Ten Reasons I'm a Sabbatarian [moved thread]

[Bob S]

Hi Bob S,

Postmoderns maybe read the Bible, but that doesn't do anything other than give them an opportunity to insert their own ideas into the divine text. Adding and subtracting from the Bible to suit a postmodern belief system is exactly the problem. Attempting to shift your blame onto "some self-made prophet" isn't helping solve the biblical chasm of a postmodern belief system.

Yes, let's talk about some of your church's redaction. First you are meddling with your prophet indicating that she must have been a terrible "postmodern" like me. Read Ellen's account of the Tower of Babel then read what scripture says. Read throughout the whole Bible and find something to indicate not eating condiments, using vinegar, drinking wine, becoming a vegetarian and all the other prohibitions she placed on her flock. Christianity is not about what we eat or not eat, it is about believing Jesus and keeping His commands like He kept His Father's commands. Jesus fulfilled His Father's commands and gave mankind a new and better covenant, but because of your redaction you change what He wrote. Yes spark, you limit what Jesus fulfilled to the words God spoke to Moses and had Him write in the book of the Law and only use the ministry that caused death part of the Law. Oh yes, you add the meat part of what Moses wrote and alter the Israelite tithing laws to suit your needs.
Just a little advice about postmodern and redaction, pointing a finger at others has four fingers pointing back at yourself.

Let's also note that I don't need to appeal to the writings of Ellen White because all of my positions are firmly rooted in what the Bible plainly teaches.

I believe I have debunked you and your postmodern view, Col 2: 16, 2Cor 3:6-11, Eph 2:8-18, 1Jn3:4, Rev14:12, Matt5:17-20 and probably much more.

I'm not seeing that I said "ALL" anywhere in this context. This appears to be your attempt to apply your use of addition to my writings now. Let's see the evidence for this accusation.

My mistake, you didn't say "all", but your indication would include all mankind would it not? Of course it would. Just who would you have left out?

Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for human beings." That is an inclusive statement. Your position attempts to redact Jesus's words to make it suit a predetermined belief system. Tell me again how many times you've asserted that "The Sabbath is only for the Jews"?

I'm not seeing that I said "is" anywhere in this context. This appears to be your attempt to apply your use of addition to my writings now. Let's see the evidence for this accusation.

If Jesus says it was for human beings, are you not a human being?

Jesus said it was made for man and I believe Jesus. So were all of the Sabbaths Israel observed. Are we now obligated to keep what was made for Israelites? Obviously, you don't believe we are. so why are you trying to impose the Israelite Sabbath on the remainder of mankind when Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law, but not even one jot or one tittle would pass from the Law UNTIL all is fulfilled. Doesn't that mean that if you don't believe Jesus did what He said he came to do you should be keeping all the other Sabbaths, wear tassels, refrain from cutting your sideburns and etc.?

How is it you get to deny the words of Jesus? Are you "some self-made prophet with a third-grade education"? It certainly sounds like you're embracing for yourself those things which you seem to decry.

How is it you get to deny the words of Jesus? Are you "some self-made prophet with a third-grade education"? It certainly sounds like you're embracing for yourself those things which you seem to decry.

Jesus said:

Luke 9:26
Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.​

Have you ever taken a moment to ponder why the Sabbath was made for human beings? Have you ever pondered why God said to "call the Sabbath a delight"? If the Sabbath was made for us does it not make sense that God made it for our benefit and that benefit makes it a "delight" for "human beings"?

Have you ever pondered why Jesus came to fulfill the Law, but all the Law would remain until all was fulfilled? Why do you redact Jesus words? Have you ever pondered why God has never asked any other nation on Earth to observe the Sabbath He gave to those who fled Egypt? If indeed it is so very important that it be observed, why didn't God stop those fleeing on their way to the Red Sea? Why did He wait to give it to them after crossing the Red Sea?

Annnnnd, here we are again. This is a big problem for your ability to embrace the unit of Ten Commandments and contributes to your desire to add and subtract from Scripture. The old covenant is an agreement. The agreement is not what was at fault. "God found fault with THE PEOPLE," not with His perfect law.

The ten were perfect as far as the sins they described. Do you believe they were the only way the Israelites could sin? The ten didn't even include the greatest sin the Israelites could do to each other, LOVE. As far as adding and subtracting, it is your failure to realize that the ten were temporary and have been done away 2Cor3:6-11 KJV. Eph 2:15 tell us Jesus set aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace.

Here's how Easton's Bible Dictionary defines a covenant:

Now you are using the redaction of someone to bolster your redacted belief.

Covenant
a contract or agreement between two parties. In the Old Testament the Hebrew word _berith_ is always thus translated. _Berith_ is derived from a root which means "to cut," and hence a covenant is a "cutting," with reference to the cutting or dividing of animals into two parts, and the contracting parties passing between them, in making a covenant (Gen. 15; Jer. 34:18, 19).

