• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

WHERE IS THE SCRIPTURE THAT SAYS GOD'S 4th COMMANDMENT IS ABOLISHED?

jimb

Active Member
Premium Member
Let's go with this idea. How many ears must you pick for it to be Harvest? 1? 100? 1000? If you only pick 1/4 of your field, could you claim that it was not harvesting? What if that 1/4 of a field is larger than the totality of someone's back yard garden? You see, your claim that "mass ingathering" is implied in "harvest" simply raises to many unanswerable questions.

So we are back to that basics. How do you harvest grain? By picking it. You can harvest an entire field, or you can harvest one ear.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

I am not going to play your silly game of word-twisting. If you want to sound like a fool, I won't play your foolish game.

And again...

“Whoever does not see God everywhere does not see Him anywhere.” – Kotzker Rebbe"

“Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father." Jesus Christ, John 14:9a
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
3rdAngel said: Yea you missed the point. I did not think you would understand my question to you which is why I asked you if you know why I asked you this question. I asked this question to you to help answer your earlier question about Hinduism being Gods Word. Just like you cannot tell me what my fruit eating experience tastes like to me, no one can prove to you their experience with God because it is personal. What I can tell you going back to your earlier question is that I have in my past looked at many different types of religions over the years including Hinduism trying to see if God was real or not real. I was an atheist at the time but curious. I have never found God in any of them accept one. I found God in the very last religion I ever expected to find him and that was in the God of the bible (Christianity). I now have no doubt that God is real.
Your response here
Then you're operating out of bigotry since it is virtually impossible to prove beyond any shadow of doubt that the God you believe in must be the only moral and logical belief dealing with God.
Nonsense. You missed the point again. There is a helpful saying that says "To him who has had the experience no explanation is necessary, to him who has not, none is possible.” That is what it is like for someone who knows God and for someone that does not know God. Bigotry is what you are doing by not being open to reason and discussion.

 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
So, your version of Christianity opposes having a belief in following the Ten Commandments?
I know you posted this to someone else (@jimb) but I do not see that at all in what you were responding to. The legalistic views of the Scribes and the Pharisees are not someone that is following Gods 10 commandments from the heart which is why Jesus says God desires mercy and not sacrifice and unless our righteousness exceeds that of the Scribes and Pharisees we will in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven. If your view of following Gods 10 commandments is following the man-made teachings and traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees by a legalistic outward observance of the law according to the scriptures you are in trouble. (see Matthew 5:17-20; John 12:1-12)
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
So, you think the Tanakh was just written by "the teachings and traditions of men"?
No, unlike you I believe all the old and new testament scriptures and not the interpretations of them in the teachings and traditions of men that crucified Gods promised Messiah that do not follow God and His Word that Jesus talks about in Matthew 23:13-35. So should you.
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
Here: 3rdAngel said: your argument is with God not me
So that is a no then? You are unable to provide me with any link with me saying as you claim here.....
IndigoChild5559 said: ... you claim that YOUR INTERPRETATION is the voice of God, that is blasphemous. It makes you out to be god
Where did I say my interpretation is the voice of God? Again, if I did not say any such thing why are you pretending that I did? That is bearing false witness is it not which is sin according to the scriptures (see Exodus 20:16; compare James 2:10-11 and 1 John 3:4). Again, I will leave that between you and God to work through and we will agree to disagree. Lets also put in some context. When I said to you "Your argument is with God not me". What you posted of me above was in context to the scriptures I provided to you that were in disagreement with your words that you provided unsupported by scripture.
I supplied the documentation. You can scream as loud as you want that you never said it, but there it was in black and white for everyone to see. I'm moving on now.
No you didn't you were bearing false witness. Pretending I said that my interpretation is the voice of God. Again, I never said this to you so if I never once made those claims why are you pretending that is what I said to you? Is that not sin in Gods eyes? (Exodus 20:16). Anyhow I will leave that between you and God to work through.
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
Of course. The ten commandments are part of the Old Covenant, which was filled in its entirety in Jesus.
Gods 10 commandments are a part of both the old and new covenant. They are Gods eternal laws spoken by God and written with the finger of God on two tables of stone (see Exodus 20:1-17; Exodus 31:18). In the new covenant every one of Gods 10 commandments are repeated as the standard of Christian living and breaking anyone of them according to James in James 2:10-11 and John in 1 John 3:4 is sin.
Since I am in Christ, I am no longer under the law, including the ten commandments.
If you are in Christ you will be obeying Gods law from a new heart that loves. This is Gods new covenant promise from Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Hebrews 8:10-12. No one is under the law if they have received Gods forgiveness of sins through repentance and confession of sin and have been born again to obey Gods law (see 1 John 3:4-9; 1 John 2:3-4; 1 John 5:2-4). We only stand under the law when we stand guilty before God of breaking the law which is the very definition of what sin is (see Romans 3:19-20; James 2:10-11 comp. 1 John 3:4).
Romans 6:4, "For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace."
If sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4) then we will obey what Gods law says. This is what Romans 6:1-23 is talking about in the old man of sin dying with Christ and being raised with Christ to walk in newness of life no longer being a slave to sin (breaking Gods law)
Romans 7:4-6, " So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."
In Romans 7 we are released from the law of sin and death in Christ to walk in newness of life and be married to another which is Christ to be free from sin (Romans 6:1-23). What bound us was sin and death because we have all broken the law while we walked in the old man of sin. The scripture does not say we no longer have to obey Gods law that the writer calls holy, just and good but says we need to be changed to walk in newness of life to obey Gods law from the inside out. (compare Romans 6:1-23 with Romans 7:7-25; Romans 8:1-13; 1 John 2:3-4).

Take Care.
 
