What Day Of The Week Is The Sabbath?

ThreeAM · May 19, 2006

holo said:
Adalbert, where and how does the bible divide the law into four separate parts? Which part did Jesus talk about when He said not one iota of it should pass? How do you know what law Paul was talking about?

1. No, but then I don't know how you define "Israel". I know that in some theologies, "Israel" is every christian.

2. I'm not quite sure what "seed" means, but I'm Abraham's heir, yes.

3. The new one, which is based on Jesus alone.

1. Israel would be the heirs of Abraham. Today's Israel are related to Abraham by faith.

Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

Gal. 3:29And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

All of Israel will be saved because Israel are true followers of Christ. They have true faith in Christ much like Abraham had true faith. Because they have true faith in Christ they all will be saved.

The new covenant was made with Israel.

Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Holo are you sure you are not part Israel?

Strong's Number 4690 Sperma

2) the sperm virile
a) the product of this sperm, seed, children, offspring, progeny
b) family, tribe, posterity
c) whatever possesses vital force or life giving power 1) of divine energy of the Holy Spirit operating within the soul by which we are regenerated

I'm pretty sure SEED means decendents.

Isa 41:8 But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend.

Gen 21:12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.

adam332 · May 19, 2006

holo said:
1. No, but then I don't know how you define "Israel". I know that in some theologies, "Israel" is every christian.

2. I'm not quite sure what "seed" means, but I'm Abraham's heir, yes.

3. The new one, which is based on Jesus alone.

1. & 2.

I'm sure that many of us differ on specific details, but I think you'll get a good idea if you check the link below....it's lengthy but a good read even if it's only to get a thorough picture of the opposing view.
(http://www.amazingfacts.org/items/Read_Media.asp?ID=1152&x=19&y=41)

3. If you are under the new covenant then you must know the new covenant was given to Israel also. (Heb.8:8, 10)

In Hebrews 7 the author establishes the validity and authority that comes from the new priesthood of Christ. Showing it's authority over that of Melchidec, Aaron, or Levi.

Then throughout Heb. 8, 9 & 10 the author is very detailed that the ceremonial aspects of the old covenant particularly the temple services and sacrifices have been fulfilled. He is also very thorough with his examples of symbolic and literal imagery, showing that in us these things are fulfilled through faith. In Heb. 10:16 he writes the these ceremonial laws are now written upon our hearts. We are now priests in Christ and our body is his temple.

There are three points made in Hebrews regarding normal Jewish worship and atonement procedures. It is contextually apparent that all 3 of these were meant to clarify mis-understandings that were occuring at that time.

a. Heb. 4 tells us that there remains a physical rest, that is a literal keeping of the Sabbath, "for the people of God". Just as God did rest from his works on the seventh day.

b. Heb. 8,9, & 10 tell us that the ceremonial/sacrificial system is still applicable, but fulfilled symbolically within the heart of the faithful. It points out that the ceremonial sacrificial was always symbolic because it never was the blood of an literal lamb that saved, etc..

c. Heb. 10:25 indicates that just because the ceremonial/sacrificial services are fulfilled within the believers heart, they should not forsake assembling together.

Adalbert · May 19, 2006

tall73 said:
They most certainly could, yes. And some who keep the Sabbath do keep both. The point is simply that one is a command, and should be kept. If you want to keep more days, it is not wrong. The issue is when Sunday is made its own type of Sabbath, which history does not record happening until much later.

If you only accept that which is inline with loving others etc. ,then realize that the Sabbath has that element as well. In the OT The animals, the slaves, everyone were free on the Sabbath. It was a day of no class divisions, a day of freedom for all to worship God. Today when kept as a day of rest everyone is likewise free on that day.

That is so interesting.........love for others!

The two great commandments, a synopsis of the ten, require that we love God and our neighbor as ourselves. Loving God includes keeping his day of rest the way he kept it. I wonder why this is such a bone of contention and so difficult.

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? We cannot possibly argue that we know better than he does. Or can we?

Adalbert · May 19, 2006

holo said:
I think I understand. But if by "law" you mean the ten commandments, surely it's not correct to say there's no sin without a law. People did sin before the time of Moses, as I'm sure you'll agree.

