The Commandments of Christ

[etz]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

The Sacrament includes the word "testify" which is in the definition of "oath" so why is it not an oath in your view?

3 O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it; that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him, and keep his commandments which he hath given them, that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen. 

2 O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee, in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them; that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, etz said:

I never asked if you keep the commandments.  I haven't a need to.  Your service to God in obedience to his commandments is between you and God.

I didn't say you asked me to keep the commandments.  I am talking about the interpretation of the commandments you are invoking. I am trying to convey to you what you are communicating and how it doesn't make sense.

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, etz said:

3 O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it; that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him, and keep his commandments which he hath given them, that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen. 

2 O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee, in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them; that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.

Not saying anything new to convince me otherwise...look there is "witness"...did mess up on "testify", but "witness" is still there right smack in the center.

(see my edit)

Edited January 16, 2017 by Calm

[etz]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Whether or not you can actually follow the commandments as you understand them does have bearing on whether you have done anything to demonstrate your interpretation is valid.

Jesus and Joseph taught much by example.  Your example so far comes across as one of pride and carelessness of those you claim to want to teach since you are refusing to help them understand.

Calmoriah,

You clearly do not believe me.  That's why you keep asking if I keep the commandments; apparently the first few times I directly affirmed that I did in response to your requests did not suffice.  And you clearly are hostile towards me just by that evidence, but also by your multitudinous attempts to make appear a charge of hypocrisy against me.  You judge me according to your own heart - that's the upshot of Romans 2:1.

The first test of discipleship is to be believing - after all, I have done you no harm.

And, secondly, even if you could make appear a charge of hypocrisy against me, the Lord's commandment are what they are.

[etz]

Just now, Calm said:

Not saying anything new to convince me otherwise...look there is "witness"...did mess up on "testify", but "witness" is still there right smack in the center.

That was the point of referring you to Webster's 1828 dictionary definition of witness, which lacks any reference to oaths.

[etz]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

I didn't say you asked me to keep the commandments.  I am talking about the interpretation of the commandments you are invoking. I am trying to convey to you what you are communicating and how it doesn't make sense.

Oddly, that has not been the point I've taken from your continued postings.

[etz]

16 minutes ago, Calm said:

Sharing how you are able to implement God's teachings in your life may encourage others to do the same or at least help them understand you are not a hypocrite if they don't how it can be done.

Which is, in fact, the only reason I answered.  Imagine if the situation were reversed, how you might feel and respond.

Edited January 16, 2017 by etz

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, etz said:

Calmoriah,

You clearly do not believe me.  That's why you keep asking if I keep the commandments; apparently the first few times I directly affirmed that I did in response to your requests did not suffice.  And you clearly are hostile towards me just by that evidence, but also by your multitudinous attempts to make appear a charge of hypocrisy against me.  You judge me according to your own heart - that's the upshot of Romans 2:1.

The first test of discipleship is to be believing - after all, I have done you no harm.

And, secondly, even if you could make appear a charge of hypocrisy against me, the Lord's commandment are what they are.

I don't see how you can do it because you have not share that with us, I do not not believe you or believe you; I can't get to that point because you do not teach, but make vague statements and point to scripture as if no one has ever interpreted it before in multiple ways.

You are bearing false witness again in claiming I am hostile.  I have not and am not making a charge of hypocrisy against you, but simply asking you to be the example that someone who takes on the mantle to teach the words of Christ needs to be to open the eyes of those they are trying to teach.

You have certainly done me no harm.  I have said nothing to suggest that you have.  But if you truly want to do good, then why don't you try to actually teach?

Edited January 16, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, etz said:

Oddly, that has not been the point I've taken from your continued postings.

Good thing I haven't claimed to be here to teach then.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, etz said:

Which is, in fact, the only reason I answered.  Imagine if the situation were reversed, how you might feel and respond.

