JESUS and the APOSTLES OBEYED GOD'S LAW and the SABBATH!

[Leaf473]

Than the rest is easy. So if you agree that Romans 7:7 and James 2:10-11 is talking about the 10 commandments and that James is saying that if we break any one of Gods' 10 commandments we stand guilty before God of sin then you have your answer in relation to God's 4th commandment Sabbath which is one of Gods' 10 commandments.

That's right, if we break any of the 10, or any of the other 600 or so other laws, then we miss the mark, sin.

Next, do we keep or fulfill them all physically? Or are some of them kept or fulfilled in a non-physical way?

According to the scriptures Gods' people keep all God's commandments not some of them which makes them a remnant in the world (see Revelation 12:17; Revelation 14:12; Revelation 22:14; 1 John 2:3-4; 1 John 5:2-3; Romans 13:8-10; Romans 3:31; Romans 8:4; 1 John 3:6-9) as sin (breaking God's law) is the difference between the children of God and the children of the devil according to 1 John 3:10.

Absolutely, all of them! All 600, 700, 800, how ever you want to count them.

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. - Ecclesiastes 12:13

Hope this is helpful.

I think it is helpful, it sounds like we agree that we keep all of God's commandments.

Then, physically or non physically?

 

[Leaf473]

The Bible includes 66 books - not just 27 - and I think a lot of people would agree on that point - on both sides of the Sabbath vs Sunday debate.

Yes! And what instructions from those 66 books we use to guide our physical actions is a matter of personal opinion. Or being led by the spirit, we could say.

In addition the Bible says in Heb 10:4-11 that the laws regarding animal sacrifice end at the cross - so that is the Bible telling us what the Bible limit on animal sacrifice is.

Yes, I know of no Christian today who is sacrificing animals.

But the non animal sacrifices such as the wave offering?
Leviticus talks about how when a person has leprosy, you do some things with pigeons, one get sacrificed in the other gets set free, if I remember right.

Still applicable today? Personal opinion, it looks like to me.

as already stated here

Sorry, here? On this thread?

Assuming your answer was No stoning, then obviously certain parts of Leviticus we keep and certain parts of Exodus we don't.

Which parts? If it's not something actually stated in the scriptures, emphasis on stated, then it becomes a matter of personal Bible interpretation, being led by the spirit.

Are you going back to that point?

Oh, I see what you're talking about, stated here means stated in the following quote

I agree that people talk about civil laws. Getting people to agree on what laws are civil and which ones are moral, ceremonial, calendar, etc is another matter.

Tassels on your clothes? A holy assembly? Civil? Ceremonial? Moral?

On the contrary as noted before - this is where they all agree with SDAs that the civil penalties under that theocracy end when the theocracy.

I agree that there's agreement in the theoretical, not so much in the practical.
This law,
"Whoever sheds man's blood, his blood will be shed by man."

Capital punishment for today? Lots of disagreement among theologians.

My point has consistently been - that there is no large need to get stuck on the part that is so easy that Bible scholars on both sides of the Sabbath debate freely admit to the Bible details.

I don't think they agree on the practical, physical side, holy assemblies, not working on Saturday.

It's kind of like if a friend and I were going to join together and build a house. So I bought all the wood and had it delivered, and told him Now you have the easy part, just nail it all together.

Something that looks easy from a distance can turn out to be not so easy when you get up close. And that's where personal opinions come in like what physical actions a person takes to keep or fulfill the sabbath.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Yes! And what instructions from those 66 books we use to guide our physical actions is a matter of personal opinion. Or being led by the spirit, we could say.


Yes, I know of no Christian today who is sacrificing animals.

But the non animal sacrifices such as the wave offering?
Leviticus talks about how when a person has leprosy, you do some things with pigeons, one get sacrificed in the other gets set free, if I remember right.

Still applicable today? Personal opinion, it looks like to me.


Sorry, here? On this thread?

Assuming your answer was No stoning, then obviously certain parts of Leviticus we keep and certain parts of Exodus we don't.

Which parts? If it's not something actually stated in the scriptures, emphasis on stated, then it becomes a matter of personal Bible interpretation, being led by the spirit.


