Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: lohr@wsqtb8.crd.ge.com (P. J. Lohr) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Eternal Law of God (Why the Mosaic Law) Message-ID: Date: 16 Oct 89 04:19:23 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: General Electric Corp. R&D, Schenectady, NY Lines: 56 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu I almost hate to jump into the fray, but someone has to come to the defense of those who agree with both sides of the arguement, and see the only disagreement as one of emphasis. I believe that the 10 commandments are both a binding moral code, separate from the ceremonial law given as part of the Mosaic covenant (which has been superseded in Christ), AND that we are not bound by any law other than that which is written on our heart. The reason I can say these seemingly contracdictory statements is that I believe that the moral code of the 10 commandments and the law written on our hearts (or DNA) are one in the same. The difference in how to treat the Sabbath "law" comes in how literally we take the written commandment. The key to the correct balance is in Matt. 5:21-22, 27-28 (and other places) where Jesus teaches us that in God's eyes, to lust (which the commandments don't mention) is actually no different than adultry and hatred, no different than murder. In this Jesus shows us that God is not so much concerned with physical acts as the attitudes of our heart. How this relates to the Sabbath is that we ARE commanded to set time apart in our week to rest, and seek and worship God. No one can disagree that this is also written on the hearts of all believers. However, based on Jesus's teachings I must believe that God is concerned that this is a desire of our hearts and not that we strickly adhere to a particular time schedule (Jewish Sabbath). Phil Lohr lohr@crd.ge.com uunet!crd.ge.com!lohr [hmmm.... Yes, we haven't heard that much from the middle ground. There are certainly two "pure" positions. One says that all of the specific commands of the Law still apply. The other says that "anything goes". As far as I can tell, almost no one in this group has taken either of those extreme positions. By and large the "legalists" manage to limit their observance to some portion of the Law, e.g. the 10 Commandments. And I don't think we've heard from any true "libertines". Even those who reject the Law's specific authority seem to recognize that there are moral principles that are constant, and that the Law is one embodiment of them. So we've been hearing from people who I would more or less characterize as "semi-legalists" and "semi-libertines". In fact I suspect that your position is more common than the "semi-libertine" position among those who worship on Sunday. Actually, I'm tempted to classify your position as "semi-legalist", and say that you simply draw the line between the moral and ceremonial Law differently than those who keep the Sabbath. A common exegesis is to say that the specific institution of worship on Saturday was part of the Jewish ceremonial law, and passes away together with circumcision, the kosher laws, etc. However the general principle of regular worship is part of the moral law, which is still binding. In general, those who adopt your position tend to use the term Sabbath to refer to Christian worship on Sunday, because they see it as carrying out the intent of the Sabbath law. Those who reject the Law generally also reject the use of the term Sabbath to refer to Christian worship, preferring "the Lord's Day". --clh]