| Author | Message | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Hi Ken, I hope we FAF people arenít overwhelming you. Most of us are rather new to the full-loaf gospel, as compared to the SDA half-loaf approach. And so we tend to get rather exuberant in witnessing to those still in Adventism. I do want to answer your question, myself, though, since you addressed it to me, despite the fact that Steve and Colleen answered it quite well, I think. But I want to answer a pointed, specific question with a pointed, specific answer. Question: Where in the New Testament is the Third Commandment, ìThou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain,î given? Answer: In Matthew 5:33-37. Jesus restates the Third Commandment in its original intent: ìYou have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ëDo not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.î The Old Testamentís Third Commandment was not referring to common ìswearingî that we hear so much of today, although I think it would include that. But its real meaning was, as the NIV text note to Exodus 20:3 makes clear: ìDo not misuse the name of the Lord. By profaning Godís name -- e.g., by swearing falsely by it (see Lev. 19:12; see also Jer. 7:9 ...), as on the witness stand in court.î And so the question really becomes: How did Jesus IMPROVE upon the Third Commandment in Matthew 5:33-37? Hereís how: Jesus recognized that the Old Testament ìallowed oaths except those that profaned the name of God. Jesus would do away with all oaths, in favor of always speaking the truth [NIV text note].î And yet even though the Law of Jesus -- as stated in the Sermon on the Mount and many other places in the New Testament -- is VASTLY SUPERIOR to the Law of Moses -- as stated in the Ten Commandments and many other places in the Old Testament -- it is STILL NOT ENOUGH. For, as Colleen pointed out, the real new covenant law is the Living Law of the actual Person of Jesus Christ living in our hearts by virtue of the Holy Spirit. May God continue to bless you, Ken, as you continue to seek and to ask quest | ||
| Bruce H |
Ken Ann L it looks like you have done the same study but I will put mine up anyway. Ken Clark The laws that were nailed to the cross were not the Ten Commandments, but the laws of ordinances. These were the ceremonial laws of types & shadows that pointed to the death of Jesus and had no further meaning beyond the cross. Thats why Paul said it was contrary to the Christian. The rent veil in the Temple at the death of Christ Matt. 27:51 indicated the end of the ordinances of animal sacrifices, & Eph. 2:15 says Jesus abolished...the law of commandments contained in ordinances. -------------------------------------------------- Bruce Heinrich Let us look at the Greek word for ORDINANCES used in these texts. 1378 dogma {dog'-mah}from the base of 1380; 1) doctrine, decree, ordinance 1a) of public decrees 1b) of the Roman Senate 1c) of rulers 2) the rules and requirements of the law of Moses; carrying a suggestion of severity and of threatened judgment 3) of certain decrees of the apostles relative to right living Now let us look at every text (only 5 times) in the NT that uses this word Dogma (1378) or ordinances. Luke 2:1 1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree (DOGMA, STRONGS 1378) from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. So here the word is translated decree, it has to do with laws and decrees. It does not have anything to do with ceremonial laws of types & shadows. Acts 16:4 4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees (DOGMA, STRONGS 1378) for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem. Same as above again it has NOTHING to do with ceremonial laws of types & shadows it is the new ordenances. Acts 17:7 7 Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees (DOGMA, STRONGS 1378) of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus. Here again it is the Law and decrees of Caesar and not ceremonial laws of types & shadows. Eph 2:15 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances (DOGMA, STRONGS 1378); for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Here the text gives use a clue, it says enmity, which means mutual hatred. Well the Law or Ten Commandments hate me for I cannot keep them and they accuse me and I do not like that. The ceremonial Law if I lived before Christ would be my friend because by it I am forgiven of my sins. The ceremonial Law was for me and I have not enmity against it. Col 2:14 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances (DOGMA, STRONGS 1378) that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; Here it says it again. It is the Ordinances that are against us. Well the Ten Commandments are against me for sure. But the ceremonial sacrificial system was for me. So by these texts I can conclude that the ordinances are not the sacrificial system or the ceremonial laws of types & shadows for they were for me not against