Luther's Defense of God's Law

[james1523]

As everybody knows, Martin Luther gave us Sola Fide - Salvation by Faith Alone. However after Luther contended with the Pope and the Papal System, Satan stirred up a number of sects to oppose and confuse the truth which Luther had brought, one of which was the idea that the 10 commandments had no value and should be rejected. These sects are the Antinomians, Familists, Anabaptists.


This same heresy is prevalent in today's Christianity - Antinomianism, which basically says that God's law has no value. They want to take the law of God, or the 10 commandments out of the Church. They reject the law saying it is impossible to keep, and therefore blame the law-giver rather than the sinner. They teach that the moral law of God has no value for the believer or unbeliever, that it is all about God's grace.


However Luther upheld the moral law of God, or the 10 commandments, as is found in his disputes against the Antionomians.


The following is paraphrased from Luther's First Disputation against the Antinomians":


THE Antinomian ARGUMENTS


Argument 1: The law is impossible to keep and on this basis is to be rejected.


Luther's response: God does not burden us with the impossible. The law was originally possible to keep and enjoyable to do so. Yet it is sin and Satan, who made the possible and enjoyable law impossible and terrifying. The problem is not with the law, or with the law-giver (God), but with the sinner. Christ, in fulfilling the law, by His Spirit enables the believer to begin to fulfil the law in this life, and to be in perfect obedience to God's law in body, soul and spirit in the life to come.




Argument 2: The law is no longer valid or in effect. The law and the prophets were until John (Luke 16:16)


Luther's Response: The true meaning of Luke 16:16 - If John, who pointed to the Lamb, had not come, man would be unable to render what the law requires and the prophets promised.


"It is therefore no longer necessary that the law require its fulfillment and the prophets preach about Christ the future Fulfiller of the law, because he appeared in his time and was made a curse in order to free us from the curse of the law (Gal. 3:13). He also gave us the Holy Spirit “that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us” (Rom. 8:4). "




Argument 3: By God’s grace alone repentance is worked in us. Therefore no part of repentance can be ascribed to the law (From Jer 31:18, Ps 51:10).


Luther's Response:
it is improper to say, God’s grace works repentance in us. For grace is properly the fulfillment of the law, the forgiveness of sins, righteousness and life in Christ. God wants us to teach the law to both the believer and the nonbeliever, and repentance is a result of God striking us with the law and the gospel.




Argument 4:
“The law terrifies those it is not supposed to. Therefore the law is not to be taught, since, when the law is taught, then those are saddened and feel the power of the law who ought to rejoice instead. Contrariwise, those hardened, to whom the law pertains, do not care.”


Luther's response:
The preaching of the Law is necessary both before & after conversion.The sinner must be drawn to God not only by His grace and love but also by the terror brought about by the law.
"The law is already mitigated greatly by the justification which we have because of Christ; and it thus ought not to terrify the justified. Yet meanwhile Satan himself comes along and makes it often overly harsh among the justified. This is why it happens that those are often terrified who ought not to be, by the fault of the devil.


Yet the law is nonetheless not to be removed from the temples; and it is indeed to be taught, since even the saints have sin left in their flesh which is to be purged by the law, until it is utterly driven out. For this wrestling match remains for the saints as long as they live here. Here they fight by day and night. There they finally overcome through Christ. "

In summary, Luther believed that the 10 commandments (or God's moral law) had an important role to play in the life of the believer. Christians keep the law by faith, and that the duty of the Christian was to fulfill the law by faith, as good followers of Christ who fulfilled the Law and freed us from the penalty of it. Yet although the Christian is set free from the curse and penalty of the law through Christ, the law is still necessary to purge the sin that is left our flesh. The preaching of the 10 commandments is important in converting sinners and also in purifying the saints.

 

[RJ]

As everybody knows, Martin Luther gave us Sola Fide - Salvation by Faith Alone. However after Luther contended with the Pope and the Papal System, Satan stirred up a number of sects to oppose and confuse the truth which Luther had brought, one of which was the idea that the 10 commandments had no value and should be rejected. These sects are the Antinomians, Familists, Anabaptists.


This same heresy is prevalent in today's Christianity - Antinomianism, which basically says that God's law has no value. They want to take the law of God, or the 10 commandments out of the Church. They reject the law saying it is impossible to keep, and therefore blame the law-giver rather than the sinner. They teach that the moral law of God has no value for the believer or unbeliever, that it is all about God's grace.


However Luther upheld the moral law of God, or the 10 commandments, as is found in his disputes against the Antionomians.


The following is paraphrased from Luther's First Disputation against the Antinomians":


THE Antinomian ARGUMENTS


Argument 1: The law is impossible to keep and on this basis is to be rejected.


Luther's response: God does not burden us with the impossible. The law was originally possible to keep and enjoyable to do so. Yet it is sin and Satan, who made the possible and enjoyable law impossible and terrifying. The problem is not with the law, or with the law-giver (God), but with the sinner. Christ, in fulfilling the law, by His Spirit enables the believer to begin to fulfil the law in this life, and to be in perfect obedience to God's law in body, soul and spirit in the life to come.




Argument 2: The law is no longer valid or in effect. The law and the prophets were until John (Luke 16:16)


Luther's Response: The true meaning of Luke 16:16 - If John, who pointed to the Lamb, had not come, man would be unable to render what the law requires and the prophets promised.


"It is therefore no longer necessary that the law require its fulfillment and the prophets preach about Christ the future Fulfiller of the law, because he appeared in his time and was made a curse in order to free us from the curse of the law (Gal 3:13). He also gave us the Holy Spirit “that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us” (Rom 8:4). "




Argument 3: By God’s grace alone repentance is worked in us. Therefore no part of repentance can be ascribed to the law (From Jer 31:18, Ps 51:10).


Luther's Response:
it is improper to say, God’s grace works repentance in us. For grace is properly the fulfillment of the law, the forgiveness of sins, righteousness and life in Christ. God wants us to teach the law to both the believer and the nonbeliever, and repentance is a result of God striking us with the law and the gospel.




Argument 4:
“The law terrifies those it is not supposed to. Therefore the law is not to be taught, since, when the law is taught, then those are saddened and feel the power of the law who ought to rejoice instead. Contrariwise, those hardened, to whom the law pertains, do not care.”


Luther's response:
The preaching of the Law is necessary both before & after conversion.The sinner must be drawn to God not only by His grace and love but also by the terror brought about by the law.
"The law is already mitigated greatly by the justification which we have because of Christ; and it thus ought not to terrify the justified. Yet meanwhile Satan himself comes along and makes it often overly harsh among the justified. This is why it happens that those are often terrified who ought not to be, by the fault of the devil.


Yet the law is nonetheless not to be removed from the temples; and it is indeed to be taught, since even the saints have sin left in their flesh which is to be purged by the law, until it is utterly driven out. For this wrestling match remains for the saints as long as they live here. Here they fight by day and night. There they finally overcome through Christ. "

In summary, Luther believed that the 10 commandments (or God's moral law) had an important role to play in the life of the believer. Christians keep the law by faith, and that the duty of the Christian was to fulfill the law by faith, as good followers of Christ who fulfilled the Law and freed us from the penalty of it. Yet although the Christian is set free from the curse and penalty of the law through Christ, the law is still necessary to purge the sin that is left our flesh. The preaching of the 10 commandments is important in converting sinners and also in purifying the saints.

