Are the Ten Commandment important? Does God really want us to keep them?

Interesting Stephen and welcome to CR !

I am of the opinion that your approach might work with certain people and not with others.

For example: The "rich man" at the front of the church boasting in his prayers how much better he is than the rest, and how much he gives and keeps the laws...your approach might get to those types of people. Likewise with people who think they are just moving along fine, neither good nor bad (fence walkers).

But for the poor wretch in the back of the church who can't even lift his eyes up to the alter, and who keeps thumping his breast and asking God to have pity on him...or those who are actively searching, and know something better is out their, if they could only get hold of a piece of it, I don't think that approach would work very well at all.

Pardon the cliche, but "shock and awe" doesn't allways work.

I also have a different idea of what "blasphemy" is:
blasphemy : [from Greek; blas- (to curse, bring harm, or treat with contempt) + -pheme (speech)] Speaking about God with contempt, hatred or disdain; trash-talking against God. It's not about letting loose a swear word or doing some religious act in a so-called "profane" style. It's not even about being angry with God. Even the truest saints have done such things, in part because they were so true that they could be honest with God and humankind. (Remember that when the charge of so-called 'blasphemy' is used by authorities to silence their opponents.) However, true blasphemy is verbally abusing the God who loves you.

Can man really hurt the Almighty Creator of the Universe, All Stars and All Time? When you were a child, you probably said things that brought your parents to tears and anger; if so, you hurt them the way you can hurt God. Or think of someone you had a close friendship with, but somehow your trust was betrayed. You were close, but bitter things were said and you're now distant and separated. And it stings. Blasphemy is when it's done willfully, with intent and meaning. God forgives blasphemy, and tries to do something about the separation. But the true blasphemer won't accept that forgiveness, as if to say : "Let me get this right : you forgive me?? HA !! What nerve!". And so they seal their future. The bigger problem is that too often others join in the harangue, and when that happens, those others also are separated from God.

Taking the Lord's name in vain is just that using the Lord's name in a useless, and unproductive way. I think that commandment is put in place for a simple but profound reason...when the name of God is invoked, a tremendous amount of power builds up for immediate release. Now how the invoker uses that power determines whether it was wasted or constructively issued. Have you ever said to someone "Godd#*mn you" in anger? What instant reaction do you observe from the recipient of that "curse"? Hurt, recoil, anger, shock, lowered self esteem, loss of composure and words. The response is almost allways a weakend attempt at defending themselves against that attack. The "sin" is the wrath behind the curse. The curse itself is a waste of the power of God.

On the other hand, I have observed people using "God Bless your heart" as a response while angry with someone. Totally different reaction. Chastised yes, but not beaten down, and not feeling less than human. The power from invoking God's name is positive here, even in an angry situation.

The OT's Ten Commandments taught us not to "Act" in certain ways. But the NT teaches us to not "Think" in certain ways, which preceeds action.

Do not become proud, do not envy, do not be wrathful, do not be lazy, do not be greedy, do not be a glutton, do not lust. Do not think these ways, for therein lies sin.

Hey, you asked for comments...;)

v/r

Q
 
Quahom1 said:
Interesting Stephen and welcome to CR !

I am of the opinion that your approach might work with certain people and not with others.

For example: The "rich man" at the front of the church boasting in his prayers how much better he is than the rest, and how much he gives and keeps the laws...your approach might get to those types of people. Likewise with people who think they are just moving along fine, neither good nor bad (fence walkers).

But for the poor wretch in the back of the church who can't even lift his eyes up to the alter, and who keeps thumping his breast and asking God to have pity on him...or those who are actively searching, and know something better is out their, if they could only get hold of a piece of it, I don't think that approach would work very well at all.