The bible's definition of sin is the transgression of the law. It is the only definition the bible provides for sin. It says there is no sin where there is no law. That is just as true in civil government.
You probably think that the ten commandments were new when God wrote them with his finger on the tablets of stone. (Would that be fair?) But if you stop to think, you'll find that Adam and Eve broke the law when they coveted that which was forbidden to them, stole it to eat it, lied about it, etc., and the bible says when you break one commandment, you are guilty of breaking all of them.
James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.

However the law may (or may not) be divided, the part of it which was written on stone -the ten commandments- is called "the ministry that brought death".

I've not heard it called so. It is, however, viable, since the law convicts the sinner and the sentence is often death.

Therefore the only logical conclusion seems to me to be that
a) the law which condemned me is obviously the ten commandments, Correct
b) it has not passed away. But I am dead with Christ and it therefore has no claim on me It has no claim until you break it. The law has no power over anyone (even in the civil setting) until it is broken. Then it comes after us.
c) and anyway I don't reckon it was ever given to the Gentiles, so I'd have to be held to another kind of law to begin with (that knowledge of right and wrong we all have in our hearts, I guess), Gentiles? As a follower of Christ, I am under the jurisdiction of his requirements. His requirements include obedience. Obedience includes that I do not break his law.
d) and the new covenant has nothing to do with the law, the way I see things.
It has everything to do with it.
[SIZE=-1]"This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," declares the Lord. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest," declares the Lord. For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more." {Jeremiah 31:31-34 NIV}[/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Main Entry: 1cov·e·nant
Function: noun
: a solemn agreement : [SIZE=-1]CONTRACThttp://www.wordcentral.com/cgi-bin/Search?book=Student&va=contract[/SIZE][/FONT]
That's all it is. Why would God change his requirements and give his enemies a chance to call him unfair? The law condemns all sinners, or none.

I know a lot of this conflicts with common christian thinking, which is one of my reasons for not calling myself a christian though I believe in Christ in much the same way as your average christian believer.

Some Christian thinkers make mountains from molehills and change God's truth into something unrecognizable.

"Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen." (Romans 1:24-25)

We prayerfully engage the Spirit of God to teach us all things that are truth.

holo · May 20, 2006

ThreeAM said:
1. Israel would be the heirs of Abraham. Today's Israel are related to Abraham by faith.

Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

Gal. 3:29And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

All of Israel will be saved because Israel are true followers of Christ. They have true faith in Christ much like Abraham had true faith. Because they have true faith in Christ they all will be saved.

The new covenant was made with Israel.

Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Holo are you sure you are not part Israel?

Well, again, it depends on how you define Israel. However it is, I know the bible also speaks of Israel specifically as a nation. I haven't studied when and where it distinguishes between the two. It's not a very important issue to me, as my faith is basically that I was lost but now I'm found, by Jesus.

holo · May 20, 2006

Adalbert said:
The bible's definition of sin is the transgression of the law. It is the only definition the bible provides for sin. It says there is no sin where there is no law. That is just as true in civil government.
You probably think that the ten commandments were new when God wrote them with his finger on the tablets of stone. (Would that be fair?) But if you stop to think, you'll find that Adam and Eve broke the law when they coveted that which was forbidden to them, stole it to eat it, lied about it, etc., and the bible says when you break one commandment, you are guilty of breaking all of them.

Well, yes, but as the commandments didn't exist per se, it would be more correct to speak of a moral standard, instead of a specific law. As the bible also says, the gentiles knew the demands of the law in their hearts. The ten commandments are largely identical to common conceptions of right and wrong.

Adalbert said:
I've not heard it called so.

It is called the ministry of death in 2.Cor. 3;6-9

Adalbert said:
It is, however, viable, since the law convicts the sinner and the sentence is often death.

Yes, if you're under the law you will certainly be judged by it. Anyone who is under the law is chanceless. And not only does the commandment accuse you, it's the very power of sin. In fact, Paul went so far as to say he hadn't known covet hadn't the commandment said 'you shall not covet'.

