HIM

Friend
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Mar 9, 2018
3,917
1,728
57
Alabama
Visit site
✟344,265.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
7. The Sabbath 40 Years After the Cross
Matthew 24:20
Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath.

Jesus is speaking in reference to the future destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. (40 years after His death). If we consider this admonition from the aspect of keeping the Sabbath holy by not working on it, then the prayer to not have to flee on the Sabbath is easily understandable. Additionally, this text also affirms the continuity of the Sabbath 40 years into the New Covenant.
Hello my friend,

Actually Matt 24:20 confirms it until the culmination, Christ's Second coming.

Here follow along please.
In Matt 24:20-31 Jesus speaks of the Sabbath being kept BY HIS FOLLOWS (US) up to His Second coming. VERSES 23 THROUGH 31 TALK OF THIS. AND VERSE 20'S WARNING THAT our FLIGHT DUE TO THE PERSECUTION PRIOR NOT BE IN THE WINTER NOR OR THE SABBATH DAY IS CONNECTED TO THIS.

How do we know? By His use of the words For, And, Then, For, Behold, Wherefore, and For in all the verses leading up to it. All of which ARE connectives and connect what is about to be said to what was previously stated.

Are the Apostles around today to experience the tribulation and see the second coming of our Lord? Have the elect been gathered together?
No, so this warning to pray that our flight not be in the winter nor Sabbath Day IS FOR US ALSO or those who will be blessed to see that glorious day.

Matt 24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
Matt 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
Matt 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
Matt 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
Matt 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
Matt 24:25 Behold, I have told you before.
Matt 24:26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
Matt 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Matt 24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
Matt 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Matt 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Matt 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

As you can see there is no argument against this. May the Lord continue to bless us in all His Way, Christ Jesus
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Icyspark
Upvote 0

HIM

Friend
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Mar 9, 2018
3,917
1,728
57
Alabama
Visit site
✟344,265.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I have never seen you post anything other than subjective opinion. Why is that? Typically no verses or anything objective. Just your opinion; how you feel about it.
In that case, I'd have to conclude that you haven't followed these exchanges very closely.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Sadly all Matt does is post scripture and then an opinion about what the verses say without posting anything to prove what he is saying is true. He posts no argument just opinion.
So although Sabbatarian after Sabbatarian on these threads has demanded "the verses," when they've been identified for you all, there hasn't been so much as a different interpretation of them given back.

No, most of the time, the claim is that they don't exist, or if not that, there is a return to "square one" by the person again lauding the Old Testament verses as though there is no New Testament.

As we see with your own reply here, for example, nothing of substance is offered by you. No rebuttal, no contrary interpretation, nothing of that sort. And not even an opinion of the Scriptural content!

Oh yes, you don't approve of Matt Slick. That says nothing worth mentioning because the link was chosen--as I pointed out--for the listing of the verses on one page there, not because it appears on Matt Slick's website.
 
Upvote 0

HIM

Friend
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Mar 9, 2018
3,917
1,728
57
Alabama
Visit site
✟344,265.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
In that case, I'd have to conclude that you haven't followed these exchanges very closely.
Yet all that you addressed was “I have never seen you post anything other than subjective opinion. Why is that? Typically no verses or anything objective. Just your opinion; how you feel about it. No proof in the pudding bud.”

And you left the following unaddressed.

I love Colossians it is one of my favorite letters. It is a shame that to many of us get centered on just one thing because it really brings out the Gospel. Colossians 2:16 is being stated in context to verse 14. We know this by the use of the word therefore. This means that the handwriting to the ordinances mentioned in verse 14 are those to which included, the meat, drink, holydays, New moon and Sabbath days. These are they which are in the Book Of the Law.

And also Verse 14 is being stated in the Dative case, Hence why it should be translated Handwriting to the, of the, or in the Ordinances. Here follow along..

Be encouraged because our hearts are united in love And into all the riches, of the full assurance of the understanding into the full recognition. The knowing of the mystery of the God and Father and of the Christ. The Mystery which is Christ in us the hope of Glory. That we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. Striving according to his working, which worketh in us mightily.

