Removing the laws of God- what does it really mean?

[SabbathBlessings]

You don't seem to understand what happened there. or maybe you don't wish to. The practice of Sunday observance is a Christian practice. It was already in place before the Church of Rome existed.

Not really. You seem like a nice enough person and it shows through your posts. This is not personal, but more about the Institution. The Roman Catholic Church takes full credit for changing the day of worship of God's Sabbath. We are told to follow scripture and not man, and no church is above God, period. God told us His covenant can not be changed so I believe Him. We should not follow traditions of the church, but the Words that was written and spoken by our Savior in His everlasting covenant. God bless.

 

[fhansen]

I'm not Catholic, but as I understand it, the only official sources for Catholic teaching are ecumenical councils and possibly papal decrees. I think that's where we would want to look to see what they claim officially.

A thing that gives me pause is that the very same people that were altering or expanding upon the Sabbath were also the ones deciding which documents would be in the Bible.

And they weren't even from the Church of Rome at that point or or not the biggest part of them in any case.

 

[Leaf473]

The Old Testament was already written, Jesus cited it in the NT many times. The New Testament was given with the guidance of the Holy Spirit and was with a widespread consensus. If the Catholic Church had complete authority as they claim, they would have mentioned the change in God's Sabbath in the NT which there is none. You might want to do some research of the Catholic church and the dark ages. Jesus told us to spread the Word, not confiscate Bibles.

I disagree that there was widespread consensus regarding which documents would be in the old or new testament.

But, if you do wish to assert that there was strong consensus, that same consensus was also there regarding Sunday being the fulfillment of the Sabbath day commandment, imo.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I disagree that there was widespread consensus regarding which documents would be in the old or new testament.

But, if you do wish to assert that there was strong consensus, that same consensus was also there regarding Sunday being the fulfillment of the Sabbath day commandment, imo.

Yeah, we all have free will. I prefer to go by what Jesus taught and the Words that are not to be changed from God. God bless

 

[Leaf473]

Yeah, we all have free will. I prefer to go by what Jesus taught and the Words that are not to be changed from God. God bless

I was talking to a Lutheran Pastor, who incidentally had an anti-catholic bias , he explained it this way*:

"Who wrote the book of Romans?"

I said, "You could say Paul wrote it or you could say God wrote it."

"That's right," he said. "God wrote the words, Paul was the human agent through whom those words were given."

"Now," He continued on, "who wrote the table of contents of your Bible?"

"Thomas Nelson?" I said. "But seriously, I get it. God wrote the table of contents, the Church was the human agent through whom it was given."

"Yep! Now, if the church had no authority to do that, then your Bible has no table of contents."

I had to agree, I could either trust the body of Christ on Earth at that time, or it would be up to me to go back and look at all the documents which could be scripture and evaluate them on my own.

To bring it around to what we've been talking about, that same body of Christ on earth was the human agent through whom God communicated his explanation of how the Sabbath commandment was to be observed.


*Not an exact transcript, the thoughts are the same.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I was talking to a Lutheran Pastor, who incidentally had an anti-catholic bias , he explained it this way*:

"Who wrote the book of Romans?"

I said, "You could say Paul wrote it or you could say God wrote it."

"That's right," he said. "God wrote the words, Paul was the human agent through whom those words were given."

"Now," He continued on, "who wrote the table of contents of your Bible?"

"Thomas Nelson?" I said. "But seriously, I get it. God wrote the table of contents, the Church was the human agent through whom it was given."

"Yep! Now, if the church had no authority to do that, then your Bible has no table of contents."

I had to agree, I could either trust the body of Christ on Earth at that time, or it would be up to me to go back and look at all the documents which could be scripture and evaluate them on my own.

To bring it around to what we've been talking about, that same body of Christ on earth was the human agent through whom God communicated his explanation of how the Sabbath commandment was to be observed.


*Not an exact transcript, the thoughts are the same.

Here are quotes from the Lutheran church on God's Sabbath

The observance of the Lord's Day (Sunday) is founded not on any command of God, but on the authority of the Church." Augsburg Confession of Faith.

