God's Ten Commandments? Still valid?

[DBowling]

Are you willing to acknowledge that the 10 Commandments are part of the Covenant that YHWH established with the House of Israel on Sinai?
(Feel free to reread Exodus 19-24 before you answer)

I have no issue that they ( the 10 ) are part of the covenant.

We're getting closer

Are you willing to admit that they ( the 10 ) are not A covenant?

I'm not sure what you are getting at with "a" vs "the"... could you clarify?

My stated position is that the 10 Commandments are part of the Covenant that YHWH established with the House of Israel on Sinai in Exodus 19-24?

That is what Scripture states, so that is my position.

I guess I wouldn't have any problem with the following:
The 10 Commandments are not the totality of the Covenant that YHWH established with the House of Israel on Sinai in Exodus 19-24.

Is that what you are getting at?

[BavarianWheels]

I guess I wouldn't have any problem with the following:
The 10 Commandments are not the totality of the Covenant that YHWH established with the House of Israel on Sinai in Exodus 19-24.

Is that what you are getting at?

I wouldn't say that the 10 are the totality of the covenant. We agree on your wording above.



Here's an analogy. Zeus is a god. YHWH is the God. Is there a difference?

That's simply to explain the 'a' vs. 'the'.

So then the question becomes about how you PLACE the 10.

Are the 10 a covenant? Do the 10 possess within the wording of the 10, any sort of promise that they would then be a covenant?

Or rather...are the 10 a means THROUGH WHICH THE covenant is based. In other words, aren't the 10 the basis on which there is even the need for the covenant? ( Luke 22:20, Matthew 26:28 and 1 Corinthians 11:25 )

So then, my position is that the 10, while we agree are PART of the covenant, are NOT the covenant NOR are they A covenant unto themselves. Rather the 10 are God's method of making us ( and the universe for that matter ) aware of sin. Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7 etc.

Therefore it cannot be ( as it would be illogical ) that these 10 are nailed to the cross, but rather the curse that comes THROUGH this law, Galatians 3:13 ( pointing at sin ), being death unto sinners, is what is nailed to the cross ALONG with the laws that POINTED at Christ's blood as THE promised covenant...fulfilled in Christ. It is these laws ( the laws that pointed at Christ's blood covering sin ), the temple laws, the sacrificial offerings, the festivals, the new moons...everything that has to do with the Covenant of blood ( the old being useless in declaring anyone righteous ) that are nailed to the cross. Christ is their fulfillment.

The 10 continue to point at sin as the NT/Paul mentions. Sin exists as long as Righteousness exists. It's the same argument we make to atheists when speaking of morals. An atheist cannot rightly believe in universal morals without a moral AGENT to dictate morals to the universe. They can't claim objective morals exist without something OBJECTIVE to dictate them.

Same for the 10. These point at sin...and always will point and/or make all aware of sin.
.
.

[DBowling]

I guess I wouldn't have any problem with the following:
The 10 Commandments are not the totality of the Covenant that YHWH established with the House of Israel on Sinai in Exodus 19-24.

Is that what you are getting at?

I wouldn't say that the 10 are the totality of the covenant. We agree on your wording above.

Yea!

So then the question becomes about how you PLACE the 10.

Are the 10 a covenant? Do the 10 possess within the wording of the 10, any sort of promise that they would then be a covenant?

The 10 Commandments are part of the conditions in Exodus 20-23 that Israel is agreeing to obey.

YHWH proposes the covenant with Israel in Exodus 19:3-6

3 Then Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4 ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

YHWH then tells Moses that if Israel keeps his covenant then "they will be a treasured possession", "a kingdom of priests", and "a holy nation"

The people respond to YHWH's proposal in Exodus 19:7-8

7 So Moses went back and summoned the elders of the people and set before them all the words the Lord had commanded him to speak. 8 The people all responded together, “We will do everything the Lord has said.” So Moses brought their answer back to the Lord.

Then in Exodus 20-23 YHWH provides a number of commands that function as the conditions of his covenant with Israel.

So the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20 function as part (but not all) of the conditions that Israel agreed to follow in the covenant that YHWH established with his covenant people Israel at Sinai (Exodus 19-24).

