What is the Atonement?

[BibleShockers]

>>>Let me ask you: Is it evil to willfully disobey the first commandment? i.e. "You shall have no other gods before me."

How can someone disobey a lwa that was never commanded to them in the first place? In order to disobey the laws of Portugal you would have to be under that law. It is a matter of jurisdiction. There are laws against murder in many countries but I could kill a million people and never have disobeyed those laws because those laws do not apply to me. But if I were under any of those laws and violated ANY ONE OF THEM, I would be a law-breaker. You don't get to pick and choose when you are under a jurisdiction.

>>>The second? i.e. "You shall not make for yourself a carved image...You shall not bow down to them..." How about the third? i.e. "You shall not take the name of LORD your God in vain..." How about the fifth? i.e. "Honor your father and your mother." How about the 7th? "You shall not commit adultery."

Ditto.

>>>If it is evil to break 9 of the 10, what makes you think breaking the 4th is excempted and not evil?

Your logic is fine, but your assumption is bogus. Unless one accepts circumcision and becomes a Jew then they are not under the Jewish laws:

Ga 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

>>>Was it evil for Adam & Eve to disregard what God said not to eat?

Adam transgressed. He disobeyed a command given to him:

Ro 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

Ro 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

>>>As for the shadowy/typical aspects of the law that pointed to the sacrificial work of Christ, yes, they ended at the Cross.

NO.

Matthew 5:17 ¶ Think not that I am come to destroy [parse] the law [into binding and unbinding], or the prophets: I am not come to destroy [parse], but to fulfil [undo such parsing].

Mt 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, **till all be fulfilled**.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>...How is one released from the law? "Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear FRUIT for God." Rom 7:4 ESV.

But what produces that fruit? Paul contrasts a life led by the breath to one led by the law:

Gal 5:

18 But ***if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law***.

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

>>>"I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if justification were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose." Gal 2:20,21 ESV.

Who's side are you on?

>>>"What then? Are we to sin (transgressing the law)

That is not what Paul says sin is. Nor John. Sin is ANOMIA - which means "unprincipled behavior" - it is not a reference to the Torah.

>>>because we are not under law but under grace?

"WE ARE NOT UNDER LAW..."

>>>By no means! Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience,

Sin or Obedience - but not obedience to the Torah but to the faith, to the teaching of Jesus, God, - but not Torah.

>>>which leads to righteousness?

Paul said the Torah does NOT lead to righteousness.

>>>But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness." Rom 6:15-18 ESV.

The teaching of Paul - that one is not under the Torah but rather justified by faith apart from the religious activities of the law...

>>>Here is what seems to be a paradox which a lot of antinomian Christians cannot seem to understand: Obedience to the law is liberty (that's why the Apostle James calls it "the law of liberty"); disobedience is slavery - slavery to sin, NOT slavery to the law!

Gal 4:

21 ¶ Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

1 ¶ Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Paul would really not like you and would "stand in doubt of you":

Gal 4:

20 I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for **I stand in doubt of you**.

21 ¶ Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

Bill Ross

[John317]

What did Paul mean about being "dead to the law" and "free from the law" and "not under the law"?

Bill

How about "having been set free from sin" (Romans 6: 18)?

Are we set free from sin and also set free from righteousness?

Remember that the definition of righteousness is doing right, or conforming to the standard of God's moral law or God's will. God's will is His law. The law reveals what God's will is. His law reveals His character. God is love. Therefore, the law of God is also love.

1) "Dead to the law." First of all, it's important to keep in mind it does not say the law is dead. It says believers die to the law.

It means being dead as far as the law is concerned. Since we died to the law through the body of Christ, that is, died with Him on the cross, (the law being the instrument of our death), we are no longer under the control or the rule of the law. It is similar to the expression of "not being under law."

Notice in both Romans 7:4 and Gal. 2: 19, that the purpose of our dying to the law is that we live for God. Living for God means living according to God's will.

2) "Free from the law." First of all, remember that Paul has just said in Roman 6: 18 that believers have been set free from sin and have become slaves of righteousness.