They [the Catholics] allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday, the Lord's day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it appears, neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath day. Great, say they, is the power and authority of the church, since it dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments.
—Augsburg Confession of Faith, Art. 28, par. 9.

They [Roman Catholics] allege the change of the Sabbath into the Lord's day, as it seemeth, to the Decalogue [the ten commandments]; and they have no example more in their mouths than they change of the Sabbath. They will needs have the Church's power to be very great, because it hath dispensed with the precept of the Decalogue.
—The Augsburg Confession, 1530 A.D. (Lutheran), part 2, art 7, in Philip Schaff, the Creeds of Christiandom, 4th Edition, vol 3, p64 [this important statement was made by the Lutherans and written by Melanchthon, only thirteen years after Luther nailed his theses to the door and began the Reformation]


I wonder exceedingly how it came to be imputed to me that I should reject the law of Ten Commandments...Whosoever abrogates the law must of necessity abrogate sin also.
—MARTIN LUTHER, Spiritual Antichrist, pages 71, 72.


Like I stated previously Paul's writings are greatly misunderstood. Paul very clearly tells us to keep God's commandments, I can provide those scriptures when more time allows.

God bless

 

[Leaf473]

Here are quotes from the Lutheran church on God's Sabbath

The observance of the Lord's Day (Sunday) is founded not on any command of God, but on the authority of the Church." Augsburg Confession of Faith.

They [the Catholics] allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday, the Lord's day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it appears, neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath day. Great, say they, is the power and authority of the church, since it dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments.
—Augsburg Confession of Faith, Art. 28, par. 9.

They [Roman Catholics] allege the change of the Sabbath into the Lord's day, as it seemeth, to the Decalogue [the ten commandments]; and they have no example more in their mouths than they change of the Sabbath. They will needs have the Church's power to be very great, because it hath dispensed with the precept of the Decalogue.
—The Augsburg Confession, 1530 A.D. (Lutheran), part 2, art 7, in Philip Schaff, the Creeds of Christiandom, 4th Edition, vol 3, p64 [this important statement was made by the Lutherans and written by Melanchthon, only thirteen years after Luther nailed his theses to the door and began the Reformation]


I wonder exceedingly how it came to be imputed to me that I should reject the law of Ten Commandments...Whosoever abrogates the law must of necessity abrogate sin also.
—MARTIN LUTHER, Spiritual Antichrist, pages 71, 72.


Like I stated previously Paul's writings are greatly misunderstood. Paul very clearly tells us to keep God's commandments, I can provide those scriptures when more time allows.

God bless

The Lutheran Church certainly has its own set of issues, doesn't it?

Myself, I don't see that those issues change the logic of:
"...if the Church had no authority to do that, then your Bible has no table of contents."

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The Lutheran Church certainly has its own set of issues, doesn't it?

Myself, I don't see that those issues change the logic of:
"...if the Church had no authority to do that, then your Bible has no table of contents."

We were told not to change one Word Proverbs 30:5,6, so we all have a choice, we can follow scriptures or follow man. The church is not above God. We are told to test all things against the scriptures. That's why Mark tells us there is only a remnant left before the second coming. Revelations12:17 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.

 

[Leaf473]

Follow up footnote to post 1685
Removing the laws of God- what does it really mean?

Regarding the pastor I was talking with, another pastor who was in the same Bible study group with him observed that he wasn't really Lutheran in his theology, he was Eastern Orthodox.

Footnote to the footnote, he currently leads services at three Episcopal churches.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I was talking to a Lutheran Pastor, who incidentally had an anti-catholic bias , he explained it this way*:

"Who wrote the book of Romans?"

I said, "You could say Paul wrote it or you could say God wrote it."

"That's right," he said. "God wrote the words, Paul was the human agent through whom those words were given."

"Now," He continued on, "who wrote the table of contents of your Bible?"

"Thomas Nelson ?" I said. "But seriously, I get it. God wrote the table of contents, the Church was the human agent through whom it was given."

"Yep! Now, if the church had no authority to do that, then your Bible has no table of contents."

