Distopian / Utopian and the Impact of Law

A number of years ago, I sat on a jury pool, where the prosecuting attorney queried the jury pool.

“On a scale of 1 to 5, how important is law in a perfect society?”

I was sitting towards the back of the group, so most people answered before I did, and this gave me a bit more time to ponder the question. When it came to me, I answered: “Zero”. Curious, the prosecutor asked me why zero. I replied that in a perfect society, there would be no need for law, seeing as it was a perfect society, where no one did anything wrong.

Imagine at that moment the others in the jury pool coming to realize that this would be true, and perhaps some of them realized the question was dishonest to begin with, leading the jury pool to believe in the necessity of laws even in a supposedly Utopian society.

The prosecutor modified his question by stating it in terms of a society seeking to be perfect, which brings up an interesting aspect in this regard.

If your “perfect” society is built on a foundation of laws that punish law breakers, where the punishment is severe, that being a death sentence for any infraction, you will have a “perfect” society where no one does anything wrong, but your perfect society will be Distopian. All members of society are motivated by fear; dread. Your law enforcement personnel will be more “Gestapo” than “Peace keepers.” The safest place in such a society is to be a member in good standing within the “Politburo.”

The “ideal” Utopian society would be one not under such draconian laws or legal system built around punitive measures regarding transgressions of the law. People would be motivated to be doing good in relation to one another, with a system of reward for doing good; not a fear of doing something wrong. This Utopian state though would require a population not inclined to do bad (evil) things injurious to the society.

Given mankind’s overall present condition, as pointed out by God in Scripture, this Utopian state is not possible. Mankind’s state of being is that of people with what is called a “deceitful and desperately wicked heart;” a “heart of stone” that understands only one thing about behavior, and that is that those who are caught doing wicked, evil things will be punished, severely.

Further complicating this Distopia is the unavoidable fact that even the enforcers of the law would themselves be in the same category as everyone else, possessed by an wicked, evil heart where they are quite aware that their position in society as one of the Politburo enforcers, effectively makes them immune to any prosecution of wrong doing as long as it can be made to look like they are doing their intended jobs within such a society.

This type of society is what has historically been the status quo. People adapt to it, even become comfortable with it, trying to make the best of it, all the while under the belief that no other, better way exists or could exist.

What no one talks about is that evil people, who wrest power for themselves, thrive in a dystopian system. A truly Utopian system would spell their ruin in this regard.

However, such a Utopian system of governance has its shortcomings.

It is predicated upon the cooperation of all parties to it. The closest any country has come has been the USA, established by men of faith, looking for the common good and self-governance based on the constituents being dedicated to the maintenance of that common good. But like as in nature, parasites are attracted to what is perceived as open ground for exploitation. On the other end of the spectrum are those who, through their inflated egos, believe that they are best suited for running things; being in charge, and deciding what is best for society as a whole so that they actively yet surreptitiously, undermine any system of such self-governance, then turn around and decry the failure was due to the flaws within the system.

When Jesus; God Incarnate came among His own, as prophesied, His own rejecte Him. They had an established order, where Jesus stated publicly that “All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. — John 10:8

He was their true and rightful King; their Ruler. But they were not going to give up without a fight, and they knew just how to manipulate the masses to rally behind them, despite the fear they instilled in them. The unspoken message was you either backed them, seeing as they administered the law, or they would subject you to the same treatment they applied to Jesus, using the law to their own advantage, manipulating the law; interpreting the law. Is it any wonder then that Jesus would berate them over their administration of the law, where they claimed and practiced obedience to it right down to the minutia of the law, tithing on the increase of even an herb garden, while ignoring the “weightier” matters of the law; justice, mercy, and faith; attributes they were incapable of embracing, being themselves among those with the deceitful and desperately wicked hearts of stone, whose only interest was their own aggrandizement and position within the Jewish society and social order.

God is preparing His governmental rule on earth where actual good people; those in possession of the “new heart” aka His Holy Spirit, are no longer subject to laws applied arbitrarily by people led by their own flesh; their evil, deceitful hearts of stone and unbelief. There is no need for them to be under and subjected to a law designed to punish evil doers, such as the old covenant law did. They are under another law, unlike any law ever found on earth; a law of faith and the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus that frees them from the previous law of sin and death, applicable only to those led by their self-centered flesh that seeks its own desires, often to the detriment of others.

