The Ten Commandments are the Covenant, did you know?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I agree . The ten commandments are moral laws. They're timeless for the Christian and,in my view, imperative for a righteous path. The new covenant is enmeshed in the ten commandments.
Any applicable law is now in the hearts and minds of believers
They must know in their minds what has been placed there, the law in their hearts MUST bring heartfelt consciousness of sin if they ''wilfully'' lets say transgress it, for:
Through the law we become conscious of sin Rom3:20
So, the words Ten Commandments are for the old covenant, not the new one
 
whoever has died is no longer liable to the law.

into what were we baptized?

were you saved?
or did you only get offered a chance to save yourself?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dino246
Any applicable law is now in the hearts and minds of believers
They must know in their minds what has been placed there, the law in their hearts MUST bring heartfelt consciousness of sin if they ''wilfully'' lets say transgress it, for:
Through the law we become conscious of sin Rom3:20
So, the words Ten Commandments are for the old covenant, not the new one
Semantics? That's a new one.


Jesus reiterated nine of the commandments of God.
The fourth commandment is referring to a gift God made for us. And never repealed.

1 John 2:4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,

Matthew 5:19

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.
 
Any applicable law is now in the hearts and minds of believers
They must know in their minds what has been placed there, the law in their hearts MUST bring heartfelt consciousness of sin if they ''wilfully'' lets say transgress it, for:
Through the law we become conscious of sin Rom3:20
So, the words Ten Commandments are for the old covenant, not the new one
The words?" Ten Commandments", are not for the New Covenant?

You're mistaken.
 
The heart of the error is simple: you are turning a change of priesthood into the cancellation of God’s moral commands. Jesus never did that. God never said that.
First, Melchizedek proves your claim wrong before Christ even arrives. He was priest of God before Levi existed(Genesis 14:18). That means priesthood does not depend on the Sinai system. So a priest outside Levi does not require God to erase His commandments. That idea is added, not taught.


Second, Jesus directly contradicts your conclusion:
“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.” (Matthew 5:17, KJV)
If the law was “ended, invalidated, and superseded,” then Jesus either misspoke or misled. Neither is acceptable.


Third, Jesus defines what remains binding after His coming:
“Whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:19, KJV)
That alone kills the idea that all commandments were invalidated.


Fourth, the New Covenant was already defined by God, not by later arguments:
“I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts.” (Jeremiah 31:33, KJV)
Notice what God says.
Not “new laws.”
Not “no laws.”
My law, written on the heart.


Fifth, Jesus explains the real change. Not law removed, but law deepened:
“Ye have heard… but I say unto you…” (Matthew 5)
He does not cancel commands. He strips away loopholes and hypocrisy and goes straight to the heart.


Finally, the priesthood argument only applies to sacrificial and temple administration, not to God’s definition of sin, righteousness, love, or obedience. Jesus never sacrificed animals, never taught animal sacrifice, and never told people God’s commandments were void.

If your conclusion were true, Jesus would not say:
“If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” (Matthew 19:17, KJV)


The New Covenant did not erase God’s standard.
It removed forgiveness without obedience and religion without transformation.


Change of priesthood? Yes.
Change of sacrifices? Yes.
Abolition of God’s commandments? Absolutely not.
That idea comes from reading theology into Christ instead of listening to Him.

If the Gentiles never knew God how could the Gentiles have received the law?

How can the Gentiles be bound by a covenant that belonged only to Israel?

How can the sign of that former covenant (the sabbath) be applied to the Gentiles.
When the Gentiles were not in that former covenant.




 
Semantics? That's a new one.


Jesus reiterated nine of the commandments of God.
The fourth commandment is referring to a gift God made for us. And never repealed.

1 John 2:4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,

Matthew 5:19

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.

Exodus 20:1-3
And God spoke all these words:
I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
You shall have no other gods before me.

Were the Gentiles freed from slavery in Egypt?

The ten commandments were spoken to Israel.

God was not speaking to the Egyptians at Mt Sinai.
 
Semantics? That's a new one.


