ARE ALL THE 10 COMMANDMENTS IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT?

guevaraj said:

Sister, understand that we do not belong to a denomination, but to Jesus. Did you convert from the Roman Catholic Church? They put the church first and not God dealing directly with each of us individually. I'm in good company!

Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than human beings! (Acts 5:29 NIV)​

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

Click to expand...

Than why do you call yourself an SDA if you do not belong to that denomination? When you identify yourself as such, you are committing to the SDA beliefs, but you do not. So therefore you are bearing false witness against the SDA church.

Do you see how confusing it is when you are teaching people that Sabbath is only in the time zone of the Garden of Eden, when no one knows where that is but more importantly, that is not what the Bible teaches or what is required as an SDA. So for you to around claiming to be an SDA but refuse to believe in what is required you are making it seem like the average SDA believes what you do when that is false. That is called false witnessing and the Bible’s teaches us that is a sin.

imge said:

Than why do you call yourself and SDA if you do not belong to that denomination?

Click to expand...

Sister, that's the movement I'm from, the church needs to catch up. Our prophetess confirmed what God told Israel and then takes us back to the first Sabbath of creation week so that you don't choose one peace of the truth about the Sabbath over the other as we did as a church when they are both true: the first Sabbath in Eden is from morning to morning, confirmed by a Passover rule and the manna story, that remembered is in Israel from evening to evening. The explanation confirmed by the International Date Line (IDL) is that remembered is the Sabbath in the Eden time zone. She also wrote that we would understand more in the future and she highlights when "evening" falls as something to learn that we haven't changed, although I found the reason to change it. We still think that the days of creation begin with an evening when I found out that Genesis reveals that the "evening" falls in the middle of the first day and not at the beginning as supposed was due to the Sabbath in Israel, which is not a day of the week as set were the weekdays in the creation week from morning to morning.


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

guevaraj said:

Sister, that's the movement I'm from, the church needs to catch up. Our prophetess confirmed what God told Israel and then takes us back to the first Sabbath of creation week so that you don't choose one peace of the truth about the Sabbath over the other as we did as a church when they are both true: the first Sabbath in Eden is from morning to morning, confirmed by a Passover rule and the manna story, that remembered is in Israel from evening to evening. The explanation confirmed by the International Date Line (IDL) is that remembered is the Sabbath in the Eden time zone. She also wrote that we would understand more in the future and she highlights when "evening" falls as something to learn that we haven't changed, although I found the reason to change it. We still think that the days of creation begin with an evening when I found out that Genesis reveals that the "evening" falls in the middle of the first day and not at the beginning as supposed was due to the Sabbath in Israel, which is not a day of the week as set were the weekdays in the creation week from morning to morning.

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was MORNING—the first day. (Genesis 1:3-5 NIV)​

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

Click to expand...

That's not how it works. You have your movement, so what you need to do is call it something so your movement does not confuse anyone with what principles the SDA church stands for. Until you do this, you are bearing false witness against the SDA church.

You wouldn't like it if someone took your movement but twisted it to fit their narrative and claimed it was what you believe when its not. They took your logo and started promoting books etc. based on a theory that has nothing to do with your beliefs, but is claiming to be part of your movement. This is what you are doing to the SDA church and the Bible defines this as a false witness which is considered breaking a commandment of God and is a sin.

At any rate this is off topic and the OP already asked to stop posting off topic.

HIM said:

Did our all powerful God need rest?

I don't know and I don't that the question should be phrased as if He needed rest.

So what should the question be?

Did God Shabath (cease)?

Yes.

Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested (shabath) on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested (shabath) from all his work which God created and made.

And in that Shabath (ceasing) did God rest (nuach)?

Yes.

Exod 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested (nuach) the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.


And in that Shabath (ceasing) in that God rested (nuach), was God refreshed (naphash)?

Yes, just as the ox, ass, the son of the handmaiden, the stranger, David and all the people with him were refreshed.

Exod 23:12 Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day thou shalt rest: that thine ox and thine ass may rest, and the son of thy handmaid, and the stranger, may be refreshed (naphash) .

Exod 31:17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed (naphash).


2Sam 16:14 And the king, and all the people that were with him, came weary, and refreshed (naphash) themselves there.


If one is refreshed from resting because of ceasing from working did they benefit from resting? If they benefited from resting because they were refreshed did they need to rest?


Did God need to rest?

I don't know. But I do know when He ceased from the work of Creation on the 7th Day He rested and in that resting He was indeed refreshed. Therefore He blessed the Sabbath Day and Hallowed it.

Exod 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Exod 31:17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.


H7673
שָׁבַת
shâbath
shaw-bath'
A primitive root; to repose, that is, desist from exertion; used in many implied relations (causatively, figuratively or specifically):—(cause to, let, make to) cease, celebrate, cause (make) to fail, keep (sabbath), suffer to be lacking, leave, put away (down), (make to) rest, rid, still, take away.




