Built on The Wrong Apostle:

[Enoch111]

So these verses make reference to the 10 commandments, the Law of Moses, and actually old testament and say literally it was done away with.

The Ten Commandments are as valid under the New Covenant as they were under the Old. So they have certainly NOT been done away with. Indeed Paul calls "the Law" (with reference to the Ten Commandments) holy, just, good, and spiritual. And these are now written on the hearts and minds of the regenerated under the New Covenant.

ROMANS 7
7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. [THIS IS THE 1OTH COMMANDMENT]
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

 

[FHII]

The Ten Commandments are as valid under the New Covenant as they were under the Old.

Did you read my post, and 2 Corinthians 3? If so, why did you not explain why it said it was done away? I gave my commentary, sure... But I didn't need to... It literally said that which was written on tables of stone was done away with. That's not my interpretation or commentary... That's what it says!

Instead, what you did was ignore it and misuse scripture to Trump other scripture. But it doesn't work. You quoted 7 verses out of Romans 7. But if you really understand Romans, you will understand that true context for anything in that 7th chapter must include chapters 4 through 8, AT LEAST. Yet, you didn't even look at the whole chapter.

You also sprinkled a bit of either Heb 8:10 or 10:16 in, again not in proper context. But what is most odd, is that you included a partial, colorful (literally) listing of verses from Romans 7 to support your point, and they don't: not even when taken out of context!

Yes, the law is holy, just and good. No disagreeable. That doesn't mean its still in effect... Even the 10 commandments. Nothing in Romans 7 says they are still in effect. Furthermore again if you look at the entire flow of his discourse (chapters 4-8) he is saying we are not under the law, but under Grace.

But again... You really didn't explain why you believe God didn't do away with the 10 commandments when Paul said God did.

 

[Enoch111]

It literally said that which was written on tables of stone was done away with. That's not my interpretation or commentary... That's what it says!

And I showed you that it is now written on hearts and minds. So you are totally OFF BASE by claiming that the Ten Commandments have been done away with. Amazing how Christians don't know the fundamentals of the New Covenant.

 

[Enoch111]

But again... You really didn't explain why you believe God didn't do away with the 10 commandments when Paul said God did.

Paul said nothing of the kind. How could God do way with the Ten Commandments when they are embedded in the Law of Christ?

 

[FHII]

And I showed you that it is now written on hearts and minds. So you are totally OFF BASE by claiming that the Ten Commandments have been done away with. Amazing how Christians don't know the fundamentals of the New Covenant.

1. Then you should've included the verses that say the they are written on hearts and minds, and not a portion of Romans 7, which doesn't say that. Don't worry. I know what verses you are referring to. And they aren't going to prove your point either!

See... You are getting that from Hebrews. I already noted that. And you are not going to find any verse or verses that really say any portion of the law is still in effect from that book.

Why... Do you EVEN realize who God is speaking of? Who exactly God said he would write his laws into the hearts of? Do you know whom he was referring to?

2. You still are avoiding 2 Cor 3, which actually says it was done away! If you think I am wrong, I will listen to your reasoning, but you better at least address the scripture in question.

 

[FHII]

Paul said nothing of the kind. How could God do way with the Ten Commandments when they are embedded in the Law of Christ?

Ok... Once again:

2 Corinthians 3:7 KJV
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:

2 Corinthians 3:11 KJV
For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

2 Corinthians 3:13 KJV
And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:


2 Corinthians 3:14 KJV
But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.

I mean... He said it 4 times! He refers that which is done away with as being that law which was engrave on stones and gave specific historical reference. It's talking about the 10 commandments, and there is NOTHING in the Bible that it otherwise could be referring to.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Paul said nothing of the kind. How could God do way with the Ten Commandments when they are embedded in the Law of Christ?

No they are not. God's eternal law is LOVE. Loving God with all your heart, and your neighbor as yourself. The Ten Commandments were the ministry of death. 2 Corinthians 3:7-11. The New Covenant is the ministry of the Spirit and goes far deeper than the surface laws of the 10C. Read the difference in the commandments of the 10C and the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus gives us His new commandments that goes to the heart of the sin. Besides the sign of the covenant of the Ten Commandments was the Sabbath. But that was not God's rest of Hebrews 4 as SDA's believe. No it is Christ that gives us God's true rest. The New Covenant has a different sign of the covenant, and it is not the Sabbath. It is representative of the blood of Jesus shed for us to save us and take away our sin, which separated us from God. The sign of the New Covenant is the Cup of the New Testament. 1 Corinthians 11:25.

