Which day of the Week is the Bible Sabbath?

bugkiller

Well-Known Member
May 16, 2015
17,773
2,634
✟80,400.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Not sure what your point is. These verses do not contradict the fact that an agreement (covenant) and the rules associated with that agreement, are not the same, yet intimately connected. 2 Cor 3:11 does not say they were not permanent. It was the glory of Moses' ministration that was done away with, now to be replaced by Christ's High Priestly ministration--the Glory of Christ. So now the "glory" shining in the law is Christ, no longer Moses. Moses was the mediator of the Old Covenant, Christ is the Mediator of the New Covenant.

2 Cor 3 is actually a chapter that is an "Adventist Chapter". It supports our positions even more, yet the evangelicals continue to interpret 2 Cor 3 in a very awkward manner, which is not in harmony with what the text actually says. It does not say the Laws written on the Tables were "done away with"---only the "glory" of Moses was done away with. When Moses was ministering, there was a "veil" blinding the Israelites from beholding the true meaning of the law--from beholding the importance of that law being transferred to their hearts. When Christ comes, that veil is removed, and now the glory of Christ shines on the law even more.

The law is actually more strict in the New Covenant, as it has to do with heart-work. Doing it from the heart, not out of compliance.

A broken agreement was abolished. Not the law.
Why do you post as though nothing has been said before? How long have you been here? The agreement was the law and the covenant Deut 4:13. Do you not like Moses either?

bugkiller
 
Upvote 0

Lysimachus

Vindicating our Historic Biblical Foundations
Dec 21, 2010
1,762
41
✟9,605.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Private
Why do you post as though nothing has been said before? How long have you been here? The agreement was the law and the covenant Deut 4:13. Do you not like Moses either?

bugkiller

I'm not sure how you think I am posting as though nothing has been said before. Are you sure you are not the pot calling the kettle black? I have yet to see you acknowledge any of the solid arguments I have presented.

I'm still curious as to how you get around the fact that Jesus and the Apostles often allude to the commandments contained in the Ten. If the entire law was abolished, why emphasize their importance in the New Covenant at all?

Perhaps maybe, just maybe, you have made some serious theological shipwreck in your interpretation of what "exactly" was abolished with the Old Covenant?

If it's the law, then Jesus and the Apostles sure made some serious blunders when they alluded to the "commandments of old" as being in effect.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
True--to the extent that the early Christians, for awhile,
attended synagogue on one day AND THEN their own services on the Lord's Day



--======================


There is no record at all in the NT of the NT saints attending Synagogue services where they are
preaching the Gospel and then inviting all the Jews and Gentiles in the Synagogue to a "week day 1" meeting as a followup.

But there IS the example of the opposite in both Acts 13 and Acts 17 where after Preaching the Gospel to both Jews and gentiles on the Sabbath they invite everyone back "NEXT SABBATH" for more Gospel preaching - and "NEXT DAY" for more Gospel preaching.


For the story about them preaching the Gospel on Sabbath and then having everyone attend a "come back tomorrow for more" service - you have to make it up - because it is not there in the NT.





--======================
They are sharing the gospel on Sabbath with BOTH bible believing Jews AND Gentiles - and instead of inviting those who accept the message to "join us tomorrow in our week-day-1 Gospel preaching service" they say "come back next Sabbath" when in fact "almost the entire town shows up" Acts 13.


No, no you are adding to the Scripture here. There is no indication they are Christians


A lot of people here think Paul was a Christian.. (And obviously - I happen to be in that group)

And the bible says in Acts 13 that the gentiles believed in the Bible and in the one true God. The point above is about "evangelism" of non-Christians. You keep insisting that non-Christians would not have been invited to a sunday (week-day-1) service to hear more about the gospel -- as if that makes sense to us.

It does not.

Once you have people who accept God and the Bible and are even listening to Gospel sermons - wanting to hear more - you do not say "oh no you cannot come to church until you are a baptized Christian".

Your argument is in the any-ol-excuse will do model instead of taking this point seriously.

in Christ,

Bob
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Frogster

Galatians is the best!
Sep 7, 2009
44,343
3,066
✟74,307.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican
I didn't say the Old Covenant wasn't abolished. I believe it was. The entire earthly ceremonial system was abolished.

But keep in mind that all the covenants made to man are subject to the Everlasting Covenant. The Everlasting Covenant ENCOMPASSES ALL the covenants. All the covenants given are simply gradual reintegrations of the Everlasting Covenant.

The "Old" covenant was never called the "Old" Covenant. It BECAME "Old" when Israel broke it.