Jesus reiterated nine of the commandments of God.
The fourth commandment is referring to a gift God made for us. And never repealed.

please check once more.

semantics is an old one. the scriptures advise us specifically to avoid and to ostracized people who create divisions by arguing over words ((2Tim 2:14, 23)) - - they are wolves, not Christians

funny how the numbers are easy to remember

and please have a good closer look at Exodus 16, the first mention of sabbath in scripture 1500 after Abraham unto whom we are grafted - - it is a test of recognition of the deity of Christ designed to prove Israel failed it.

for two more witnesses see also Exodus 31:13, Ezekiel 20 12.
 
Exodus 20:1-3
And God spoke all these words:
I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
You shall have no other gods before me.

Were the Gentiles freed from slavery in Egypt?

The ten commandments were spoken to Israel.

God was not speaking to the Egyptians at Mt Sinai.
Jesus,who was God at Sinai, spoke the nine commandments to everyone he ministered to. And said,if we love him we will keep his commandments. Which are laws that govern morality and his worship.

His synopsis of those laws,and the prophets,was when he said,loving God and our neighbor as ourselves are that upon which they hang.

How do we insist moral directives are for Jews only? When we are all one in Christ with those laws written in our hearts,how do we insist that's not true.

What Christian says,in our faith we don't have moral laws? Because the words,ten commandments, no longer are words that applies to the new testament.

When they were given to the world by The Word,that's an odd stance.

Matthew 5:19

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.
 
please check once more.

semantics is an old one. the scriptures advise us specifically to avoid and to ostracized people who create divisions by arguing over words ((2Tim 2:14, 23)) - - they are wolves, not Christians

funny how the numbers are easy to remember

and please have a good closer look at Exodus 16, the first mention of sabbath in scripture 1500 after Abraham unto whom we are grafted - - it is a test of recognition of the deity of Christ designed to prove Israel failed it.

for two more witnesses see also Exodus 31:13, Ezekiel 20 12.
I'll leave it to you to judge @Undergrace1 a wolf.

Really,I find it strange that there is a debate here. One side says God's word has no instructions as pertains to morality.

The other side says, Jesus meant what he said and died to seal it in our hearts and upon our soul for all time.

It's wild to witness the example of of Matthew 5:19 unfold in this thread.
 
Semantics? That's a new one.


Jesus reiterated nine of the commandments of God.
The fourth commandment is referring to a gift God made for us. And never repealed.

1 John 2:4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,

Matthew 5:19

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.
Why semantics? It isnt an external law anymore, but one written in the mind and placed on the heart by God Himself at conversion. To use the words ''Ten Commandments'' is to be looking to an external law, that is old covenant.
Paul tells us if we have never known of biblical law we can show the requirements of the law are written on our hearts, obviously by the way we act. How many, if they had never known of biblical law would by instinct set aside a set Saturday sabbath?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Inquisitor
The words?" Ten Commandments", are not for the New Covenant?

You're mistaken.
As what is written in applicable law is now in your heart and mind, your most inward parts, it is instinctively known to you, it is part of your dna in Christ so to speak. You cannot hide from it or be in ignorance of it, it is with you every day of your life. Under the circumstances why would anyone need the words ''Ten commandments''?
It would be like me saying to you ''you must follow your twelve times tables'' which would be pointless as I assume you know them
 
Really,I find it strange that there is a debate here. One side says God's word has no instructions as pertains to morality.

.
Who believes that? I instinctively know I should not murder, commit adultery, steal ,lie, take the Lords name in vain, covet/dwell on impure thoughts. Just don't need that as an instruction written in ink for that is not where the law now is for the believer(2Cor3:3)
 
The power of sin is the law(1Cor15:56)the legally binding law with the power to condemn.

Yet what is written in the law is holy, just and good(Rom7:12)

So what was God to do, He would want to remove the power of sin, but not abolish what is holy, just and good.

Law as we all naturally understand law to mean comes in two parts, what is written in it and the penalty for transgression, nothing wrong at all with the first part it is holy, just and good, it’s the second part that’s the problem. So, God transferred what is written in applicable law from an external law engraved in stone to an internal law if you like written in believers minds and placed on their hearts. An external law does not mean you in your heart would want to obey it, but a law in your heart does mean in your heart you want to follow it

Simply means in your mind you know God does not want you to steal, commit adultery, bear false witness, covet, take His name in vain, etc, and in your heart(the flesh is another matter) you do not want to do those things, as I imagine all Christians would testify to.

