The Sabbath: Why do Christians say Sunday?

memoriesbymichelle

Senior Veteran
Jun 8, 2007
10,211
931
64
Arizona
✟22,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
The first few verses in Romans 14 address to whom that chapter is about; 'Those who are weak in the faith'. Shabbat is not the issue there nor are the feasts but things of personal preference that have noting to do with the mandates of God.

Well we can agree to disagree then:wave: How about the fact that we should give our firstfruits to God and Sunday is the first day of the week? And that is the reason alot of people worship on Sunday.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

memoriesbymichelle

Senior Veteran
Jun 8, 2007
10,211
931
64
Arizona
✟22,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
Saturday is still the Sabbath, Sunday is the Lord's day

Biblical references to happenings on Sunday, the first day of the week...

1. Jesus Christ rose from the dead on Sunday, Lk 24:1-12

2. Christ appeared to the disciples on the road to Emmaus, and celebrated the Eucharist on Sunday, Lk 24:13

3. Jesus appeared to the disciples behind closed doors, Jn 20:19

4. Jesus appeared to the disciples with Thomas one week later, Jn 20:26 NAB

5. Jesus opened the minds of the Apostles to the Scriptures, Lk 24:45

6. The Apostles received their 'Great Commission' to go and teach all nations, Mt 28:1-20.

7. The Apostles were given the Holy Spirit and the power to forgive sins, Jn 20:19-23.

8. Jesus told the Apostles to wait in the city until they were to be clothed with power from on high, Lk 24:49.

9. On the seventh Sunday after the resurrection, the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles,
Acts 2:1-4.

10. Immediately after receiving the Holy Spirit, Peter gave a powerful address on the Gospel resulting in 3000 conversions, Acts 2:41.

11. The Apostles met for the Holy Eucharist on the 'first' day, Acts 20:7.

12. The Apostles set the 'first' day of the week for the Churches to take up the collections,
1Cor 16:1-2.


One should celebrate the Lord everyday, not just one day a week
 
Upvote 0
T

TanteBelle

Guest
Well we can agree to disagree then:wave: How about the fact that we should give our firstfruits to God and Sunday is the first day of the week? And that is the reason alot of people worship on Sunday.

I have no problem with folks worshipping on a Sunday. I have no problem with folks worshipping on a Wednesday! When we have the feasts that go for 7 or 8 days, we worship on every day! But we never claim that any of those days is the Shabbat or has taken the place of the Shabbat. God was the one who ordained the feast of firstfruits and He never made it a set day on Sunday, so with all due respect, that argument has no standing. It becomes another excuse with no validation from scripture. But yeah, I don't have a prob with folks worshipping on other days ........ as long as they don't go around claiming that God has changed the Shabbat.

Saturday is still the Sabbath, Sunday is the Lord's day

Biblical references to happenings on Sunday, the first day of the week...

1. Jesus Christ rose from the dead on Sunday, Lk 24:1-12

2. Christ appeared to the disciples on the road to Emmaus, and celebrated the Eucharist on Sunday, Lk 24:13

3. Jesus appeared to the disciples behind closed doors, Jn 20:19

4. Jesus appeared to the disciples with Thomas one week later, Jn 20:26 NAB

5. Jesus opened the minds of the Apostles to the Scriptures, Lk 24:45

6. The Apostles received their 'Great Commission' to go and teach all nations, Mt 28:1-20.

7. The Apostles were given the Holy Spirit and the power to forgive sins, Jn 20:19-23.

8. Jesus told the Apostles to wait in the city until they were to be clothed with power from on high, Lk 24:49.

9. On the seventh Sunday after the resurrection, the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles,
Acts 2:1-4.

10. Immediately after receiving the Holy Spirit, Peter gave a powerful address on the Gospel resulting in 3000 conversions, Acts 2:41.

