<chuckle> As
@bbyrd009 has already spoken of this, I shall say no more. BTW: You stated something to the effect of that you don't have the time, which could be perceived as your time is more valuable than others time. I shall re-construct this [not that it is that hard, but it still requires that little bit extra]:
I aplogogize if that's how it sounded. If I didn't think it wise to be here, I wouldn't be here. I have a sick husband that requires attention. If he's watching documentaries, then I'm a free woman !
I'm also on another forum I have difficulty leaving, but I like it here too...so...
I know that is one of the popular takes upon this. However the author of Hebrews offers one of the strongest warnings in striving against sin, to the shedding one's own blood. And we know that sin is transgression of the law. Further, the author of Hebrews also states that there remains a sabbatismos unto the people of "God", "as God did from His". Those hardly strike me as a warning against returning to Judaism. Not laying the foundation of "repentance", from dead works. Would you account the ten as "dead works"? And upholding the 10, is not laying a foundation of repentance.
I agree with what you said about Hebrews, and in every other letter Paul makes mention of being in Christ and not being lawless. Many miss these verses of his, but I happen to catch everything, the good and the bad. Sabbatismos must mean Sabbath. So are you saying that we can REST from our works? I don't want to address returning to Judaism. That was not my intent. Judaism did not work. But God does expect good deeds from us. Ephesians 2:10 would be perfect for this. He does expect us to work FOR HIM. NOT for our salvatiion.
Not all of the 613 would be applicable to you anyway. As Hillel the Great once said: "the rest are the explanation".
Looks like some are the explanation.
Exodus 23:19 comes to mind and I wouldn't know how to categorize that - boiling a kid in the mother's milk (a goat) - but it's not important to me. I said the 613 did not apply to me. Only the ten - and Jesus did not add any new commands. He also just explained.
The two are out of the OT. The ten are out of the OT. The difference, is that one was written on tablets of stone, and the other is written upon tablets of flesh, upon the heart.
Yes. This is the difference.
Not really. Was it not intended as such from the beginning? If that was the manner in which it was intended, then it has not changed.
OK. I hate these quote things. Can't we just talk? I don't know to what you're saying "Not really."
What you're referring to "Not really" is when I stated that the Law to be followed is the same (God's Law) BUT HOW we follow it has changed.
You're saying this is not true.
Why not? It was not possible to keep the Law before..
Why do you suppose it's possible now? Is it not precisely because it has moved from the tablet of stone into our heart? (Jeremiah, Ezekiel)
What has made it move into our heart?
Perhaps the love we have for the One who died for us, to save us?
Our love for Jesus makes it POSSIBLE for us to follow the Law, which is impossible otherwise.
Does this mean we will never sin? No. But our sin nature is kept under submission and no longer rules.
You confuse me. I never know whether we agree or not.
But it's all good.