Notice Romans 7: 2, 3, 6.

1-3 You shouldn't have any trouble understanding this, friends, for you know all the ins and outs of the law—how it works and how its power touches only the living. For instance, a wife is legally tied to her husband while he lives, but if he dies, she's free. If she lives with another man while her husband is living, she's obviously an adulteress. But if he dies, she is quite free to marry another man in good conscience, with no one's disapproval.

4-6 So, my friends, this is something like what has taken place with you. When Christ died he took that entire rule-dominated way of life down with him and left it in the tomb, leaving you free to "marry" a resurrection life and bear "offspring" of faith for God. For as long as we lived that old way of life, doing whatever we felt we could get away with, sin was calling most of the shots as the old law code hemmed us in. And this made us all the more rebellious. In the end, all we had to show for it was miscarriages and stillbirths. But now that we're no longer shackled to that domineering mate of sin, and out from under all those oppressive regulations and fine print, we're free to live a new life in the freedom of God. (The Message)

3) Under the law. See Romans 6: 14, 15; 1 Cor. 9: 20; 14: 21; Gal. 3: 23; 4: 4, 5, 21; 5: 18. Being under the law means one is attempting to be justified by works of law. Justification-- or restoration of the sinner's broken relationship with God-- only come by God's grace through faith in Christ. Notice in 6: 14 that only the grace of God can keep sin from reestablishing its rule over us. Therefore sin will not have dominion over you. God's grace enables you to obey God's law. See Romans 8: 3-5. Under the New Covenant, God writes His law in our hearts and on our minds, so that obedience results from faith.

[John317]

But what produces that fruit? Paul contrasts a life led by the breath to one led by the law:

Gal 5:

18 But ***if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law***.

....

What does Paul mean by "led by the breath," as you put it? Why not "wind"?

What or who is this "breath" referred to?

How are we led by the "breath"? Are you led by the breath? How do you know?

[John317]

>>>I believe you have a misunderstanding about the Sermon on the Mt. Jesus said:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill [Gk pleroo - to make full, fill to the full, to complete, to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be - Enhanced Strong's Lexicon] them." Mt 5:17 ESV.

A Lexicon offered all that foolishness? I mean, PLEROO is a Greek word, not a religious word, and it decidedly does not mean "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be!" Am I supposed to say, "Oh, if that's what the word means, then of course..."? I loathe it when the "authorities" are "on the take." You should burn that book immediately as it is clearly rubbish.

People won't accept your expertise in Greek and reject standard authorities, authorities who have been recognized by the world's leading translators and scholars in Koine Greek. I think it's unreasonable to expect them to do that.

Here on the Forum we expect members to show valid documentation for their opinions of what they claim the Greek says or means. Otherwise it is merely personal opinion. Please show documentation by recognized authorities in the Koine Greek for your statement that "PLEROO is a Greek word, not a religious word, and it decidedly does not mean 'to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be!'

If you cannot, you may not accept the quote from Strong's Enhanced Lexicon, but you won't be able to blame others if they do. The point being made by Strong is that in the context in which it occurs in that NT verse, it carries the above meaning.

You've made the claim that the book by the authorities is rubbish and ought to be burned. Can you show this to be true in this instance?

[BibleShockers]

>>>...Remember that the definition of righteousness is doing right, or conforming to the standard of God's moral law or God's will. God's will is His law.

What do you mean by "moral law"? Please be crystal clear in the use of your terms to avoid confusion. Of course I am not arguing that believers died to the moral law of God and are free from the requirement to live righteously. We are discussing the law of Moses, the covenant terms of God's covenant with Israel.

Do you equate the terms "God's moral law" and the Torah? Or are they two different things? What about when you refer to "the law?" Are you referring to Torah? As long as that is not clear I cannot possibly interact with your assertions.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>What does Paul mean by "led by the breath," as you put it? Why not "wind"?

Wind is also moving air, but it is impersonal. Of course the Hebrew and Greek did not have distinct words.

What or who is this "breath" referred to?

It is God's breath - "the breath of life."