Adalbert said:
It has no claim until you break it. The law has no power over anyone (even in the civil setting) until it is broken. Then it comes after us.

Well, the law always demands you keep it. It has no exceptions. It's pretty much meaningless to even be talking about keeping God's law, since, as you quoted, we all violate it continously. Break one, break them all.

Adalbert said:
As a follower of Christ, I am under the jurisdiction of his requirements. His requirements include obedience. Obedience includes that I do not break his law.

According to my faith, I'm more of a child than a servant. Jesus didn't die so that I may serve Him, but so that I may be called a child of God. I have the rights of a child of God. Besides, Jesus laid down way harder commandments than the ten commandments, so I don't understand why anyone would go from them to His... I mean, as if the ten commandments didn't judge you enough

Our righteousness must be found outside of/apart from the law, that's for sure.

If you are under the law, you will be judged by it, correct?

Adalbert said:
It has everything to do with it.

Well, the bible also says God's righteousness has been revealed apart from the law, and Paul said he hasn't got HIS OWN righteousness, which (in fact) comes by the law, but rather the righteousness of Christ. In fact, I wouldn't even know what to use the law for on a regular day. How do you use it?

Adalbert said:
Why would God change his requirements and give his enemies a chance to call him unfair?

Well, even if you say that the ten commandments are still in effect, you'd have to agree that God has in fact changed His requirements by abolishing other commandments. I think He's either abolished them all, or none. I don't think God has changed His law at all. I believe the Jews, too, saw the law as a whole.

Adalbert said:
The law condemns all sinners, or none.

Yes. The law is for the ungodly, not the righteous. Therefore I believe I have nothing to do with it. I'm righteous.

Adalbert said:
Some Christian thinkers make mountains from molehills and change God's truth into something unrecognizable.

I agree. We certainly have a tendency to complicate it. My most basic faith, and a thing that often comforts me, is the fact that the gospel is simple enough for a fool to understand. It's basically about God loving us. Our discussion is more about HOW He loves us, I guess

Fredkc6cfb · May 20, 2006

I haven't had time to read every post yet (I will though).
Right now, as I understand it, the thread's question is what day of the week should we observe the Sabbath?

I personally believe that Jesus Christ is our Sabbath rest. Every day is the Sabbath in Christ's love and grace. I take my rest and comfort in Him and the Word of God (Christ's "Living Water") every day. Its not a once a week thing for me.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Jesus said, "Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light"[/SIZE][/FONT] ~ Matthew 11:28-30

ThreeAM · May 20, 2006

holo said:
Well, again, it depends on how you define Israel. However it is, I know the bible also speaks of Israel specifically as a nation. I haven't studied when and where it distinguishes between the two. It's not a very important issue to me, as my faith is basically that I was lost but now I'm found, by Jesus.

It should be very important since ALL of Israel shall be saved. And Paul wrote if you are Christ's you ARE Abraham's seed.

Basically Israel is Christ's name also so if you are Christ's you are a member of the House of Israel. The promises made to Israel now apply to you.

You do agree God knows the future correct?

DeaconDean · May 20, 2006

tall73 said:
And he also said that the law is FULLY met in us who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

The law is written on the heart in the new covenant, not done away with. Paul's whole point is that Christ is now the guiding force in his life, not the law. And Christ is able to do far more in us than an external law, which was always to be in the heart in the first place. Paul does not do away with God's moral precepts by keeping them from the heart, and not living according to the letter. And if you doubt that just read all the imperatives that Paul gives to the gentile churches. They are certainly not free from the law in the sense of not having to worry about their behavior at all. Instead he is asking them to truly serve God from the heart.

Now, aspects of the ceremonial law were done away with for gentiles. But the question is whether the Sabbath is a ceremonial law, and whether it was done away with.

Quote

I know I said I was going to reframe from this thread, but you seemed to be getting beaten down and fustrated, so I wanted you to know that if you are going to be in hell for worshipping on Sunday, you'll not be alone friend, I'll be there with you. Along with about a billion others of the Protestant faith. Shoot friend, if you follow others beliefs, because we worship on Sunday, the only ones in heaven be those who are not Protestant. Go figure.

An emotional argument based on the crowd, not any biblical evidence.

