How many commandments should we christians obey?

[sword]

According to some "experts" on grace we should obey only one or two; some even say we should obey none; However, what did Jesus our Lord say?

Matthew 5:19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Certainly he meant the more we obey the better.

 

[MaggieMye]

Well the Lord never talked just to hear Himself talk. He gave every commandment for a reason. Ceremonial commandments of the OT have been abolished by the Cross. All other commandments should be adhered to unless it is addressed in scripture as being no longer valid...like when the Lord tell Peter he can eat meat that was considered unclean. That is a very strainge question to ask. And IMO, any pastor or person that says we only have to obey one or two, they do not KNOW God or His character....unless they are referring to the 2nd commandment upon wihch ALL THE REST are linked to.
Maggie

 

[Leilaii425]

Like i said before, i obey only the even numbers. For those of you who dont know, thats 2,4, 6, 8, 10. Which is far better than if i obeyed the odd cause thats only 1,3,5,7

 

[Definition_Christ]

Yeah man great idea!! Let's all obey all of the 613 commandments written in the OT just like Jesus did!!

I'm pretty sure Paul was an EXPERT on grace.

Now I am going to post some verses that may shock you but it's all in your bible.
Philippians 3
1 Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. For me to write the same things to you is not tedious, but for you it is safe.
2 Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation!
3 For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh,
4 though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so:
5 circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee;
6 concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. (KEY VERSE)
8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ
9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;
10 that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death,
11 if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.

.........

Galations 2:21 I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.

I'm not sure if you are saying work for salvation but just in case here is one of the many verses that go against that.

For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God (Eph 2:8)

 

[Mobius]

All of them

< /thread >

 

[Mobius]

Well the Lord never talked just to hear Himself talk. He gave every commandment for a reason. Ceremonial commandments of the OT have been abolished by the Cross. All other commandments should be adhered to unless it is addressed in scripture as being no longer valid...like when the Lord tell Peter he can eat meat that was considered unclean. That is a very strainge question to ask. And IMO, any pastor or person that says we only have to obey one or two, they do not KNOW God or His character....unless they are referring to the 2nd commandment upon wihch ALL THE REST are linked to.
Maggie

Scripture is quite clear that Peter's vision was about Jews and goyim, not clean and unclean foods.

 

[MaggieMye]

<H2 style="MARGIN: auto 0in">Scripture is quite clear that Peter's vision was about Jews and goyim, not clean and unclean foods Jews and Nation? that makes no sense. There is nothing in scripture to negate that it WAS about food:

Acts 10:13-15 (King James Version) 13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. If it's not talking about food, then just What is being eaten?

That law was one of the Mosaic or Levitical Laws and with the conversation of Peter's vision, it was negated.

Maggie

</H2>

 

[JesusmyLord]

This is a great question sword. I agree with you, we should be following all the commandments of the new testament. May the Lord help us all to do his will and follow his ways. Amen.

 

[lil-rush]

All of them

< /thread >

sounds about right

 

[Mobius]

<H2 style="MARGIN: auto 0in">Scripture is quite clear that Peter's vision was about Jews and goyim, not clean and unclean foods Jews and Nation? that makes no sense. There is nothing in scripture to negate that it WAS about food:

Acts 10:13-15 (King James Version) 13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. If it's not talking about food, then just What is being eaten?

That law was one of the Mosaic or Levitical Laws and with the conversation of Peter's vision, it was negated.

Maggie

</H2>

"goyim" is a more respectful way to refer to non-Jews. Gentile means pagan, and usually that's not really what we're talking about.

It makes perfect sense. If you want the proper biblical context, you just have to read the whole chapter (sometimes maybe even more). In this case, I would direct your attention to verses 27-28

JesusmyL-rd-

The NT only contains a single original instruction "Love as I have loved you". All the rest came from the Torah (the 5 books of Moses).

 

[MaggieMye]

It can and does refer to both.

 

[Definition_Christ]

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?

I could make an assumption here but I don't want to, but Mobius you are not a Christian are you? Do you believe that Jesus is the Christ?

 

[87dumpling]

We should try to obey All, however seeing as how we are not and cannot be perfect we WILL fail. No one can follow the law to the letter, hence the reason for Christ to come and rescue us. But we should still try with all our hearts to follow His laws, His commandments and His life. Would that I do so with a grateful heart!

 

[Mobius]

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?

I could make an assumption here but I don't want to, but Mobius you are not a Christian are you? Do you believe that Jesus is the Christ?

"Jesus" is basically His slave name, and we were never told in prophecy to look for a "Christ."

I DO believe that Yeshua is the prophecied Messiah, if that counts.

It may seem trivial, but the orthodox Jews of Yeshua's time (of which He was one) had a saying "I would rather feed my children pork than teach them Greek." So using the Greek or Latin translations matters to me. Besides, only the Hebrew Yeshua means literally "He Saves."

 

[Definition_Christ]

"Jesus" is basically His slave name, and we were never told in prophecy to look for a "Christ."

I DO believe that Yeshua is the prophecied Messiah, if that counts.

It may seem trivial, but the orthodox Jews of Yeshua's time (of which He was one) had a saying "I would rather feed my children pork than teach them Greek." So using the Greek or Latin translations matters to me. Besides, only the Hebrew Yeshua means literally "He Saves."