Agreed:

• The law is holy, righteous and blameless.
• The law is worthy as a standard of living and good for the Christian to follow.
• It is still very necessary to show the unbeliever there sin.
• I look at the 10 commandments often and gauge myself .
• The law was and still is perfect; what you would only expect from a perfect God. The problem was that man is not perfect. Symbolic with man's relationship to the law is this verse: James 2:10
• The law as a prerequite or a standard to be accomplished for or maintaining salvation is a false doctrine. If this was true, God would not have given us a New Covenant or a new contract.
• If, someone was to say, that by God;s grace they follow the 10 Commandments perpectly is a false doctrine and the truth is not in them.
• We are now saved by Ephesians 2:8......grace alone.
• Yes the law is still very important, Jesus said that: " He didn't come to abolish the law but he came to fullfil it". What did he mean? As a part of the Old Covenant, the "law" included the "Day of Atonement". This day was an annual requirement, where believer's sins where atoned for and covered over by the blood of bulls and goats. Jesus fulfilled the law by spilling his blood and dying once and for all and becoming the final atonement, where by he "took away" our sins forever and then sat down. All of what Jesus ( God) did was a part of his free grace and no other requirement but belief.

 

[Barny]

James1523. I note no scripture in support of the argument you offer here. It's really just mans opinion.

Fact remains that you preach righteousness by works of the law.
You have claimed that perfect obedience to the law must be attained to enter into eternal life. You have even claimed that there is no death bed salvation as such persons would have no perfect works of the law to show their faith.

 

[B-A-C]

It's funny how over time, not only do theologies change, but even definitions.

I see a few problems with the OP from the view of Luther, mostly by what is presumably defined.

For example, some see the "law" and the "commandments" as one and the same thing. Main stream protestantism does not.
The commandments are just a small subset of the entire law. So "the law" means being under the Aaronic/Levite priesthood,
sacrifices, circumcision, and and human punishment (i.e. and eye for an eye, stoning rebellious children, etc..)
Also being free from the law means, doesn't mean we shouldn't obey the ten commandments, it means we are free from the penalty
of the law (death) if we don't obey them 100%.

Another example is the definition of legalism.
From the antimonian point of view, legalism means obeying any part of the law at all.
From the mainstream protestant point of view, it means those who believe you must follow all of the law, all of the time. 100%
The antimonian would label someone who believe we SHOULD follow the ten commandments as a legalist.
The mainstream protestant would label someone who believes we HAVE to follow the ten commandments as a legalist.

Yet another difference, are those who believe salvation and the Christian walk are one and the same thing.
Mainstream protestantism separates them. For example, we can not get saved by works. However the works of our Christian walk (after we are saved) are the proof that we have faith.

The provision of grace is viewed differently by different groups also (there seems to be much disagreement about this).
The antimonian view is that the only sin anyone can commit is unbelief, so the only grace required, is the grace to "let sinners" receive salvation.
(This seems to be somewhat contradicted, in that they also believe we can "become" under the law if we choose to).
Some Christians believe that grace is a one time thing, in that now I am saved - I need no more grace. All of my past and future sins are covered
at the moment of salvation.
Some Christians believe that grace is an on-going thing. Every time I sin after becoming a Christian, more grace must be given.
The difference between this and legalism is, that instead of having to follow the ten commandments 100% of the time, there is grace for those
times we mess up.
There is yet another group, extreme Armenianists, that really don't believe in grace it seems. These would be considered legalists.
You must follow all of the commandments, all of the time after becoming a Christian. There is no grace, no forgiveness, and no second chances.

Righteousness does not come by works of the law, indeed no man can keep even the ten commandments 100%. This is where grace comes in.
It covers the failures (sins). So that before God, we appear perfect. We are saved by faith (and grace), yet faith without works is dead.

Christians will be judged by Christ. This also means different things to different people.
Antimonians seems to believe that Christians won't be judged by Christ at all.
Some believe Christians will only be judged for rewards, for example, even if you have no works, the man himself will be saved.
Others believe we will be judged by our deeds, and that there have to be at least some good works.

The paradox of the commandments....
The mainstream protestant asks for forgiveness for not keeping all of the commandments.
The tongue in cheek joke would be that antimonians would ask for forgiveness for accidentally keeping one of the commandments.
And while it's true that no one can keep the commandments 100% (except Jesus)
It's also true that no one can NOT keep at least some of the commandments, at least some of the time.
Very few people can lie, steal, murder, commit adultery, worship idols and false gods, and envy every single day!
So if you haven't killed anyone today, you have kept at least one commandment today. Even if you didn't mean to.

Perfect obedience isn't required, there is grace. (Thank God for that). But some obedience is required.
The minute we think we cannot sin, and there is no debt for our sins, is the minute we think we can stop needing Jesus.

While we cannot sin so much that we lose our salvation, we can sin so much that we lose our faith.
Part of that faith is that I am saved even though I sometimes sin. This is much different from I am saved because I do not sin.
(Which in the old testament days would be the same as saying I am able to keep the commandments 100%)

 

[DHC]

As everybody knows, Martin Luther gave us Sola Fide - Salvation by Faith Alone. However after Luther contended with the Pope and the Papal System, Satan stirred up a number of sects to oppose and confuse the truth which Luther had brought, one of which was the idea that the 10 commandments had no value and should be rejected. These sects are the Antinomians, Familists, Anabaptists.


This same heresy is prevalent in today's Christianity - Antinomianism, which basically says that God's law has no value. They want to take the law of God, or the 10 commandments out of the Church. They reject the law saying it is impossible to keep, and therefore blame the law-giver rather than the sinner. They teach that the moral law of God has no value for the believer or unbeliever, that it is all about God's grace.


However Luther upheld the moral law of God, or the 10 commandments, as is found in his disputes against the Antionomians.


The following is paraphrased from Luther's First Disputation against the Antinomians":


THE Antinomian ARGUMENTS


Argument 1: The law is impossible to keep and on this basis is to be rejected.


Luther's response: God does not burden us with the impossible. The law was originally possible to keep and enjoyable to do so. Yet it is sin and Satan, who made the possible and enjoyable law impossible and terrifying. The problem is not with the law, or with the law-giver (God), but with the sinner. Christ, in fulfilling the law, by His Spirit enables the believer to begin to fulfil the law in this life, and to be in perfect obedience to God's law in body, soul and spirit in the life to come.




Argument 2: The law is no longer valid or in effect. The law and the prophets were until John (Luke 16:16)


Luther's Response: The true meaning of Luke 16:16 - If John, who pointed to the Lamb, had not come, man would be unable to render what the law requires and the prophets promised.


"It is therefore no longer necessary that the law require its fulfillment and the prophets preach about Christ the future Fulfiller of the law, because he appeared in his time and was made a curse in order to free us from the curse of the law (Gal. 3:13). He also gave us the Holy Spirit “that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us” (Rom. 8:4). "




Argument 3: By God’s grace alone repentance is worked in us. Therefore no part of repentance can be ascribed to the law (From Jer 31:18, Ps 51:10).