This forum is for inter-denominational discussion of a theological nature. You are required to back up the things you say in regards to other faiths. So if you wish to call us legalists, or say that we are needlessly consigning people to hell, then you need to address our acutal arguments, not just go on about how the majority do not agree with us, therefore no one need worry about the actual discussion.

In the first place friend, did I personally say you or your denomination were the ones I was talking about? Did I say you or your denomination were consigning anyone to hell? Hum? If you will read my post I said:

DeaconDean said:
KalEl76, remember what I told you in post #6 and post #41?

From me to you friend,

Did I address you? I was adressing the OP. You were the one who jumped in friend. You were the one taking offense friend. You were the one who jumped in and started "nit picking" my post apart.

tall73 said:
You are required to back up the things you say in regards to other faiths.

Did I address your faith or denomination? Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians have their Sabbath on Saturday too in case you didn't know. For that fact, so do the JW's. As do those of Jewish faith. So did I say anything about your denomination?

I'm Baptist, your SDA, you keep the Sabbath in your way, we'll keep it in ours. We chose to have our Sabbath on Sunday because this was the day Jesus rose from the grave and as a way to separate ourselves from other religions.

I see from your icon that your SDA. May I ask you a question friend? Do you observe the dietary laws being as since you are SDA?

Linda63 · May 20, 2006

SABBATH
(rest). God first gave the sabbath as a duty to man in the book of Exodus. It is true that the sabbath originated at the completion of the creation (Ge 2:1-3), but that was God's rest, not man's. There is no record in Genesis that God gave the sabbath to man, and there is no record of men keeping the sabbath before Israel in the wilderness. Ne 9:13-14 plainly states that the sabbath was first given to Israel. Seventh-day Adventists teach that men kept the sabbath from the days of Adam onward, but this is contrary to the Bible's own record. Ex 31:12-18 says the sabbath was a special sign between God and Israel. If mankind in general had been given the sabbath following creation, it could not have been a sign for Israel. The fact is that the sabbath belongs to the nation Israel and not to any other people. It is also important to note that the sabbath will be an eternal possession of Israel (Ex 31:16). This sign will never be annulled or transferred to another people. This explains why the prophets foretell that Israel will keep the sabbath even after the kingdom of Christ is established on earth (Isa 66:23). It also explains why Jesus Christ mentioned the sabbath in His prophecies of the Tribulation (Mt 24:20). Israelites in the land of Palestine still keep the sabbath today.
In their writings to the churches, the Apostles only mentioned the sabbath three times.

(1) The sabbath is a symbol of salvation rest in Christ (Heb. 4).

(2) The N.T. believer is not bound to keep the sabbath (Col 2:9-17).

(3) The N.T. believer has liberty in the matter of holy days (Ro 14:1-23).

Those who teach that the sabbath is binding upon the Christian, are going contrary to what the Apostles taught.

Why, then, did Jesus keep the Sabbath? He kept the sabbath for the same reason He kept all the other Mosaic laws. He also observed the feasts. Jesus did these things because He was born a Jew, born under the law, that He might fulfill it and redeem His people from its penalty and bondage (Ga 4:4; Ro 9:5).

Way of Life Encyclopedia
***************************************************************
The Sabbath Day has not been changed from Saturday (the seventh day) to Sunday. It has always been on the seventh day (Saturday)--it was given to Israel, not the Church.

ThreeAM · May 20, 2006

DeaconDean said:
I'm Baptist, your SDA, you keep the Sabbath in your way, we'll keep it in ours. We chose to have our Sabbath on Sunday because this was the day Jesus rose from the grave and as a way to separate ourselves from other religions.

Sunday is NOT the Sabbath. God blessed the 7th day and made it HOLY God never made the 1st day HOLY. Most baptist DO NOT believe Sunday is the Sabbath.

Here is what most baptist believe:

"Some Christians have erroneously called Sunday the Sabbath, but the Sabbath is, by definition, the seventh day of the week. Furthermore, some Christians suggest that the Bible teaches that Sunday has replaced Saturday and serves as a "Christian Sabbath." But admittedly, this is nowhere clearly taught in the Bible."

