From the Law to Grace

There are many many moral codes in existence.
Christians and believers in Judaism hold the law of Moses in the Jewish Tanakh ( or Christian Old Testament) to be the, let's put it this way - "the mother of all moral codes in history".

Maybe my Hebrew friends would object. But anyway I am trying to convey that the Law of Moses is the rules and commandments delivered to the world by God Himself.

It has its functions.
It has various aspects to it according to the Bible itself.

It has what we might call a positive optimistic side.
And it has what we might say a negative pessimistic side too.

It is a nuanced matter that is not always cut and dry.
I'll take some (some) questions on its relationship to grace in the Bible. I'll watch some (some) discussion of it with interest in what some (some) opinions are out there.

I am ready to be corrected if I offer some of my own, which seem not too good.

Originally posted by @sonship
There are many many moral codes in existence.
Christians and believers in Judaism hold the law of Moses in the Jewish Tanakh ( or Christian Old Testament) to be the, let's put it this way - "the mother of all moral codes in history".

Maybe my Hebrew friends would object. But anyway I am trying to convey that the Law of Moses is the rules and commandm ...[text shortened]... out there.

I am ready to be corrected if I offer some of my own, which seem not too good.

It's amusing how the God haters will challenge the morality of the Bible at every turn but can't seem to offer a better alternative moral code.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
It's amusing how the God haters will challenge the morality of the Bible at every turn but can't seem to offer a better alternative moral code.

Atheists are constantly offering a better moral code: marriage equality for gays, gender equality for women, etc.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
It's amusing how the God haters will challenge the morality of the Bible at every turn but can't seem to offer a better alternative moral code.

Fallen man has a problem with being accountable to God.
This was true even before God gave the ten commandments.

Cain, the second generation of human beings, retorted to God that he was not responsible for his brother. That is the brother he just murdered.

When the vertical relationship towards God is gone immediately the horizontal relationship with fellowmen is damaged.

"Then Jehovah said to Cain, Where is Abel your brother? And he said, I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper?" (Gen 4:9)

it is interesting that the first two commandments respectively involve the love of God supremely and the love of one's neighbor as one loves himself. Before the official giving of these two topmost commandments, it seems the same was written on man's heart intuitively.

I think God asked Cain because of the conscience of Cain, a conscience that Cain suppressed and would not listen to.

One thing the Bible makes clear - whether the code is delivered by God, or the code is written on the heart of man, or the code is arrived at collectively by the good thinking people in a culture - man fails it. However the standard comes - man is eventually a transgressor.

Originally posted by @sonship
Fallen man has a problem with being accountable to God.
This was true even before God gave the ten commandments.

Cain, the second generation of human beings, retorted to God that he was not responsible for his brother. That is the brother he just murdered.

When the vertical relationship towards God is gone immediately the horizontal relationship wi ...[text shortened]... ople in a culture - man fails it. However the standard comes - man is eventually a transgressor.

An atheist doesn't 'hate' God, an atheist 'doesn't believe' in God. (There truly is a difference).

It is this 'not believing' in God that makes 'being accountable' to him a nonsense. 'The problem' is that I don't believe God exists and that far from 'falling' mankind is on the ascendancy.

Originally posted by @vivify
Atheists are constantly offering a better moral code: marriage equality for gays, gender equality for women, etc.

‘Better’ according to which objective standard?

Originally posted by @vivify
Atheists are constantly offering a better moral code: marriage equality for gays, gender equality for women, etc.

Atheists are constantly offering a better moral code: marriage equality for gays, gender equality for women, etc.

i don't think this is an improvement over the ordination of God for marriage. I think it is capitulating to the seemingly inevitable progression of unbridled greediness in fornication.
I think this is only apparently "progressive". it is mistakingly viewing degradation as "progress."

If I pull the plug out of the AC current for my refrigerator, some of the food will soon rot.
Not being able to arrest this process of rotting I may instead wish to view the rotting food as it making "progress".