Luther's Response:
it is improper to say, God’s grace works repentance in us. For grace is properly the fulfillment of the law, the forgiveness of sins, righteousness and life in Christ. God wants us to teach the law to both the believer and the nonbeliever, and repentance is a result of God striking us with the law and the gospel.




Argument 4:
“The law terrifies those it is not supposed to. Therefore the law is not to be taught, since, when the law is taught, then those are saddened and feel the power of the law who ought to rejoice instead. Contrariwise, those hardened, to whom the law pertains, do not care.”


Luther's response:
The preaching of the Law is necessary both before & after conversion.The sinner must be drawn to God not only by His grace and love but also by the terror brought about by the law.
"The law is already mitigated greatly by the justification which we have because of Christ; and it thus ought not to terrify the justified. Yet meanwhile Satan himself comes along and makes it often overly harsh among the justified. This is why it happens that those are often terrified who ought not to be, by the fault of the devil.


Yet the law is nonetheless not to be removed from the temples; and it is indeed to be taught, since even the saints have sin left in their flesh which is to be purged by the law, until it is utterly driven out. For this wrestling match remains for the saints as long as they live here. Here they fight by day and night. There they finally overcome through Christ. "

In summary, Luther believed that the 10 commandments (or God's moral law) had an important role to play in the life of the believer. Christians keep the law by faith, and that the duty of the Christian was to fulfill the law by faith, as good followers of Christ who fulfilled the Law and freed us from the penalty of it. Yet although the Christian is set free from the curse and penalty of the law through Christ, the law is still necessary to purge the sin that is left our flesh. The preaching of the 10 commandments is important in converting sinners and also in purifying the saints.

Hello James.

Are you a 'Lutheran' James?

Are you also a Reformer in that should the Catholic church repent would you return to her fellowship?

Do you hold to the Unaltered Augsburg Confession of 1530 and the Triglotta Concordance of 1580?

 

[james1523]

Agreed:
The law is holy, righteous and blameless.
The law is worthy as a standard of living and good for the Christian to follow.
It is still very necessary to show the unbeliever there sin.
I look at the 10 commandments often and gauge myself .
The law was and still is perfect; what you would only expect from a perfect God. The problem was that man is not perfect. Symbolic with man's relationship to the law is this verse: James 2:10
The law as a prerequite or a standard to be accomplished for or maintaining salvation is a false doctrine. If this was true, God would not have given us a New Covenant or a new contract.
If, someone was to say, that by God;s grace they follow the 10 Commandments perpectly is a false doctrine and the truth is not in them.
We are now saved by Ephesians 2:8......grace alone.
Yes the law is still very important, Jesus said that: " He didn't come to abolish the law but he came to fullfil it". What did he mean? As a part of the Old Covenant, the "law" included the "Day of Atonement". This day was an annual requirement, where believer's sins where atoned for and covered over by the blood of bulls and goats. Jesus fulfilled the law by spilling his blood and dying once and for all and becoming the final atonement, where by he "took away" our sins forever and then sat down. All of what Jesus ( God) did was a part of his free grace and no other requirement but belief.

We are saved by God's grace, which is a gift, and is not earned or deserved by us, and cannot be gained by any of our works. But this does not mean "alone". The Scripture doesn't say "alone", and the book of James says it is not alone, and the part about there not being any requirement except belief. Luther believed that we can be saved by faith alone. But then he said that faith is not alone, that is, faith without works is not genuine faith. The Bible is clear that it is not only about what you believe, but what you do with and what is the result of that belief. "Be doers of the word and not hearers only, deluding yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his own face in a mirror. He sees himself, then goes off and promptly forgets what he looked like." James 1:22-25

The Scripture gives at least 7 things which are said to save us.
The blood of Jesus (1 Peter 1:18-10).
Repentance (2 Cor 7:10)
Works (James 2:24).
Faith (Rom 5:1)
Mercy (Titus 3:5)
Grace (Titus 3:7)
Baptism (1 Peter 3:21).


The Bible says each one of these items plays a part in our salvation.


Think about this intelligently for one moment, clearly, it is wrong, to say that any one of these things saves us alone.


Peter the apostle did not believe in salvation by grace or faith alone.


In Acts 2 Peter gave a Sermon, many were convicted and wanted to be saved. They answered "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (AActs 2:37.


Peter, if he believed in salvation by faith alone could have said "there is nothing you can do, you are saved by grace alone through faith alone". If you were Peter, this is probably what you would have said.


Instead, Peter said a number of things they had to do:


38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.


This proves that Peter did not believe in the "alone" things, Peter believed they had to do something to be saved.

Peter also urged his listeners to save themselves: Acts 2:40

 

[james1523]

James1523. I note no scripture in support of the argument you offer here. It's really just mans opinion.

Fact remains that you preach righteousness by works of the law.
You have claimed that perfect obedience to the law must be attained to enter into eternal life. You have even claimed that there is no death bed salvation as such persons would have no perfect works of the law to show their faith.

Think about what you are saying intelligently for one moment. If you say we don't have to obey the law to enter the kingdom of God, it is like saying you don't need to obey the laws of the US to enter the United States.
Salvation is not about God giving us entrance to a place called heaven just because we believe.
Salvation is about being saved into the kingdom of God and being under the rule and authority of God.
Jesus said that obedience to the law is required to enter life.
It is possible since Jesus fulfilled the law for us, and the Spirit fulfills the law in us by us walking in the Spirit (Romans 8:3-4).
What else do you think fulfill the law means? Do you think fulfill the law means disobey the law?

 

[james1523]

Hello James.

Are you a 'Lutheran' James?

Are you also a Reformer in that should the Catholic church repent would you return to her fellowship?

Do you hold to the Unaltered Augsburg Confession of 1530 and the Triglotta Concordance of 1580?

No not at all.

 

[DHC]

No not at all.

Hello James.
You cited Luther and I was wondering why, that is why I asked the previous questions.
The Catholic Church upholds the so called 'moral law' and so did Luther. That is where
Luther derived the belief that the ten commandments are integral in the Christian life.
From the Catholic Church James, the Catholics had the ten commandments hundreds of
years before Luther wrote on the subject.

Where I am confused with the advocates of the ten commandments. Is how they deduce that
it is the ten commandments that must be upheld. Gentile nations were not members of the
Mt Sinai Covenant, and I cannot see that the Gentiles were ever included in the Old Covenant.
Unless the Gentiles were slaves in Israel or as individuals decided to sign up to the covenant
by the process of circumcision.

The ten commandments appear as the written law in the Mt Sinai Covenant. The moment
these laws were included in the Old Covenant they became the responsibility of the nation of
Israel. That is why the scripture uses phrases like 'those under the law' to describe the Jews.
The fact that the Jews in the first century were under the law is abundantly evident in the
scripture. What is absent in the New Testament is the inclusion of the Gentile nations in the
Old Covenant. All I find in the New Testament is the New Covenant. A new beginning, a new
Genesis, a spiritual creation in Christ.

To follow the Old Testament law requires that you be circumcised, James. Any Gentile who
wishes to obey the Old Covenant law must abide by the conditions that the law dictates.
Let us assume for your sake that it is possible for a Gentile to lift the ten commandments
from the law. Then we will try to obey the literal ten commandments James. So we read
through the ten commandments and arrive at the seventh commandment.

Exodus 20
7 You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not leave
him unpunished who takes His name in vain.