To ancients, breath was a kind of intelligent organ, as were the flesh, the heart and the kidneys. We know now that this is anatomically incorrect, but this was how they thought it all worked. In the kidneys were your motives. Sin dwelled in your muscles ("flesh"). The heart was where your thoughts and faith were. And your breath was your self awareness which you could communicate to others by breathing and speaking. (They had no idea about brain function).

I've heard of some contemporary culture that believes that love is a function of the liver. If you are in love, you have "a quiver in your liver!"

The believer receives the breath of God into their lungs (as they did on the day of Pentecost) through the ministry of the breath. Originally Paul said that this could only happen through a live preacher, but in the Fourth Century, 2 Tim claimed that the writings were God-breathed.

2 Cor 3:

6 ¶ Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit [breath]: for the letter killeth, but the spirit [breath] giveth life [ie: "the breath of life"].

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

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

The unbeliever, however, operates by air that has been spread by the enemy:

Modified KJV:

Eph 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air of the breath that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

Worda and air are connected:

Joh 6:63 It is the spirit [breath] that quickeneth [gives life]; the flesh profiteth nothing: ***the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit [breath], and they are life.***

Joh 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost [receive holy breath]:

Because believers have God's own breath, they know his thoughts!:

1Co 2:

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit [breath]: for the Spirit [breath] searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit [breath] of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit [breath] of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit [breath] of the world, but the spirit [breath] which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Ghost [breath] teacheth; comparing spiritual things [things of breath] with spiritual [things of breath].

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit [breath] of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually [by breath] discerned.

15 But he that is spiritual [by breath] judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Bill Ross

[Gerr]

>>>I believe you have a misunderstanding about the Sermon on the Mt. Jesus said:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill [Gk pleroo - to make full, fill to the full, to complete, to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be - Enhanced Strong's Lexicon] them." Mt 5:17 ESV.

A Lexicon offered all that foolishness? I mean, PLEROO is a Greek word, not a religious word, and it decidedly does not mean "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be!" Am I supposed to say, "Oh, if that's what the word means, then of course..."? I loathe it when the "authorities" are "on the take." You should burn that book immediately as it is clearly rubbish.

Mr. Ross, you may want to reconsider your last line. If I burn my dictionary that tells me how to use words properly, how are we going to understand each other? If all the teams in the SEC burn the rule book, how then can the Crimson Tide play the Gators or the Tigers?

Quote:

Now the question is, did Jesus:

* abolish the Torah (No.)

* explain "the Real Meaning of Christmas and the Torah"? (No.)

* add to the Torah (No.)

Agreed.

Quote:

* give a new Torah (Yes,)

Wrong!!! What was new was the meaning He gave to the Law. As the Apostle John says:

[color:red]"Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard. At the same, it is a new commandment that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining." 1 Jn 2:7,8 ESV.

It seemed like new because the darkness of human traditions piled on top of the law is being peeled away by the light of the glory of the Son.

Gerry

[Gerr]

Quote:

>>>Jesus did not only carry out what the law demanded, He also came to "magnify His law and make it glorious," Isa 42:21 ESV, to teach and show the full meaning of the law. That is what the Sermon on the Mt is - the law magnified and made glorious.

NO:

Ps 89:34 My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.

Jesus did not have the authority to change a ratified covenant between God and the Jews:

Ga 3:15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.

Da 6:8 Now, O king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not.

He came to establish a new covenant that was so glorioius that it made the glory of the first covenant to disappear:

2Co 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.

Bill Ross

Jesus would have had no authority to established a new covenant if the old were still in force!

God did not break His covenant. The people (Israelites) did, repeatedly! See Ex 32, Heb 8, Jer 31:31. Hence the need for a new covenant.

Gerry

[BibleShockers]

>>>"Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard. At the same, it is a new commandment that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining." 1 Jn 2:7,8 ESV.

It seemed like new because the darkness of human traditions piled on top of the law is being peeled away by the light of the glory of the Son.