Oh, I see what you're talking about, stated here means stated in the following quote

I agree that people talk about civil laws. Getting people to agree on what laws are civil and which ones are moral, ceremonial, calendar, etc is another matter.

Tassels on your clothes? A holy assembly? Civil? Ceremonial? Moral?


I agree that there's agreement in the theoretical, not so much in the practical.
This law,
"Whoever sheds man's blood, his blood will be shed by man."

Capital punishment for today? Lots of disagreement among theologians.

I don't think they agree on the practical, physical side, holy assemblies, not working on Saturday.

It's kind of like if a friend and I were going to join together and build a house. So I bought all the wood and had it delivered, and told him Now you have the easy part, just nail it all together.

Something that looks easy from a distance can turn out to be not so easy when you get up close. And that's where personal opinions come in like what physical actions a person takes to keep or fulfill the sabbath.

Leaf,

Personal opinions really does not matter, as Paul tells us what matters is keeping God's commandments 1 Corinthians 7:19 I am really confused by your responses, because you keep agreeing we need to keep God's commandments, but seem to think the 4th commandment is optional, when it is part of an eternal covenant that our Savior wrote with His own finger and God went on to specifically state REMEMBER the 4th commandment. His holy Sabbath day is not optional despite the majority of people not keeping the Sabbath commandment, which is why its best to not always follow what is popular/traditions over what God has commanded us. Mathew 7:13 Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it 14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

LoveGodsWord said: ↑ Than the rest is easy. So if you agree that Romans 7:7 and James 2:10-11 is talking about the 10 commandments and that James is saying that if we break any one of Gods' 10 commandments we stand guilty before God of sin then you have your answer in relation to God's 4th commandment Sabbath which is one of Gods' 10 commandments.

Your response here...

That's right, if we break any of the 10, or any of the other 600 or so other laws, then we miss the mark, sin. Next, do we keep or fulfill them all physically? Or are some of them kept or fulfilled in a non-physical way?

No, do you still keep the old covenant laws of the Levitical Priesthood, the earthly Sanctuary service, the laws for sin offerings and animal sacrifices of which the 613 are a part of? If not why not?

Now also, if you agree that if we break anyone of Gods' 10 commandments than why break Gods' 4th commandment which is one of God's 10 commandment that the scriptures shown earlier from James, Paul and John give us the knowledge of what sin is when we break them *Romans 7:7; James 2:10-11; 1 John 3:4 and if we knowingly continue to break them will put us in danger of the judgement according to Paul in Hebrews 10:26-31?

Then, physically or non physically?

Can you spiritually not steal from someone while physically stealing from someone? I think if you consider your arguments here and the scriptures beings shared with you, perhaps you will see your views might need changing. I believe God is calling you home to his Word.

Hope this is helpful.

 

[BobRyan]

Yes, I know of no Christian today who is sacrificing animals.

But the non animal sacrifices such as the wave offering?

"If Christ were on Earth today - He would not be a priest at all" Heb 8:4

Heb 10
"8 After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and offerings for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second."

Heb 7
12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. 13 For the one about whom these things are said belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses said nothing concerning priests.

Here "again" a detail in this Sabbath topic that the Bible scholarship in almost all major Christian denominations (if not ALL of them) fully agrees with SDA and many other Sabbath keeping groups.

The "easy part" - again.

It would be nice not to get stuck on the "easy part"

 

[BobRyan]

I agree that people talk about civil laws. Getting people to agree on what laws are civil and which ones are moral, ceremonial, calendar, etc is another matter.

Tassels on your clothes? A holy assembly? Civil? Ceremonial? Moral?


I agree that there's agreement in the theoretical, not so much in the practical.
This law,
"Whoever sheds man's blood, his blood will be shed by man."

That is a civil law. We are not under a theocracy so we cannot use the bible for it. But our own civil government may choose to adopt that law. I don't think this is even a debatable item in the Sabbath vs Sunday bible discussions where Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations already agree with Sabbath keeping denominations on these basic - easy parts -- easy to see in the Bible.

I don't think they agree on the practical, physical side, holy assemblies, not working on Saturday.

As noted in my earlier post the part where they differ is on the degree to which the bible can be "edited" either literally or by net effect. This is where there is a big divide between those scholars and the position of the Bible-Sabbath keeping denominations.