me, they were for me because they atoned for my sins and they were a guide for me to point the way to Jesus Christ. The ordinaces are Laws and decrees which are against me remember James 2:10. -------------------------------------------------- Ken Clark Paul wrote in Col. 2:16-17 that we are no longer judged by meat offerings, drink offerings, and sabbath days "which are a shadow of things to come." Note that these are yearly and not weekly Sabbath of the moral law. These shadowy sabbaths are described in Lev. 23:24-37. The mystery of Col 2:16 is completely cleared up. The law of the yearly sabbaths, with all its meat & drink offerings, was nailed to the cross, but the great Ten Commandment law with the weekly Sabbath was not affected by that blotting out of ordinances. -------------------------------------------------- Bruce Henrich First of all the GREAT COMMANDMENT is not the Ten commandments Matt 22:37-40. Now let us look at Col 2:16-17 KING JAMES VERSION 16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an HOLYDAYS, or of the NEW MOON, or of the SABBATH DAYS. REVISED STANDARD VERSION 16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a FESTIVAL or a NEW MOON or a SABBATH. AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION 16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a FEAST DAYS or a NEW MOON or a sabbath day: NEW KING JAMES 16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a FESTIVAL, or a NEW MOON, or SABBATHS: The text say nothing about offerings, be careful not to read into the text what is not there. Here it also mentions the three types of Sabbaths. 4 TYPES OF SABBATHS A. SABBATH OF YEARS (EVERY 7TH YEAR, YEARS) CALLED: 1. JUBILEE EXAMPLE: 1. JUBILEE B. 7 - YEARLY SABBATH1S (SEASONS) CALLED: 1. HOLYDAYS 2. FESTIVALS 3. FEASTS EXAMPLE: 1. PASSOVER, 2. WEEKS OR PENTECOST, 3. BOOTHS OR TABERNACLES OR SUKKOT, 4. DAY OF ATONEMENT OR YOM KIPPUR, 5. THE NEW YEARS1S DAY OR ROSH HASHANAH. (6). PURIM, (7). HANUKKAH OR DEDICATION. C. 12 - MONTHLY SABBATH1S (MONTHS) CALLED: 1. NEW MOON OR ROSH HODESH EXAMPLE: 1. NEW MOON D. 52 - WEEKLY SABBATH1S (DAYS) CALLED: 1. WEEKLY FESTIVAL OR SABBATH EXAMPLE 1. SABBATH (SEVENTH DAY SABBATH) . So this text clearly states it is the weekly sabbath, notice the order of the sabbath. When they are mentioned in the OT they are always mentioned in the OT they are always mentioned this way in either ascending or decending order. -------------------------------------------------- Bruce H | ||
| Bruce H |
Ken Clark OK so the New Testament proves that the 10 Commandments, from a Loving unchanging God have been done away with. Then the new law has replaced the old. Where in the New Testament does it say not to use the Lords name in vain? -------------------------------------------------- Bruce Heinrich Why did a unchanging God change his mind about circumcision? Why did a unchanging God change his mind about monthly (New Moons) sabbaths? Why did a unchanging God change his mind about not making a fire on the sabbath (Exo 35:3) ? Why did a unchanging God change his mind about carring a burden on the sabbath? Why did a unchanging God change his mind about stonning a man for breaking the sabbath? Why did a unchanging God change his mind about shaving around the sides of your head (Lev 19:23)? I have a lot more. Maybe God did not change his mind? maybe the Old covenant is still binding? Where in the Old Testament does it say we are not to circumcise. Where in the Old testament does it say Love your enemies (Matt 5:43-44; Deut 23:6; 30:7; 33:27) Where in the Old testament does it say resist evil (Matt 5:38; Lev 24:20) Where in the Old testament does it say do not make an oath (Matt 5:34; Nu 30:1) Where in the Old testament does it say give all to the Lord (Matt 19:21, Nu 30:1) Where in the NEW testament does it say we must keep the Law. Acts 15:24 Bruce | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Jude, The above discussion is great. In particular, the April 28, 2000, 1:19pm excerpt below. "But Christ not only bettered the Law of Moses by expanding and deepening it. He also bettered it by re-seating or re-establishing it within himself, that is, by making it come out of his New Testament mouth rather than his Old Testament finger. Thus he demonstrated all over again that he was God ññ God of the Old Testament giving at Mount of Sinai and God of the New Testament giving on the Mount of Blessings. For Jesus as God had and retains the right to abolish the old inferior Law of Moses and to recreate it as the new superior Law of Jesus spoken with Godíís own mouth on the Mount of Blessings. In one stroke, his action on the cross, he both abolished it and recreated it in a superior form. Thus, by explaining this spiritual reality to the Ephesians, Paul put an end to the hostility between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians in Ephesus, "For through him [Christ] we both [Jews and Gentiles] have access to the Father by one Spirit." This is not only true, but it's beautiful as well. Totally awesome, Maryann | ||