It will be helpful to understand the bigger picture of 1 John. It was written (ostensibly) by John who was with Jesus in the beginning [of the gospel]:

1 John 1:

1 ¶ That which was from the beginning [of the gospel], which we [John and the other eyewitnesses of Jesus] have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life [the gospel];

2 (For the life was manifested, and we [the apostles] have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you [the younger generation] that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us [the apostles]

3 That which we [the apostles] have seen and heard declare we unto you [the younger, non-eyewitnesses], that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our [the apostles] fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

4 And these things write we unto you [non-eyewitnesses], that your joy may be full.

5 ¶ This then is the message which we [the apostles] have heard of him, and declare unto you [non-eyewitnesses], that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

Ok, so in the verse you cite, he explains that though he is bringing them new information, it is not new, but that which comes for the original source.

>>>"Beloved, I [John] am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had [was commanded you] from the beginning [of the gospel]. The old commandment is the word that you have heard [God is light]. At the same, it is a new commandment [God is light] that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining." 1 Jn 2:7,8 ESV.

So this is not a reference to the law but to the notion that God is light, etc. He gets very specific:

John 1:

5 ¶ This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

8 ¶ If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

9 If we confess our sins, he [God] is faithful and just[ified] to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

John did not preach the law of Moses to Christians but rather the mandates of Christ.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Mr. Ross, you may want to consider your last line. If I burn my dictionary that tells me how to use words properly, how are we going to understand each other? If all the teams in the SEC burn the rule book, how then can the Crimson Tide play the Gators or the Tigers?

I recommend that you get an honest lexicon with real Greek definitions, not one with false religious traditions supplied as the definition of the Greek words. Such does not promote understanding of either Greek or of each other. It undermines and corrupts linguistics.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Jesus would have had no authority to established a new covenant if the old were still in force!

Jesus is just the mediator. The parties involved in the new covenant are God and Israel and Judah (ie: the Jews).

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant **with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah**:

Heb 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**:

Heb 12:24 And to Jesus **the mediator of** the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

>>>God did not break His covenant, the people (Israelites) did, repeatedly! See Ex 32, Heb 8, Jer 31:31. Hence the need for a new covenant.

What do you make of this?:

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.

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>...Remember that the definition of righteousness is doing right, or conforming to the standard of God's moral law or God's will. God's will is His law.

What do you mean by "moral law"? Please be crystal clear in the use of your terms to avoid confusion. Of course I am not arguing that believers died to the moral law of God and are free from the requirement to live righteously. We are discussing the law of Moses, the covenant terms of God's covenant with Israel.

Do you equate the terms "God's moral law" and the Torah? Or are they two different things? What about when you refer to "the law?" Are you referring to Torah? As long as that is not clear I cannot possibly interact with your assertions.

Bill Ross

The online dictionary defines

antinomian

adjective

of or relating to the view that Christians are released by grace from the obligation of observing the moral law.

"The moral law of God" is summed up in the Ten Commandments, often referred to as the Decalogue. They sum up God's moral commandments or requirements. It's violation of this law, whether in thought or action, which is sin.

[BibleShockers]

>>>The online dictionary defines

antinomian |ˌantiˈnōmēən|

adjective

of or relating to the view that Christians are released by grace from the obligation of observing the moral law.

Ok. It is important to define terms to avoid confusion.

>>>"The moral law of God" is summed up in the Ten Commandments, often referred to a the Decalogue. They sum up God's moral commandments or requirements. It's violation of this law, whether in thought or action, which is sin.

Ok, well this is not a Biblical assertion. According to Jesus, the moral law consists of the Two Great Commands:

Matthew 22:

36 Master, which is **the great commandment in the law**?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is **the first and great commandment**.

39 And the **second** is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 ****On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets****.

Mark 12:

28 ¶ And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?

29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the **first** commandment.

31 And the **second** is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. ***There is none other commandment greater than these***.

Note that the second command does not appear in "The Ten Commandments"!

Note that all the law and the prophets "hang on" these. That is, when the command to observe the 7th day is severed from these it will fall into the fire like the snake off of Paul's hand:

Ac 28:5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm.