I wouldn't appoint myself into a position as teacher unless I was willing to open myself up to actually teach in every way possible, especially not as a teacher of Christ's words.  If I make a claim I do something, I generally provide extensive detail on how I do it as demonstrated by way too many epic long posts on this board.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

I am not just asking if you keep the commandments, I am asking how you manage to do so.  There is a huge difference.

[etz]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

I don't see how you can do it because you have not share that with us, I do not not believe you or believe you; I can't get to that point because you do not teach, but make vague statements and point to scripture as if no one has ever interpreted it before in multiple ways.

You are bearing false witness again in claiming I am hostile.  I have not and am not making a charge of hypocrisy against you, but simply asking you to be the example that someone who takes on the mantle to teach the words of Christ needs to be to open the eyes of those they are trying to teach.

You have certainly done me no harm.  I have said nothing to suggest that you have.  But if you truly want to do good, then why don't you try to actually teach?

How many interpretations are there of "give to every man that asketh thee?"

How many interpretations are there of "of him that taketh away thy goods, ask them not again?"

And so on down the line.

And as to whether I am bearing false witness in noting your obvious and openly hostile conduct towards me, well, I'm not worried about it.  I explained the public evidence that formed the basis for the assessment.  There are degrees of hostility, to be sure, but unbelief is one sure sign.

I'm afraid it is very hard to teach with hostile hecklers which have no interest in keeping the Lord's commandments driving the topic away from the commandments and towards my observance of them.  That is, of course, the point of heckling.

If you were interested in the commandments, you would ask relevant questions about the commandments, and not about me.

Edited January 16, 2017 by etz

[etz]

Just exactly how many "interpretations" have there really been of the Lord's commandments?
Let's look at Luke 6:30.

Quote

KJV

Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

NKJV

“Give to everyone who asks of you. And from him who takes away your goods do not ask them back.

NLT

Give to anyone who asks; and when things are taken away from you, don’t try to get them back.

NIV

Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.

ESV

Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back.

HCSB

Give to everyone who asks you, and from one who takes your things, don’t ask for them back.

NASB

“Give to everyone who asks of you, and whoever takes away what is yours, do not demand it back.

NET

Give to everyone who asks you, and do not ask for your possessions back from the person who takes them away.

RSV

Give to every one who begs from you; and of him who takes away your goods do not ask them again.

ASV

Give to every one that asketh thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

YLT

'And to every one who is asking of thee, be giving; and from him who is taking away thy goods, be not asking again;

DBY

To every one that asks of thee, give; and from him that takes away what is thine, ask it not back.

WEB

Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods, ask them not again.

HNV

Give to everyone who asks you, and don't ask him who takes away your goods to give them back again.

 

 

There doesn't seem to be much variety of meaning. So, I ask again: what is the principal objection to keeping the commandments of Christ?

Edited January 16, 2017 by etz

[Calm]

"How many interpretations are there of..."

Lots (interpretations that is).  Because it matters how one goes about doing that, not just the basic definition of what, but the how.

Let me use an example.  I have a sleep disorder.  In the past, this would me I would be awake all night, tossing and turning almost till sunrise and sometimes past until my body calmed down.

Some people trying to help would tell me "I can get to sleep when my body wants to be restless.  You can do it as well if you just want to enough".  And I would "great!  No one wants to more than I do.  Please tell me how to do that."  And they would say "just hold yourself still".  "Okay, so tell me how to do that".  "Just what I said, hold still."  "The problem is I can't.  Not only do my muscles feel like runnerbands about to snap if I don't move to relieve the tension, but my body jerks on its own when I start to relax."  And they will respond "well, don't do that then".  And I will ask again "how do I not do it?"  And the circle continues.  One does not teach to obey commandments by just saying "do it" and more than one teaches someone to drive by saying "drive".

Teaching involves a lot more of the how and even passing on the why can really help as well.  Thus when people ask me to teach them how I have learned to sleep...most nights...I tell them I use certain supplements, especially magnesium, avoid cholcolate and popcorn (but they may have no problem with those so they need to pay attention to what they eat in case something else is a trigger food) and I tell them the latest research is explaining the benefit of exercising for this particular problem as raising beneficial neurochemicals and resetting the body's clock so it doesn't send signals to wake up when it needs to sleep, etc. etc. etc.

