GOD'S WORD vs TRADITIONS OF MEN; Sabbath vs Sunday

listed

are you?
May 14, 2011
9,126
1,817
✟53,797.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
hint: the "old covenant" was given in fact to Adam as "Obey and Live"
This isn't what is called the "old covenant."
Paul says the "Gospel was preached to THEM (Israel at Sinai) - just as it was to US also " Heb 4:1
And what is that Gospel (good news)? Is it the law?
 
Upvote 0

listed

are you?
May 14, 2011
9,126
1,817
✟53,797.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Repeating lies does not make them true. You have not proved any of your claims with scriptures.
Here are 2 SDA pioneers identifying the Old and New Covenants.
Here are the words of JN Andrews


How can men thus carelessly read the Scriptures? The language of inspiration is very explicit in stating that the new covenant is made with the same people that were the subjects of the old covenant. Thus Jeremiah, speaking in the name of the Lord, says: “I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah.” And he further alludes to the fact that the new covenant is made with the Hebrew people when he adds: “Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.” And yet again he identifies the Hebrew people when he says: “This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel.” And Paul quotes at length, in Hebrews 8, this entire statement of Jeremiah respecting the old and new covenants’ being severally made with the Hebrew people. And, as if this were not enough, he makes a statement in Romans 9:4, 5, that exactly meets the case. Thus he says of the Hebrews: “Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.” Thus it appears that everything valuable God has given to the world through the instrumentality, or by the means, of the Hebrew people. Those who choose to do so can venture to despise the law of God because given to the Jews, and to reject Christ because he came of the Jews; but one thing they cannot do. They cannot say, “We accept the new covenant because it pertains to the Gentiles, whereas the first covenant, and the law, etc., pertained to the Jews.” No such distinction can be drawn. Both the covenants pertain to the Hebrew people, according to the explicit statement of Paul; and both are said by Jeremiah and Paul, or rather by the Spirit of inspiration speaking through them, to be made with Judah and Israel. SOTC
Sermon on the Two Covenants

Here are words of Uriah Smith
Can we than tell what did constitute the first, or old, covenant. What does the word, covenant, mean? Webster defines it thus: “A mutual agreement of two or more persons or parties, in writing and under seal, to do or to refrain from, some act or thing; a contract; stipulation.” This is the primary, leading definition of the word; and in looking for the old covenant, we look for some transaction to which this definition will apply. TTC 5.3

We have definite data from which to work. We are told who was the author of the first covenant. It was God. We are told with whom it was made. It was made with Israel. We are told when it was made: It was made with that people when they came out of the land of Egypt.
Jeremiah 31:32; Hebrews 8:9. By these circumstances the old covenant is clearly distinguished from the Adamic, the Abrahamic, or any other covenant brought to view in the Bible. TTC 6.1

We go back therefore to the history of Israel as they came out of Egypt, and lay down this as a consistent and self-evident principle: That the very first transaction we find taking place between God and the Israelites after they left Egypt, which answers to the definition of the word covenant, must be the first covenant, unless some good reason can be shown why it is not. TTC 6.2

The Two Covenants
Sometimes they speak truth.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cribstyl
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
hint: the "old covenant" was given in fact to Adam as "Obey and Live"
Paul says the "Gospel was preached to THEM (Israel at Sinai) - just as it was to US also " Heb 4:1

Yet Sinai was not an "individual" covenant (and the New Covenant is) . In other words it is not as though there were 2 million sinless "individuals" at Sinai -- until they started worshiping the golden calf.

Thus it is the NEW Covenant according to Paul - the Gospel that was being given all along - but at Sinai it was given with visual aids and illustrations.

The national-covenant at Sinai is used as a "symbol" of the Old Covenant made with Adam "obey and live" because at the level of 'a nation' that is how it was framed. Only national apostasy / rebellion -- would break it. An individual who coveted on that day or any other -- would not break that covenant.

The SAME moral Law is in both the Old and and NEW Covenant as the Bible shows and as even
The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson -- freely demonstrate that they too can see this glaringly obvious Bible detail.