I had to agree, I could either trust the body of Christ on Earth at that time, or it would be up to me to go back and look at all the documents which could be scripture and evaluate them on my own.

To bring it around to what we've been talking about, that same body of Christ on earth was the human agent through whom God communicated his explanation of how the Sabbath commandment was to be observed.

*Not an exact transcript, the thoughts are the same.

Hi Leaf, I hope you do not mind me making some comments here on your discussion with @imge. I agree with much of this post but let me share why I do not agree with the last part of this post.

I believe as you have rightly stated and God's Word teaches that God shares His Word to us either by direct revelation or through His prophets as His Human instruments as God used the Church at that time to compile the scriptures (His Word) into the bible to be given to the world. There is no argument here as the scriptures teach that God uses human agents to do His will and share His Word (2 Peter 1:21; 2 Timothy 3:16).

Do you think though making a compilation of the scriptures which is the Word of God might be a different situation to human agents teaching something that is against the scriptures or that is in opposition to the scriptures? Why do the scriptures teach that we should examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith or not in 2 Corinthians 13:5 or that we should not believe everyone that professes to be of God, but to test them to see if their message is really from God or not in 1 John 4:1?

Do you not think there is a difference between God using human agents compiling a list of the books of scriptures thought to be Gods Word and those teaching against the scriptures in order to follow man-made teachings and traditions that break the commandments of God that are scripture and God's Word in order to follow teachings that are not God's Word keeping in mind here that the renunciation of the biblical Sabbath in the RCC was a slow process over time when at the same time many of God's people from that time to this present day still continued keeping God's 4th commandment according to the scriptures in the Church's of the east after the schism with the Roman Catholic Church.

Some historical background...

The Christians during the apostolic era, from about 35 to 100 A.D., all kept Sabbath on the designated seventh day of the week. For the first 300 years of Christian history, when the Roman emperors regarded themselves as gods, Christianity became an “illegal religion,” and God’s people were scattered abroad (Acts 8:1). Judaism, however, was regarded at that time as “legal,” as long as they obeyed Roman laws. Thus, during the apostolic era, Christians found it convenient to let the Roman authorities think of them as Jews, which gained them legitimacy with the Roman government.

However, when the Jews rebelled against Rome, the Romans put down their rebellion by destroying Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and again in A.D. 135. Obviously, the Roman government’s suppression of the Jews made it increasingly uncomfortable for Christians to be thought of as Jewish. At that time, Sunday was the rest day of the Roman Empire, whose religion was Mithraism, a form of sun worship. Since Sabbath observance is visible to others, some Christians in the early second century sought to distance themselves from Judaism by observing a different day, thus “blending in” to the society around them.

During the Empire-wide Christian persecutions under Nero, Maximin, Diocletian, and Galerius, Sabbath-keeping Christians were hunted down, tortured, and, for sport, often used for entertainment in the Colosseum.

When Emperor Constantine I—a pagan sun-worshipper—came to power in A.D. 313, he legalized Christianity and made the first Sunday-keeping law. His infamous Sunday enforcement law of March 7, A.D. 321, reads as follows:

“On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.” (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3, trans. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 5th ed. (New York, 1902), 3:380, note 1.)

The Sunday law was latter officially confirmed by the Roman Papacy. The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed,

“Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).

Cardinal Gibbons, in Faith of Our Fathers, 92nd ed., p. 89, freely admits, “You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we [the Catholic Church] never sanctify.”

Again, “The Catholic Church, … by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday” (The Catholic Mirror, official publication of James Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893).

“Protestants do not realize that by observing Sunday, they accept the authority of the spokesperson of the Church, the Pope” (Our Sunday Visitor, February 5, 1950).

“Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change [Saturday Sabbath to Sunday] was her act... And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical authority in religious things” (H.F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons).

The Catholic Church claims that “the church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact” (Catholic Record of London, Ontario Sept 1, 1923).