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=14104

DeaconDean · May 21, 2006

ThreeAM said:
Sunday is NOT the Sabbath. God blessed the 7th day and made it HOLY God never made the 1st day HOLY. Most baptist DO NOT believe Sunday is the Sabbath.

Here is what most baptist believe:

"Some Christians have erroneously called Sunday the Sabbath, but the Sabbath is, by definition, the seventh day of the week. Furthermore, some Christians suggest that the Bible teaches that Sunday has replaced Saturday and serves as a "Christian Sabbath." But admittedly, this is nowhere clearly taught in the Bible."

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=14104

Friend, you are absolutely in error! When you address things like this, be sure you have the right source to quote from. I said:

DeaconDean said:
We chose to have our Sabbath on Sunday because this was the day Jesus rose from the grave and as a way to separate ourselves from other religions.

From the Baptist Faith and Message of 2000:

VIII. The Lord's Day
The first day of the week is the Lord's Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should include exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private. Activities on the Lord's Day should be commensurate with the Christian's conscience under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Exodus 20:8-11; Matthew 12:1-12; 28:1ff.; Mark 2:27-28; 16:1-7; Luke 24:1-3,33-36; John 4:21-24; 20:1,19-28; Acts 20:7; Romans 14:5-10; I Corinthians 16:1-2; Colossians 2:16; 3:16; Revelation 1:10.

http://www.sbc.net/bfm/bfm2000.asp

So before you bash me for my and my denominations beliefs, please get it right.

tall73 · May 21, 2006

DeaconDean said:
In the first place friend, did I personally say you or your denomination were the ones I was talking about? Did I say you or your denomination were consigning anyone to hell? Hum? If you will read my post I said:

Yes, you clearly were talking about those who take a pro-Sabbath stance. Please quote your WHOLE statement.

Deacondean said:
From me to you friend, if they want to bash me I'll ignore them.

Why did you cut it to just the first part? Who did you mean when you said "they"?

Since you were addressing someone who was just quoting BrightCandle and then giving a sarcastic reply, and since you were comforting him on that, I think it is clear who you were referring to.

When you post here it is for all. If you want to talk just to him you can do that by personal message.

Did I address you? I was adressing the OP. You were the one who jumped in friend. You were the one taking offense friend. You were the one who jumped in and started "nit picking" my post apart.

So taking you to task for what you actually said in a public discussion is nit picking? Sorry, I don't agree. And you were addressing EVERYONE who reads the thread, and especially someone who had just responded to BrightCandle in a hostile way.

Did I address your faith or denomination? Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians have their Sabbath on Saturday too in case you didn't know.

Actually not. The Catholics believe that the moral force of the commandment was transferred to Sunday. Check John Paul's encyclical Dies Domini, which follows the reasoning of the Laodicean regional council which applied the resting of the Sabbath to Sunday.

The Orthodox still have services but opinions are mixed on the point, and most in these threads see no continuation of the Sabbath due to the testimony of certain church fathers.

The Coptic church however does still keep it.

For that fact, so do the JW's. As do those of Jewish faith. So did I say anything about your denomination?

The JW's do not keep it, check their official site here:

http://www.watchtower.org/library/jt/article_03.htm

Actually there are hundreds of groups who do keep it. But you made it clear in the flow of the posts that you were referring to KalEl76's ,most recent post. Things are not said in a vacuum. . Are you now saying that you just started talking about being consigned to hell at random? It was clearly in response to his post, which was extrapolated by him from other poster's statements. None of that kind of talk actually furthers the factual point that is being discussed. Which is why I responded to your post the way I did.

I'm Baptist, your SDA, you keep the Sabbath in your way, we'll keep it in ours. We chose to have our Sabbath on Sunday because this was the day Jesus rose from the grave and as a way to separate ourselves from other religions.

Great, and that is in fact a point that can be debated and discussed. It is the other type of statement where people talk aobut being consigned to hell, etc. that is not profitable in discussion.

However, while it is true that we both keep it in our own way, there is, as with all doctrine an objective truth. That is what we are looking for in this thread. We can disagree as to which is right, but we should not agree that both are right. They cannot be.