Question for 1stcenturylady - what part of this did you not know "really"?? I don't think that this particular post is "news" to very many people -- not even
The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith

And I think you have seen something from me like it from me before.



On the contrary - I prefer the scriptures -- instead of man made traditions.



had you actually read the post you claimed to have been responding to - you would have seen that point already dealt with.



Which makes my point - the Gospel was from Adam to this very day. The "national covenant" was at Sinai and could not have been made before that - since they were not a nation before that.

The point remains.




Paul always includes himself in "US" and does not argue that he rejected the gospel Hebrews 3 and 4 is not about "all have rejected the Gospel -- even US.. the Apostles" and we all know it.



Indeed it was - much older than even the Gospel -- it was "obey and live" --- and all sinless beings in entire universe where under that covenant.

The point remains.

Paul also points to it as "obey and live" in Galatians 3.

God's LAW existed even in Eden - and included the TEN commandments as not only Christ's affirmation in Mark 2:27 indicates but so also do scholars on both sides of this debate agree.

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism.



You are of course welcome to your personal preference. You have free will.

I choose the Bible
I can't find the phrase "obey and live" in the Bible. Can you share the exact text?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I can't find the phrase "obey and live" in the Bible. Can you share the exact text?

Just sharing 3 of them because it is such and obvious answer.

Genesis 2.
“From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Lev 18:5 "5 So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord."

Gal 3:12 Yet the law is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.”

Gal 3: 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”

Rom 10: 5 For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, “The man who does those things shall live by them.”

Matt 19: 17 if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Just sharing 3 of them because it is such and obvious answer.

Genesis 2.
“From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Lev 18:5 "5 So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord."

Gal 3: 5 So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord.

So "obey and live" is not actually a quote, even though you have quote marks around it.
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Some further interesting thought in relation to the OP here...

GOD'S WORD vs TRADITIONS OF MEN PART 2/2

It is amazing how those that do not have God's WORD to supoport their traditions that break the commandments of God accuse those who have God's WORD of things that are not true.

The religious teachers in the days of Jesus said that he had a devil and his followers were a cult this was also independently verifiable in the days of Jesus and the Apostles. Just ask the Jews who hung Jesus on the cross (John 7:20; John 8:48; 52; Matt 10:25 12:24; Acts 28:22).

This could be said of all those who followed Jesus throughout time even before Jesus the religious teachers of the day killed the prophets sent to them by God to share God's WORD (Luke 11:47; Matt 23:31)

Stephen was stoned to death it was independently verified that he was blaspheming because no one could argue with the scriptures that he was presenting (Acts 6:8-15).

Paul, Peter and most of the Apostles were also executed because it was independently verified by the religious teachers of the day that they could not respond to God's WORD they were sharing with them.

Not to mention all those of the reformation and the birth of Protestantism and the inquisition of the Roman Catholic Church which executed millions of God's people because it was independently verified by the Roman Catholic Church that they were all heretics and should be burned at the stake.

Now today you call heretic or cult because it is independently verified because you cannot respond to the scriptures that disagree with your Catholic traditions which has led many to break God's Commandments?

ONLY God's WORD is true and you do not have it to support your tradition that breaks the commandments of God. The WORD of God is sent to help you have a closer walk with God but you reject God's WORD in order to follow the traditions of the fathers.

Jesus and Paul spoke correctly quoting Isaiah;

Well spoke the Holy Spirit by Isaiah the prophet unto our fathers, Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing you shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing you shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people is stubborn, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.


Something to think about who do we BELIEVE and FOLLOW? The teachings and traditions of men that break the Commandments of God or the WORD of GOD. Jesus says those who follow man made traditions that break God's Commandments are not following him...

MATTHEW 15:2-9 [2], Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. [3], But he answered and said to them, Why do you also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? [4], For God commanded, saying, Honor your father and mother: and, He that curses father or mother, let him die the death. [5], But you say, Whoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatever you might be profited by me; [6], And honor not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have you made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. [7], You hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, [8], This people draws near to me with their mouth, and honors me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. [9], But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

It is very clear according to Jesus if we follow the teachings and traditions of men that break the Commandments of GOD we are not following God.