11. The Apostles met for the Holy Eucharist on the 'first' day, Acts 20:7.

12. The Apostles set the 'first' day of the week for the Churches to take up the collections,
1Cor 16:1-2.


One should celebrate the Lord everyday, not just one day a week

I glad you made your first statement, ma'am! :D Saturday is the Shabbat and Sunday is what they call 'The Lord's Day' (though in scripture, the Lord's Day has been understood to be the Shabbat as that was the only day set aside as being for the Lord, but I do understand it being used for the day that the Lord rose on). Yes, some of those passages talk about the first day of the week, I won't deny that, but to say that those days are specifically taking the Sunday as being holy is not correct because the one about Paul 'collecting' on the Sunday is not keeping the Sunday holy! Sunday was picked out for gathering the collections because Paul was keeping the Shabbat the day before and would not be collecting the gifts. I don't know what no. 9 or 10 has to do with the Sunday considering that time period was Shavuot/Feast of Weeks/Pentecost. In fact, most of those passages don't refer to the Sunday at all (from 2 till 10).
 
Upvote 0

Ronald

Exhortations
Site Supporter
Jul 30, 2004
4,620
982
southern
✟111,578.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No, I don't believe that the HS is just a force, but a spiritual being.
A spiritual being other than God would be an angel. So, logically you think He is an angel, who is omniscient (He knows all truth and know all believers), omnipresent (He's within all believers so is everywhere)and omnipotent (contains all the power of God)?


So, have I been baptised in the HS? I don't know, how do you know?
He will bear witness to your spirit by answering prayers, guiding, teaching, comforting, etc., etc., etc. Only those who can honestly say the Jesus is Lord in their life can do this if they have the Spirit.

I do pray for the HS and I do listen to my 'conscience' when I'm convicted on something.
Your conscience is a part of your soul that moral code (law in your heart- if you will) directs you to go this way, do that, don't do that, etc. Everyone has a conscience but some peoples conscience is calloused.
When you witness to someone about Christ and you may sense someone empowering you, giving you words to say, bringing things to remembrance, organizing your thoughts, etc. This is the Holy Spirit.
You are only spiritually connected to God when you have the Holy Spirit living in you. He glorifies Jesus, teaches all that Jesus taught, helps you along your path and convicts you when you stray.
I can tell you that personally, I am aware of God working in my life, guiding and directing me and tending to my needs. I was in a car accident once and the guy stormed up to my window and started cursing, blaming me ... "look what you did to my car _ _ " and shouting. I was driving a shuttle, transporting people to the airport. I cut him off but thought that He was in a turn lane at an intersection. I remained calm and spoke in a soft voice, questioning him and got out to look. I saw that there was no turn lane and that I had crossed over into his lane. I came back and said you were right, my fault. He instantly calmed down. The passengers couldn't believe how well I handled it and I couldn't believe I didn't lose my temper either. The Holy Spirit gave me peace and directed me to a peaceful outcome. This guy was from the ghetto with a beaten up car and who knows if I had lost my cool what he would have done?

And that passage from 1 John was not in the original but was added in by Christian translators
That's true, I don't really need that passage to confirm that however, if you look at the context of the ASV it says: "For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water (representing His baptism) and the blood (representing His sacrificial death) and the three are in agreement. If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for the testimony of God is this, that He has testified concerning His Son." 1John 5:7-9
The Spirit and God here are one. The Spirit testifies, then the next sentence confirms who the Spirit is.
God lives within our temple.
"If any man destroys the temple of God, god will destroys him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are."1Cor. 3:17

"Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?" 1Cor. 6:19

Here again it equates the Holy Spirit with God, one in the same.
Jesus is the exact likeness of the Father. He is the Creator. (John 1:3; Col. 1:16)

In Matt. 3:16,17 you have the Spirit descending upon Jesus and then a voice from the Father claiming this is my beloved son. 3 persons = God

"elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." 1 Pet. 1:2 three = one

"For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father." Eph.2:18 three = one

"And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever - the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know him, for He dwells with you and will be in you." John 14:16,17 three = one

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you." John 14:26 three = one
 
Upvote 0
T

TanteBelle

Guest
A spiritual being other than God would be an angel. So, logically you think He is an angel, who is omniscient (He knows all truth and know all believers), omnipresent (He's within all believers so is everywhere)and omnipotent (contains all the power of God)?

Oh crikey, shall I just post my views on the trinity? No, I don't believe that the HS knows all truth. Scripture only mentions the Father and the Son knowing all things. I don't believe that there is just one in every single believer; makes no sense whatsoever! And I don't believe that he contains all the powers of God or that would make him God. And I don't believe that.

He will bear witness to your spirit by answering prayers, guiding, teaching, comforting, etc., etc., etc. Only those who can honestly say the Jesus is Lord in their life can do this if they have the Spirit.