So this change was started gradually under pagan Rome (although pagan Rome did not change the Sabbath in Christianity) under Constantine first as a civil law (see post # 2 linked for historical records). When on March 7, 321, however, Roman Emperor Constantine I issued a civil decree making Sunday a day of rest

While established only in civil law rather than religious principle, the Church welcomed the development as a means by which Christians could the more easily attend Sunday worship and observe Christian rest. At Laodicea also, the Church encouraged Christians to make use of the day for Christian rest where possible, without ascribing to it any of the regulation of Mosaic Law, and indeed anathematizing Hebrew observance on the Sabbath. The civil law and its effects made possible a pattern in Church life that has been imitated throughout the centuries in many places and cultures, wherever possible. {Wiki}

In those early times the Church only included the Roman Catholic Church of the west and the Eastern Orthodox Church (EOC) ) which the Romans Catholic church eventually separated from (the EOC still keeps God's seventh day Sabbath today).

Anyhow some time latter we see the continued departure of the Roman Catholic Church from scripture in favor of man made teachings and traditions which led to the great reformation which much of Protestantism has its origin today. Hence the unbiblical claim to "Sunday" being "the Lords day" and the replacement of the true Christian Sabbath of God's 4th commandment being handed down to Christianity today.

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

So can you see a difference here in what you posted earlier? God does indeed use people to do his revealed will. His revealed will is that his Word (the gospel) is to be given to the whole world so the compilation of the scriptures is God's express will and he used the Church at that time to do His will. What is not God's revealed will according to Jesus in Matthew 15:3-9 is to follow man-made teachings and traditions that break the commandments of God and go against His express revealed Word outlined in the scriptures. This of course includes Gods 4th commandment which is one of Gods' 10 commandments according to Exodus 20:8-11.

Does this all make sense?

God bless dear friend.

 

[Leaf473]

We were told not to change one Word Proverbs 30:5,6, so we all have a choice, we can follow scriptures or follow man. The church is not above God. We are told to test all things against the scriptures. That's why Mark tells us there is only a remnant left before the second coming. Revelations12:17 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.

I certainly don't see it as adding to God's word, or the church or God being greater.

For me, I realized there was a question of whether God used the church as the human agent through whom he communicated which documents were his Word.

And if so, was that the only thing he communicated through the church.

And my answer was... I'm not sure.

 

[Nathan@work]

Okay, so maybe a bit off topic from the thread,

But why did eating the fruit give Adam and Eve temporary knowledge of Good and evil but permanent corruption which continued through all their descendants?

Good question.

I would not define the knowledge they received as “temporal”. I mean, it was, but it’s effect was continual.

Have you ever had a part of your body ripped off? The pain you feel would be something you would ‘know’ for a moment, but the effects of it would last your lifetime.

The day they ate it brought death. The knowledge they received killed them. That is what is passed on. That is the corruption.

This is why the new birth. The new birth brings about the ability to hear from God.

It really is simple at its core, but seemingly complex to talk about.

 

[Leaf473]

Hi Leaf, I hope you do not mind me making some comments here on your discussion with @imge. I agree with much of this post but let me share why I do not agree with the last part of this post.

I believe as you have rightly stated and God's Word teaches that God shares His Word to us either by direct revelation or through His prophets as His Human instruments as God used the Church at that time to compile the scriptures (His Word) into the bible to be given to the world. There is no argument here as the scriptures teach that God uses human agents to do His will and share His Word (2 Peter 1:21; 2 Timothy 3:16).

Do you think though making a compilation of the scriptures which is the Word of God might be a different situation to human agents teaching something that is against the scriptures or that is in opposition to the scriptures? Why do the scriptures teach that we should examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith or not in 2 Corinthians 13:5 or that we should not believe everyone that professes to be of God, but to test them to see if their message is really from God or not in 1 John 4:1?

Do you not think there is a difference between God using human agents compiling a list of the books of scriptures thought to be Gods Word and those teaching against the scriptures in order to follow man-made teachings and traditions that break the commandments of God that are scripture and God's Word in order to follow teachings that are not God's Word keeping in mind here that the renunciation of the biblical Sabbath in the RCC was a slow process over time when at the same time many of God's people from that time to this present day still continued keeping God's 4th commandment according to the scriptures in the Church's of the east after the schism with the Roman Catholic Church.