I see from your icon that your SDA. May I ask you a question friend? Do you observe the dietary laws being as since you are SDA?

I don't eat any meat at all, so by default I suppose I do.

ThreeAM · May 21, 2006

DeaconDean said:
Friend, you are absolutely in error! When you address things like this, be sure you have the right source to quote from. I said:

From the Baptist Faith and Message of 2000:

VIII. The Lord's Day
The first day of the week is the Lord's Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should include exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private. Activities on the Lord's Day should be commensurate with the Christian's conscience under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Exodus 20:8-11; Matthew 12:1-12; 28:1ff.; Mark 2:27-28; 16:1-7; Luke 24:1-3,33-36; John 4:21-24; 20:1,19-28; Acts 20:7; Romans 14:5-10; I Corinthians 16:1-2; Colossians 2:16; 3:16; Revelation 1:10.

http://www.sbc.net/bfm/bfm2000.asp

So before you bash me for my and my denominations beliefs, please get it right.

Deacondean said:

I'm Baptist, your SDA, you keep the Sabbath in your way, we'll keep it in ours. We chose to have our Sabbath on Sunday because this was the day Jesus rose from the grave and as a way to separate ourselves from other religions.

Click to expand...

So you are saying the Baptist church teachs that Sunday is the Sabbath?

Ridiculous!

The quote you posted from the SBC says not one single word about the Sabbath.

You are deely in error.

tall73 · May 21, 2006

ThreeAM said:
So you are saying the Baptist church teachs that Sunday is the Sabbath?

Ridiculous!

The quote you posted from the SBC says not one single word about the Sabbath.

You are deely in error.

However, the quote he gave referenced Exodus 20:8-11, so indirectly it did.

tall73 · May 21, 2006

So for those who do not continue to keep the Sabbath can you show where the early church kept Sunday before 100 AD, especially as a Sabbath?

And do you hold that the early church did not observe the Sabbath?

ThreeAM · May 21, 2006

tall73 said:
However, the quote he gave referenced Exodus 20:8-11, so indirectly it did.

Its talking about the activities that are appropriate on the "Lord's Day" it did not say the "Lord's day" (which they assume means 1st day of the week) was the Sabbath.

tall73 · May 21, 2006

holo said:
Well, yes, but as the commandments didn't exist per se, it would be more correct to speak of a moral standard, instead of a specific law. As the bible also says, the gentiles knew the demands of the law in their hearts. The ten commandments are largely identical to common conceptions of right and wrong.

Actually we know that the Sabbath specifically was blessed and sanctified at the 7th day of creation, which the commandment itself recalls. The other commands, as you said, are seen in Gen. too, but NOT in commandment form.

In fact, the commandments were added due to transgression because the law on the heart, as you rightly said, was losing its hold among the nations. God chose Israel to restore knowledge of Him.

But the law was not saving even then. Paul makes clear, quoting the OT, in Romans 4, 10 etc. that salvation was ALWAYS by faith.

The commandments themselves are the baseline, and the Spirit living out the law in us go beyond this baseline. Therefore lust is adultery, anger is murder etc. Paul said that the law is fully lived out in us who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

So yes, if you depend on the law for salvation you are in trouble. But if you are saved by grace and let Christ live out His law in you, that is not legalism, or being under the law.

Now note too though that the new covenant is not the removal of the law. It is the writing of the law on the heart, and remembering sins no more. God is putting His law back where it always belonged.

It is called the ministry of death in 2.Cor. 3;6-9

Yes it was! Because the letter kills. Israel sought righteousness in the wrong way.

2Co 3:6 who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
2Co 3:7 Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses' face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end,
2Co 3:8 will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory?
2Co 3:9 For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory.

The old covenant was not kept, the people broke their promise to do all that God said. So He solved that by writing the law on the heart.

Yes, if you're under the law you will certainly be judged by it. Anyone who is under the law is chanceless. And not only does the commandment accuse you, it's the very power of sin. In fact, Paul went so far as to say he hadn't known covet hadn't the commandment said 'you shall not covet'.