In times of ignorance God winks at but now ,<when a KNOWLEDGE of the truth has come> calls all men everywhere to REPENT (FOLLOW) (Acts 17:30-31).

.......................

SIN is the breaking of God's Commandments (James 2:9-11; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4)

Those who CONTINUE in UNREPENTANT SIN will NOT enter into the KINGDOM of HEAVEN.

.......................

God's 4th commandment is one of the ten (Exodus 20:8-11) If we knowingly break it when God asks us not to we stand guilty before God of committing sin (James 2:8-12). If we do not seek him in repentance and forgiveness we are in danger of the Judgement (Hebrews 10:26-27)

Sunday worship is a tradition and teaching of man that has led many to break the commandments of God. Jesus says that if we follow the traditions of man that break the commandments of God we are not following God (Matthew 15:3-9)

There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says that God's 4th Commandment is now ABOLISHED and we are now commanded to KEEP Sunday as a Holy day.

Who should we follow the teachings and traditions of men or the Word of God? Who should we believe the Words of men or the Word of God?
 
Upvote 0

Cribstyl

Veteran
Jun 13, 2006
8,989
2,067
✟97,528.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
And here is the "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 - admitting that the New Covenant has the TEN Commandments written on the heart.

Philadelphia Confession of Faith (1742)

And here is the "Westminster Confession of Faith" section 19 - admitting that the New Covenant has the TEN Commandments written on the heart.
Westminster Confession of Faith: Chapter 19 - Of the Law of God..

Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 19. The Law and the Covenant of Works.
Clue: We're trying to identify the Old Covenant.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I can't find the phrase "obey and live" in the Bible. Can you share the exact text?

Just sharing 3 of them because it is such and obvious answer.

Genesis 2.
“From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Lev 18:5 "5 So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord."

Gal 3: 5 So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord.

Clue: We're trying to identify the Old Covenant.

Excellent!

Read the post.

Think about it.

Post response
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I can't find the phrase "obey and live" in the Bible. Can you share the exact text?

Just sharing 3 of them because it is such and obvious answer.

Genesis 2.
“From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Lev 18:5 "5 So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord."

Gal 3: 5 So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord.

So "obey and live" is not actually a quote, even though you have quote marks around it.

Only for those who don't read

for those of us who do - those texts "say it all"

in fact it "just does not GET any easier than that"

I freely admit that when I am leading a horse to water - he can always choose not to drink. A person convinced against their will - is of the same opinion still.

I am ok with free will.

But other people will read the obvious in those texts and that is good news! :)

(And we all know it)
 
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,381
Sydney, Australia.
✟244,844.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Yet again, you have posted this false teaching.
Sunday worship is a tradition and teaching of man that has led many to break the commandments of God.
Celebrating the resurrection of Jesus on Sunday has nothing to do with Saturday.

You have been taught that there is some association between, celebrating the resurrection on Sunday and resting on Saturday. I don't know who put that idea into your head, but there is no correlation between them. One day you rest and the other day you celebrate the resurrection. It may be that you attend a church that does not celebrate the day of the resurrection.
Jesus says that if we follow the traditions of man that break the commandments of God we are not following God (Matthew 15:3-9)
Sin is disobedience, whether you commit sorcery, drink too much or gamble, e.t.c. It is all sin whether the law defines the sin or not. Believe me you will know when your sinning, yet the law may be silent regarding your sin. You can't get around the fact that what you believe sin to be, is sin, because your own conscious will condemn you.
There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says that God's 4th Commandment is now ABOLISHED and we are now commanded to KEEP Sunday as a Holy day.
Depends how you have been taught to interpret the scripture. There are numerous interpretations of the scripture, but only one interpretation is correct. For me it's simple, the context determines how I understand the scripture.
Who should we follow the teachings and traditions of men or the Word of God? Who should we believe the Words of men or the Word of God?
Once again, the word of God reduces to the interpretation you have been taught. It is a rare person who reads and interprets the scripture, on their own. Nearly all interpret the scripture as others have read it, in centuries past. All follow men's tradition to some degree, even you do without even realizing it. The SDA interpretation follows an earlier traditional reading of the text, where the ten commandments have priority. You have a traditional interpretation whether you admit to it or not.