No, I wouldn't jump to that last part. Matt 7:21-23 is just one passage that suggests otherwise. Is Yeshua Lord of my life? I sure darn hope He is and try to make Him such in every act I do and decision I make.

Your conscience is a part of your soul that moral code (law in your heart- if you will) directs you to go this way, do that, don't do that, etc. Everyone has a conscience but some peoples conscience is calloused.
When you witness to someone about Christ and you may sense someone empowering you, giving you words to say, bringing things to remembrance, organizing your thoughts, etc. This is the Holy Spirit.
You are only spiritually connected to God when you have the Holy Spirit living in you. He glorifies Jesus, teaches all that Jesus taught, helps you along your path and convicts you when you stray.

My conscience I believe to be either the HS or an angel from the devil (a good or evil conscience). Whom we listen to is the huge question. I've had an experience once that was just totally out of this world and scared (almost literally) the hell-outta me! That experience really helped me to understand the spiritual battle within us and the difference between the good and evil.

That's true, I don't really need that passage to confirm that however, if you look at the context of the ASV it says: "For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water (representing His baptism) and the blood (representing His sacrificial death) and the three are in agreement. If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for the testimony of God is this, that He has testified concerning His Son." 1John 5:7-9

I have to admit, I'm a hard core, Bible thumpin' KJV girl!!!! Meheehee!!!! ;) What I mean is that when I compare versions, they can say the total opposite! LOL! But okay, I'll go with the ASV in that passage for now. The key phrase in that is 'and these three are in agreement'! It doesn't say, 'and these three are one and the same'. So, to align ........... nope, I'll save that argument for my trinity explanation! LOL! If you care to read it all. You don't strike me as someone allergic to long posts, no? :p

"Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?" 1Cor. 6:19

'Whom you have FROM GOD.' Not 'whom you have who is God'.

All of those other passages don't say that the HS is God at all. They may mention the HS and God but to say that those passages are saying that the HS is God is a bit of a stretch, to be honest.
 
Upvote 0

ks777

Start singing
May 8, 2009
4,610
544
Other world
✟16,650.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Tante, have you stopped to consider whether Paul's letters are actually scipture?

I'm sure no one's going to agree with me here, but I'll say it anyway. Paul's writings to me don't have any more authority than something that I've written. The same people that brought us Easter, Christmas and priestly molestation are the one's who proclaimed Paul's writings the word of God. I don't care what they think, they can't even get His name right. When his letters are taken out of the 'bible' and read as what they are, he just becomes a first century itinerant evangalist. His letters become half a conversation between two people that an entire doctrine has been based on. He's like me (and we both have the same name lol), he gets some things right and he gets some things wrong. Most of the time in church we study his writings way more often than we actually study God's word.

Do I think Yah is 'happy' with Paul? No way.

This link shows instances where Pauls teaching is in conflict with Yahshua's.
Paul vs Messiah - God Damn Religion - Yada Yahweh Forum
 
Upvote 0
T

TanteBelle

Guest
Tante, have you stopped to consider whether Paul's letters are actually scipture?

I'm sure no one's going to agree with me here, but I'll say it anyway. Paul's writings to me don't have any more authority than something that I've written. The same people that brought us Easter, Christmas and priestly molestation are the one's who proclaimed Paul's writings the word of God. I don't care what they think, they can't even get His name right. When his letters are taken out of the 'bible' and read as what they are, he just becomes a first century itinerant evangalist. His letters become half a conversation between two people that an entire doctrine has been based on. He's like me (and we both have the same name lol), he gets some things right and he gets some things wrong. Most of the time in church we study his writings way more often than we actually study God's word.

Do I think Yah is 'happy' with Paul? No way.

This link shows instances where Pauls teaching is in conflict with Yahshua's.
Paul vs Messiah - God Damn Religion - Yada Yahweh Forum

Yep, I've listened to lots of folks who question Paul. Many Messianics just throw Paul out coz they don't believe that he lines up with torah. I don't agree. You'd have to admit, that most of the controversy between Christianity and Messianism is due to the writings of Paul, no? So, if we're going to stand on the writings of James, Peter, and the other apostles, let's see what they had to say about Paul and see if in their eyes Paul had any standing ....

From Luke in Acts ....

Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto Me, to bear My name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for My name's sake.

