Has the Holy Spirit explicitly led you to keep the Sabbath?

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You do not know this and no one in the entire Bible is making this judgment of Eve.

You have no proof God didn't tell Eve not to eat, not even to touch.

This is what she said:

“But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden God has said ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’” Gen 3:3

This is what He said:

“But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” Gen 2:17

See what she added?

He did NOT say “you shall not touch”

OR

maybe He told Eve she could eat it? It didn't say right?

maybe He told Cain he could kill?

maybe He told Israel to make a golden calf?

or maybe changed His mind and told Moses to "touch" the rock again instead of speak to it...?

or maybe He made pig and dog and rat clean for us to eat?

or changed Sabbath into Sunday?

or...or...or...

Satan does still deceive

as he did her...and HOW does he?

she added to what was said according to His Spirit Who inspired Moses what to write...
 
Upvote 0

Studyman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
2,147
623
65
Michigan
✟325,466.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Let’s continue reading Paul’s message shall we?


“For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

Yes, Gentiles who turned to the God of the Bible in repentance, show their faith by obedience to God's Laws that HE wrote on their hearts as Prophesied in Jer. 31.

But why not show what Paul said before this?

Rom. 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

Now you seem to have been convinced that God is not the Author of "Good", and that we must rely on the philosophies of religious men to define "good works" for us. Mostly which include the rejection of many of God's Commandments by religious traditions, the same thing the mainstream religions of Jesus' Time did.


But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God, and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God? For " THE NAME OF GOD IS BLASPHEMED AMONG THE GENTILES BECAUSE OF YOU," just as it is written. For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭2:12-29‬ ‭NASB

Obedience to the law for salvation is not what Paul was teaching. Salvation is the result of the heart’s intent not obedience to the law.

You are not reading what Paul is saying here. A Jew who pollutes God's Sabbaths and Laws are considered by God as "Uncircumcised", and a Gentile who repents and turns to God in obedience to Him, is considered Circumcised by God.

As Paul also says. 1 Cor. 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

I am reading and believing every scripture. This is why I oppose much of the religious philosophies promoted by the religions of the land I was born into.

Paul most certainly promoted obedience to the God of the Bible.

Eph. 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of (MAN'S) works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

You are a sharp guy sir. Think about it for a minute outside the influence of the religious franchises of this world.

What "Good Works" did God before ordain that we should walk in them? Who was HIS Sabbath created for? Who were HIS 10 Commandments and Laws created for? Don't fall for the same tactic Eve fell for.

1 Cor. 9:8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?

9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?

10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

Even this LAW of God was created for us. "Come out of her my friend",

Heb. 12:12 Wherefore lift up the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees;

13 And make straight paths for your feet, lest that which is lame be turned out of the way; but let it rather be healed.

14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:

15 Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled;

16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.

These are good discussions for men to have in this evil time.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,488
7,346
Dallas
✟885,119.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
2 They will ban you from the synagogue, yet an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering a service to God. 3 These things they will do because they have not known the Father nor Me. 4 But these things I have spoken to you, so that when their hour comes, you may remember that I told you of them.

Context Context Context

Who is Jesus speaking to? What did Caiaphus & Paul do to them? No one was banned from the synagogues at Nicaea.
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You don’t believe in the Trinity? Are you saying the Trinity is an error not in scripture?

which Trinity do you believe the Eastern the Western or the Armenian?...

and now:

imagine if the disciples taught the Trinity...you think Gamaliel would advise "leave them alone"...would pious zealous Jews left them alone their NEW god teaching...

or would the Pharisees claim they found no fault with Paul Acts 23:9

Barnes comments this:

"We find no evil in this man - No opinion which is contrary to the Law of Moses; no conduct in spreading the doctrine of the resurrection which we do not approve. The importance of this doctrine, in their view, was so great as to throw into the background all the other doctrines that Paul might hold; and, provided this were propagated, they were willing to vindicate and sustain him."

or believing a Trinity could Paul say this:

Acts 24:14 New King James Version
But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets.

would ANY of this be true if Paul or the disciples taught "the 1 is 3 a mystery!!"

it was hard enough to accept a man...this Man...was risen from the dead...let alone the Messiah...the Son of Yah...

and now you wish for them to add another equal immortal being?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Studyman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
2,147
623
65
Michigan
✟325,466.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
This is what she said:

“But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden God has said ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’” Gen 3:3

This is what He said:

“But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” Gen 2:17

See what she added?