This word is used (1) of a covenant or compact between man and man (Gen. 21:32), or between tribes or nations (1 Sam. 11:1; Josh. 9:6, 15). In entering into a convenant, Jehovah was solemnly called on to witness the transaction (Gen. 31:50), and hence it was called a "covenant of the Lord" (1 Sam. 20:8). The marriage compact is called "the covenant of God" (Prov. 2:17), because the marriage was made in God's name. Wicked men are spoken of as acting as if they had made a "covenant with death" not to destroy them, or with hell not to devour them (Isa. 28:15, 18).​

So for you to throw out the baby (Ten Commandments) with the old covenant bathwater is untenable.

Maybe you forgot the covenant was not made with us or anyone else except the ones that came out of Egypt and their offspring. Why do you continue to tell us things that are not true?

Hebrews 8:8-9
But God found fault with the people ... because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord​

God didn't find fault with His perfect law. What did He find fault with? "The PEOPLE"
Why did God find fault with the PEOPLE? "Because they did not remain faithful to my covenant" (i.e. "contract or agreement").

To whom was the writer referring?

Stop with the redacting and read the Bible in its normative sense. I think if you can get over this one hurdle that much of your contentions will just fade away.

Stop with the redacting and read the Bible in its normative sense. I think if you can get over this one hurdle that much of your contentions will just fade away.

So when Jesus says, "The Sabbath was MADE ..." you get to reject this affirmation and conclude that it wasn't made? Um, sorry, no.

Jesus said it and I believe it. It WAS made for man. I have never rejected any of Jesus words like you have done with Matt 5:16-18, Eph 2:15, Col 2:16 and 2Cor3;6-11. I do not understand Jesus' statement in light of the fact the Sabbath was never offered to any other nation except Israel. Maybe you could enlighten us on the subject.

While the word "Sabbath" is not in the creation account, all the elements that comprise the Sabbath are there. Your position is that if you see something that looks EXACTLY like a mousetrap but doesn't have the word "mousetrap" emblazoned on the object that it's not a mousetrap. Does that even make sense?

If it is not there, why do you redact what is written and add your own theory. Does that even make sense?

The work Jesus was doing in John 5 wasn't the work of carpentry. He was doing the work of salvation and even the Jewish leaders couldn't condemn Him for the work He was doing. That's part of the reason why they appealed to false witnesses in order to condemn Him. If Jesus broke the law He was born under then he was a sinner and the Jewish leaders were compelled to not only reject him as the Messiah but to put him to death.

David broke the Law, but it was not accounted as a sin. The Israelites circled Jerico for eight straight days breaking the law, but it was never accounted as sinning. Jesus was Lord of the Sabbath. 16 So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. 17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

From what icy your beliefs come from a much edited version of the Scriptures. I call this idea "thinspiration."

From what I see your beliefs come from a much-edited version of the Scriptures and the writings of Ellen. I call this idea calling the kettle black.

Mark 2:27
The Sabbath was made for the good of human beings [the Jews]; they were not made for the Sabbath.​

If you could stop editing the Scriptures, that'd be great!

If you could stop editing the Scriptures, that'd be great!

 

[Bob S]

Hi Bob S,

So here again we see you elevating your opinion above what the Bible says:

1 Peter 2:21
To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. “He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.”​

So when Peter says that Christ left an example for you to follow in the steps of Jesus, you look for as many possible ways to reject the message and the implications it has for you. So for you the example Jesus left for you to follow has zero meaning.

Sorry spark, you didn't tell the truth, I have never rejected what Peter wrote. Why is it that you always have to put others down because we do not do as you say or answer your pointless questions your preconceived ideas? Is it any wonder others ignore you?

 

[Icyspark]

Sorry spark, you lie [<--When you can't respond to the message, attack the messenger.], I have never rejected what Peter wrote. Why is it that you always have to put others down [<--When you can't respond to the message, attack the messenger.] because we do not do as you say or answer your pointless questions your preconceived ideas? Is it any wonder others ignore you? [<--When you can't respond to the message, attack the messenger.]

Hi Bob S,

Everything you wrote in your previous post was a rejection of what Peter wrote. It goes along well with your postmodern mindset that lets you appeal to John 3:16 to endorse your belief that "satin [sic] will still tempt us in every way, but Jesus can and will keep us from falling." When I point out to you that "John 3:16 doesn't say anything about keeping us from falling," your response is this nonsensical, postmodern assertion: "Sorry spark, it doesn't have to."

So when you make an accusation about me believing something about Ten Commandments not being in "1Cor3:6-11" and in particular "verse 7," how was I supposed to know that you referenced the wrong book of the Bible? If you refer to John 3:16 in such a way that makes no sense and defend your nonsense with "it doesn't have to" then who's to say you weren't doing the same nonsense in this case? Regardless, you accused me of something I never said and have zero proof to substantiate your claim. But yeaaah, I'm the one who's lying and I'm the one who's putting others down

God bless.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[Leaf473]

Brother, yes! The free woman, Sarah, is our mother. God fulfills his own promises to free us from sin with the commandments written in stone and the cycle of forgiveness that gives us victory over sin and our mother is not the slave woman Hagar, with added human laws to Judaism that does not free us from sin but enslaves us to ineffective human laws. No human laws found in Judaism are placed on our hearts by the Holy Spirit, only God's laws written in the word of God.