20 And straightway he preached Messiah in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God.

21 But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?

22 But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Messiah.

26 And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple.

27 But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Yeshua.

28 And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem.

29 And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Yeshua, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him.

30 Which when the brethren knew, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus.

31 Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied.

Acts 15:12 Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.

22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren:

25 It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,

26 Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Yeshua Messiah.

Acts 21:18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.

19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.

20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the torah:

21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.

22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.

23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;

24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.

Acts 23:9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.

11 And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of Me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.

Acts 24:10 Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself:

11 Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.

12 And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:

13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.

14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the torah and in the prophets:

15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

16 And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void to offence toward God, and toward men.

17 Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings.

18 Whereupon certain Jews from Asia found me purified in the temple, neither with multitude, nor with tumult.

19 Who ought to have been here before thee, and object, if they had ought against me.

20 Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evil doing in me, while I stood before the council,

21 Except it be for this one voice, that I cried standing among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day.

And the rest of the testimony of Luke regarding Paul is the same in Acts.

2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

I think the testimonies of the apostles from the NT without Paul himself is sufficient enough for me to rest on the fact that Paul was keeping torah and was in alignment with the rest of scripture. Yes, the Bible may have been put together by men who were not of the torah but is it not God who guides the hearts of man when He wants it? Yeshua prophesied that the truth and the gospel would be preached throughout the world. Don't you think that God can guide men to unknowingly make it right? Why didn't they put in the talmud? Mishnah? Zoarh? The book of Yasher? Enoch? Barnabas? I'm against much of the writings of Luther, but I have no doubt that God convicted Luther about the issues that he got right in regards to the Catholic Church and gave him the ability to speak against it. I think if you went to the apostles and said to them, 'You know, your writings are going to be counted as holy scripture one day' they'd shout 'Blasphemy!' It's not just Paul but all of the apostles who would never have thought that their writings would make up what we call 'divine scripture'. But I don't find it any coincidence that God has preserved the Bible the way it is for a reason and that is what has gone around the globe.
 
Upvote 0
T

TanteBelle

Guest
I've read most of that link you gave me and yep, they brought up most passages that I thought they would. And yes, the translation he has is not helping Paul's case whatsoever!!! For example, where he 'quotes' Paul by saying that no one is justified by 'observing the torah'. That is totally false!! KJV says that no one can be justified by the works of the torah. Totally different! Paul was a theologian and so does use very theological terms. It amazes me how those who claim to be theologians take Paul in a very literal light rather than a theological light. 'Works of the law', 'under the law', and such terms that Paul uses are what confuses people. But those terms are not against torah at all.

Any questions regarding Paul, feel free to ask and I'll answer as best I can! :D I think it dangerous for someone to throw out Paul (which is much of the NT) because they 'don't understand' as Peter says, rather than admit, 'Hey, I just don't understand!' and try see where they've misinterpreted him. Peter admits that he's hard to understand but the problem is not with Paul but with us! And it would help by having a reliable translation. :(
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ks777

Start singing
May 8, 2009
4,610
544
Other world
✟16,650.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
I think it dangerous for someone to throw out Paul (which is much of the NT) because they 'don't understand' as Peter says, rather than admit, 'Hey, I just don't understand!' and try see where they've misinterpreted him. Peter admits that he's hard to understand but the problem is not with Paul but with us! And it would help by having a reliable translation. :(
Just a quick question before I go, how is it dangerous? If you're unsure, wouldn't it be safer to ignore it? If Paul raises any new information that isn't in the Torah prophets and pslams and what Yahshua Himself never taught (some would argue taught the opposite) why is it dangerous to ignore him? If people want to gain insights from his writing, then so be it, but I just can't figure out why people take his letters as the direct Word of God. Personally I think it's dangerous not to ignore it; I know you say it doesn't if you understand it properly, but most everyone that reads it thinks that the Torah is abolished. To me, that's dangerous.

I wouldn't mind betting he himself would have never professed his letters to be considered scipture.

I'd like to continue this in the future :p
 
Upvote 0

Isolation

It's not enough, it never is
Apr 14, 2011
893
81
✟8,842.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Just a quick question before I go, how is it dangerous? If you're unsure, wouldn't it be safer to ignore it? If Paul raises any new information that isn't in the Torah prophets and pslams and what Yahshua Himself never taught (some would argue taught the opposite) why is it dangerous to ignore him? If people want to gain insights from his writing, then so be it, but I just can't figure out why people take his letters as the direct Word of God.

I wouldn't mind betting he himself would have never professed his letters to be considered scipture.

I'd like to continue this in the future :p
Peter considered Pauls writings as scripture
 
Upvote 0

memoriesbymichelle

Senior Veteran
Jun 8, 2007
10,211
931
64
Arizona
✟22,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
WOW TanteBelle. I'm impressed by your knowledge (much greater than mine) and how well you can articulate your arguments. For me it is much simpler but still in agreement with you. GOD is God and there is NO way that I believe that He would let some "men" put writings in HIS book for us to study if they weren't meant to be there. So either we trust He wants them there (just like we trust that the Holy Spirit inspired the men that wrote it) or we don't but IF we don't then we are saying men are more in control than God. We are fortunate to have all the writings in one book. In biblical times they did not. All they had were various letters sent to various people. I believe God is in control, but everyone is free to believe whatever they want. To me, not believing God allowed any of the books in the Bible to be there is a very dangerous place to be.
 
Upvote 0
T

TanteBelle

Guest
Just a quick question before I go, how is it dangerous? If you're unsure, wouldn't it be safer to ignore it? If Paul raises any new information that isn't in the Torah prophets and pslams and what Yahshua Himself never taught (some would argue taught the opposite) why is it dangerous to ignore him? If people want to gain insights from his writing, then so be it, but I just can't figure out why people take his letters as the direct Word of God. Personally I think it's dangerous not to ignore it; I know you say it doesn't if you understand it properly, but most everyone that reads it thinks that the Torah is abolished. To me, that's dangerous.

I wouldn't mind betting he himself would have never professed his letters to be considered scipture.

I'd like to continue this in the future :p

I don't consider it a danger to simply say, 'Look I don't get this so I'm going to just leave it be for now'. There's a huge difference between that and then saying, 'Nope, because I don't get this, this bloke and his writings are not scripture! Paul was a heretic!' and proceed to throw out much of the NT. That is where the danger lies. It's claiming that you know more about the powers of God than that man did by being able to make such a statement that his writings are contrary to scripture and therefore can not be relied upon for truth. If folks are going to go around claiming that, I don't want to be the judge of that but Peter doesn't make it sound nice and it's something we really need to heed. Is it us? Or is it Paul? Who am I going to rely upon for having more knowledge, understanding, and wisdom on the word of God? 'Trust in the Lord will all your heart and lean not on your own understanding!' I'm inclined to think that if there's something wrong with scripture, it's not scripture itself but me and my understanding. I wouldn't say Paul taught anything new. He was more detailed and he was an extremely 'black and white' bloke. I mean, if Christian churches think that Paul would've been great to have in their midst, I think they'd get a shock horror reality. He was a very difficult man to get on with because he was extremely blunt and hit the nail on the head where it needed it. But you read much of Proverbs and though it doesn't give a 'lecture' on such morals as Paul did, it gives two lines that can sum up where Paul got his ideas from.
I think it's issues like this that we need to get a lesson on humility in. We don't know all of the mysteries of God and we don't know all truth, so if God has allowed the Bible to be preserved the way it is (excluding many other 'holy' books deemed as such by men) then we need to take note of that and admit, 'Hey, I simply don't get this!' But leave the book as it is. And what does torah say? 'Out of the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses shall every matter be established.' So far, I've posted up 3 human witnesses to Paul's case and we know that we have an even better witness; Yeshua Himself, the HS, and if those two are witnesses, then we can conclude the Father as well. :D I think Paul's a settled issue in my head! :D LOL!

No, you're absolutely right! Paul would never have dreamed that his personal letters to churches would be counted as scripture one day! :D Hey, we can keep discussing this! :D

WOW TanteBelle. I'm impressed by your knowledge (much greater than mine) and how well you can articulate your arguments. For me it is much simpler but still in agreement with you. GOD is God and there is NO way that I believe that He would let some "men" put writings in HIS book for us to study if they weren't meant to be there. So either we trust He wants them there (just like we trust that the Holy Spirit inspired the men that wrote it) or we don't but IF we don't then we are saying men are more in control than God. We are fortunate to have all the writings in one book. In biblical times they did not. All they had were various letters sent to various people. I believe God is in control, but everyone is free to believe whatever they want. To me, not believing God allowed any of the books in the Bible to be there is a very dangerous place to be.