In the end, it will be those led by the Spirit, in the kingdom of God populated by His children, only, where there will be no call for laws that governed the faithless and “lawless” who lived outside the jurisdiction of the law of faith and the Spirit.

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************

Condemnation by Law or Unbelief?

Jesus said good works were lawful on the Sabbath, as contrasted to evil works. He gave no further elaboration regarding the nature of good and evil works beyond a comparison of the two in regards to saving life versus destroying it.

Nothing Jesus did had anything to do with the destruction of life. He stated He came to give life abundantly and to save life, and His works all had this in mind.

(John 12:47) And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

His Gospel message then was a message of life.

(John 11:25-26) Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

(John 3:14-21) And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Jesus is that Light, and evil-hearted ones do not come to the Light. They do not acknowledge the Light. So they are the ones who produce false gospels based on other things besides the Light; other than Jesus. Their gospels will declare other things you must believe in order to be saved; in order to acquire eternal, everlasting life.

What do evil people do that results in their condemnation: break the law and Sabbath of Israel, or refuse to come to Christ Jesus for salvation?

To “do truth” is to come to the Light – Jesus. And the deeds, the works, of those who come to Him are made known (manifest) that they are wrought in God. Not some of their works; all of their works. Good trees, who now produce only good fruits unto God to the Glory of God.

The evil ones in this scenario produce their own gospel of salvation that substitutes faith and belief in Christ Jesus alone with other “requirements.”

Examine the rationalization put forth by Adventists. “Grace is not a license to sin, and sin is what happens when you transgress the law, and if you sin by transgressing “God’s law” you cannot be saved.”

They will cite, in support of their argument:

(1 Corinthians 6:9-10) Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

(Galatians 5:19-21) Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Murder, for example, is addressed in the law as a sin; a transgression of the law. Therefore, doing any of these things transgresses the law in some fashion, resulting in your exclusion from the kingdom of God / Heaven where those who receive eternal, everlasting life reside.

Now, if you were paying attention, transgressing the law was not stated by Jesus as that which results in condemnation. He specifically stated rejecting Him was the cause of condemnation, not breaking / transgressing the law. Evil people are those who do not respond to, or come to, the “Truth”, which is Jesus Christ. They are evil, and according to the teachings of Jesus, the works of evil people are only evil and sin, even as the works of good people, those who “come to the Light”, are all good works.

God does NOT judge mankind like mankind does. God declared He judges according to the heart. Evil people have evil hearts, and because they have evil hearts, thoughts, intents, they act according to that heart, doing evil things. One evil thing being the refusal to come to the Light, Christ Jesus, so that they might have life eternal.

Evil people, who embrace a religion of law - works of law, righteousness by law, justification by law -such as the law that was given to the Hebrews, use the law in an attempt to build a foundation of religion that gives them the means of “looking good” as a result of keeping it, even as did the Pharisees and other religious elite that Jesus referred to as evil children of the devil, who were doing the will of their father the devil.

Let that sink in. The people who were being addressed by the Prophets, the Hebrews, were told that their hearts were deceitful and desperately wicked.

(Jeremiah 17:9) The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

God knew it. Those religious elite could not, being deceived by their own hearts.

(Psalms 109:2) For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue.

Those versed in what all transpired between Jesus and the Pharisees, et alia, know this to be a prophesy in relation to Christ Jesus. Who spoke against Jesus? Who spoke lies about Him?

The religious elite.
Those who claimed to be religious and doing the will of God, through the law they believed they kept. They hated Him, hated Jesus, because they were evil, and evil ones do not come to the Light. They are the ones who seek to destroy life; not save it. They sought to destroy the Author of Life itself.

Was their undoing by the law, or by their unbelief?

I will leave you, the reader, with this last thought…
Which religious organization - that claims to be the true church, and claims to love "the law, the Ten Commandments" - is the one that has built hospitals around the world, conducting the destruction of life in their hospitals through elective abortions, where they destroy on a routine basis the most innocent of all lives, with absolutely no just hearing or appeal by anyone on their behalf as was required in the law they claim to keep?

(Exodus 20:7) You shall not murder.

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************

LAW LAW LAW

Having a background in Sabbatarian groups creates a skewed understanding of law in general and the old covenant law specifically.