 

[justbyfaith]

1Jo 5:3, For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

2Jo 1:6, And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.

 

[Davy]

I'm not so sure that is true. Have you read 2 Cor 3?

2 Corinthians 3:3 KJV
Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

That which was written with ink and on tables of stone is being discussed. I can safely assume that means both the 10 commandments and the rest.

You do realize that Apostle Paul was speaking metaphorically there in comparing us to ink and tables of stone, etc.? It is not a statement that God's laws are no more. As a matter of fact, there's Bible evidence in God's Word that His laws were established prior to their being written down in ink or stone. Not talking about everything He gave through Moses. The 19th century British scholar E.W. Bullinger did research on the old Zodiac in archaeology and discovered that the original names and meanings of the 12 star signs had Bible meanings. The pagans over time corrupted the original meanings (like Satan does with everything else). It proves that God's Word was originally written in the stars long before it was ever given to man. (See The Witness Of The Stars by Bullinger).

2 Corinthians 3:7 KJV
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:

Here only that which was engaged in stone is mentioned... And it specifically does say it was to be done away.

If you think that includes God's 10 commandments, and His laws against theft, murder, rape, perjury, i.e., the list of things Paul mentioned here, then you are simply playing the absolutist card with words like 'law', and not really understanding how Paul was using metaphor there in 2 Cor.3. Your interpretation is contradicting Paul here:

1 Tim 1:8-11
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
KJV

2 Corinthians 3:11 KJV
For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

Again it clarifies that the law (not Moses' continence) was done away with.

Once again, what... was done away with that Paul was talking about? Not ALL of God's laws, but specifically the laws dealing with the old covenant ordinances, which dealt with the blood ordinances, ceremonial ritual like a needed flesh mediator, etc. It did NOT do away with the 10 commandments, nor all of God's laws which Paul reveals right there in 1 Timothy 1 as part of The Gospel he was entrusted with.

 

[Davy]

Since God and Christ have declared all meats to be clean under the New Covenant, Christians are free from the dietary restrictions of the Old Covenant. However, if weaker Christians prefer to maintain those restrictions they are free to do so. At the same time, they are not free to tell other Christians that dietary restrictions still apply.

It's not about NOT BEING ABLE TO EAT UNCLEAN MEATS. You can keep trying to make that the subject of debate, but it is not. We can eat ANYTHING we want under Christ Jesus, but that does not... mean our flesh bodies will remain healthy, so let's not act like none of this makes sense and create some religion out of it. Apostle Paul didn't make this a religious thing, nor did He do away with God's health laws. Eating a buzzard is STILL going to be unhealthy.

And yes I AM FREE TO TELL CHRISTIAN BRETHREN THAT EATING UNHEALTHY THINGS WILL MAKE YOUR FLESH SICK! IF YOU THINK YOU HAVE THE POWER TO STOP ME FROM SAYING THAT, THEN GO TO YOU WHITEWASHED WALL!!!

 

[FHII]

You do realize that Apostle Paul was speaking



Once again, what... was done away with that Paul was talking about? Not ALL of God's laws, but specifically the laws dealing with the old covenant ordinances, which dealt with the blood ordinances, ceremonial ritual like a needed flesh mediator, etc. It did NOT do away with the 10 commandments, nor all of God's laws which Paul reveals right there in 1 Timothy 1 as part of The Gospel he was entrusted with.

I absolutely disagree... It was talking about the 10 commandments specifically --he gave historical references and talked about theme being written on tablets of stone. and no he wasn't speaking metaphorically and he doesn't contradict what he said in 1 Tim 1:8-11 (Especially if you read that in context:

"Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm: But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully..."

Paul was speaking unfavorably of those who were trying to mix the law and grace... He called it vain jangling.

Paul mentions so many times that Grace and works (the law) do not mix. It probably can be found at least once in all his epistles. Seeing so much evidence that points to Paul's position that the law was done away would encourage me to not get tripped up by 1 Timothy 1.

 

[Davy]

I absolutely disagree...

Fine, then you disagree with the 1 Timothy 1 Scripture that Apostle Paul wrote as a Gospel doctrine he was entrusted with...