Hence:

Lu 13:15 The Lord then answered him, and said, Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him away to watering?

Lu 13:16 And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?

Luke 14:

3 And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day?

4 And they held their peace. And he took him, and healed him, and let him go;

5 And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day?

6 And they could not answer him again to these things.

So the two great commands dictate the morality that decides whether the Sabbath should be cast into the fire, etc, not the other way around.

So, your definition of the moral law is patently false by the explicit sayings of Jesus.

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>Mr. Ross, you may want to consider your last line. If I burn my dictionary that tells me how to use words properly, how are we going to understand each other? If all the teams in the SEC burn the rule book, how then can the Crimson Tide play the Gators or the Tigers?

I recommend that you get an honest lexicon with real Greek definitions, not one with false religious traditions supplied as the definition of the Greek words. Such does not promote understanding of either Greek or of each other. It undermines and corrupts linguistics.

Bill Ross

There are the standards, A Greek/English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich; Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament; and the Liddell and Scott Greek-English Lexicon.

[John317]

>>>The online dictionary defines

antinomian |ˌantiˈnōmēən|

adjective

of or relating to the view that Christians are released by grace from the obligation of observing the moral law.

Ok. It is important to define terms to avoid confusion.

>>>"The moral law of God" is summed up in the Ten Commandments, often referred to a the Decalogue. They sum up God's moral commandments or requirements. It's violation of this law, whether in thought or action, which is sin.

Ok, well this is not a Biblical assertion. According to Jesus, the moral law consists of the Two Great Commands:

Matthew 22:

36 Master, which is **the great commandment in the law**?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is **the first and great commandment**.

39 And the **second** is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 ****On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets****.

Mark 12:

28 ¶ And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?

29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the **first** commandment.

31 And the **second** is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. ***There is none other commandment greater than these***.

Note that the second command does not appear in "The Ten Commandments"!

Note that all the law and the prophets "hang on" these.

He means that all the law and the prophets are like the fingers that hang on our hand. They all go together just as all our fingers go together. You have 10 commandments just like you have 10 fingers. The two hands are the two principles of love for God and love for neighbor.

The first 4 commandments in the moral law (which law was the only things that God wrote and spoke Himself) deal with our relationship to God, as in "Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, etc." The idea is, Bill, that if we really do love God with all of our hearts, we will obey all the first four of the moral law.

They all go together, like a chain. If you break one, you break all of them. Just like James says in James 2: 8-12. If you break one link, it wouldn't be accurate to say you only have a broken link-- you've really broken the entire chain. That is the way it is with God's law, because they are all related and based on the law of love. It's the law of love because they are expressions of God's very nature of love.

The last 6 commandments in the moral law are summed up in the command to love our fellow-humans. In other words, if we really love our neighbor, we will keep all 6 of those commandments. For instance, if I love my neighbor, I won't steal from him or kill him or have sex with his wife or her husband. I will be honest, etc. If I truly love my neighbor, I will seek his welfare, and that wouldn't lead me to do him/her harm.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>The online dictionary defines

antinomian |

adjective

of or relating to the view that Christians are released by grace from the obligation of observing the moral law.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- Ok. It is important to define terms to avoid confusion.

Quote:

JOHN3:17--- >>>"The moral law of God" is summed up in the Ten Commandments, often referred to a the Decalogue. They sum up God's moral commandments or requirements. It's violation of this law, whether in thought or action, which is sin.

Quote:

BILL ROSS--- Ok, well this is not a Biblical assertion. According to Jesus, the moral law consists of the Two Great Commands:

Matthew 22:

36 Master, which is **the great commandment in the law**?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is **the first and great commandment**.

39 And the **second** is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 ****On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets****.

.......So, your definition of the moral law is patently false by the explicit sayings of Jesus.

The entire New Testament teaches that all the Ten Commandments should be obeyed by followers of Christ.

God did not write and speak the Ten Commandments and then later change His mind about them. The moral law is as eternal as God Himself is because the moral law proceeds from God's very character. It is a written expression of who He is and what His will is for humanity.