These two women serve as an illustration of God’s two covenants. The first woman, Hagar, represents Mount Sinai where people received the law that enslaved them. And now Jerusalem is just like Mount Sinai in Arabia, because she and her children live in slavery to the law. But the other woman, Sarah, represents the heavenly Jerusalem. She is the free woman, and she is our mother. (Galatians 4:24-26 NLT)​

The commandments are the instructions for the descendants of the free woman, the Holy Spirit does not place in our hearts the slave woman' human laws in Judaism.

“But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel after those days,” says the LORD. “I will put my instructions deep within them, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 34And they will not need to teach their neighbors, nor will they need to teach their relatives, saying, ‘You should know the LORD.’ For everyone, from the least to the greatest, will know me already,” says the LORD. “And I will forgive their wickedness, and I will never again remember their sins.” (Jeremiah 31:33-34 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

Brother, yes, we are children of the promise!

Hagar represents the Sinai Covenant. That Covenant was written on two stone tablets. The children of that Covenant are still in bondage. The Sinai Covenant does not contain human laws, we agree there. It is the two stone tablets.

And yes, God writes his laws on our hearts. But it's not letters, it's thoughts and ideas.

If you believe God writes letters on our hearts, please reproduce them here.

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus and in the bond of love.

 

[Bob S]

Sorry spark, you lie [<--When you can't respond to the message, attack the messenger.] lying seem a bit harsh, so I changed my statement to you didn't tell the truth. If you call that an attack then your calling me a postmodern and coming from you whatever a postmodern is can't be good. You accuse me of redacting and if I have done such a grievous atrocity. I would like to have you explain your accusation.

Hi Bob S,

Everything you wrote in your previous post was a rejection of what Peter wrote. It goes along well with your postmodern mindset that lets you appeal to John 3:16 to endorse your belief that "satin [sic] will still tempt us in every way, but Jesus can and will keep us from falling." When I point out to you that "John 3:16 doesn't say anything about keeping us from falling," your response is this nonsensical, postmodern assertion: "Sorry spark, it doesn't have to."

What does: ''For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.'' What does that mean to you???? It seems you just love to make mountains out of mole hills. You cannot refute what I write, so you revert to petty things and putting me down.

So when you make an accusation about me believing something about Ten Commandments not being in "1Cor3:6-11" and in particular "verse 7," how was I supposed to know that you referenced the wrong book of the Bible? If you refer to John 3:16 in such a way that makes no sense and defend your nonsense with "it doesn't have to" then who's to say you weren't doing the same nonsense in this case? Regardless, you accused me of something I never said and have zero proof to substantiate your claim. But yeaaah, I'm the one who's lying and I'm the one who's putting others down

No, just not telling the truth.

It is so hard to correspond with someone who is so perfect. It was a MISTAKE spark and if you are so Biblical savey as you let on you would have recognized my mistake and not hold it over my head. I have seen many mistakes people make, but I don't make an issue out of them. Why do you?

Look, let's stop all the pettiness and just have a civil debate. Are you up to the challenge?

 

[Leaf473]

Yes, let's talk about some of your church's redaction. First you are meddling with your prophet indicating that she must have been a terrible "postmodern" like me. Read Ellen's account of the Tower of Babel then read what scripture says. Read throughout the whole Bible and find something to indicate not eating condiments, using vinegar, drinking wine, becoming a vegetarian and all the other prohibitions she placed on her flock. Christianity is not about what we eat or not eat, it is about believing Jesus and keeping His commands like He kept His Father's commands. Jesus fulfilled His Father's commands and gave mankind a new and better covenant, but because of your redaction you change what He wrote. Yes spark, you limit what Jesus fulfilled to the words God spoke to Moses and had Him write in the book of the Law and only use the ministry that caused death part of the Law. Oh yes, you add the meat part of what Moses wrote and alter the Israelite tithing laws to suit your needs.
Just a little advice about postmodern and redaction, pointing a finger at others has four fingers pointing back at yourself.


I believe I have debunked you and your postmodern view, Col 2: 16, 2Cor 3:6-11, Eph 2:8-18, 1Jn3:4, Rev14:12, Matt5:17-20 and probably much more.

My mistake, you didn't say "all", but your indication would include all mankind would it not? Of course it would. Just who would you have left out?


I'm not seeing that I said "is" anywhere in this context. This appears to be your attempt to apply your use of addition to my writings now. Let's see the evidence for this accusation.


Jesus said it was made for man and I believe Jesus. So were all of the Sabbaths Israel observed. Are we now obligated to keep what was made for Israelites? Obviously, you don't believe we are. so why are you trying to impose the Israelite Sabbath on the remainder of mankind when Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law, but not even one jot or one tittle would pass from the Law UNTIL all is fulfilled. Doesn't that mean that if you don't believe Jesus did what He said he came to do you should be keeping all the other Sabbaths, wear tassels, refrain from cutting your sideburns and etc.?

