Why dont SDA's and Sabbath keepers also keep the Feast Days of Leviticus 23 too???

[BobRyan]

You haven't answered my question.

You will need to read this answer more carefully then --post 214

http://www.christianforums.com/t7802949-22/#post65103634

Not sure why that does not go to 214.

Try this...http://www.christianforums.com/t7802949-22/#post65100790

 

[VictorC]

You will need to read this answer more carefully then --

I don't think anyone is interested in deflection. The premise for my question is already firmly established, and you haven't answered it.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan

Since the question is also asked about the "Baptist Confession of Faith" affirmation of the TEN commandments as binding on all saints from Eden to this very day...

==========================================

[FONT=&quot]CH Spurgeon[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
“The Perpetuity of the Law of God”
[/FONT]
Very great mistakes have been made about the law. Not long ago there were those about us who affirmed that the law is utterly abrogated and abolished, and they openly taught that believers were not bound to make the moral law the rule of their lives. What would have been sin in other men they counted to be no sin in themselves. From such Antinomianism as that may God deliver us. We are not under the law as the method of salvation, but we delight to see the law in the hand of Christ, and desire to obey the Lord in all things. Others have been met with who have taught that Jesus mitigated and softened down the law, and they have in effect said that the perfect law of God was too hard for imperfect beings, and therefore God has given us a milder and easier rule. These tread dangerously upon the verge of terrible error, although we believe that they are little aware of it.

Section 19 of the Baptist Confession of Faith .

Section 19
. The Law of God

• God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience which was written in his heart, and He gave him very specific instruction about not eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. By this Adam and all his descendants were bound to personal, total, exact, and perpetual obedience, being promised life upon the fulfilling of the law, and threatened with death upon the breach of it. At the same time Adam was endued with power and ability to keep it.

• The same law that was first written in the heart of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness after the Fall, and was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, and written in two tables, the first four containing our duty towards God, and the other six, our duty to man.

• Besides this law, commonly called the moral law, God was pleased do give the people of Israel ceremonial laws containing several typical ordinances. These ordinances were partly about their worship, and in them Christ was prefigured along with His attributes and qualities, His actions, His sufferings and His benefits. These ordinances also gave instructions about different moral duties. All of these ceremonial laws were appointed only until the time of reformation, when Jesus Christ the true Messiah and the only lawgiver, Who was furnished with power from the Father for this end, cancelled them and took them away.

• To the people of Israel He also gave sundry judicial laws which expired when they ceased to be a nation. These are not binding on anyone now by virtue of their being part of the laws of that nation, but their general equity continue to be applicable in modern times.

• The moral law ever binds to obedience everyone, justified people as well as others, and not only out of regard for the matter contained in it, but also out of respect for the authority of God the Creator, Who gave the law. Nor does Christ in the Gospel dissolve this law in any way, but He considerably strengthens our obligation to obey it.

• Although true believers are not under the law as a covenant of works, to be justified or condemned by it, yet it is of great use to them as well as to others, because as a rule of life it informs them of the will of God and their duty and directs and binds them to walk accordingly. It also reveals and exposes the sinful pollutions of their natures, hearts and lives, and using it for self-examination they may come to greater conviction of sin, greater humility and greater hatred of their sin. They will also gain a clearer sight of their need of Christ and the perfection of His own obedience. It is of further use to regenerate people to restrain their corruptions, because of the way in which it forbids sin. The threatenings of the law serve to show what their sins actually deserve, and what troubles may be expected in this life because of these sins even by regenerate people who are freed from the curse and undiminished rigours of the law. The promises connected with the law also show believers God's approval of obedience, and what blessings they may expect when the law is kept and obeyed, though blessing will not come to them because they have satisfied the law as a covenant of works. If a man does good and refrains from evil simply because the law encourages to the good and deters him from the evil, that is no evidence that he is under the law rather than under grace.

• The aforementioned uses of the law are not contrary to the grace of the Gospel, but they sweetly comply with it, as the Spirit of Christ subdues and enables the will of man to do freely and cheerfully those things which the will of God, which is revealed in the law, requires to be done.

========================


I claim that is completely contrary to your idea of tossing the Ten Commandments under a bus.


I claim that they argue for the actual SEVENTH day Sabbath starting in Eden - applicable to all mankind - and then "bent" at the cross to point to week-day-1.




You and I have both seen the somewhat nonsensical response to that - which is of the form "oh no they now support Sunday" as if "week day 1" above - were somehow being refuted with "Sunday" -- which we both know is nonsense.


These "Sunday Sources" would quickly agree that "week day 1" is sunday.

​

​

Hint the "Baptist Confession of Faith" quoted above as edited by C.H. Spurgeon.