As I've shown in my previous post, there is no contradiction between Christ's words and the whole moral law in Ten Commandments. He is saying that if we love God, we will obey all the first four commandments; and if we love our neighbor, we will obey the last six. All of the law and the prophets are summed up in the Ten Commandments,and the Ten Commandments are summed up in the command to love God and love our neighbors.

Of course God's grace does not release us from obedience to God's moral law. In fact, as Paul says in Romans 3: 31, faith in Christ puts God's law on a firmer footing, by setting it in its proper perspective. Our love for God will mean that we will want to obey God's will, and His will is His law. Hebrews 8 and 10 say that under the New Covenant, God's law is written on our hearts and on our minds. This law is internalized. It is no longer simply on stone. It is to be on our hearts and become the motive-force of our lives. This happens as we live in daily, intimate relationship with Jesus Christ.

See 1 John 3: 1-10.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- ...Note that all the law and the prophets "hang on" these. That is, when the command to observe the 7th day is severed from these it will fall into the fire like the snake off of Paul's hand......

........So the two great commands dictate the morality that decides whether the Sabbath should be cast into the fire, etc, not the other way around.

The Sabbath commandment is based on the creation of the world by God. As God first made the Sabbath, it had nothing whatever to do with sin. It has to do with mankind's relationship with His creator. It is part of the New Covenant, and as such it is as eternal as the rest of the moral law. It was made before the Fall (Gen. 2: 1-3) and it will be celebrated and kept in the earth that will be remade. See Isaiah 66 and Rev. 21 & 22.

[BibleShockers]

>>>He means that all the law and the prophets are like fingers that hang on a hand of those two commandments.

So if the fingers are the moral law, upon what do they hang (in a physical but non-dependent way)? What are the 2 commands upon which the moral law hangs?

And there are some 614 commands altogether. Are we talking about 614 fingers? Or do the law and the prophets actually hang onto the fingers and not onto the two commands as Jesus said?

>>>The first 4 commandments in the moral law (which law was the only things that God wrote and spoke Himself) deal with our relationship to God, as in "Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, etc." The idea is, Bill, that if we really do love God with all of our hearts, we will obey all the first four of the moral law.

First of all, the "Ten Commands" are actually only nine. Second of all, if the "Ten Commands" define the absolute, inviolable morality of God, then how can Paul say that it is ok is someone regards every day the same? Why does Jesus say that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath? Or that is a shadow? And that one must not be judged by this moral law?:

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Surely if this is THE MORAL LAW then it is precisely what should be used to judge someone?

I realize that your mental fortress has many layers of defense laid up, but you really will have to abandon this idea. It is a lie.

>>>They all go together, like a chain. If you break one, you break all of them. Just like James says in James 2: 8-12.

So are these the links of the chain?:

Two Great Commands - > The law and the prophets

Or are these the link:

God's Moral Law ("The 10 Commandments") - > The Two Great Commands (Which are what, if not the moral law?) - > The 614 -> the prophets - > ?

Pr 26:7 The legs of the lame are not equal: so is a parable in the mouth of fools.

>>>The last 6 commandments in the moral law

You do realize that the Bible NEVER says that the "10" are "The Moral Law." It is very careful to say that if you violate any command (ie: eat a pig) then you have broken them all. You do realize that you are just heaping up notion after notion COMPLETELY off the top of your head and are NOT EXPOSITING ANY STATEMENT OF THE TEXT ITSELF when you speak of the 10 being the moral law. This is just your tradition. It is Ellen White, not Jesus, Paul, John or anyone else.

>>>are summed up in the command to love our fellow-humans.

But the command to love one's fellow human is not even present in those 6. If I don't do this and I don't do that but I don't love, have I really fulfilled the moral law?

>>>In other words, if we really love our neighbor, we will keep all 6 of those commandments. For instance, if I love my neighbor, I won't steal from him or kill him or have sex with his wife or her husband. I will be honest, etc.

But does it work the other way?

Lu 18:22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

Are the two dependent on the 10?

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>He means that all the law and the prophets are like fingers that hang on a hand of those two commandments.

