So what about the fourth commandment?

[LaurenTM]

WOW! That was the best display of mental gymnastics I've seen lately. LOVE the way you injected "salvation" into my comment. Bravo.

I injected nothing mr mayo. You call those who do not observe YOUR opinion on the Sabbath as children...in other words you are the adult in the room. Do you insult people so often you don't know when you do it or what?

Uh, this thread is called "So What About The 4th Commandment", isn't it. That's the one about the Sabbath, right?

I must be some kind of superhero in that I have no problem whatsoever in keeping the Big Ten (sarcasm alert).

another dodge

that is how you folks bypass the NT...you just dodge and then redirect or make snide comments when someone presses the point

you have an OPINION..this thread, discipledaves primer on his religion, has been all over the place, so don't worry about it

if you say you keep the 10 commandments, you make God a liar because He says we can't...that is why Jesus died

if you have EVER broken any of them...even before you were saved, you are doomed

if you accept Jesus' sacrifice, then you admit you cannot keep them

 

[Grace777x70]

Grace 777x70's comments are in quotation marks and italicized (and taken out of BOLD PRINT):

"There is no mention of feasts in Acts 18:21 - that is from the KJV which has different manuscripts then most translations. This particular verse is not in most scriptures. This could mean ( even if it was true of which we don't know for sure ) that Paul simply wanted a chance to preach Christ to the people coming to the feast so in order to do that - he had to go to Jerusalem at feast time".

I'll not start another subject (manuscripts/textural criticism) in this thread. Feel free to start a new thread and I'll go there with you.

"To show you that Paul didn't believe in the "actual practice" of the Law but that it was fulfilled in Christ - he had this to say about "circumcision" which is a part of the Law. Remember you can't partial out the Law you break one - you are guilty of it all.

Galatians 2:3-5 (NASB)
[SUP]3 [/SUP] But not even Titus, who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.

Yes, but Paul did have Timothy circumcised. - "Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek". - Acts 16:3".

As far as Paul believing but not practicing there's this in Acts 21 :

17And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. 19And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. 20And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: 21And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. 22What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. 23Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; 24Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. And Paul took part in the ceremony with those men. Sounds to me Paul followed the Law.

You seem to be saying that one may "believe" in Jesus and not do what He said. I don't see how that's possible.


"If you or others want to depend on your law keeping to justify yourselves before God - be my guest. I will receive by faith the gift of righteousness and the abundance of grace from the Lord Jesus Christ".

I have never said (nor can I remember anyone in this tread saying so either) that anyone is "justified" by keeping the Sabbath. I have commented on this over and over and folks still can't seem to comprehend that I'm NOT talking about being Torah observant or keeping The Law. I'm talking about being obedient to God's Ten Commandments, SPOKEN by His voice to the people and written with His own finger. NOT The Law as written by Moses in his handwriting.

I have read what Paul had done in Acts "in order to appease" the Jews there that "were zealous for the law". Paul did say that he would become like a Jew to win a Jew. I believe he gave in to the request of the leadership in Jerusalem.

Look at what they wanted Paul to do - shave his head and purify himself according to the temple rules in the Law. This had nothing to do with the ten commandments. This was 100% pure law.

Yet Paul continually stated that we are "released from the Law, freed from the Law, dead to the Law and not under the Law at all but under grace. Rom. 6:14 ( and a host of other scriptures like Rom. 7:1-6 ) ( how many different ways can someone say the same thing? )

1 Corinthians 9:20 (NASB)
[SUP]20 [/SUP] To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law;

Very important point Paul was making here - "as under the Law though not being myself under the Law,"

The Ten Commandments are included in the Law as has been shown by scriptures. There is no such thing as "separating them out." That's a man-made tradition.

Romans 7:6-7 (NASB)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

[SUP]7 [/SUP] What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "YOU SHALL NOT COVET."

This is from Exodus 20:17 which is the list of the Ten Commandments.

We can trust the law of Christ which is His life in and through us to walk in the intentions and realities of all of the Law which are fulfilled in Christ Himself including the ten. The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus will direct our lives now that we serve in newness of the Spirit.

( the " justifying part " came from Rom 2:15 that you quoted which said that "it's the doers of the law that are justified" )

 

[Officermayo]

Oh, I get what you're saying.

Like we can be baptized (or not) in any way we choose instead of following Jesus' example.
How we're allowed to decide for ourselves what scriptures need to be taken out of the Bible.
We can go to a class to learn how to speak in tongues.
We can pray to Mary.
We can confess our sins to an intermediate instead of going right to our Savior.

Yep, it's Christianity ala carte these days.