He did NOT say “you shall not touch”

OR

maybe He told Eve she could eat it? It didn't say right?

maybe He told Cain he could kill?

maybe He told Israel to make a golden calf?

or maybe changed His mind and told Moses to "touch" the rock again instead of speak to it...?

or maybe He made pig and dog and rat clean for us to eat?

or changed Sabbath into Sunday?

or...or...or...

Satan does still deceive

as he did her...and HOW does he?

she added to what was said according to His Spirit Who inspired Moses what to write...

I'm just pointing out that God doesn't make the same judgment as you are, anywhere in the entirety of the Holy Scriptures. You are making a judgment about Eve that God doesn't make. You have no proof that God didn't tell Eve not to touch the forbidden fruit. You are calling her a Liar and Deceiver with no proof, and no support from God or even one verse in the entire Bible.

If that doesn't give you pause, then I don't know what to say.
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'm just pointing out that God doesn't make the same judgment as you are, anywhere in the entirety of the Holy Scriptures. You are making a judgment about Eve that God doesn't make. You have no proof that God didn't tell Eve not to touch the forbidden fruit. You are calling her a Liar and Deceiver with no proof, and no support from God or even one verse in the entire Bible.

If that doesn't give you pause, then I don't know what to say.

she blamed the Serpent...should have gotten a pass right? Satan's fault right? and yet...

or what was in her that had her walk over...accept it looked good? and allowed the deception to occur...
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Let’s continue reading Paul’s message shall we?


“For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus. But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God, and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God? For " THE NAME OF GOD IS BLASPHEMED AMONG THE GENTILES BECAUSE OF YOU," just as it is written. For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭2:12-29‬ ‭NASB

Obedience to the law for salvation is not what Paul was teaching. Salvation is the result of the heart’s intent not obedience to the law.

lol...the circumcised heart's intent is to OBEY His living oracles according to a Christlike "inner Jew" mind into which His Law was PUT...and live as He lived...LOVE AS HE LOVED...JUST AS...and NOT serve Sunday Ham dinners...

because they were SAVED by Him...now represent Him...and establish a law NOT made void by their faith...
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,488
7,346
Dallas
✟885,119.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You are not reading what Paul is saying here. A Jew who pollutes God's Sabbaths and Laws are considered by God as "Uncircumcised", and a Gentile who repents and turns to God in obedience to Him, is considered Circumcised by God.

Romans 2 has nothing to do with the Sabbath. The only place the Sabbath might be mentioned in the entire epistle is in chapter 14. So please try not to inject your commentary into what’s actually stated in the scriptures. Paul hasn’t said a single word about the sabbath since he began this epistle.

let’s continue reading again.

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:19-31‬ ‭NASB

Then Paul continues to drive the notion that we are not saved by works of the law in chapter 4 by using Abraham as an example.


“What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? " ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: " BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED. " BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT." For this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, " FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation. For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭4:1-16‬ ‭NASB

Now is Paul teaching that justification is the result of obedience to the law?
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Romans 2 has nothing to do with the Sabbath. The only place the Sabbath might be mentioned in the entire epistle is in chapter 14. So please try not to inject your commentary into what’s actually stated in the scriptures. Paul hasn’t said a single word about the sabbath since he began this epistle.

let’s continue reading again.

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:19-31‬ ‭NASB

Then Paul continues to drive the notion that we are not saved by works of the law in chapter 4 by using Abraham as an example.


“What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? " ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: " BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED. " BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT." For this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, " FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation. For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭4:1-16‬ ‭NASB

Now is Paul teaching that justification is the result of obedience to the law?

Nope.

Is why once justified by Him and saved by Him

His people keep His living oracles and live His way...as He did

You always miss that...

Saved first Israel was then given the living oracles...Even those not of Jacob as the Sabbath includes...an irony you also miss

Just like the Gentiles crowding the synagogues wanting to hear about One resurrected and forgiving ALL they THEN were given 4 actually 5 house rules in order to...so that... therefore...they would keep hearing Moses every Sabbath Acts 15:21
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,488
7,346
Dallas
✟885,119.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I am reading and believing every scripture. This is why I oppose much of the religious philosophies promoted by the religions of the land I was born into.