[BavarianWheels]

The 10 Commandments are part of the conditions in Exodus 20-23 that Israel is agreeing to obey.

YHWH proposes the covenant with Israel in Exodus 19:3-6

3 Then Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4 ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

YHWH then tells Moses that if Israel keeps his covenant then "they will be a treasured possession", "a kingdom of priests", and "a holy nation"

The people respond to YHWH's proposal in Exodus 19:7-8

7 So Moses went back and summoned the elders of the people and set before them all the words the Lord had commanded him to speak. 8 The people all responded together, “We will do everything the Lord has said.” So Moses brought their answer back to the Lord.

Then in Exodus 20-23 YHWH provides a number of commands that function as the conditions of his covenant with Israel.

We half agree.

Israel ( anyone who believes in the covenant, anyone that is a child of God including NT Gentiles ) CANNOT keep ANY of the 10 commandments in any way, shape or form ( Romans 8:7 ) to become a treasured possession or a kingdom of priests. The only law where they become priests is through the CEREMONIAL law where there are priests that STAND as a representation of Christ in the temple to offer the blood of animals for the remission of sins! There is NO PRIESTHOOD in the 10. The 10's only function is to make us aware of sin ( Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7 ) and therefore the NEED of the old covenant ( the blood of animals ).

Just because the people say, "We will do everything the Lord has said", doesn't mean they do or can! In fact, as it has to do with the Law that points to sin, NO ONE CAN as all have sinned and fall short... Romans 3:23

So the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20 function as part (but not all) of the conditions that Israel agreed to follow in the covenant that YHWH established with his covenant people Israel at Sinai (Exodus 19-24).

Not a condition! It's impossible to keep as all are born sinners. This is the part you're simply not getting. It is part of the covenant ONLY in the sense that IT CURSES SIN/the Sinner. Therefore there is need of a blood covenant to cover the sinner...and we are ALL in need of Christ's blood covering.

So, again, what is nailed to the cross is the law that points to a Messiah as Christ becomes that reality. There is no need for actions pointing at a Messiah as the Holy Lamb of God HAS been sacrificed for the remission of the world's sin. It is the CURSE against us, the record that the Law ( the 10 ) accuses, keeps against us that Christ nails to the cross.

The Law ( the 10 ) still remain a measure of righteousness. Romans 3:31 etc.
.
.

[DBowling]

The 10 Commandments are part of the conditions in Exodus 20-23 that Israel is agreeing to obey.

YHWH proposes the covenant with Israel in Exodus 19:3-6

3 Then Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4 ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

YHWH then tells Moses that if Israel keeps his covenant then "they will be a treasured possession", "a kingdom of priests", and "a holy nation"

The people respond to YHWH's proposal in Exodus 19:7-8

7 So Moses went back and summoned the elders of the people and set before them all the words the Lord had commanded him to speak. 8 The people all responded together, “We will do everything the Lord has said.” So Moses brought their answer back to the Lord.

Then in Exodus 20-23 YHWH provides a number of commands that function as the conditions of his Covenant with Israel.

We half agree.

Israel ( anyone who believes in the covenant, anyone that is a child of God including NT Gentiles ) CANNOT keep ANY of the 10 commandments in any way, shape or form ( Romans 8:7 )

Agreed... and that was the problem with the Old Covenant.
The Old Covenant showed people their sinfulness, but it did nothing to resolve the sin problem.

And we see this demonstrated in the OT as Israel failed to obey the Covenant, turned their backs on YHWH, and were ejected from the Land by Assyria and then Babylon.

It was only through the work of Jesus that the problem of sin and death could truly be resolved.

So the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20 function as part (but not all) of the conditions that Israel agreed to follow in the covenant that YHWH established with his covenant people Israel at Sinai (Exodus 19-24).

Not a condition!

Of course it is. Read Exodus 19:5-6.
The commands that God gives in Exodus 20-23 are the conditions of the covenant that God made with Israel in Exodus 19-24. It's all in the text.

However, you are correct in this... no one is able to keep the Law, and as a result Israel was ejected from the Land.
And since Israel was unable to fulfill their part of the Old Covenant, God promised to establish a New Covenant with the House of Israel.