The name of the Lord your God is Jesus Christ. Thou shall not take the name of Jesus
in vain. Methinks I have correctly translated the old into the new commandment.
Do not be deceived if you take the name of Jesus in vain, you will be punished!
That is what the commandment states James.

Here is the problem James, Jesus specifically states that the vain use of His name.
In the New Testament will be forgiven and not punished, read below.

Luke 12:10
And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him;
but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.

You can take the name of Jesus in vain and escape the punishment. There appears
to be a conflict between the law and the command of Jesus? If you could clear up
the anomaly I would be grateful.

 

[Barny]

Think about what you are saying intelligently for one moment. If you say we don't have to obey the law to enter the kingdom of God, it is like saying you don't need to obey the laws of the US to enter the United States.

Christians are under the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, Rom 8:2.

But you are preaching the law of sin and death instead.

What I see you saying is that we must keep the laws of Saudi Arabia to enter into the USA.

Salvation is not about God giving us entrance to a place called heaven just because we believe

.

The simplicity that is in Christ seems to be quite a problem for some.
Believing God's promise of eternal life in Christ is too easy and therefore a stumbling block for those who desire to be under the law.

But, for Christians we believe God's promise. Thus our faith is counted for righteousness, Rom 4;5.
Hence we do not lust after Hagar (symbolic for righteousness by works of the law, Gal 4:24)

What else do you think fulfill the law means? Do you think fulfill the law means disobey the law?

Rom 8:3,4
For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us

How is the law fulfilled?
God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh

How was the law fulfilled in Christians?
Rom 6:6
knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with,

Rom 8:10.
And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin,

James 1523, Why do you still try to determine your righteousness by whether your physical body can perfectly obey the law of sin and death?
If a Christian's body is already dead (by faith, Rom 6:6.) because of sin, then the law of sin and death has been fulfilled, as shown in Rom 8:3,4. To deny this is unbelief in Jesus and his work on the cross.

 

[james1523]

Hello James.
You cited Luther and I was wondering why, that is why I asked the previous questions.
The Catholic Church upholds the so called 'moral law' and so did Luther. That is where
Luther derived the belief that the ten commandments are integral in the Christian life.
From the Catholic Church James, the Catholics had the ten commandments hundreds of
years before Luther wrote on the subject.

Hello DHC, I cited Luther to show that Luther engaged in several arguments with those who misused his writings to say the 10 commandment law was done away with.


Belief in the continuance of the moral law as contained in the 10 commandments is fairly universal within mainstream Protestantism. What it indicates, is that belief in the 10 commandments was not one of the heresies of the Catholic Church. Luther, Calvin and Wesley all believed that God's moral law was contained within the 10 commandments. I doubt that they merely copied the beliefs of the Catholic Church on this issue - they had good and justifiable reasons to believe this to be true.


I highlight that the largest protestant denominations believe in the moral law which includes the 10 commandments. Although the size of a denomination does not indicate its doctrinal accuracy, it does indicate that the many protestant scholars and forefathers, historically, find no reason to exclude the 10 commandments as being irrelevant to New Covenant Christianity.


Church of England articles of religion:
"Although the law given from God by Moses as touching ceremonies and rites doth not bind Christians, nor ought the civil precepts thereof of necessity be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian whatsoever is free from the obedience of the commandments which are called moral."


Westminster Confession of Faith (Presbyterian):
"The moral law doth forever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof; and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator who gave it. Neither doth Christ in the gospel any way dissolve, but much strengthen, this obligation."


New Hampshire Confession (Baptist):
"We believe that the Law of God is the eternal and unchangeable rule of his moral government; that it is holy, just, and good."

Where I am confused with the advocates of the ten commandments. Is how they deduce that
it is the ten commandments that must be upheld. Gentile nations were not members of the
Mt Sinai Covenant, and I cannot see that the Gentiles were ever included in the Old Covenant.
Unless the Gentiles were slaves in Israel or as individuals decided to sign up to the covenant
by the process of circumcision.


The ten commandments appear as the written law in the Mt Sinai Covenant. The moment
these laws were included in the Old Covenant they became the responsibility of the nation of
Israel. That is why the scripture uses phrases like 'those under the law' to describe the Jews.
The fact that the Jews in the first century were under the law is abundantly evident in the
scripture. What is absent in the New Testament is the inclusion of the Gentile nations in the
Old Covenant. All I find in the New Testament is the New Covenant. A new beginning, a new
Genesis, a spiritual creation in Christ.

You raise a good point as to why the 10 commandments are chosen to be representative of God's moral law. It is important to note that God's moral law pre-dates the Mt Sinai Covenant. Remember that God made a covenant with Noah after the flood, and every human being is descended from Noah. We should note that the moral law is not limited to the 10 commandments (they are only a summary) but includes all the moral commands of Scripture. Like summaries of God's moral law are found in Ex. 20:1–17; Deut. 6:5; Matt. 22:36–40; Rom. 13:8–10; 1 Tim. 1:5–11.


Theologically, there are 3 kinds of law:
I. The ceremonial law;
2. The civil law;
3. The moral law.


Only the moral law which is contained in the 10 commandments (and the whole of Scripture) is still in force. This law cannot be abolished because it is founded upon God's own nature. The purpose of God's moral law as based in the 10 commandments is not to be a means to salvation but so we might reflect the moral character and image of God. Even though the law cannot save, it remains God's standard. We note that love is defined by the law (eg we love our neighbour by not committing adultery with their wives, not stealing from them etc), and love also fulfills the law.


My unprovable opinion is that the 10 commandments were chosen to be representative of God's moral law, because according to Jewish traditions, it is believed that (about) 7 commandments are applicable to Gentiles. There is perhaps some carry over in tradition from Judaism to Christianity, and that is the origins of the 10 commandments being upheld as the moral law by Catholics and then later by Protestants. In retrospect, I cannot see any reason why any of the passages of the New Testament which summarize God's moral law, could not also be used as a summary of the moral law.


Scripturally, use of the 10 commandments is taken from Romans 13:8-10 and 1 Jn 5:1-3 and Romans 1:18-32 which shows that several commandments are applicable as moral laws in the New Covenant.
For example,
1st commandment: Romans 1 verse 25 & 28
2nd commandment: 23 & 25
3rd commandment: 21
4th:Elsewhere
5th:30
6th:29
7th:26 & 26
8th:Elsewhere
9th: 30
10th: 29


It is also necessary to change the Sabbath (Saturday) to the Lord's Day (Sunday), and many Christians (except SDA's) believe keeping the Sabbath is abiding in the perpetual rest accomplished by Christ's work on the cross.


The 10 commandments are not seen as an exclusive summary of God's moral law. As proved by Matt. 5:27–28; 1 Jn. 3:15, any of the 10 commandments may be expanded to cover any issue. Therefore the commandment against adultery covers a wide range of sexual sins.

To follow the Old Testament law requires that you be circumcised, James. Any Gentile who
wishes to obey the Old Covenant law must abide by the conditions that the law dictates.
Let us assume for your sake that it is possible for a Gentile to lift the ten commandments
from the law. Then we will try to obey the literal ten commandments James. So we read
through the ten commandments and arrive at the seventh commandment.


Exodus 20
7 You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not leave
him unpunished who takes His name in vain.