How is it you get to deny the words of Jesus? Are you "some self-made prophet with a third-grade education"? It certainly sounds like you're embracing for yourself those things which you seem to decry.

Have you ever pondered why Jesus came to fulfill the Law, but all the Law would remain until all was fulfilled? Why do you redact Jesus words? Have you ever pondered why God has never asked any other nation on Earth to observe the Sabbath He gave to those who fled Egypt? If indeed it is so very important that it be observed, why didn't God stop those fleeing on their way to the Red Sea? Why did He wait to give it to them after crossing the Red Sea?


The ten were perfect as far as the sins they described. Do you believe they were the only way the Israelites could sin? The ten didn't even include the greatest sin the Israelites could do to each other, LOVE. As far as adding and subtracting, it is your failure to realize that the ten were temporary and have been done away 2Cor3:6-11 KJV. Eph 2:15 tell us Jesus set aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace.


Now you are using the redaction of someone to bolster your redacted belief.

Maybe you forgot the covenant was not made with us or anyone else except the ones that came out of Egypt and their offspring. Why do you continue to tell us things that are not true?


To whom was the writer referring?


Stop with the redacting and read the Bible in its normative sense. I think if you can get over this one hurdle that much of your contentions will just fade away.


Jesus said it and I believe it. It WAS made for man. I have never rejected any of Jesus words like you have done with Matt 5:16-18, Eph 2:15, Col 2:16 and 2Cor3;6-11. I do not understand Jesus' statement in light of the fact the Sabbath was never offered to any other nation except Israel. Maybe you could enlighten us on the subject.


If it is not there, why do you redact what is written and add your own theory. Does that even make sense?


David broke the Law, but it was not accounted as a sin. The Israelites circled Jerico for eight straight days breaking the law, but it was never accounted as sinning. Jesus was Lord of the Sabbath. 16 So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. 17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.






From what I see your beliefs come from a much-edited version of the Scriptures and the writings of Ellen. I call this idea calling the kettle black.

If you could stop editing the Scriptures, that'd be great!

___________________________

...Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law, but not even one jot or one tittle would pass from the Law UNTIL all is fulfilled.

That's a good point. If, say, animal sacrifices have ended, then Heaven and Earth have passed away or all has been fulfilled.

(Heaven and Earth passing away may be apocalyptic language for an "Earth shaking" event. In that case, both may have happened at the cross.)

 

[guevaraj]

If you believe God writes letters on our hearts, please reproduce them here.

Brother, here are the letters in our language! With an additional Eleventh Commandment not possible before Jesus, to "follow" His example.

Once a religious leader asked Jesus this question: “Good Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?” “Why do you call me good?” Jesus asked him. “Only God is truly good. But to answer your question, you know the commandments: ‘You must not commit adultery. You must not murder. You must not steal. You must not testify falsely. Honor your father and mother.’” The man replied, “I’ve obeyed all these commandments since I was young.” When Jesus heard his answer, he said, “There is still one thing you haven’t done. Sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” (Luke 18:18-22 NLT)​

How does the Holy Spirit put these words of Jesus in our hearts? The Holy Spirit will "remind you" of everything the Holy Spirit taught in the guarantied word of God since the beginning through Prophets.

Jesus replied, “All who love me will do what I say. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with each of them. Anyone who doesn’t love me will not obey me. And remember, my words are not my own. What I am telling you is from the Father who sent me. I am telling you these things now while I am still with you. But when the Father sends the Advocate as my representative—that is, the Holy Spirit—he will teach you everything and will remind you of everything I have told you. (John 14:23-26 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

 

[Icyspark]

Look, let's stop all the pettiness and just have a civil debate. Are you up to the challenge?

Hi Bob S,

I'd love to have a civil debate.

What does this text mean to you:

Mark 2:27 Good News Translation
And Jesus concluded, “The Sabbath was made for the good of human beings; they were not made for the Sabbath.​

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[Bob S]

Hi Bob S,

I'd love to have a civil debate.

Okey, me too. Let's see how you do with my answer to your question.

What does this text mean to you:

Mark 2:27 Good News Translation
And Jesus concluded, “The Sabbath was made for the good of human beings; they were not made for the Sabbath.​

First, Jesus said it and I believe it. The debate starts with the question: Which humans? The Bible and history have no account of anyone besides Israelites that were ever given a command to rest on a certain day, so we can readily include them in who it was made. Resting one day a week would be good for all to heed. The issue is that only one nation was compelled to stop their labor on a certain day, so does that command have any significance for anyone else? Since God commanded Israel to rest one day a week it would behoove all mankind to take a day each week and rest.

The question then becomes what makes one day better than another? The old covenant with its 613 laws is history and we under a new covenant that has no such special day law. Certainly not observing the day given only to Israel will not cause us to lose our eternal inheritance Mark 2:27 is just a good statement and not a requirement.

Also, I am wondering if Mark2:27 being written in past tense has any significance. Could "were" indicate being made for the Israelites since they were the only ones ever given the special day?

