The Sabbath Day, Should You Keep or not Keep?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Most of the scholars and rabbis I've read expressed that the 603 laws in the "book of the law" (the Torah, the Law of Israel, the Law of Moses, Mosaic Code, whatever one wishes to call it), which was established in the Covenant at Moab, are predicated upon one, or can be categorized with, one of the Ten Commandments, which was the Covenant Sinai, established 39+ years prior. It was added to the original Ten Commandments, and is based on them. For example, Rabbi Shlomo Itzhaki (Rashi) wrote in the Shemos:

What distinguishes the Ten Commandments from all the other 613 laws in the Torah is that the Ten Commandments act as the “categories” under which all the other commandments are included (Rashi, Shemos 24:12).

What I'm calling the "Law of Moses", was given at Moab to help the Israelites understand HOW to obey the Aseros HaDibros (the Ten Commandments). That is why the 603 laws of Moses are not considered any less important than the 10, each is predicated upon and categorized in some way under each of the 10.

If one doesn't see a distinction between two covenants (made 39 years or more apart) I'm not sure what to say.

2 Cor 3 called the ten commandments the reading of Moses.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by mfblume

2 Cor 3 called the ten commandments the reading of Moses.

It doesn't matter what they call the Ten Commandments. There is a distinction.

When I use the term "Law of God", I'm speaking specifically of the eternal moral Ten Commandments which were inscribed by God upon stone tablets at Sinai, that were broken by Moses.

When I use the term "Law of Moses", I'm speaking about the Torah and all of the 613 laws contained therein, that was confirmed in Moab.

Both the tablets and the Torah contain the 10 Commandments. This causes many much confusion. But the Torah (Law of Moses) is unique. While it contains the Ten Commandments, it also contains an entire system of laws that govern how to keep those commandments as an Israelite.

What was broken at Sinai by Moses did not.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Aquila

It doesn't matter what they call the Ten Commandments. There is a distinction.

When I use the term "Law of God", I'm speaking specifically of the eternal moral Ten Commandments which were inscribed by God upon stone tablets at Sinai, that were broken by Moses.

When I use the term "Law of Moses", I'm speaking about the Torah and all of the 613 laws contained therein, that was confirmed in Moab.

Both the tablets and the Torah contain the 10 Commandments. This causes many much confusion. But the Torah (Law of Moses) is unique. While it contains the Ten Commandments, it also contains an entire system of laws that govern how to keep those commandments as an Israelite.

What was broken at Sinai by Moses did not.

Why not call Bible things by Bible names? Why make distinctions that the Bible doesn't?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Most of the scholars and rabbis I've read expressed that the 603 laws in the "book of the law" (the Torah, the Law of Israel, the Law of Moses, Mosaic Code, whatever one wishes to call it), which was established in the Covenant at Moab, are predicated upon one, or can be categorized with, one of the Ten Commandments, which was the Covenant Sinai, established 39+ years prior. It was added to the original Ten Commandments, and is based on them. For example, Rabbi Shlomo Itzhaki (Rashi) wrote in the Shemos:

What distinguishes the Ten Commandments from all the other 613 laws in the Torah is that the Ten Commandments act as the “categories” under which all the other commandments are included (Rashi, Shemos 24:12).

What I'm calling the "Law of Moses", was given at Moab to help the Israelites understand HOW to obey the Aseros HaDibros (the Ten Commandments). That is why the 603 laws of Moses are not considered any less important than the 10, each is predicated upon and categorized in some way under each of the 10.

If one doesn't see a distinction between two covenants (made 39 years or more apart) I'm not sure what to say.

You should read Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law. He ties all that together with extensive documentation.

BTW, the "613 laws" is a rabbinic invention, they can't agree on the contents of the various lists, and some are actually Talmudic instructions rather than Biblical commands.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

It doesn't matter what they call the Ten Commandments. There is a distinction.

"THEY" is not the issue. The Holy Ghost inspired "THEM" to call it the reading of Moses.

When I use the term "Law of God", I'm speaking specifically of the eternal moral Ten Commandments which were inscribed by God upon stone tablets at Sinai, that were broken by Moses.

Paul did not do that, though.

When I use the term "Law of Moses", I'm speaking about the Torah and all of the 613 laws contained therein, that was confirmed in Moab.

I'm concerned with what the bible called them.

Both the tablets and the Torah contain the 10 Commandments. This causes many much confusion. But the Torah (Law of Moses) is unique. While it contains the Ten Commandments, it also contains an entire system of laws that govern how to keep those commandments as an Israelite.

What was broken at Sinai by Moses did not.

I disagree. If the book of the law, as you put it, is full of laws that fall under each of the ten commandments, then each and every law is basically the ten commandments, anyway.

[Aquila]

Where does the Bible call the Son "humanity"?

My point is that the terms we use, though not in Scripture, can clarify distinctions made in Scripture.

[Aquila]

Wow. Such effort to discount the blessing of obedience.

[Aquila]

Is adultery a sin?
Why?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Where does the Bible call the Son "humanity"?

My point is that the terms we use, though not in Scripture, can clarify distinctions made in Scripture.

Jesus is not "humanity". Otherwise, we are all made of "Jesus".

Using Bible terms in a way the Bible does NOT use them cannot possibly clarify anything. Confusing the terms is not "clarifying" anything.

I also think we should be VERY careful in thinking we can improve on what God has said. His Words are perfect. Giving the sense is one thing, but inventing distinctions that are 180 degrees opposite from the distinctions made or not made in Scripture is another thing altogether.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Where does the Bible call the Son "humanity"?

My point is that the terms we use, though not in Scripture, can clarify distinctions made in Scripture.

Inapplicable comparison. The principle of humanity is distinctly involved in scripture, whereas some principle of the book of Law versus the Law of God is non-existent in any point the bible is trying to make with us.