He meant it

1Cor 6:17 I see the word plainly saying here, and until someone can show me otherwise from the Word, that 1cor7:19 is one more reinforcement of what Jesus layed out to be taught in Deut 6, and then reiterated in the gospels. I did not mean that it is only the OT law, but on what exegetical basis would we say….. it doesn’t include it? One more to put alongside all the others.

Two points.

First point, Paul himself said in the verse… Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters. 1 Cor 7:19

....Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing,..... rituals, ceremonies are not what he is talking about. That’s a given.

Second point
Jesus uses the same Greek word for commandments here, that Paul used in Corinthians…

For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Matt 5:18-19 If you have been called, then you are a soldier in kingdom of heaven. What are you doing & teaching? We are told, you will be called great (doing what?) ….as an encouragement to do it! Maybe even....“well done, good and faithful servant! Side tracked, sorry. Not really.

Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters. 1 Cor 7:19

Can anyone biblically show that God did not mean for Paul to include the OT law as part of keeping the commandments of God, in 1cor6:17? ( this is the same Paul who said…. Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law. Romans 3:31

For giggles. If anyone can do this exegetically, show that these references to the commandments in the NT, do not include the OT commandments, please call Westminster Seminary. They will make you a department chair. Greg Bahnsen was given his docterate by Westminster for making the positive case. Its only 560 pgs long. But he was not hired by them becasue they were did not want to accept it. Their entire faculty spent 14 yrs trying to put together a case that showed he was wrong, and that the Bible didnt mean what it said. They couldn’t do it.

We can be skeptical and be a Berean. But that skeptiscism cannot be equated as being a Berean. You can either show from the word that something is, or you cant.