[RickD]

DBowling wrote:
And since Israel was unable to fulfill their part of the Old Covenant, God promised to establish a New Covenant with the House of Israel.

And specifically, what does that mean happens to the Old Covenant? Or, how does the New Covenant affect the Old Covenant?

[Philip]

Excellent question - really, the key one for this issue.

[DBowling]

DBowling wrote:
And since Israel was unable to fulfill their part of the Old Covenant, God promised to establish a New Covenant with the House of Israel.

And specifically, what does that mean happens to the Old Covenant? Or, how does the New Covenant affect the Old Covenant?

Hebrew 8:6-13 answers that specific question.

6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, He says,

“Behold, days are coming, says the Lord,
[f]When I will effect a new covenant
With the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers
On the day when I took them by the hand
To lead them out of the land of Egypt;
For they did not continue in My covenant,
And I did not care for them, says the Lord.
10 “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
After those days, says the Lord:
[g]I will put My laws into their minds,
And I will write them on their hearts.
And I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.
11 “And they shall not teach everyone his fellow citizen,
And everyone his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
For all will know Me,
From [h]the least to the greatest of them.
12 “For I will be merciful to their iniquities,
And I will remember their sins no more.”

13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is [j]ready to disappear.

[BavarianWheels]

Agreed... and that was the problem with the Old Covenant.
The Old Covenant showed people their sinfulness, but it did nothing to resolve the sin problem.

That's not what I'm in agreement with. The covenant exists BECAUSE Man, since/through the 1st Adam, is sinful. The 10 are not A covenant nor are they THE covenant. I'm trying to be as plain as possible, but you keep lumping the two together as fulfilling one ( the 10 ) is salvation. Paul clearly makes a distinction in promoting the 10 as a means of exposing sin. ( Romans 3:31, Romans 7:12, Romans 3:20 )

And we see this demonstrated in the OT as Israel failed to obey the Covenant, turned their backs on YHWH, and were ejected from the Land by Assyria and then Babylon.

Again, this sounds ok, but it depends on what you mean when you say "failed to obey the Covenant". If you're including the 10 in that statement, then I disagree since "ALL have sinned and fall short...". It's not a matter of obeying the 10. That's impossible.

It was only through the work of Jesus that the problem of sin and death could truly be resolved.

Yes, but the work of Jesus is not to remove the Law ( the 10 that measure righteousness ) to gain salvation, but rather the law that points to Christ as the Lamb AND the Law's condemnation ( Galatians 3:13 ) ( the 10 show sin ) that was a curse. The Law ( the 10 ) themselves are not a curse...they point at sin. The Law is holy, righteous and good. ( Romans 7:12 ) The Law ( the 10 ) is separate to the covenant/the promise ( Galatians 3:15-18 )

So the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20 function as part (but not all) of the conditions that Israel agreed to follow in the covenant that YHWH established with his covenant people Israel at Sinai (Exodus 19-24).

Not a condition!

Of course it is. Read Exodus 19:5-6.
The commands that God gives in Exodus 20-23 are the conditions of the covenant that God made with Israel in Exodus 19-24. It's all in the text.

I'm sorry, DB...as respectfully as I can, it is impossible that the Law ( the 10 ) are a condition of the covenant. You don't believe that. Here's why; we are saved by faith, not by keeping the commands of the Law which is the measurement of righteousness, the measure of having sin or being guiltless of sin. ( Romans 8:4 ) Christ did it. They/We could never. It isn't a condition. The condition is in the ceremonial law and the faith that one puts in the Blood that is the condition.

However, you are correct in this... no one is able to keep the Law, and as a result Israel was ejected from the Land.
And since Israel was unable to fulfill their part of the Old Covenant, God promised to establish a New Covenant with the House of Israel.

The new covenant is not a Law...it is BLOOD...not of animals ( old covenant ) but of Christ's own blood. ( the new covenant ) ( Luke 22:20, Matthew 26:28, 1 Corinthians 11:25 ) The covenant is: Do this and I will do that. Have faith in Me and I will save you from your sins. There exists no such wording in the 10. The 10 merely exist to expose sin...and sin still exists.
.
.