The name of the Lord your God is Jesus Christ. Thou shall not take the name of Jesus
in vain. Methinks I have correctly translated the old into the new commandment.
Do not be deceived if you take the name of Jesus in vain, you will be punished!
That is what the commandment states James.


Here is the problem James, Jesus specifically states that the vain use of His name.
In the New Testament will be forgiven and not punished, read below.


Luke 12:10
And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him;
but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.


You can take the name of Jesus in vain and escape the punishment. There appears
to be a conflict between the law and the command of Jesus? If you could clear up
the anomaly I would be grateful.

If we do not use the old testament law to define morality, then what else should we use? I think we need definition of some law. Sin is breaking God's moral law: 1 Jn.3:4. There is no other way to define sin other than breaking the law. The moral law stops us misrepresenting or excusing sin. The opposite of law is not grace, it is lawlessness. Our faith does not make the Law of God invalid - it establishes it (Rom 3:21-31). As believers we have died to the condemnation of the law, but because of our union with Christ who fulfilled the Law, the law is established, not done away with (Rom 3:31).


It is important to note they we are not following the Old Testament law given to the Israelites, we are following the moral law which is God's unchangeable laws founded upon God's own unchangangeable nature, which have been in effect since the time of the creation of Adam and the woman, which have applied to all people on the face of the Earth both Jew and Gentile. Remark: Even if gentiles were following the old testament law, scripture is fairly clear that circumcision is not required for gentile believers, except in the isolated case of Paul circumcizing Timothy.


I don't think the meaning of Luke 12:10 is in contradiction to Exodus 20:7. It does not mean that those who blaspheme the name of Christ will not be punished, only that they will have opportunity for forgiveness. Why is blaspheming the Son forgiven but not the Spirit? Blaspheming the Son of Man can be forgiven because the Spirit can still work to convert their hearts so they may be saved and forgiven. The reason why those who blaspheme against the Spirit are not forgiven is because they have offended the only one who can turn their hearts to Christ and be saved. Such people are effectively rejecting the work of the Holy Spirit in their hearts
and therefore cannot be saved.

 

[james1523]

Christians are under the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, Rom 8:2.

But you are preaching the law of sin and death instead.

What I see you saying is that we must keep the laws of Saudi Arabia to enter into the USA.

The law of sin and death is the enslaving power of sin in our members. The written laws of God in Scripture are called good, holy and perfect, as they reflect God's holy nature.

I would like to see you explain how the 10 commandments differ from the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. You do realize, I hope, that the Spirit of life is the same God who gave Moses the written 10 commandments. They are the same laws, as far as morality is concerned.

How are you going to communicate God's standard of morality to others without the written law?

 

[RJ]

We are saved by God's grace, which is a gift, and is not earned or deserved by us, and cannot be gained by any of our works. But this does not mean "alone". The Scripture doesn't say "alone", and the book of James says it is not alone, and the part about there not being any requirement except belief. Luther believed that we can be saved by faith alone. But then he said that faith is not alone, that is, faith without works is not genuine faith. The Bible is clear that it is not only about what you believe, but what you do with and what is the result of that belief. "Be doers of the word and not hearers only, deluding yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his own face in a mirror. He sees himself, then goes off and promptly forgets what he looked like." James 1:22-25

The Scripture gives at least 7 things which are said to save us.
The blood of Jesus (1 Peter 1:18-10).
Repentance (2 Cor 7:10)
Works (James 2:24).
Faith (Rom 5:1)
Mercy (Titus 3:5)
Grace (Titus 3:7)
Baptism (1 Peter 3:21).


The Bible says each one of these items plays a part in our salvation.


Think about this intelligently for one moment, clearly, it is wrong, to say that any one of these things saves us alone.


Peter the apostle did not believe in salvation by grace or faith alone.


In Acts 2 Peter gave a Sermon, many were convicted and wanted to be saved. They answered "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (AActs 2:37.


Peter, if he believed in salvation by faith alone could have said "there is nothing you can do, you are saved by grace alone through faith alone". If you were Peter, this is probably what you would have said.


Instead, Peter said a number of things they had to do:


38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.


This proves that Peter did not believe in the "alone" things, Peter believed they had to do something to be saved.

Peter also urged his listeners to save themselves: Acts 2:40

Alas, we will never agree,you believe in salvation by works and I believe in salvation by only God's free gift! I can actually understand where you are coming from. To support your Immersion Regenerationist Theology, you support grace to only a limit and are bounds to your belief in works first and not grace first. For my understanding everything /all is a result of his grace to us and none, "not even a smidgen", of ourselves.

The Scripture gives at least 7 things which are said to save us.

• The blood of Jesus (1 Peter 1:18-10). 18-10 is not a valide set of versers but, Jesus suffering, spilling of blood and final death were all allowed by and a part of God's grace.

• Repentance (2 Cor 7:10) we are not saved from the righteous judgment of God by stopping sin and doing good--that would be salvation by works. We are saved from our sins by trusting in Christ. Again if our repentance was a requirement before salvation that is our works. We have a change in conscienceness toward God, regeneration, then repentance.

• Works (James 2:24). Yes but justification is the work of God where the righteousness of Jesus is reckoned to the sinner . It is based completely and solely upon Jesus' sacrifice on the cross 1 Peter 2:24 and is received by faith alone; which all is precluded by God's grace to us....none of our doing.

• Faith (Rom 5:1) Faith is a gift or by the grace of God and not a requirement of salvation but a derivative of God;s free grace. Romans 12: 3...Faith is only a result of God's grace alone! Why don't you explain this verse?
• Mercy (Titus 3:5) Wow James, this is so odd of you...this verse actually argues against your stance on works required for salvation and clearly this "Mercy" is by God's grace alone.

• Grace (Titus 3:7) Same as mercy above.
• Baptism (1 Peter 3:21). You are a Immersion Regenerationist by your works and I am not.

 

[B-A-C]

Faith (Rom 5:1) Faith is a gift or by the grace of God and not a requirement of salvation but a derivative of God;s free grace. Romans 12: 3...Faith is only a result of God's grace alone! Why don't you explain this verse?

I tend to be a little less Calvinistic here. On one hand God gives faith to "every man". ( Rom 12:3; ) but yet, not all men come to God.
So the grace and salvation here come from God, the choice of faith comes from us.
As for Rom 5:1; what is the definition of justification to you? Is it the same thing as salvation? Justification is the reason for some thing to happen.
Salvation was a result of that need. For example the justification for me buying a car is so I can get to work on time. But just because I buy a car
doesn't mean I will get to work on time. I also have to get up on time, and actually drive the car to work.

Rom 4:18; In hope against hope he believed, so that he might become a father of many nations according to that which had been spoken, “So shall your descendants be.”
Rom 4:19; Without becoming weak in faith he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah’s womb;
Rom 4:20; yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God,
Rom 4:21; and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform.
Rom 4:22; Therefore it was also credited to him as righteousness.
Rom 4:23; Now not for his sake only was it written that it was credited to him,
Rom 4:24; but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, as those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead,
Rom 4:25; He who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.
Rom 5:1; Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
Rom 5:2; through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.

