Why does the word "commandment" seem to frighten some people? What justification is there for committing adultery, stealing, or breaking any of the other Ten Commandments?
Commandments
- Thread starter Bob Estey
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
The word "commandment" doesn't frighten me. What does concern me, however, is when you seem to infer that "commandment" is necessarily synonymous with the "10 Commandments."
There are NT "commandments" of Jesus that have nothing whatsoever to do with the Law of Moses and the 10 Commandments. They are not the same thing.
To properly interpret a word, one must always consider *context!*
Last edited:
Justification for it?
Because I wanted to. What is it to you?
The word commandment doesn’t bother me either. It’s either you do or don’t. Not everything in there is applicable to one’s life, in fact it involves people living under a stressful time of people killing their own brother or sister for believing in Christ.
We have jails for people who get caught doing crime; whether or not they recover is irrelevant to the point you bring up concerning the commandments as we have our own laws that are governed by the state.
There is only one commandment that to me can be applied that is to love God first with all your heart, all your mind, and all your soul, and to love your neighbor as yourself (which is to cherish understanding and acquire wisdom.)
Some people say everything God or Jesus said was a commandment, and then conclude it is impossible to obey all the commandments, and then don't try. But not everything God said was a commandment. There are decrees, statutes, ordinances, and testimonies.
Jesus said, "You know the commandments: `Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.'" (Luke 18:20 RSV). He didn't give us a hundred commandments to follow.
Justification says “I wanted to an it was right.” That is what is being referred to. With the attitude of “what is it to you?” It’s obvious you wouldn’t desire another person to take your life or pull a gun on the street and rob you. But when it gets that point, a person is justified in their own doings - however not before God, or a judge who sentences a person to life or some years in jail or prison.
Ziggy
Well-Known Member
I found this interesting, breaking down the meanings of statutes and precepts, etc..
Statutes means laws, commands, decrees, directives – how we are to live
Ordinances means legislation; but can mean prohibitions and restrictions; think of the Mosaic Law and dietary laws
Precepts – general rules of behavior or thought; wisdom and doctrine could also be used
Testimonies – this is a direct reference to the work of the Lord, creation, deliverance, intercession, mercy and grace to mankind and specifically Israel and believers
Funny I hear:
The Executive branch, the Legistative branch, and the Judiciary branch.
And our testimony is our vote of whether a job well done or a change in the administration is needed.
God is the Executive, Priests are the Legislative, Judges are the Judiciary. And then We the People.
In the NT it is Jesus and the church.
Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of lords, Jesus is the High priest, Jesus is the judge.
Then comes the body of believers.
Just thinking..
hugs
Statutes means laws, commands, decrees, directives – how we are to live
Ordinances means legislation; but can mean prohibitions and restrictions; think of the Mosaic Law and dietary laws
Precepts – general rules of behavior or thought; wisdom and doctrine could also be used
Testimonies – this is a direct reference to the work of the Lord, creation, deliverance, intercession, mercy and grace to mankind and specifically Israel and believers
Funny I hear:
The Executive branch, the Legistative branch, and the Judiciary branch.
And our testimony is our vote of whether a job well done or a change in the administration is needed.
God is the Executive, Priests are the Legislative, Judges are the Judiciary. And then We the People.
In the NT it is Jesus and the church.
Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of lords, Jesus is the High priest, Jesus is the judge.
Then comes the body of believers.
Just thinking..
hugs
Yes, such people might want to educate themselves to understand justice will be meted out.
A dictionary gives lots of meanings for different words. We have to decide which is the one intended by the Bible writers.
In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom. Moreover, Jesus set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Mosaic Law, and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6). So the NT commandments have everything to do with the Mosaic Law.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Sadly, you are misconstruing a couple of things here. 1st and foremost, Jesus began his Gospel Ministry while Israel was still under the Law. After the cross, the Gospel Ministry was no longer under the Law. So the "commandments" under the Law are different than the "commandments" under NT standards.
To walk "like Jesus" is not to walk sinless nor to walk under the OT commandments of the Law. Jesus was not under the Law, since he was sinless and did not need redemptive sacrifices under the Law. The Law of Moses was not for him, though he followed them to demonstrate to Israel what *they* were to do.
Now that Jesus has fulfilled our redemptive sacrifice for sin Israel no longer requires recourse to the Law for redemptive sacrifices. And by extension, Gentiles don't require anything like that either.