The Old Covenant is the Everlasting Covenant broken by the poor promises of Israel. The New Covenant is the Everlasting Covenant restored, recaptured, and made better by the blood of Christ. This is why a New Covenant was absolutely necessary, because although the Everlasting Covenant was made between the Father and Son, long before this planet was created, a breach had been made in the Covenant by a stubborn and stiffnecked people.

Therefore, this Everlasting Covenant had to be restored. And this is why we see that the blood Christ shed was the blood of the Everlasting Covenant (Hebrews 13:20). But we also already know according to Scripture it was the blood of the New Covenant.

The most convincing proof that the abolishing of the covenant does not erase the law is the fact that Jesus, the Apostles, and Paul repeat or allude to all 10 of them.

Simple as pie.

simple as pie? then why, oh pie, do we not have to keep the jewish festivals, externally verbatim, but somehow we gotta keep sabbath externally?

show me this pick-n-choose thing in the text. U ignored me on that, cause u know it takes down your fusion, and using the New cov, to bind the old.

besides, 13;20 was written to people to being told to people that they should leave the old cov, they did not come to sinai chapter 12, WHERE THE 10 WERE GIVEN...HEHEHEHEH
 
Upvote 0

Frogster

Galatians is the best!
Sep 7, 2009
44,343
3,066
✟74,307.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican




--======================









A lot of people here think Paul was a Christian.
And the bible says in Acts 13 that the gentiles believed in the Bible and in the one true God. The point above is about "evangelism" of non-Christians. You keep insisting that non-Christians would not have been invited to a sunday (week-day-1) service to hear more about the gospel -- as if that makes sense to us.

It does not.

Once you have people who accept God and the Bible and are even listening to Gospel sermons - wanting to hear more - you do not say "oh no you cannot come to church until you are a baptized Christian".

Your argument is in the any-ol-excuse will do model instead of taking this point seriously.

in Christ,

Bob

Paul called himslef a Christian before agrippa in acts 26. (red above)
 
Upvote 0

Frogster

Galatians is the best!
Sep 7, 2009
44,343
3,066
✟74,307.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican
I didn't say the Old Covenant wasn't abolished. I believe it was. The entire earthly ceremonial system was abolished.

But keep in mind that all the covenants made to man are subject to the Everlasting Covenant. The Everlasting Covenant ENCOMPASSES ALL the covenants. All the covenants given are simply gradual reintegrations of the Everlasting Covenant.

The "Old" covenant was never called the "Old" Covenant. It BECAME "Old" when Israel broke it.

The Old Covenant is the Everlasting Covenant broken by the poor promises of Israel. The New Covenant is the Everlasting Covenant restored, recaptured, and made better by the blood of Christ. This is why a New Covenant was absolutely necessary, because although the Everlasting Covenant was made between the Father and Son, long before this planet was created, a breach had been made in the Covenant by a stubborn and stiffnecked people.

Therefore, this Everlasting Covenant had to be restored. And this is why we see that the blood Christ shed was the blood of the Everlasting Covenant (Hebrews 13:20). But we also already know according to Scripture it was the blood of the New Covenant.

The most convincing proof that the abolishing of the covenant does not erase the law is the fact that Jesus, the Apostles, and Paul repeat or allude to all 10 of them.

Simple as pie.

it does not "encompass all" (red above).

no adding..


Gal 3:5 To give a human example, brothers:even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified.

no fusing...

Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise.

or it implodes!!:preach:


rom 4:14 For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. 15 For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.


Simple as pie.


refute the clear text....go for it...
 
Upvote 0

Lysimachus

Vindicating our Historic Biblical Foundations
Dec 21, 2010
1,762
41
✟9,605.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Private
simple as pie? then why, oh pie, do we not have to keep the jewish festivals, externally verbatim, but somehow we gotta keep sabbath externally?

show me this pick-n-choose thing in the text. U ignored me on that, cause u know it takes down your fusion, and using the New cov, to bind the old.

besides, 13;20 was written to people to being told to people that they should leave the old cov, they did not come to sinai chapter 12, WHERE THE 10 WERE GIVEN...HEHEHEHEH

Because the Jewish festivals were shadows pointing forward to Christ's death on the cross and High Priestly intercession in heaven as per Col 2:14-16; Heb. 9:9,10. These have met their "substance" in Christ. The 10 Commandments are moral commands of conduct, that existed in heaven and currently exist in heaven (Revelation 11:19; 15:5). The Sabbath points "backward" to Creation week, as per Exodus 20:11. It was made "for" "mankind".