I never think of it as a ‘’law’’ as such, its just part of who I am now in Christ.

At the same time what is written in applicable law is placed in your heart and mind:

‘’Their sins and lawless deeds I will remember no more’’ For Jesus died for your sins. Law as we all naturally understand law to mean abolished, whist what is holy, just and good is retained. You only get a saviour from sin because the first part of the covenant has taken place. For Jesus will be no ones saviour from sin unless they in their heart desire to live as his Father wants them to live.

With the power of sin now removed from your life(1Cor15:56) you can live a far more holy life(Rom6:14&Rom3:31)

Sadly, many do not accept this, they are still stuck in an old covenant mindset: ‘’You MUST NOT’’

Whereas under the new covenant: ‘’You in your heart WANT TO’’

And so they keep repeating:

‘’You MUST obey the TC’’

That is looking to an external law, that is not where the law now is for the believer!
 
The power of sin is the law(1Cor15:56)the legally binding law with the power to condemn.

Yet what is written in the law is holy, just and good(Rom7:12)

So what was God to do, He would want to remove the power of sin, but not abolish what is holy, just and good.

Law as we all naturally understand law to mean comes in two parts, what is written in it and the penalty for transgression, nothing wrong at all with the first part it is holy, just and good, it’s the second part that’s the problem. So, God transferred what is written in applicable law from an external law engraved in stone to an internal law if you like written in believers minds and placed on their hearts. An external law does not mean you in your heart would want to obey it, but a law in your heart does mean in your heart you want to follow it

Simply means in your mind you know God does not want you to steal, commit adultery, bear false witness, covet, take His name in vain, etc, and in your heart(the flesh is another matter) you do not want to do those things, as I imagine all Christians would testify to.

I never think of it as a ‘’law’’ as such, its just part of who I am now in Christ.

At the same time what is written in applicable law is placed in your heart and mind:

‘’Their sins and lawless deeds I will remember no more’’ For Jesus died for your sins. Law as we all naturally understand law to mean abolished, whist what is holy, just and good is retained. You only get a saviour from sin because the first part of the covenant has taken place. For Jesus will be no ones saviour from sin unless they in their heart desire to live as his Father wants them to live.

With the power of sin now removed from your life(1Cor15:56) you can live a far more holy life(Rom6:14&Rom3:31)

Sadly, many do not accept this, they are still stuck in an old covenant mindset: ‘’You MUST NOT’’

Whereas under the new covenant: ‘’You in your heart WANT TO’’

And so they keep repeating:

‘’You MUST obey the TC’’

That is looking to an external law, that is not where the law now is for the believer!

Yes, the NT indicates that those who accept Jesus as Messiah/Lord receive the HS (Acts 16:31, Rev. 3:20, Rom. 5:5),
whose love fulfills all moral laws that prepare the way for faith in Christ (Matt. 3:11, 22:37-40, Rom. 3:20, Gal. 3:24).
Thus, sinners are saved via faith in Christ's atonement as they learn to cooperate fully with the His HS (Rom. 3:21-5:1, Eph. 2:8-10), although the Ten Commandments except the fourth describe spiritual fruit and so remain relevant (Matt. 19:17-19, Gal. 5:22-23).
The Sabbath law was not reaffirmed because it was Levitical or for separating Jews from Gentiles (Matt. 12:1-12, Col. 2:16, Heb. 7:11-22).
Other verses regarding Christians and the law include: Rom. 6:14, 7:6, 10:14, Gal. 5:18, 23.
 
Looking for ways to please God other than offering that which He says Himself pleases Him seems rather dismissive of Him, don't you think? But, in asking "how so?," I'm assuming you don't know that I'm talking about faith, because you have your own ideas about qualifying works of faith, but I'm not interested because I'm also assuming they are necessarily similar to that of Saturday service. And, I'm okay with you keeping any day you like.as long as you, or any other Saturday keeper doesn't try to solicit my admiration for any supposed moral superiority. When God told the Israelites that they polluted His sabbaths, do you suppose that they were at least trying to keep them or not keeping any at all?
Anyway, asking "how so?," in sincerity, signals an interest in knowing what I think about it, and I like to always give the benefit of the double. That is, initially, but admittedly I do wonder if my inkling that you just meant, "I don't see it, nor will I" is spot on.
 
