Irrefutable evidence of 4th Commandment support by pro-Sunday sources

[BobRyan]

(This thread title change idea - is one of the options open to me - as recommended Tywin Lannister )

If we all stay on the subject of the OP - it will work fine -
============================================

Here is an example of claims made by the pro-Sunday sources - and 6 of the 7 are actually correct according to the Bible!.


Yes that is right - 6 of the 7 are actually common ground between Sabbath keeping and Sunday keeping Christians.


1. That the Sabbath Commandment is first given to mankind in Gen 2:1-3
2. That all mankind was obligated by the TEN commandments in the OT and to this very day.
3. That the seventh day as the Sabbath was Saturday the seventh day of the week from Gen 2:1-3 until NT times - including at the cross.
4. That the Ten Commandments are the moral Law of God
5. That the moral law of God is written on the heart under the New Covenant
6. that the Ten Commandments as the moral law of God are in no way opposed to grace and the Gospel.
7. That the Sabbath commandment can rightly be BENT by man-made-tradition to point to week-day-1 after the cross.

I agree with 6 out of 7 as listed above - and yet many who post against God's TEN commandments object to all of the points listed above. And sometimes they will even go on to complain that so many of the points above are in agreement with my position and opposed to the war-against-the-Ten-Commandments position.

================================
In line with those 6 points we have ...

Bible texts both NT and OT about God's Commandments - Showing that the TEN Commandments are assigned the title "in scripture" as being "Commandments of God" -- and as also being "The Word of God"

10 Commandments are –
“Commandments of God” Neh 10:29
“Law of God” Neh 10:29
“Word of God” Mark 7:13
“Commandment of God” Mark 7:6-13
NT “Scripture” James 2:8
NT “Law” – James 2:9-11
NT Commandments Eph 6:2, Rom 13:9, Romans 7:7-10

Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Note that in 1John 5 - John contrasts "LOVE", to the Commandments of God. He does not say "By this we know that we Love God -- if we Love God".

Rather John points to obedience to the WORD of God "the Commandments of God" as the sign that we truly to LOVE God. Being at war against his Word is not such a great sign of "loving God" as some had perhaps imagined.

1 John 5
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.
2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome. 1 John 5:1-3

==========================================================
Paul affirms the Ten Commandments (see point 5 below) AND He never claims that "if I did not write it -- it is not scripture for us today" -- as one or two have imagined for us.

1. Paul never commands gentiles to "Love God WITH ALL your heart".
2. Paul never commands gentiles "not to take God's name in vain"
3. Paul never commands gentiles to ignore the writings of Moses.
4. Paul DOES tell gentiles that Moses' writings are still authoritative scripture in 1Cor 9:8-9 and 1Tim 5:18 and binding as being "Law" and as being "scripture".
5. Paul quotes from Moses and the TEN Commandments Eph 6:2. Full 5th commandment
6. Paul DOES teach that there remains therefore a "Sabbath rest for the people of God" Hebrews 4.
7. Paul DOES tell gentiles that "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD" 1 Cor 7:19
8. Paul does tell gentiles "it is not the HEARERS of the Law that are just before God but the DOERS of the Law will be justifIED... on the day when according to my GOSPEL God will judge all mankind" Rom 2:13-16
9. Paul DOES ask that gentiles consider the doctrine of LAW "Do we then make void the LAW of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31
10. Paul DOES tell gentiles that it is only the lost who will "not subject themselves to the LAw of God neither indeed CAN they" Rom 8:6-8
11. Paul DOES tell gentiles that "The Law" is in fact "The LAW of Moses" and is to be used for testing doctrine 1Cor 9:8-9
12. Paul DOES tell gentiles that the OT text is to be used for Doctrine 2Tim 3:16

--------------------------

Since some have not looked up the referenced -- I added the info for them here -- #297 (Baptist Confession of Faith)

#13 (D.L. Moody)

 

[BobRyan]

Since this emphasizes a lot of common ground between the two groups - I expect to see some group-hug ideas as well as those who would differ and also those who (like me) strongly support 6 of the 7 points.

 

[from scratch]

.

 

[BobRyan]

I have a couple of examples in the OP

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


Since some have not looked up the referenced -- I added the info for them here -- #297 (Baptist Confession of Faith)

#13 (D.L. Moody)

 

[BobRyan]

If you look at the thread titles ahead of or near this thread - you will see that the ones which are pro-Ten Commandments and pro-4th Commandment are making statements that even the pro-Sunday sources listed in the OP would make.

But in the details you will find that while those opposing ALL SEVEN of the pro-Sunday source statements in the OP about the 4th commandment - ( statements are reflected in a great many thread titles near this thread.) - they are opposing the very points where the pro-Sunday sources agree with the Sabbath keepers here instead of just limiting their opposition to point 7 in that list.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[from scratch]

.

 

[BobRyan]

They've already been refuted.

We keep hearing that claim but then when the details are reviewed- all the complaints vanish and the statement in the OP remain unchallenged by actual details.