And Bugkiller cited the same sources saying -One should read Weighed and Wanting by D L Moody to see what he is calling the sabbath

So then "some details".

1. The quote I have been providing above is from Spurgeon not from Moody. I think we all knew that.

2.the list of six points that I have been making about that quote is not denied by anything Spurgeon said -- much less Moody.

The "Sunday Sources" are well known Sunday promoting Christian documents, Bible teachers, pastors, confession of Faith that admit to key Bible details that some people remain at war against when it comes to God's own TEN Commandments.

In fact I do. I agree with them on these details
1. Sabbath began in Eden not Sinai.
2. Sabbath as given by God was the 7th day - and began in Eden.
3. Sabbath binding on all saints from Eden to this very day.
4. ALL TEN Commandments - the moral Law of God under the NEW Covenant.
5. All saints to honor and obey the TEN Commandments from Eden to this very day.

6/The one point where I differ with them is that the Sabbath Commandment can be "bent" to point away from the 7th day as God gave it.

Those at war with God's Ten Commandments today will typically object to ALL SIX points listed above - claiming that the Commandments are either downsized or deleted for today.

So then Spurgeon argues that the 7th day Sabbath kept "from creation to the cross" was bent/edited/altered so that the 4th commandment now (still in full force) is "bent" to point to week day 1.

Something that current crowd at war with God's Ten Commandment have not been in favor of - so far.

The material already cited is from The Ten Commandments by DL Moody on the Fundamental Baptist Institute site. Please read the whole section. We find this in the section for the 4th commandment -

Quoting Moody now:
A man ought to turn aside from his ordinary employment one day in seven. There are many whose occupation will not permit them to observe Sunday, but they should observe some other day as a Sabbath. Saturday is my day of rest, because I generally preach on Sunday, and I look forward to it as a boy does to a holiday. God knows what we need.

So then point 6 "again"

6/The one point where I differ with them is that the Sabbath Commandment can be "bent" to point away from the 7th day as God gave it.

Those at war with God's Ten Commandments today will typically object to ALL SIX points listed above - claiming that the Commandments are either downsized or deleted for today.

How many ways to "agree with me" without admitting it?

At least one more I think.

D L Moody is not presenting Saturday as the sabbath for the Christian. He clearly calls Sunday the sabbath. He does go on and try and apply at least some sabbath regulations to Sunday as principles to live by.

So as much as your idea of "quote Moody and NOT Spurgeon" was supposed to "help" you with my quote of Spurgeon's "The Baptist Confession of Faith" -- it is apparent that the 6 points I listed are only affirmed by your addition of Moody's quote.

How is that supposed to be a problem for my view?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I don't think anyone is interested in deflection. .

Which is why I keep reference the post on this very thread that deals with the bible text of Gen 2 and Exodus 20.

I think we all knew that.

Just click it. And note "the details" -- post 214
http://www.christianforums.com/t7802949-22/#post65100790



in Christ,

 

[VictorC]

Which is why I keep reference the post on this very thread that deals with the bible text of Gen 2 and Exodus 20.

I think we all knew that.

Just click it. And note "the details" -- post 214
http://www.christianforums.com/t7802949-22/#post65100790



in Christ,

Another deflection? You haven't defended your premise, and you're misrepresenting my post - again. If you don't want to share your motive for discarding the Law, you could have just said so. It isn't important to me.

 

[BobRyan]

Okay, you've conceded that the Bible isn't your arbiter to determine doctrine, ?

Not at all true.

I have posted the bible statements on the Ten commandments soooo many times even the board monitors are starting to notice the Bible texts. Too late to now start pretending that they do not exist.

or that this post does not exist.

God says it is in Gen 2:3.

When God summarizes Gen 1-2:3 in Ex 20:11 He specifically says it is in Gen 2:3.

We need to believe "God" -- as it turns out.

And Christ affirms it in Mark 2:27 speaking both of the making of mankind and the making of the Sabbath in Creation week "the Sabbath was MADE for Mankind".

So obvious - even many Sunday Sources get this Bible point - of the Sabbath starting in Eden.



Oh Good -- Bible quotes instead of tired old "man made tradition" about the Commandments of God supposedly being dead.

Christ affirms it in Mark 2:27 speaking both of the making of mankind and the making of the Sabbath in Creation week "the Sabbath was MADE for Mankind"

"From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship" Is 66:23

Ex 20:11 "11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed THE Sabbath day and made it holy." That is what God said He did in Gen 2:3.

Gen 2:1-3

Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

"And Sanctified it" -- "And made it Holy" -- the same word.

Another deflection?

If you don't want to share your motive for discarding the Law, .