Q
Thanks for your comments they are always welcome

I think you can see the difference between the two above the first is proud and the second is humble, the verse (and I hope i quote it correct as I cant find it) that comes to mind " God gives Law to the proud and grace to the humble" if these people were standing in front of me then to the first man I would keep going through the Law because he is not ready for the Gospel as Jesus said we are not to throw the Beautiful pearl of the Gospel before swine but the second person is ready for the Gospel he is humble and realises he has sinned against God

I do not disagree with you on Blasphemy but if I heard someone use the name of our Lord flipantly then I would class that as taking the Lords name in vain

when I ask people if they Have ever taken the Lords name in vain they never ask me to explain what i mean, most know that they are guilty of it
 
mynameisstephen said:
...I do not disagree with you on Blasphemy but if I heard someone use the name of our Lord flipantly then I would class that as taking the Lords name in vain

when I ask people if they Have ever taken the Lords name in vain they never ask me to explain what i mean, most know that they are guilty of it
LOL, no worries, I still "catch myself" doing it. Only there is an immediate awareness of what I've just done, and a quick "sorry" to the Man upstairs.

v/r

Q
 
mynameisstephen said:
...I think you can see the difference between the two above the first is proud and the second is humble, the verse (and I hope i quote it correct as I cant find it) that comes to mind " God gives Law to the proud and grace to the humble" if these people were standing in front of me then to the first man I would keep going through the Law because he is not ready for the Gospel as Jesus said we are not to throw the Beautiful pearl of the Gospel before swine but the second person is ready for the Gospel he is humble and realises he has sinned against God...
How do you approach the second party, with the state that they are already in? Surely your message must be modified?...

v/r

Q
 
Quahom1 said:
How do you approach the second party, with the state that they are already in? Surely your message must be modified?...

v/r

Q
sorry I should have explained a bit better, I would go straight into the Good news of the Gospel
 
Stephen, I understand where you're going with that, but I must say I don't find it inspiring. Perhaps that method works for some people. But I just don't find worship out of fear of Hell correct. "Fear" as it is translated in the English Bible, actually was a word that meant closer to "awesome respect" in Greek manuscripts. I don't worship God because I am afraid of Hell- that doesn't seem like genuinely loving God with my whole heart to me. No offense, but it looks like self-preservation, which is a selfish attitude.

As an example, I'll take the way I love (and obeyed as a child) my mother. I desired to obey my mother out of love. I did not obey her or love her because she could punish me for my wrongdoings, but rather because she continually showed her unconditional and deep love for me from the time I was born. Experiencing this love was inspiring and humbling, and so I sought to please her out of reciprocal love for her, not because I was afraid of punishment (or alternatively because I wanted to get a reward). Now, on occasion I'd screw up, because no one is perfect. And so I'd get grounded, and I'd also get a clear talking-to about what I did wrong and why it was wrong. This was not punishment, it was teaching- for my own betterment and learning. God's Law, to me, is like this. It is not for demoralising people, but rather for our betterment and learning. It is to teach us the proper way to behave, and is a tremendous gift. It is God trying to help us understand what we are doing wrong and why, and to coach us into better behavior that will help us grow closer to Him. Yet, like I obeyed and pleased my mother out of love for her and not out of desire for reward or avoidance of punishment, I also seek to obey and please God out of my deep love for Him, and not out of desire for Heaven or avoidance of Hell.

I worship God because He's given me this tremendous life- not only physical, but spiritual- the amazing capacity to have His comfort, guidance, and love. I don't worship God because I'm trying to get anything- not now, and not after I die. I don't worry about the afterlife. I know that I worship God and follow Jesus the best that I can, and I love God and His entire creation with my whole heart. I am not perfect, but the God of the Bible never demanded perfection- study Judaism and the Old Testament and you will find people that God denoted as righteous and good who were far from perfect. God is forgiving as well as just.

No offense, I completely acknowledge your arguments are very common in Christianity. I've heard them before, numerous times. But I must politely disagree in how they set up the human-God relationship, in their motivations for worship. God deserves worship purely because He is God, not because we have a celestial carrot stick or whip flashed before us. If all I ever got was this one day on earth, and then ceased to exist, I'd still be worshipping God for giving me this one day. I'm grateful for His promises, but the blessings I've received in being alive are more than enough to warrant worship.
 
