Sabbath was blessed by God and made holy. Sunday was never blessed by God.

More inconsistency:

Originally Posted by dollarsbill Originally Posted by TruthWave7 Originally Posted by TruthWave7

SU: Given you reject an associated commandment about the sabbath, exactly what do you mean about a holy day?

IOW, Moses clarified and said "no work". You reject that idea of "holy". And you probably spark a fire, drive a car, turn on the heat, etc on saturday, breaking the holy day. So can you explain what God meant, if not per Moses?

Strong in Him said:

Observing one day as a day of rest is not a moral law.
.

Click to expand...

If it is just "tradition of man" then you are correct. If it is the Word of God - for all mankind - "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall all mankind come before Me to Worship" Isaiah 66 - then it is a moral law.

Thus the promise to the gentiles who "keep my Sabbath".

The Christian Church has historically accepted the fact that the Sabbath Commandment within the TEN commandment is indeed - moral law. As James points out in James 2 - "break one - is to break them all".

There are 3 posts here -- that demonstrate that level of acceptance of Bible truth by a great many denominations, pastors and Bible students outside of the one I belong to, including D.L Moody, R.C Sproul, Matthew Henry etc. Even Andy Stanley is in this group.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7678827-21/#post61195921

TruthWave7 said:

I have a NKV, NASB, and KJV.

The Sabbath was created on the 7th day in Genesis. The 7th day is the Sabbath, they are one in the same. Any theologian "worth his salt", knows that. Morals law are never retired. Ceremonial law are.

Click to expand...

As R. C Sproul points out - the Sabbath as God gave it in scripture -- "is Saturday".

As most Christians admit today- Christ rose from the dead on "week day 1" which is Sunday - making Saturday - the 7th day of the week - even by today's standards. -- still --

As the Christian church generally admits even to this day - the Ten Commandments are indeed part of the Moral Law of God - and James teaches that "to break one is to break them all".

And as Paul admits in 1Cor 7:19 there is indeed a divide between the ceremonial law and the moral law when he says "what matters is KEEPING the commandments of GOD". 1Cor 7:19

And so it is that the "moral law" remains - in fact "There remains therefore a SABBATH rest for the people of God" Hebrews 4 and as Isaiah points out "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to Worship".Is 66 -- in that new earth.

bugkiller said:

If all that matters is the keeping of the law, God is one luny dude or the complete NT is false.

Click to expand...

"what matters is KEEPING the commandments of GOD". 1Cor 7:19

1. Your argument is with the text.

2. 1Cor 7 is 'in the New Testament"

As is Rev 14:12, and James 2, and Romans 6 and Romans 8:5-8 and Romans 3:31...

Isaiah says nothing about the sabbath's continuance in 66:22.

Click to expand...

"From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to Worship".Is 66 - Isaiah says this in reference to the future New Earth of Rev 21.

Your argument is with the text itself.

in Christ,

Bob

I will concede the point that it seems silly to take the Torah, and say that 'xyz' isn't for us any longer, but we'll take this other part, over here. It's one law, for one people (Israel). Granted, there are some points in the Torah that aren't applicable to us because the temple is not standing, and because Israel is a scattered people, all over the world- both the natural, cultivated branch, and the wild.

I keep reading in this thread, and everything keeps coming back to one familiar idea, and that is that somehow YHWH expected things from his people that folks of today think are unjust. Time and again, there are conversations where Christians point towards the "Old Testament" with horror, as though the things that YHWH demanded of his people was heinous, because it goes against their own sensibilities. YHWH's ways are not our ways, and that doesn't mean that we have the right to try and paint him in a changed picture than what he has revealed of himself. If a person finds it impossible to love YHWH in the beginning of the book, how do they purport to love his son, who only speaks the words that the Father gives him? Over and over, Yeshua (Jesus) quotes Torah, again and again and again. He says that if we love him, we will keep his commandments, and he only speaks what YHWH has already said. Test it. Yeshua expounds on what we see in Torah, how to function as a person, as part of a family, and as a community of his children- and he takes it beyond just the outward actions, but calls us to go even further into the condition of our hearts.

There is such a disconnect in this thread, trying to separate one commandment from all of the rest of the Torah. YHWH doesn't operate a pick & choose buffet. That said, faith has always been where salvation is found. The gospels and epistles repeat it ad nauseum that if we have faith, it will be readily apparent because we will bear good fruit. We will love YHWH and because we love him, we will keep his Torah, and part of that being that we will love our neighbors as we love ourselves.

I think of it much like baptism. Does the physical act of being cleaned with water somehow magically save someone? Or is it that because they have faith, that faith drives them to take the physical actions that Messiah says to do? This circumcised heart should cause a person to desire to do all that YHWH says is right, good, and beneficial. If a person says that they have faith, yet don't desire to do what YHWH says to do, is that faith alive or dead? Each person will have to wrestle with that, in their own lives.

