The Ten Commandments—What happened?

[justbyfaith]

Look again...
In chapter 20 God spoke 10 laws and the people freaked.
After they settled down He gave 4 more...and then went on to ordinances.
They are summaries.
If you were to study the 613 Mosaic Laws you would know that these summaries are defined more complete in actual body of the Law.

Then we turn to chapter 34 and here hands down and for sure is the only place in the Bible that God Himself called a set of laws the Ten Commandments and and even more specific God said these were the Laws that would form a Covenant. And even more, these are the Law that He told Moses to write on the two Tablets of the Testimony and in fact the scripture indicate that Moses did that.

Now if you want to point out that Deuteronomy points to another set of laws....that is your problem to resolve.
I am going to stick with what God spoke Himself, directly to Moses.

They are the same ten in Deuteronomy 5:6-21 as in Exodus 20:1-17.

That the set that was given ends in verse 17 is evident in verse 18 (Exodus 20:18)...thunderings and lightnings being the separation between the ten written on tablets and the extra four that you seem to think are part of the ten.

 

[Grailhunter]

They are the same ten in Deuteronomy 5:6-21 as in Exodus 20:1-17.

That the set that was given ends in verse 17 is evident in verse 18 (Exodus 20:18)...thunderings and lightnings being the separation between the ten written on tablets and the extra four that you seem to think are part of the ten.

Exactly! God did not call the 14 summaries laws the Ten Commandments, why did Deuteronomy only count ten, and then decided to override or correct God and call them the Ten Commandments?

thunderings and lightnings being the separation between the ten written on tablets and the extra four that you seem to think are part of the ten.

Why?...extra?...part of the ten? Because someone sneezes in the middle of a speech that does mean when they continue it is not part of the speech. There is no separation indicated and He finished that category of summary laws and continued on with the next category of laws...ordinances...ergo...Now these are the ordinances which you are to set before them...

What God said in chapter 34 is clear...there is no vague scripture there. Clear, definitive, and precise. It is everything else in this topic that is set to speculation and conjecture.

Now clear your head. God was not speaking about the actual Mosaic Law as He talked to the people from atop Mt. Sinai and they were not writing it down. So what was the real purpose of the event in chapter 20? You tell me.

 

[justbyfaith]

Because someone sneezes in the middle of a speech that does mean when they continue it is not part of the speech.

That is a ridiculous argument.

Everything God does, He does with purpose.

He doesn't accidentally "sneeze".

 

[Grailhunter]

That is a ridiculous argument.

Everything God does, He does with purpose.

He doesn't accidentally "sneeze".

It was an example there JBF. lol There was no indication that the other four laws were not a continuance.

 

[justbyfaith]

It was an example there JBF. lol There was no indication that the other four laws were not a continuance.

There is an indication. Exodus 34:28 says that there are ten.

And scripture interprets scripture.

So then, Deuteronomy 5:22, compared to Exodus 34:28 shows that the ten, written on tablets, are the ones spoken of in Deuteronomy 5:6-21; repeated from Exodus 20:1-17....as these are the ones written on tablets according to Deuteronomy 5:22.

 

[Grailhunter]

There is an indication. Exodus 34:28 says that there are ten.

And scripture interprets scripture.

So then, Deuteronomy 5:22, compared to Exodus 34:28 shows that the ten, written on tablets, are the ones spoken of in Deuteronomy 5:6-21; repeated from Exodus 20:1-17....as these are the ones written on tablets according to Deuteronomy 5:22.

You so funny! That is exactly where God told Moses to write the Ten Commandments on the Tablets of the Testimony. Of course it is talking about the ten. lol

 

[justbyfaith]

You so funny! That is exactly where God told Moses to write the Ten Commandments on the Tablets of the Testimony. Of course it is talking about the ten. lol

Since you just agreed with me I think that I have won the argument.

The commandments in Exodus 20:1-17, Deuteronomy 5:6-21 are the ten commandments spoken of in Exodus 34:28.

 

[Grailhunter]

Since you just agreed with me I think that I have won the argument.