We say the 4th commandment cannot be edited to point to week-day-1 nor can tradition modify the text so that week-day-1 observance satisfies "the 7th day" obligation in Ex 20:10 and Gen 2:1-3

 

[Leaf473]

The one's I keep quoting in various areas #1438 do agree with that .. on both sides of the debate.

Where they differ with the Bible-Sabbath keeping denominations is the degree to which the Bible can be "edited" to repoint the 4th commandment to week-day-1

Continuing with your vocabulary and line of reasoning there,

I think in general Catholic theologians
(picking them since they are by far the largest)
would say the difference is who gets to do the editing.

The Catholic view is is that only the church as a whole is authorized to do that. The general Protestant view is that it is the individual who does it, imo.

 

[Leaf473]

2. The Sabbath commandment cannot be "edited" by Tradition.

As I understand it, in the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox view, any issue can be "edited" by an ecumenical council.

In the Protestant world, Tradition plays a much smaller role. But any Bible passage can be "edited" by the individual.

 

[Leaf473]

BobRyan said: ↑
In 1 Cor 7:19 we see this "what matters is keeping the commandments of God"

But if you read the entire verse it addresses your point

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

The moral law of God is what determines what sin is - and that includes the TEN as Paul reminds us in Rom 13 and in Eph 6:1-3

This is the easy part of the discussion where the Bible scholars on both sides of the Saturday vs Sunday debate admit that the Bible affirms the ten as included in that moral law of God.

They also agree with SDAs and other Saturday groups - that the civil laws applicable only under a theocracy - are no longer applicable since none of us are in that Theocracy and we have no control over civil law to that extent.

This is what I keep calling the "easy part" since both sides agree to it.



And as both sides agree - "that does not mean we are free to take God's name in vain" neither Rom 13 or Matt 19 are telling us we can take God's name in vain as long as we love our neighbor as ourselves.

So again - the easy part of the discussion would be a great place to accept - and start.

So when you talk about both sides agreeing, are you essentially attempting to appeal to consensus?
If most theologians think something, then it must be true?
That's not really a bad approach, it's kind of like the idea of the holy Spirit guiding the church as a whole. But then, the church as a whole does not keep a Saturday Sabbath the way my SDA brothers and sisters do.

So again - the easy part of the discussion would be a great place to accept - and start.

I hear what you're saying, but the reason I don't go along with it is that as one moves away from the easy part to the more difficult part, one finds that the solution used at the easy part doesn't work anymore.
Kind of like a leaky boat will float for a while.
So for myself, I like to have a solution that will work consistently throughout.

 

[BobRyan]

So when you talk about both sides agreeing, are you essentially attempting to appeal to consensus?

No I am appealing to the idea that some parts of the discussion of what the Bible says - are so easy, so obvious that in the debate about the Sabbath - BOTH sides see and admit to "the basics" -- the simple stuff.

No doubt that when it comes to "opposing views" there are a lot of more-here or more-there points to be discussed.

But what about the really really simple part where opposing sides will both agree to the basics. It just does not get any easier than that part.

 

[Leaf473]

Not true. That is two gospels - but in real life Gal 1:6-9 - there is only one.
Gal 3:8 and that Gospel was preached to Abraham
Heb 4:1 "the Gospel was preached to US just as it was to THEM also"

Moses and Elijah stand "with Christ in glory" before the cross - in Mattt 17 and it is not because "they only had Christ one day a week". Here again you have a flawed application.

No, a great application.

I'm sure you agree that Jesus is the true manna/bread that comes down out of heaven.

The point remains - that it is God coming up with this concept -- not the devil.

Absolutely, as God spoke the entire law.

Funny -- but not true.

They all agree that no matter how highly you value your garbage and the sorting of the glass bottles out of it to recycle them - you can't do it in the middle of church.

Well, and the consensus is that it can be done on Saturday.

Just as God also stated in Is 58:13 no mixing in the secular with the sacred.

God didn't want the Israelites doing their own pleasure on his holy Day.

As Christians, we strive to do God's pleasure every day of the week.

This is the easy part.

Would be good to get passed the part where scholarship on both sides of the Sabbath debate agree and get to the part where they differ.

Yes, if we can maintain a consistent solution throughout, that sounds great!