 

[HIM]

___________________________

That's a good point. If, say, animal sacrifices have ended, then Heaven and Earth have passed away or all has been fulfilled.

(Heaven and Earth passing away may be apocalyptic language for an "Earth shaking" event. In that case, both may have happened at the cross.)

No it isn't.
Context explains what law Jesus is speaking.

 

[Leaf473]

Brother, here are the letters in our language! With an additional Eleventh Commandment not possible before Jesus, to "follow" His example.

Once a religious leader asked Jesus this question: “Good Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?” “Why do you call me good?” Jesus asked him. “Only God is truly good. But to answer your question, you know the commandments: ‘You must not commit adultery. You must not murder. You must not steal. You must not testify falsely. Honor your father and mother.’” The man replied, “I’ve obeyed all these commandments since I was young.” When Jesus heard his answer, he said, “There is still one thing you haven’t done. Sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” (Luke 18:18-22 NLT)​

How does the Holy Spirit put these words of Jesus in our hearts? The Holy Spirit will "remind you" of everything the Holy Spirit taught in the guarantied word of God since the beginning through Prophets.

Jesus replied, “All who love me will do what I say. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with each of them. Anyone who doesn’t love me will not obey me. And remember, my words are not my own. What I am telling you is from the Father who sent me. I am telling you these things now while I am still with you. But when the Father sends the Advocate as my representative—that is, the Holy Spirit—he will teach you everything and will remind you of everything I have told you. (John 14:23-26 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

Brother, happy Sabbath!*
God writes the letters of the New Living Translation in our hearts? I suppose it's possible, but I find it hard to believe.

How does the Holy Spirit put these words of Jesus in our hearts? The Holy Spirit will "remind you"...

That sounds reasonable. The Holy Spirit reminds us of things, helps us remember.

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus and in the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
____________________________
*Assuming days of the week start at sunset in Jerusalem.

 

[Leaf473]

No it isn't.
Context explains what law Jesus is speaking.

In the context, he's talking about the law and the prophets. It's implied that it's the entire law and all the prophets imo. He goes on to cite some of the 10 commandments, something about oaths, and a passage from Leviticus. Again, it sounds like the entire law.

 

[Icyspark]

Okey, me too. Let's see how you do with my answer to your question.

First, Jesus said it and I believe it.

Hi Bob S,

Good. Me too.

The debate starts with the question: Which humans?

Jesus said it. Do you suppose that if He meant "the Sabbath was made for the Jews" that He would've said that? I think so. The word anthropos (which is translated as "human beings") is inclusive language, not exclusionary. So taking this inclusive language and retasking it to be exclusionary is reading into the text something which is not there (eisegesis).

The Bible and history have no account of anyone besides Israelites that were ever given a command to rest on a certain day, so we can readily include them in who it was made.

Looking strictly at what Mark 2:27 says you don't have the latitude to make such a sweeping statement. That said, let's just go on to acknowledge that this is an example of an argument from silence fallacy. Your silence argument is addressed by noting several things:

1. The Sabbath is first discovered in Genesis 2:1-3. To claim that it is not the Sabbath is to be ignorant of what the the Sabbath is and the fact that Jesus said it was "MADE for human beings." One translation says, "CREATED for humans". So for you to insist that this "Sabbath" which Jesus says was "created for humans" was put into effect at some time other than when things were actually "created" and/or "made" seems implausible, improbable and irrational. (For a more thorough response, see my thread titled, "Creation Sabbath Origin")
2. To insist on a command for the Sabbath in the book of Genesis is not consistent or coherent and here's why. There is no command against murder, yet God forewarned Cain that "SIN" was "lurking at [his] door" desiring to have him. Guess what God told him he should do with this desire? He said, "you MUST MASTER IT." After Cain murdered his brother God punished him. Why? Did Cain really not know what sin was? Did he not know it was a sin to murder his brother? There was no recorded command prohibiting this action, so do you likewise believe Cain was punished for something he didn't know about? If you don't have a problem with Cain being punished for committing murder then you should have no issue with there being no command regarding the Sabbath in Genesis. Cain obviously knew murder was wrong otherwise God's conversation with him about sin is meaningless.
3. The Bible says, "sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law." If there was no "law" in Genesis then what was God referring to when He told Cain that "sin is crouching at your door"? It's apparent that the law was known based on the facts that A) God is not arbitrary. B) God tells Cain that he is to be the "master" of "sin," as opposed to letting sin master him. C) Sin is the transgression of the law. So any mention of "sin" in Genesis is not an arbitrary discussion of an intangible concept.

Resting one day a week would be good for all to heed. The issue is that only one nation was compelled to stop their labor on a certain day, so does that command have any significance for anyone else? Since God commanded Israel to rest one day a week it would behoove all mankind to take a day each week and rest.

Here we discover the cognitive dissonance you are going through. Perhaps subconsciously you realize that resting one day in seven is necessary for human beings and realize that God wants His creatures to rest. Your issue appears to be with the fact that this one day in seven has been selected by God and is not left for you to arbitrarily decide for yourself. God only blessed one day. God only made one day holy. That day is not left open for you or anyone else to change. It was blessed and MADE holy for "human beings." It's not really that big of a leap from where you are with your above acknowledgement to accepting what you've been fighting against for so many years (i.e. that "the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God.").