That’s definitely a good thing I also reject the mainstream theology that is predominantly scattered throughout my area as well. Namely Protestantism. I originally came to Christ in a Protestant theological understanding and thru my studies have moved away from it to a more Orthodox understanding of the scriptures. I think a very common mistake many people make is rejecting anything Catholic because they reject Roman Catholicism which I am mostly opposed to as well but many people don’t know the history behind the RCC and when it actually fell away from the Catholic Church which is the apostolic Church of God. I firmly believe that Matthew 16:18 says that Christ’s church will always remain and the gates of hell will not prevail over it. I believe this means that Christ’s Church will always remain untainted by heresy, the there will always be a church present in this world until His return that is preaching the true gospel. This is why I have a hard time accepting new theologies that have appeared long after the church was established. Theologies that have no historical background to support them. If I accept SDA theology then I must accept that there was a complete void of the true gospel being preached for over 1500 years. How can I believe Matthew 16:18 is true if that were the case? The implications of a widespread conspiracy to preach a false gospel over such a largely dispersed group of devoted servants of God who endured persecution and even martyrdom with no sign of resistance seems extremely highly improbable if not impossible all together.
 
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

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That’s definitely a good thing I also reject the mainstream theology that is predominantly scattered throughout my area as well. Namely Protestantism. I originally came to Christ in a Protestant theological understanding and thru my studies have moved away from it to a more Orthodox understanding of the scriptures. I think a very common mistake many people make is rejecting anything Catholic because they reject Roman Catholicism which I am mostly opposed to as well but many people don’t know the history behind the RCC and when it actually fell away from the Catholic Church which is the apostolic Church of God. I firmly believe that Matthew 16:18 says that Christ’s church will always remain and the gates of hell will not prevail over it. I believe this means that Christ’s Church will always remain untainted by heresy, the there will always be a church present in this world until His return that is preaching the true gospel. This is why I have a hard time accepting new theologies that have appeared long after the church was established. Theologies that have no historical background to support them. If I accept SDA theology then I must accept that there was a complete void of the true gospel being preached for over 1500 years. How can I believe Matthew 16:18 is true if that were the case? The implications of a widespread conspiracy to preach a false gospel over such a largely dispersed group of devoted servants of God who endured persecution and even martyrdom with no sign of resistance seems extremely highly improbable if not impossible all together.

Even the “first pope” kept weekly Sabbaths and annual festivals and oh yeah...from unclean meats

He warned of wolves and other dogs returning to their own vomit...
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,488
7,346
Dallas
✟885,119.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Even the “first pope” kept weekly Sabbaths and annual festivals and oh yeah...from unclean meats

He warned of wolves and other dogs returning to their own vomit...

Pope Leo IX kept the Sabbath? How do you know?
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Pope Leo IX kept the Sabbath? How do you know?

Typically Peter is called “the first pope”

That you acknowledge a drift away from the original should be enough to silence your own protestation of “how could a conspiracy exist to hide the truth this long?!!”...

Jeremiah 11:9 speaks of an even longer one...
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,488
7,346
Dallas
✟885,119.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Typically Peter is called “the first pope”

That you acknowledge a drift away from the original should be enough to silence your own protestation of “how could a conspiracy exist to hide the truth this long?!!”...

Jeremiah 11:9 speaks of an even longer one...

Your comparing the schism of one church governed by one individual who was refuted by 4/5 of the pentarchy to a complete non existence of true gospel taught in any Christian church. That’s hardly a comparison. Jesus said many will fall away not all.
 
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
You haven’t posted a single New Testament verse that says we must keep the Sabbath. The verses you keep quoting do not say we must keep it. They don’t even imply that we must keep it. Sure many of them do show that people did keep it but we already knew that. The New Covenant abolished the old one. It’s a completely new agreement, a new contract with new requirements.
You of course are free to believe as you wish. I prefer the bible which disagrees with you. It was JESUS that says he is LORD of the Sabbath that he created for all mankind in Mark 2:27-28 and taught us how to correctly keep the Sabbath as shown in Matthew 12:1-12. Everyone of God's 10 commandments are repeated all through the new testament scriptures even God's 4th commandment (Scripture support here linked). How many commandments are there in God's 10 commandments? "THEREFORE IT REMAINS FOR THE PEOPLE OF GOD TO KEEP THE SABBATH." - Hebrews 4:9
 
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
All mankind? Where do you see the words ALL MANKIND in this verse? It’s not there stop adding what isn’t written in the scriptures in order to support your theology. No one ever observed the Sabbath before Moses, the command to observe the Sabbath was not given until Moses.
Repetition? Mark 2:27 And he said to them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath Did you catch that? Jesus says he did not make the Sabbath for the Jew or Israel. In fact there was no Israel or Jew when the Sabbath was made on the "seventh day" of creation in Genesis 2:1-3. If you look up the Greek word for "man" you will see it means human beings. There were only two humane beings when God created the Sabbath for mankind. Yep Adam and Eve.
 
