[POLL] Should Christians Rest and Keep Holy the Sabbath Day?

[stuart lawrence]

.

 

[BobRyan]

In Matt 22 Jesus and the Jews agree (even before the cross) that all the LAW and the prophets are based on two Commandments of Moses -

"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5
and
"Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18

Instead of "All the Law and the prophets deleted by two commands of Moses"

Yes, that is what He is stating but He also says all the Law and prophets hang on these two commandments. Love is also about following Commandments like not stealing, murdering, using the Lord's name in vain,... The Sabbath day is part of the Law. That is a day the Lord sanctified (made holy) from the beginning of creation.

While I respect your commitment to keep the commandments, and recognize that the issue of Sabbath-keeping is a live option, one that I could presently have false beliefs about (as I don't keep sabbath), this exegesis of the passage above seems wrong construed.

The context is not if you want to demonstrate love of God according to Shema, then keep all the commandments, but instead, if you want to keep the law love God and love your neighbor. So I would not choose this scripture to support a keeping-the-commandments inference.
.

And you also would not use "what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19??

 

[BobRyan]

Okay, so your point is the scholars have it wrong

My point is they have it right when it comes to Sabbath for all mankind and Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God written on the heart under the New Covenant.

Please reply with a peer-reviewed scholarly journal article that support your claim.

This was the obvious part - they themselves admit to it.

When BOTH sides of the debate agree on such obvious Bible details - well.. "it just does not get any easier than that".

But they have it wrong when they claim one of God's commandments can be "edited".

 

[Uber Genius]

I agree the SDA has a lot of false doctrine and a lot of truth. I agree there are good sincere Christians in the SDA.

The MJ generally have better doctrine in my opinion, although you have to be careful which MJ church you attend because some have bad doctrine.

What if every church on the planet had false beliefs in some area of their doctrine?

If they have the core beliefs correct and provide a place for you to practice your gifts to build up the local body, does it matter?

Many can struggle for years to find a church that agrees with their own view of doctrine, only to miss the weightier portions of being a disciple. In many ways this approach, "Strains the gnat."

 

[Uber Genius]

And you also would not use "what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19??

No more than I would building an ark.

But what is at work here in a majority of the discussion is an equivocation between "obedience to the witness of the Holy Spirit as to righteousness," and, "the commandments of God."

I'm am intent on following the former as they transcribe the commands that are still in force on my heart, but also add specifics based on my day to day encounters with people in my share of influence.

 

[Uber Genius]

My point is they have it right when it comes to Sabbath for all mankind and Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God written on the heart under the New Covenant.

But have it wrong when they claim one of God's commandments can be "edited".

So see what just did there?

You changed the context of my claim.

I claimed 4 options for exegeting Romans 14:5ff

You claimed Paul couldn't have been referring to sabbath (option 4)

I said give scholarly reference for why the scholars got it wrong about option 4.

You replied with a non sequitur and no scholarly references. My request still stands.

 

[stuart lawrence]

As Jesus said to the crowds:
None of you keep the law. Why are you trying to kill( or attack) me
John 7:19

 

[stuart lawrence]

So see what just did there?

You changed the context of my claim.

I claimed 4 options for exegeting Romans 7:5ff

You claimed Paul couldn't have been referring to sabbath (option 4)

I said give scholarly reference for why the scholars got it wrong about option 4.

You replied with a non sequitur and no scholarly references. My offer still stands

Rom7:5 is referring specifically to the moral law/ TC.
In verses7-11 Paul goes into detail about it. The commandment he gives as the example is: Thou shalt not covet

 

[Uber Genius]

Very different from "Forget whatever the LORD said when he spoke to you -- I am now making up new stuff" as we all can see and all can agree.

Great bumper sticker but you may have to shorten it a little.

This is an appeal to emotion as it takes the work of the cross and a New Covenant and reduces it to, "Forget whatever the Lord said!"

Rhetorical flourish and logical fallacy rather than ex egos and argument.