So AS we have received Christ Jesus walk ye in Him. Being rooted, built up and established in the faith in Him. We are complete in Him, circumcised in the putting of the body of the sins of the flesh. Buried and risen with Him in baptism, quicken together with HIM walking in newness of life. Having Forgiving us all trespasses. Blotting out the handwriting TO THE ordinances. Not the ordinances themselves but the handwriting to them, in them or of them is what the verse says. THE ONES THAT HAD TO DO WITH FORGIVENESS or when we sinned. Because we have been forgiven all trespasses and are not complete in Him, striving to His working which works in us mightily. He took them out of the way nailing them to the cross.

That is the context. Having spoiled their, the handwriting TO THE Ordinances, power and their authority. He triumphed over them in it, the Cross. Let no man therefore, Because of what was just said judge you in meat, drink or respect of Holy day, new moon or sabbath days. These that were of the handwriting to the ordinances. NOT THE ORDINANCES themselves and certainly not the ten commandments.

Col 2:2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;
Col 2:6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:
Col 2:7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.
Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of the ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Col 2:16 Let no man THEREFORE (because of what was just stated) judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
Col 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.[/QUOTE]
 
Upvote 0

Icyspark

Active Member
Oct 2, 2020
276
218
Least coast
✟82,573.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
So although Sabbatarian after Sabbatarian on these threads has demanded "the verses," when they've been identified for you all, there hasn't been so much as a different interpretation of them given back.

No, most of the time, the claim is that they don't exist, or if not that, there is a return to "square one" by the person again lauding the Old Testament verses as though there is no New Testament.

As we see with your own reply here, for example, nothing of substance is offered by you. No rebuttal, no contrary interpretation, nothing of that sort. And not even an opinion of the Scriptural content!

Oh yes, you don't approve of Matt Slick. That says nothing worth mentioning because the link was chosen--as I pointed out--for the listing of the verses on one page there, not because it appears on Matt Slick's website.


Hi Albion,

I don't know about demanding, but I think it's only right if someone A) claims they have divine authorization for forgetting something God commanded should be remembered and B) substitutes that venerated day with some new day, that they C) supply their supposed authorization. Why do you choose to hide behind a link instead of supplying what you consider weighty evidence? Even if your evidence is formulated by someone else (i.e. Matt Slick) why not post the salient points here?

God bless.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
So although Sabbatarian after Sabbatarian on these threads has demanded "the verses," when they've been identified for you all,
"demanded all what verses??" -- you don't even give that much detail in your opening statement in your post.

Right there was a missed golden opportunity to link to a post with all those texts that prove something you did not even bother to state. Without naming anything specific one can always say "somewhere some place the texts were posted" because "texts that say WHAT?" is missing from the statement NOT just the link to those posts/texts.


there hasn't been so much as a different interpretation of them given back.

You are leaving out the antecedent to the pronoun "them" -- with a lot of detail left out I guess one could make any claim "on the surface".

No, most of the time, the claim is that they don't exist,

"They" defined as "them" and also "the verses" -- the verses saying what?

make a specific point.

or if not that, there is a return to "square one" by the person again lauding the Old Testament verses as though there is no New Testament.

I gave you a post with nothing but new testament verses... I think you found that "inconvenient".

===================
It went something like this --

from: #361

If it were nonsense, people of your persuasion would not be terrified of the question being put them about the inspiration of the New Testament books and why such people will not or cannot explain their dismissal of its contents. .

An accusation without any support is not as compelling as it may seem at first.

... I would really like to know why SDAs, at least those on these forums, do not accept the New Testament but say that they do.

I beg to differ. I quote the NT almost non-stop so also does the Adventist 28 Fundamental Beliefs.

So for example on "this thread" --
1 John 3:4 "Sin IS transgression of the Law"

Rom 3:19-20
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin...23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

James 2:
8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,”(Lev 19:18) you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.

Gal 3:8 "the Gospel was preached to Abraham"

1 John 5:3-4 "This IS the LOVE of God - that we KEEP His Commandments"
Rev 14:12 "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND Their faith in Jesus"
1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God"




Albion - Some sort of 'fact' needs to get into your post when making those accusations.