If you see a calling as a teacher, then invest in it as much as you invest in giving your possessions away or not worrying about the future.  Go all in and don't hold back out of fear, laziness, whatever.

Not only share the what, but share the hows and whys to the best of your ability.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Calm

[etz]

And it seems to me that the true significance of the Book of Mormon is not as a witness to Joseph's prophethood, neither the truth of the Church, but as a second witness to the commandments of Jesus Christ, along with the Bible's witness.

One might cry "perverse interpretation" with respect to the Bible, but it gets harder to do with the Book of Mormon.

And again, why waste so much ink and effort in establishing the ancient provenance of the Book of Mormon while ommitting to do those things which the Lord commanded us to do therein?

[Calm]

I don't object in the least to keeping the commandments of God.

 

[etz]

There really isn't more to "give to every man that asketh thee" than giving to every man that asks you.

Thus, teaching this commandment is as simple as repeating it.  And by recasting the Lord's commandments in modern English, I have done as much teaching as needs to be done.

[Calm]

And yet is there any evidence here that anyone understands better how to live the commandments in their lives from reading what you have to say?

And why should we trust you recasting in modern English?  Where in the scripture does it say "modern English is all that is needed to understand what needs to be taught"?  How do I know you understand definitions, connotations, grammar, idioms, etc...everything an interpreter must understand before he begins to interpret.

To me, you seem to have some fundamental misunderstanding of the meaning of "teaching", if you provide nothing beyond what you claim the scriptures say, well...Imcan read the scriptures myself and listen to the Spirit and have. It would appear to me that what you are providing is confusion, not enlightenment.  Lack of followthrough often results in that.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

If you have so poorly understood me, why should I assume you understand the scriptures better?

[Calm]

Perhaps a different approach??

Let us try to stick to one word only and maybe understanding can occur with that.

I love the word "oath" and what it means biblically.

Can you explain to me why you think how Jesus understood it in 30ish AD is irrelevant when we are studying his words?

My apologies up front if I misunderstand you, as is not only possibly, but likely, me being human, you being human...

l am hoping the learning how God uses oath when he speaks the word matters to you because that would make a great common beginning.  We both love God's words.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

Was it halc or Hamba who had shared something on the meaning of oath.

[Calm]

59 minutes ago, etz said:

There really isn't more to "give to every man that asketh thee" than giving to every man that asks you.

Thus, teaching this commandment is as simple as repeating it.  And by recasting the Lord's commandments in modern English, I have done as much teaching as needs to be done.

So I only need to give to men, but can ignore women and children since they are not part of the command, right?  That is the plain reading.

And I need to give, but it doesn't say what, so I will give a hug to everyone that asks me.  Plain reading.

And if someone takes something away from me, I won't try to get them back, but instead just take something that belongs to him.  Plain reading.

----

Plain reading is folklore, it does not exist in any language more complicated than math (and I have my doubts there).

I care less about what the English says in the Bible and more what the Hebrew and Greek mean.  Etz, you might be a great translator of archaic English to modern English in spite of your current performance, but how does one know the scribes that started fooling around way back when they were writing down Jesus's words got it right?  Is there any evidence he proofread them for final approval?  There is no evidence Jesus wrote anything so it is important that they heard and remembered him correctly.

So start from the first on to each and every step of translation where they go along and then come eventually to distrust the current popular one as having too much error creep into it, so they do the intelligent, the wise thing and get back close to the source as possible and as much as possible start over again...though they don't actually do that.  The KJV at least was built upon its predecessors.  It was not anything that new...but they did improve on the poetry and rhythm of the words.

you should try that too if you are concerned about the plain meaning of words.  Let us be sure we have the right words as plain meaning of wrong words will not be edifying at all.