In the late 1980s, a TV commercial asked, "What goes through the mind of a driver who is not wearing a seat belt in a head- n collision?" Then they showed a crash dummy having its head crushed by a steering wheel in a collision, and said, "The steering wheel!" Those were scare tactics, but no one complained because they were legitimate scare tactics. That’s what happens in a head-on collision if you are foolish enough to not put on a seat belt. To warn of hell is fearful, but it is absolutely legitimate, because the Bible says that it is a fearful thing for a sinner to fall into the hands of the living God
 
mynameisstephen said:
In the late 1980s, a TV commercial asked, "What goes through the mind of a driver who is not wearing a seat belt in a head- n collision?" Then they showed a crash dummy having its head crushed by a steering wheel in a collision, and said, "The steering wheel!" Those were scare tactics, but no one complained because they were legitimate scare tactics. That’s what happens in a head-on collision if you are foolish enough to not put on a seat belt. To warn of hell is fearful, but it is absolutely legitimate, because the Bible says that it is a fearful thing for a sinner to fall into the hands of the living God
No. To discuss one's thoughts is fine. To disagree is fine. To proselytize or preach is not so fine. That is what is of concern. Besides, this is the Christianity forum. Most of us are there already. :D

You started out by stating this is what you teach on the street to non-believers or unknowns. Path of One said he dis-agreed with the method, because he sees God in a gentler light.

There was a time in my life, when someone told me I'd be damned if I didn't convert...and at that point in my life, I spat back that I was already damned, and at the time, I meant it. Perhaps the person set wheels in motion in my mind, but I wasn't ready to hear more hell than I was already in, and I didn't fit the proud, nor the poor in heart. I was just plain angry. So, you message might have gone right over my head.

Some may need to hear about hell, some may need to hear about heaven, and some may simply need to hear that the Lord is right there, ready to catch them, if they'd only take a chance and trust, or there to take the burdens off their shoulders if they would let Him.

That's all. Jesus has a different message for different people. But I do like the way you broke the ten commandments down. Can't argue with the basic facts...;)

v/r

Q
 
I apologies if I started to stray off the subject of the topic when i started talking about Hell, The Topic is are the Ten Commandments important?..... my answer to that was yes they are important as Galations 3:24 says

"The Law was our School master to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith"

so here are some quotes from some of the great preachers of old

John Wycliffe, the Bible translator. He said, “The highest service to which a man may obtain on earth is to preach the law of God.”

“If you do not use the law in gospel proclamation, you will fill the church with false converts.”

Martin Luther: He said, “Satan, the god of all dissension stirs up daily new sects. And last of all which of all others I should never have foreseen or once suspected, he has raised up a sect such as teach that men should not be terrified by the law, but gently exhorted by the preaching of the grace of Christ.”

John Wesley said to a friend, in writing to a young evangelist, “Preach 90 percent law and 10 percent grace.”

Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones: "The trouble with people who are not seeking for a Savior, and for salvation, is that they do not understand the nature of sin. It is the peculiar function of the Law to bring such an understanding to a man’s mind and conscience. That is why great evangelical preachers 300 years ago in the time of the Puritans, and 200 years ago in the time of Whitefield and others, always engaged in what they called a preliminary 'Law work.'”

John Newton (wrote "Amazing Grace"): “Ignorance of the nature and design of the Law is at the bottom of most religious mistakes.”

Charles Spurgeon: “I do not believe that any man can preach the gospel who does not preach the Law.” Then he warns, “Lower the Law and you dim the light by which man perceives his guilt; this is a very serious loss to the sinner rather than a gain; for it lessens the likelihood of his conviction and conversion. I say you have deprived the gospel of its ablest auxiliary [its most powerful weapon] when you have set aside the Law. You have taken away from it the schoolmaster that is to bring men to Christ . . . They will never accept grace till they tremble before a just and holy Law. Therefore the Law serves a most necessary purpose, and it must not be removed from its place.”

Jonathan Edwards: “The only way we can know whether we are sinning is by knowing His Moral Law.”

George Whitefield said to his hearers, “First, then, before you can speak peace to your hearts, you must be made to see, made to feel, made to weep over, made to bewail, your actual transgressions against the Law of God.”

John Wesley: "...it is the ordinary method of the Spirit of God to convict sinners by the Law. It is this which, being set home on the conscience, generally breaketh the rocks in pieces. It is more especially this part of the Word of God which is quick and powerful, full of life and energy and sharper than any two-edged sword."

Martin Luther: "The first duty of the Gospel preacher is to declare God's Law and show the nature of sin."
 
Back
Top