 

[Dan_473]

Oh, I get what you're saying.

Like we can be baptized (or not) in any way we choose instead of following Jesus' example.
How we're allowed to decide for ourselves what scriptures need to be taken out of the Bible.
We can go to a class to learn how to speak in tongues.
We can pray to Mary.
We can confess our sins to an intermediate instead of going right to our Savior.

Yep, it's Christianity ala carte these days.

Hi Officermayo,

who are you talking to in that post?

 

[Officermayo]

I injected nothing mr mayo. You call those who do not observe YOUR opinion on the Sabbath as children...in other words you are the adult in the room. Do you insult people so often you don't know when you do it or what?



another dodge

that is how you folks bypass the NT...you just dodge and then redirect or make snide comments when someone presses the point

you have an OPINION..this thread, discipledaves primer on his religion, has been all over the place, so don't worry about it

if you say you keep the 10 commandments, you make God a liar because He says we can't...that is why Jesus died

if you have EVER broken any of them...even before you were saved, you are doomed

if you accept Jesus' sacrifice, then you admit you cannot keep them

Might wanna brush up on your study of grammar to see that "like" is a comparison and not a declarative tool of speech.

"You folks"? Really? I didn't think that kind of language was PC these days, but suit yourself.

So.... we are not forgiven of past sins when we become Believers in Jesus? Thanks for hipping me to that.

As to bypassing the NT, I must disagree. What it comes down to is that if there's a contradiction in the interpretation between what God/Jesus says and Paul, I'm going with the former and not the latter.

 

[LaurenTM]

Folks like to say that Paul wrote that the Law was abolished, and yet Paul himself followed the Law.

Acts 18:21 - but took leave of them, saying, "I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem; but I will return again to you, God willing."

Acts 24:14 (NKJV) - "But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the Elohim of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets.

Acts 25:8 - while he answered for himself, "Neither against the Law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all."

Romans 2:12 - For as many as have sinned without Law will also perish without Law, and as many as have sinned in the Law will be judged by the Law 13 (for not the hearers of the Law [are] just in the sight of god, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Romans 3:31 - Do we then make void the Law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the Law.

​

Christ fulfilled the law...nothing has been abolished

if it is abolished, then why does Paul say if you try to live by the law, you are under a curse

you say you don't think it is a sin not to observe the Sabbath, yet and again, you believe yourself superior by calling those who don't observe it, children

how many times does Paul have to say don't let anyone judge you after these things that you ARE judging folks by

Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day--
Colossians 2:16

you have to deny scripture in order to continue your observations on those who do not follow your opinion

 

[LaurenTM]

Might wanna brush up on your study of grammar to see that "like" is a comparison and not a declarative tool of speech.

"You folks"? Really? I didn't think that kind of language was PC these days, but suit yourself.

So.... we are not forgiven of past sins when we become Believers in Jesus? Thanks for hipping me to that.

As to bypassing the NT, I must disagree. What it comes down to is that if there's a contradiction in the interpretation between what God/Jesus says and Paul, I'm going with the former and not the latter.

as I said in my above post, you place your OPINION above the word of God

ignore what I actually wrote, (common when someone has to admit they are wrong as you are) and make personal comments

but then again, that is right in keeping with your remark about how we are all children..other than you

So.... we are not forgiven of past sins when we become Believers in Jesus? Thanks for hipping me to that.

if you accepted Jesus as your Savior, and now you think you are somehow better than simple faith in Him, which you indicate with your superior Sabbath keeper opinion, then you have found JESUS + your obedience to the law

I don't expect you to either understand that or admit it

better things to do then talk with someone who twists what you say and talks down to people

BTW, isn't it your Sabbath? shouldn't you be resting or something.....

 

[Officermayo]

You say you don't think it is a sin not to observe the Sabbath, yet and again, you believe yourself superior by calling those who don't observe it, children.


Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day--
Colossians 2:16

you have to deny scripture in order to continue your observations on those who do not follow your opinion

I've already pointed out that the rules of grammar preclude my use of the word children from being an insult, but actually a comparison. Here's one other clue you might want to get to know. "a" as used in your scripture quote is an indefinite article, where "the" is a definite one. That means Paul was speaking about the feasts and not THE Sabbath.

 

[LaurenTM]

I've already pointed out that the rules of grammar preclude my use of the word children from being an insult, but actually a comparison. Here's one other clue you might want to get to know. "a" as used in your scripture quote is an indefinite article, where "the" is a definite one. That means Paul was speaking about the feasts and not THE Sabbath.

right...well, when your version of the Bible comes out, I am sure Sabbath keepers everywhere will rejoice

it's bad enough when people misquote scripture in order to be right, but you just ignore it...