To walk "like Jesus" is therefore walking in his grace, which is how we are to walk in him--not sinless like he is, but in righteousness, partaking of his spiritual virtue.
The Law did help Israel to know what Sin is, but it was never the exclusive measure of Sin for the world. God's Word in the consciences of all men, Jew or Gentile, is the measure of what Sin is.
The Law simply amplified what it was for Israel in a time before Christ had provided for their redemption. Sin is no longer Israel's failure to observe animal sacrifices properly. Sin is no longer failure by Israel to observe Sabbath rest, since Christ has achieved a better rest for us by his work of redemption.
Hence, neither Israel nor the Christian world is required to live by an outdated Law of temporary redemption. We now have full and complete redemption by the sacrifice of Jesus himself. We live in him, and therefore live "like him." We partake of his holy nature, not in perfection, but by grace as we obey his word in our lives.
And we know what Christ's word is in our lives because it is similar to what the Law was in its moral structure. We are to love God and to love one another, detesting anything that belongs to the independent, sinful world. We are not to live *under the Law,* but we are to live according to how the Law portrayed Christ, as our Redeemer and God, who made us in his own image.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
There are different Hebrew words. You would have to locate a particular passage to determine what word is being used.
Some people may say that what God or Jesus called for us to do was a "commandment." That is not Bible, but Man talking. And so, it seems irrelevant if we're discussing biblical truth.
When it comes to doing what Jesus or God "commands" us to do, I agree with you that we *can do* what God asks us to do. We can do what Jesus asks us to do. We do not do things perfectly, but we can carry out a mission. We can give up our anger and forgive. We can show love to the unlovable.
Jesus was speaking to Jews under the Law. These same commandments assume a new context under the New Covenant. They may be the same commandments or they may not. "Remember the Sabbath Day" is not a New Covenant commandment, even though the rest of the Commandments may be somehow applicable under the New Covenant.
The Old Covenant of Law was given exclusively to Israel, although Gentiles could follow that Law as immigrants in Israel or in their hearts in other countries. But nobody is under the Law any more.
The still-valid principles of the 10 Commandments now apply under a New Covenant which is *not* directed solely at Israel. So the format is different, and Sabbath Law is excluded, which was exclusively Israeli law.
"You know the commandments: `Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.'" Luke 18:20 RSV.
I'm not saying it's easy, but I AM saying we shouldn't add burdens to the ones the Lord already gave us.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
The problem with most of what you said is that it is not in accordance with what is taught by the Bible. Jesus did not go to the cross or teach anything after the cross in order to negate anything that he spent his ministry teaching. In John 12:46-50, it does not leave us any room to reject anything that Jesus spent his ministry teaching. In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20) and returning to the lawlessness that he gave himself to redeem us from is the way to reject what he accomplished.
The Bible repeatedly speaking about walking out God's commandments in connection with obeying the Mosaic Law, such as in Leviticus 23:6 and Deuteronomy 13:4, so while I agree that walking in the same way that Jesus walked does not refer to being sinless, it does refer to walking out the commandments of the Mosaic Law in the same manner that he did, which is the whole point of a rabbi/disciple relationship. In Galatians 4:4, Jesus was born under the law, and in Luke 2:21, he was circumcised on the eight day, so he was obligated to obey the Mosaic Law as a member of the Mosaic Covenant. The Mosaic Law is God's word (Deuteronomy 5:31-33) and Jesus is God's word made flesh (John 1:14), so he is the embodiment of the Mosaic Law expressed through walking in sinless obedience to it. There would be would be no point in Jesus spending His ministry demonstrating to Israel what they must do if he was going to negate that at the cross. Rather, in Matthew 28:16-20, Jesus commissioned his disciples to make disciples of all nations teaching everything that he taught them. It is not just the Israelite who are instruction to follow Christ's example (1 Peter 2:21-22), to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6), and to be imitators of Paul as he is of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1).
In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law in contrast with saying that he did not come to abolish it and he warned against relaxing the least part of it or teaching others to do the same, so you should not interpret fulfilling the law as referring to relaxing even the least part of it. Rather, "to fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo). According to Galatians 5:14, anyone who has ever loved their neighbor has fulfilled the entire law, which again refers to correctly obeying it, moreover, it refers to something that countless people have done. Likewise, in Galatians 6:2, bearing one another's burdens fulfills the Law of Christ, yet you do not consistently interpret that as saying that we no longer are required to follow the Law of Christ.