The New Testament is divine and no one is stating otherwise, but nowhere does it delete the 4th commandment

True statement

For those who look at NT texts - the post above had this --

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

Rom 3:19-20
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin...23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

James 2:
8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,”(Lev 19:18) you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.

Gal 3:8 "the Gospel was preached to Abraham"

1 John 5:3-4 "This IS the LOVE of God - that we KEEP His Commandments"
Rev 14:12 "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND Their faith in Jesus"
1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God"

===================

Where "his Commandments" include the TEN having "honor your father and mother" as "the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2

Matt 19 Jesus said "KEEP the Commandments" and when asked "which ones" He quotes exclusively from the TEN and the LAW of Moses (something you claim we should not do else we are denying the NT as scripture???). So then Paul in Rom 13 quotes just what Christ did -- just from the TEN and from the LAW of Moses.

"There REMAINS therefore a SABBATH rest for the people of God" Heb 4.

Such that "EVERY SABBATH" Acts 18:4 Paul preached the Gospel to gentiles and Jews - even believing Gentiles and Jews.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
10,021
4,233
USA
✟470,517.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
NT verses that support Sunday worship.

The problem I see with your argument is that all scripture has to reconcile. First you have to disprove all the Word of God where God tells us:

Exodus 20:10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God.

Isaiah 58:13 “If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, From doing your pleasure on My holy day, And call the Sabbath a delight, The holy day of the LORD honorable, And shall honor Him, not doing your own ways, Nor finding your own pleasure, Nor speaking your own words,

Isaiah 66:23 And from one Sabbath to another, All flesh shall come to worship before Me,” says the LORD.


Matthew 4:4 But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’ ”

So you need to disprove God did away with the very commandment God personally wrote with His own finger, spoke with His own voice and told us to Remember and where God tells us very specifically where we are to worship Him now on the first day. God commanded us to work on the first day Exodus 20:9 so the fact you have not disproved the Sabbath commandment nor proved there was a change in the holy day of the Lord thy God, and we are told God does not change. You might want to consider are you arguing to be right or do we follow the narrow path of God’s Word that leads us to eternal life?

Jesus warned us about this scenario Matthew 15:3-9

If you can’t point out your argument from scripture and have to point to other people aside from God’s Word that would be concerning if one was seeking to follow God’s word in both truth and Spirit.

God bless
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Freth
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The problem I see with your argument is that all scripture has to reconcile. First you have to disprove all the Word of God where God tells us:

Exodus 20:10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God.
Your argument is inconsistent. You want verses to reconcile, but that's possible only if you ignore some of them. That is what I have pointed to many times in these discussions.

If you can’t point out your argument from scripture and have to point to other people aside from God’s Word that would be concerning if one was seeking to follow God’s word in both truth and Spirit.
As you know very well, the verses that support Sunday worship have been identified, recommended to the Sabbatarians here, and with links included for all readers. Yet you still come back saying, "If you can't point out your argument from scripture...."

:rolleyes:
 
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

HIM

Friend
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Mar 9, 2018
3,917
1,728
57
Alabama
Visit site
✟344,265.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Your argument is inconsistent. You want verses to reconcile, but that's possible only if you ignore some of them. That is what I have pointed to many times in these discussions.


As you know very well, the verses that support Sunday worship have been identified, recommended to the Sabbatarians here, and with links included for all readers. Yet you still come back saying, "If you can't point out your argument from scripture...."

:rolleyes:
Because you haven’t
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
and, folks, I have ALSO made this point repeatedly:

When the Sabbatarian argument runs afoul of the facts, what is the final claim made in its defense?

Oh, it's saying that what has been posted a number of times has not been posted. :sigh:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
10,021
4,233
USA
✟470,517.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
This is the end of the debate.

Exodus 20:10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God.

Isaiah 58:13 “If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, From doing your pleasure on My holy day, And call the Sabbath a delight, The holy day of the LORD honorable, And shall honor Him, not doing your own ways, Nor finding your own pleasure, Nor speaking your own words,

Isaiah 66:23 And from one Sabbath to another, All flesh shall come to worship before Me,” says the LORD.