The question then becomes what makes one day better than another? The old covenant with its 613 laws is history and we under a new covenant that has no such special day law. Certainly not observing the day given only to Israel will not cause us to lose our eternal inheritance Mark 2:27 is just a good statement and not a requirement.

Adam and Eve were told not to eat from one specific tree in the Garden. They were not given the latitude to choose from which tree they would not eat. They could not provide any legitimate excuse to God for why they shouldn't be punished because they chose not to eat from another tree and ate from the one they were commanded not to eat. Such an explanation wouldn't make their transgression any less sinful. You cannot rationalize your way around the fact that the Sabbath was made for "human beings." If you are a "human being," then the Sabbath was made for you.

Also, I am wondering if Mark2:27 being written in past tense has any significance. Could "were" indicate being made for the Israelites since they were the only ones ever given the special day?

Or it could refer back to the actual origin of the Sabbath in Genesis 2:1-3.

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[HIM]

In the context, he's talking about the law and the prophets. It's implied that it's the entire law and all the prophets imo. He goes on to cite some of the 10 commandments, something about oaths, and a passage from Leviticus. Again, it sounds like the entire law.

No the following passages in the chapter speak to what he is meaning

 

[guevaraj]

Brother, happy Sabbath! God writes the letters of the New Living Translation in our hearts? I suppose it's possible, but I find it hard to believe.

Brother, the translation we choose to study has a big impact on our understanding of the word of God. Some translations, like the King James Version (KJV), affected many other translations after it. Many translations continue the error started by the KJV's misidentification of Joshua as Jesus in Hebrews, chapter 4, when Jesus was not before David to make the "good news" of entering the Sabbath the "Gospel" of Jesus. The wrong translation of "Gospel" for the phrase the "good news" of entering the Sabbath has influenced wrongly many other Bible translations after the KJV. The newer NKJV fixes the misidentification of Joshua as Jesus but not its effect on the rest of the passage, like the "Gospel" (not possible before David), for the phrase, the "good news" of entering the Sabbath, first heard by those that died in the desert. Those, like Joshua, who were not allowed to enter the Sabbath by "oath" near the Promised Land with Manna, that Joshua later entered before the seventh day of the week from evening to evening, having been prevented from entering the Sabbath with Manna for 40 years from morning to morning near the Promised Land. In the Hebrews passage, "another day" refers to a different day than the one thought for the Sabbath since Joshua: not the seventh day of the week everywhere, but the seventh day of the week of creation remembered in the time zone of creation.

So God’s rest is there for people to enter, but those who first heard this good news failed to enter because they disobeyed God. So God set another time for entering his rest, and that time is today. God announced this through David much later in the words already quoted: “Today when you hear his voice, don’t harden your hearts.” Now if Joshua had succeeded in giving them this rest, God would not have spoken about another day of rest still to come. So there is a special rest still waiting for the people of God. For all who have entered into God’s rest have rested from their labors, just as God did after creating the world. So let us do our best to enter that rest. But if we disobey God, as the people of Israel did, we will fall. (Hebrews 4:6-11 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

 

[Leaf473]

No the following passages in the chapter speak to what he is meaning

Sorry, not following you here.

Matthew 5 “Don’t think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn’t come to destroy, but to fulfill.

18 For most certainly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished.

And he goes on to talk about murder (ten commandments)

Offering a gift at the altar (could be any number of laws)

Adultery (ten commandments)

Divorce (both in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, I think)

Performing vows (again, any number of laws, some passages in the Prophets)

"An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth." (Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy)

"Love your neighbor" (Leviticus)

So he starts the passage by talking about the law and the prophets. And he goes on to talk about laws from all over the place imo.

 

[Leaf473]

Brother, the translation we choose to study has a big impact on our understanding of the word of God. Some translations, like the King James Version (KJV), affected many other translations after it. Many translations continue the error started by the KJV's misidentification of Joshua as Jesus in Hebrews, chapter 4, when Jesus was not before David to make the "good news" of entering the Sabbath the "Gospel" of Jesus. The wrong translation of "Gospel" for the phrase the "good news" of entering the Sabbath has influenced wrongly many other Bible translations after the KJV. The newer NKJV fixes the misidentification of Joshua as Jesus but not its effect on the rest of the passage, like the "Gospel" (not possible before David), for the phrase, the "good news" of entering the Sabbath, first heard by those that died in the desert. Those, like Joshua, who were not allowed to enter the Sabbath by "oath" near the Promised Land with Manna, that Joshua later entered before the seventh day of the week from evening to evening, having been prevented from entering the Sabbath with Manna for 40 years from morning to morning near the Promised Land. In the Hebrews passage, "another day" refers to a different day than the one thought for the Sabbath since Joshua: not the seventh day of the week everywhere, but the seventh day of the week of creation remembered in the time zone of creation.

