The Bible - Man's Instruction Manual

hedrick said:

Instruction is quite a general concept. You can instruct someone in basic principles, or in lists of rules. The term instruction manual, however, implies to me something closer to the list of rules.

Click to expand...

Paul said intruction in righteousness. This leads to being perfect into all good works according to 2 Timothy 3:17. Also, Paul talks about his doctrine. He says his doctrine is: manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience, Persecutions, afflictions. (See: 2 Timothy 3:10). This flies off the heels of 2 Timothy 3:1-9 of Paul warning us about how in the last days perilous times will come. Men shall be lovers of their own selves, and they will have a form of godliness, but they will deny the power thereof. What power are they denying of God? The ability to live holy and righteously by God's power in this life. Most today justify sin and evil and think they are saved by having a belief alone on Jesus. But Jude 1:4 warns against those who turn God's grace into a license for immorality.

As for the thinking that God's Saturday Sabbath command (not the Sabbath as a calendar day) is still binding for today:

Well, there are Sabbatarian groups (not all of them) who believe that keeping the Sabbath command relates to salvation or it will in time relate to one's salvation in the future later on. This is a very serious problem because Paul says if we seek to be justified by the Law (i.e. the 613 Laws of Moses as a whole), we have fallen from grace (Galatians 5:4). The Sabbath is a command that is clearly an Old Covenant Law and it is not all that clear that is a command in the New Covenant. In fact, on the contrary, Colossians 2:14, and Colossians 2:16 both suggest that the Sabbath is no longer a binding a command. Yes, the existence of the Sabbath as a calendar still exists, but the command to keep the Sabbath no longer exists. There is no direct command to keep the Saturday Sabbath in the New Testament, and there is no mention of Sabbath breaking as being a sin among the list of other sins listed by Paul, and John. But this does not mean we should not obey God's laws today as a part of eternal life. We are under a New Covenant with New Commands. We must follow and obey the commands that come from Jesus and His followers. We must live a holy and righteous life (after we are saved by God's grace). For without holiness, no man shall see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14).

There is a lot of big talk about the Bible but so many (christians) no longer believe the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Without changing parts to metaphorical language, especially concerning creation.

d taylor said:

There is a lot of big talk about the Bible but so many (christians) no longer believe the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Without changing parts to metaphorical language, especially concerning creation.

Click to expand...

Yes, we are living in the last days. Many do not take Genesis literally and they think the global flood was local (Which is unfortunate). Many today want to justify some form of sin while thinking they are saved by having belief alone in Jesus. Little do they realize that as it was in the days of Noah so shall it be at the coming of the Son of man. Little do they realize that the global flood was an example to all who should live ungodly thereafter (2 Peter 2).

Yes, there are many parts of the Bible that are literal, but there are times that others take metaphors in the Bible as being literal when they are not, too. The story involving Noah and Ham is one such example.

Biblical Metaphors Shed Light on Ham's Sin in Noah's Tent.

Bible Highlighter said:

Yes, we are living in the last days. Many do not take Genesis literally and they think the global flood was local (Which is unfortunate). Many today want to justify some form of sin while thinking they are saved by having belief alone in Jesus. Little do they realize that as it was in the days of Noah so shall it be at the coming of the Son of man. Little do they realize that the global flood was an example to all who should live ungodly thereafter (2 Peter 2).

Yes, there are many parts of the Bible that are literal, but there are times that others take metaphors in the Bible as being literal when they are not, too. The story involving Noah and Ham is one such example.

Biblical Metaphors Shed Light on Ham's Sin in Noah's Tent.

Click to expand...

Your are a perfect example of what i am talking about

Heading:
The Bible - Man's Instruction Manual

Apparently your post is just for men.

BTW, I noticed your preference for the KJV. I was raised in it and loved it as well, but am having more and more difficulty understanding what is written to me (a woman) or what isn't due to the universal use of the word "man" for both men and mankind.

I'm in the process of switching to the NIV for a more obvious reading of the Bible's application to me.

The KJV translation had some obvious cultural biases against women in some verses that are used to silence and diminish women even today. It did, however, get 1 Cor 11:3 correct whereas the ESV has chosen to incorporate it's gender politics into it, so I do appreciate that about the KJV.

d taylor said:

Your are a perfect example of what i am talking about

Click to expand...

So you are for the position that Genesis is not literal and the Earth is millions or billions of years old?
So you are for the position that the flood was local, and not global?
So you are for the position that a believer can commit mortal sin and still be saved all because they have a belief alone on Jesus Christ?

For I believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis 1, and I believe the Earth is young.
I believe the flood was global and not local.
I believe that Christians cannot justify mortal sin and think they are saved just because they have a belief alone on Jesus Christ.

