International Bible Teaching Ministries
Ten Commandments
Question 1: Does the New Testament clearly state that Christians are no longer under the Ten Commandments?
ANSWER: Yes! In addition to those passages mentioned heretofore, Paul says in Romans Chapter seven, that Christians are "dead to the law" (vs.4) and that they are "delivered (discharged) from the law" (Vs.6). In Verse seven, he tells us that the law we are "dead to" and "delivered from" is the law that says, "Thou shalt not covet!" The law that says, "Thou shalt not covet" clearly refers to the Ten Commandments! In fact, "Thou shalt not covet is the tenth Commandment (Exodus 20:17)!
Question 2: Were the Ten Commandments reinstated under the New Testament?
ANSWER: No! Neither the "Ten Commandment Law," nor any other "Law" was reinstated under the New Testament. The New Testament is a totally "new" law, having replaced totally the "old" law! It is true that the New Testament encompasses and includes the moral principles inherent in "nine" of the "ten" Commandments. However, these principles are applicable to Christians today because they are a part of the New Testament; not because they were a part of the Old Testament! It is very significant that the fourth of the Ten Commandments, "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy," is strikingly omitted from the New Testament!
Question 3: Do both the Old and New Testaments discuss doing away with the Sabbath?
ANSWER: Yes! First of all, Paul says in Romans, Chapter seven, that Christians are "dead to the law" (Vs.4) and that they are "delivered (discharged) from the law" (Vs.6). In Verse seven, he tells us that the law we are "dead to" and "delivered from" is the law that says, "Thou shalt not covet!" The law that says, "Thou shalt not covet" clearly refers to the Ten Commandments! In fact, "Thou shalt not covet is the tenth Commandment (Exodus 20:17)! Therefore, we are “dead to” and “delivered from” the Ten Commandment Law!
Again, the Hebrew writer says, in Chapter 8:5-13, that “the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt . . .” Note in Verse five, the writer refers to the “pattern shewed to thee in the mount.” Then, he says, beginning in Verse eight, ‘I will make a new covenant, not like the one I made with them when I brought them out of Egypt.’ Clearly, reference is being made in this passage to the Ten Commandment Law, because it was the Law/Covenant made with Israel ‘in the mount, in the day when God brought them out of Egypt.’ This passage in Hebrews shows the fulfillment of the prophecy of a New Covenant made under the Old Testament in Jeremiah 31:31-34. So both the Old and New Testaments attest to the fact that we today are no longer bound to keep the Sabbath Day! In fact, this is not the only place in the Old Testament where such prophecies are made.
Consider, also, the prophecy in Amos 8:1-10. In Verse two, the Lord says, “The end is come upon my people of Israel: I will not again pass by them any more.” Then in Verse five, the question is asked, ‘When will the New Moon (religious holy day) and the Sabbath be gone?’ The answer to this question is given in Verse eight: “And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord God, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in a clear day.” So, from this passage, we learn that the Sabbath would be no more in the day that God would cause the sun to go down at noon! When did that happen? It happened on the day our Lord was crucified (Luke 23:44), beginning with the sixth hour. The Jewish day started at six o’clock (six hours) in the morning, therefore, the sun went down precisely at noon as prophesied in the book of Amos. This is exactly what the New Testament teaches in Ephesians 2:13-16 and Colossians 2:14, i.e., the Old Testament was taken out of the way at the Cross!
Zechariah 11:10-14 prophesied the same truth. In Verse five, God says, “I will break my covenant (Deuteronomy 5:2) which I had made with all the people.” When would it be broken? Verses twelve and thirteen: In that day when, “they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver” (Matthew 26:14-15 and Matthew 27:1-6). The covenant that God had made with Israel in Horeb was the Ten Commandments! (Mt. Sinai was a mountain within the mountain chain called Horeb).