If you want to teach plain meaning, go to the Greek to do so.

https://danielbwallace.com/2012/11/05/somethings-always-lost-in-translation/

Edited January 16, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

It was Halc:

"Jesus' prohibition wasn't on making promises, or entering into agreements, but was directed towards oaths. While these may seem like similar ideas, the concept of an oath in the ancient world was far different than ours, and was a different arrangement than a covenant, promise or agreement. The verb ὀμνύω, used in Matthew 5 does not signify promising, which is the verb ὑπισχνοῦμαι, but means the solemn declaration of terms of intent, with the one making the oath determining the blessings and consequences of success or failure. One could promise to keep the terms of God, or could swear to do so. The former means that the mortal strives to keep God's terms, in relation to God's blessings and punishments. The latter means that the mortal declares to God the commandments that the mortal sets, with the blessings and curses the mortal sets. Jesus prohibits the latter, but not the former.

There is nothing wrong with saying that we are covenanting with God. In Latter-day Saint belief, covenanting on the part of mortals is the agreeing to terms, promises, and consequences set by God. Promising to keep them isn't the declaration of our terms, or consequences, even our most solemn covenants in the temple are entered into by a simple "Yes.""

[pogi]

9 hours ago, etz said:

Just exactly how many "interpretations" have there really been of the Lord's commandments?
Let's look at Luke 6:30.

 

There doesn't seem to be much variety of meaning. So, I ask again: what is the principal objection to keeping the commandments of Christ?

I thought we weren't supposed to have any "goods" or "posessions" in the first place?  Seems there is a misinterpretation of at least 1 commandment somewhere.

Edited January 16, 2017 by pogi

[etz]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

And yet is there any evidence here that anyone understands better how to live the commandments in their lives from reading what you have to say?

And why should we trust you recasting in modern English?  Where in the scripture does it say "modern English is all that is needed to understand what needs to be taught"?  How do I know you understand definitions, connotations, grammar, idioms, etc...everything an interpreter must understand before he begins to interpret.

To me, you seem to have some fundamental misunderstanding of the meaning of "teaching", if you provide nothing beyond what you claim the scriptures say, well...Imcan read the scriptures myself and listen to the Spirit and have. It would appear to me that what you are providing is confusion, not enlightenment.  Lack of followthrough often results in that.

I am unconcerned with whether "anyone understands better how to live the commandments in their lives from reading what I have to say."  As I said: there is nothing more to the command to "give to every man that asketh of thee" than giving to every man that asks you.  If after hearing the commandment and acknowledging it comes from the Lord you choose to disobey it, your sins are upon your own head, for I have done my part, which was repeating the commandment of the Lord in your hearing.

You need not trust my recasting.  All you need do, if you are a disciple of Christ, is keep his commandments, howsoever you cast them.  Disputing with me over my recasting is pointless.  Disputing with me is pointless altogether.

My understanding is irrelevant - your understanding of, and hearing of, the Lord's commandments, among them "give to every man that asketh of thee," is.  If you protest the scriptures cannot be understood, then clearly you have not applied your heart to understanding, and have neither kept nor taught the commandments of Christ.  What therefore have you been doing and teaching since it has not been what Christ instructed and taught?

It is true that if you hearkened to the scriptures, to learn and do what Christ said to do as befits a disciple, you would have no need of having these things repeated in your hearing, but neither would you have cause to heckle.

Which is all the teaching required for disciples of Christ: mere repetition.

Quote

 

3 Nephi 19:8

 7 And the disciples did pray unto the Father also in the name of Jesus. And it came to pass that they arose and ministered unto the people.

 8 And when they had ministered those same words which Jesus had spoken—nothing varying from the words which Jesus had spoken—behold, they knelt again and prayed to the Father in the name of Jesus.

 

You may protest that my recasting "varies from the words Jesus had spoken."  But you protest that his words in the scripture cannot be reliably understood - so I did you the favor of performing the recast.  If you do not trust my recasting, you may, as you acknowledge, read his words from the scripture yourself, and do what he said to do, which includes teaching his word - which means repeating it.