Bro.T said:

Everything that is made comes with a set of instructions. Whether it is home appliances, toys, automobiles, pet accessories, clothing, food, etc. Man is no different. Man was created by God and given an instruction manual, that if read and followed carefully, he would be able to make the best of his life given him on earth. Man's instruction manual is called the Bible.

Click to expand...

So what about those people in the bible? What was their instruction manual?

Bible Highlighter said:

So you are for the position that Genesis is not literal and the Earth is millions or billions of years old?
So you are for the position that the flood was local, and not global?
So you are for the position that a believer can commit mortal sin and still be saved all because they have a belief alone on Jesus Christ?

For I believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis 1, and I believe the Earth is young.
I believe the flood was global and not local.
I believe that Christians cannot justify mortal sin and think they are saved just because they have a belief alone on Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

I have discussed this with you multiple times, you do not take Genesis literal, oh you make take God creating Adam literal. But then you take him out of Gods creation and place Him in science lie creation and every other account in The Bible.

Bro.T said:

Revelation 22: 18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Click to expand...

That is regarding one book of the Bible, not the whole Bible, is it not?

d taylor said:

I have discussed this with you multiple times, you do not take Genesis literal, oh you make take God creating Adam literal. But then you take him out of Gods creation and place Him in science lie creation and every other account in The Bible.

Click to expand...

My life does not revolve around remembering every conversation with all who I had a conversation with on a Christian forum. I read the Bible literally unless there is sufficient evidence to the contrary that says otherwise with what we know about observational Science. I believe the six days of creation are literal because a day is defined as an evening and a morning in Genesis 1. God resting on the 7th day from His work also was a pattern for the Israelite in resting from His work on the 7th day (Which was a week). The Sabbath command was under the Old Covenant that is no longer a binding covenant or contract anymore. But the point here is that the Israelite keeping the weekly Sabbath (when it was in effect as a command) was a parallel to what God did after the 6 literal (24 hour) days of the creation week.

Also, you did not answer my questions.

Bro.T said:

The people in the Bible are the people in the Bible. But if we read from Genesis to Revelation, we can learn from their mistakes. Some didn't follow instruction. Paul says in 2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Let's take a look at the first lie that was told in the bible. It was told by the father of lies, Satan himself. (Gen. 2:7-8) And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (v.8) And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. Here's where the Lord God gave man one simple commandment. In (Gen. 2:16-17) (v.16) And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: (v.17) But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Now that's not so hard to comprehend. After the Lord made man, then he brought forth the woman. In (Gen. 2:21-22) (v.21) And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; (v.22) And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. Here's where the deception started.

In (Gen. 3:1-4) (v.1) Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? (v.2) And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: (v.3) But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. See, this is first of man situation of not following instruction.

(v.4) And the serpent said unto the woman, YE SHALL NOT SURELY DIE: Adam and Eve didn't listen to God, instead they choose to talk to Satan. That's right, talk to Satan, that's who the serpent is. Rev. 12: 7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

And they didn't eat an apple. (Can an apple make you wise?) But yea they ate fruit all right, the fruit of lies. (Hosea 10:14) Ye have plowed wickedness, ye have reaped iniquity; ye have eaten the fruit of lies: because thou didst trust in thy way, in the multitude of thy mighty men. And man has been dying ever since. So what if Adam and Eve hadn't listened to Satan and obeyed God? Man would have eaten from the tree of life (Jesus) and learned how to live forever. Can we understand the significance of that, do we know how far man has fallen. I'll tell you how far we have fallen, we have fallen from Godhood.

Click to expand...

My question was not answered directly. According to the teachings of Jesus this is a "tell" that the rest of the post is a lie. (let your yes be yes, and your no be no)

As far as the content of the post, the fruit eaten was the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, the way you are phrasing the teachings of the bible is in terms of good and evil.

You also state something regarding theosis that is incorrect, but since it is a complex subject - I'll skip that.

Bro.T said:

First let's understand what Jesus says in Mark 9:23 Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.

Click to expand...

I read your post, and I am not sure what your point was with this verse in regards to defending the Sabbath.

You said:

Let's take a look at verse in Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. This law is referring to the priesthood, which is now nail to the cross, all of them.

Click to expand...