So God’s rest is there for people to enter, but those who first heard this good news failed to enter because they disobeyed God. So God set another time for entering his rest, and that time is today. God announced this through David much later in the words already quoted: “Today when you hear his voice, don’t harden your hearts.” Now if Joshua had succeeded in giving them this rest, God would not have spoken about another day of rest still to come. So there is a special rest still waiting for the people of God. For all who have entered into God’s rest have rested from their labors, just as God did after creating the world. So let us do our best to enter that rest. But if we disobey God, as the people of Israel did, we will fall. (Hebrews 4:6-11 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

Brother, God writes his laws in our hearts. I don't think he uses letters, definitely not a particular translation. That's my opinion.

Here's something you might find interesting:
If God writes letters in our hearts, then for Hebrew speaking believers today, he would be writing the Divine name. Then we could ask those speakers how to pronounce it for sure, because they could see the vowel pointing. Then people could call upon the Divine name to be saved. But Peter tells us in Acts 4 that there is only one name available today that we can call on to be saved, Jesus. But if we could call on the divine name, then there would be two names.

United in one Church.

 

[guevaraj]

Brother, God writes his laws in our hearts. I don't think he uses letters, definitely not a particular translation. That's my opinion.

Brother, Jesus uses words in His laws that have meaning in all languages. None of His laws are ambiguous in their wording, so they cannot be faithfully translated into all languages. The meaning of His words is independent of language. The daily cycle of forgiveness of Jesus, as our High Priest, is what we need to be born again to overcome the power of sin within us: a child does not learn to walk the moment he is born, he will fall many times before he can walk without falling.

Well then, am I suggesting that the law of God is sinful? Of course not! In fact, it was the law that showed me my sin. I would never have known that coveting is wrong if the law had not said, “You must not covet.” But sin used this command to arouse all kinds of covetous desires within me! If there were no law, sin would not have that power. At one time I lived without understanding the law. But when I learned the command not to covet, for instance, the power of sin came to life, and I died. So I discovered that the law’s commands, which were supposed to bring life, brought spiritual death instead. Sin took advantage of those commands and deceived me; it used the commands to kill me. But still, the law itself is holy, and its commands are holy and right and good. But how can that be? Did the law, which is good, cause my death? Of course not! Sin used what was good to bring about my condemnation to death. So we can see how terrible sin really is. It uses God’s good commands for its own evil purposes. So the trouble is not with the law, for it is spiritual and good. The trouble is with me, for I am all too human, a slave to sin. I don’t really understand myself, for I want to do what is right, but I don’t do it. Instead, I do what I hate. But if I know that what I am doing is wrong, this shows that I agree that the law is good. So I am not the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it. And I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. I want to do what is right, but I can’t. I want to do what is good, but I don’t. I don’t want to do what is wrong, but I do it anyway. But if I do what I don’t want to do, I am not really the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it. I have discovered this principle of life—that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. I love God’s law with all my heart. But there is another power within me that is at war with my mind. This power makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. Oh, what a miserable person I am! Who will free me from this life that is dominated by sin and death? Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord. So you see how it is: In my mind I really want to obey God’s law, but because of my sinful nature I am a slave to sin. (Romans 7:7-25 NLT)​

Here's something you might find interesting:
If God writes letters in our hearts, then for Hebrew speaking believers today, he would be writing the Divine name. Then we could ask those speakers how to pronounce it for sure, because they could see the vowel pointing. Then people could call upon the Divine name to be saved. But Peter tells us in Acts 4 that there is only one name available today that we can call on to be saved, Jesus. But if we could call on the divine name, then there would be two names. United in one Church.

What the Holy Spirit does with each individual is remind us of what He has taught us in the guarantied word of God through prophets.

Jesus replied, “All who love me will do what I say. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with each of them. Anyone who doesn’t love me will not obey me. And remember, my words are not my own. What I am telling you is from the Father who sent me. I am telling you these things now while I am still with you. But when the Father sends the Advocate as my representative—that is, the Holy Spirit—he will teach you everything and will remind you of everything I have told you. (John 14:23-26 NLT)​

The original Hebrew writings never had vowels. The vowels were added later to what was already written only with consonants. God, having chosen this language, tells us that the pronunciation is not important as long as the meaning of the words is known. The original pronunciation has been lost, but the meaning of God's name can be translated into all languages. The name of God, if He says it, is: "I am" and if we say it, it is: "He is". God has the unique quality expressed in His name because it says of Him that He has no beginning, "He is". No one else has this property and, therefore, it is a uniquely appropriate name that only describes Him. Jesus is the "I am" incarnate. Both names would refer to the same person. Our maker made himself known to Moses as "I am".

In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. He existed in the beginning with God. God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him. The Word gave life to everything that was created, and his life brought light to everyone. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness can never extinguish it. God sent a man, John the Baptist, to tell about the light so that everyone might believe because of his testimony. John himself was not the light; he was simply a witness to tell about the light. The one who is the true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He came into the very world he created, but the world didn’t recognize him. He came to his own people, and even they rejected him. But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God. (John 1:1-13 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

 

[Leaf473]

Brother, Jesus uses words in His laws that have meaning in all languages. None of His laws are ambiguous in their wording, so they cannot be faithfully translated into all languages. The meaning of His words is independent of language. The daily cycle of forgiveness of Jesus, as our High Priest, is what we need to be born again to overcome the power of sin within us: a child does not learn to walk the moment he is born, he will fall many times before he can walk without falling.