[BavarianWheels]

DBowling wrote:
And since Israel was unable to fulfill their part of the Old Covenant, God promised to establish a New Covenant with the House of Israel.

I'm not sure what you mean here, RickD.

The covenant ( old and new ) are not anything "they" could fulfill through keeping the law. It was always through faith. Well, unless you believe animal blood actually does cover sin. Their failure was in keeping faith, not in keeping the law ( the 600+ laws )There was ALWAYS a promise of a "new" covenant as the old ( the shedding of animal blood ) was a shadow of things to come ( the shedding of God's own blood ). Christ's words exactly convey and support. ( Luke 22:20, 1 Corinthians 11:25, Matthew 26:28 )

And specifically, what does that mean happens to the Old Covenant? Or, how does the New Covenant affect the Old Covenant?

The old covenant is the shadow. It only worked through faith in the promise of a COMING Lamb of God though which salvation was gained. Salvation was never gained through the shedding of animal blood NOR could it be gained through keeping the Law ( the 10 ), but keeping and having faith in the promise THROUGH the law ( the shedding of animal blood ) which was the old covenant law..."Do this and have faith and I will do this and save you."

The new replaces the old. Christ's blood replaces animal blood. ( Luke 22:20 )
.
.

[DBowling]

Agreed... and that was the problem with the Old Covenant.
The Old Covenant showed people their sinfulness, but it did nothing to resolve the sin problem.

That's not what I'm in agreement with. The covenant exists BECAUSE Man, since/through the 1st Adam, is sinful. The 10 are not A covenant nor are they THE covenant.

According to Exodus 19-24, the 10 Commandments (and the rest of Exodus 20-23) are the conditions that God established for Israel in the Covenant that God established with Israel at Sinai.

I'm trying to be as plain as possible, but you keep lumping the two together as fulfilling one ( the 10 ) is salvation.

I never said any such thing. Keeping the Law and God's Covenant never saved anyone. People have always been saved by grace through faith under the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.

And you are correct that one of the functions of the Law is to show people their sinfulness.

And we see this demonstrated in the OT as Israel failed to obey the Covenant, turned their backs on YHWH, and were ejected from the Land by Assyria and then Babylon.

Again, this sounds ok, but it depends on what you mean when you say "failed to obey the Covenant". If you're including the 10 in that statement, then I disagree since "ALL have sinned and fall short...". It's not a matter of obeying the 10.

at the risk of beating a dead horse...
According to Exodus 19-24, the 10 Commandments (and the rest of Exodus 20-23) are the conditions that God established for Israel in the Covenant that God established with Israel at Sinai.

And you are correct that it is impossible for anyone to perfectly obey the conditions of the Old Covenant (Including the 10 Commandments)... which is why Israel was ejected from the land and why God established a New Covenant with Israel.

So the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20 function as part (but not all) of the conditions that Israel agreed to follow in the covenant that YHWH established with his covenant people Israel at Sinai (Exodus 19-24).

Not a condition!

Of course it is. Read Exodus 19:5-6.
The commands that God gives in Exodus 20-23 are the conditions of the covenant that God made with Israel in Exodus 19-24. It's all in the text.

I'm sorry, DB...as respectfully as I can, it is impossible that the Law ( the 10 ) are a condition of the covenant.

And as respectfully as I can... I respectfully recommend that you reread Exodus 19-24. Your assertion is in direct conflict with Holy Spirit inspired Scripture.

Now let's look at where we agree.

we are saved by faith, not by keeping the commands of the Law

I agree...
No one was ever saved by keeping the Law... under either the Old or New Covenant.

It isn't a condition. The condition is in the ceremonial law and the faith that one puts in the Blood that is the condition.

I think this may be the focal point of your error.
The laws in Exodus 20-23 are not a condition for salvation (we agree on that)
However, the laws in Exodus 20-23 are a condition for the Covenant that YHWH established with the House of Israel at Sinai

[BavarianWheels]

According to Exodus 19-24, the 10 Commandments (and the rest of Exodus 20-23) are the conditions that God established for Israel in the Covenant that God established with Israel at Sinai.