It is unfortunate that chapter 4 ends there, because the thought continues on in the next verse in chapter 5 (Remember numbers and chapters were added well after the Bible was written)
In verse 4:25; we see He was "raised for our justification". Does that mean for our salvation? Well, He wouldn't have had to come die for us
if our sins wouldn't have justified the reason for him to die. And our faith is the justification for Him to rise again.

In my line of work, I am often asked, what is your justification for doing this, or doing that, or buying this, or spending money on that.
He was raised for our justification, because we needed a savior. However just because we need a savior doesn't mean we choose to believe in Him.
(Count the number of times the words "faith and belief" are used in leading up to that verse).

 

[RJ]

I tend to be a little less Calvinistic here. On one hand God gives faith to "every man". ( Rom 12:3; ) but yet, not all men come to God.
So the grace and salvation here come from God, the choice of faith comes from us.
As for Rom 5:1; what is the definition of justification to you? Is it the same thing as salvation? Justification is the reason for some thing to happen.
Salvation was a result of that need. For example the justification for me buying a car is so I can get to work on time. But just because I buy a car
doesn't mean I will get to work on time. I also have to get up on time, and actually drive the car to work.

Rom 4:18; In hope against hope he believed, so that he might become a father of many nations according to that which had been spoken, “So shall your descendants be.”
Rom 4:19; Without becoming weak in faith he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah’s womb;
Rom 4:20; yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God,
Rom 4:21; and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform.
Rom 4:22; Therefore it was also credited to him as righteousness.
Rom 4:23; Now not for his sake only was it written that it was credited to him,
Rom 4:24; but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, as those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead,
Rom 4:25; He who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.
Rom 5:1; Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
Rom 5:2; through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.

It is unfortunate that chapter 4 ends there, because the thought continues on in the next verse in chapter 5 (Remember numbers and chapters were added well after the Bible was written)
In verse 4:25; we see He was "raised for our justification". Does that mean for our salvation? Well, He wouldn't have had to come die for us
if our sins wouldn't have justified the reason for him to die. And our faith is the justification for Him to rise again.

In my line of work, I am often asked, what is your justification for doing this, or doing that, or buying this, or spending money on that.
He was raised for our justification, because we needed a savior. However just because we need a savior doesn't mean we choose to believe in Him.
(Count the number of times the words "faith and belief" are used in leading up to that verse).

I tend to be a little less Calvinistic here. On one hand God gives faith to "every man". ( Rom 12:3; ) but yet, not all men come to God.
So the grace and salvation here come from God, the choice of faith comes from us.

• So if Calvanism is the theology of salvation by grace alone, I guess I am a Calavinist! I have'nt studied Calvin or any other man; what I have I credit God and the Holy Spirit alone.
• No, God does not give faith to every man; if that were the case, there would be no need for Jesus Christ and, he is not who he said he was. God offers forgiveness to every man. God gives faith to those who believe in the works of Jesus Christ and justifies man because of his faith.
• No, I believe the choice to believe is from us ( Revelations 3:20), faith comes from God as I have already stated: Romans 5:1 and Romans 12:3
• And no, justification is not the same as salvation. Justification is God's action as a result of salvation....not the same. God justifies us after salvation because of Jesus is in us. He sees Jesus in us and justifies us as if we have never sinned because of the finality of what Jesus did on the cross for us....which is a gift or God's grace to us. This is what God means when he says; " And I will look at there sin no more" !

 

[DHC]

Reference post #11, Luther's defense of God's laws.

Hello James.

Your effort is always appreciated James and your post is solid as usual. In reply to my
assertion that the Catholic church originated the legal error and Luther simply accepted
that it was true. You replied with the following.

What it indicates, is that belief in the 10 commandments was not one of the heresies of the
Catholic Church. Luther, Calvin and Wesley all believed that God's moral law was contained
within the 10 commandments. I doubt that they merely copied the beliefs of the Catholic Church
on this issue - they had good and justifiable reasons to believe this to be true.

Your statement above provides the key to the origin of the legal paradox in Christianity. If
someone in the past promoted an idea and even if the idea is clearly erroneous. Then the idea
becomes doctrine and is passed from generation to generation in Christianity, regardless of
it's Biblical integrity. There are some facts regarding the law that we should be mindful of.

Fact one James, the ten commandments as listed in (Exodus 20) and cannot be legally obeyed
by the Gentiles. The law was given to Israel and to no other nation on earth James.

Exodus 19:5-6 (ASV)
5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be
mine own possession from among all peoples: for all the earth is mine: 6 and ye shall be
unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt
speak unto the children of Israel.

Please note the word 'covenant' and the phrases, 'kingdom of priests' and 'a holy nation'.
The law and this includes the ten commandments was only given to the nation of Israel!
God established the Mt Sinai Covenant with the nation of Israel, James.

Fact two, the Sabbath law or fourth commandment is specific to the nation of Israel.

Deuteronomy 5:12
15 And thou shalt remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and Jehovah thy
God brought thee out thence by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm: therefore Jehovah
thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day.

Exodus 31:16
16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout
their generations, for a perpetual covenant.

Gentile nations are not commanded by God to keep the Sabbath day, James. Only Israel has
been commanded to keep the seventh day rest. Christians cannot celebrate the legal Sabbath day,
because Christians are not members of the 'Old Covenant'! We do not rest on Saturday and then
go to church on Sunday. Nor do we move the Sabbath day rest forward to a first day rest. I
repeat that the Gentiles and Gentile Christians were never under the ten commandments. Only
Israel was commanded to keep the seventh day rest and that is declared within the Old Covenant.

So you are unable to obey the fourth commandment as you were never given this command
to obey James. So if you can resist in future using the argument that the Gentiles are under
the TEN commandments, which they are not.

Fact three, the law of Mt Sinai was codified decrees given by God to the nation of Israel.
Law is specific and well defined. Precise definitions of the words and phrases in legal code,
is what lawyers are paid to define and explain. If the law states you cannot exceed the speed
limit, then you are bound by the law to the maximum posted speed limit. No other interpretation
of the law is permitted by a citizen other than the literal, defined interpretation. Law never
has a wider meaning or an expanded meaning, law is precise and specific, law is letter perfect,
legal code.

Fact four James, Jesus did not ratify the commandments. Jesus did not expand on the law.
Jesus defined what the true heart of the law was about. Let us examine an example from
the scripture.

Matthew 5
21 Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever
shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment 22 but I say unto you, that every one who is
angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his
brother, Racca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall
be in danger of the hell of fire.

The law was specific in that the physical act of killing was punished. Jesus goes beneath
the law against killing and exposes the heart of the problem. Man's heart is dark and
deceptive and very judgmental. Mankind is prone to anger even against members of
one's own family. The law can never correct the problem of anger, nor was the law
designed to deal with anger. Jesus is referring to the deeper inclinations of the human
heart. Jesus is not saying that the law now says this and that. Jesus is actually saying
it is the deeper drumbeat of the sinful flesh that is causing the real problems. Jesus
introduced thought crime, you will be judged according to your thought patterns.
Think the thought and you will die! But Jesus also was expanding on the O.T crimes
of the thoughts and heart.

Genesis 6:5
And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every
imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

The law is so weak in addressing this deeper rift of the human heart and mind.

Romans 8:3
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh...

James, the law is almost useless when it comes to identifying the real issue of the carnal
flesh of mankind. I have never killed anyone nor committed adultery therefore I am
righteous?