As far as if a 7th day Sabbath is something that we are called by YHWH to keep, can't we trust the good word and example of our Messiah? Yeshua kept the Sabbath, though he didn't bow to the man-made traditions that sought to add to YHWH's torah. Instead of telling the lost sheep of Israel (the scattered 10 tribes, who were at that point considered divorced from YHWH, and because of that- "gentiles") that they were free to keep whatever day they liked, he kept all of the commandments and told his followers to do the same. It's not about earning salvation, because none of us is even remotely capable of doing that- no matter how well we think we obey our Father. No, it is now and has always been about LOVE.

Shalom <3

Originally Posted by Alive_Again I'm a latecomer, but it should be said that "This is the day that the Lord has made. I will rejoice and be glad in it!"

The "days" are evil in the sense that we are living in a fallen world where corruptness is everywhere. We are of God (in Him) and all things are of God, so our days are blessed, but we should walk circumspectly, redeeming the time, for the days are "evil".

Click to expand...

TruthWave7 said:

That was cute, but its not biblical. There is only one day that God himself made holy in the Bible, and that was the 7th day, and it is found in Genesis 2. Pope's cannot make a day holy, only God can.

Click to expand...

Awww, quit yer whining! Your sect is just jealous

http://www.christianforums.com/t7325781-104/

#1. "The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God."

#13. "Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions."

#18. "As to papal authority, the Pope is as it were, God on earth, Sole sovereign of all the faithful of Christ, chief king of kings,
having a plentitude of unbroken power, entrusted by the omnipotent God to govern the earthly and heavenly kingdoms."

#30. "The Pope is of so great authority and power, that he is able to modify, declare, or interpret even divine laws."

Click to expand...

TruthWave7 said:

As I already stated the dietary laws, were not purely moral laws like the Ten Commandments, they were laws to insure good health and happiness to His people, which includes us! (I might add, that is one reason SDAs have greater longevity than the general population), They were inspired laws, but were not of of the same level of importance as the 10 Commandments. God was surely making a statement when He himself wrote the 10 Commandments in stone with His own finger, by passing even Moses. Oh, and one other point, only the 10 Commandments were put inside the Ark of Covenant, the other laws written on parchment, were kept in a pouch on the outside of the Ark of the Covenant.

Click to expand...

Lotsa spinning here.... so you AGREE dietary Laws are of LESS importance than the 10C's yet you demand adherence while rejecting by cherry picking anything you disagree with in the midst of things. I will take it either that I can ignore the dietary laws completely as IRRELEVANT because you ignore menstral and dead animal and other laws in the same venue. If you want to again exalt the dietary laws to the same level of importance (mandatory) as the 10C's then I will again remind you that you must obey all the other laws in the same area of the bible as MANDATORY which includes punishment for sabbath breaking via stoning..... mandatory.
The way I see it you either need to drop dietary laws or start getting your ammo ready for lawbreakers.

Sophrosyne said:

Lotsa spinning here.... so you AGREE dietary Laws are of LESS importance than the 10C's yet you demand adherence while rejecting by cherry picking anything you disagree with in the midst of things. I will take it either that I can ignore the dietary laws completely as IRRELEVANT because you ignore menstral and dead animal and other laws in the same venue. If you want to again exalt the dietary laws to the same level of importance (mandatory) as the 10C's then I will again remind you that you must obey all the other laws in the same area of the bible as MANDATORY which includes punishment for sabbath breaking via stoning..... mandatory.
The way I see it you either need to drop dietary laws or start getting your ammo ready for lawbreakers.

Click to expand...

Question : They *could* simply obey all of the commands . They would then not need to deal with people pointing out that they are not doing what they say everyone else should do . Do they not understand that their refusing to observe the Lord's commands for them is distracting the discussion from their all important command ?

As it is , they refuse to do such a simple thing which keeps them from proving their point .

New_Wineskin said:

Question : They *could* simply obey all of the commands . They would then not need to deal with people pointing out that they are not doing what they say everyone else should do . Do they not understand that their refusing to observe the Lord's commands for them is distracting the discussion from their all important command ?

As it is , they refuse to do such a simple thing which keeps them from proving their point .

Click to expand...

It just shows hypocrisy in it all, demanding we keep SOME of God's laws while ignoring the ones that they don't want to keep then ignoring us when we point out they are ordered to keep them. The excuse of government and temple used cuts both ways when it comes to punishment they say no can do but if you cannot punish for a law then the law is not valid to begin with to demand compliance for. What you end up is everyone their own lawmaker/keeper and lawlessness in it all because nobody is accountable to nobody else. God will not be mocked those who put their faith in keeping the Law will be judged by the Law they keep INSTEAD of their faith in Jesus.

Sophrosyne said:

It just shows hypocrisy in it all, demanding we keep SOME of God's laws while ignoring the ones that they don't want to keep then ignoring us when we point out they are ordered to keep them. The excuse of government and temple used cuts both ways when it comes to punishment they say no can do but if you cannot punish for a law then the law is not valid to begin with to demand compliance for. What you end up is everyone their own lawmaker/keeper and lawlessness in it all because nobody is accountable to nobody else. God will not be mocked those who put their faith in keeping the Law will be judged by the Law they keep INSTEAD of their faith in Jesus.