| jtree |
Bruce, my friend... Matthew 22:36-39 I notice some will state that... Verse 22:37 - Love the Lord - Commandments 1 - 4 Verse 22:39 - Love thy neighbor - Commandments 5 - 10. That to me is reading into it what isn't there. | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Maryann, Thanks. Some of your posts have been "totally awesome" too. And I attribute that to your changing relationship to Jesus Christ. It means that you are growing in grace and in the knowledge of the Truth, which is a Person -- Jesus Christ -- far more than it is a set of words on paper. Even more grace to you, Jude | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Bruce, Your posts seem to be getting more and more powerful. I deeply appreciate the depth to which you plunge into Scripture. Also, your use of scholarly tools -- such as that book containing the 613 OT laws -- is, in Maryann's words, "totally awesome." God Bless you. I never fail to learn from you. More grace to you, Jude | ||
| Ken Clark |
Bruce It seems to me that somehow you can't separate The Ten Commandments from Moses' ceremonial laws. Moses' law regulated the preisthood, sacrfices, rituals, meat & drink offerings...all of which forshadowed the cross. This law was added until the seed should come, that seed being Jesus. Gal 3:16,19 The ritual & ceremony of Moses' law pointed forward to Christ's sacrifice. When He died, this law came to an end, but the Ten Commandments stand fast forever & ever. Psalms 111:8 That there are two laws is made crystal clear in Daniel 9:10-11. Ken | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Hi Ken, How does Daniel 9:10-11 make "crystal clear" that there are two laws? Bruce has a book by Jewish scholar which lists 613 laws in the Torah, not two! How do you get two? Jude | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Ken, The book that Jude refers to that Bruce has is called, "Biblical Literacy," by Joseph Telushkin. You should be able to find one. It would be an eye opener. I'm sure if you really wanted one, someone would get one to you. As for mine, anyone that tried to get it, would draw back a bloody stump. (That's how good it is!) Maryann | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Hi Ken again, Psalm 111:8 proves that the Ten Commandments stand forever? That's a new one on me! Let's read it (NIV): "They [the Lord's precepts] are steadfast for ever and ever." POINT NUMBER ONE TO THE CONTRARY: If you believe the New Testament, then don't you think you'll have to agree that "the Lord" of the Old Testament was Jesus Christ in action before the first Christmas? For Jesus said, "Before Abraham was born, I am." John 8:58 NIV. And "I am" in Hebrew means "Yahweh," who is "the Lord" of the entire Old Testament. The reason the Jews picked up stones to kill Jesus was because he told them he was Yaweh. To claim to be Yaweh was to claim to be God and thus to blaspheme. And the punishment for blasphemy was to be stoned to death. And, if Christ WAS the Old Testament Lawgiver, then wasn't it Christ's finger that wrote the Ten Commandments on stone tablets on Mt. Sinai? And if that's true, then wasn't it also Yahweh's mouth that spoke the New Commandments on the Mount of Blessings? POINT NUMBER TWO TO THE CONTRARY: The precepts mentioned in Psalm 111 (the entire chapter, not just verse 8) refer to everything that the Lord has said, not just the Ten Commandments. This would include more even than the list of 613 laws that include the Ten. For example, "precepts" would include everything in Proverbs, for example, for Proverbs, as you know, is FULL of "precepts." And so we must look deeper than the mere surface of all of these laws and precepts, psalms and inspired history, to find what is meant by "steadfast." And if we do that, we're looking at the Lawgiver, and not just at the words of laws given. And if we're looking at the Lawgiver, then we're looking again at Yaweh or Jesus Christ, who gave us the new covenant laws on the Mount of Sinai. For, if Jesus Christ is God -- you DO believe that, don't you? -- then he has every right to deepen and improve upon an earlier statement of law given to a primitive people. But if you want to hang on to the words of the laws and precepts referred to in Psalm 111, then you're going to have to start eating beetles (Lev. 11:22 if you obey the KJV) or katydids (Lev. 11:22 if you obey the NIV). Do you do that? And if you do, I've got 612 more commandments from the Old Testament for you! Peace to you, Jude | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Ken, You posted, "It seems to me that somehow you can't separate The Ten Commandments from Moses' ceremonial laws." If that's true, then you're going to have to start slaughtering goats and lambs and bullocks and oxen for your sins, aren't you? Especially, if, as you argue later in your post, ALL of the laws and precepts referred to in Psalm 111 -- and not just the Ten Commandments -- are to "stand forever and ever." Are we on the same wavelength here? Jude | ||