By referring to it as THE law of God, with the attributes of God; eternal, unchanging, a “transcript of God’s Character”, a vision is built of a law that is unassailable. It stands immutable, solid as stone, despite the fact the first set of tablets were reduced to rubble by Moses.

With this view of the law ingrained into the mind, even Jesus’ words about good works on the Sabbath being lawful and not a sin requires quite a bit of mental gymnastics to reduce the apparent cognitive dissonance.

What I find truly amazing is that the same people who instilled this mindset of a perfect, infallible and immutable law have altered the law themselves, in multiple ways, both adding to and taking away from, while convincing the laity that their ‘interpretations’ of the law are valid. Those that are outside of the organization who might well provide truth and understanding are summarily rejected. Any attempt to point out the inconsistencies is seen only as an attack. “Truth only comes from within,” and not without, especially from ex ‘disgruntled’ members with an ‘axe to grind.’

The law, the Decalogue, becomes sacrosanct; above examination and reproach. Unassailable as imperfect or insufficient. It is sold as the ultimate expression of God’s will for mankind.

What Jesus said and did in relation to the Sabbath becomes an interesting test to those with the wit to recognize it. It comes down to who or what you are going to believe in regards to which one has the greater authority in your mind, heart, and soul.

Jesus, God Incarnate, who identifies Himself as the One who was there providing Israel with their “salvation” from Egypt, and the one who thundered verbally the Decalogue to the Hebrews from Mount Sinai, was now declaring to the offspring of those Israelites that good works are lawful on the Sabbath; good works as contrasted to evil works, with no other categorization, explanation, or clarification in regards to the commandment which declares no one was to do “any” work on the Sabbath; labor that included even the preparation of a meal.

Instead of choosing between the two opposing issues, people attempt to reconcile the two, where one has to be modified to eliminate the cognitive dissonance or reduce it to a point where the dissonance can be tolerated.

The two greatest commandments in the law, which are not found in the Decalogue, state:

(Matthew 22:36-40) Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Everything else in the law, including the Decalogue, hang on these two primary commandments.

The Sabbath was being used by Jesus as a test, even as He tested Adam and Eve with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, where the serpent was right there promoting it.

When it came to the old covenant law at the time Jesus walked the earth in the flesh, it was the Pharisees and other religious elite who administered and taught the law, even the Decalogue. Jesus pointed out these same Pharisees were evil-hearted, doing the will of their true father, the devil. How then are they any different than those today who claim to be the religious elite who do the same exact thing those Pharisees did in teaching the law?

But but but… it’s GOD’S LAW!

Yes indeedee. And so was that Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil "GOD’S TREE", whose fruit, the outcome of partaking of it, brought death. God created that tree. He put it there. It was God's tree. The tree itself wasn't evil.

This doesn’t change the situation between God Incarnate and the Sabbath of the Decalogue where the Sabbath said all were to cease from any work and Jesus now declaring good works lawful; good works as contrasted to evil works.

You, the Adventist or other Sabbatarian reading this, underwent conditioning by the leadership so that you could not see the real and true way this is reconciled. You are conditioned not to see it; not to agree with it; to reject it out of hand.

Good works - truly good works - are never a sin, and evil works are never good and lawful. And God, foreseeing this situation, inspired Isaiah to write:

(Isaiah 5:20) Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Now an important question to ponder… do evil people believe they are good or evil?
By embracing the law, as did the Pharisees, the evil children of the devil, they thought they were good, doing the good will of God, being the legitimate children of righteous Abraham. And the people who saw their works of law thought them to be righteous. Unlike this Jesus, who they intimated was an uneducated pauper from a backwater village and illegitimately conceived.

Legalism is a condition of the mind, heart and soul. Some people look to the law for their answers to life’s situations, where the “transgression of the law” is deemed to be sin, regardless. Good and evil are determined by and through the law. Keeping the law is good and righteous; breaking the law, transgressing it, is evil and sin.

But… the Pharisees kept the law. They did. And with greater dedication than any Adventist or Sabbatarian alive today. And Jesus STILL referred to them as children of the devil, doing the will of their father the devil, even though they were focused solely on the law. They would transverse earth and sea to convert a proselyte who ended up twice the child of hell those Pharisees were, according to Jesus’ assessment of their activities, where it is unavoidable that their proselytes were being taught the law and how to keep it.
And so the excuse is concocted that the failure of the Pharisees was that they added to and took away from the law; a thing which modern "law-keepers" also do. But Jesus' true diagnoses of their problem was not about their actions, but about their hearts. The motivation and the intent which was being masked by the outward display.