Agreed. But notice in the same passage he said the law was spiritual, righteous, good, etc. The problem was not the law, but him. He couldn't keep the law. Therefore sin was the problem. The law is holy. But since we all sin the law is powerless to save us. But God did what the law could not do because of our sin, He forgave us.

Well, the law always demands you keep it. It has no exceptions. It's pretty much meaningless to even be talking about keeping God's law, since, as you quoted, we all violate it continously. Break one, break them all.

James agrees that if you break the law in one point you break the whole law. But what do you do with those walking in the Spirit keeping the law fully? What do you do with the law written on the heart? You are missing something key here. It is the LETTER that kills. It is trying to keep it for salvation. We will keep it by the Spirit. But the focus is not on the law itself but on Christ living in us.

According to my faith, I'm more of a child than a servant. Jesus didn't die so that I may serve Him, but so that I may be called a child of God. I have the rights of a child of God. Besides, Jesus laid down way harder commandments than the ten commandments, so I don't understand why anyone would go from them to His... I mean, as if the ten commandments didn't judge you enough

Our righteousness must be found outside of/apart from the law, that's for sure.

Exactly, Jesus went with the true meaning of the law which goes beyond the letter, and comes from the heart.

If you are under the law, you will be judged by it, correct?

Yes, but those who are under the law are those who are trying to be justified by it. We are not.

Well, the bible also says God's righteousness has been revealed apart from the law, and Paul said he hasn't got HIS OWN righteousness, which (in fact) comes by the law, but rather the righteousness of Christ. In fact, I wouldn't even know what to use the law for on a regular day. How do you use it?

Well, even if you say that the ten commandments are still in effect, you'd have to agree that God has in fact changed His requirements by abolishing other commandments. I think He's either abolished them all, or none. I don't think God has changed His law at all. I believe the Jews, too, saw the law as a whole.

Acts 15 makes it pretty plain that either some laws were eliminated for gentiles or only some were applied to them.

Yes. The law is for the ungodly, not the righteous. Therefore I believe I have nothing to do with it. I'm righteous.

If the righteous have the law in their hearts then I would think that they have something to do with it.

I agree. We certainly have a tendency to complicate it. My most basic faith, and a thing that often comforts me, is the fact that the gospel is simple enough for a fool to understand. It's basically about God loving us. Our discussion is more about HOW He loves us, I guess

True

Paulien theology does get a bit complicated in the specifics, but the gospel message is clear. We are not saved by law.

tall73 · May 21, 2006

ThreeAM said:
Its talking about the activities that are appropriate on the "Lord's Day" it did not say the "Lord's day" (which they assume means 1st day of the week) was the Sabbath.

Agreed, but the whole text is an assumption that it is taking over the role of the Sabbath. And therein lies the problem. It is assumed but never explained.

DeaconDean · May 21, 2006

Friend, I will not debate with you in this thread. As a Baptist, I'm bound to follow the Baptist Faith and Message of 2000. We (Baptists) celebrate the day our Lord rose from the grave (Sunday) by chosing to worship on that day. You have your system, we have ours. You'll not change me, I'll not change yours.

tall73 said:
But you made it clear in the flow of the posts that you were referring to KalEl76's ,most recent post.

Yes I was, there were people on this thread who were beating him down pretty bad. So I guess I can't offer a word of hope either, hum?

tall73 said:
Why did you cut it to just the first part? Who did you mean when you said "they"?

Anybody who says that we are sining by not worshiping on Saturday. (Catholics, who some hold Saturday Mass, Eastern Orthodox, SDA, Jews, anybody who says we are sinning by not observing Saturday as our Sabbath)

tall73 said:
I don't eat any meat at all, so by default I suppose I do.

So would you say this statement is true:

Healthful Lifestyle
SDAs believe their bodies to be the temples of the Holy Spirit [SIZE=-1]26[/SIZE]. Thus they feel a duty to take care of their bodies as such [SIZE=-1]27[/SIZE] by a healthful lifestyle which includes avoiding the unclean meats [SIZE=-1]28[/SIZE]. They also abstain from alcoholic drinks, smoking and nonmedical drug use, since these do not promote wellness.