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly corrupt: who can know it?

Reformation of the thoughts and attitudes of the heart are impossible. Regeneration
is only possible when the Holy Spirit takes the reigns. We are not under the law and
never have been, because the law is weak. The law was only introduced as an interim
step in God's grand plan of reconciliation and only to physical Israel. The law can
at times simply indicate one's actions are unrighteous. But the law is limited and weak
and does not disclose the deeper evil within the heart and mind. Only the Holy Spirit
will bring out the motives and intentions of the flesh.

Theologically, there are 3 kinds of law:
I. The ceremonial law;
2. The civil law;
3. The moral law.

Correction pending James.

Romans 3:27
...but by a law of faith

Romans 7:23
...the law of sin and death

Romans 8:2
...the law of the Spirit of life

We note that love is defined by the law (eg we love our neighbour by not committing
adultery with their wives, not stealing from them etc), and love also fulfills the law.

It is not only the ten commandments that love fulfills James.

Galatians 5:14
For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

If you are under the law then it is the 'whole law' that is fulfilled by loving thy neighbor.

My unprovable opinion is that the 10 commandments were chosen to be representative of God's
moral law, because according to Jewish traditions, it is believed that (about) 7 commandments
are applicable to Gentiles.

This paragraph may need to be rewritten James as you are contradicting yourself.
Is it seven commandments or ten commandments or nine commandments?

Scripturally, use of the 10 commandments is taken from Romans 13:8-10 and 1 Jn 5:1-3 and Romans 1:18-32 which shows
that several commandments are applicable as moral laws in the New Covenant.
For example,
1st commandment: Romans 1 verse 25 & 28
2nd commandment: 23 & 25
3rd commandment: 21
4th:Elsewhere
5th:30
6th:29
7th:26 & 26
8th:Elsewhere
9th: 30
10th: 29

Could I request that you also resubmit this part of your post in a clearer way. You might also provide a definition of the
word 'moral', thanks James. When you have attended to the above I can proceed with the remainder of your post.

 

[james1523]

Reference post #11, Luther's defense of God's laws.

Hello James.

Your effort is always appreciated James and your post is solid as usual. In reply to my
assertion that the Catholic church originated the legal error and Luther simply accepted
that it was true. You replied with the following.

What it indicates, is that belief in the 10 commandments was not one of the heresies of the
Catholic Church. Luther, Calvin and Wesley all believed that God's moral law was contained
within the 10 commandments. I doubt that they merely copied the beliefs of the Catholic Church
on this issue - they had good and justifiable reasons to believe this to be true.
Your statement above provides the key to the origin of the legal paradox in Christianity. If
someone in the past promoted an idea and even if the idea is clearly erroneous. Then the idea
becomes doctrine and is passed from generation to generation in Christianity, regardless of
it's Biblical integrity. There are some facts regarding the law that we should be mindful of.

Fact one James, the ten commandments as listed in (Exodus 20) and cannot be legally obeyed
by the Gentiles. The law was given to Israel and to no other nation on earth James.

Exodus 19:5-6 (ASV)
5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be
mine own possession from among all peoples: for all the earth is mine: 6 and ye shall be
unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt
speak unto the children of Israel.

Please note the word 'covenant' and the phrases, 'kingdom of priests' and 'a holy nation'.
The law and this includes the ten commandments was only given to the nation of Israel!
God established the Mt Sinai Covenant with the nation of Israel, James.

DHC, thankyou, I have no problem engaging in discussion with yourself as your posts are objective, intelligent, polite and factual.
I agree with you that the 10 commandments were not given to the Gentiles. The Gentiles did not have the written law of Moses.
However, in Romans 2:14 Paul seems to say that they are not without law, and must have a law, against which they sinned, and so deserved punishment, and which they also obeyed, for these Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the law.
The substance of the moral law of Moses agrees with the law and revelation of God's nature in the creation and the sense of right versus wrong which God wrought into man's conscience.

Fact two, the Sabbath law or fourth commandment is specific to the nation of Israel.
Deuteronomy 5:12
15 And thou shalt remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and Jehovah thy
God brought thee out thence by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm: therefore Jehovah
thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day.

Exodus 31:16
16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout
their generations, for a perpetual covenant.

Gentile nations are not commanded by God to keep the Sabbath day, James. Only Israel has
been commanded to keep the seventh day rest. Christians cannot celebrate the legal Sabbath day,
because Christians are not members of the 'Old Covenant'! We do not rest on Saturday and then
go to church on Sunday. Nor do we move the Sabbath day rest forward to a first day rest. I
repeat that the Gentiles and Gentile Christians were never under the ten commandments. Only
Israel was commanded to keep the seventh day rest and that is declared within the Old Covenant.

So you are unable to obey the fourth commandment as you were never given this command
to obey James. So if you can resist in future using the argument that the Gentiles are under
the TEN commandments, which they are not.

No Christian (except SDA's, and a few others), who believes in the 10 commandments, think they have to keep the Sabbath in the Jewish sense. That keeping the Sabbath in the Jewish sense, is not for Gentiles is well understood. No one has said that Gentiles are under the 10 commandments in the same manner as the Jews. They are required to obey the moral laws of God which are reflected in the 10 commandments.
I believe the spirit of the 4th commandment can be kept for that reason, by abiding in Christ's rest by faith.

Fact three, the law of Mt Sinai was codified decrees given by God to the nation of Israel.
Law is specific and well defined. Precise definitions of the words and phrases in legal code,
is what lawyers are paid to define and explain. If the law states you cannot exceed the speed
limit, then you are bound by the law to the maximum posted speed limit. No other interpretation
of the law is permitted by a citizen other than the literal, defined interpretation. Law never
has a wider meaning or an expanded meaning, law is precise and specific, law is letter perfect,
legal code.

You are speaking of the written and legislated laws. What you wrote is not normally true of moral laws. We are concerned with the morality (or spirit) of the 10 commandments and not the written laws themselves. For this reason, unlike the written laws of God, the morality of the 10 commandments cannot be precisely defined.
An example is the command "thou shalt not kill". Some, believe it is only murder, but early Christians believed it was shedding the blood of any man, and for this reason (and for other reasons too) early Christians had issues with joining the military. But a few decades later, after the Christianization of the Roman Empire, people had no problem shedding blood in the name of Christianity.

Fact four James, Jesus did not ratify the commandments. Jesus did not expand on the law.
Jesus defined what the true heart of the law was about. Let us examine an example from
the scripture.

Matthew 5
21 Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever
shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment 22 but I say unto you, that every one who is
angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his
brother, Racca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall
be in danger of the hell of fire.

The law was specific in that the physical act of killing was punished. Jesus goes beneath
the law against killing and exposes the heart of the problem. Man's heart is dark and
deceptive and very judgmental. Mankind is prone to anger even against members of
one's own family. The law can never correct the problem of anger, nor was the law
designed to deal with anger. Jesus is referring to the deeper inclinations of the human
heart. Jesus is not saying that the law now says this and that. Jesus is actually saying
it is the deeper drumbeat of the sinful flesh that is causing the real problems. Jesus
introduced thought crime, you will be judged according to your thought patterns.
Think the thought and you will die! But Jesus also was expanding on the O.T crimes
of the thoughts and heart.