The commandments in Exodus 20:1-17, Deuteronomy 5:6-21 are the ten commandments spoken of in Exodus 34:28.

First off it is not an argument.....you will know when it is argument. Whatever floats your boat.

 

[justbyfaith]

First off it is not an argument.....you will know when it is argument. Whatever floats your boat.

Whether it is an argument or not...I win.

 

[Grailhunter]

Whether it is an argument or not...I win.

Bon Voyage!!!

 

[Cooper]

<<a day in the sight of the Lord is as a thousand years>>. A day in the sight of the Lord is - rather, sometimes, is "AS a thousand years" and NEVER in the sight of the Lord, IS a day. Most elementary linguistic, semantic principle you do know perfectly well but pretend you are completely stupid about.

When God says a day in the sight of the Lord is as a thousand years he is saying His time is not measured by our time. Our day is not God's day. God inhabits eternity, while we do not, at least not while we are in the flesh. Time for the eternal God is longer than for those things that fade and pass away.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Yes, the names Joshua and Jesus are interchangeable, but what you are biased about is identifying the Son of God as not giving us rest, instead of the actual individual, Joshua, and talking about the Promised Land. That is not just ignorance, but willful bias against Jesus. You are calling Him a liar when He said "Come unto Me all ye who are heavy laden and I will give you REST." Jesus wasn't in the promised land with Joshua, and the children of Israel rebelled against God. They did not enter into His REST. But now through Jesus we can boldly enter the throne of Grace.

the names Joshua and Jesus are interchangeable

Examples for your presumption of examples? NONE. So your claim is false, it's plain.

the Son of God as not giving us rest, instead of the actual individual, Joshua, and talking about the Promised Land.

In Hebrews 4 there is no word written about Joshua or the Promised Land, and there is no negation that : fact : "Jesus gave them Rest". Christ gave Himself for the People of God "The Rest OF GOD" : "Jesus"; not <Joshua> and not the time of turmoil in <The Promised Land> but "entered in into His Rest". The actual Individual who GAVE God's People HIS Rest, it is written, is "Jesus" [Iehsous].

The supposition, "If Jesus gave them Rest" is <bias>, 'bias' of certainty, of indubitable certainty based upon historical fact and consequence, "If Jesus gave them Rest" HE GAVE THEM REST! There is no <bias> based upon some possibility or mere probability in this Scripture. It is the Divine presumption -bias, "If JESUS gave them Rest" the Rest was given and God's People received His Rest and THE DAY OF SALVATION SHALL BE THE LAST: because "IF JESUS gave them rest God won't mention another Day-of-Salvation". SALVATION has been done and The Name has been given, "the only Name under the sun given among men, whereby he shall be saved". "And then THEREFORE", continues the author, "keeping of the Sabbath Day REMAINS VALID for the People of God". Not <therefore shall it be abolished>.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

It is written, both things, sometimes you answer the fool; sometimes he is so foolish you don't answer him in any way.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Examples for you presumption of examples? NONE. So your claim is false, it's plain.

The Greek name, Jesus, is Joshua in Hebrew.

In Hebrews 4 there is no word written about Joshua or the Promised Land, and there is no negation that : fact : "Jesus gave them Rest". Christ gave Himself for the People of God "The Rest OF GOD" : "Jesus"; not <Joshua> and not the time of turmoil in <The Promised Land> but "entered in into His Rest". The actual Individual who GAVE God's People HIS Rest, it is written, is "Jesus" [Iehsous].

The supposition, "If Jesus gave them Rest" is <bias>, 'bias' of certainty, of indubitable certainty based upon historical fact and consequence, "If Jesus gave them Rest" HE GAVE THEM REST! There is no <bias> based upon some possibility or mere probability in this Scripture. It is the Divine presumption -bias, "If JESUS gave them Rest" the Rest was given and God's People received His Rest and THE DAY OF SALVATION SHALL BE THE LAST: because "IF JESUS gave them rest God won't mention another Day-of-Salvation". SALVATION has been done and The Name has been given, "the only Name under the sun given among men, whereby he shall be saved". "And then THEREFORE", continues the author, "keeping of the Sabbath Day REMAINS VALID for the People of God". Not <therefore shall it be abolished>.