Manipulative!

But have it wrong when they claim one of God's commandments can be "edited".

Rinse and repeat.

Please exegete passages instead of appeals to emotion.

If you child rebels do you stone them? Do you keep all the 600+ commandments in the Torah. Obviously not. Your premise is false prima facie

 

[stuart lawrence]

For when we were controlled by the sinfull nature, the sinfull passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies bringing forth fruit for death
Rom7:5

Paul cannot possibly be referring to legalistic law here for he could faultlessly obey that law ( phil3:6)
Nearly the entire chapter is about the tenth commandment

Why, if you live under the law are sinfull passions aroused in you by the law?

If i said to you:

If you think of a pink rabbit God will condemn you to hell, what is the first thought that would come into your head if you believed me?

Consequently. If I said to you:
If you covet, God will condemn you to hell
what thoughts will come into your mind then?

 

[Uber Genius]

For when we were controlled by the sinfull nature, the sinfull passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies bringing forth fruit for death
Rom7:5

Paul cannot possibly be referring to legalistic law here for he could faultlessly obey that law ( phil3:6)
Nearly the entire chapter is about the tenth commandment

Why, if you live under the law are sinfull passions aroused in you by the law?

If i said to you:

If you think of a pink rabbit God will condemn you to hell, what is the first thought that would come into your head if you believed me?

Consequently. If I said to you:
If you covet, God will condemn you to hell
what thoughts will come into your mind then?

while I appreciate your attempt to engage the text, the "Paul cannot possibly be referring to the law," is a problem.

it might help if I cited the proper reference as Romans 14:5ff. Sorry

 

[stuart lawrence]

while I appreciate your attempt to engage the text, the "Paul cannot possibly be referring to the law," is a problem.

Firstly, it is an inaccurate representation of my claim.

My claim, "scholars maintain 4 live options, one of which is that Romans 7:5ff refers to sabbath."

So to knock down that claim you would need a scholar to say all other scholars that held Sabbath as univocal to "hold one day more holy," we're wrong and obviously so.

Please provide reference.

Here's the reference:
What shall we say then? Is the law sin?
Nay, I had not known sin but by the law, for i had not known lust except the law had said: Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment aroused in me all manner of concupiscence
Rom 7:7

Through Pauls knowledge of the commandment:
Thou shalt not covet
Sin aroused all manner of concupiscence in him.

I imagine you know the dictionary definition of concupiscence

 

[stuart lawrence]

The law is not the problem. Sin is the problem:

Wherefore the law is holy and the commandment holy and just and good

Was then that which is good( the law) made death unto me? God forbid. But sin that it might appear sin working death in me by that which is good, that sin BY the commandment might become EXCEEDING sinful
Verse13

Sin took occasion of what is holy, righteous and good to make Saul exceeding sinfull

 

[Uber Genius]

Here's the reference:
What shall we say then? Is the law sin?
Nay, I had not known sin but by the law, for i had not known lust except the law had said: Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking g occasion by the commandment aroused in me all manner of concupiscence
Rom 7:7

Through Pauls knowledge of the commandment:
Thou shalt not covet
Sin aroused all manner of concupiscence in him.

I imagine you know the dictionary definition of concupiscence

thought it was a medical condition having to do with lack of bladder control.

My fault for leading us down a rabbit trail. My reference from yesterday was Romans 14:5ff not 7:5. Sorry

 

[stuart lawrence]

thought it was a medical condition having to do with lack of bladder control.

My fault for leading us down a rabbit trail. My reference from yesterday was Romans 14:5ff not 7:5. Sorry

The penalty of sin brings great fear of sin, and fear of sin brings much allurement to sin.

This of course is only true if you rely on righteousness of observing the letter of the law.
Saul the pharisee undoubtedly did. He wasn't play acting or being half hearted. He was in dead earnest about his religion

 

[stuart lawrence]

Saul the pharisee of course understood the true demands of the TC. Many today appear not to

 

[stuart lawrence]

I mean, no one who understands what the TC demand is going to believe heaven hinges on obeying the letter of them, are they?

