Is it wrong that I keep Shabbat and do not "go to church" on Sunday?

Saint Steven said:

There is no evidence of any human keeping the Sabbath before it was given in Exodus chapter sixteen.

Here are the facts:

Nowhere before Exodus chapter 16
do we find any biblical evidence of any human:
- observing the sabbath.
- preparing for the sabbath.
- adjusting their plans to account for the sabbath.
- teaching anyone else to observe the sabbath.
- extolling the virtues of the sabbath.
- being criticized for not observing the sabbath.

Click to expand...

Nor do we find the command "do not take God's name in vain" in those chapters - but it still exists.

And yet we DO find that the Sabbath was made binding on the 7th day of creation week. Gen 2:1-3 and even the "legal code" of Ex 20:11 reminds us'

("we" as in both sides of the classic Sunday vs Bible Sabbath debate
as we saw here Yesterday at 3:16 PM #84
and here Yesterday at 3:27 PM #85 )
==============================

BobRyan said: ↑
Nor do we find the command "do not take God's name in vain" in those chapters - but it still exists.
And we DO find that the Sabbath was made binding on the 7th day of creation week.

Click to expand...

Saint Steven said:

That's not correct.

Click to expand...

I notice you provide no "Do not take God's name in vain" quote before Exodus 20 in your response. What were you hoping to use as fact to back up your claim just then??

Saint Steven said:

Not sure what you are trying to prove with that.

Click to expand...

I am proving that in the case of a very clear command "Do not take God's name in vain" that we both know is fully binding from Eden onward - the wooden "rule" you are trying to impose does not work.


And then of course there is --

Saint Steven said:

Romans 5:13
To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given...

Click to expand...

Again "informed" by scripture showing that the formal writing of law on Stone - did not mean no law existed.

Genesis 25 "Abraham kept my Laws, Commandments and Statutes"
Gen 4 "SIN is crouching at your door "
1 John 3:4 "SIN IS transgression of the LAW"
Genesis 7 clean vs unclean animal distinction even though identifying them is not found until Lev 11.

Turns out - Genesis is not an exhaustive account of every word spoken for 2000 years. I think we all knew that.

ace of hearts said:

So jump to another ship.

Click to expand...

Where you intending to post on a different thread? A navy ship oriented thread possibly?

==========

Saint Steven said:

"We"?
You cited two of your own posts.
There is no agreement here. I have stated plainly that I do not agree with you.

Click to expand...

You said "do WE find" and stated something that we do not agree to

But I qualified "we" this way --

("we" as in both sides of the classic Sunday vs Bible Sabbath debate
as we saw here Yesterday at 3:16 PM #84
and here Yesterday at 3:27 PM #85 )

What does it mean when someone takes God's name in vain. And where do you see that prior to the giving of the law?

John 1:17
For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

A great example of NOT quoting Ex 20:7 "Do not take God's name in vain"

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

You HAVE to say ALL of Exodus 16 because it is quite evident that Shabbat was kept BEFORE Sinai.
What is to take? The New Covenant is Torah, not on stone but in our hearts.

Click to expand...

Why would you want to have the transitory ministry that brought condemnation and death, that has no glory now, written on your heart? The letter kills. No matter where it is written.

2 Corinthians 3:6-11
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. 7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

Tone said:

Not a threat, just a heads up...you wouldn't want to call something Yah calls holy--unholy...common...or unclean would you?

Isaiah 5:20
"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter."

This will explain:
Torah Incarnate

Click to expand...

That reminds me of something that was said to Peter before he went to visit Cornelius.

Acts 11:9
“The voice spoke from heaven a second time, ‘Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.’

BobRyan said:

Because context matters so readers get the point - and because the point it makes answers the question Ace asks and address his speculation on that very point

- and ignoring the detail in the post to then post a statement addressed by the post already - does not cause the answer to vanish.

Click to expand...

So, why address it to me if it is for someone else?

BobRyan said:

Still no biblical evidence for Exodus 20:7 "Do not take God's name in vain" quoted/stated before Exodus 20??? Shall we then "imagine to ourselves" it was ok before Exodus 20??

Obviously that sort of game does not work with moral law.

Hence the reference in Ex 20:11 back to Genesis 2:1-3 -- the sort of reference that does not at all exist for "do no take God's name in vain".

Click to expand...

That's a task for you, not for me.
I already provided scripture to say that sin was before the law and that the law was given through Moses. You have failed to provide anything.

BobRyan said:

Yes --
AND on the heart under the New Covenant.

Click to expand...

See my comment to Tone on that.

BobRyan said:

You do not have biblical evidence for any human quoting/observing "do not take God's name in vain" before Exodus chapter 20.
Am I understanding you correctly?

