Ten Commandments Pre cross - Questions

[Brother Bob]

grahame I think our Lord widened the field somewhat on the commandments so as to include thoughts and intents of the heart. You just need to read His sermon on the mount to see that. I'm sure you don't need me to expand on that thought, for you already know these things.

Yes, agree with you grahame and thanks for the reply. Again, I think to look at a woman and see that she is pretty or a woman looking at a man is not lust. I look as some and thing they are ugly and that is not unlust. We do have the ability to "move on". If a man stops and looks and lust to have her, it is adultery for sure. Because of our nature on this, it probably is very hard for some, but they can do it if they love the Lord enough.

Also, I think it is impossible to keep the two without keeping the Ten.

2 Peter;
13: And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
14: Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:
15: Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness

If I was in this kind of condition then I certainly would be breaking the Commandments and sinning unto death.

 

[grahame]

I agree with grahame as far as that goes..

Claudia. Just read your own signature. If you believe that, then we are both agreed.

 

[DHK]

You said the Commandments which is the Ten Commandments. You didn't say anything about angry, bad thoughts, missing church, failing to visit the sick, etc. So, I don't say I haven't sinned, just that I have not committed adultery, killed, stolen, dishonored my father and mother, coveted my neighbors wife, worshipped a cow etc.

You remind of the Catholics (I grew up as one). You take those sins which you arbitrarily deem as serious enough to be "a sin unto death" and put them into the same bag that the Catholic calls mortal sins. They are the sins that can send you to Hell. Those other "lesser sins," that the Catholcs call venial sins aren't as bad as the mortal sins but if unconfessed they will keep you out of heaven. Catholics say they will send you to Purgatory. Bob is more severe than that. They can even send you to Hell. Thus the blood of Christ is not sufficient enough to cover all our sins. Christ failed at the cross. He failed to atone for all our sins. Bob says that he must atone for that last sin himself. He must have it confessed himself. It isn't enough that Jesus atoned for it. Bob must make sure that it is confessed or Jesus failed.
That theology borders on blasphemy if it isn't. It does spite to the blood of Christ and his atoning work on the cross.

 

[Brother Bob]

You remind of the Catholics (I grew up as one). You take those sins which you arbitrarily deem as serious enough to be "a sin unto death" and put them into the same bag that the Catholic calls mortal sins. They are the sins that can send you to Hell. Those other "lesser sins," that the Catholcs call venial sins aren't as bad as the mortal sins but if unconfessed they will keep you out of heaven. Catholics say they will send you to Purgatory. Bob is more severe than that. They can even send you to Hell. Thus the blood of Christ is not sufficient enough to cover all our sins. Christ failed at the cross. He failed to atone for all our sins. Bob says that he must atone for that last sin himself. He must have it confessed himself. It isn't enough that Jesus atoned for it. Bob must make sure that it is confessed or Jesus failed.
That theology borders on blasphemy if it isn't. It does spite to the blood of Christ and his atoning work on the cross.__________________
DHK

I guess if I wanted to make a way in case I messed up and was on my neighbor's wife when I died as you said and still be saved, I would say the same thing as you do DHK. It just that I do not believe you can be on your neighbors wife when you die and go to Heaven and sing with the angels. I believe that to be false teachings and just what the devil loves to hear. IMO, you would be better off following the Catholics belief than what you put out.

 

[grahame]

Well thats the key. You have got to take the commandments to their most legalistic height so that you can then claim we cant keep them.

Its the modern day Pharisee. In the old days they would just keep the law outwardly but not inwardly thats why Jesus said they were whited walls, cleaning the outside of the cup and not the inside.

Today's Pharisee does neither... they make the law itself appear legalistic then they dont keep the law outwardly or inwardly.

Jesus said clean the inside of the cup and the outside as well.

These words I find very searching

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

(Matt 5:19-20)

 

[DHK]

I guess if I wanted to make a way in case I messed up and was on my neighbor's wife when I died as you said and still be saved, I would say the same thing as you do DHK. It just that I do not believe you can be on your neighbors wife when you die and go to Heaven and sing with the angels. I believe that to be false teachings and just what the devil loves to hear. IMO, you would be better off following the Catholics belief than what you put out.

Then had David died before Nathan came to him, would he have gone to heaven or hell?
Remember he was called a "man after God's own heart" by God himself.