| Steve |
Hi Ken, I hope all the response you've been getting here isn't overwhelming you too much. A little "whelming" is good for the soul. I hope you're checking out what people are saying. Clarify this for me: You say the Ten Commandments are going to stand forever. Jesus said that in heaven, there will be no marrying and giving in marriage. Therefore, how will the commandment about committing adultery apply when this world ends? Please clarify this for me, because it just makes no sense. Also, when the word Law is used in scripture, I don't see where any difference is made between one part of God's Law and another part of God's Law. Please clarify that for me. Please don't be like the Jehovah's Witnesses I've studied with, who jump from scripture to scripture to try to find something that isn't clear in any of the passages. Let the Word speak for itself. Let's not make it say something it's not. Looking forward to your clarification on how adultery might be committed when there is no marriage. BTW, along the same lines, would be interested in your thoughts on how murdering would be committed on "immortal" people; how stealing would happen when we'll be living in complete sinlessness in a heaven or paradise of limitless treasure; how bearing false witness will apply when all will be known by God, and God and the Lamb will be living in our midst; for that matter, on the first four, how would we have false gods, when that commandment was specifically given to deal with the lands that Israel was going into with all the false gods, etc, etc, etc. God Bless, Steve | ||
| Bruce H |
Ken Clark ---It seems to me that somehow you can't separate The Ten Commandments from Moses' ceremonial laws.--- Ken I have had other Adventist say this to me could you show me where in the Bible you can make this clear. Ken could you tell me a little bit about yourself, you dont have to. I am Bruce Heinrich, I live in Loma Linda, I am 42 years old and was an Adventist for 39 great years. I have no bad feeling about Adventist, in fact I have a real place in my heart for the church and its people. I am very greatfull for my Adventist past. I have left the Chruch because of my relationship with Jesus Christ, My Lord and Savior. He is my King and my God,I have entered His Sabbath Rest, and I will be with him forever this He promises me. Br | ||
| Bruce H |
Ken Clark I really Love Jesus, I am not trying to get out from under anything that Jesus would have me do. I want to abey to the best of my ability all the commands that He has given me, and not because this will save me but because He Loved me. | ||
| Ken Clark |
Hi All: Since y'all Love the NIV version of the Bible consider the following. I await your thoughts... 1. Fill in the missing words in Matthew 5:44. "Love your enemies,__________ them that curse you, ______________ to them that hate you, and pray for them that __________ and persecute you." 2. According to Matthew 17:21, what two things are required to cast out this type of demon? 3. According to Matthew 18:11, why did Jesus come to earth? 4. According to Matthew 27:2, what was Pilate's first name? 5. In Matthew 27:35, when the wicked soldiers parted His garments, they were fulfilling the words of the prophet. Copy what the prophet said in Matthew 27:35 from the NIV. 6. In Mark 3:15, Jesus gave the apostles power to cast out demons and to: ____________ 7. According to Mark 7:16, what does a man need to be able to hear? 8. According to Luke 7:28, what was John? (teacher, prophet, carpenter, etc.). What is his title or last name? 9. In Luke 9:55, what did the disciples not know? 10. In Luke 9:56, what did the Son of man not come to do? According to this verse, what did He come to do? 11. In Luke 22:14, how many apostles were with Jesus? 12. According to Luke 23:38, in what three languages was the superscription written? 13. In Luke 24:42, what did they give Jesus to eat with His fish? 14. John 3:13 is a very important verse, proving the deity of Christ. According to this verse (as Jesus spoke), where is the Son of man? 15. What happened each year as told in John 5:4? 16. In John 7:50, what time of day did Nicodemus come to Jesus? 17. In Acts 8:37, what is the one requirement for baptism? 18. What did Saul ask Jesus in Acts 9:6? 19. Write the name of the man mentioned in Acts 15:34. 20. Study Acts 24:6-8. What would the Jew have done with Paul? What was the chief captain's name? What did the chief captain command? 21. Copy Romans 16:24 word for word from the NIV. 22. First Timothy 3:16 is perhaps the greatest verse in the New Testament concerning the deity of Christ. In this verse, who was manifested in the flesh? 23. In the second part of First Peter 4:14, how do [they] speak of Christ? And, what do we Christians do? 24. Who are the three Persons of the Trinity in First John 5:7? 