(John 1:17) For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Simple logic should tell you that grace and truth therefore did not come through the law, despite statements by those who were under the law, given that the law was the means whereby God punished those with no love of truth; the Great Lie they believed that, in the end, would be the means to their destruction.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12, we are informed that God has a particular fate in store for those with no love of truth, and the law is suspect in this respect:

(2 Thessalonians 2:10-12) And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

If law was by Moses and truth by Jesus, then law is not what is being referred to as "truth" here. The law curses those under the law.

(Galatians 3:10) For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Small wonder that Adventists would pare the law down to just the Decalogue. They must, as there is no other way to keep it. But in doing so, they furthered their own condemnation. "All things" it says.

You might well claim that this “unrighteousness” that people had pleasure in could only be related to not keeping the law, but consider there is also an associated unrighteousness in Scripture attached to not believing the Gospel and the law of faith and the Spirit that Adventists and other Sabbatarians insist is still the old covenant law (meaning the Decalogue).

(Matthew 5:20) 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.

The righteousness of the Pharisees was derived through the law, and it was self-righteousness; a glorification of the self and not God. The glorification of God occurs when one’s righteousness is derived from God through faith, even as was Abraham’s righteousness who believed God and was counted as righteous.

The true believer was saved and even loved by God while still a sinner; where God justifies the ungodly, who in turn are truly thankful and offer up praise to God to His glory, whereas the Pharisee in the narrative with the Publican, was busy adulating Himself while denigrating the Publican who ended up going home justified by God.

Scripture is replete with clues about the law and those with evil hearts who embrace it then use it to further their evil agendas. The argumentations that abound against this whole concept are replete with denials based not in biblical evidence but in rationalizations and accusations and other methods commonly employed in deceptions and deceptive reasoning. And, you will always hear about the sin of rejecting the law, of speaking against the law, even as they so charged Jesus, Paul, and Stephen the Martyr. Law, law, law, all the while ignoring the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, love, and faith; something the faithless Hebrews, who were given the law, could never in a million years comply with, given the condition of their evil hearts of unbelief.

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************

Editing The Commandments

Everyone knows the Ten Commandments begin with "You shall have no other gods before Me." But that's not actually where the Ten Commandments begin. The very first words of the Decalogue send a message that we must not ignore.

---

Going to church on a particular day of the week is the key doctrine that sets Sabbatarianism apart from other Christian groups. Going to church on Saturday is central to how they believe the Sabbath functions, which has far-reaching effects on how they believe Christianity functions.
But we must ask ... is that what the Fourth Commandment says to do? No. It is not. When we read the Old Testament, do we see corporate worship as the way the Sabbath rest was observed? No. We do not.

So, we find the Fourth Commandment has been altered a bit. Of course, that's where the excuses begin (we have articles on that). But now we must ask ... where else has the "perfect and unchanging" law been edited?

I know of a surprising place, and we don't have to go far to find it.

One of the main supporting reasons for seventh-day Sabbath observance is that it is found in the Ten Commandments. It's the Fourth Commandment don't ya know. The claim is everyone must "keep" the Sabbath because the Ten Commandments are universal and given to the whole world. Sabbatarianism absolutely requires this.
But we must ask ... is this what the Bible says? More specifically, is that what the Ten Commandments themselves actually say?

Let's walk through this together and see it for ourselves. Go in your mind's eye back to Mt. Sinai. Imagine we are witnessing that time and place.

WHO ARE YOU

Israel was formed by God to be a distinct and separate people. The Old Testament is the story of Israel. Most Sabbatarians accept it was written by and about Israel, but still read it like it was written directly to them.

So, we need these two Sabbatarian ideas in mind: 1) the Ten are eternal and unchanging, and 2) the Ten are for the whole world.

Now, let's read the beginning of the First Commandment:

(EXO. 20:2) I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

Have you ever stopped and contemplated this verse? It says so very much.

This is the very first sentence in the Ten; the primary introduction of God, to describe who He is. And who is He? The One who saved "you" from slavery in Egypt.

God is very specific about who He is. His "name" is a description of what He is. Until this, God was mainly seen as the Almighty God who created and possessed heaven and earth. Or, He was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (as opposed to the Gentiles). Or, He is the one who exists (I Am). This verse changes things. Now, He stresses His identity as "your" God, the one who rescued "you".

