# Nature/Purpose of the Ten Commandments



## Sonoftheday (Dec 5, 2007)

This is a rather simple question, but is this a proper understanding of the Ten Commandments.

1.) They were given not as a means of salvation, but as conditions of the Mosaic Covenant with the nation of Isreal.

2.) The 10 Commandments is God's perfect moral law in summary form.

3.) This perfect moral law summarized by the 10 Commandments is the condition needing met for the covenant of works, and fulfilled by Christ in his earthly ministry.

4.) God's perfect moral law summarized by the 10 commandments will be upheld in our glorified state, and should be aspired to in our regenerate state.

5.) God's perfect moral law can be derived from the 10 commandments because they are it in summary form.

Most dispensational people I know uphold 1. but then they deny 2. causing 3, 4, & 5 to fall as well. 

How can we biblically prove 2. to someone with dispensational beliefs?
If 2 is wrong where/how can we find God's Perfect Moral Law?


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Dec 5, 2007)

When Jesus was asked to sum up the Law, what law is that referring to? Is his summary still binding? (Some Dispensationalists say "no" because their Bible isn't really ethically relevant until Acts 2). If the summary is still binding, back to question 1, what is it a summary of?

Jesus says "You know the commandments, Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother" (Mk. 10:19). Is Jesus speaking to us today? Is he our Lord and Master? "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and do not the things that I say?"

Romans 13:8-10, Paul "summarizes the law." What law is he referring to? Is it still binding? Does it sound as if Paul thinks it is still binding?

1 Tim 1:5-11


> The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions. Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the glorious gospel of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.


Note that listing of heinous acts that parallel the 10 commandments, which is all "in accord with the glorious gospel." Paul describes those in the church in his own day who are claiming to be teachers of righteous conduct who understand neither "what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions," respecting the law. (Sound familiar?) Christians will not be judged finally by the law since its ultimate penalty is discharged already against the Sinless One. But these same statements don't stop being descriptive of sin. Professing Christians who live "contrary to sound doctrine" are in peril, and may not be Christians at all.

James 2:9-12, James says break the law at one point, and you are guilty of all, and references the laws against murder and adultery. (Some Dispensationalists deny that James is relevant to Christians as well, they pit him against Paul, or say he fits between Moses and Paul). Is James speaking to the New Testament age?


----------



## Casey (Dec 5, 2007)

Sonoftheday said:


> 1.) They were given not as a means of salvation, but as conditions of the Mosaic Covenant with the nation of Isreal.


Actually, however true this might be theologically, you can only say this absolutely if you remove the Preface from the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments, with the Preface, tell God's people, "Since I have saved you, I want you to live this way . . ."


----------



## Iconoclast (Dec 6, 2007)

*The moral law*

One of the descriptions given of the work of the Servant of Jehovah in Isa .42:21 was-




> 21The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.


 If we could keep the law of God 100% perfect we could be saved by law keeping but in God's decree Adam's fall would not allow for that possibility.



> 21Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
> 
> 22But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
> 
> ...



The need for the incarnation was that The elect Servant, the Sinless Son of God, By His active obediance restores the fallen and broken image of man Psalm8/ Hebrews 2. and In saving union with Him , This holy righteousness is reckoned to us. 
Then in sanctification [ as Bruce spoke about in post 2] The Spirit works in us the love of God ,fulfilling the law however imperfectly we attempt to Love God/ove our neighbor.
Romans 2 indicates that gentiles do by nature the things contained in the law, but as fallen they cannot keep it perfectly, so it will in the end be the standard that condemns them to second death.


----------



## No Longer A Libertine (Dec 6, 2007)

The law serves as a mirror that exposes our depravity and distance from holiness, it is a revelation to our sinfulness but not the cure or soap if you will, you can not clean yourself up through obedience to the law.

We are however saved by works they just aren't our own, they belong to Christ Jesus whom we are hopeless apart from.


----------