So if the fingers are the moral law, upon what do they hang (in a physical but non-dependent way)? What are the 2 commands upon which the moral law hangs?

They hang, or depend completely, on God's character. The 2 commands are expressions of God's eternal character, which is love.

On the other hand, if the God of the Bible does not exist, or if He is not love, then the 2 commands are worthless and have no authority. In that case, they are just an ideal that one may or may not pay attention to.

As Nietzsche and Dostoyevsky said, if God does not exist, then everything is permitted. A man may choose to continue being moral, but that is merely that man's opinion or desire but it has no authority for the man who chooses to be "immoral." They're both equally right or wrong because there is no standard except what anyone wants to make it.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>He means that all the law and the prophets are like fingers that hang on a hand of those two commandments.

[John317]

JOHN3:17--->>>He means that all the law and the prophets are like fingers that hang on a hand of those two commandments.

>>>The last 6 commandments in the moral law

Quote:

BILL ROSS---You do realize that the Bible NEVER says that the "10" are "The Moral Law." It is very careful to say that if you violate any command (ie: eat a pig) then you have broken them all.

Of course the Bible never calls the Ten Commandments the "Moral Law." I have never suggested that it does call them "the Moral Law." That is a name students of the Bible use in order to understand what the Ten Commandments are. Just like the Bible never calls the "parousia" the "Second Coming of Christ." Yet it is not inaccurate to call it the Second Coming of Christ.

Why are they called the Moral Law? They are called this because they summarize the moral commands of God. There is no sin that is not included in the Ten Commandments-- that is, if they are viewed and understood properly, in the way that the New Testament sees them.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- You do realize that you are just heaping up notion after notion COMPLETELY off the top of your head and are NOT EXPOSITING ANY STATEMENT OF THE TEXT ITSELF when you speak of the 10 being the moral law. This is just your tradition. It is Ellen White, not Jesus, Paul, John or anyone else.

Do you read much in the way of systematic theology or the history of Christian doctrine?

I'm speaking of systematic theology throughout the entire Christian church, including all denominations and groups. If you did or do, you would surely notice that the concept of the moral law that I've been describing goes far beyond Ellen White or the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Go to any university or large Christian book store and look up "sin" (the definition thereof, in particular), "law" or "moral law" or "Ten Commandments" in any book of systematic theology or of the history of the development of Christian doctrine. You will see in all of them discussions of the "moral law." And it is always related to the Ten Commandments.

For instance, this in Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology, p. 490-- "We may define sin as follows: Sin is any failure to conform to the moral law of God in act, attitude, or nature." Then immediately it speaks of the Ten Commandments as illustrating God's prohibitions of sinful actions.

Also, if one examines virtually any study Bible with notes on the subject (written by Christian scholars of all persuasions), it will be seen that they also refer to "the Moral law" as synonymous with the Ten Commandments.

[BibleShockers]

>>>The entire New Testament teaches that all the Ten Commandments should be obeyed by followers of Christ.

Um, can you be more specific?!

>>>God did not write and speak the Ten Commandments and then later change His mind about them.

Did he change his mind about any of the 614? What makes these so special? God NEVER said "You must keep these but you can safely ignore anything else I've said."

Jas 2:11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.

Jas 4:11 Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: ***but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge***.

>>>As I've shown in my previous post, there is no contradiction between Christ's words and the whole moral law in Ten Commandments.

You continue to baselessly confuse the moral law with the 10. That confused assumption taints everything you say and makes it like sugar laced with poison. It is lie riding on the tails of everything you say, no matter how benign.

What about Paul? Did he discriminate when he said that the believer was dead to the law? Of course not. He said they were all one. One is dead to ALL 614, not 604. No one in the scriptures ever said that these "10" were "the moral law" - that is your tradition. Period.

>>>He is saying that if we love God, we will obey all the first four commandments; and if we love our neighbor, we will obey the last six. All of the law and the prophets are summed up in the Ten Commandments,and the Ten Commandments are summed up in the command to love God and love our neighbors.