Who is "you"? Who had been in bondage in Egypt? Who was God addressing? You are there, in your mind's eye, at a mountain in the desert, and apart from the crowd at the mountain there isn't another human soul around for miles; who is He talking to? There is only one answer: Israel. Israel and none other.

Please pay very close attention to three key things here:

1. He says, "your God". Sure, He is the Creator and God over all things, all the world is His, but the world had rejected Him and He disinherited the nations (temporarily), and so the Gentiles were not His people at this time; only Israel was. He was the God of Israel.
2. The word "Israel" does not appear in that verse. The words "you" and "your" are used. He was addressing Israel audibly, directly, and specifically. How do we know it was Israel? Because He says so in other places and because no other nation was saved by God from bondage in Egypt and taken to the promised land. That's what Exodus is about.
3. The words "you" and "your" are singular, not plural. Israel is addressed as a singular whole, just as the Covenant is a singular whole. One covenant for one people.

You and your. The Ten Commandments were specifically for Israel, the people who were saved from Egypt. It's right there in the first sentence of the Decalogue! Let's read the entire First Commandment together:

(EXO. 20:2-3) 2 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3 You shall have no other gods before Me.

When I was younger, I read that as if that "you" meant me; God was speaking to me. He wasn't. That "you" meant Israel. I am a Gentile. God was not the God of the Gentiles at that time. We chose idolatry. We were purposefully given over to other gods as part of our disinheritance. Israel being commanded to have no other gods is key to their distinction from the Gentiles. If we make that "you" and "your" about us, then that's a change.

Now, let's take what we've learned here and apply it elsewhere.

(EXO. 20: 7a) You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.

Whose God? Israel's God.
Now we have to edit the Third Commandment, too. But that's not all.

(EXO. 20:12) Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.

Whose God? Who was getting land? It was called the land of what? Israel.
Now we have to edit the Fifth Commandment as well. Look what editing the First Commandment has caused!

Some try to get around this by mentioning the Gentiles who came out of Egypt with Israel. Some Gentiles did come out with Israel, but does that actually change anything we are looking at? No. That they were there does not change the fact that Israel was the one and only covenant nation. Again, look at the wording throughout; it says "house of bondage" (v2), "the land which the Lord your God is giving you" (v12), and "You shall say to the children of Israel" (v22). The Bible never says those Gentiles were in bondage in Egypt. You really only have two good options: either those Gentiles were incorporated into the nation of Israel, or they were not incorporated and thus weren't the ones God was addressing.

Let's take this one step farther.

In proper Bible study, we must always ask, "Who is the intended audience and how would they have understood this?"

Who were the Ten given to? The nation of Israel (the physical nation of Israel, specifically). Israel is the direct intended audience. The rest of us are merely overhearing the conversation.
And how did Israel understand it? 

(DEU. 5:3) The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive.

Israel understood this as being specifically to them and with them. If it didn't even apply to their own ancestors, then how could it apply to the entire world? It cannot. The Ten cannot be universal if the Decalogue itself, even in the very First Commandment, makes it clear they were for Israel.

"You" and "your" is Israel. "You" and "your" is singular, a singular whole. One single body of law for one singular people. For Sabbatarianism to work, it needs the Ten to apply to all. And for the Ten to apply to all, the Commandments must be changed.

COVENANT

It is clear that everyone involved understood what was happening at Mount Sinai to be the beginning of the Covenant with Israel. We call it the Old Covenant, the Sinaitic Covenant, and even the Mosaic Covenant. And the Ten are the very foundational words of that Covenant. Seriously, how many times over the years have I reminded readers of these verses:

(EXO. 34: 28) So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments [Ten Words].

(DEU. 4: 13) So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

(DEU. 9: 9) When I went up into the mountain to receive the tablets of stone, the tablets of the covenant which the LORD made with you, then I stayed on the mountain forty days and forty nights. I neither ate bread nor drank water.

(DEU. 9: 11) And it came to pass, at the end of forty days and forty nights, that the LORD gave me the two tablets of stone, the tablets of the covenant.

(DEU. 9: 15) So I turned and came down from the mountain, and the mountain burned with fire; and the two tablets of the covenant were in my two hands.