1 John 5:3-4 "This IS the LOVE of God - that we KEEP His Commandments"
Rev 14:12 "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND Their faith in Jesus"
1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God"

We are not the ones anyone needs to convince.
 
Upvote 0

HIM

Friend
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Mar 9, 2018
3,917
1,728
57
Alabama
Visit site
✟344,265.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
and, folks, I have ALSO made this point repeatedly, also.

When the Sabbatarian argument runs afoul of the facts, what is the final claim made in its defense?

What is said in order to get in "the last word?" -- even it is without any substance? Oh, it's saying that what has been posted a number of times is alleged not to have been posted. :sigh:
You are still not adding anything to support what you believe. No verses and no facts pertaining to any verses. All you do is talk about what people post without actually addressing the points made. You post feelings not facts or what one could construe as facts
 
  • Agree
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You are still not adding anything to support what you believe. No verses and no facts pertaining to any verses.

Been there. Done that. Over and over again.

You're simply starting the routine over again from the beginning with your claim here.
 
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

HIM

Friend
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Mar 9, 2018
3,917
1,728
57
Alabama
Visit site
✟344,265.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Been there. Done that. Over and over again.

You're simply starting the routine over again from the beginning with your claim here.
Still
Nothing
 
  • Agree
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
NT verses that support Sunday worship.

Ok -- good point - a list of verses showing that:

1. sunday is the weekly day set aside for worship rather than secular activity,
2. or that Sunday is the Lord's day,
3. or that week-day-1 is the Lord's Day
4. or that they were preaching the Gospel "every Sunday" (just like we have for "Every Sabbath" in Acts 18:4),
5. or that the Sabbath Commandment now refers to week-day-1

-- would be a nice list of texts to have

Acts 2 shows that Tuesday was a day on which they had worship "at least one time" during the feast of pentecost -- but never a weekly day of worship.

Been there. Done that. Over and over again.
.

How nice then for your position to have your post with just such a list of texts easy enough to point to -- feel free to post it or the link to it.

So...are you aware that you have yet to post a link to such a list of texts?

And without actually having such a list of texts - it is pretty hard to then claim that people who join you in not finding that list of texts - are somehow ignoring the NT.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
How nice then for your position to have your post with just such a list of texts easy enough to point to....
You're welcome. When you locate it a few dozen posts ago, I hope you will offer your "take" on all of them. Not on your own list, mind you. Not rebutting claims that were never made from this side but which the Sabbatarians were so eager to refute that they did so even though those issues were not raised. None of that, but just the relevant verses.
 
Upvote 0

Icyspark

Active Member
Oct 2, 2020
276
218
Least coast
✟82,573.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
You're welcome. When you locate it a few dozen posts ago, I hope you will offer your "take" on all of them. Not on your own list, mind you. Not rebutting claims that were never made from this side but which the Sabbatarians were so eager to refute that they did so even though those issues were not raised. None of that, but just the relevant verses.


Hi Albion,

I have requested that you post the ones you'd like to see specifically addressed and I'm starting to feel ignored :confused2: I'm not sure why you won't post them on here but I'm certainly up for the challenge.

Here's what you posted "a few dozen posts ago":

Speaking of Paul, this article explains the basis for Sunday worship very well and includes all the "chapter and verse" citations that many Sabbatarians insist do not exist.

Does the Bible allow Christians to worship on Sunday? | carm.org

So let's take a look at Matt Slick's first contention:

In the Old Testament, God stated, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you,” (Exodus 20:8-10, NASB). It was the custom of the Jews to come together on the Sabbath, which is Saturday, cease work, and worship God. Jesus went to the synagogue on Saturday to teach (Matt. 12:9; John 18:20) as did the apostle Paul (Acts 17:2; 18:4). So, if in the Old Testament we are commanded to keep the Sabbath and in the New Testament we see Jews, Jesus, and the apostles doing the same thing, then why do we worship on Sunday?