1 Tim 1:8-11
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
KJV

Lot of preachers out there that pull from Scripture just enough to attract a following, and of course money. Often they don't bother to go to the depth required to really understand what all Paul taught. The doctrine that all of God's laws are now dead is a money doctrine, not a New Testament doctrine by Apostle Paul. Apostle Paul made this easy to grasp in the above Scripture to Timothy.

 

[FHII]

Lot of preachers out there that pull from Scripture just enough to attract a following, and of course money. Often they don't bother to go to the depth required to really understand what all Paul taught.

Yet, that's exactly what you are doing. You are pulling just enough out of 1 Timothy 1:8 to make a point, but not the correct one. Read the whole chapter, not just the 3 or verses that support your doctrine.

 

[Davy]

Yet, that's exactly what you are doing. You are pulling just enough out of 1 Timothy 1:8 to make a point, but not the correct one. Read the whole chapter, not just the 3 or verses that support your doctrine.

No, it's not... what I am doing. Paul was very clear in 1 Timothy 1 about God's laws still existing against those acts he listed there.

It sounds like you have been listening to one of those reprobate preachers who hate God's laws.

 

[FHII]

It sounds like you have been listening to one of those reprobate preachers who hate God's laws.

Sounds like you are one of those Christian's who don't believe in Grace.

 

[Enoch111]

And yes I AM FREE TO TELL CHRISTIAN BRETHREN THAT EATING UNHEALTHY THINGS WILL MAKE YOUR FLESH SICK! IF YOU THINK YOU HAVE THE POWER TO STOP ME FROM SAYING THAT, THEN GO TO YOU WHITEWASHED WALL!!!

I like that last phrase, but it does not really apply to Christians. You took it out of context and ruined your post.

As to *unhealthy things* the meats sold in supermarkets are free from contamination and disease, and are tightly regulated. So no one is getting sick from properly cooking and eating them.

At the time that dietary restrictions applied it was a totally different story, and there was no refrigeration or freeing of foods. But if you are squeamish, don't ask others to be squeamish. And if you prefer kosher, then go for it. It's just not kosher to tell Christians what's kosher! As far as Jesus was concerned, He flatly stated that it is not what enters into your belly that defiles you, but what comes out of your heart.

 

[justbyfaith]

Of course, if my eating of certain kinds of meats will cause my brother to stumble, I will eat no meat while the world standeth.

For neither, if we eat not, are we the worse, nor, if we eat, are we the better.

However, I am a good minister of Jesus Christ if I point out that every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused if it be received with prayer and thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

So then, I have liberty to eat every kind of food, but I will not exercise that liberty if my brother or sister in Christ might stumble because of that liberty.

Gal 5:13, For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

1Pe 2:16, As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

Rom 15:1, We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves.
Rom 15:2, Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification.
Rom 15:3, For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.

 

[Davy]

Sounds like you are one of those Christian's who don't believe in Grace.

That's a losing statement if we were in an official debate. You tried to change the subject. Grace is a free gift. It is not the same operation as God's laws.

 

[Davy]

I like that last phrase, but it does not really apply to Christians. You took it out of context and ruined your post.

As to *unhealthy things* the meats sold in supermarkets are free from contamination and disease, and are tightly regulated. So no one is getting sick from properly cooking and eating them.

At the time that dietary restrictions applied it was a totally different story, and there was no refrigeration or freeing of foods. But if you are squeamish, don't ask others to be squeamish. And if you prefer kosher, then go for it. It's just not kosher to tell Christians what's kosher! As far as Jesus was concerned, He flatly stated that it is not what enters into your belly that defiles you, but what comes out of your heart.

You don't have authority to try and tell me what to do or say. And to even assume... that you do, makes you what I said.

I'm not Jewish. I'm not pushing their kosher religious system. I'm saying God made certain meats that's good for our flesh body, and others He made to cleanse the earth. It's about simple science. Mad cow disease is an example of ignorant people not understanding this. The feed people put animal parts in the cow's feed, and it made the cow's sick. And the reason is simple. It's because God didn't design cow's to process meat. He designed them to process grains. You'd think those people would know at least the science behind that. Same here, I'd like to think brethren are smart enough to understand this too.

 

[FHII]

That's a losing statement if we were in an official debate.

SO it this:

It sounds like you have been listening to one of those reprobate preachers who hate God's laws.