And the tablets of the covenant were kept in what? The Ark of the Covenant. (For more, read "The Covenant and The Testimony", which BTW I wrote in 2009; As Bereans Did has been reminding people of this for years.)

So, not only are the Ten given to Israel only, but they are the very foundation of the Old Covenant that God made only with the covenant people Israel ... and which has since ended.

A covenant is between parties; specifically stated parties, and only those parties. In this case, two parties. Verse 2 is the introduction of God, the primary party to the Covenant. It also introduces Israel, the second party to the covenant. "I am the Lord your God." The Ten cannot be universal if the Decalogue is a legal document between two parties; the foundation of the Covenant between God and Israel alone. A covenant that was dissolved when God the Son, the primary party to the covenant, died.

One might argue, "But they are universal moral principles. They have to be for everyone." It is debatable that the Fourth is moral but it is clear the others are ... but not because of the law. We've been reading it for ourselves. The letter of the law is not universal. The law was written in a way that is specifically for Israel. That's the law. The solution given in the Old Testament was, if you want these to apply to you, then you get circumcised and join Israel. I've said in other places what can and does make moral principles universal. (Hint: it's not law-keeping.)

For Sabbatarianism to work, it needs the covenant law to apply to all. If you make that contract document into a list of ten do's and don'ts, if you make "you" and "your" refer to yourself, that's a change to the eternal and perfect and unchanging law. For the law to apply to all, the Commandments must be changed.

WHAT TO DO

Having cast their lot in with the Ten Commandments, Sabbatarians are now forced to do something with Exodus 20:2. That one is the key; verses 7 & 12 hang on it.

Glossing straight over it seems to be the preferred method of dealing with it. Most articles will not display verse 2 at all. Some articles will display it, but then ignore it like it isn't there, proceeding straight on to verse 3. Most start the Ten at verse 3, not verse 2, like in the image here. Skipping verse 2 makes it a lot easier to insert "me" or "we" where it absolutely does not belong. They also drop the second half of verse 12. (I realize it would be difficult to put every word of the Ten on any image, but this image is only meant to illustrate the point I am making.)

There are really only two ways to handle Exodus 20:2 - either you take it literally (like I do), or you take it figuratively (like I do).

If you take it literally, in a more Old Covenant sense, then we must ask why does this apply to anyone but Israel? When were you a slave in Egypt? When did God save you from Egypt, march you through the desert, and speak these words to you at Mt. Sinai? When did God give you a land?
I do take it literally, and I argue the Old Covenant and its terms, the law, does not apply to anyone else besides Israel ... because that's exactly who it says it was given to. Multiple times.

If you take it figuratively, in a more New Covenant sense, then we must ask why can't we also take the Sabbath command figuratively? If we can change "you" and "your" into everyone, and change "rest" into church, and change "bondage" into sin, and change "land" into God's kingdom, then why can't we change "day" into Jesus? If we can interpret Egypt as metaphor for sin and our rescue from Egypt/sin is in Christ (which most Christians do, including Sabbatarians), then why not interpret the Old Covenant's rest for the rump as a shadow of our New Covenant rest for the very soul in Christ (COL. 2: 16-17)?
I do take it figuratively, and I do think sin is our Egypt from which God rescues us so that we can finally find peace and rest in His victory over sin and the grave. I argue the spirit of the law is what matters in the New Covenant, not the letter, and I do think the point of the Sabbath is a rest rather than church attendance, and spirit of that rest is a true spiritual rest in Jesus Christ rather than setting up chairs at church on Saturday (or Sunday for that matter).

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot edit the law to get it to apply to everyone and church, then when it comes to the Sabbath day demand the law is eternal and perfect and unchanging.

Neither of those are comfortable options for a Sabbatarian system which must make the law about Gentiles and about church; and to do that it must change the law and then keep it changed.

CONCLUSION

"You" and "your", they mean Israel.

Sabbatarianism promotes these two ideas: 1) the Ten are eternal and unchanging, and 2) the Ten are for the whole world. But what we find is the Ten Commandments were given as the foundation of the Covenant made with Israel alone. The First, Third, and Fifth Commandments are worded specifically for Israel, and the Fourth Commandment says nothing about corporate worship. So, Sabbatarianism makes the necessary changes.

"God's eternal, perfect, and unchanging law! Well, except for these laws we don't keep and these foundational details we've rewritten."