I thought typing was against Sabbath resting?

the rules of grammar preclude insult....I actually could care less about your little poem...it's your attitude

you can put all the grease on your words you want....they don't slip by...you just have a real attitude

 

[Grace777x70]

Christ Himself gave Paul the revelation of what happened when Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected. You do not get this understanding from the 4 gospels. The gospels were actually written after most of Paul's epistles were written.

Jesus chose Paul to explain His gospel and to make known the revelation of what actually happened to the believer in Christ when we received Him after hearing the gospel of the grace of Christ.

The early church had very little understanding of the cross and the resurrection and what happened to the believer until Paul started to write his epistles.

It's not a matter of choosing Christ's words or Paul's words as Christ Himself was the one who taught Paul about His gospel. It's a matter of receiving the revelation of Christ and His work in a believers life and we only get the clarity of that in Paul's epistles.

The apostles were told 17 times that Jesus was going to die and they still didn't understand what He was saying.

 

[Officermayo]

Really? According to whom?
God or the Pharisees?

God's commandment says to separate it from the other six days and rest from your labor. I don't see where discussing the Bible would be work.

It's sort of like how we tithe we money instead of cattle like they did in the OT days.

As to "my version" of the Bible, the KJV works pretty well so I doubt I'd bother to create another one.

In this entire thread I've not said anyone else has to keep the Sabbath. I've not said those who don't aren't saved or are going to Hell or anything even close to that. I've simply answered the OP's question with what I believe. Whether anyone decides to join in keeping the Sabbath really makes no difference to me as most of my Christian friends do not. I do find it odd that many of y'all who don't want to keep it get really upset when it's brought up. I think that means its prickling you somewhat.

 

[mpaper345]

Might wanna brush up on your study of grammar to see that "like" is a comparison and not a declarative tool of speech.

"You folks"? Really? I didn't think that kind of language was PC these days, but suit yourself.

So.... we are not forgiven of past sins when we become Believers in Jesus? Thanks for hipping me to that.

As to bypassing the NT, I must disagree. What it comes down to is that if there's a contradiction in the interpretation between what God/Jesus says and Paul, I'm going with the former and not the latter.

There is no contradiction between Jesus and Paul,for Paul said that no man told him the truth,but he received it by Jesus Christ.

When Paul is saying anything concerning not saved by works,or we cannot live up to the law,he is talking according to the flesh,for by the flesh we do not have the power to keep the spiritual laws perfectly,but only by the Spirit.

The Bible says if we are led of the Spirit,we will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh,and will show the characteristics of the Spirit,which then there is no law.

If we are led of the Spirit we are not under the law,because our sins are forgiven,and we are abstaining from sin,therefore the law cannot touch us for prosecution,but if a person that claims Christ lives in sin they will not give up,they are under the law,and the law can touch them for prosecution,which the Bible says if we sin willfully,which means not give up sin,then there is no more sacrifice for that sin,until the person repents of that sin.

When led of the Spirit then we have to have works of the Spirit,for a man is justified by works,and not faith alone,for faith without works is dead.

People should not confuse when Paul is talking according to us walking in the flesh,to us walking in the Spirit,for when Paul says not saved by works,he is saying that all our works we do to think we have a relationship with God,apart from Christ,or apart from the operation of the Spirit,will not save us,but we have to confess Christ,which is a gift of God,and when we are saved we have to have works of the Spirit to have faith active in our life,which the Bible says quench not the Spirit,and do not grieve the Holy Spirit,and when we have faith active in our life led by the Spirit,then we are not under the law,for the law cannot touch us for prosecution.

Paul said we do not void out the law through faith,but we establish the law,and the law is spiritual,holy,just,and good,the moral laws,laws of love,and any law that is a spiritual law has to be obeyed,for it is spiritual in the New Testament,where is could not be like that in the Old Testament for they could not be led of the Spirit as in the New Testament.

People should understand when Paul is talking according to us walking in the flesh,not saved by works,cannot live up to the law,and James talking according to us walking in the Spirit,a man is justified by works,and not faith alone,and faith without works is dead.

There is no contradiction between Jesus and Paul,and look how many times Paul rebuked people,and told them to act right,which he said to the Galatians,having begun in the Spirit,are you made perfect by the flesh.

Paul even said himself if he did not keep under his body,which is to abstain from sin,he would be a castaway,which the Bible says work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

 

[Grace777x70]

Originally Posted by LaurenTM

You say you don't think it is a sin not to observe the Sabbath, yet and again, you believe yourself superior by calling those who don't observe it, children.


Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day--
Colossians 2:16

you have to deny scripture in order to continue your observations on those who do not follow your opinion

I've already pointed out that the rules of grammar preclude my use of the word children from being an insult, but actually a comparison. Here's one other clue you might want to get to know. "a" as used in your scripture quote is an indefinite article, where "the" is a definite one. That means Paul was speaking about the feasts and not THE Sabbath.

The Greek word that was used in Col 2:16 is also the same Greek word used in this scripture in Matt.12:1,2 ....and in fact used in 68 other times as well.

It is referring to the Sabbath day despite any definite article to try to make it look like it's not the actual Sabbath as used in the Law of Moses.

Matthew 12:1 (KJV)
[SUP]1 [/SUP]
At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.

Matthew 12:2 (KJV)
[SUP]2 [/SUP] But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.

Matthew 12:10 (KJV)
[SUP]10 [/SUP] And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

 

[LaurenTM]

Don't miss the observations made by mayo about comments

like I have said, he is all about his own opinion

here is his brand new thread, which you can find in the Bible forum...belongs in miscellaneous, but he does think of his comments as superior I guess




[/QUOTE]

Lot's of "Personal Interpretation" Going On In Some Of These Threads


When I read some of the comments made in threads here I'm reminded of the "Sermon On The Mount" scene from Monty Python's "The Life Of Brian":

https://youtu.be/YP2KDUiBI-E[/QUOTE]

 

[Grace777x70]

Really? According to whom?
God or the Pharisees?

God's commandment says to separate it from the other six days and rest from your labor. I don't see where discussing the Bible would be work.

It's sort of like how we tithe we money instead of cattle like they did in the OT days.

As to "my version" of the Bible, the KJV works pretty well so I doubt I'd bother to create another one.

In this entire thread I've not said anyone else has to keep the Sabbath. I've not said those who don't aren't saved or are going to Hell or anything even close to that. I've simply answered the OP's question with what I believe. Whether anyone decides to join in keeping the Sabbath really makes no difference to me as most of my Christian friends do not. I do find it odd that many of y'all who don't want to keep it get really upset when it's brought up. I think that means its prickling you somewhat.

What can happen is that this can throw off new Christians as if they have to keep the Law now when in fact they are to live by His life in them now - not the law of Moses. This is why people are discussing this "observance of the Sabbath day as in the Law of Moses".

It is not because they are pricked that people are bringing all this to light. It's the absolute opposite. We know it is nothing to do with Christ and His life in us at all - that is in the observing of the Law of Moses which includes the Sabbath keeping.

 

[Officermayo]

Don't miss the observations made by mayo about comments

like I have said, he is all about his own opinion

here is his brand new thread, which you can find in the Bible forum...belongs in miscellaneous, but he does think of his comments as superior I guess

I need to hire you as my agent for advertising for me. As I'm on disability after many years of fighting with inmates in a state maximum security prison I won't be able to pay you.

Why do you take the stance that I suffer from some sort of superiority complex just because we disagree? I really don't get that at all.

 

[Officermayo]

What can happen is that this can throw off new Christians as if they have to keep the Law now when in fact they are to live by His life in them now - not the law of Moses. This is why people are discussing this "observance of the Sabbath day as in the Law of Moses".

It is not because they are pricked that people are bringing all this to light. It's the absolute opposite. We know it is nothing to do with Christ and His life in us at all - that is in the observing of the Law of Moses which includes the Sabbath keeping.

Are you suggesting we should have this thread for fear of hurting baby Christians? If so, then why allow the subject to be discussed at all?

 

[Grace777x70]

Are you suggesting we should have this thread for fear of hurting baby Christians? If so, then why allow the subject to be discussed at all?

No...I believe everything can be discussed but that Christ's finished work should be the main emphasis and not man's attempt at trying to keep certain commandments in the Law.

This is an anti-Christ belief that negates the power and life of God in our lives that Christ died at the cross and rose again in resurrection in order to get our salvation and freedom for us.

There are a few Judaizers on threads ( I do not consider you as one of them...) that try to get people to desert Christ for their law-keeping - that I am strongly opposed to as it is a perversion of the gospel of the grace of Christ.

People are free to observe whatever they want but to say that if one doesn't "observe" the Sabbath like I do - that they are not obeying God - ( like many have done including those that say it in a round about way ) - that too is a perversion of the gospel of grace of Christ. This kind of talk can hurt baby Christians.

They need to be fed Christ - NOT any law of Moses - including the Sabbath day as set out in the Law.