If you have some that you would be glad to stand behind - please post one.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Sophrosyne]

We keep hearing that claim but then when the details are reviewed- all the complaints vanish and the statement in the OP remain unchallenged by actual details.

If you have some that you would be glad to stand behind - please post one.

in Christ,

Bob

hogwash

 

[bbbbbbb]

They've already been refuted. This is old news which I use to start fires in the stove with in the winter. Started on the other day. It seems 58 is really cold compared to 100.

Just be sure not to kindle your fire on the Sabbath.

 

[Angelquill]

Just be sure not to kindle your fire on the Sabbath.

Of course, if you live somewhere where the snow flies and the temperatures stay below zero, perhaps it would be better to have a fire than to freeze to death.
I'm pretty sure Jesus did say that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath.

Remember, we are under a New Covenant now...all that old stuff no longer applies.

 

[BobRyan]

I notice that those opposed to the 4th commandment struggle with the idea of staying on the topic of the OP and showing actual evidence/data/ in support of their view.

I think it is better to be objective, and post substantive content in support of one's position.

We could all post "I did something some place - unnamed - that refutes whatever point you would like to make in the OP of this thread" -- on almost every thread of CF that we differ with. But that would be an argument run-aground.

I think we all can agree on at least that much.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[bbbbbbb]

Of course, if you live somewhere where the snow flies and the temperatures stay below zero, perhaps it would be better to have a fire than to freeze to death.
I'm pretty sure Jesus did say that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath.

Remember, we are under a New Covenant now...all that old stuff no longer applies.

Exactly how much of "that old stuff" no longer applies?

 

[Sophrosyne]

I notice that those opposed to the 4th commandment struggle with the idea of staying on the topic of the OP and showing actual evidence/data/ in support of their view.

I think it is better to be objective, and post substantive content in support of one's position.

We could all post "I did something some place - unnamed - that refutes whatever point you would like to make in the OP of this thread" -- on almost every thread of CF that we differ with. But that would be an argument run-aground.

I think we all can agree on at least that much.

in Christ,

Bob

Nobody wants to (again) play this game with you and I don't blame them it does nothing to refute your propaganda because you will just let the thread lapse and start another one later as if nobody ever said a thing.

 

[from scratch]

Of course, if you live somewhere where the snow flies and the temperatures stay below zero, perhaps it would be better to have a fire than to freeze to death.
I'm pretty sure Jesus did say that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath.

Remember, we are under a New Covenant now...all that old stuff no longer applies.

Just more evidence the law was only given to Israel and meant for a specific location (region).

 

[from scratch]

Just be sure not to kindle your fire on the Sabbath.

I'll probably already have one going.

 

[from scratch]

We keep hearing that claim but then when the details are reviewed- all the complaints vanish and the statement in the OP remain unchallenged by actual details.

If you have some that you would be glad to stand behind - please post one.

in Christ,

Bob

Only if we use your selective details.

 

[BobRyan]

how wonderful that we have no evidence at all being posted in opposition to the OP so far. (though clearly some have stated they are in opposition to the 7 points listed there)

Simply wonderful.

But keep in mind the OP already agrees that those posting against Christ our Creator's seventh-day Sabbath - are in opposition to all 7 points affirmed buy the majority of even pro-sunday scholarship... I oppose only one of those 7 points.

Conclusion: All the complaining about this or that pro-Sabbath group is nonsense - since the opposition is invariably on one of the 6 points where we DO agree with the majority of even pro-Sunday Christian scholarship!!

How instructive.

How devastating for some of the solutions tried out on this area of the board in opposition to God's 4th commandment.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[from scratch]

how wonderful that we have no evidence at all being posted in opposition to the OP so far. (though clearly some have stated they are in opposition to the 7 points listed there)

Simply wonderful.

But keep in mind the OP already agrees that those posting against Christ our Creator's seventh-day Sabbath - are in opposition to all 7 points affirmed buy the majority of even pro-sunday scholarship... I oppose only one of those 7 points.

Conclusion: All the complaining about this or that pro-Sabbath group is nonsense - since the opposition is invariably on one of the 6 points where we DO agree with the majority of even pro-Sunday Christian scholarship!!

How instructive.

How devastating for some of the solutions tried out on this area of the board in opposition to God's 4th commandment.

in Christ,

Bob

Bob we've already done this and you simply open another thread with the same challenge as though nothing has been said. We played and you quit. To me that means the game is over and since you voluntarily left you lost by forfeiture if nothing else.

 

[BobRyan]

I think it is better to be objective, and post substantive content in support of one's position.

We could all post "I did something some place - unnamed - that refutes whatever point you would like to make in the OP of this thread" -- on almost every thread of CF that we differ with. But that would be an argument run-aground.

I think we all can agree on at least that much.

I would point out - that the solution I show as failing -- the one that says "I did something some place I just can't point to it -- but it was really good and convincing" is not the substantive response to the OP that some may have at first imagined to themselves.

A link or a post of some point that they think makes their case - is the "normal thing" to do on a discussion thread.

I think we all knew that ... so I am just stating the obviouis.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

We played and you quit.

I love that story... point to some place where it happened in actual life.