<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]When Jesus said, "keep my commandments" did He mean "keep the Decalogue"? How about "all of the (613 rules) in the Pentateuch"? . . . etc.</font><hr></blockquote><p>First of all, are you going to bifurcate the "law" of Christ for the "law" which was of God throughout the history of mankind? The Lord Christ did not recognize anything of Himself, but only that which was given Him by the Father. (Jh 6:38; 8:28; 10:25; 10:30, 32, 37; et al). Notice how Jesus equates His commandments with that of His Father:<blockquote>John 15:10 (KJV) If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love."</blockquote>As to the division of the Mosaic law into: "civil, ceremonial and moral", this is a legitimate designation as anyone can see by reading the O.T. The ceremonial laws were shadows of that which was to come, i.e., the atonement of Christ and therefore are fulfilled in Him. The book of Hebrews makes this perfectly clear. The civil law was given to Israel as a Theocracy and they too were shadows and types of the New Heaven and New Earth. The principles of the civil law are applicable to the temporary kingdom of God on earth, which is the church. Thus they too cannot be what Jesus is speaking about when He tells His sheep to keep His commandments. This leaves the moral law, which did not originate on Mt. Sinai, but were from the beginning and by which all men were held accountable and judged. They, being the expression of the very nature of God Himself cannot be abrogated by the coming of Christ, as He Himself said:<blockquote>Matthew 5:18 (KJV) "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."<br><br>Luke 16:17 (KJV) "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail."</blockquote>Are Christians no longer bound to avoid idolatry? If not, then the law applies. Are Christians free to take God's name in vain? If not, then they are bound to keep it. Are Christians prohibited from murder? stealing? lying? gossiping? talebearing? adultery? fornication? coveting? If so, then these these laws are binding upon their conscience and soul no less than any other man since Adam. The very definition of holiness and righteousness is defined by the moral law. Without the law, "love" is inexpressible. For the law is the basis of loving God and one's neighbor:<blockquote>Matthew 22:36-40 (ASV) Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law? And he 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 great and first commandment. And a second like [unto it] is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. [color:red]On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets.</font color=red>" (cf. Matt 5:17)</blockquote>When Christ was going through Galilee and taught the multitudes that had followed Him there, He sat down to teach them, in which teaching Matt 5:17 is included. This teaching has been called, "The Sermon on the Mount". In it, Jesus set forth the ethics of the kingdom. You will notice that He quotes from the Decalog in several places. What He taught was NOT against the Ten Commandments, but rather against the superficial and distorted teaching of them by the Pharisees. The moral law is not something to be restricted to the external; it is a matter of the heart, thus spiritual in nature. (cf. Matt 5:19f)<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Paul is emphatic that we are not under law.</font><hr></blockquote><p>Let's take this quote in its original <span style="background-color:yellow;">context</span>, for a text out of context is nothing more than pretext! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin[/img]<blockquote>Romans 6:11-18 (ASV) "Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey the lusts thereof: neither present your members unto sin [as] instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves unto God, as alive from the dead, and your members [as] instruments of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under law, but under grace. What then? shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves [as] servants unto obedience, his servants ye are whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But thanks be to God, that, whereas ye were servants of sin, ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching whereunto ye were delivered; and being made free from sin, ye became servants of righteousness."</blockquote>First of all, being no longer under sin but grace is in reference to JUSTIFICATION. No man is justified by the keeping of the law. So we can quickly dismiss any notion that law-keeping makes one right with God. Now, knowing that some would take this to the extreme error which you and Alex_Light have, he continues and shows that just because one is freed from the law unto justification does not mean that one is free to sin because the believer is now no longer under the condemnation of the law. (Rom 8:1; Gal 3:11-13, 19ff) How does one not let sin (transgression of the law) become his master? By substituting Masters. Those who were unregenerate were slaves of sin (their master). But when they were given a new nature and became one with God in Christ, that relationship was broken and a new relationship was established with God as their Master. Thus, as enemies of God, men naturally transgress the moral law of God (unrighteousness). As children of God, men naturally do not transgress the law of God. Contrariwise, they love the law of God and desire to keep it by grace unto SANCTIFICATION, knowing that God is within them to will and do His good pleasure, ergo: If you love Me, keep my commandments.<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]If you're going to be consistent, you can't avoid adultery yet eat lobster.</font><hr></blockquote><p>Well, I guess that makes God inconsistent according to your system of thought. For Peter was told by God directly to eat things which were previously forbidden in the Mosaic dietary laws. (cf. Acts 10:9-15; see also 1Cor 8:1ff, 10:23ff; Rom 14:1ff) Thus, the dietary laws, having fulfilled the purpose for which they were intended by God, does this then mean, according to your "reasoning", that adultery is no longer prohibited? [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/rolleyes.gif" alt="rolleyes" title="rolleyes[/img]<br><br>In His Grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]