I feel honoured by your comment, ma'am but I'm no theologian but an utter simpleton. I'm more inclined to bow to your 51 years! :D

Absolutely! In Biblical times (NT included), the only thing they had that they called scripture was the torah and tenach. They didn't have the NT at that time. I don't even think that during the days of the apostles their letters would have been scripture but simply letters of warning or encouragement.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

memoriesbymichelle

Senior Veteran
Jun 8, 2007
10,211
931
64
Arizona
✟22,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
Well TanteBelle I agree with everything you just said except the part about bowing to my 51 years. :wave:You have a way of getting the point across that reads very well! :thumbsup: I just know that I for one, am not one to question the validity of the Word of God that has been around for a long long time and for which people even today will die to keep a copy or risk their life to smuggle it in countries. And God is perfectly capable of maintaining his Word. And I will take every word that is written to heart thru the Holy Spirit who witnesses to my spirit. But that's just me. I don't want to have to answer to God as to why I would say part of His Word is not true or worth anything. Not taking that risk, not this gal.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ronald

Exhortations
Site Supporter
Jul 30, 2004
4,620
982
southern
✟111,578.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
All of those other passages don't say that the HS is God at all. They may mention the HS and God but to say that those passages are saying that the HS is God is a bit of a stretch, to be honest.
[/QUOTE]

It's OK if you don't see that right now, maybe someday? The entire Christian Church, including both Catholic and Prostestant believers for the last 1900+ years have believed in the Trinity. As I have shown you that it is taught in scripture. So, you are opposing sound doctrine, hence you are out on the limb - a branch that's maybe connected but not bringing forth the fruit that it could.
Examine yourself, don't give me an answer to this question, just ask yourself: Are you demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit in Gal. 5:22 and would you say the people who know you would confirm this?
At this point, my imput is done and I'll just say that I disagree with you.
See you on another topic sister. Btw, sea turtles are my favorite to snorkel with!
 
Upvote 0
T

TanteBelle

Guest
Well TanteBelle I agree with everything you just said except the part about bowing to my 51 years. :wave:You have a way of getting the point across that reads very well! :thumbsup: I just know that I for one, am not one to question the validity of the Word of God that has been around for a long long time and for which people even today will die to keep a copy or risk their life to smuggle it in countries. And God is perfectly capable of maintaining his Word. And I will take every word that is written to heart thru the Holy Spirit who witnesses to my spirit. But that's just me. I don't want to have to answer to God as to why I would say part of His Word is not true or worth anything. Not taking that risk, not this gal.

Agh, I must've learned something from my ol' man then! :D

Absolutely! Which is why I don't 'fit in' with Messianics on the topic of 'other holy books'. Not all but there are quite a few who read other writings that are not in the cannon of scripture.

It's OK if you don't see that right now, maybe someday? The entire Christian Church, including both Catholic and Prostestant believers for the last 1900+ years have believed in the Trinity. As I have shown you that it is taught in scripture. So, you are opposing sound doctrine, hence you are out on the limb - a branch that's maybe connected but not bringing forth the fruit that it could.
Examine yourself, don't give me an answer to this question, just ask yourself: Are you demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit in Gal. 5:22 and would you say the people who know you would confirm this?
At this point, my imput is done and I'll just say that I disagree with you.
See you on another topic sister. Btw, sea turtles are my favorite to snorkel with!

See, that's the prob; the trinity doctrine doesn't go back 2000 years, so what was before it? You're not even interested in hearing my views though they are purely from scripture? How can you disagree with me if you haven't even heard my views which are squarely from scripture?

I know you didn't want me to answer this, but I shall anyway. I don't know. I don't like to be a judge on myself in case I'm not harsh enough so I do leave that to my critics and those who know me (which is why I have the odd nature of liking folks telling me what I don't like to hear! LOL!). It's like your question do I have the HS? I don't know. I do my best to follow God in every way I can but I can't answer those questions with positivity, I'll admit. :)

YOU'VE SNORKELLED WITH SEA TURTLES!??????? I saw a sea turtle while I was snorkelling but it was too far below me! :D I have seen the great sea turtles while fishing once and those things were a few meters in length! Totally awesome creatures!!!!! And I did watch a leatherback turtle lay eggs; so I've had my amazing turtle experiences! :D
 
Upvote 0

SneakerPimp53

Becoming X
Jan 14, 2011
385
37
The 'rents' basement
✟15,724.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
The canon of Scripture that you're using was formulated 4 centuries after the time of Christ. The Triune nature of God is expressed very clearly in Scripture.