Even the canon of scripture relies heavily on church tradition.
 
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

Cribstyl

Veteran
Jun 13, 2006
8,989
2,067
✟97,528.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
So "obey and live" is not actually a quote, even though you have quote marks around it.
Not sure why these SDA will not say that " obey and live " is a quote from Ellen G White's writings;
Patriots and Prophets pg 53 Patriarchs and Prophets
Page 53
Like the angels, the dwellers in Eden had been placed upon probation; their happy estate could be retained only on condition of fidelity to the Creator's law. They could obey and live, or disobey and perish.

Their prophetess writings gives them boldness to say what the scriptures does not say.
Page 372
The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: "If a man do, he shall even live in them" (Ezekiel 20:11; Leviticus 18:5); but "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." Deuteronomy 27:26. The "new covenant" was established upon "better promises"--the promise of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the heart and bring it into harmony with the principles of God's law. "This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts . . . . I will forgive their iniquity, and will remember their sin no more." Jeremiah 31:33, 34.


Notice how EGW identifies the Old Covenant as being with the Children of Israel at Sinai... but she calls the Abrahamic covenant the new covenant,,,,


Page 371
Another compact--called in Scripture the "old" covenant--was formed between God and Israel at Sinai, and was then ratified by the blood of a sacrifice. The Abrahamic covenant was ratified by the blood of Christ, and it is called the "second," or "new," covenant, because the blood by which it was sealed was shed after the blood of the first covenant. That the new covenant was valid in the days of Abraham is evident from the fact that it was then confirmed both by the promise and by the oath of God--the "two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie." Hebrews 6:18.

But if the Abrahamic covenant contained the promise of redemption, why was another covenant formed at Sinai? In their bondage the people had to a great extent lost the knowledge of God and of the principles of the Abrahamic covenant. In delivering them from Egypt, God sought to reveal to them His power and His mercy, that they might be led to love and trust Him. He brought them down to the Red Sea--where, pursued by the Egyptians, escape seemed impossible--that they might realize their utter helplessness, their need of divine aid; and then He wrought deliverance for them. Thus they were filled with love and gratitude to God and with confidence in His power to help them. He had bound them to Himself as their deliverer from temporal bondage.
 
Upvote 0

listed

are you?
May 14, 2011
9,126
1,817
✟53,797.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Repeating lies does not make them true. You have not proved any of your claims with scriptures.
Here are 2 SDA pioneers identifying the Old and New Covenants.
Here are the words of JN Andrews


How can men thus carelessly read the Scriptures? The language of inspiration is very explicit in stating that the new covenant is made with the same people that were the subjects of the old covenant. Thus Jeremiah, speaking in the name of the Lord, says: “I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah.” And he further alludes to the fact that the new covenant is made with the Hebrew people when he adds: “Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.” And yet again he identifies the Hebrew people when he says: “This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel.” And Paul quotes at length, in Hebrews 8, this entire statement of Jeremiah respecting the old and new covenants’ being severally made with the Hebrew people. And, as if this were not enough, he makes a statement in Romans 9:4, 5, that exactly meets the case. Thus he says of the Hebrews: “Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.” Thus it appears that everything valuable God has given to the world through the instrumentality, or by the means, of the Hebrew people. Those who choose to do so can venture to despise the law of God because given to the Jews, and to reject Christ because he came of the Jews; but one thing they cannot do. They cannot say, “We accept the new covenant because it pertains to the Gentiles, whereas the first covenant, and the law, etc., pertained to the Jews.” No such distinction can be drawn. Both the covenants pertain to the Hebrew people, according to the explicit statement of Paul; and both are said by Jeremiah and Paul, or rather by the Spirit of inspiration speaking through them, to be made with Judah and Israel. SOTC
Sermon on the Two Covenants

Here are words of Uriah Smith
Can we than tell what did constitute the first, or old, covenant. What does the word, covenant, mean? Webster defines it thus: “A mutual agreement of two or more persons or parties, in writing and under seal, to do or to refrain from, some act or thing; a contract; stipulation.” This is the primary, leading definition of the word; and in looking for the old covenant, we look for some transaction to which this definition will apply. TTC 5.3