Many other passages also deal with the fact that the Old Testament was taken out of the way, e.g., II Corinthians 3; Galatians 2:16-21; Galatians 3, 4, & 5; Ephesians 2:11-22; Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 7:12; Hebrews 8:7; Hebrews 9:15-17; and Hebrews 10:1-4. The SDA contradicts every one of the above passages when they read into the passages of inquiry that we today are to keep the Sabbath Day! They pronounce sentence upon those who do not keep the Sabbath in violation of Colossians 2:16 which says, “Let no man therefore judge (pronounce sentence on) you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days.”
Question 4: Does James 2:10-12 force us to keep the Ten Commandments (Decalogue)? If not what are the commandments spoken of?
ANSWER: No! Neither this passage, nor any other forces Christians to keep the Ten Commandments. Note that James is writing to the twelve tribes scattered abroad (1:1); to those familiar with the Old Ten Commandment Law. Beginning in Chapter two, he begins dealing with relationships between men. He instructs in Verse one, that, as Christians, they (and us) should not exhibit “respect of persons.” Then in the balance of the chapter he is going to elaborate on this particular matter. It is important for us to see, as we start, that the commandments of Verse eleven are those which have to do with man’s duty to man; which is the subject at hand. In Verse eight, he talks about the “Royal Law” and describes it as follows: “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” This “Royal Law” is an eternal law having first been given in Leviticus 19:18 and then incorporated by Jesus into the “Perfect Law of Liberty” (Matthew 22:34-40; Luke 10:26-28); the New Testament. He, as well, incorporated the two Old Testament commandments mentioned in Verse eleven into the New Testament, but with deeper meaning than in the old: (Thou shalt not kill - Matthew 5:21-24; Thou shalt not commit adultery – Matthew 5:31-31). In this deeper meaning, we can see the “Royal Law” being elaborated upon more fully in the statement of our Lord, “But I say unto you” (Matthew 5:22 & 32). James is not (in Chapter 2) suggesting that Christians are to keep these two commandments (or any of the others) as a part of the Old Ten Commandment Law. He is simply teaching Christians under the New Testament how they are to conduct themselves by using the Old Testament as an example. This teaching principle is proper and taught in Romans 15:4 and I Corinthians 10:11. The “law” that James is talking about in Verses 9 and 10 is the “Royal Law” discussed in Verse eight. And he is simply saying in these two verses, that if one commits the sin of “respect of persons,” he is guilty of all the law; i.e., all parts of the eternal “Royal Law” governing proper relationships between men, which includes the sins of murder and adultery! So, he looks to two of the Ten Commandments and those who lived under them by way of example, teaching us today that, even though we might refrain from murder and adultery, if we show respect of persons we, nonetheless, are found guilty of violating the “Royal Law,” just as were those who lived under the Ten Commandments. Another valid point made in the text is that when we violate the laws governing man’s duty to man, and thereby become guilty of all governing law, we are also in violation of the commandments relating to man’s duty to God.
Now, a very important consideration in support of the above discussion is found in Verse twelve of Chapter two! This verse is always overlooked by the SDA! Here he says, “So do ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.” The word “so” is an adverb that means “in the way shown;” “according to the example set forth;” or “in the way expressed and understood.” Therefore, James is saying something like this: ‘I have shown you an eternal principle based on an eternal Old Testament example; you follow that eternal example as they that shall be judged, not by the Old Ten Commandment Law, but by the Law of Liberty! The Perfect Law of Liberty (James 1:25), by which Christians will be judged, is that engrafted word which is able to save our souls (James 1:21; Romans 1:16); the Gospel of Jesus Christ!
Question 5: Are the Ten Commandments settled in Heaven (Revelation 11:19?
ANSWER: The phrase “settled in heaven” is from Psalms 119:89: “Forever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.” This phrase simply means that God’s purposes are determined and finalized in heaven. Nothing more, nothing less!