Okay so you believe that Jesus is the Christ, but you don't believe the NT is the inspired Word of God? Is that correct? I am just curious what you believe maybe I'm posting it on the wrong thread. So you believe Jesus is the Christ, do you follow His teachings?

 

[songster]

Jesus was asked, which of the laws were most important. He replied, ' To love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind, and to love your neighbor as yourself.


Apart from laws having to do with clothing, ceremonial washings and food consumption, which, under grace, are no longer applicable, I sincerely believe that if we obey these 2 laws, it is impossible to break any other law. If we genuinely love the Lord our God, we will do nothing to grieve his Holy Spirit, and if we love our neighbors as ourselves, we will do nothing to harm another person. I believe this is the reason Jesus answered in this way.


The law will not, and has not, perished. But, it certainly serves a different purpose in our day. Galations 3:10 says, all who rely on observing the law are under a curse. Gal. 3:12 says, the law has nothing to do with faith. I Timothy 1:9 says , the law is not made for the righteous, but for the ungodly, the rebels and the sinful.


These things were written so that, though the righteous believe and obey through faith, , there would remain a standard which condemns the wicked. It is the standard which continually points the way to the cross and to the call for repentance. It is a standard which stands as a witness against all ungodliness so that the wicked are without excuse, because sin has been thoroughly and clearly defined. But the law is no longer our teacher, the Holy Spirit has filled that place in the lives of believers. The law is no longer our salvation, because no man will ever again be considered righteous by simply obeying the law.


Legalistic teachings will continue to encourage, with great persuasiveness, that we are to live, dress and generally abide by the law, but this is a teaching that fails to see the law for what it is, the standard which calls for repentance and points the way to Jesus. It is not by the works of the law that we are saved, lest anyone would boast of his ability to obey the commandments, but through faith alone.

 

[sword]

Paul never said we could murder, steal or commit adultery. He just elaborated on Jesus`s teachings about not being legalistic or hypocrites like the pharisees. Jesus didn´t say the 2 great commandments were the only ones we should obey. He just summarized all of the moral laws in those two.
Romans 13
8Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet,"[a] and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself."[b] 10Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

So we christians obey the moral commandments (exodus 20) because of God`s love in our hearts.

 

[sword]

Matthew 15
10Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

Jesus said that because his disciples were criticized because they were eating with unclean hands but he didn´t mean we should eat just any moving thing such as rats, snakes, or worms. Besides we should be aware that the excessive consumption of red meats and dairy products could cause cancer tumors.

 

[Mobius]

Okay so you believe that Jesus is the Christ, but you don't believe the NT is the inspired Word of God? Is that correct? I am just curious what you believe maybe I'm posting it on the wrong thread. So you believe Jesus is the Christ, do you follow His teachings?

No, I didnt say that. Only a prophet can speak the revealed Word of G-d. In the original Hebrew, that is exactly what the word for "prophet" means. The apostles, though much more than mere scribes, did act as scribes for a prophet (which Himself was much more than a prophet). Likewise, John would seem to BE a prophet, since it was of him that Jesus said "Among those born of woman, there has arisen none greater."

Paul's really the only question, and it's only questionable as he appears to contradict what is said elsewhere in the Bible. G-d's Word cannot conflict with G-d's Word. If ANYone, Malachi, Jude, even Jesus, came along preaching something other than what the Word of G-d had said all along, that person would clearly be wrong, as scripture cannot conflict with scripture. But none of those people did say anything against scripture.

Paul, however, is used all the time, to justify apostasy from a Biblical lifestyle, and this is precisely what makes his teachings questionable. Now I have Messianic friends that would say Paul simply gets a bad rap, that he never was anti-Torah, and his teachings are simply twisted to portray him as such, and justify the apostasy that ended up happening in his name.

Either way, in the earliest days after Messiah came, there were three basic divisions.. the Messianics, which lived and worshipped among other Jews... The Gnostics, which were their own special brand of wierdness... and the Paulines, which were just another denomination until the birth of the Catholic church made theirs the official position, and put his writings into the Bible.

 

[Definition_Christ]

No, I didnt say that. Only a prophet can speak the revealed Word of G-d. In the original Hebrew, that is exactly what the word for "prophet" means. The apostles, though much more than mere scribes, did act as scribes for a prophet (which Himself was much more than a prophet). Likewise, John would seem to BE a prophet, since it was of him that Jesus said "Among those born of woman, there has arisen none greater."

Paul's really the only question, and it's only questionable as he appears to contradict what is said elsewhere in the Bible. G-d's Word cannot conflict with G-d's Word. If ANYone, Malachi, Jude, even Jesus, came along preaching something other than what the Word of G-d had said all along, that person would clearly be wrong, as scripture cannot conflict with scripture. But none of those people did say anything against scripture.

Paul, however, is used all the time, to justify apostasy from a Biblical lifestyle, and this is precisely what makes his teachings questionable. Now I have Messianic friends that would say Paul simply gets a bad rap, that he never was anti-Torah, and his teachings are simply twisted to portray him as such, and justify the apostasy that ended up happening in his name.

Either way, in the earliest days after Messiah came, there were three basic divisions.. the Messianics, which lived and worshipped among other Jews... The Gnostics, which were their own special brand of wierdness... and the Paulines, which were just another denomination until the birth of the Catholic church made theirs the official position, and put his writings into the Bible.

Do you believe Jesus when He says He is the great I AM mentioned in Exodus and Isaiah?