 

[grahame]

You remind of the Catholics (I grew up as one). You take those sins which you arbitrarily deem as serious enough to be "a sin unto death" and put them into the same bag that the Catholic calls mortal sins. They are the sins that can send you to Hell. Those other "lesser sins," that the Catholcs call venial sins aren't as bad as the mortal sins but if unconfessed they will keep you out of heaven. Catholics say they will send you to Purgatory. Bob is more severe than that. They can even send you to Hell. Thus the blood of Christ is not sufficient enough to cover all our sins. Christ failed at the cross. He failed to atone for all our sins. Bob says that he must atone for that last sin himself. He must have it confessed himself. It isn't enough that Jesus atoned for it. Bob must make sure that it is confessed or Jesus failed.
That theology borders on blasphemy if it isn't. It does spite to the blood of Christ and his atoning work on the cross.

That reminds me of this verse in James' epistle

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.

 

[Brother Bob]

David was among those worshiping God in the flesh. Now God seeks such to worship him in Spirit and in truth. Jesus took it out of the flesh and put it in the heart, so if you find yourself having to run back to the OT always to support your theology, you need to rethink what you believe.

Bob will speak for himself and I say if your sins have been atoned for you won't be on your neighbor's wife when you die, for you are kept by the power of God.

 

[DHK]

David was among those worshiping God in the flesh. Now God seeks such to worship him in Spirit and in truth. Jesus took it out of the flesh and put it in the heart, so if you find yourself having to run back to the OT always to support your theology, you need to rethink what you believe.

Bob will speak for himself and I say if your sins have been atoned for you won't be on your neighbor's wife when you die, for you are kept by the power of God.

Nevertheless David makes a good example. As for being from the OT, we use Abraham as an example of faith more than any other person.
When David repented he prayed to the Lord "restore unto me the joy of my salvation, not my salvation. Even in the OT, David was assured of his salvation. It was his fellowship with God that had been lost; his joy; when he repented that was restored. His salvation he never doubted. The same is true today.
Paul uses David as an example:

Romans 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

David was saved without works, and without continuing in works. He was saved by believing in Jehovah by faith and faith alone--the same way we are.

 

[EdSutton]

David was among those worshiping God in the flesh. Now God seeks such to worship him in Spirit and in truth. Jesus took it out of the flesh and put it in the heart, so if you find yourself having to run back to the OT always to support your theology, you need to rethink what you believe.

Bob will speak for himself and I say if your sins have been atoned for you won't be on your neighbor's wife when you die, for you are kept by the power of God.

Sounds good to me, Brother Bob. But I do have one question. Aside from "Now God seeks such to worship him (sic) in Spirit and in truth.", can you show one verse of Scripture to back any of the rest of this post?

What 'Bob says' doesn't rise to the level I'm looking for. And FTR, David's statement about having righteousness imputed, and that about Abraham and righteousness was lifted directly from the OT by none other than Paul. Being as I'm such a nice guy, I'll help by actually citing the passage.

1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?[d] 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[e] 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

David Celebrates the Same Truth


5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.” [f]

Abraham Justified Before Circumcision


9 Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had while still uncircumcised.

The Promise Granted Through Faith


13 For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect, 15 because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression.
16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all 17 (as it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations”[g]) in the presence of Him whom he believed—God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did; 18 who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, “So shall your descendants be.”[h] 19 And not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah’s womb. 20 He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, 21 and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform. 22 And therefore “it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[i] (Rom. 4:1-22 - NKJV)

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

Nevertheless David makes a good example. As for being from the OT, we use Abraham as an example of faith more than any other person.
When David repented he prayed to the Lord "restore unto me the joy of my salvation, not my salvation. Even in the OT, David was assured of his salvation. It was his fellowship with God that had been lost; his joy; when he repented that was restored. His salvation he never doubted. The same is true today.
Paul uses David as an example:

I find it very very hard to us examples of how they walked under the OT, when they had their concubines and such. To be truthful, I really have never been able to figure out why Israel was God's chosen people, when they were so disobeident, but who am I. Anyway, David did pay for what he did, he lost his son. That in no way justifys dying on your neighbor's wife.

 

[Brother Bob]

Do you and DHK use the same computer Ed? You always show up in pairs.
I in no way question what God did for David or Abraham. I do know that God said now he seeks such to worship him in Spirit and in truth. Not to offer up our sons as both of them were asked to do or did.