We have no allusion to the Seventh-Day Sabbath of the 4th commandment being a shadow anymore than we find the other 9 of not worshiping idols, not stealing, murdering, committing adultery, not coveting, etc. etc. being a shadow.

All the earthly ceremonial types finding their meaning spiritually in the New Covenant.

Here are some examples of how all the earthly ceremonial services meet their antitypical, and spiritual reality:

“I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” (Romans 12:1)

“Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin (Romans 6:6)

"Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2:5)

"It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these." (Hebrews 9:23)

"And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." (Mark 12:33)

"By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased." (Hebrews 13:15,16)

"And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour." (Ephesians 2:5)

"But I have all, and abound: I am full, having received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you, an odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, wellpleasing to God." (Philippians 4:18 )

"And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." (Galatians 5:24)

"And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." (Colossians 2:10,11)

"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." (Romans 2:28, 29)

"For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh." (Philippians 3:3)

"Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." (1 Cor 5:8 )

And concerning the sprinkling of blood we find:

"Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." (Hebrews 10:22)

"And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel." (Hebrews 12:24)​
 
Upvote 0

New_Wineskin

Contributor
Jun 26, 2004
11,145
652
Elizabethtown , PA , usa
✟13,854.00
Faith
Non-Denom
The most convincing proof that the abolishing of the covenant does not erase the law is the fact that Jesus, the Apostles, and Paul repeat or allude to all 10 of them.

Simple as pie.

If so "simple" , why can you not give the passage that repeats "all ten" *to* Gentiles *as* a means of salvation ?
 
Upvote 0

New_Wineskin

Contributor
Jun 26, 2004
11,145
652
Elizabethtown , PA , usa
✟13,854.00
Faith
Non-Denom
No, no you are adding to the Scripture here. There is no indication they are Christians as you imply with your "Bible believing" statement. Pretty sly trick on those lacking in knowledge with your code word applications. It is your very Bible believer thumping Jews who seek to kill Paul.


Bugkiller
- As well as the bible believing thumping Paul who sought believing Jews to kill .
 
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

Frogster

Galatians is the best!
Sep 7, 2009
44,343
3,066
✟74,307.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican
Because the Jewish festivals were shadows pointing forward to Christ's death on the cross and High Priestly intercession in heaven as per Col 2:14-16; Heb. 9:9,10. These have met their "substance" in Christ. The 10 Commandments are moral commands of conduct, that existed in heaven and currently exist in heaven (Revelation 11:19; 15:5). The Sabbath points "backward" to Creation week, as per Exodus 20:11. It was made "for" "mankind".

We have no allusion to the Seventh-Day Sabbath of the 4th commandment being a shadow anymore than we find the other 9 of not worshiping idols, not stealing, murdering, committing adultery, not coveting, etc. etc. being a shadow.

All the earthly ceremonial types finding their meaning spiritually in the New Covenant.

Here are some examples of how all the earthly ceremonial services meet their antitypical, and spiritual reality:

“I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” (Romans 12:1)

“Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin (Romans 6:6)

"Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2:5)

"It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these." (Hebrews 9:23)

"And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." (Mark 12:33)

"By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased." (Hebrews 13:15,16)

"And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour." (Ephesians 2:5)

"But I have all, and abound: I am full, having received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you, an odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, wellpleasing to God." (Philippians 4:18 )

"And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." (Galatians 5:24)

"And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." (Colossians 2:10,11)

"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." (Romans 2:28, 29)

"For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh." (Philippians 3:3)

"Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." (1 Cor 5:8 )

And concerning the sprinkling of blood we find:

"Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." (Hebrews 10:22)

"And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel." (Hebrews 12:24)​

i just want a simple question answered..:doh:

why do you keep the jewish food restrictions, the sabby, but somehow allow yourself to break festival commandments?:D

show me where it says we pick-n-choose, internal from external?

internal circumcision, external sabby, external diet, but no external keeping of the jewish feasts?:D
 
Upvote 0

bugkiller

Well-Known Member
May 16, 2015
17,773
2,634
✟80,400.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I'm not sure how you think I am posting as though nothing has been said before. Are you sure you are not the pot calling the kettle black? I have yet to see you acknowledge any of the solid arguments I have presented.

I'm still curious as to how you get around the fact that Jesus and the Apostles often allude to the commandments contained in the Ten. If the entire law was abolished, why emphasize their importance in the New Covenant at all?

Perhaps maybe, just maybe, you have made some serious theological shipwreck in your interpretation of what "exactly" was abolished with the Old Covenant?

If it's the law, then Jesus and the Apostles sure made some serious blunders when they alluded to the "commandments of old" as being in effect.
Read the Sermon on the Mount for instance. I love Jesus' words "but I say"...

bugkiller
 
Upvote 0

bugkiller

Well-Known Member
May 16, 2015
17,773
2,634
✟80,400.00
Faith
Non-Denom
A lot of people here think Paul was a Christian.
Oh excuse me for think such a thing. Now what was Paul evangelizing about? Something he isn't to people that already were. That make no sense at all.
And the bible says in Acts 13 that the gentiles believed in the Bible and in the one true God. The point above is about "evangelism" of non-Christians. You keep insisting that non-Christians would not have been invited to a sunday (week-day-1) service to hear more about the gospel -- as if that makes sense to us.
Where is this that the Gentiles believed in and on Jesus? Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
It does not.

Once you have people who accept God and the Bible and are even listening to Gospel sermons - wanting to hear more - you do not say "oh no you cannot come to church until you are a baptized Christian".
Wanna bet!
Your argument is in the any-ol-excuse will do model instead of taking this point seriously.
Get serious.

bugkiller
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

New_Wineskin

Contributor
Jun 26, 2004
11,145
652
Elizabethtown , PA , usa
✟13,854.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Read the Sermon on the Mount for instance. I love Jesus' words "but I say"...

bugkiller
Yeah . I bring that up and they pooh-pooh it . They say that Jesus exhorted the use of the Law ( especially the 10 ) but He was already setting it aside to listen to Him . That is why He said that people whould keep *His* commandments to show a seperation from previously written ones .
 
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

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
No, no you are adding to the Scripture here. There is no indication they are Christians


A lot of people here think Paul was a Christian.. (And obviously - I happen to be in that group)

And the bible says in Acts 13 that the gentiles believed in the Bible and in the one true God. The point above is about "evangelism" of non-Christians. You keep insisting that non-Christians would not have been invited to a sunday (week-day-1) service to hear more about the gospel -- as if that makes sense to us.

It does not.

Once you have people who accept God and the Bible and are even listening to Gospel sermons - wanting to hear more - you do not say "oh no you cannot come to church until you are a baptized Christian".

Your argument is in the any-ol-excuse will do model instead of taking this point seriously.
[

Oh excuse me for think such a thing. Now what was Paul evangelizing about? Something he isn't to people that already were. That make no sense at all.


I find your response hard to follow. It appears that you are missing the point entirely.

 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
No, no you are adding to the Scripture here. There is no indication they are Christians



BobRyan said:
A lot of people here think Paul was a Christian.. (And obviously - I happen to be in that group)

And the bible says in Acts 13 that the gentiles believed in the Bible and in the one true God. The point above is about "evangelism" of non-Christians. You keep insisting that non-Christians would not have been invited to a sunday (week-day-1) service to hear more about the gospel -- as if that makes sense to us.

It does not.

Once you have people who accept God and the Bible and are even listening to Gospel sermons - wanting to hear more - you do not say "oh no you cannot come to church until you are a baptized Christian".

Your argument is in the any-ol-excuse will do model instead of taking this point seriously.

Paul called himslef a Christian before agrippa in acts 26. (red above)


Yep -- no doubt about that - Paul is Christian.

Not sure why this point is a sticking point with some people - I thought this was the part where all agreed.

in Christ,

Bob
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
I didn't say the Old Covenant wasn't abolished. I believe it was. The entire earthly ceremonial system was abolished.

Simple as pie.
Have you tried to explain that to the unbelieving Jews of today and to the Christian MJ sect? ;)

....
 
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

Frogster

Galatians is the best!
Sep 7, 2009
44,343
3,066
✟74,307.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican


A lot of people here think Paul was a Christian.. (And obviously - I happen to be in that group)

And the bible says in Acts 13 that the gentiles believed in the Bible and in the one true God. The point above is about "evangelism" of non-Christians. You keep insisting that non-Christians would not have been invited to a sunday (week-day-1) service to hear more about the gospel -- as if that makes sense to us.

It does not.

Once you have people who accept God and the Bible and are even listening to Gospel sermons - wanting to hear more - you do not say "oh no you cannot come to church until you are a baptized Christian".

Your argument is in the any-ol-excuse will do model instead of taking this point seriously.
[



I find your response hard to follow. It appears that you are missing the point entirely.


but being a christian or not, is essential to the whole argument.

who cares about what unsaved did..golly gee wilickers.:D
 
Upvote 0