We have definite data from which to work. We are told who was the author of the first covenant. It was God. We are told with whom it was made. It was made with Israel. We are told when it was made: It was made with that people when they came out of the land of Egypt.
Jeremiah 31:32; Hebrews 8:9. By these circumstances the old covenant is clearly distinguished from the Adamic, the Abrahamic, or any other covenant brought to view in the Bible. TTC 6.1

We go back therefore to the history of Israel as they came out of Egypt, and lay down this as a consistent and self-evident principle: That the very first transaction we find taking place between God and the Israelites after they left Egypt, which answers to the definition of the word covenant, must be the first covenant, unless some good reason can be shown why it is not. TTC 6.2

The Two Covenants
So what is being said here by the quote from TTC, 6.1 with:

Those who choose to do so can venture to despise the law of God because given to the Jews, and to reject Christ because he came of the Jews; but one thing they cannot do. They cannot say, “We accept the new covenant because it pertains to the Gentiles, whereas the first covenant, and the law, etc., pertained to the Jews.”

Is this a reason they don't fully accept the NC?

Isn't this the reason they try so hard to drag Christians from the NC to keeping some part of the the OC?

Doesn't the words new, first and second show a difference?

How can anyone observe conflicting covenants?

How can being required to observe the OC even in part be the truth?

Are Paul and James putting us on with ideas about all or nothing when it comes to the law?

To be required to keep any of the covenant issued at Sinai requires complete compliance including physical circumcision. Keeping any part of the covenant issued at Sinai isn't following Jesus.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

listed

are you?
May 14, 2011
9,126
1,817
✟53,797.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Not sure why these SDA will not say that " obey and live " is a quote from Ellen G White's writings;
Patriots and Prophets pg 53 Patriarchs and Prophets
Page 53
Like the angels, the dwellers in Eden had been placed upon probation; their happy estate could be retained only on condition of fidelity to the Creator's law. They could obey and live, or disobey and perish.

Their prophetess writings gives them boldness to say what the scriptures does not say.
Page 372
The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: "If a man do, he shall even live in them" (Ezekiel 20:11; Leviticus 18:5); but "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." Deuteronomy 27:26. The "new covenant" was established upon "better promises"--the promise of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the heart and bring it into harmony with the principles of God's law. "This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts . . . . I will forgive their iniquity, and will remember their sin no more." Jeremiah 31:33, 34.


Notice how EGW identifies the Old Covenant as being with the Children of Israel at Sinai... but she calls the Abrahamic covenant the new covenant,,,,


Page 371
Another compact--called in Scripture the "old" covenant--was formed between God and Israel at Sinai, and was then ratified by the blood of a sacrifice. The Abrahamic covenant was ratified by the blood of Christ, and it is called the "second," or "new," covenant, because the blood by which it was sealed was shed after the blood of the first covenant. That the new covenant was valid in the days of Abraham is evident from the fact that it was then confirmed both by the promise and by the oath of God--the "two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie." Hebrews 6:18.

But if the Abrahamic covenant contained the promise of redemption, why was another covenant formed at Sinai? In their bondage the people had to a great extent lost the knowledge of God and of the principles of the Abrahamic covenant. In delivering them from Egypt, God sought to reveal to them His power and His mercy, that they might be led to love and trust Him. He brought them down to the Red Sea--where, pursued by the Egyptians, escape seemed impossible--that they might realize their utter helplessness, their need of divine aid; and then He wrought deliverance for them. Thus they were filled with love and gratitude to God and with confidence in His power to help them. He had bound them to Himself as their deliverer from temporal bondage.
Lots of conflict in their writings. Never-the-less some truth can be picked out. It's the confusion caused by untrue conflicting statements that give me a headache.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cribstyl
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

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU KNOW GOD?