Click to expand...

Why is that a task for me?

Saint Steven said:

So, why address it to me if it is for someone else?

Click to expand...

Ace jumped into the conversation I had with you and commented. I show that the discussion did not support his comment -- then you responded and I responded. Nice thing is - that post of mine shows all of it. Easy to follow

BobRyan said:

Nor do we find the command "do not take God's name in vain" in those chapters - but it still exists.

Click to expand...

Reminds of a one string banjo played by a one-armed man. Enough is enough.
How do you define goading?

Saint Steven said:

Still no biblical evidence for any human observing the Sabbath before Exodus chapter sixteen?

Click to expand...

Still no biblical evidence for Exodus 20:7 "Do not take God's name in vain" quoted/stated before Exodus 20??? Shall we then "imagine to ourselves" it was ok before Exodus 20??

Obviously that sort of game does not work with moral law.

Hence the reference in Ex 20:11 back to Genesis 2:1-3 -- the sort of reference that does not at all exist for "do no take God's name in vain".

Saint Steven said:

Why is that a task for me?

Click to expand...

Because presumably you understand that taking God's name was always sin -- even before Exodus 20:7 -- just as Ex 20:11 points back to Gen 2:1-3 from the very beginning.. Sabbath.

I thought that was the obvious part.

BobRyan said:

Easy to follow

Click to expand...

Says who?

BobRyan said:

Still no biblical evidence for Exodus 20:7 "Do not take God's name in vain"

Click to expand...

I asked you to define it. No response.

Tone said:

Let's hash this out...

Click to expand...

If you are in a congregation of Messianic Jews or other Sabbatarians I guess then fine. But if not then you probably are forsaking the fellowship (Hebrews 10:24-25) of believers and that is bad. Of course some of that can be done online to some extant, but I don't believe that online message boards and other modern communication methods can completely make up for human face to face time.

Saint Steven said:

Says who?

Click to expand...

Says the one who puts the entire conversation flow into the post so you can just read it rather than having me explain it

BobRyan said: ↑
Still no biblical evidence for Exodus 20:7 "Do not take God's name in vain"

Saint Steven said:

I asked you to define it. No response.

Click to expand...

I have no obligation to explain God's commandments. In Gen 26 Abraham is said by God to have "KEPT My Laws My Statutes and My Commandments" -- you want to see "the quote of the Sabbath Commandment" because you claim it is not clear that the Commandments kept are the ones in the actual Bible, in the actual TEN Commandments for example Sabbath.

My claim is that they are and even you admit that it would be sin to take God's name in vain -- even if it was Cain doing it, and even if there is no "quote of it" before Ex 20... thus undoing your own argument against the 4th commandment.

The point remains.

The beauty of this is that even the very easy parts of the discussion get to be repeated so no one misses it - by the tactic of claiming not to get the point being made in favor of God's Commandments.

BobRyan said:

I have no obligation to explain God's commandments.

Click to expand...

Good. I'm done reading your posts.

BobRyan said: ↑
Still no biblical evidence for Exodus 20:7 "Do not take God's name in vain"

Saint Steven said:

I asked you to define it. No response.

Click to expand...

I have no obligation to explain God's commandments. In Gen 26 Abraham is said by God to have "KEPT My Laws My Statutes and My Commandments" -- you want to see "the quote of the Sabbath Commandment" because you claim it is not clear that the Commandments kept are the ones in the actual Bible, in the actual TEN Commandments for example Sabbath.

My claim is that they are and even you admit that it would be sin to take God's name in vain -- even if it was Cain doing it, and even if there is no "quote of it" before Ex 20... thus undoing your own argument against the 4th commandment.

The point remains.

The beauty of this is that even the very easy parts of the discussion get to be repeated so no one misses it - by the tactic of claiming not to get the point being made in favor of God's Commandments.

Saint Steven said:

Good. I'm done reading your posts.

Click to expand...

That's a great conclusion to an obvious point - where you have been gaming the point for a few posts and are simply looking for an exit. I frankly consider it -- affirmation of the attributes of an irrefutable point. There you are exiting because I will not "explain the commandment - do not take God's name in vain" when the entire argument against God's 4th commandment is not "it is not explained" but rather "it is not quoted before Ex 16" -- just as is the case with "Do no take God's name in vain".

Were we simply not supposed to notice???

Saint Steven said:

Why would you want to have the transitory ministry that brought condemnation and death, that has no glory now, written on your heart? The letter kills. No matter where it is written.

Click to expand...

Because that is what Scripture says. I love ya Achi, but you sure are stubborn
Shabbat Shalom

I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.