 

[Leaf473]

Leaf,

Personal opinions really does not matter, as Paul tells us what matters is keeping God's commandments 1 Corinthians 7:19 I am really confused by your responses, because you keep agreeing we need to keep God's commandments, but seem to think the 4th commandment is optional,

No, not optional, just a question of physical or non-physical?

Peace be with you!

...when it is part of an eternal covenant that our Savior wrote with His own finger and God went on to specifically state REMEMBER the 4th commandment. His holy Sabbath day is not optional despite the majority of people not keeping the Sabbath commandment, which is why its best to not always follow what is popular/traditions over what God has commanded us. Mathew 7:13 Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it 14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

 

[Leaf473]

Your response here...

No, do you still keep the old covenant laws of the Levitical Priesthood, the earthly Sanctuary service, the laws for sin offerings and animal sacrifices of which the 613 are a part of? If not why not?

I keep them in the sense that I fulfill them by loving my neighbor as myself.

At least that's the goal.

Now also, if you agree that if we break anyone of Gods' 10 commandments than why break

I don't break it.

...Gods' 4th commandment which is one of God's 10 commandment that the scriptures shown earlier from James, Paul and John give us the knowledge of what sin is when we break them *Romans 7:7; James 2:10-11; 1 John 3:4 and if we knowingly continue to break them will put us in danger of the judgement according to Paul in Hebrews 10:26-31?

Can you spiritually not steal from someone while physically stealing from someone?

No, that would be a place where the physical and the spiritual keeping of the law overlap.

But can you spiritually put tassels on your clothes while not doing it physically? Yes.

So again we are back to which laws are fulfilled or kept in which way?

I think if you consider your arguments here and the scriptures beings shared with you, perhaps you will see your views might need changing. I believe God is calling you home to his Word.

Hope this is helpful.

 

[Leaf473]

"If Christ were on Earth today - He would not be a priest at all" Heb 8:4

Heb 10
"8 After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and offerings for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second."

Heb 7
12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. 13 For the one about whom these things are said belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses said nothing concerning priests.

Here "again" a detail in this Sabbath topic that the Bible scholarship in almost all major Christian denominations (if not ALL of them) fully agrees with SDA and many other Sabbath keeping groups.

The "easy part" - again.

It would be nice not to get stuck on the "easy part"

If the same solution for the easy part will work for the difficult part as well, that sounds great.

I go through the posts one by one, so I don't know yet if you talk about the bird being set free related to a person who no longer has leprosy.

But the same solution has to work for things like that as well, imo.

 

[Leaf473]

That is a civil law.

I'm not sure if there is a consensus among theologians that it is a civil law.
My impression is that many would say it is a moral law, but superseded by something in the New testament.

We are not under a theocracy so we cannot use the bible for it. But our own civil government may choose to adopt that law. I don't think this is even a debatable item in the Sabbath vs Sunday bible discussions where Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations already agree with Sabbath keeping denominations on these basic - easy parts -- easy to see in the Bible.

I think if we want to solve one part with a "consensus" approach, we would want to use that same approach consistently.

As noted in my earlier post the part where they differ is on the degree to which the bible can be "edited" either literally or by net effect. This is where there is a big divide between those scholars and the position of the Bible-Sabbath keeping denominations.

We say the 4th commandment cannot be edited to point to week-day-1 nor can tradition modify the text so that week-day-1 observance satisfies "the 7th day" obligation in Ex 20:10 and Gen 2:1-3

Are we going to give Catholic scholars just one vote since they are one denomination?

Or should we give more weight to theologians from larger groups?

If we go by numbers of people in the groups, the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox together make up something like 80% of the Christian world. Add to that the majority of protestant theologians, and the clear consensus is that the scripture can indeed be "edited" to support Sunday worship.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

No, do you still keep the old covenant laws of the Levitical Priesthood, the earthly Sanctuary service, the laws for sin offerings and animal sacrifices of which the 613 are a part of? If not why not? Now also, if you agree that if we break anyone of Gods' 10 commandments than why break Gods' 4th commandment which is one of God's 10 commandment that the scriptures shown earlier from James, Paul and John give us the knowledge of what sin is when we break them *Romans 7:7; James 2:10-11; 1 John 3:4 and if we knowingly continue to break them will put us in danger of the judgement according to Paul in Hebrews 10:26-31? Can you spiritually not steal from someone while physically stealing from someone? I think if you consider your arguments here and the scriptures beings shared with you, perhaps you will see your views might need changing. I believe God is calling you home to his Word.