It seems clear the Bible is being manipulated to achieve a desired end. Israel is removed so that all mankind can be inserted, into a covenant which was dissolved nearly 2,000 years ago, so that we can all go to church on Saturday because our whole identity rests on a law that says nothing about going to church.

And why? Because some think righteousness and sin come from laws rather than the nature of God, and our oneness with Him through faith alone. I think another key underlying issue going on is what I mentioned in "The Road to Sabbatarianism - Part II": people do not seem to understand that the Old Testament was not written to us; it was written for us.

I'm not arguing against the moral principles contained within the Ten Commandments. I am arguing against selectively editing the legal terms of the Old Covenant so they can command what they do not command and apply to whom they do not apply. I am arguing against taking laws of the Old Covenant, editing them to change primary details - like who God is, what the law is, what the law says, and who the law was given to - then claiming we're just doing what God wants.
If you are changing the law, then you're not "keeping" the law.

What starts as "the law says" will inevitably become "the law needs to say". And the one thing Sabbatarianism needs the law to say more than anything else is that the "you" and "your" refers to "us". But they don't.

As Bereans Did has several articles intended to help people see that there are other things to consider here, other ways to look at verses, other critical facts that have been left out of the Sabbatarian equation.

If You Love Me Keep My Commandments
Are The Ten Commandments Removed?
Is the Sabbath A Test Commandment?
What Does The New Testament Teach About Law and Grace?
Sunday, or Herbert Armstrong?
The Sabbath Rest of Hebrews 4
What Did Jesus Say In Relation To The Sabbath?
Constantine vs The Sabbath
The Covenant and The Testimony
Common Legalist Arguments - Part II
The Road to Sabbatarianism - Part I
Is Ceremonial Law Removed?
Without Law There Is No Sin
What Use Is The Old Law?

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************

Lawless

(1 Timothy 1:9-11) Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

(1 John 3:4) Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

The phrase, “the transgression of the law” is derived from the a single Greek word, “anomia”, translated into English as “evil”, “iniquity”, “lawlessness” where “lawlessness” comes close to the literal transliteration of the Greek word: “a-” against “nomia” law. Against law. Contrary to law. Lawless is more aptly understood as “without law.” Without the restraints of law.

The first citation here gives a perspective of “lawless” based on the context. Lawless people are also disobedient, ungodly, sinners, unholy, profane, murderers of parents and others; liars, perjurers; things that are contrary to sound doctrine, in relation to the Gospel.

Notice Paul did not say these attributes of the lawless was in relation to the law, but in relation to the Gospel and being attributes or behaviors contrary to the Gospel, which, in this context, makes the Gospel a type or form of “law.”

The Gospel commands belief, faith, and trust in Christ Jesus. There exists a “law” of faith, mentioned by Paul in Romans chapter 3. In Romans chapter 8, another “law”:

(Romans 8:1-2) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Those who are no longer condemned by the one law are freed from that law of “sin and death” through conformity to the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus; a law associated also with the Gospel, related to faith/belief, being attributes of the Spirit.

There are those who reject the law of faith; the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, who embrace the other law that the apostle Paul pointed out was not of faith, for this other law has nothing to do with the law of faith and the Spirit. It is / was a law for the FAITHLESS.

The Hebrews, the legal party to the old blood covenant law, were defined as faithless, stiff-necked and rebellious. The author of Hebrews refers to them as having “evil hearts of unbelief.”

Paul points out in his writings that they were to be held under the law UNTIL the revelation of the “faith to come.”

(Galatians 3:23) But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

The faithless do not embrace the law of faith. They do apply methods of deception with the law that is not of faith in order to make it appear to be the law of faith, denying there even is another law.

With the new covenant law of faith and the Spirit; the law closely associated with the Gospel, faithlessness is a sin.

(Romans 14:23) And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Seeing as the followers of Christ are freed now from condemnation, based on being freed from the one law and embracing the other, does the previous law still condemn those who have rejected the law of faith and the Spirit? Or does the new law of faith and the Spirit condemn those who fail to embrace it?

(John 16:7-9) Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me;

It is those who reject the law of faith and the Spirit that stand condemned in this present world. The faith that was to be revealed has been revealed, and many there be that reject it, in favor of the law they were kept under in the meantime.