The mustard seed is Jeremiah 31:34 which is cited in Hebrews 8:8 and Hebrews 10:16-17, which refer back to Jeremiah 31:33 and 34 This is the covenant he writes on our hearts and our minds, it is the covenant of Love, that 'their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more." That is the mustard seed that grows into loving the Lord with all our heart, and all our mind, and all our strength.

I can afford a bit of speculation on this forum, seeing that much of it does go on throughout the various topics, so I will take the liberty, that is plainly afforded, to indulge here and there in it. I wonder how far off I might be to think that Jesus drew hearts in the sand as he challenged the crowd gathered to stone the adulteress.

Hi Mem, i wrote this last night to explain further;

“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah… But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts… And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” (Jeremiah 31:31–34, KJV)

Here, Jeremiah is not speaking about a single moment only. He is speaking about a work of God that has a beginning, a growth, and a completion. The phrase “the days come” shows a future work. The phrase “after those days” shows that it unfolds in stages. This is important. The covenant is promised, but its full condition is very specific: God’s law is written so deeply in the heart that teaching is no longer needed, because “they shall all know Me.” That has never yet happened to the whole people of God.
Jesus Himself began this covenant through His death and resurrection. He said plainly, “This cup is the new testament in my blood” (Luke 22:20). So yes, the New Covenant was truly established by Jesus. But establishment is not the same as full completion. Jesus did not say the Kingdom would appear fully grown in one moment. He said the opposite.

“The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree.” (Matthew 13:31–32, KJV)
This parable explains exactly how Jeremiah’s promise unfolds. The Kingdom begins small. It grows. It spreads. It takes time. Jesus did not say the seed instantly becomes a tree. He said it becomes a tree. That means the New Covenant begins with Christ, but it moves toward a future fullness.

When Jesus rose and sent the Holy Spirit, the Spirit did not fall on everyone. It fell on a few, first the apostles, then those who believed. This matches the mustard seed. The Kingdom had begun, but it was still growing. The disciples went out teaching because Jeremiah’s words “they shall teach no more” were not yet fulfilled. Teaching still existed because the covenant had not reached its final measure.

Jesus Himself confirmed that growth and delay are part of the plan. He said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36), and He also taught that the end would come only when the message had gone out widely.
“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” (Matthew 24:14, KJV)

Jeremiah’s vision points to a time beyond the present age, when the work that began with Christ reaches its fullness at His return. At that time, God’s law will not merely be known outwardly or taught by others. It will be fully written within. Knowing God will no longer be partial, mixed with weakness, confusion, or struggle against sin.
This agrees with what Jesus said about the future state of His people.
“Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.” (Matthew 5:8, KJV)

Purity of heart is not yet complete in believers now. We are being shaped, corrected, taught, and pruned. But Jeremiah speaks of a day when the heart is fully formed by God Himself. When Christ returns, those who belong to Him will no longer struggle between flesh and spirit. They will know God truly, naturally, and fully, and sin will have no place in them.

So your point stands. The New Covenant has begun, but it has not yet reached its final condition. The mustard seed has been planted. The tree is growing. The disciples were the first branches. The Spirit was the first rain. But the full harvest comes when Jesus returns, when Jeremiah’s words are no longer partially true, but completely true.
At that time, “they shall all know Me” will no longer be hope or promise. It will be reality.
And that is not speculation. That is simply letting Jeremiah explain Jesus, and Jesus explain Jeremiah, in the plain and simple way Scripture itself teaches.
 
And "fulfill" means "bring to completion". If something has been brought to completion, why do you think you still need to add your obedience to it?
Good morning Dino,

You are redefining words to escape what Jesus actually said.
“Destroy” does not mean “cancel” or “replace.” Jesus Himself explains it by pairing the words. He says destroy versus fulfill. If fulfill meant abolish, then His sentence would contradict itself. Jesus was not careless with words.