So on what authority do you make 514 commands passe, but not these 10?

>>>Of course God's grace does not release us from obedience to God's moral law.

Please quit using the unbiblical term "moral law" in reference to the 10. That is not a Biblical identification so you are adding to the text. You are marrying your tradition to the text. It is offensive and dishonest. You are arguing from a platform of text + tradition. Use Biblical language in your expositions. Paul said that the believe died to the law, so how can you continue in it? The principle is the same as this:

Ro 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

>>>In fact, as Paul says in Romans 3: 31, faith in Christ puts God's law on a firmer footing, by setting it in its proper perspective.

No. He said that we establish a law: the law of faith. He said believer died to the law, which was a curse, and are no longer under the law.

>>>Our love for God will mean that we will want to obey God's will, and His will is His law.

Ugh. That is not what he said, and he pretty much said what he means. He said that the believer was set free from the law in order to serve another, not to serve the same law.

Ro 7:3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

You are the adultress in this illustration, are you not?

>>>Hebrews 8 and 10 say that under the New Covenant, God's law is written on our hearts and on our minds. This law is internalized. It is no longer simply on stone. It is to be on our hearts and become the motive-force of our lives. This happens as we live in daily, intimate relationship with Jesus Christ.

That is not a covenant that concerns you. It is between God and Jews.

>>>See 1 John 3: 1-10.

This word ANOMIA does not have reference to Torah.

1 John 3:4 Every one who is doing the sin, the lawlessness also he doth do, and the sin is the lawlessness,

What you are saying is that "justification by faith apart from the works of the law" is not possible.

You would not be considered in the faith by Paul, but rather fallen from favor, and under the curse.

Bill Ross

[John317]

Is this just an exercise in theory or do you accept the words of Jesus Christ as true? That is what's important.

[BibleShockers]

Originally Posted By: BibleShockers

>>>He means that all the law and the prophets are like fingers that hang on a hand of those two commandments.

So if the fingers are the moral law, upon what do they hang (in a physical but non-dependent way)? What are the 2 commands upon which the moral law hangs?

They hang, or depend completely, on God's character. The 2 commands are expressions of God's eternal character, which is love.

On the other hand, if the God of the Bible does not exist, or if He is not love, then the 2 commands are worthless and have no authority. In that case, they are just an ideal that one may or may not pay attention to.

As Nietzsche and Dostoyevsky said, if God does not exist, then everything is permitted. A man may choose to continue being moral, but that is merely that man's opinion or desire but it has no authority for the man who chooses to be "immoral." They're both equally right or wrong because there is no standard except what anyone wants to make it.

I am asking about the 2 Great Commands. They are commands. "God is love" you say is God's character, and "the 10 commandments" you say are God's moral character. Then what are the 2?:

God's Character (Love) - > Two Commands -> The 10 Moral Laws, the law and the prophets

What are the 2 commands? Just two really cool commands?

If the 2 are the "2 Greatest" then what are the 10? "The 10 Supremest?" "The even more important?"

It is ONLY your tradition and presumption that designates the 10 as being:

* God's "moral law"

* exempt from every mention of being "free from the law" or "dead to the law" etc.

Bill Ross

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>The entire New Testament teaches that all the Ten Commandments should be obeyed by followers of Christ.

Quote:

BILL ROSS--Um, can you be more specific?!

Yes. Every one of the Ten Commandments are supported in the New Testament.

They are all quoted as binding under the New Covenant.

Example: Does the New Covenant release Christians from the law prohibiting murder?

Does faith in Christ release Christians from the law prohibiting using God's name in vain?

Does faith in Christ release Christians from the law prohibiting sexual immorality?

Does faith in Christ release Christians from the law respecting the Seventh-day Sabbath?

Does faith in Christ mean that I can now steal and lie or dishonor my parents?

Does such faith mean that I am now free to worship creatures rather than the Creator or make images and bow down to them?

Go down the entire Ten Commandments and read them for yourself and see where the New Testament refers to them or quotes them.

Can you think of any of the Ten Commandments which were changed or abrogated before the New Covenant was ratified?