Last edited:

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
And the Ten Commandments are part of that Law, so if one observes them are they also "legalistic"? If one observes Jesus' Two Commandments, are they also "legalistic"? If one's Christian denomination has teachings per the NT, are they also "legalistic"? To accuse Jews as being "legalistic" because they observe the Law is an unwarranted insult as all religions and all Christian denominations have teachings of what's right and what's wrong.
The Scribes and the Pharisees observed Gods law but not from a new heart that loves. They outwardly observed Gods 10 commandments but inwardly (from the heart) were sinning against God. So it is possible to legalistically obey Gods law from the outside but inwardly be breaking them and sinning against God and our fellow man (see Matthew 23:26-28 and Matthew 5:17-20) Gods new covenant promise is to give us a new heart that loves so that we can keep His commandments from the inside out. Salvation therefore is from the inside out. This is Gods new covenant promise (see Jeremiah 31:31-34; Hebrews 8:10-12). So yes Jesus accused the Jews of being legalistic which they were as proven in the scriptures provided in this post and so we all can be legalistic today if we are not born again into Gods new covenant promise by believing and obeying what Gods Word says.
 
Last edited:

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
pearl, pearl, pearl. This is not a matter of Orthodox Judaism (and *I* am not Orthodox). It has to do with the simple definition of a word in the English language. How does one harvest grain? By picking it. This is not rocket science. I'm not sure why you are bringing up the cereal box thing. It has no relevance to this conversation. If you have a question about Orthodox halakha, there are several Orthodox Jews in the forum you can go to. I'm just not one of them.
According to the scriptures (Matthew 12:1-12) the disciples were hungry and eating grain directly from the field as a meal. This was not working on the Sabbath. Do you know what the difference is between harvesting grain as business and work and eating some grain directly from plants in the field not taking anything more because you are hungry? This was allowed under Mosaic law. The law of Moses expressly allowed the plucking ears of corn for eating as one passed through a field (see Deuteronomy 23:25) but the legalistic Jews (Scribes and Pharisees) were perverse enough to think this action forbidden on the sabbath. This prohibition was a Pharisaic rule not found in the Mosaic Law. It was a principle with the Pharisees to extend the provisions of the Law and make minute regulations over and beyond what Moses commanded, in order to avoid the possibility of transgression. Jesus responds to His accusers and gives two examples: (1.) a case of David and his companions doing something of which he comments 'which was not lawful' by eating the shew bread in the temple; and (2.) a case of Priests doing what he describes as 'desecrating the sabbath' by doing Gods work ministering to the people on the Sabbath day. His argument teaches us that God regards "mercy not sacrifice" and that He is Lord the Sabbath day and it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. Lets not strain at the gnat to swallow a camel like those legalistic Jews did. Eating a grain of corn in the field because of hunger is not harvesting or working on the Sabbath in Gods eyes. God desires mercy not sacrifice. Your interpretation of the scriptures makes Jesus a sinner and we are all lost because Jesus then could no longer be Gods perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world because in your mind Jesus was a sinner just like you and me? My bible does not teach this. Your Messiah has already come dear friend but sadly you still cannot see this because you do not know God or His Word.
 
Last edited:

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
When you said "your argument is with God not me."
Yes if you are provided scripture in disagreement with your words that are not Gods Words your argument is with God not me we they are Gods Words you deny not my words. That is not the same as you claiming I said
IndigoChild5559 said: ... you claim that YOUR INTERPRETATION is the voice of God, that is blasphemous. It makes you out to be god
That is something I have never said and is you bearing false witness
 

jimb

Active Member
Premium Member
The 4th commandment is still in effect -- if a person still lives by the Old Covenant , a.k.a., the external law. If a person lives by the New Covenant, i.e. guided by the Holy Spirit, s/he is no longer under the law.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Yes if you are provided scripture in disagreement with your words that are not Gods Words your argument is with God not me we they are Gods Words you deny not my words. That is not the same as you claiming I said

That is something I have never said and is you bearing false witness
When you said "your argument is with God not me."
THAT statement, that "your argument is with God not me" when in fact their argument IS with YOU, conflates your interpretation with the voice of God. So yes. Blasphemous.
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
THAT statement, that "your argument is with God not me" when in fact their argument IS with YOU, conflates your interpretation with the voice of God. So yes. Blasphemous.
Well look at you. You try and make unbiblical claims here that by Jesus disciples eating some food directly from the field for lunch permitable in Mosaic law was full on harvesting and breaking the Sabbath then in the next breath you openly in a public forum bear false witness to things I have never said to you?
IndigoChild5559 said: ... you claim that YOUR INTERPRETATION is the voice of God, that is blasphemous. It makes you out to be god
I am sorry I do not know how your mind works. You strain at the gnat to swallow a camel following man-made teachings and traditions to make out Jesus was a sinner then when I posted scripture to you that were in disagreement with you and say "Your argument is between you and God" the context being that you were provided scripture which is Gods Words in disagreement with your words that are not Gods Words showing your argument was not with me but with the scriptures shared with you that were in disagreement with what you said you call this blasphemy then go on to say things I have never said to you on a public forum? What you claimed I said above in this post, is something I have never said or believe and it is you bearing false witness which is sin according to the scriptures (1 John 3:4; Exodus 20:13). I have never ones said to you that my interpretation of the scriptures is the voice of God. So please stop this nonsense. I posted earlier I will therefore leave this between you and God to work through. You are better off just owning it and apologizing but only if you want to.
 
Last edited:

McBell

mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Yes if you are provided scripture in disagreement with your words that are not Gods Words your argument is with God not me ...
Yet here you are...


Interesting you claim you are not speaking for God in one sentence, then claiming their argument is with God, not you, in the next sentence then speaking for God in the next...
 
Top