If it is being argued that the ark of Revelation 11:19, which was seen by John in the heavenly temple, holds the Ten Commandments and is, therefore, binding upon people today, then even more clearly seen is the irrational lengths to which the SDA will go to support a false doctrine. This passage is totally symbolic! For any to suggest that the Ten Commandments on two tables of physical stone is literally and physically in a symbolic ark, in a non-physical Heaven, is foolishness. The Hebrew writer says that “Christ is not entered into the holy places [made with hands;] but into Heaven [non-physical] itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us” (Hebrews 9:24). One cannot take something more out of a passage than that which is symbolized therein! Neither can one take something they read into a symbolic passage and make that binding upon people today! Common sense tells us that if one “could” do so with the Ten Commandments, then he would be ethically and scripturally bound (Galatians 5:3) to take everything else with it, including the punishments (even stoning to death) appointed for violating them, which the SDA scrupulously avoids! And if he were to take all things of the temple of the Old Testament, and that for which it stood, and, then, make all of it applicable to us today, (as the SDA wants to do with the Ten Commandments) then we would have to live totally under the Old Testament, including its punishments, and there would be no need for the New Testament! There logic is faulty, to say the least! Revelation 11:19 is but a description of the dwelling place of God which symbolically foreshadowed the church of Christ in which God now dwells (II Corinthians 6:16).
Question 6: Did not the Sabbath exist before the Ten Commandments were given (Genesis 2:1-3; Exodus 16:23-30).
ANSWER: The fact of God’s sanctifying of the Sabbath at the creation (Genesis 2:1-3) does not mean that the commandment to keep the Sabbath Day holy was given or made known to man as a legal institution at this point. That such is the case is a matter of conjecture by those who espouse that Sabbath-keeping is for Christians today! Speaking of God, Nehemiah said in Chapter nine, Verses 13-14, “Thou camest down also upon Mount Sinai, and spakest with them (the children of Israel) from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments: “And madest known unto them thy holy Sabbath, . . .” To suggest that the commandment to keep the Sabbath Day was given and known as a legal institution by man from the events of Genesis 2:1-3 is to suggest that the Holy Spirit made a mistake in Nehemiah 9:13-14! We must be careful not to read more into a passage than is intended by the inspired writer in order to support a preconceived notion or doctrine.
Exodus 16:23-30 indicates clearly that, although the seventh day was referred to in this passage, it was not previously observed in any special way. If it was previously recognized in any way, why the need for the instructions of Exodus 16? They would already have been doing what they were now being instructed to do! The gift of manna was that which opened the way for the sanctification of the Sabbath by the law that would afterwards be given. On the sixth day of the week the quantity yielded was twice as much, i.e., two omers for one (one person). When Moses was informed of this, he said to them, "Let tomorrow be a rest, a holy Sabbath to the Lord." They were to bake and boil as much as was needed for the day, and keep what was left over for the next day, for on the seventh they would find none in the field. They did this, and what was kept for the seventh day, neither stank nor bred worms. It is perfectly clear from this event, that the Israelites were not acquainted with any sabbatical observance at that time, but that, while the way was practically opened here, it was through the Ten Commandments that it was raised into a legal institution (Exodus 20:8ff). Thus, the record of Nehemiah, i.e., that “God (at Sinai) spake with them from heaven and gave them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments,” clearly providing, thereby, the legalities that would from that time be binding upon them, including the fourth commandment to “Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy.” Note the support of this fact provided in Deuteronomy 5:2-3, “The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb (Mt. Sinai was a mountain within the mountain chain called Horeb). The Lord made NOT this covenant (including the fourth commandment) with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us alive here today.”
Question 7: Does the Bible teach that the Judgment laws alone could give life and/or were nailed to the Cross (Romans 10:5; Ezekiel 20:11; Galatians 3:12; Galatians 3:21); that the Ten Commandments are still in force today?