The 10 cannot be a condition. Why? Because the 10 SOLELY exist as a measure of sin or righteousness depending on one's state. ( sinful or perfect i.e. Christ ) The NT/Paul is clear on this.

I never said any such thing. Keeping the Law and God's Covenant never saved anyone.

This is wrong. Christ is righteous because He keeps the Law ( the 10 that either point at one's sin or prove on sinless not having sinned )

However, God's covenant ( the blood ) does save!

People have always been saved by grace through faith under the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.

Correct. They ( prior to Christ ) were saved/declared righteous through faith in the old covenant being fulfilled by God at a later date. The Promise. We are saved/declared righteous through faith in the new covenant, Christ's blood which is the fulfillment of the old.

And you are correct that one of the functions of the Law is to show people their sinfulness.

This is misquoting me or simply not understanding what it is I am saying.

The Law ( the 10 ) is NOT one of the functions to show people their sinfulness...it is THE ONLY function to show people their sinfulness. ( Romans 3:20, etc ) The ceremonial law showed people the consequence of sin...IT pointed to Christ being the Lamb ultimately crucified.

at the risk of beating a dead horse...
According to Exodus 19-24, the 10 Commandments (and the rest of Exodus 20-23) are the conditions that God established for Israel in the Covenant that God established with Israel at Sinai.

It is not a condition. I don't think you know what that word means. If you did, you'd agree with me ( as you did above ) that it cannot be a condition of the covenant SINCE WE/NO ONE has EVER kept it. It's impossible...hence the need for Christ's righteousness to cover us, His blood.

Rather, as I've agreed, the 10 are PART of what makes up the covenant IN THAT it is because of the curse of the Law ( the 10 seeing sin in humanity ) that the covenant ( the blood and Blood ) exist. The 10 are not a condition. We've broken the Law and are cursed as sinners PRIOR to the covenant ( though I would again argue a technicality that the covenant was already in place from the time of the Adam and Eve's sinning in the garden and God covering them in animal skins ) in Exodus.

And you are correct that it is impossible for anyone to perfectly obey the conditions of the Old Covenant (Including the 10 Commandments)... which is why Israel was ejected from the land and why God established a New Covenant with Israel.

No...it's not impossible to obey the conditions of the old covenant. The old covenant was a group of laws describing the redemption process of blood covering sin...first by the shadow of the reality ( animal blood ) and then the fulfillment of that promise ( Christ's Blood ) in the new. Fulfilling the covenant is simply having faith. Faith in the blood. We cannot obey the 10 as a condition for salvation. IF we could, Christ was needlessly sacrificed!

we are saved by faith, not by keeping the commands of the Law

If you believe what you just wrote, then the 10 cannot be a CONDITION...a method...an obligation...

The 10 are simply the accusatory factor that leads to the covenant and therefore the condition of FAITH in blood.
.
.

[warren631]

A pretentious narcissist (see Jeremiah 9:23) listed all the OT laws to insult me and to confuse others. The subject only concerns God's ten commandments. Moses' tablets must have been pretty heavy if they contained all the laws listed.

[DBowling]

According to Exodus 19-24, the 10 Commandments (and the rest of Exodus 20-23) are the conditions that God established for Israel in the Covenant that God established with Israel at Sinai.

The 10 cannot be a condition.

sure it can... again...
Read Exodus 19-24... It's all right there..

I never said any such thing. Keeping the Law and God's Covenant never saved anyone.

This is wrong. Christ is righteous because He keeps the Law

Wrong... Wrong... Wrong...
Christ is not righteous because he keeps the Law.
Christ is able to keep the law BECAUSE he is righteous.

However, God's covenant ( the blood ) does save!

Rhetorical question... I think you know the answer...
Was anyone ever saved by keeping the Old Covenant?

People have always been saved by grace through faith under the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.

Correct. They ( prior to Christ ) were saved/declared righteous through faith in the old covenant being fulfilled by God at a later date. The Promise. We are saved/declared righteous through faith in the new covenant, Christ's blood which is the fulfillment of the old.