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
The commandment to keep it had not been given until Moses which is why you will never see anyone observing the Sabbath before Exodus. I swear SDA and Sabbath are just like Roman Catholics are to purgatory. SDA claim that scripture that even remotely mentions the Sabbath is saying we must keep it just like Roman Catholics claim purgatory is being mentioned every time someone so much as lights a match in the scriptures. Any time a fire is mentioned they claim oh that purgatory just like any time Sabbath is mentioned you claim it’s a commandment to keep it.
Not really dear friend your wrong but lets see why. The commandment to keep the Sabbath from God only re-enforces why it was given in the first place and that is because JESUS made it for all mankind *Mark 2:27 on the "seventh day" of the creation week *Genesis 2:1-3. There was no ISRAEL or JEW when JESUS made the Sabbath and JESUS did not say he made the Sabbath for the Jew or ISRAEL but for man (Human beings). There was only Adam and Eve when God made the Sabbath for them and before the written Word of God there was the spoken Word of God and yep God's people were keeping the Sabbath before the written Word of God was given at Mt Sinai (Genesis 26:5; Exodus 16).

Your welcome :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Your comparing the schism of one church governed by one individual who was refuted by 4/5 of the pentarchy to a complete non existence of true gospel taught in any Christian church. That’s hardly a comparison. Jesus said many will fall away not all.

Yahushua did say that...which I reminded you of...

and He has indeed had His throughout...obviously a minority view...is why the way is so narrow

So here we are

And since it seems it is evil or too hard or burdensome for you to serve Him it’s still choose ye this day Whom ye will serve...how and when...

As for me and mine...a day off is nice after six of work

TGIF right?
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
55
Chattanooga
✟16,418.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That’s definitely a good thing I also reject the mainstream theology that is predominantly scattered throughout my area as well. Namely Protestantism. I originally came to Christ in a Protestant theological understanding and thru my studies have moved away from it to a more Orthodox understanding of the scriptures. I think a very common mistake many people make is rejecting anything Catholic because they reject Roman Catholicism which I am mostly opposed to as well but many people don’t know the history behind the RCC and when it actually fell away from the Catholic Church which is the apostolic Church of God. I firmly believe that Matthew 16:18 says that Christ’s church will always remain and the gates of hell will not prevail over it. I believe this means that Christ’s Church will always remain untainted by heresy, the there will always be a church present in this world until His return that is preaching the true gospel. This is why I have a hard time accepting new theologies that have appeared long after the church was established. Theologies that have no historical background to support them. If I accept SDA theology then I must accept that there was a complete void of the true gospel being preached for over 1500 years. How can I believe Matthew 16:18 is true if that were the case? The implications of a widespread conspiracy to preach a false gospel over such a largely dispersed group of devoted servants of God who endured persecution and even martyrdom with no sign of resistance seems extremely highly improbable if not impossible all together.

you sound EXACTLY like those that walked away hearing a hard saying from Yahushua...not accepting the SPIRITUAL lesson of eating Him...His words of life...they rejected His literal body...you too reject the literal seventh day of rest not accepting its SPIRITUAL lesson...

you would be with the Pharisees..."why have we not seen this new theology of 'the Word become Flesh' for 4000 years?" LOL

"The implications of our sages and prophets in their widespread writings partaking of a conspiracy to preach a false gospel over such a largely dispersed group of devoted servants of God who endured persecution and even martyrdom with no sign of resistance seems extremely highly improbable if not impossible all together."

what's next from you?

"CRUCIFY HIM!! CRUCIFY HIM!!!"?

"With His new theology that has appeared so long after we were established with NO historical background to support Him"

Many other Sabbatarians were...and not just by Rome
 
Last edited:
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
You haven’t posted a single New Testament verse that says we must keep the Sabbath. The verses you keep quoting do not say we must keep it. They don’t even imply that we must keep it. Sure many of them do show that people did keep it but we already knew that. The New Covenant abolished the old one. It’s a completely new agreement, a new contract with new requirements.

Only if one does not read the scriptures posted or did not see them. Then your statement would be true
 
Upvote 0