It's true that to believe in Jesus is a command. The command to love is, I think, simply a summary statement as I pointed out earlier.
I think we need to be careful about saying things like "We only have one command now (or two or ten)!" First of all, I don't see any logical or Scriptural basis for saying that we only have one. Scripture treats love as a summation of the law, so love can't be seen as something contrary to it. Scripture also seems to be very clear that God's moral prescriptions still apply: do not steal, do not commit murder, do not commit adultery. These are commands, right? Moral laws?
This sounds similar to an old dispensational idea that God never intended to give them the law. He only offered it to test them, and wanted them to reject it, but they failed the test by accepting the law. But this has absolutely no Scriptural basis and I'm not aware of any dispensationalists who still hold to this idea.
But what you're saying looks a bit different. It sounds like you're saying that God gave them some commandments as a form of punishment. But I don't see any basis for this either.
Scripture only describes God's law in *very* positive terms (cf. Psa. 119). Even in the NT this positive quality of the law is taught:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes 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 does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:17–19)
“So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. ” (Romans 7:12)
“For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. ” (Romans 7:14)
“Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. ” (Romans 7:16)
“Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. ” (Romans 3:31)
“Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, ” (1 Timothy 1:8)
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. ” (2 Timothy 3:16–17)
And there are many other places where Paul quotes particular laws in a positive fashion, assuming that it still has a morally binding quality to it (e.g. do not muzzle the ox).
The fact that we cannot keep the law doesn't make the law bad. And there are not good laws and bad laws. The Bible depicts the laws in a unified fashion:
“For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. ” (James 2:10–11)
The New Testament repeats the command to "Be holy" as the Lord is holy (1 Peter 1:16; Leveticus 11:44). But who can live up to that standard? I don't think anyone can, but to say that, therefore, the command is bad seems very odd to me. Isn't it more reasonable to say that we cannot keep the command and therefore *we* are bad?
I think we need to be careful about saying things like "We only have one command now (or two or ten)!" First of all, I don't see any logical or Scriptural basis for saying that we only have one. Scripture treats love as a summation of the law, so love can't be seen as something contrary to it. Scripture also seems to be very clear that God's moral prescriptions still apply: do not steal, do not commit murder, do not commit adultery. These are commands, right? Moral laws?
This sounds similar to an old dispensational idea that God never intended to give them the law. He only offered it to test them, and wanted them to reject it, but they failed the test by accepting the law. But this has absolutely no Scriptural basis and I'm not aware of any dispensationalists who still hold to this idea.
But what you're saying looks a bit different. It sounds like you're saying that God gave them some commandments as a form of punishment. But I don't see any basis for this either.
Scripture only describes God's law in *very* positive terms (cf. Psa. 119). Even in the NT this positive quality of the law is taught:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes 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 does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:17–19)
“So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. ” (Romans 7:12)
“For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. ” (Romans 7:14)
“Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. ” (Romans 7:16)
“Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. ” (Romans 3:31)
“Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, ” (1 Timothy 1:8)
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. ” (2 Timothy 3:16–17)
And there are many other places where Paul quotes particular laws in a positive fashion, assuming that it still has a morally binding quality to it (e.g. do not muzzle the ox).
The fact that we cannot keep the law doesn't make the law bad. And there are not good laws and bad laws. The Bible depicts the laws in a unified fashion:
“For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. ” (James 2:10–11)
The New Testament repeats the command to "Be holy" as the Lord is holy (1 Peter 1:16; Leveticus 11:44). But who can live up to that standard? I don't think anyone can, but to say that, therefore, the command is bad seems very odd to me. Isn't it more reasonable to say that we cannot keep the command and therefore *we* are bad?
I don't know why we are afraid to state things the way that they are. God has given us birth into His family, we are His born children, lead by the Spirit, filled with His love and His life and He has made peace with us through His cross. The Law and the commandments did none of this, could not do this, for if they could, then Jesus would not have had to die.