No. Colossians 2:14-17 makes it clear that the Sabbaths are also nailed to the cross. The weekly Sabbath is an ordinance according Isaiah, and Colossians 2:14 says Christ nailed to the cross those ordinances that were against us. How was the weekly Sabbath against us? Well, if you did not keep it, you could be stoned according to the Old Law. Colossians 2:16 says we are not to let others judge us according sabbaths. Meaning, we are not to let other people judge us if we do not keep the Sabbath. Of course, Sabbatarians change these portions of Scripture to refer to the priesthood laws and not the Saturday weekly Sabbath. But Colossians 2:16 does not mention an exclusion of the weekly Sabbath. So Sabbatarians are reading things into Scripture that are not specifically stated. Some of them are seeking to be justified by the Law (i.e. the Old Law).

You said:

Jesus was born out of the tribe of Judah and not a levite. In Daniel the prophet foretold the doing away of this law. (Dan 9:26-27) And after threescore and two weeks shall Mes-si’-ah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. Now we know that Jesus is the Mes-si’-ah, and cut off means to be killed, and Jesus didn’t die for himself, but for the sins of the people. (v.27) “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.” When Jesus died on the cross he caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease. This signified the end of the law of animal sacrifice, not Gods Royal law.

Click to expand...

Again, Colossians 2:14-17, and Romans 14:5-6 makes it clear that the Saturday weekly Sabbath has also ended as a command (and not as a calendar day).

You said:

Paul explained this in; (Heb.10:1, 9-10,18,26-27) (v.1) For the law (what law, the law of animal sacrifice?) having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. (v.9) Then said he, (Jesus) Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first that he may establish the second. (v.10) By which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Click to expand...

Hebrews 7:12 says, “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.”

This means that the priesthood (Which would be changed) is naturally tied to laws on the priesthood which would be changed, and the verse also says that there is also a necessity of a change also of the Law (i.e. the Old Law).

“Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.” (Hebrews 9:10).

You said:

When Jesus died on the cross that was the end of the first covenant, which consisted of the blood of animals and the keeping of God’s commandments. And his death also brought in the second covenant, which consist of the blood of Jesus and the keeping of God’s commandments. (v.18) Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin. In other words, no more animals are going to die for your sins. (v.26) For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.

Now do we understand what’s being said here? If you sin willfully after you have knowledge of what the truth is, no more animals are going to die for you. (v.27) But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. Now if you are being deceived into believing that once you are under God’s grace you no longer have to keep his commandments, remember the day of judgement and the lake of fire (fiery indignation).

Click to expand...

Again, if the Saturday weekly Sabbath command continued and was so important for us to keep, then...

#1. Why is there no weekly Sabbath commands given to us after the cross?
#2. Why is there is no sin that mentions the breaking of the weekly Sabbath listed alongside other sins that the apostle Paul, and John listed in the New Testament?
#3. Why does Colossians 2:16 teach that we are not to let others judge us in regards to keeping the Sabbaths? (Note: The weekly Sabbath is naturally apart of the Sabbaths).
#4. Why does Romans 14:5-6 appear to not teach the imperative of keeping the weekly Sabbath?

This all suggests a change of the Law just as Hebrews 7:12 says and the Sabbath command ending is a part of that change.

Bible Highlighter said:

My life does not revolve around remembering every conversation with all who I had a conversation with on a Christian forum. I read the Bible literally unless there is sufficient evidence to the contrary that says otherwise with what we know about observational Science. I believe the six days of creation are literal because a day is defined as an evening and a morning in Genesis 1. God resting on the 7th day from His work also was a pattern for the Israelite in resting from His work on the 7th day (Which was a week). The Sabbath command was under the Old Covenant that is no longer a binding covenant or contract anymore. But the point here is that the Israelite keeping the weekly Sabbath (when it was in effect as a command) was a parallel to what God did after the 6 literal (24 hour) days of the creation week.

Also, you did not answer my questions.

Click to expand...

Like i said you do not believe in a complete literal reading of Genesis 1 in the Bible. You said it yourself, you do not read the Bible literal because of science not because the Bible calls for it. But still you say you believe in a literal Genesis 1

So do not say you do by making statements like this.

Yes, we are living in the last days. Many do not take Genesis literally

For I believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis 1, and

d taylor said:

Like i said you do not believe in a complete literal reading of Genesis 1 in the Bible. You said it yourself, you do not read the Bible literal because of science not because the Bible calls for it. But still you say you believe in a literal Genesis 1

So do not say you do by making statements like this.

Yes, we are living in the last days. Many do not take Genesis literally

For I believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis 1, and

Click to expand...

So how am I not taking Genesis 1 literally? Please tell me what I believe. For surely you are more of an expert about what I believe than I am, right?

Bible Highlighter said:

So how am I not taking Genesis 1 literally? Please tell me what I believe. For surely you are more of an expert about what I believe than I am, right?

Click to expand...

I will not go over every verse, but here is a simple one.
Genesis 1:16 stating God created two great lights.