The Gospel has an association with the new covenant law of faith and the Spirit, and no association with the other law of sin and death, also referred by Paul in 2Corinthians 3 as the ‘ministration of condemnation and death, engraven in stones’; the law the Hebrews were kept under UNTIL the faith to be revealed; a law of faith and the Spirit, expressed through the Gospel; a message of salvation based in the law of faith and the Spirit; not the previous law of sin and death; the ministration of condemnation and death, engraven in stones.

That previous law produces wrath and makes all guilty of sin: Lawless in relation to the New Covenant law of faith and the Spirit. Lawless in relation to the Gospel. Lawless in relation to the OC law, that was given to the lawless, faithless.

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************

Old Heart — New Heart

The rationalization for keeping the law is so that one does not sin; sin being defined by the advocates of the law as the result of transgressing the law.

There are several things wrong with this belief.

Not all transgressions of the law resulted in a charge of sin. Jesus pointed out examples, and He is the ultimate authority on the subject. When it came to the Sabbath, He worked, and declared good works lawful; not “lawless” and thus not a sin, even though the Sabbath law was transgressed by anyone who did “any” work.

By working on the Sabbath; transgressing the Sabbath commandment “as is” those who insist the law be kept, especially the Sabbath, exposed themselves, unwittingly, that they held the law in higher esteem than they do God. They made the law; even the Sabbath, as greater than God; another god besides (along side of) God.

Adventists, for example, go so far as to assign the attributes of God to that law, claiming it to be “moral” as well as “eternal,” “unchanging,” and most egregious of all, “a transcript of God’s character.”

To “sin” against the law is to sin against God. To obey the law is to obey God, where once again, equivocation between God and the law is established. They become nearly indistinguishable.

Another flaw of this argument has to do with how God judges, and He does not judge according to the law and whether someone keeps it or not. God judges “righteous” judgment, according to the heart. God knows that those with the “deceitful and desperately wicked hearts; those who have hearts of stone and evil hearts of unbelief, will act accordingly, right down to even their thoughts and imaginations, reflecting the evil that resides within. They will transgress the law as a result, leading to their just condemnation spelled out in the law. The law provides the last nail in the evil person’s coffin. At issue here is how evil minded people think, where they are influenced by a deceptive “heart.” They shift the problem from themselves regarding what they are by nature, to sin being just a problem of behavior and behavior modification so that, if you don’t transgress the law, your problem is solved without ever addressing the heart that is sinful, regardless, and condemned, regardless. For a person with an evil heart only produces evil works in the sight of God. An evil person is incapable of doing anything truly good, seeing as the motive behind anything and everything they do is an evil heart that seeks its own advantage in everything they do.

The law condemns sin in all of its forms and manifestations. If you have an evil heart, you are evil. You are sin, personified. Keeping the law does not alter an evil heart. Keeping the law while having an evil heart is a futile endeavor. You will transgress in ways you cannot imagine, being deceived by your own wicked, evil heart.

People with wicked, evil hearts believe “wholeheartedly” that simply keeping the law solves their sin problem, while at the same time being in total denial over the other side of this coin, that is where people with a good heart; the “new heart” God provides to those who believe the Gospel, placing all their faith and hope in God for their salvation; now can only produce good fruits in the sight of God, due to the influence of that good heart where one’s motive is not about the self and self, but with God and pleasing Him; not disappointing the God who saved them from their sins.

Their sins are not remembered; there being no remembrance of sins in the New Covenant and those who are a part of it.

Those with the evil hearts of unbelief are quick to point out that Christians do sin, still trying to judge sin and others according to the law that true Christians are dead to, not under, freed from and redeemed from.

Christians will occasionally succumb to the pulls of the flesh while still in the flesh, the difference being, again, the heart; the same heart whereby God judges. Their sins; missing the mark when it comes to the glory of God, are the result of spiritual immaturity; a failure to follow through all the time with the fruits of the Spirit; a failure to do good. Contrast this with those who have evil hearts where they can do no good, being evil. All they can do is either do evil, or refrain from doing evil, which is not doing good.

Those with the deceitful and wicked hearts are incapable of any spiritual discernment. As such, all that is left to them is based in the physical and a physical religion they embrace in the hope of acquiring eternal life on their own terms. Keep the law; don’t sin, and God owes you – is obligated to save you because you don’t sin, for the most part, and when you do, you simply seek forgiveness, then it’s back to business as usual, until the next time you sin while keeping the law...

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************