ANSWER: I am not sure what “Judgment laws” mean. Some differentiate by making a distinction between what they call the “ceremonial” part of the law and the “moral” part of the law (including the Ten Commandments). This is usually done to support the erroneous doctrine of present day Sabbath-keeping. However, no matter what distinction one may desire to make, it is the case that the Old Testament in its entirety was nailed to the cross of Christ! Ezekiel 20:12 is simply stating that those who lived under the Old Law would receive the benefits of that law, if they did that which was commanded. In the context of Romans 10:4-6, Paul is contrasting the righteousness of works under the Old Law with the righteousness of faith under the New Law. He says (Verse four) that “Christ is the end (completion) of the Old Law (not a part of it, but all of it) that He might bring those who were under the Old Law to righteousness through belief in Him. In Verse five, we are told that it was necessary for Christ to end the Old Law, because righteousness under the Old Law could not be realized unless one kept that Law perfectly. Paul is not suggesting here or anywhere else that Christians are to “keep the Sabbath Day holy.” Neither is he suggesting that the Ten Commandments were not nailed to the cross.
Paul tells us very clearly in, Romans 7:1-7, that we are no longer under the Ten Commandments. He states that the Christians are "dead to the law" (Vs.4) and that they are "delivered (discharged) from the law" (Vs.6). In Verse seven, he tells us that the law we are "dead to" and "delivered from" is the law that says, "Thou shalt not covet!" The law that says, "Thou shalt not covet" clearly refers to the Ten Commandments! In fact, "Thou shalt not covet” is the tenth Commandment (Exodus 20:17)! Therefore, it follows that one cannot “die” to the law that says, “Thou shalt not covet” without also dying to the law that says, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy,” because both are contained in the same, identical Ten Commandment law! Further, we must recognize that neither the "Ten Commandment Law," nor any other "Law" was reinstated under the New Testament. The New Testament is a totally "new" law, having replaced totally the "old" law (Hebrews 7:12)! Nonetheless, it is true that the New Testament encompasses and includes the moral principles inherent in "nine" of the "ten" Commandments. However, these principles are applicable to Christians today because they are a part of the New Testament; not because they were a part of the Old Testament! It is very significant that the fourth of the Ten Commandments, "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy," is strikingly omitted from the New Testament!
Galatians 3:10-13 and Galatians 3:21-23 teach the same thing as Romans 10:4-6, i.e., that man could not be justified through the Old Law, because man could not fulfill “all things which are written in the book of Law” (Verse 10). This fact was the curse of the Old Law that resulted in all men under that Law being cursed. In order to remove that curse, so that man might be redeemed and justified, Christ become a “curse for us: for it is written, cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree” (Verse 13). The Law that is specifically being discussed here is that Law which was given 430 years after the promise (Galatians 3:14) was made to Abraham by God (Galatians 3:17). We learn from Exodus 12:40-41 that the 430 years refers to that time spent by the children of Israel in Egypt. The Law that was given at the end of the 430 years (“when God took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt” – Hebrews 8:9) was the Ten Commandments. If the Ten Commandments were not a part of that which was taken out of the way by the death of Christ on the cross, then it is the case that we are still under the curse of the Law and that Christ’s death did not fulfill its purpose! But there is no doubt that the Law (including Sabbath-keeping) was added only till (until) the Seed (Christ – Verse 16) should come (Verse 19).
In Galatians 3:21, Paul is only saying that the promise first given to Abraham (Verse 14) was still valid (Verse 29), even though the Old Law was fulfilled and taken out of the way; that the doing away with that Law in no way affected the promise of God, since it was not given under that Law, but 430 years before it was added. In the latter part of the verse, Paul implies that there would have been no need for a New Law if the righteousness of faith could have come by the Old Law. In Verse 24, we learn that it was not the purpose of the Old Law to so do. It was simply a “schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by (His system of) faith. But after that (system of) faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster, i.e., the Old Law.”
Question 8: Does Galatians 3:10 speak of the abolition of the Ten Commandments. If yes, did Moses write them in the book (Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, 25)?