Click to expand...

What do they obtain for convincing us of their argument ?
Oh yeah , they can boast of our flesh - as in Galatians .

New_Wineskin said:

What do they obtain for convincing us of their argument ?
Oh yeah , they can boast of our flesh - as in Galatians .

Click to expand...

Yup... if everyone is a slave then the reality of freedom changes because then there is none to compare with. Misery loves company, I know I would be miserable if I had to follow the OT Law and am very thankful for the freedom that grace has afforded us.

Jenna said:

I will concede the point that it seems silly to take the Torah, and say that 'xyz' isn't for us any longer, but we'll take this other part, over here. It's one law, for one people (Israel). Granted, there are some points in the Torah that aren't applicable to us because the temple is not standing, and because Israel is a scattered people, all over the world- both the natural, cultivated branch, and the wild.

I keep reading in this thread, and everything keeps coming back to one familiar idea, and that is that somehow YHWH expected things from his people that folks of today think are unjust. Time and again, there are conversations where Christians point towards the "Old Testament" with horror, as though the things that YHWH demanded of his people was heinous,

Click to expand...

Agreed. That is a problem that some people seem to have these days.

It is a model that assumes that Christians need to find a way to keep God under control because if you just let Him make Law without restriction then He will ask that you not eat diseased Cattle in Lev 11 or else not eat rats, or cats, or dogs, or He might say of the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall all mankind come before Me to Worship" Isaiah 66.

One at-first convenient way to keep God in a box is to all agree with a handshake - to only read the NT.

The problem there is that the Gospels are not all speaking about events after the cross - so fine -- do away with the Gospels as well.

The problem with that is that the NT writers keep referring to Mosaic Law as "Scripture" such as we find in 1Timothy 5:18.

It is a never-ending battle for those trying to put god in some sort of man-sized box, and the NT writers just aren't cooperating with that effort - for some reason.

in Christ,

Bob

I guess if one might insert truncated in front of text and allowing the contiuned divorced quotes.

For example there is nothing in the text about anything occuring on the sabbath in Isa 66:23

bugkiller

TruthWave7 said:

Your understanding of Scripture is illogical, you do not know how "to rightly divided the word of truth". The commandments that you quote were not written by the finger of God in stone. They told to Moses during the time when God was the civil law enforcement and leader of the Israelite nation, in other words, it was a theocracy. But, it does give one a definite idea of how flagrant Sabbath keeping is in God's eyes.

Click to expand...

Now that's an interesting NON Scriptural, personally insulting reply.

Neither were the dietary, circumcision, clothing, etc. written in stone. Many of the commandments in the Law were NOT written in stone.

Paul said it is sin to judge others about the Sabbath. So OBVIOUSLY it is not commanded for Christians.

Colossians 2:16 (NASB)
16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—

Sophrosyne said:

Answer the question....
Where is food laws written by the finger of God in stone?

You are asserting that the commandment to stone people is invalid because it was not written in stone by the finger of God yet you demand compliance to OTHER laws NOT written likewise... food laws. You cannot say choose one without opening the floodgates for ALL the rest that are NOT written in Stone by the finger of God..... in other words.... you take ALL.. or NONE. No buffet Law is allowed.

Click to expand...

It seems clear that several here have caught the obvious contradiction.

TruthWave7 said:

As I already stated the dietary laws, were not purely moral laws like the Ten Commandments, they were laws to insure good health and happiness to His people, which includes us! (I might add, that is one reason SDAs have greater longevity than the general population), They were inspired laws, but were not of of the same level of importance as the 10 Commandments. God was surely making a statement when He himself wrote the 10 Commandments in stone with His own finger, by passing even Moses. Oh, and one other point, only the 10 Commandments were put inside the Ark of Covenant, the other laws written on parchment, were kept in a pouch on the outside of the Ark of the Covenant.

Click to expand...

Where does the Bible say dietary laws were for health?

BobRyan said:

"what matters is KEEPING the commandments of GOD". 1Cor 7:19

Click to expand...

And that would be the New Covenant for Christians.

Originally Posted by BobRyan

"what matters is KEEPING the commandments of GOD". 1Cor 7:19
​

Click to expand...

dollarsbill said:

And that would be the New Covenant for Christians.

Click to expand...

Yes the New Covenant writes the LAW of God on the heart for all saints - NT and OT - since there is only "ONE Gospel" and "The Gospel was preached to THEM just as it was to US also" Heb 4:2 -- for "they all drank from the same spiritual ROCK and that ROCK was Christ" 1Cor 10.

Elijah AND MOSES are standing WITH Christ in Matt 17 -- not opposed to Him.

in Christ,

Bob

BobRyan said:

Yes the New Covenant writes the LAW of God on the heart for all saints - NT and OT - since there is only "ONE Gospel" and "The Gospel was preached to THEM just as it was to US also" Heb 4:2 -- for "they all drank from the same spiritual ROCK and that ROCK was Christ" 1Cor 10.

Click to expand...

There's nothing written on my heart not to eat pork.