First of all, of the ten commandments listed in Exodus 20:1-17, only 9 of them were restated in the New Testament. (Six in Matt. 19:18, murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, honor parents, and worshiping God; Rom. 13:9, coveting. Worshiping God properly covers the first three commandments) [This is an incredibly weak assertion disguised as "apologetics" and he doesn't even supply a text reference. One could just as easily contend that "Worshiping God properly covers the first FOUR commandments.] The one that was not reaffirmed was the one about the Sabbath. Instead, Jesus said that He is the Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8). [Jesus also said, "The Sabbath was made for human beings;" and speaking with regard to the seventh day of creation the author of Hebrews says, "There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God"]
Right off the bat Matt Slick makes an incorrect assertion. If one is going to use this premise of commandments being "restated in the New Testament," then the number is actually only eight. The command not to take the Lord's name in vain is no where to be found.

This is actually a silly argument seeing as how the Ten Commandments are a unit that comprises ... you guessed it, Ten Commandments! If an apostle appeals to one of the Ten Commandments he is of necessity appealing to all of them.

If I say Boardwalk and Park Place one familiar with board games immediately knows I'm referring to two of the 28 properties in the game of Monopoly. I don't need to list all 28 for them to realize, "Ah yes, he's speaking of Monopoly!" My referring to two of the properties does not likewise provide the option to conclude that only those two remain and that all the others have been destroyed, abolished, annulled or obliterated.

Romans 7:7-12
7 What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” 8 But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of coveting. For apart from the law, sin was dead. 9 Once I was alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. 11 For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. 12 So then, the law IS holy, and the commandment IS holy, righteous and good.

The law that "is holy, righteous and good" is the law that contains the commandment, "You shall not covet." That's from the law that reveals sin. Did you note that little two letter word at the beginning of that quote? Paul is speaking of the law in the present tense. The law IS holy. The law IS righteous. The law IS good. Present tense. And no, he's not alluding to just the singular command not to covet.

Paul says he wouldn't have know what sin was without the law. If you say there is no law then there is no sin. If there is no sin then there is no need for a Savior. If you have no need for a Savior then you have no need for Jesus. If you have no need for Jesus then you are in a lost condition. That's an ipso facto.

Does it make more sense to conclude that one needs to have a commandment "restated" in order for it to be "remembered," or rather, that if an apostle appeals to a singular commandment from the Ten (i.e. "You shall not covet") then he's actually including all Ten? What do you think?

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark
 
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
So although Sabbatarian after Sabbatarian on these threads has demanded "the verses," when they've been identified for you all, there hasn't been so much as a different interpretation of them given back. No, most of the time, the claim is that they don't exist, or if not that, there is a return to "square one" by the person again lauding the Old Testament verses as though there is no New Testament.
As we see with your own reply here, for example, nothing of substance is offered by you. No rebuttal, no contrary interpretation, nothing of that sort. And not even an opinion of the Scriptural content! Oh yes, you don't approve of Matt Slick. That says nothing worth mentioning because the link was chosen--as I pointed out--for the listing of the verses on one page there, not because it appears on Matt Slick's website.

Hello Albion,

I had some time today. Is your whole argument based on someone your following by the name of Matt Slick? I also caught up a little reading through this thread today and looked at your link and there is nothing that has been posted there that I can see that has not been addressed with detailed scripture responses either in this thread or elsewhere in this forum.

Did you want to discuss something from your linked thread in detail? I am also happy to discuss the content of your linked thread in detail with you if you are interested in a discussion.