H5117
נוּחַ
nûach
noo'-akh
A primitive root; to rest, that is, settle down; used in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively, intransitively, transitively and causatively (to dwell, stay, let fall, place, let alone, withdraw, give comfort, etc.):—cease, be confederate, lay, let down, (be) quiet, remain, (cause to, be at, give, have, make to) rest, set down. Compare H3241.


H5314
נָפַשׁ
nâphash
naw-fash'
A primitive root; to breathe; passively, to be breathed upon, that is, (figuratively) refreshed (as if by a current of air):—(be) refresh selves (-ed).

Click to expand...

I'm not sure the goal of this nuanced point. I'm not in disagreement my point is made in a genesis vacuum and the fact that 2500 years later we learn more information just affirms my point that genesis does not value the sabbath as law. There is no reason to say it was law before the Sabbath law as that would just be silly. Genesis did not have sabbath law regardless of the knowledge people had of the sabbath or what they did during the Sabbath it still doesn't negate the fact that in genesis there is no sabbath law. This makes the sabbath law conditional not universal as you seem to claim because it has an indisputable starting point 2500 years after creation. I am speaking of written law not an abstract concept of the sabbath.

Try and show me how to practice sabbath by just using genesis. You can't because it's not a practice in Genesis.

DamianWarS said:

I'm not sure the goal of this nuanced point. I'm not in disagrement my point is made in a genesis vacuum and the fact that 2500 years later we learn more information just affirms my point more that genesis does not value the sabbath as a law. There is no reason to say it was law before the Sabbath law as that would just be silly. Genesis did not have sabbath law regardless of the knowledge people had of the sabbath or that they did during the Sabbath it still doesn't negate the fact that in genesis there is no sabbath law. This makes the sabbath law conditional not universal innately because it has a indisputable beginning 2500 years after creation. I am speaking of written law not an abstract concepts of the sabbath. Try and show me how to practice sabbath by just using genesis. You can't, because it's not a practice.

Click to expand...

Brother, have you considered progressive revelation? God didn't tell everyone His complete plan at once. They couldn't "bear" it. The sections of the Bible written later contain a more complete revelation from God than the earlier sections. Someone like Enoch grew so much walking with God that God took him away from this world. Jesus said why He couldn't tell us more than the Holy Spirit would tell us later.


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

guevaraj said:

have you considered progressive revelation?

Click to expand...

of course, but that certainly doesn't answer anything and it just adds more questions as progressive revelation shows that early forms always point to something greater. Sabbath is a perfect example of something existing since the beginning, turned into law 2500 years later and then later again upon Christ shown in new revelation as sabbath being something far greater than ceasing work activities but rather a spiritual restoration from the enslavement of sin.

What's next? we know of a millennia reign and we are upon the 7th millennium since creation... could this mean Christ's return will usher in a millennia sabbath? What happens after the sabbath? Sunday of course, the first day of the week, the resurrection, the first day of creation, a "new heaven and earth" all chiastic structures alluded to in the creation account itself. If we are on day 6 we are on the day of man, soon comes the day of Christ, the restoration of all things. What does that look like...? perhaps we need to wait for more progressive revelation after Christ returns.

progressive revelation also doesn't change that the requirements for the sabbath are conditional in that the first 2500 years of biblical history there was no law for sabbath regardless of how people practiced or understood the day (which Genesis is absent of any such knowledge). If we are to still keep the law as it was given to at the time of Moses isn't this more an example of regressive revelation? for it to be progressive it sort of needs to progress.

LoveGodsWord said:

Of course it matters! In both the old and new covenant scriptures, God's 10 commandments give us the knowledge of GOOD (righteousness; right doing - moral right) and EVIL (unrighteousness; wrong doing moral wrong); SIN (transgression of the law) and RIGHTEOUSNESS (obedience to God's law - Psalms 119:172) *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4 and if we break anyone of God's 10 commandments which are the standard of moral right doing to God and man we stand guilty before God of sin *James 2:10-11. According to the scriptures all those who knowingly practice sin after God gives them a knowledge of the truth through his Word and they reject it *Acts of the Apostles 17:30-31 will not enter into God's kingdom because they count the blood of the covenant an unholy thing doing despite to the Spirit of God's grace *Hebrews 10:26-31. So of course it matters. Sin will keep all who knowingly practice it out of God's kingdom according to the scriptures *Matthew 7:21-23 and those who are born of God in the Spirit do not practice sin (breaking God's commandments) *1 John 3:6-9; 1 John 2:3-4.

Click to expand...

there was no sabbath law before sabbath law. to claim there was is just silly. thus the first 2500 biblical years sabbath law was not required which inherently makes sabbath law conditional not universal. this is indisputable.

DamianWarS said:

If we are to still keep the law as it was given to at the time of Moses isn't this more an example of regressive revelation? for it to be progressive it sort of needs to progress.

Click to expand...

Brother, progressive revelation is not about God's plan progressing as you describe a changing Sabbath, it's about our understanding of what God wanted all along from the beginning with the Sabbath. He is not changing, we are growing in our understanding of what He wanted from us from the beginning. We are learning what it meant for God to make a "holy" time. We learn that Israel remembers the first morning to morning Sabbath from evening to evening in Israel because set was the Sabbath in the Eden time zone when God made that "holy" time.