Your response here...

I keep them in the sense that I fulfill them by loving my neighbor as myself. At least that's the goal. I don't break it. No, that would be a place where the physical and the spiritual keeping of the law overlap, But can you spiritually put tassels on your clothes while not doing it physically? Yes. So again we are back to which laws are fulfilled or kept in which way?

You really did not answer any of the questions asked of you in the post you are responding to. See Matthew 22:36-40. Jesus says on these two commandments of love to God and man hang all the law and the prophets. Do you love your neighbor by lying stealing and killing them? Do you love God by making idols and worshiping them, using his name in vain, having other Gods and breaking his Sabbath? See Romans 13:8-10 where Paul agrees with Jesus saying that loving our neighbor as our self is simply summing up those of the 10 commandment that are our duty of love to our fellow man as does James in James 2:8-12 which is why John says in 1 John 5:2-3 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. No one can claim that they love God or their fellow man by breaking God's commandments because love according to the scriptures is expressed in obedience to them not breaking them. According to John those who say they know God but breaking his commandments are not telling the truth in 1 John 2:3-4 and that they are the children of the devil in 1 John 3:6-10. So who should we follow; God or men? *Romans 3:4; Acts of the Apostles 5:29.

No one loves God or their fellow man by breaking anyone of Gods 10 commandments. According to the scriptures if we break anyone of Gods' 10 commandments we stand guilty before God of sin.

Something to pray about.

 

[Leaf473]

No I am appealing to the idea that some parts of the discussion of what the Bible says - are so easy, so obvious that in the debate about the Sabbath - BOTH sides see and admit to "the basics" -- the simple stuff.

No doubt that when it comes to "opposing views" there are a lot of more-here or more-there points to be discussed.

But what about the really really simple part where opposing sides will both agree to the basics. It just does not get any easier than that part.

Are you sure that they agree on the degree of "editing" that can be done?

 

[Leaf473]

Your response here...

You really did not answer any of the questions asked of you in the post you are responding to.

I believe I did answer them.

Would you like me to go through your post again and answer them in a very "bare bones" fashion?

See Matthew 22:36-40. Jesus says on these two commandments of love to God and man hang all the law and the prophets. Do you love your neighbor by lying stealing and killing them?

Are these rhetorical questions or did you want me to answer each one of them?

Do you love God by making idols and worshiping them, using his name in vain, having other Gods and breaking his Sabbath? See Romans 13:8-10 where Paul agrees with Jesus saying that loving our neighbor as our self is simply summing up...

He goes on to say the love is the fulfillment of the law.

...those of the 10 commandment that are our duty of love to our fellow man as does James in James 2:8-12 which is why John says in 1 John 5:2-3 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. No one can claim that they love God or their fellow man by breaking God's commandments because love according to the scriptures is expressed in obedience to them not breaking them. According to John those who say they know God but breaking his commandments are not telling the truth in 1 John 2:3-4 and that they are the children of the devil in 1 John 3:6-10. So who should we follow; God or men? *Romans 3:4; Acts of the Apostles 5:29.

Something to pray about.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I believe I did answer them.

Would you like me to go through your post again and answer them in a very "bare bones" fashion?


Are these rhetorical questions or did you want me to answer each one of them?


He goes on to say the love is the fulfillment of the law.

Yes please answer the questions they will be helpful to the discussion. You already agree that breaking anyone of God's 10 commandments is sin right? How do we fulfill God's law according to Romans 13:8-12? Take your time. I have to get back and do some work for now.

 

[Leaf473]

Yes please answer the questions they will be helpful to the discussion.

Okay, in the post that follows.

You already agree that breaking anyone of God's 10 commandments is sin right?

Yes, as is true of all of God's commandments.

How do we fulfill God's law according to Romans 13:8-12?

By loving our neighbor.
Did you want a fuller answer, such as loving our neighbor and throwing off the works of darkness?

Take your time. I have to get back and do some work for now.

Peace be with you.