As shown through the scriptures already though, there is;
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that says God's 4th commandment which is one of God's 10 commandments has been abolished and no longer a part of Gods' 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken in the new testament *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4; James 2:10-11.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that says that we are to venerate, worship, keep as a holy day of rest, or honor anywhere in the scriptures, Sunday as a day of remembrance that Jesus rose from the dead.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that says any of the Patriarchs, prophets, Jesus or the Apostles ever kept Sunday as a holy day of rest.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that commands Sunday sacredness of any kind, as God himself calls every other day of the week including Sunday a working day according to Ezekiel 46:1
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible where God blesses Sunday sacredness or says we are to do anything with Sunday worship in place of God's 4th commandment.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that says Jesus, or the Apostles ever rested on Sunday or held Sunday as a sacred day of rest.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that sanctifies or separates out Sunday from any other working day of the week in honor of Jesus and the resurrection.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that calls Sunday "the Christian Sabbath".
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that calls Sunday "the Lord's day".
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that calls God's 4th commandment "the Jewish Sabbath". Jesus says that the Sabbath was made for all mankind in Mark 2:27 and there was no Jews when God made the Sabbath for man (Genesis 2:1-3).
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that says Gods' 10 commandments that includes God's 4th commandment "seventh day" are no longer the standard for Christian living and we are now free to break anyone of them when according to the scriptures breaking them is sin *James 2:10-11.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that links God's 4th commandment Sabbath of the 10 commandments to Romans 14 which is talking about eating and not eating (fasting) on days that men esteem over other day, and judging others in this regard.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that calls Jesus "the Sabbath"
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that calls Gods' 4th commandment Sabbath anything else except "the seventh day of the week" that God commands us to keep as a holy day of rest.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that links Gods' 4th commandment seventh day Sabbath of the 10 commandments to being "shadow law" fulfilled in Christ in Colossians 2:16-17. The scripture is referring to the old covenant laws of remission of sin in the meat and drink offerings for atonement for sin, the new moons, in the annual Feast days which were all shadows of things to come (see Ezekiel 45:17; Colossians 2:17). Colossians 2:16 is in context to annual sabbaths (plural) in the feast days. There were many different kinds of sabbaths in the old covenant. Colossians 2:16 is referring to the old covenant "ceremonial sabbaths" directly linked into the annual Feast days and the old covenant laws for remission of sins (not God's 4th commandment) *Leviticus 23:6-8; Leviticus 23:27-32; Leviticus 23:24-25; Leviticus 23:34-36; Leviticus 23:39; Leviticus 23:7-8; 21;24; 27; 35-36; Leviticus 25:2; Leviticus 25:9-54. The annual feast days were linked directly to the old covenant laws for remission of sins under the Levitical Priesthood and earthly Sanctuary system which were all shadows of things to come now fulfilled and continued in Christ based on better promises (Hebrews 7:1-25; Hebrews 8:1-13; Hebrews 9:1-27; Hebrews 10:1-22).
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that says there arenow only 9/10 of the commandment in the new covenant we are now to follow. In fact Paul tells us that "it remains for the people of God to keep the Sabbath" - Hebrews 4:9.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that links the old covenant sacrificial laws to only Gods' 4th commandment. The only covenant sacrificial laws were applied to every day of the week. These were the shadows of things to come.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that ever calls the first day of the week (Sunday) a holy day. Sunday has it's origins in pagan sun worship.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that ever giver Sunday or the first day of the week a sacred name.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that say any of the Apostles kept Sunday or the first day of the week as a holy day.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that the apostles ever taught any convert to keep the first day of the week as a Sabbath or a holy day in honor of the resurrection of Jesus.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible that says first day was ever appointed to be kept as the Lord's Day.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible telling man to keep the first day of the week holy or to worship or rest on the first day of the week.
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible authorizing anyone to set aside God's Sabbath and observe any other day
  • No scripture anywhere in the bible declaring that the "seventh day" of the week is no longer the eternal Sabbath day as given in God's 4th commandment of the 10 commandments and is no longer a sign to those who believe and follow his Word that God is saving us from our sins.
..............

The man-made tradition and teaching of Sunday worship is not supported in the scriptures as a replacement for Gods 4th commandments. Sunday worship is a man-made teaching and tradition followed by some in the early Church that has lead many away from God and His Word to break his 4th commandment that according to God's new covenant scriptures give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7. Jesus says in His own words if we knowingly follow these man-made teachings and traditions that lead us to break God's commandments we are not worshiping God in Matthew 15:3-9.

The question we should all be asking then is who should we believe and follow here; God or man? Gods' Word directly answers this question in Romans 3:4; Acts of the Apostles 5:29 if your interested.

Something to pray about.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0