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

guevaraj said:

Brother, progressive revelation is not about God's plan progressing as you describe a changing Sabbath, it's about our understanding of what God wanted all along from the beginning with the Sabbath. He is not changing, we are growing in our understanding of what He wanted from us from the beginning. We are learning what it meant for God to make a "holy" time. We learn that Israel remembers the first morning to morning Sabbath from evening to evening in Israel because set was the Sabbath in the Eden time zone when God made that "holy" time.

Click to expand...

if you claim a progressive revelation then it's not the sabbath that changes it's the revelation. progressive revelation would show that pre-law there was an early understanding of the sabbath and that understanding changed after law from new revelation. So what gives you the authority to say that this progressive revelation has stopped at Moses? Why is it that there isn't new revelation that gives us deeper meaning as to what sabbath is and how we approach it? Jesus said he came here to fulfill the law and the prophets not destroy them. So tell me, what is the product of a fulfilled Sabbath? The product of the Sabbath is rest but rest that was conditional to the sabbath day (and its requirements). If I want sabbath rest under the law I must at the very least wait until the Sabbath to get it. But a fulfilled Sabbath would be unhindered rest that has not bound by a day and is accessible all the time. Can you think of someone who can give us that rest? Tell me what is work that we must cease? although not a requirement of the law does not the logic of "work" point to our beating hearts and our every breath we take? So in order to rest at this level, you would have to be dead during the sabbath and come alive the next day. Can you think of one that has done this? Might he be the same one that can give us this unhindered rest? That sounds a bit like a revelation that Moses didn't have access to.... perhaps, dare I say, an example of a progressive revelation.

The Temple had a place called the holy of holies where the presence of God was, new revelation tells us that we are the holy of holies. So what changed? God didn't change and how he existed then is exactly the same as how he exists now, yet the revelation has changed and it has changed how we approach God. The temple changed since the veil was torn into and the temple was also later destroyed and the ark is lost or possibly destroyed with it. So we can't hide behind a sentiment that "God doesn't change so that means the Sabbath doesn't change" logic because that's not how the rest of the bible works, and it's not how the Sabbath historically worked pre-law. So we know the revelation of Moses was perhaps perfect in its function but yet points to something greater, a new revelation, that does not change God but has changed how we approach God so why is it the sabbath is the exception?

LoveGodsWord said:

If all the law and the prophets include Gods' 10 commandments does it not also include God's 4th commandment?

Click to expand...

Christ says "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." so as you ask, ask yourself, "If all the law and the prophets include Gods' 10 commandments does it not also include God's 4th commandment" If so, does this not mean Christ came to fulfil the 4th commandment too? This is of course by your own logic. Tell me what is the product of a fulfilled commandment? it is not the fruits of that commandment? so if the fruit of sabbath is rest, then a fulfilled sabbath would be rest unhindered by a day of the week and accessible to all, all the time.

DamianWarS said:

Christ says "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." so as you ask, ask yourself, "If all the law and the prophets include Gods' 10 commandments does it not also include God's 4th commandment" If so, does this not mean Christ came to fulfil the 4th commandment too? This is of course by your own logic. Tell me what is the product of a fulfilled commandment? it is now the fruits of that commandment? so if the fruit of sabbath is rest, then a fulfilled sabbath would be rest unhindered by a day of the week and accessible to all, all the time.

Click to expand...

By this logic, than its okay to lie, steal, murder or break any of Gods 10 commandments. It would not make sense if Jesus said I didn't come to destroy the law, but I came to destroy the law, which is what you are implying. Fulfill in this instance means the opposite of destroy.

"Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law" (Matthew 5:18).

The heaven and earth has not passed and we are obligated to the commandments of God which is why in Revelations it says:

Revelations 22:14 14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.

DamianWarS said:

if you claim a progressive revelation then it's not the sabbath that changes it's the revelation. progressive revelation would show that pre-law there was an early understanding of the sabbath and that understanding changed after law from new revelation. So what gives you the authority to say that this progressive revelation has stopped at Moses? Why is it that there isn't new revelation that gives us deeper meaning as to what sabbath is and how we approach it?

Click to expand...

Brother, are you asking under whose authority we should stop new human ideas? The answer is in God's authority through His written word.


God "does nothing" without first telling us what He is going to do through His prophets! My new understanding of the Sabbath does not come from my "own interpretation" because it is not new. Revealed was from the beginning of creation week. What you are describing comes from your "own interpretation" because what I have found in God's word is opposed to your "own interpretation" of the Sabbath.


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

imge said:

By this logic, than its okay to lie, steal, murder or break any of Gods 10 commandments. It would not make sense if Jesus said I didn't come to destroy the law, but I came to destroy the law, which is what you are implying. Fulfill in this instance means the opposite of destroy.

"Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law"

Click to expand...

Not one not or one tittle has passed. You are refering to a destroyed law, I am refering to a fulfilled law. Please don't confuse those two, I have been quite specific saying fulfilled not destroyed.