Has God ever taken your child in death over something you did?

Has God ever asked you to offer up your son as a sacrifice.

Is that what you want?

This thread is about the Ten Commandments, of which one of them is "thou shalt not commit adultery". Ed and DHK both have given me and this board their veiws on dying while in the very act of adultery that you would in no way lose your salvation and would go to Heaven and sing with the angels. Well, how you jumped back to the faith of Abraham I don't know. If you want to start a thread on faith and works it probably would be a good one but that in now way justifys adultery.

 

[DHK]

Bob,
I am not using "OT" examples, as both Abraham and David are used by Paul in the book of Romans. If you accuse me of this allegation then whenever someone brings up the subject of "works" and James 2, I will request them not to use James 2, but rather to relegate it to the OT, because it speaks of Abraham and Rahab. Does this make sense to you?

 

[Brother Bob]

I have no problem with it DHK;
Of course they were our examples in certain things. We are just under a different system of being saved than they were. In their time they stoned adulterers to death, it was an eye for and eye. This thread is about the Ten Commandments and not about faith and works. If you want to start a thread on faith and works I be glad to participate.

I just got Office 2007 so I be down for a few.

 

[DHK]

This thread is about the Ten Commandments and not about faith and works. If you want to start a thread on faith and works I be glad to participate.

What is this thread supposed to be about Bob?
Go and read the OP. It is not faith and works.

This thread is intended to address the following question/challenge from DHK--

DHK said
Now if you have been reading the posts, my challenge was to demonstrate through the gospels where Jesus came preaching the Ten Commandments.

That quote was from you. My challenge was for you to demonstrate the veracity of your statement or retract it.
Jesus came preaching the gospel, not the Ten Commandments.
Why in all these pages have you not addressed the OP

 

[Brother Bob]

What is your problem DHK;
I have posted and others have posted of Jesus preaching the Ten Commandments. It is you who are afraid of them, not Jesus, not Paul and not me and many others on this board. You are the one along with a couple more. So, I will not be retracting anything. I would think you would want to retract where you said a man could be on his neighbor's wife when he died and still go to Heaven. I think that is false doctrine. IMO

 

[BobRyan]

Bob,
I am not using "OT" examples, as both Abraham and David are used by Paul in the book of Romans. If you accuse me of this allegation then whenever someone brings up the subject of "works" and James 2, I will request them not to use James 2, but rather to relegate it to the OT, because it speaks of Abraham and Rahab. Does this make sense to you?

well - first of all let me just say what a great thing it is to read this from someone who complains about any doctrine that relies upon the "ALL SCRIPTURE" of 2tim 3:16 which would dare to include the OT itself!!

I am all for this "new DHK" -- I like his acceptance of the "ALL Scripture" mentioned by Paul - much better.

 

[BobRyan]

According to scripture you can say all day long "you trust in Him" but if you keep not His Commandments, it is just words and not the truth. That should be easy to understand. We don't add anything. Its already there.

Actually 1John 2:4-7 says that anyone doing such a thing is guilty of breaking one of the Ten Commandments - the commandment against lying.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

But God is "good". How on earth can you be "Christlike" without doing good, which is the Commandments. You cannot separate Christ from Good. You cannot have one without the other. The "word" was made flesh. Think what that is saying, if Christ is the "word" and the Commandments are part of the "word". Oh, the means we go to try and get around the Commandments to the point we try to divide the "word".

Excellent point. In John 1 Christ is the "WORD That became flesh"
In Rev 19 John STILL sees Christ as "THE WORD" coming in flames of fire.

In Heb 8 and 10 we find that the New Covenenat spoken of by Jeremiah includes the promise of "God's LAW written on the human heart" rather than rebellion against God being there or "no Ten Commandments" included there.

In fact in 2Cor 3 we see that this LAW that is writtenn on the heart is "written on the TABLETS of the human heart rather than TABLETS of stone".

SAME law - but written in a DIFFERENT place -- INTERNAL and not merely EXTERNAL.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I think our Lord widened the field somewhat on the commandments so as to include thoughts and intents of the heart. You just need to read His sermon on the mount to see that. I'm sure you don't need me to expand on that thought, for you already know these things.

Preach IT!

As Christ said "DO NOT think that I have come to ABOLISH God's LAW" Matt 5:17