Almost but not quite... OT saints were saved through faith in YHWH not faith in the Old Covenant.
The object of saving faith has always been YHWH (and Jesus is YHWH).

And you are correct that one of the functions of the Law is to show people their sinfulness.

The Law ( the 10 ) is NOT one of the functions to show people their sinfulness...it is THE ONLY function to show people their sinfulness. ( Romans 3:20, etc ) The ceremonial law showed people the consequence of sin...IT pointed to Christ being the Lamb ultimately crucified.

If that is your position then your position is not Scriptural.
The Law is not the ONLY function to show people their sinfulness.
See Romans 1:18-20 and Romans 2:14-15

at the risk of beating a dead horse...
According to Exodus 19-24, the 10 Commandments (and the rest of Exodus 20-23) are the conditions that God established for Israel in the Covenant that God established with Israel at Sinai.

It is not a condition. I don't think you know what that word means.

I know exactly what a conditional statement is.
And I also know that an if/then statement is by definition a conditional statement.

Now here's Exodus 19:5
5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine

I hilighted the "if" for you and I hilighted the "then" for you.
According to Exodus 19:5 the Covenant that YHWH established with Israel at Sinai is by definition (if/then) a conditional covenant.

[BavarianWheels]

sure it can... again...
Read Exodus 19-24... It's all right there..

I have.

Wrong... Wrong... Wrong...
Christ is not righteous because he keeps the Law.
Christ is able to keep the law BECAUSE he is righteous.

That IS more correct. Agreed. However the point being that the Law either condemns or it doesn't...and it doesn't condemn Christ because He IS righteous....and being righteous means He is NOT guilty of committing sin...which the Law is the measure thereof.

Rhetorical question... I think you know the answer...
Was anyone ever saved by keeping the Old Covenant?

Rhetorical answer: YES! They had the assurance of God's promise/salvation in the same manner we have assurance in God's promise/salvation fulfilled in Christ. Abraham was declared righteous THROUGH faith! It doesn't say Abraham would eventually be declared righteous... No one has been saved yet, literally. Christ's reward is with Him... Revelation 22:12

We are still in this body of sin.

Almost but not quite... OT saints were saved through faith in YHWH not faith in the Old Covenant.
The object of saving faith has always been YHWH (and Jesus is YHWH).

God cannot save without blood! Hebrews 9:22 If it were simply YHWH, there would be no need for the law...the covenant spoken of in Hebrews 9:22

If that is your position then your position is not Scriptural.
The Law is not the ONLY function to show people their sinfulness.
See Romans 1:18-20 and Romans 2:14-15

Heh...are you suggesting that the Law functions as a showing of God's wrath? Because I'm talking about the 10...not arguing about God's wrath, God's existence nor God being Creator...which Romans 1:18-20 is speaking about.

I've highlighted what this text is referring to plainly:

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

People are without excuse about God's power and divine nature.

Romans 2:14-15 is speaking exactly about the Law ( the 10 ) point out sin or basic morals intrinsic in God's creation of Man.

14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)

The Law points at sin ( to the believer ) and to "objective" morality to the unbeliever by their own conscience.

You haven't proven it has another function.

I know exactly what a conditional statement is.
And I also know that an if/then statement is by definition a conditional statement.

Now here's Exodus 19:5
5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine

I hilighted the "if" for you and I hilighted the "then" for you.
According to Exodus 19:5 the Covenant that YHWH established with Israel at Sinai is by definition (if/then) a conditional covenant.

I thought we had already agreed that there is no salvation in following the Law ( the 10 )...how is it then that you're continually ADDING in the 10 as a condition...you said even "if/then". God's covenant is NOT IF you keep my 10 commandments THEN you will be saved. The covenant is if you keep my law, the covenant ( the law that describes the shadow of Christ's blood to come ) then you will be saved! That's the covenant.

The 10 are simply the MECHANISM that CURSES one as a sinner that needs a blood covering.

You know what conditional is, but you're then applying it to something WE'VE agreed is impossible to keep. Therefore the 10 are NOT part of the condition to be kept.

It's simply not logical.
.
.