From the first chapter of the Gospel of St. John:

1 In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through him all things came into being, not one thing came into being except through him.
4 What has come into being in him was life, life that was the light of men;
5 and light shines in darkness, and darkness could not overpower it.
6 A man came, sent by God. His name was John.
7 He came as a witness, to bear witness to the light, so that everyone might believe through him.
8 He was not the light, he was to bear witness to the light.
9 The Word was the real light that gives light to everyone; he was coming into the world.
10 He was in the world that had come into being through him, and the world did not recognise him.
11 He came to his own and his own people did not accept him.
12 But to those who did accept him he gave power to become children of God, to those who believed in his name
13 who were born not from human stock or human desire or human will but from God himself.
14 The Word became flesh, he lived among us, and we saw his glory, the glory that he has from the Father as only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.

Jesus Christ is the Word, as the Word was made flesh and dwelt among men. But the Word was with God (separate from God), but at the same time the Word was God (equality of nature). There's nothing in the Nicene Creed that isn't in Scripture and in line with the belief of the Church going back to the beginning. End of the day if you don't accept the Nicene Creed then you don't have a canon of Scripture either. The canon was determined by the same Church, around the same time period, and using the same process that produced the Nicene Creed. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If they were wrong about the Creed they were obviously wrong about the canon too. If they were right about the canon then they were right about the Creed.
 
Upvote 0
T

TanteBelle

Guest
There are plenty of denoms who claim the whole Bible but have some very very wack ideas or just downright blasphemous ideas. Doctrine is a personal issue. Everyone has their own interpretation of scripture. It's merely up to the individual to make sure that scripture is their 'fence post' and not their own 'wanting' of God and scripture: God framed in their own imagination.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ks777

Start singing
May 8, 2009
4,610
544
Other world
✟16,650.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
I don't consider it a danger to simply say, 'Look I don't get this so I'm going to just leave it be for now'. There's a huge difference between that and then saying, 'Nope, because I don't get this, this bloke and his writings are not scripture! Paul was a heretic!' and proceed to throw out much of the NT. That is where the danger lies. It's claiming that you know more about the powers of God than that man did by being able to make such a statement that his writings are contrary to scripture and therefore can not be relied upon for truth. If folks are going to go around claiming that, I don't want to be the judge of that but Peter doesn't make it sound nice and it's something we really need to heed. Is it us? Or is it Paul? Who am I going to rely upon for having more knowledge, understanding, and wisdom on the word of God? 'Trust in the Lord will all your heart and lean not on your own understanding!' I'm inclined to think that if there's something wrong with scripture, it's not scripture itself but me and my understanding. I wouldn't say Paul taught anything new. He was more detailed and he was an extremely 'black and white' bloke. I mean, if Christian churches think that Paul would've been great to have in their midst, I think they'd get a shock horror reality. He was a very difficult man to get on with because he was extremely blunt and hit the nail on the head where it needed it. But you read much of Proverbs and though it doesn't give a 'lecture' on such morals as Paul did, it gives two lines that can sum up where Paul got his ideas from.
I think it's issues like this that we need to get a lesson on humility in. We don't know all of the mysteries of God and we don't know all truth, so if God has allowed the Bible to be preserved the way it is (excluding many other 'holy' books deemed as such by men) then we need to take note of that and admit, 'Hey, I simply don't get this!' But leave the book as it is. And what does torah say? 'Out of the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses shall every matter be established.' So far, I've posted up 3 human witnesses to Paul's case and we know that we have an even better witness; Yeshua Himself, the HS, and if those two are witnesses, then we can conclude the Father as well. :D I think Paul's a settled issue in my head! :D LOL!
I didn't reply to this right away because I was wondering what I thought about it, but each time I keep coming back to the same anti-Paul standpoint. I deleted my reply because it didn't present anything other than opinion and I didn't see it as helpful, but it is something I want to talk about in the future, instead of bumping the thread I might just PM you :p
 
Upvote 0