Where did i claim to discard the law? Since you only quote "you" in your post -- who knows what you are referring to? Perhaps "imagination"??

Let us know. Quote something and respond to it.

Notice in the example I give above -- I quote you and then respond.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

As for this thread -- Hebrews 10 explains why the ceremonial law in sacrifices and offerings is no longer applicable as the predicted Sacrifice of Christ has been made.

We read chapters 1-13 but in this case Heb 10 answered your question.

Nothing like staying focused on the point. (So why so quick to change the focus from Heb 10? Like you touched a hot stove? You had to have known this was the easy answer from scripture. Maybe we need to focus more on Heb 10 and see.)

Here we will see why Hebrews 10 is such a "hot potatoe" for some of our posters. And why it is so obviously the solution as to "why" we do not continue to keep ceremonial laws that are based in sacrifice and offering.

Heb 10
[FONT=&quot]3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year.
4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
5 Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "" SACRIFICE AND OFFERING YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME;
6 IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE.
7 "" THEN I SAID, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'''
8 After saying above, "" SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED, NOR HAVE YOU TAKEN PLEASURE in them'' (which are offered according to the Law),
9 then He said, "" BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL.'' He takes away the first in order to establish the second.
10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,
13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]By the will of God we have been sanctified (set apart) through the offering of the body of Christ.


[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]KJV[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Vs 9[/FONT]
9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.



So then - Not many many times in a “continued” sacrifice



[FONT=&quot]Hebrews 8[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
1 Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,
2 a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Zech 6[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] 12"Then say to him, 'Thus says the LORD of hosts, "Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the LORD. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] 13"Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the LORD, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Heb 10[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,
16 "" THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM,'' He then says,
17 "" AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE.''
18 Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin.[/FONT]

I think we all knew that.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[VictorC]

Not at all true.

I have posted the bible statements on the Ten commandments soooo many times even the board monitors are starting to notice the Bible texts. Too late to now start pretending that they do not exist.

or that this post does not exist.

Where did i claim to discard the law? Since you only quote "you" in your post -- who knows what you are referring to? Perhaps "imagination"??

Let us know. Quote something and respond to it.

Notice in the example I give above -- I quote you and then respond.

in Christ,

Bob

I'm sure there's a reason you don't understand posts presented to you - but as I mentioned, your motive is immaterial to me. You can't bring yourself to say "no".

 

[BobRyan]

I Just posted the Heb 10 solution. You can choose to respond or simply keep ignoring the answers. But if you ignore the answers - and just keep circling back to the same questions as if you don't have time for the actual Bible answers - the discussion ends.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[VictorC]

I Just posted the Heb 10 solution. You can choose to respond or simply keep ignoring the answers. But if you ignore the answers - and just keep circling back to the same questions as if you don't have time for the actual Bible answers - the discussion ends.

in Christ,

Bob

Do you remember this post?

Also, it was you who brought up Hebrews chapter 10's mention of the various offerings, of which God shows no pleasure in.

Hebrews 10
8 Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. 10 By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Bob, what is the significance of the burnt offerings?
What happened to the ordinances that drove these offerings?

And He -who is Jesus Christ- took away the 'first' in order to ordain the second covenant. That 'first' is defined in this epistle.
What happened to the ordinances contained within the 'first'?

You never provided an answer to my questions. I endorse the 'solution' Hebrews 10 provides, but you don't seem to understand the implications it presents.

 

[BobRyan]

Do you remember this post?

You never provided an answer to my questions. I endorse the 'solution' Hebrews 10 provides, but you don't seem to understand the implications it presents.

Originally Posted by VictorC

Also, it was you who brought up Hebrews chapter 10's mention of the various offerings, of which God shows no pleasure in.

Hebrews 10
8 Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. 10 By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Bob, what is the significance of the burnt offerings?
What happened to the ordinances that drove these offerings?

And He -who is Jesus Christ- took away the 'first' in order to ordain the second covenant. That 'first' is defined in this epistle.
What happened to the ordinances contained within the 'first'?
​

Paul did not say that the Bible died - Paul said that the animal sacrifices end at the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ.

I thought we all saw that point. Where is your confusion??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[VictorC]

Paul did not say that the Bible died - Paul said that the animal sacrifices end at the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ.

I thought we all saw that point. Where is your confusion??

in Christ,

Bob

Paul? You made this up from a vacuum. And once again, you didn't address the content presented to you. You didn't answer the questions that have been waiting for more than two weeks for you to answer.

 

[from scratch]

​

Hint the "Baptist Confession of Faith" quoted above as edited by C.H. Spurgeon.



So then "some details".

1. The quote I have been providing above is from Spurgeon not from Moody. I think we all knew that.

2.the list of six points that I have been making about that quote is not denied by anything Spurgeon said -- much less Moody.