1 JOHN 2:3-4 [3], And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
[4], He that said, I know him, and keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

1 JOHN 3:3-10 [3], And every man that has this hope in him purifies himself, even as he is pure.
[4], Whoever commits sin transgresses also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
[5], And you know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
[6], Whoever stays in him sins not: whoever sins has not seen him, neither known him.
[7], Little children, let no man deceive you: he that does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. [8], He that commits sin is of the devil; for the devil sins from the beginning. For this purpose, the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
[9], Whoever is born of God does not commit sin; for his seed remains in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. [10], In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whoever does not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loves not his brother.

WHO ARE GOD'S PEOPLE?

Revelation 12
17,
And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ

Revelation 14
12,
Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

WHO ARE THOSE THAT RECEIVE ETERNAL LIFE?

Revelation 22
14, Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life,
and may enter in through the gates into the city.

WHAT IS GRACE FOR?

ROMANS 1:5, By whom we have received GRACE and apostleship, FOR OBEDIENCE TO THE FAITH among all nations, for his name.

Romans 6:1-2, [1] What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. [2], How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?


DOES FAITH ABOLISH GOD'S LAW?

ROMANS 3:31 [31], Do we then ABOLISH THE LAW THROUGH FAITH? GOD FORBID: YES, WE ESTABLISH THE LAW.


WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THOSE WHO CONTINUE IN SIN ONCE THEY RECEIVE A KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH?

HEBREWS 10:26-27 [26], For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sins, [27], But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

Indeed, those who CONTINUE IN SIN will not enter the KINGDOM of HEAVEN.

.................

God's 4th commandment is one of the ten (Exodus 20:8-11) If we knowingly break it when God asks us not to we stand guilty before God of committing sin (James 2:8-12). If we do not seek him in repentance and forgiveness we are in danger of the Judgement (Hebrews 10:26-27)

Sunday worship is a tradition and teaching of man that has lead many to break the commandments of God. Jesus says that if we follow the traditions of man that break the commandments of God we are not following God (Matthew 15:3-9)

There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says that God's 4th Commandment is now ABOLISHED and we are now commanded to KEEP Sunday as a Holy day.

Who should we follow the teachings and traditions of men or the Word of God? Who should we believe the Words of men or the Word of God?

In times of ignorance God winks at but now ,<when a KNOWLEDGE of the truth has come> calls all men everywhere to REPENT (FOLLOW) (Acts 17:30-31).
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I responded to your question to me.

you admitted you did not read it.

That leaves us at a bit of a dead end. hard to have a discussion using your method as you have stated it.

Indeed this is the problem of some who respond to posts that they have not bothered to read.
 
Upvote 0

JLB777

Newbie
Supporter
Jun 18, 2012
5,905
1,258
✟403,811.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Sunday worship is a tradition and teaching of man that has led many to break the commandments of God. Jesus says that if we follow the traditions of man that break the commandments of God we are not following God (Matthew 15:3-9)


Can you show us in the New Testament where Jesus or the Apostles commanded us to gather on Saturday to worship Jesus?


JLB
 
Upvote 0

Bob S

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 5, 2015
4,584
2,203
88
Union County, TN
✟656,784.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Indeed this is the problem of some who respond to posts that they have not bothered to read.
Well I wonder why???? I believe we all have pleaded with you to condense your posts, but no because you are never ever wrong about anything. Oh wait, I do remember you trying to tell us that transient means transfer. I never received any recognition from you for pointing out that it doesn't. Oh wait, Have you ever admitted you were wrong?
 
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
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Can you show us in the New Testament where Jesus or the Apostles commanded us to gather on Saturday to worship Jesus?
JLB

Matthew 5 "do not even think that I came to reduce or abolish the LAW"
Mark 2:27 "the SABBATH was MADE for mankind"
Acts 18:4 "EVERY Sabbath" both Jews and gentiles gathered in the synagogue to hear Gospel preaching - and as they heard they were believing -- yet still meeting "every Sabbath".
Isaiah 66:23 for "all eternity after the cross" -- "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall all mankind come before Me to worship" - in the New Earth.
Acts 15 - the Christian church "solution" relies on the fact that "every Sabbath Moses is preached in the Synagogues"
Hebrew 4 'there REMAINS therefore a SABBATH rest for the people of God"

None of that is said in either OT or NT about "week-day-1"
 
Upvote 0