 

[Officermayo]

No...I believe everything can be discussed but that Christ's finished work should be the main emphasis and not man's attempt at trying to keep certain commandments in the Law.

This is an anti-Christ belief that negates the power and life of God in our lives that Christ died at the cross and rose again in resurrection in order to get our salvation and freedom for us.

There are a few Judaizers on threads ( I do not consider you as one of them...) that try to get people to desert Christ for their law-keeping - that I am strongly opposed to as it is a perversion of the gospel of the grace of Christ.

People are free to observe whatever they want but to say that if one doesn't "observe" the Sabbath like I do - that they are not obeying God - ( like many have done including those that say it in a round about way ) - that too is a perversion of the gospel of grace of Christ. This kind of talk can hurt baby Christians.

They need to be fed Christ - NOT any law of Moses - including the Sabbath day as set out in the Law.

Thanks for clarifying your position.

I DO NOT preach that folks MUST keep the Sabbath. I wouldn't have even brought up the subject. I was replying to an already existing thread. I still feel (for myself) that the Big Ten are not "the Law of Moses" (as I've explained) but I can see what you're saying.

Along that line, what do you think was meant by the statement from the Jerusalem Council saying, "For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day". Acts 15:21

I believe James meant not to bother new Christians with the Law and just have them do these few things (abstain from blood, fornication, ect) because once they're on board they'll be hearing the Law preached in church and they'll learn it then, not now.

What say ye?

 

[jcha]

Many believe that the Pharisees were condemned for keeping the law, but what does your Bible say? If they were not condemned for that, what were they condemned for?

Halley’s Bible Handbook states that the:

“Pharisees were the most numerous and influential of the religious sects of Jesus’ day. They were strict legalists. They stood for the rigid observance of the letter and forms of the Law, and also for the Traditions”.

Is this view correct? Did the Pharisees stand for the observance of the law, did they keep the law, were they ‘legalists’, or instead did they prefer to keep traditions of men?

The first mention of the Pharisees in the Bible involved John the Baptist.

“But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, ‘Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance, and do not say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father”” (Mat 3:7-9).

The first statement Jesus made which mentions them was also negative,

“For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven” (Mat 5:20).

According to Smith’s Bible Dictionary,

“The fundamental principle of the Pharisees…is that…there was an oral law to complete and explain the written law, given to Moses”.

A biblical example of that would be Mat 15:1-2,

“Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus saying, ‘Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread’”.

Interestingly, the Pharisees were quite concerned about ‘the tradition of the elders’ even though there was no biblical requirement to wash hands before eating bread.

What did Jesus do?

Jesus had issues with the Pharisees:

“He answered and said to them, ‘Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? For God commanded saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and he who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God’–then he need not honor his father or mother.’ Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition.Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophecy about you, saying: ‘There people draw near to Me with their mouth, and honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines of God the commandments of men” (Mat 15:3-9).

Jesus also said,

“making the word of God of no effect through your tradition, which you have handed down. And many such things you do” (Mark 7:13).

Jesus often called the Pharisees hypocrites (Mat 15:7;16:3;22:18;23:23,25,27,29; Mk 7:6). According to Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, the Greek word Jesus used that was translated as hypocrite means, “an actor under an assumed role”.
The Pharisees didn’t really want to be good, they just wanted to look good (Mat 23:25-27).

Why?

Because “they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God” (Joh 12:43).

Jesus condemned the Pharisees by saying, “you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness” (Mat 23:28).

Jesus said the Pharisees were filled with lawlessness because they did not keep God’s law (Mat 15:3-9;22:15-18;23:23), and that they mainly tried to appear righteous before men (Mat 23:23-28).

Were the Pharisees Legalists?

The term ‘legalist’ is not actually in the Bible. Some claim that believing in following the laws of God makes one a legalist. However, if legalism is defined as adhering to the Law of God, then the Pharisees could not have been ‘legalists’–the Pharisees repeatedly violated the law of God and justified these violations by traditions of men (Talmud) (Mk 7:13).

How Did the Pharisees Violate the Law of God?

Jesus indicated that the Pharisees did not keep the law,

“Did not Moses give you the law, yet none of you keeps the law? Why do you seek to kill Me?…and the Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take Him” (John 7:19,32).

They truly did not understand the law of God.

Were you aware of that?

Many, especially those who consider themselves Protestant, do not seem to understand that the Pharisees were condemned for violating the law, not for actually keeping it. Many do not understand the law of God today.

Many believe that the Pharisees were condemned for keeping the law, but what does your Bible say? If they were not condemned for that, what were they condemned for?

119 Ministries

Answer: man-made laws and traditions.