To fulfill does not mean to erase. It means to bring to its true meaning, to fill it up, to live it perfectly, and to reveal its full purpose. A prophecy is fulfilled, yet its truth remains. Love fulfills a commandment, yet the commandment still stands.
Jesus proves this immediately after Matthew 5:17. He says,
“Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:19, KJV)
That settles it. Fulfillment did not remove obedience. Jesus links fulfillment directly to doing and teaching God’s commandments.

You ask, “Why add your obedience?”
Jesus answers that too.
“If you love Me, keep My commandments.” (John 14:15, KJV)
“Blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it.” (Luke 11:28, KJV)
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father.” (Matthew 7:21, KJV)

Obedience is not an addition to Jesus’ work. It is the fruit of it. Jesus saves us from sin, not so we can ignore God’s will, but so we can finally live it from the heart.
If “fulfilled” meant “no longer required,” then Jesus would be teaching rebellion against His own Father. That is impossible.
Jesus fulfilled the Law by living it perfectly, teaching it rightly, and writing it on the heart of His followers. What He fulfilled, He did not cancel. What He fulfilled, He calls His people to walk in.
The real question is not what the word fulfill means.
The real question is whether we will believe Jesus’ words — or redefine them to avoid obedience.
 
Hi Mem, i wrote this last night to explain further;

“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah… But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts… And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” (Jeremiah 31:31–34, KJV)

Here, Jeremiah is not speaking about a single moment only. He is speaking about a work of God that has a beginning, a growth, and a completion. .
This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.
I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds.”[b]
17 Then he adds:

“Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more Heb10:15-17

No one can be under the new covenant unless God has placed his applicable laws in their hearts and minds!
It is NOT a gradual process, scripture does not say it is a gradual process. You only get a saviour from sin because God has placed his applicable laws in your heart and mind, not some of them, all of them.
The first part of the covenant cuts out a licence to sin by your sins and lawless deeds being remembered no more. God did NOT give a partial process of law being placed in your heart and mind so you get to sin partially as you wish
It is no longer an external law engraven in stone, or written in ink, but one placed on tablets of human hearts(2Cor3:3) So you do not need to read of law written in ink to complete the work God says He will do and in fact has done for those who have entered covenant!
 
If the Gentiles never knew God how could the Gentiles have received the law?

How can the Gentiles be bound by a covenant that belonged only to Israel?

How can the sign of that former covenant (the sabbath) be applied to the Gentiles.
When the Gentiles were not in that former covenant.
Hello Inquisitor,

Your questions assume something Scripture never says.
First, Gentiles did know God.
Not through Sinai, but through creation and conscience. God judged nations long before Israel existed. Cain was judged. The world in Noah’s day was judged. Sodom was judged. None of them were Israelites, yet God held them accountable. Why? Because sin already existed, which means God’s moral law already existed.
Jesus confirms this when He says the judgment will include all nations, not just Israel
“When the Son of man shall come… before him shall be gathered all nations” (Matthew 25:31–32, KJV)
Second, the covenant at Sinai belonged to Israel, yes.
But God’s law did not begin at Sinai. Sinai revealed the law clearly, it did not invent it. Murder was sin before Sinai. Adultery was sin before Sinai. Idolatry was sin before Sinai. Jesus Himself says these commandments come from the beginning, not from Moses
“From the beginning it was not so” (Matthew 19:8, KJV)
Third, Gentiles are not bound to Israel’s national covenant.
They are bound to God’s authority as Creator and Judge. Jesus does not say, “If you are Jewish, keep the commandments.” He says
“If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” (Matthew 19:17, KJV)
No ethnic limit. No covenant loophole.
Fourth, the Sabbath was not invented for Israel.
Jesus says
“The sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27, KJV)
Not for Jews only. For man. Humanity. Creation. The Sabbath comes from Genesis, before Israel, before Sinai.
Finally, Gentiles were never excluded from obedience to God.
They were excluded from Israel’s priesthood and national laws, not from righteousness, repentance, or holiness. That is why Jesus can say
“Many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham” (Matthew 8:11, KJV)
So the problem is not Gentiles and the law.
The problem is confusing Israel’s covenant administration with God’s eternal standard of right and wrong.
Jesus did not lower God’s standard to include Gentiles.
He opened the door so Gentiles could walk in and live by it.