In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Mosaic Law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith, an this is the way to walk in Christ's grace again in the way that he walked in righteousness.
Sin is what is contrary to God's nature, such as with righteousness being in accordance with God's nature while unrighteousness is sin, so the things that are sin are specific to the nature of who God is, not to a particular group of people.
Our conscience part of our fallen nature, so it is not perfect, which is why Paul said in 1 Corinthians 4:3 that he was not justified even though he was not aware of anything against himself. So our conscience helps us to live in accordance with the Law of God, but it does not replace it, and therefore is not the ultimate determiner of our spiritual condition. Our conscience is capable of warning us when our spiritual condition is in danger, but it is not God's law and needs to be informed by it in order to function correctly.
In Romans 14, there are weak Christians whose conscience is not informed in a mature way, where their conscience won't let them do what they really would be free to do, so again our conscience does not replace the Law of God. Someone's conscience can be so misinformed that their glory is in their shame (Philippians 3:19), where both their mind and their conscience are defiled (Titus 1:15). So the first way to destroy the work of conscience is to misinform it where you don't give it the true Law of God and the second way is to silence it when it speaks. In 1 Timothy 4:2, Paul spoke about a wounded or seared conscience, and a good indicator of this is if someone doesn't feel convicted about continuing to do what God has revealed in His law to be sin.
The Bible notably does not state that the actions that are sin have changed.
In Hebrews 3:18-19, they did not enter into God's rest because of their disobedience/unbelief, and in Ezekiel 20:13, it specifically mentions that they greatly profaned God's Sabbaths. In Hebrews 4:9-11, there remans a Sabbath rest for the people of God, we should rest from our work as God rested from His work, and we should strive to enter into God's rest so that no one may fall away by the same sort of disobedience, so you trying to use entering unto God's rest to justify the same sort of disobedience is the opposite of what was being said.
All of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160).
Christ was not in disagreement with the Father about which laws we should follow, but rather he spent his ministry teaching us to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example. Everything commanded in the Mosaic Law is in regard to how to love God or how to love our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them. So the position that we should obey the greatest two commandments is also the position that we should obey all of the commandments that hang on them, for example, if we love God and our neighbor, then we won't commit adultery, theft, murder, idolatry, rape, kidnapping, favoritism, and so forth for the rest of the Mosaic Law. It is contradictory to think that we should obey the greatest two commandments of the Mosaic Law while thinking that we are not to live under the law and it is again contradictory to say that we are not to live under the law but are to live according to how the law portrayed Christ. The Mosaic Law is his instructions for how to be in His image.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
We'll see. Read on.
That's a truism. Jesus did not, of course, negate himself or his teaching. But he did determine that in light of a covenant agreement, in which Israel failed to keep their part of the agreement, the covenant agreement was dead.
This was made clear at the cross, even as Jesus said, Jerusalem would be destroyed along with its temple. In sum, Jesus' going to the cross meant that Israel had failed their covenant with God, and their temple worship would be annulled. Clearly, you're wrong.
Here is what Jesus taught would happen, although I don't think you get it...
Matt 23.37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left to you desolate."
Here is how a biblical author interpreted this...
Heb 8.6 But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises.
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people...
As I told you, Jesus was not subject to the Law of Moses. He said he was Lord of the Sabbath. And what he told Israel to do while they were under the Law he did *not* tell them to do after the cross.
Jesus went to heaven, but he commissioned his apostles to lay the foundation for NT truth, which is *not* OT truth. To teach the Law in the NT era is heresy.
He was God. He was not obligated to do anything other than what his Father showed him to do. Since his Father had him demonstrate obedience to the Law on behalf of Israel, he got baptized and carried on like any Jew would at that time. But as John the Baptist said, Jesus had no inherent need to be baptized.
The Scriptures are saying that Jesus was born under the *era* of the Law--not *subject* to the Law. As a sinless person, he had no need to offer sacrifices for his sins. Indeed the entire Law was about performing duties in faith in order to achieve at least a temporary redemption from sin. Jesus did not need the Law to forgive his sins since he had no sin!
All of the various laws applied to sinful Israel and not to the sinless Christ. Sabbath rest and certain foods did not pertain to him. Feast days did not pertain to him. He did not need redemption under that system! He did not need a Passover sacrifice. He was Lord over it all.