So then Spurgeon argues that the 7th day Sabbath kept "from creation to the cross" was bent/edited/altered so that the 4th commandment now (still in full force) is "bent" to point to week day 1.

Something that current crowd at war with God's Ten Commandment have not been in favor of - so far.




So then point 6 "again"

6/The one point where I differ with them is that the Sabbath Commandment can be "bent" to point away from the 7th day as God gave it.

Those at war with God's Ten Commandments today will typically object to ALL SIX points listed above - claiming that the Commandments are either downsized or deleted for today.

How many ways to "agree with me" without admitting it?

At least one more I think.



So as much as your idea of "quote Moody and NOT Spurgeon" was supposed to "help" you with my quote of Spurgeon's "The Baptist Confession of Faith" -- it is apparent that the 6 points I listed are only affirmed by your addition of Moody's quote.

How is that supposed to be a problem for my view?

in Christ,

Bob

I see you didn't use the part of Bugkiller's quote by the Baptist you quoted. Why don't you want to play fair?

 

[BobRyan]

Paul? You made this up from a vacuum. And once again, you didn't address the content presented to you. You didn't answer the questions that have been waiting for more than two weeks for you to answer.

The text answered the question about the animal sacrifices and therefore the ceremonies given - in animal sacrifices - ended at the cross. (The subject of this thread).

I thought we all saw that point. What part did you find confusing?

Did you suppose that your questions are getting around this detail?

If so -- how?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[VictorC]

The text answered the question about the animal sacrifices and therefore the ceremonies given - in animal sacrifices - ended at the cross. (The subject of this thread).

I thought we all saw that point. What part did you find confusing?

Did you suppose that your questions are getting around this detail?

If so -- how?

in Christ,

Bob

Maybe if I extract the questions you haven't addressed -again- you might respond to content. Here they are:
Bob, what is the significance of the burnt offerings?
What happened to the ordinances that drove these offerings?
What happened to the ordinances contained within the 'first'?

 

[BobRyan]

I see you didn't use the part of Bugkiller's quote by the Baptist you quoted. Why don't you want to play fair?

BugKiller never quotes the Baptist Confession of Faith or the Westminster Confession of Faith -- I do.

You keep bringing Bugkiller up as if he solved this problem for your view - but then never find that he quotes those documents -- so you post D.L. Moody "instead".

But even at that - you can't find a place where the 6 claims made about these Sunday Sources - are not proven true - true and more true - in the D.L. Moody quote you are resorting to - instead of the Baptist Confession of Faith.

How is that helping your point?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[from scratch]

Not at all true.

I have posted the bible statements on the Ten commandments soooo many times even the board monitors are starting to notice the Bible texts. Too late to now start pretending that they do not exist.

or that this post does not exist.

Where did i claim to discard the law? Since you only quote "you" in your post -- who knows what you are referring to? Perhaps "imagination"??

Let us know. Quote something and respond to it.

Notice in the example I give above -- I quote you and then respond.

in Christ,

Bob

I don't know if its to deny, disregard or edit Ex 20:8-11 that is the problem. It seems you claim adherence to it but when questioned about its contents you brush them aside for some reason. At best I believe others besides me see you've at least edited the Bible to fit your idea.

 

[BobRyan]

Maybe if I extract the questions you haven't addressed -again- you might respond to content. Here they are:
Bob, what is the significance of the burnt offerings?
What happened to the ordinances that drove these offerings?
What happened to the ordinances contained within the 'first'?

the animal sacrifices point to the sacrifice of Christ. -- which answered your first question - already.

The ceremonies given in animal sacrifices ended at the cross - which answered your second question - already.

The third question is just a re-statement of the second question.

i fail to see how this is confusing you - such that you keep circling back to the answered questions instead of commenting on the answers.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[from scratch]

As for this thread -- Hebrews 10 explains why the ceremonial law in sacrifices and offerings is no longer applicable as the predicted Sacrifice of Christ has been made.

I think we all knew that.

in Christ,

Bob

It appears to me you've just admitted that jots and tittles of the law have changed. So much for your Mat 5:17-18 argument.

I'm told not to laugh. You're just way to much fun.

 

[BobRyan]

I don't know if its to deny, disregard or edit Ex 20:8-11 that is the problem. It seems you claim adherence to it but when questioned about its contents you brush them aside

Feel free to provide an actual quote of me brushing aside Ex 20:11 because as it stands now - even the Moderators are noticing that I quote it a lot and comment on it a lot.

I particularly like the fact that the "Sanctify" and "made it holy" -- terms in Ex 20:11 and Gen 2:3 are the same for the seventh day.

in Christ,

Bob