Some historical background...

The Christians during the apostolic era, from about 35 to 100 A.D., all kept Sabbath on the designated seventh day of the week. For the first 300 years of Christian history, when the Roman emperors regarded themselves as gods, Christianity became an “illegal religion,” and God’s people were scattered abroad (Acts 8:1). Judaism, however, was regarded at that time as “legal,” as long as they obeyed Roman laws. Thus, during the apostolic era, Christians found it convenient to let the Roman authorities think of them as Jews, which gained them legitimacy with the Roman government.

However, when the Jews rebelled against Rome, the Romans put down their rebellion by destroying Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and again in A.D. 135. Obviously, the Roman government’s suppression of the Jews made it increasingly uncomfortable for Christians to be thought of as Jewish. At that time, Sunday was the rest day of the Roman Empire, whose religion was Mithraism, a form of sun worship. Since Sabbath observance is visible to others, some Christians in the early second century sought to distance themselves from Judaism by observing a different day, thus “blending in” to the society around them.

During the Empire-wide Christian persecutions under Nero, Maximin, Diocletian, and Galerius, Sabbath-keeping Christians were hunted down, tortured, and, for sport, often used for entertainment in the Colosseum.

When Emperor Constantine I—a pagan sun-worshipper—came to power in A.D. 313, he legalized Christianity and made the first Sunday-keeping law. His infamous Sunday enforcement law of March 7, A.D. 321, reads as follows:

“On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.” (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3, trans. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 5th ed. (New York, 1902), 3:380, note 1.)

The Sunday law was latter officially confirmed by the Roman Papacy. The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed,

“Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).

Cardinal Gibbons, in Faith of Our Fathers, 92nd ed., p. 89, freely admits, “You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we [the Catholic Church] never sanctify.”

Again, “The Catholic Church, … by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday” (The Catholic Mirror, official publication of James Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893).

“Protestants do not realize that by observing Sunday, they accept the authority of the spokesperson of the Church, the Pope” (Our Sunday Visitor, February 5, 1950).

“Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change [Saturday Sabbath to Sunday] was her act... And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical authority in religious things” (H.F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons).

The Catholic Church claims that “the church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact” (Catholic Record of London, Ontario Sept 1, 1923).

So this change was started gradually under pagan Rome (although pagan Rome did not change the Sabbath in Christianity) under Constantine first as a civil law (see post # 2 linked for historical records). When on March 7, 321, however, Roman Emperor Constantine I issued a civil decree making Sunday a day of rest

While established only in civil law rather than religious principle, the Church welcomed the development as a means by which Christians could the more easily attend Sunday worship and observe Christian rest. At Laodicea also, the Church encouraged Christians to make use of the day for Christian rest where possible, without ascribing to it any of the regulation of Mosaic Law, and indeed anathematizing Hebrew observance on the Sabbath. The civil law and its effects made possible a pattern in Church life that has been imitated throughout the centuries in many places and cultures, wherever possible. {Wiki}

In those early times the Church only included the Roman Catholic Church of the west and the Eastern Orthodox Church (EOC) ) which the Romans Catholic church eventually separated from (the EOC still keeps God's seventh day Sabbath today).

Anyhow some time latter we see the continued departure of the Roman Catholic Church from scripture in favor of man made teachings and traditions which led to the great reformation which much of Protestantism has its origin today. Hence the unbiblical claim to "Sunday" being "the Lords day" and the replacement of the true Christian Sabbath of God's 4th commandment being handed down to Christianity today.

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

So can you see a difference here in what you posted earlier? God does indeed use people to do his revealed will. His revealed will is that his Word (the gospel) is to be given to the whole world so the compilation of the scriptures is God's express will and he used the Church at that time to do His will. What is not God's revealed will according to Jesus in Matthew 15:3-9 is to follow man-made teachings and traditions that break the commandments of God. This of course includes Gods 4th commandment which is one of Gods' 10 commandments according to Exodus 20:8-11.

Does this all make sense?

God bless dear friend.