26 1 Cor 6:19-20
27 2 Cor 7:1
28 Lev 11

Your core beliefs (in this particular area)have their roots in the law.

Lev. 11:

And the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them, 2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth. 3 Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat. 4 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. 5 And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. 6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. 7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. 8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.

9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. 10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: 11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination. 12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you. 13 And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, 14 And the vulture, and the kite after his kind; 15 Every raven after his kind; 16 And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, 17 And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, 18 And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, 19 And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.
20 All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you. 21 Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; 22 Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind. 23 But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you. 24 And for these ye shall be unclean: whosoever toucheth the carcase of them shall be unclean until the even. 25 And whosoever beareth ought of the carcase of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even. 26 The carcases of every beast which divideth the hoof, and is not clovenfooted, nor cheweth the cud, are unclean unto you: every one that toucheth them shall be unclean. 27 And whatsoever goeth upon his paws, among all manner of beasts that go on all four, those are unclean unto you: whoso toucheth their carcase shall be unclean until the even. 28 And he that beareth the carcase of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: they are unclean unto you. 29 These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon the earth; the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his kind, 30 And the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail, and the mole. 31 These are unclean to you among all that creep: whosoever doth touch them, when they be dead, shall be unclean until the even. 32 And upon whatsoever any of them, when they are dead, doth fall, it shall be unclean; whether it be any vessel of wood, or raiment, or skin, or sack, whatsoever vessel it be, wherein any work is done, it must be put into water, and it shall be unclean until the even; so it shall be cleansed. 33 And every earthen vessel, whereinto any of them falleth, whatsoever is in it shall be unclean; and ye shall break it. 34 Of all meat which may be eaten, that on which such water cometh shall be unclean: and all drink that may be drunk in every such vessel shall be unclean. 35 And every thing whereupon any part of their carcase falleth shall be unclean; whether it be oven, or ranges for pots, they shall be broken down: for they are unclean, and shall be unclean unto you. 36 Nevertheless a fountain or pit, wherein there is plenty of water, shall be clean: but that which toucheth their carcase shall be unclean. 37 And if any part of their carcase fall upon any sowing seed which is to be sown, it shall be clean. 38 But if any water be put upon the seed, and any part of their carcase fall thereon, it shall be unclean unto you. 39 And if any beast, of which ye may eat, die; he that toucheth the carcase thereof shall be unclean until the even. 40 And he that eateth of the carcase of it shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: he also that beareth the carcase of it shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even. 41 And every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth shall be an abomination; it shall not be eaten. 42 Whatsoever goeth upon the belly, and whatsoever goeth upon all four, or whatsoever hath more feet among all creeping things that creep upon the earth, them ye shall not eat; for they are an abomination. 43 Ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby. 44 For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 45 For I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy. 46 This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth: 47 To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.

So you are submitting yourself to the O.T. law.

Since you do, Paul was adressing the Galatians when he spoke to them about "ceremonial circumcision" when he said:

"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing."-Gal. 5:2

Circumcision was required by the law for Jews:

"And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. 10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. 11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you." -Gen 17:9-11

It later became a law under Moses:

"And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised." -Lev. 12:3

Back to what I was getting to. Paul said:

"For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law." -Gal. 5:3

Paul was addressing "ceremonial" observance of the law. The Galatians were being misled to believe that not only did you have to have faith in God as Paul preached, but they had to submit to "ceremonial circumcision" also. And Paul stated that if you submit to "ceremonial" observance of the law. then "Christ is of no effect." And you had better be able to do the whole law. So friend you go ahead and observe the "law." As for myself, I am:

"not under the law." -Gal. 5:18

God bless you and your beliefs friend. I've already posted more than I intended to. You have your beliefs and I have mine. Lets leave it that way.

I'm outta here.

What Day Of The Week Is The Sabbath?

Well-Known Member

Deut. 10:12 And now, Israel, what doth the LORD t

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

former Christian

former Christian

Active Member

Well-Known Member

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

Active Member

Well-Known Member

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

Sophia7's husband

Well-Known Member

Sophia7's husband

Sophia7's husband

Well-Known Member

Sophia7's husband

Sophia7's husband

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

Similar threads