 

[stuart lawrence]

thought it was a medical condition having to do with lack of bladder control.

My fault for leading us down a rabbit trail. My reference from yesterday was Romans 14:5ff not 7:5. Sorry

No problem.
I'm allways happy to discuss 7:5 anyway!

 

[BobRyan]

In Matt 22 Jesus and the Jews agree (even before the cross) that all the LAW and the prophets are based on two Commandments of Moses -

"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5
and
"Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18

Instead of "All the Law and the prophets deleted by two commands of Moses"

Yes, that is what He is stating but He also says all the Law and prophets hang on these two commandments. Love is also about following Commandments like not stealing, murdering, using the Lord's name in vain,... The Sabbath day is part of the Law. That is a day the Lord sanctified (made holy) from the beginning of creation.

While I respect your commitment to keep the commandments, and recognize that the issue of Sabbath-keeping is a live option, one that I could presently have false beliefs about (as I don't keep sabbath), this exegesis of the passage above seems wrong construed.

The context is not if you want to demonstrate love of God according to Shema, then keep all the commandments, but instead, if you want to keep the law love God and love your neighbor. So I would not choose this scripture to support a keeping-the-commandments inference.
.

And you also would not use "what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19??

No more than I would building an ark.

No exegesis on planet Earth argues that in Matt 22 Jesus and the Pharisees were arguing that the Ten Commandments had been deleted.

No exegesis on planet earth argues that in Matt 22 Jesus and the Pharisees were arguing that all mankind was supposed to build the ark.

Bible details matter.

The obvious matters.

as for Paul

Eph 6:2 "Honor your father and mother... is the first commandment with a promise" -- First commandment in what distinct ... ordered.. unit of law? (certainly not the first promise or command given in the book of Genesis... but if we select the Exodus 20 - Ten Commandments will then it is obvious as to why the "Baptist Confession of Faith" the "Westminster Confession of Faith" the Catholic Catechism, R.C.Sproul etc all agree on this singular point of Bible doctrine along with the pro-Bible Sabbath scholars.

All scholars agree - it is the unit of the TEN commadments.

Again - just stating the incredibly obvious.

It is irrefutable.

(Which we will probably have to come back to this point again... because so far nothing refutes on this area of the board.)

 

[BobRyan]

Where in Deut 5 does it say that?

Deut 5 says first and foremost to recall the Commands spoken by God at Sinai 40 years before - rather than "forget what God actually spoke - I am giving you a change of orders" --

"“Hear, O Israel, the statutes and the ordinances which I am speaking today in your hearing, that you may learn them and observe them carefully. 2 The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb."

4 The Lord spoke to you face to face at the mountain from the midst of the fire, 5 while I was standing between the Lord and you at that time, to declare to you the word of the Lord; for you were afraid because of the fire and did not go up the mountain. He said,
6 ‘I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
7 ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.

Very different from "Forget whatever the LORD said when he spoke to you -- I am now making up new stuff" as we all can see and all can agree.

This is an appeal to emotion as it takes the work of the cross and a New Covenant and reduces it to, "Forget whatever the Lord said!"

An interesting fiction but as we all know the New Covenant actually says "this is the NEW Covenant that I will make with the House of Israel... I will write My LAW on their heart and mind" Jer 31:31-33.

1 John 5:2-3 "This IS the Love of God that we KEEP His Commandments"
John 14:15 "IF you LOVE Me KEEP My Commandments"
Exodus 20:6 "LOVE Me and KEEP My Commandments"

1 John 3:4 "Sin IS transgression of the LAW"

It is still 'a sin' -- to take God's name in vain. Read about it in Exodus 20:7

The point remains if we choose the bible over fiction.

(This thread is wayyy more fun than I had at first anticipated it would be. )