It was an expansion for the simple reason that we can not find any law in the old testament against hatred or calling someone a fool. When Jesus said that the command against adultery also included lustful thoughts, that was definitely an expansion and elevation of the law at that time, which even surprised Jesus's hearers. But this expansion was in keeping with the heart or spirit of the law, which is what we really mean when we say the morality of the 10 commandments. I would say it is both a definition of the heart of the law, and an expansion at the same time.

Genesis 6:5
And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every
imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

The law is so weak in addressing this deeper rift of the human heart and mind.

Romans 8:3
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh...

James, the law is almost useless when it comes to identifying the real issue of the carnal
flesh of mankind. I have never killed anyone nor committed adultery therefore I am
righteous?

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly corrupt: who can know it?

Reformation of the thoughts and attitudes of the heart are impossible. Regeneration
is only possible when the Holy Spirit takes the reigns. We are not under the law and
never have been, because the law is weak. The law was only introduced as an interim
step in God's grand plan of reconciliation and only to physical Israel. The law can
at times simply indicate one's actions are unrighteous. But the law is limited and weak
and does not disclose the deeper evil within the heart and mind. Only the Holy Spirit
will bring out the motives and intentions of the flesh.

The purpose of the law is to instill terror into the heart of the hearer so that they may realize their sinful condition and then seek the remedy that is found in Christ. I have already stated that the purpose of the law was not for achieving righteousness, but to reflect the moral character and nature of God. Martin Luther said "we are saved by faith alone but the faith which saves is not alone".
To put what Luther said in terms of law and righteousness, he might have said "We are not made righteous by obeying the law, but if we are righteous we will obey the law".

Theologically, there are 3 kinds of law:
I. The ceremonial law;
2. The civil law;
3. The moral law.
Correction pending James.

Romans 3:27
...but by a law of faith

Romans 7:23
...the law of sin and death

Romans 8:2
...the law of the Spirit of life

Pertaining to our discussion of the Old Covenant law there are 3 kinds as I mentioned. There is also the law of gravity, thermodynamics, and Murphy's Law etc.

We note that love is defined by the law (eg we love our neighbour by not committing
adultery with their wives, not stealing from them etc), and love also fulfills the law.
It is not only the ten commandments that love fulfills James.

Galatians 5:14
For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

If you are under the law then it is the 'whole law' that is fulfilled by loving thy neighbor.

I agree - love fulfills all of the moral laws contained in the Bible, not just the 10 commandments.

My unprovable opinion is that the 10 commandments were chosen to be representative of God's
moral law, because according to Jewish traditions, it is believed that (about) 7 commandments
are applicable to Gentiles.

This paragraph may need to be rewritten James as you are contradicting yourself.
Is it seven commandments or ten commandments or nine commandments?
Scripturally, use of the 10 commandments is taken from Romans 13:8-10 and 1 Jn 5:1-3 and Romans 1:18-32 which shows
that several commandments are applicable as moral laws in the New Covenant.
For example,
1st commandment: Romans 1 verse 25 & 28
2nd commandment: 23 & 25
3rd commandment: 21
4th:Elsewhere
5th:30
6th:29
7th:26 & 26
8th:Elsewhere
9th: 30
10th: 29
Could I request that you also resubmit this part of your post in a clearer way. You might also provide a definition of the
word 'moral', thanks James. When you have attended to the above I can proceed with the remainder of your post.

What is the moral law? The moral law means - the rules of behavior an individual or a group may follow out of personal conscience and that are not necessarily part of written and legislated law. I believe the words "spirit of the law" and "moral law" may be used interchangeably. The moral law is the application of the 10 commandments. With the letter of the law there is no room for interpretation or judgement. With the spirit of the law (or moral law), there is room for interpretation, judgement, expansion and application of those laws to different situations.

An example of the written law is that no one may pick grain on the Sabbath. In wanting to enforce the written law, the Pharisees condemned Christ and his disciples for harvesting on the Sabbath. However the spirit of the law, was about not working, not about prohibiting picking and eating a bit of grain when one was hungry.

Whether it is 7, 8, 9 or 10 commandments is irrelevant when we are talking about God's moral law. How long is a piece of string? I said in my earlier post "We should note that the moral law is not limited to the 10 commandments (they are only a summary) but includes all the moral commands of Scripture."

I believe the 10 commandments were chosen by early Christians to be representative of the moral commands contained in the whole of Scripture.
Note that according to Jewish tradition (the Talmud), God gave a set of 7 laws to the gentiles, in the time of Noah. These are the so-called "laws of Noah".
Whether or not this was a hand-down of oral traditions from Judaism into Christianity, I do not know, but it should be clear that the belief that Gentiles are accountable to at least some of the laws in the 10 commandments is a very ancient belief that is not exclusive to the Catholics or Protestants.

 

[Barny]

.
I would like to see you explain how the 10 commandments differ from the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. You do realize, I hope, that the Spirit of life is the same God who gave Moses the written 10 commandments. They are the same laws, as far as morality is concerned.

How do you conclude the law of sin and death is the same as the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus?

Whilst the law of sin and death is just, holy and righteous, under that law the whole world (including you) is guilty before God. Hence we ss that by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

But under the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, those who believe God's promise of eternal life in Christ are saved.
Christians believe on Jesus and love one another, as Jesus commanded. And love forgives 7x70 just as we Christians are forgiven by God.

.How are you going to communicate God's standard of morality to others without the written law?

I preach the gospel of grace to lost.
And I don't judge anyone according to the law.
The commandments of Jesus are that we believe on him (thus our faith is counted for righteousness) and to love one another. Love does no ill to another, and love also forgives 7x70 should we slip up.

 

[HisFollower]

(for me anyway) It is not fellowship at all, nor communion with the holy Ghost at all, to come to God and His Word as a matter of scholastic achievement, and then making a philosophical discussion out of it: that is the way the world conducts itself, but it is not supposed to be so among us. Again for me anyway this matter can be summed with a short simple response. (for me anyway) That which is abolished from the Old is not what is right and wrong according to God; for that shall abide for ever, but it is the ceremonies and rituals for sin offerings which are no more in effect. Under the Law was judgment without mercy, but under grace there is mercy without judgment. For now in Christ Jesus we are given because of His sacrifice the privilege to repent, whereas in times past there was only judgment and punishment. (for me anyway) The difference or that which has been made manifest as a "new and living way" is mercy and forgiveness, whereas the old way stones were thrown.

 

[james1523]

How do you conclude the law of sin and death is the same as the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus?

Whilst the law of sin and death is just, holy and righteous, under that law the whole world (including you) is guilty before God. Hence we ss that by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

But under the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, those who believe God's promise of eternal life in Christ are saved.
Christians believe on Jesus and love one another, as Jesus commanded. And love forgives 7x70 just as we Christians are forgiven by God.

I don't believe that the law of sin and death is the 10 commandments. The law of sin and death is the law within yourself that causes you to break the 10 commandments even when you don't want to. That is what Paul meant in Romans 7-8. But for the purpose of our discussion I will use your definition of the law of sin and death.

I agree that no flesh is justified by works of the law. They are justified by faith which shows itself in good works.

However the 10 commandments do not contradict the law of the Spirit of life.

Could you please explain what are the laws in the Law of the Spirit of life , and how are these different to the ones in the 10 commandments?