Hi LoveGodsWord, of course you and anyone else are always welcome to join in!

And thank you for the nice message.

I ask myself, did God say that Christians back then had the authority to say what was his word and what wasn't? Or that they would be his mouthpiece to communicate that list?

I'm not sure. But if he did, did he go on to say to listen to exactly what the church says about the bible without questioning, but only listen to them on that subject?

Again I'm not sure, but that would seem like a strange situation to me.

But I don't feel like I really have to know. I give thanks for each day,
This is the day that the Lord has made!

 

[Nathan@work]

We are not free to violate the Ten Commandments in the New Covenant (Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 13:8-10).

I agree.

In Christ the law, all of it, is fulfilled and not violated.

Only those in Christ can not violate them. Everyone else does - including some who think they don’t.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I certainly don't see it as adding to God's word, or the church or God being greater.

For me, I realized there was a question of whether God used the church as the human agent through whom he communicated which documents were his Word.

And if so, was that the only thing he communicated through the church.

And my answer was... I'm not sure.

You do not see changing God’s Sabbath that He said was a perpetual covenant to a day God said was meant to do work, not adding to His Words and not being greater than He? That the church would know better than the Creator on which day is His Holy Sabbath?

 

[Leaf473]

I agree.

In Christ the law, all of it, is fulfilled and not violated.

Only those in Christ can not violate them. Everyone else does - including some who think they don’t.

Doesn't it say somewhere that the one who is born of God does not sin? I think that would fit well with what you're saying.

 

[Leaf473]

You do not see changing God’s Sabbath that He said was a perpetual covenant to a day God said was meant to do work, not adding to His Words and not being greater than He? That the church would know better than the Creator on which day is His Holy Sabbath?

That's an interesting charge.

What did the church actually say?

As I understand it, the only official teachings of the church come from ecumenical councils or, possibly, papal decrees.

I think that's where we would want to look to see what they officially said.

(@LoveGodsWord You're welcome to jump in here too. In the nice message you wrote me, were those quotes from ecumenical councils?)

 

[Nathan@work]

Doesn't it say somewhere that the one who is born of God does not sin? I think that would fit well with what you're saying.

Yes, specifically continual sin. As in, willful, desire, not changing from your past, kind of sin.

That can be tricky for some because not everyone has jaded pasts like others. But even for those people, the sin they lay aside is self righteousness.

1 John 3

 

[SabbathBlessings]

That's an interesting charge.

What did the church actually say?

As I understand it, the only official teachings of the church come from ecumenical councils or, possibly, papal decrees.

I think that's where we would want to look to see what they officially said.

(@LoveGodsWord You're welcome to jump in here too. In the nice message you wrote me, were those quotes from ecumenical councils?)

I guess you can read all the quotes, but for me all I have to do is read God’s commandments that He said are eternal and either choose to believe what He said is the final Word or believe what man claims, that they have authority to change anything they want and go away from “God’s manual- the Holy Bible” and see where that path leads. From what Jesus teaches about keeping God’s commandments I am not sure how anyone could believe the Holy Spirit would lead the church or anyone to break any of God’s laws. Jesus said Mathew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’ John 14:15-18

Hopefully @LoveGodsWord has some additional comments on this subject as well.

At any rate, I hope you have a blessed Sabbath! I am off for now. God bless.

 

[Leaf473]

Yes, specifically continual sin. As in, willful, desire, not changing from your past, kind of sin.

That can be tricky for some because not everyone has jaded pasts like others. But even for those people, the sin they lay aside is self righteousness.

1 John 3

Yes, that sounds right about the continual sinful lifestyle.

It seems like it would follow, to me, that we could look at sincere Christians to see what kinds of lifestyle practices in general they avoid.

The reason I bring that up is because it looks to me like only a small percentage of those Christians are concerned about avoiding work on the Sabbath.

Seems like it would follow, imo, that the kinds of Sabbath practices we've been talking about on this thread aren't something God is leading most Christians to do.

Some may say that those Christians just haven't been taught, or they are in a bad habit. My thinking is that if the laws of God are written on their hearts, they wouldn't need to be taught.