What do you mean by Jesus embodying the Law? Are you saying that Jesus is a sinner in need of festivals pertaining to redemption, that he needed a Passover or an animal sacrifice?
Don't be ridiculous! Jesus was the morality behind the Law, but never required the Law as an instrument of redemption. He did not embody the Law except in terms of his sinless moral perfection. The OT Law symbolically portrayed the need for his coming. The Law was a *prophecy* of his New Covenant sacrifice.
On the contrary, Jesus predicted the fall of their entire temple system. He was not advocating for temple sacrifices at a temple that would not exist!
No NT teaching suggests either Jew or Gentile follow Jesus in his pre-cross adherence to the Law. On the contrary, we are told that to teach the Law as a requirement for redemption is heresy.
Gal 3.1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. 2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard? 3 Are you so foolish? After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh? 4 Have you experienced so much in vain—if it really was in vain? 5 So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?
What Paul is referring to is the Galatians' "hearing" about Jesus' resurrection from the dead, which meant that Israel who in effect died in their covenant under Law are able to obtain a new start apart from the condemnation of the Law.
The Law proved all men guilty of sin, and thereby deserving of death. Christ's resurrection removed the condemnation of the Law and promised resurrection to those who live in the spirit of Jesus, and not by their own independent choices.
You do not understand. Jesus indicated that while the Law was in effect nobody in Israel was liberated from indebtedness to the Law. Redemption was relegated to the mercy of God alone, and not to the efforts of sinful men.
The Law did not justify any infraction of God's moral law, and only brought temporary redemption by faith. The only thing that could redeem from death was Christ himself, justifying men *apart from the Law!* No man could be justified from death by the Law!
But the Law never applied outside of Israel and it never promised liberation from the curse of the Law, which is death for all men. Jesus indicated he had to fulfill the redemption implied in this Law, which he did by rising from the dead. It removed the Law and its curses, and replaced it with eternal mercy.
Since you reject Redemption through Christ Alone 101, no sense arguing with you. But others should know that your teaching of OT Law in the NT era is heretical.
The purpose of the commandments is to keep us out of trouble. For instance, if I rob a bank, I go to prison, so the Lord told us not to steal. The commandments are are friends. I don't think you understand that.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
The Sabbath commandment is not "my friend." It may be your friend but it's not mine.
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
The 10 Commandments are a summary of the Natural Law, given us by God.
So, what is the Natural Law? Here's my explanation. I'm assuming you have a car. In your car, in the glove box, is usually a manual put there by the manufacturer of your car. It explains how your car was designed to best operate. For example, it tells you that you should use unleaded gasoline in the tank and 5w20 oil in the crankcase. But, what if, you woke up one morning and thought to yourself, "You know, I've thought long and hard about this, and I'm absolutely convinced that my car will run just as well on water as it does on unleaded gasoline!" So, the next time you needed to tank up, you drug the garden hose over and filled up your tank with water. What would be the result of your actions with regard to your car? You'd be a pedestrian! Why? Because your car wasn't designed to run on water, regardless of what you thought! It would do no good to start complaining, "It's MY car! Who are THEY to tell ME what to do with MY car? I paid for it!" How silly, yes?
Well, the 10 Commandments are the "manual" given us humans by God, to tell us how we should best live according to how He designed us. All of those things are to help us live a better life and to reach eternal life. They aren't there to take anything away from us, except perhaps pain and sorrow.
So, what is the Natural Law? Here's my explanation. I'm assuming you have a car. In your car, in the glove box, is usually a manual put there by the manufacturer of your car. It explains how your car was designed to best operate. For example, it tells you that you should use unleaded gasoline in the tank and 5w20 oil in the crankcase. But, what if, you woke up one morning and thought to yourself, "You know, I've thought long and hard about this, and I'm absolutely convinced that my car will run just as well on water as it does on unleaded gasoline!" So, the next time you needed to tank up, you drug the garden hose over and filled up your tank with water. What would be the result of your actions with regard to your car? You'd be a pedestrian! Why? Because your car wasn't designed to run on water, regardless of what you thought! It would do no good to start complaining, "It's MY car! Who are THEY to tell ME what to do with MY car? I paid for it!" How silly, yes?
Well, the 10 Commandments are the "manual" given us humans by God, to tell us how we should best live according to how He designed us. All of those things are to help us live a better life and to reach eternal life. They aren't there to take anything away from us, except perhaps pain and sorrow.
Similar threads