I think unbridled greediness to the point of making sexual fulfillment an idol leads to "coupling" sexually without regard to nature's design of the complimentary physical characteristics of the two sexes.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
‘Better’ according to which objective standard?

According to the standard that pummeling rocks at another human being for no other reason than sexual preference, is objectively wrong...though you obviously disagree.

Originally posted by @vivify
According to the standard that pummeling rocks at another human being for no other reason than sexual preference, is objectively wrong...though you obviously disagree.

We may disagree on what makes a standard objective. Why do you think it’s objectively wrong?

Gender Equality:

Notice the Old Testament's frequent placing men and women purposely in the same status.

Genesis 1:27 - "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; MALE AND FEMALE He created them" It didn't just mention MALE.

Genesis 2:24 - "For this reason a man shall leave his FATHER AND HIS MOTHER ..." [/b]. Chauvinism probably would have just said 'Don't leave your FATHER, without mentioning the female MOTHER too.

Exodus 20:12 - "Honor your father AND YOUR MOTHER ..." . Bigotry probably would have just said "Honor your male father" without equal status being given to the female mother also.

Leviticus 10:3 - 'Every one of you shall reverence his MOTHER and his father"
Male chauvinism probably would have just said "Make sure you reverence your MALE FATHER." The female mother is set in equal rank of deserving of reverence.

Proverbs 6:20 - "My son, observe the commandment of your father and do not forsake the teaching OF YOUR MOTHER." Male chauvinism would probably only mentioned the commandments of the man. Equal weight is given here to the teaching of mom.

Proverbs 19:26 - "He who assaults his father and drives HIS MOTHER away is a shameful and disgraceful son." Male chauvinism would probably downplayed the shame of hurting the MOTHER. The word of God places them both on equal status here too.

Proverbs 23:22 - "Listen to your father who begot you, and do not despise YOUR MOTHER when she is old." The female mother is placed on equal status of deserving respect and attention.

Proverbs 23:25 - "Let your father AND YOUR MOTHER be glad, and let HER rejoice who gave birth to you." Male chauvinism probably would only have considered making the MALE glad as important. Here the WOMAN's satisfaction has equal status.

Song of Songs 6:3 - "I am my beloved's and my beloved's is mine" . The ownership in the love relationship is completely mutual. It is not just the man owns the woman. The woman also has ownership over the man.

Originally posted by @sonship
There are many many moral codes in existence.
Christians and believers in Judaism hold the law of Moses in the Jewish Tanakh ( or Christian Old Testament) to be the, let's put it this way - "the mother of all moral codes in history".

.

How many of the 613 commandments do you obey?

Just the ones you like?

Originally posted by @sonship

Atheists are constantly offering a better moral code: marriage equality for gays, gender equality for women, etc.

i don't think this is an improvement over the ordination of God for marriage. I think it is capitulating to the seemingly inevitable progression of unbridled greediness in fornication.
I think this is only apparently "prog ...[text shortened]... ithout regard to nature's design of the complimentary physical characteristics of the two sexes.

The problem with what you say is that you have no reason for objecting to homosexuality other than your beliefs. You can't actually name what's wrong with homosexuality, or how it harms another person. No specifics, only vague generalities. To object to something without a reason is senseless.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
We may disagree on what makes a standard objective. Why do you think it’s objectively wrong?

Give a plain yes or no, and don't dodge by tap-dancing around a straightforward question: is stoning gays wrong? Yes or no?

Originally posted by @wolfgang59
How many of the 613 commandments do you obey?

Just the ones you like?

As a new covenant saint I am under grace.
The title of the thread hints strongly at this "From Law to Grace".

In Romans the Apostle Paul writes that the just requirement of the law is fulfilled in us who walk by the Spirit.

"For that which the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending His own Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin and concerning sin, condemned sin in the flesh,

That the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the spirit." (Rom. 8:3,4)

I am in the process of honing in my skills to WALK step by step by the Spirit of Christ Who is mingled with my human spirit.

"He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit." ( 1 Cor. 6:17)

Much needs to be said about this.