25. Revelation 1:11 is another very important verse that proves the deity of Christ. In the first part of this verse Jesus said, "I am the A______________ and O___________, the _________ and the _______:" Conclusion: Little space is provided for your answers, but it's much more than needed. If you followed the instructions above, you not only failed the test, you receive a big goose egg. (Ed. These are all missing in the NIV.) So now what do you think of your "accurate, easy to understand, up to date Bible"? If you would like to improve your score, and in fact score 100%, you can take this test using the Authorized (King James) Bible. "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" Gal. 4:16 | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Ken, The KJ ONLY controversy is just that. Am I to surmise that you are identifying yourself as an "enemy?" I would hope not. If you as a fellow Bible believer, believe you have truth not understood by FAF people, you have a very curious way of presenting it to FAF people! As an ENEMY? I got caught up in this KJ Only thing through a "Baptist Church" and the "Oneness, Jesus Only, Non-Trinitarian Penticostals." Wow, what a ride that was. I got a great book called, "The King James Only Controversy" (I think by James White No relation to EGW). I'll be glad to get that book into your hands if you're interested in not being an enemy to Bible Believing Christians. I just spent 1/2 an hour looking for my copy and can't find it. Sorry, I'd loved to have discussed a few things with you. Really though, this issue is more controversy stirring than gospel stirring. By the way, I missed the Goose Egg as the Bible I had handy was a Gk-Eng KJ and scrolled down after a few unrelated verses. Your FRIEND...Maryann | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Ken, I just thought of something else. You know what was a LARGE contributing factor to my not being as well versed in the Gospel as I should have been in the last couple years? Battling the "Word Faith" movement (you know, those money mongers on TV) that were predominately "Authorized KJ Only" advocates, that came into my home via my Mom. Then my husband brought the "Oneness Penticostal" heretical non-trinitarian rubbish in the house that is vehemently against ALL Scripture except the "Authorized KJ only" Bible. Before that, I tried to find a Church home and ended up in this radical Baptist Church that was nearly violent in it's insistance on ALL members have "Authorized KJ Only" Bibles! I nearly tossed religion permanantly from this. You know what I learned from these experiences? Making something other than Jesus Life, His Death, His Resurection, His Ascension, His Sitting at the right hand of His Father (NOW), His Completed Work and the necessity of us to simply BELIEVE in the Finished Work and allow the Holy Spirit to truly guide our lives is VERY dangerous. Infact, it could cost one their ETERNAL life. Now, seriously, do you believe, can you actually picture Paul, an Apostle, inspired by God, saying to the foolish Galations; Gal. 4:16 "Am I therefore become your ememy, because I tell you the truth?" Using THAT context, shaking the "Authorized Version" of his day and telling them they must use it ONLY? And that was his big truth? Re-read Galations. It is a wonderful journey to liberty (not license) in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. By the way, I love the KJ version, it is so familiar. I like to use it with the NASB and NIV and a few other "maverick" brands. I take VERY high offense to toting one so highly over another and on who's authority and making it into a doctrine. Did you ever have a copy of the 1611 version in your hand? Maybe, if you haven't you should. It might surprise you. Before I think of something else, I'm going to bed! As my friend Allenette so sweetly says, Ment nice, Again, your friend, Maryann | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Ken again, I thought of something else. Can you show me in the "Authorized KJ Bible" where it authorizes the "Authorized KJ Bible?" And tripple again, Your friend, Maryann | ||
| Steve |
Ken, You say, "since y'all Love the NIV version of the bible . . ." This confuses me. I don't usually use the NIV version of the Bible. If you don't understand Biblical translations and the constant need for updated translations based on the most accurate and most ancient manuscripts, then perhaps a translation in 400 year old English will do fine for you. My wife, however, who was raised in a Latin American country spoke only Spanish. The KVJ only confuses her as it doesn't even use simple modern English. Ask someone who speaks any of a hundred different languages if the KJV communicates to them and I'm confident thay'll answer you that they don't understand it. If you read multiple translations, you'll see that most of the accepted translations are saying the same thing, with MINOR differences. The Clear Word Bible (CWB) however, is an atrocity. I'd be interested in your comments on the CWB. God Bless, Steve |