ANSWER: Yes, but not only the Ten Commandments! Galatians 3:10 refers to all of the Old Testament, including the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament that were written by Moses), which in turn includes the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20: 1-17). The Ten Commandments were first given on two tablets of stone, but, as we can now see in our Bibles today, were included in the books written by Moses (Deuteronomy 31:24).
Question 9: Does Revelation 11:19 indicate that the Ten Commandments are preserved in heaven for all eternity? Do you suppose that the Sabbath Commandment has been deleted from the Ten Commandments in the Ark of the Covenant in heaven?
ANSWER: Revelation 11:19 does not indicate or imply that the Ten Commandments are for all people for all time! Heaven does not contain things that are physical, not the actual ark, nor the actual tables of stone. The book of Revelation was written in symbolic language (Revelation 1:1), i.e., where one thing stood for another. To fully understand the symbols in this passage one must first be familiar with, at least, Chapter nine of the book of Hebrews. Here a comparison is made of the blood sacrifices made under the Old Law with the blood sacrifice of Christ made under the New Law! The temple of God in the subject passage does not refer to the actual temple, but rather refers to the church, which is the temple of God (I Corinthians 3:16) that was opened in Heaven. The blood sacrifice offered by Christ was for the purchase of that church (Acts 20:28), the only institution wherein the blood of Christ is accessed and applied! The old actual Mosaical Ark of the Covenant was kept in the Most Holy Place. Atop this Ark was the mercy seat upon which the blood of animals was sprinkled by the high priest once a year for the sins of the people! Christ symbolically entered the symbolic Most Holy Place as our high priest and sprinkled His blood symbolically upon the mercy seat of the symbolic Ark of the Covenant, once for all (Hebrews 9:11- 10:12).
You are wresting the scripture by carrying the symbolism of this passage too far in order to support a false doctrine. It is totally improper to take a highly symbolic passage and base a doctrine on it when such doctrine is clearly refuted in non-symbolic passages. For example, none of the SDA’s has ever tried to convince me that Romans 7:4-7 does not teach that we are no longer under the Ten Commandments. Rather than taking this ethical and proper approach, they often resort to obscure symbolic passages to try to support their irrational teachings! It is the case that if Revelation 11:19 teaches that we are still under the Ten Commandments, then it must be the case that Romans 7:4-7 is in error. Which position will you take?
Question 10: Did Jesus command us to keep the Ten Commandments (Matthew 19:16-21; Luke 18:18-21; Mark 10:19-21)?
ANSWER: No! He did not! He commanded the rich young ruler who lived under the Old Testament to do so. You and I no longer live under the Old Law. It was taken out of the way at the cross of Christ (Romans 7:4-7; II Corinthians 3:1-18; Galatians 3:19-29; Ephesians 2:12-22; Colossians 2:14-16; Hebrews 7:12; Hebrews 8:7-13!
Question 11: The Ten Commandments were given to the children of Israel only. What was our law from then till now?
ANSWER: The laws that God gave to man before the Ten Commandments were given directly to the patriarchs (the heads) of each family. This is referred to as “patriarchal law.” This law continued until the cross at which time both Jew and Gentile were brought into one body under the law of Jesus Christ. It is most likely that Cornelius (Acts 10 & 11) worshipped God under this law. He was an uncircumcised Gentile (Acts 11:2) and, therefore, was not a proselyte of the Jews under the Old Testament. Certainly, he was not a Christian under the New Testament before the accounts of his conversion. Since God has only accepted worship under three laws, i.e., Patriarchy, Old Testament, and the New Testament, and it being shown that he could not have worshipped God under either the Old or New testament, we must gather that he did so under Patriarchy. The answer to your question, following this line of reasoning, would be, had we lived as Gentiles before the cross, that we could have worshipped God under the law of Patriarchy, or we could have been proselyted to Judaism.