ark that is specificly listed in the objects contained in the first (OLD) covenant. That is what this thread is about. We are specifically dealing with Hebrews 8:31 thru 9:4 and the exact understanding of what the Hebrews author is telling us. I've seen a few posts by SDAs trying to tell us that the Hebrews writer is WRONG and here is why..., but that is not correct. Hebrews 8:31-9:4 is just as inspired as all the other passages presented here. How can SDAs make all passages fit together in a logical and ethical way? Peace, Bob |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|