6 Since therefore it remains that some must enter it, and those to whom it was first preached did not enter because of disobedience, 7 again He designates a certain day, saying in David, “Today,” after such a long time, as it has been said:

“Today, if you will hear His voice,
Do not harden your hearts.”

8 For if Joshua, (Hebrew name) had given them rest, (That is historical, meaning the promised land) then He would not afterward have spoken of another day. 9 There remains therefore a rest for the people of God. 10 For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His. (finished by Jesus, Greek name), 27 All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him. 28 Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”

 

[CharismaticLady]

"And then THEREFORE", continues the author, "keeping of the Sabbath Day REMAINS VALID for the People of God". Not <therefore shall it be abolished>.

Where does it say to keep the Old Testament Sabbath Day in Hebrews 4? It doesn't and is not talking about the Old Covenant, but the New. His rest is not one day a week, it is today, and today, and today... Our rest in Jesus is every moment of every day.

5 and again in this place: “They shall not enter My rest.”

6 Since therefore it remains that some must enter it, and those to whom it was first preached did not enter because of disobedience, 7 again He designates a certain day, saying in David, “Today,” after such a long time, as it has been said:

“Today, if you will hear His voice,
Do not harden your hearts.”

8 For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day. 9 There remains therefore a rest for the people of God. 10 For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.

This is not a re-establishment of the Old Sabbath day, but to accept Jesus and cease from your burden by entering into His Rest, the New Covenant, Jeremiah 31:31-34.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

8 For if Joshua, (Hebrew name) had given them rest, (That is historical, meaning the promised land) then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.

This is what YOU say, because this is what you WANT it to say, because you hate a "Sabbath-Rest-Day remaining valid for the People of God" because "JESUS" on it rose from the dead "entering into His Own Rest" of RESURRECTION VICTORY AND LORDSHIP "on the Sabbath - before the First Day of the week" you instead worship.

What you mean is not what is written; what is written is written. And the Promised Land never has been God's Rest it in Hebrews is written about - "Jesus', is.

 

[CharismaticLady]

This is what YOU say, because this is what you WANT it to say, because you hate a "Sabbath-Rest-Day remaining valid for the People of God" because "JESUS" on it rose from the dead "entering into His Own Rest" of RESURRECTION VICTORY AND LORDSHIP "on the Sabbath - before the First Day of the week" you instead worship.

What you mean is not what is written; what is written is written. And the Promised Land never has been God's Rest it in Hebrews is written about - "Jesus', is.

No, on the contrary, re-establishing the Sabbath Day is what you have added, due to your extreme shameful bias to raise the Sabbath Day above Jesus.

We are to rest in God's rest. Not a day, but faith in Jesus that we may come to His throne of grace established by Jesus, our High Priest.

11 Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall according to the same example of disobedience. 12 For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. 13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account.

14 Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

They refused to hearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, that they should not hear. Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should hear the law, and the words which the LORD of hosts hath sent. Zechariah 7:11-12

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

No, on the contrary, re-establishing the Sabbath Day is what you have added, due to your extreme shameful bias to raise the Sabbath Day above Jesus.

And there it is, like every time! This is how the one in actual error, SHALL behave, guaranteed!

By the way, I did not <<re-establish>> the Sabbath Day, I quoted the Text - HOLY WRIT, where it, says, "keeping of the Sabbath REMAINS VALID for the People of God" - 'apoleipetai Sabbatismos tohi Laohi tou Theou'.

But of MAIN importance in this Scripture is the "THEREFORE"--the WHY "keeping of the Sabbath REMAINS VALID". For you, it's non-existent, while for the author - who ultimately is the Holy Spirit of GOD BREATHING THIS VERY SCRIPTURE, it is, quote, "JESUS while having given them Rest".

So, <<re-establishing the Sabbath Day>> is not what I <<have added>>; IT IS WHAT YOU have DENIED and keep on DENYING: THE HOLY SPIRIT SPEAKING BY THE SCRIPTURES. Just like the SDAs do.