Well then, am I suggesting that the law of God is sinful? Of course not! In fact, it was the law that showed me my sin. I would never have known that coveting is wrong if the law had not said, “You must not covet.” But sin used this command to arouse all kinds of covetous desires within me! If there were no law, sin would not have that power. At one time I lived without understanding the law. But when I learned the command not to covet, for instance, the power of sin came to life, and I died. So I discovered that the law’s commands, which were supposed to bring life, brought spiritual death instead. Sin took advantage of those commands and deceived me; it used the commands to kill me. But still, the law itself is holy, and its commands are holy and right and good. But how can that be? Did the law, which is good, cause my death? Of course not! Sin used what was good to bring about my condemnation to death. So we can see how terrible sin really is. It uses God’s good commands for its own evil purposes. So the trouble is not with the law, for it is spiritual and good. The trouble is with me, for I am all too human, a slave to sin. I don’t really understand myself, for I want to do what is right, but I don’t do it. Instead, I do what I hate. But if I know that what I am doing is wrong, this shows that I agree that the law is good. So I am not the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it. And I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. I want to do what is right, but I can’t. I want to do what is good, but I don’t. I don’t want to do what is wrong, but I do it anyway. But if I do what I don’t want to do, I am not really the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it. I have discovered this principle of life—that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. I love God’s law with all my heart. But there is another power within me that is at war with my mind. This power makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. Oh, what a miserable person I am! Who will free me from this life that is dominated by sin and death? Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord. So you see how it is: In my mind I really want to obey God’s law, but because of my sinful nature I am a slave to sin. (Romans 7:7-25 NLT)

What the Holy Spirit does with each individual is remind us of what He has taught us in the guarantied word of God through prophets.

Jesus replied, “All who love me will do what I say. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with each of them. Anyone who doesn’t love me will not obey me. And remember, my words are not my own. What I am telling you is from the Father who sent me. I am telling you these things now while I am still with you. But when the Father sends the Advocate as my representative—that is, the Holy Spirit—he will teach you everything and will remind you of everything I have told you. (John 14:23-26 NLT)

The original Hebrew writings never had vowels. The vowels were added later to what was already written only with consonants. God, having chosen this language, tells us that the pronunciation is not important as long as the meaning of the words is known. The original pronunciation has been lost, but the meaning of God's name can be translated into all languages. The name of God, if He says it, is: "I am" and if we say it, it is: "He is". God has the unique quality expressed in His name because it says of Him that He has no beginning, "He is". No one else has this property and, therefore, it is a uniquely appropriate name that only describes Him. Jesus is the "I am" incarnate. Both names would refer to the same person. Our maker made himself known to Moses as "I am".

In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. He existed in the beginning with God. God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him. The Word gave life to everything that was created, and his life brought light to everyone. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness can never extinguish it. God sent a man, John the Baptist, to tell about the light so that everyone might believe because of his testimony. John himself was not the light; he was simply a witness to tell about the light. The one who is the true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He came into the very world he created, but the world didn’t recognize him. He came to his own people, and even they rejected him. But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God. (John 1:1-13 NLT)

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

_____________

The meaning of His words is independent of language.

Brother, Yes! That's what I would call a thought or an idea.

The name of God, if He says it, is: "I am"...

Brother, Possibly. Many people make that connection. The father and the son are not the same person. But yes, they are the same God. That's the standard doctrine of the trinity, as I understand it.

But the big picture is that what is written in the hearts of believers in the New Covenant is the same in all languages.

United in seeking God's truth together!

 

[guevaraj]

But the big picture is that what is written in the hearts of believers in the New Covenant is the same in all languages.

Brother, what is written in the heart is the same in all languages only if properly translated in our Bibles.

Jesus replied, “All who love me will do what I say. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with each of them. Anyone who doesn’t love me will not obey me. And remember, my words are not my own. What I am telling you is from the Father who sent me. I am telling you these things now while I am still with you. But when the Father sends the Advocate as my representative—that is, the Holy Spirit—he will teach you everything and will remind you of everything I have told you. (John 14:23-26 NLT)​

The Holy Spirit's reminder is only effective if what you read in your Bible is a correct translation. Today we all have access to the word of God in all our languages. This was not the case in the past, when the bishops of Rome were the only ones who had access to very few Latin Bibles.

“But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel after those days,” says the LORD. “I will put my instructions deep within them, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. And they will not need to teach their neighbors, nor will they need to teach their relatives, saying, ‘You should know the LORD.’ For everyone, from the least to the greatest, will know me already,” says the LORD. “And I will forgive their wickedness, and I will never again remember their sins.” (Jeremiah 31:33-34 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge