Why we are not supposed to keep the Sabbath

Freth said:

1. Look at Psalm 95:10, the previous verse, in context.

Psalm 95:10-11 Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said, It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways: Unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest.​

​

What rest is being talked about? This is Israel in the wilderness. The Sabbath, of course.​

Exodus 16:27-30 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for that the Lord hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day. So the people rested on the seventh day.​

Click to expand...

Psalm 95 has nothing to do with the sabbath but everything to do with unbelief. Look at verses 7-8.

“For He is our God, And we are the people of His pasture and the sheep of His hand. Today, if you will hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts as at Meribah, As on the day of Massah in the wilderness,”
‭‭Psalm‬ ‭95‬:‭7‬-‭8‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Parts of these verses are also quoted in Heb. 4.

“He again sets a certain day, “Today,” saying through David after so long a time just as has been said before, “Today if you hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts.””
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭4‬:‭7‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Do not harden your hearts refers to keeping their faith in God and there is urgency so worship Him and have faith in Him today, not tomorrow or next Saturday.

In addition the Massah and Meribah are tied to the events of Exodus 17:1-7 where the people of Israel quarreled with Moses because they didn’t have water and did not trust the Lord to provide the water for them. Massah literally means “testing” and “temptation” as they tested God and wanted God to show them His power by providing water in the desert. Meribah literally means “to quarrel” and “contention” as they quarreled with Moses and God to provide water.

“Then he named the place Massah and Meribah because of the quarrel of the sons of Israel, and because they tested the Lord, saying, “Is the Lord among us, or not?””
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭17‬:‭7‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Exodus 16 is unrelated to Psalm 95.

Freth said:

​

2. Psalm 95:11 points directly to the Sabbath, not away from it. Hebrews 4:5 points directly to the Sabbath, not away from it.

Hebrews 4:4-5 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.​

​

Hebrews 4:4 is referring to Genesis 2:1-3, the Sabbath rest at creation.​

Hebrews 4:5 is referring to Psalm 95:11 which is referring to the forty years of Israel in the wilderness, breaking the Sabbath they were commanded to keep.​

Click to expand...

No. The sabbath rest spoken of in Heb. 4 is a shadow comparison with those who have faith who now rest in Christ because of that faith. This is evidenced by the fact that Joshua (not Jesus) could not give Israel rest even as he led Israel under the law into the promise land after 40 years of wondering because if their unbelief. (Heb. 4:8). The rest spoken of in both Psalm 95:11 and Heb. 3:18-19 refers to Israel not entering the promise land because of their unbelief. Nothing in Heb. 4 about following the law and we know that the law is not of faith (Gal.3:12).

Freth said:

​

Conclusion: In both cases the context is shown in the previous verse. Both examples point directly to the Sabbath; its institution at creation and the commandment of God to keep it.

Click to expand...

Perfect example of reading your doctrine into scripture. Context is not derived just by reading up or down a couple of verses. You have to account for linguistic, historical, physical, cultural, and situational context which you did not do.

throughfierytrial said:

The point is made there in Hebrews to watch yourself so as not to fall into sin. The Israelites sin which precluded them from entering Canaan was not the lack of observing the Sabbath, they did not have the faith in His Word and command that He would conquer the heathen territories. They feared the strength of the enemy and would not follow into battle… they were faithless

See Colossians 2:16-17
The Sabbath is a shadow of heavenly things. The days, special years and festivals were symbolic only as Christ made know through the Apostles teachings as well as His own. We are not to go back to those principles.
Galatians 4:9-11

Click to expand...

If that was the point, that was extremely vague. Why use the sabbath as its own metaphor for sin? That makes absolutely no sense. I understand your premise, and I do agree that there is an overarching metaphor of sabbath in general for resting in God but I think you're ignoring wording in order to fit this into a generalized sin argument instead of the duel argument Hebrews 4 purposes. My only argument is that Hebrews 4 is arguing for BOTH, resting in Christ AND continuing in the regular practice of keeping the sabbath.

"For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His." --- This makes no sense if the only context is rest in heaven with God, because if "entered His rest" only meant entering heaven, then the comparison "as God did from His" would imply that God's cessation of work is also future and final and that essentially, everyone in heaven just does nothing for the rest of eternity.

throughfierytrial said:

I read Hebrews 4 to find the promise of a Sabbath rest remains and that rest is Heaven! That is why we read in Hebrews 4:11: Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience.

Reading the full chapter shows that God rested on the seventh day after His work of creation. It is symbolic of heavenly rest. We too shall rest in heaven after our work on earth. God promised Isreal an earthly land of rest they referred to as the Promised Land, Canaan, which Joshua led them into. This is referenced in Hebrews 4:8. The Bible here teaches that Canaan was indeed not the ultimate land of rest, there remains a promise of rest… verse 1… and that is heaven! Hebrews expounds on the need not to be found fallen short so as to miss out on the heavenly rest.

Click to expand...

15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.
16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.

Caleb and Joshua didn't harden their hearts when they heard the Voice of God, but many did provoke. Should we not understand who it was that fell in the wilderness and why? Isn't this the purpose of this part of Hebrew 4? And the Author does explain who fell, and why in the next verse, in my understanding.

17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness? 18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? 19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

So God told them about His Commandments, including His Holy Sabbath, that those who defiled or polluted them, would be cut off from His People, would be "put to death".

Clearly Caleb and Joshua believed God, and it was attributed to them as Righteousness. They didn't reject or defile God's Commandments, including the polluting God's Holy Sabbath commandment.

But of those who fell in the Wilderness, it is written:

Ez. 20: 11 And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them. 12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them.

13 But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness: they walked not in my statutes, and they despised my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them; and my sabbaths they greatly polluted: then I said, I would pour out my fury upon them in the wilderness, to consume them. (Howbeit not all)

Are these not examples God had written for us, upon whom the ends of the world are come, "to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted"? (1 Cor. 10)

It seems wrong to judge 1 of the Commandments they defiled, as irrelevant for us.

Studyman said:

15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.
16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.

Caleb and Joshua didn't harden their hearts when they heard the Voice of God, but many did provoke. Should we not understand who it was that fell in the wilderness and why? Isn't this the purpose of this part of Hebrew 4? And the Author does explain who fell, and why in the next verse, in my understanding.

17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness? 18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? 19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

So God told them about His Commandments, including His Holy Sabbath, that those who defiled or polluted them, would be cut off from His People, would be "put to death".

Clearly Caleb and Joshua believed God, and it was attributed to them as Righteousness. They didn't reject or defile God's Commandments, including the polluting God's Holy Sabbath commandment.

But of those who fell in the Wilderness, it is written:

Ez. 20: 11 And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them. 12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them.

13 But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness: they walked not in my statutes, and they despised my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them; and my sabbaths they greatly polluted: then I said, I would pour out my fury upon them in the wilderness, to consume them. (Howbeit not all)

Are these not examples God had written for us, upon whom the ends of the world are come, "to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted"? (1 Cor. 10)

It seems wrong to judge 1 of the Commandments they defiled, as irrelevant for us.

Click to expand...

You seem to have neglected looking into the passages Icited. Colossians 2:16-17 and Galatians 4:8-11 which state very clearly we are no longer under O.T. law (even listing the Sabbath among them) and what purpose these Days served back then. I believe you’d follow the thoughts I set down better if you were to read them
I explained my faith with back up Scripture.
I do not wish to continue and just “argue” which Scripture itself warns against.
And yes, I’m aware Caleb and Joshua were spared due to their faith… I am always hopeful that the reader has done his due diligence in reading the Scripture before posting so some knowledge I hope is assumed.

Hentenza said:

The problem with your theory

Click to expand...

It is not a theory. You are being shown the text and the facts therein. Couple that with the fact that the verse 3 makes no sense any other way. It would be a contradiction within the text itself if the if which is in the text was not translated so. For how could we who do enter into rest, enter therein if God sworn in His wrath that we shall not?

Heb 4:3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

HIM said:

It is not a theory. You are being shown the text and the facts therein. Couple that with the fact that the verse 3 makes no sense any other way. It would be a contradiction within the text itself if the if which is in the text was not translated so. For how could we who do enter into rest, enter therein if God sworn in His wrath that we shall not?

Heb 4:3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Click to expand...

Again, the vast majority of translations do not translate it your way. You are not a Bible scholar with full competency in Greek so I’m going to go with the experts. In fact I find it quite interesting that the KJV and NKJV differ although both are translated using the same text.

throughfierytrial said:

You seem to have neglected looking into the passages Icited. Colossians 2:16-17 and Galatians 4:8-11 which state very clearly we are no longer under O.T. law (even listing the Sabbath among them) and what purpose these Days served back then.

Click to expand...

I don't believe it was the Spirit of Christ's Intent to pit the words of the Hebrews author and Paul's words in 1 Cor. 10, against Paul's words in Col 2 and Gal. 4. when HE inspired the Words written therein. Although this philosophy was widely accepted in the religions of this world I was placed in, I think it's important to study to seek the Truth of God's message, not for the purpose of justifying a religious philosophy, tradition of men or rudiment of this world.

In Hebrews 4, the Spirit of Christ wants men to understand who it was that fell in the Wilderness and why. In 1 Cor. 10, the Spirit of Christ wants me to "not be ignorant" of why the Exodus story was written, namely "Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted".

In Col. 2, Paul teaches:

8 Beware lest "any man" spoil you "through philosophy" and vain deceit, after "the tradition of men", after "the rudiments of the world", and not after Christ.

Paul is speaking to men who have "Yielded themselves to God", and their bodies as instruments of righteousness, unto God. Wouldn't this be like Caleb and Joshua?

He goes on to tell them, in addition to "beware of philosophies "after the traditions of men and after rudiments of this world"

16 Let "no man" therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

17 Which are a shadow "of things to come"; but the body is of Christ.

18 Let "no man" beguile you of your reward in "a voluntary humility" and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

He goes on;

20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines "of men"?

So it seems clear to me that Paul, and the Hebrews author, who some believe to be Paul as well, is teaching the exact same thing as the Spirit of Christ inspired Paul to write in 1 Cor. 10, not to be ignorant of. To not turn away from God's instruction, to the doctrines and traditions of men, that the mainstream religion of Paul's Time taught for doctrines. Let's go to Galatians 4 and see if Paul contradicted himself here.

Gal. 4: 8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service "unto them" which by nature "are no gods".

So these Galatians, before they knew God, had doctrines and commandments that they served, but this "service" was not to God, but unto them by nature, was no god. OK, that aligns with those who fell in the wilderness, that aligns with being spoiled and beguiled by the philosophies and traditions of men. So far, all of these messages are teaching the same thing. Lets continue.

9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, "whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage"?

So this would be turning back to the Philosophies, traditions of men and Rudiments of this world, that held them bondage "Before they knew God", Yes?

10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. And also "are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not;" all being traditions of men.

Why would they turn away from God's Commandments and Statutes that were "Shadows of things to come", and God's instruction in righteousness, and turn again to observe the days, months, times and years that are shadows of NOTHING, but are rudiments of this world, and Philosophies after the traditions of men and not after Christ, that Paul warned about in Col. 2? Which is the service they did unto them that were not gods, when they knew not God.

Is it then your contention that God's Commandments, Statutes and Judgments, are no different than pagan high days, religious rituals of Egypt, or the commandments of men the mainstream preachers of Paul's time, the Pharisees, taught for doctrines, when they didn't know God?

Or is it that you may not have really considered these things, but just followed the teaching of the "many" who come in Christ's Name? That's what happened to me for many years.

throughfierytrial said:

And yes, I’m aware Caleb and Joshua were spared due to their faith… I am always hopeful that the reader has done his due diligence in reading the Scripture before posting so some knowledge I hope is assumed.

Click to expand...

Actually, it is because of my due diligence, and respect for the Christ of the Bible, including His Warnings about the greatest danger His People are to face, that I questioned your stated philosophy, and your accusation of my neglecting Paul's teaching, which just isn't true.

I would be overjoyed beyond imagination, if you and I could engage in an honest discussion regarding what is actually written by Paul. I find his teaching, though sometimes hard to understand, very enlightening, and his drive for the perfection Jesus commanded very encouraging in this cursed world God placed me in. But as Peter warned, there are many who twist his words to justify disobedience. Which is why I did my own due diligence.

I don't believe Paul ever called, considered or even implied that God's instruction in righteousness, were Rudiments of this world, Beggarly Elements or Traditions of men, especially given that the Jesus "of the Bible" instructed men to "Live by" them.

And I certainly understand why Paul warned the Faithful Colossians:

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" and also, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."

And why he rebuked the Galatian;

8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. 9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? 10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.

Those who fell in the wilderness did the exact same thing.

Ex. 32: 5 And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, To morrow is a feast to the LORD. 6 And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.

Service they did unto them who by nature are no gods.

BobRyan said:

when people argue against the Sabbath commandment claiming it would be legalism to obey God's commandment, and when they argue against the command that says not to make images and bow down before them and offer to serve them... saying that to do as God says is "legalism" they miss the fact that we all know "do not take God's name in vain" should be obeyed also , just as it says, even though it is never quoted in the NT.

This detail keeps coming up

Almost every Christian denomination on Earth affirms the continued *"unit of TEN" for Christians today (including the Sabbath Commandment in the TEN, though they edit it in many case to point to week day 1)


[*]The Baptist Confession of Faith section 19
[*]The Westminster Confession of Faith section 19
[*]Voddie Baucham
[*]C.H. Spurgeon
[*]D.L. Moody
[*]Dies Domini by Pope John Paul II
[*]D. James Kennedy
[*]R.C. Sproul
[*]many others as well..

Click to expand...

Not really. Why don’t you post what they actually believe. None of these denominations and people keep the sabbath.

For example, regarding the Baptist Confession of Faith:

PARAGRAPH 7​

As it is the law of nature, that in general a proportion of time, by God's appointment, be set apart for the worship of God, so by his Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, he has particularly appointed one day in seven for a sabbath to be kept holy unto him,28which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which is called the Lord's Day:29 and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished.

What’s worse is to know the Truth yet still do something different.

There was and is a command to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will however be readily said, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week, with all its duties, privileges and sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I have studied for many years, I ask, where can the record of such a transaction be found: Not in the New Testament – absolutely not. There is no scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week.
—Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’.

Click to expand...

To me it seems unaccountable that Jesus, during three years' discussion with His disciples, often conversing with them upon the Sabbath question, discussing it in some of its various aspects, freeing it from its false [Jewish traditional] glosses, never alluded to any transference of the day; also, that during the forty days of His resurrection life, no such thing was intimated. Nor, so far as we know, did the Spirit, which was given to bring to their remembrance all things whatsoever that He had said unto them, deal with this question. Nor yet did the inspired apostles, in preaching the gospel, founding churches, counseling and instructing those founded, discuss or approach the subject.

Of course I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of Paganism, and christened with the name of the sun-god, then adopted and sanctified by the Papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism.
—Dr. E. T. Hiscox, report of his sermon at the Baptist Minister's Convention, in 'New York Examiner,' November 16, 1893

Click to expand...

SabbathBlessings said:

What’s worse is to know the Truth yet still do something different.

Click to expand...

Yes. There is such a thing as Seven Day Bsptists and they are just as wrong as the Seven Day Adventists. Just because one guy says it does not mean that regular Bsptists believe it. I’m a deacon in my Baptist church and we are not sabbath keepers. Neither are the members of the largest Baptists conventions.

Hentenza said:

Yes. There is such a thing as Seven Day Bsptists and they are just as wrong as the Seven Day Adventists. Just because one guy says it does not mean that regular Bsptists believe it. I’m a deacon in my Baptist church and we are not sabbath keepers. Neither are the members of the largest Baptists conventions.

Click to expand...

He wrote the Baptist manual, not the 7th day baptist manual, which is a seperate denomination.

• Title: The Baptist Manual
• Author: Dr. E. T. Hiscox
• Denomination: Sunday-keeping Baptists
• Purpose:A standard handbook for Baptist churches covering:
  • Church order
  • Ordinances (baptism & the Lord’s Supper)
  • Articles of faith
  • Church governance
• It includes the New Hampshire Confession of Faith, commonly used by Baptist churches.

Most Sunday-keeping Protestant churches founders knew the Sabbath Truth, yet kept Sunday anyway (some have talked about the doubts of Sunday over the Sabbath issue towards the end of their life) . They broke away from the Mother church, why she has daughters, but kept some of the same teachings and never came out all the way. Baptists brought back the Truth in baptism that it has to be a decision and its by water submersion (at least they used to know sure what the do now) but never came out of all the teachings of the Catholic church.

Something the Catholic church pokes fun at

But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn't it curious that non-Catholics who profess to take their religion directly from the Bible and not the Church, observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Yes, of course, it is inconsistent; but this change was made about fifteen centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed.

They have continued the custom, even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text in the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away - like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair.
—The Faith of Millions

Click to expand...

It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.

Click to expand...

Almost every Christian denomination on Earth affirms the continued *"unit of TEN" for Christians today (including the Sabbath Commandment in the TEN, though they edit it in many case to point to week day 1)


[*]The Baptist Confession of Faith section 19
[*]The Westminster Confession of Faith section 19
[*]Voddie Baucham
[*]C.H. Spurgeon
[*]D.L. Moody
[*]Dies Domini by Pope John Paul II
[*]D. James Kennedy
[*]R.C. Sproul
[*]many others as well..

Hentenza said:

Not really. Why don’t you post what they actually believe.

Click to expand...

Fine: don't mind if I do.

Notice that while these sources all affirm all TEN even the SABBATH, they do grant some license to man's proclivity to edit God's law as Christ condemns that very tradition practice in Mark 7:7-13... yet man does so enjoy doing it.

Still they admit that all TEN remain... some folks won't even do that.

notice the "please don't keep the Sabbath, Sabbath is not for mankind" language is entirely missing from the following

=================================== from Baptist Confession of Faith

Baptist Confession of Faith Section 19 -- it is the TEN Commandments (not the much imagined downsized-nine) that are written on the heart under the New Covenant.

1. God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience which was written in his heart, and He gave him very specific instruction about not eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. By this Adam and all his descendants were bound to personal, total, exact, and perpetual obedience, being promised life upon the fulfilling of the law, and threatened with death upon the breach of it. At the same time Adam was endued with power and ability to keep it.

2. The same law that was first written in the heart of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness after the Fall, and was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in the Ten Commandments, and written in two tables, the first four containing our duty towards God, and the other six, our duty to man.

3. Besides this law, commonly called the moral law, God was pleased do give the people of Israel ceremonial laws ... these ceremonial laws were appointed only until the time of reformation, when Jesus Christ the true Messiah and the only lawgiver, Who was furnished with power from the Father for this end, cancelled them and took them away.

5. The moral law ever binds to obedience everyone, justified people as well as others, and not only out of regard for the matter contained in it, but also out of respect for the authority of God the Creator, Who gave the law. Nor does Christ in the Gospel dissolve this law in any way, but He considerably strengthens our obligation to obey it.

6. Although true believers are not under the law as a covenant of works, to be justified or condemned by it, yet it is of great use to them as well as to others, because as a rule of life it informs them of the will of God and their duty and directs and binds them to walk accordingly. It also reveals and exposes the sinful pollutions of their natures, hearts and lives, and using it for self-examination they may come to greater conviction of sin, greater humility and greater hatred of their sin. They will also gain a clearer sight of their need of Christ ...

7. The aforementioned uses of the law are not contrary to the grace of the Gospel, but they sweetly comply with it

Hentenza said:

None of these denominations and people keep the sabbath.

For example, regarding the Baptist Confession of Faith: PARAGRAPH 7
...

Of Religious Worship and the Sabbath Day — The 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith

Chapter 22

www.the1689confession.com

Click to expand...

I was wondering how long it would take you to show us all the paragraphs in section 19 you needed to cull out, to make your case.

In the details I show, not excised out of the document .. I show the "inconvenient details " you seem to skim over as if "we simply would not notice.

Seriously? You really think that sort of thing works in the light of day?

Notice that while these sources all affirm all TEN even the SABBATH, they do grant some license to man's proclivity to edit God's law as Christ condemns that very tradition practice in Mark 7:7-13... yet man does so enjoy doing it.

Still they admit that all TEN remain... some folks won't even do that.

notice the "please don't keep the Sabbath, Sabbath is not for mankind" language is entirely missing from the following

=================================== from DL Moody's sermon on TEN Commandments

http://www.fbinstitute.com/moody/The_TenCommandments_Text.html

Fundamental Baptist Institute
http://www.fbinstitute.com/


THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
BY THE DWIGHT L. MOODY

The Ten Commandments:
Exodus 20:2-17


THERE HAS BEEN an awful letting-down in this country regarding the Sabbath during the last twenty-five years, and many a man has been shorn of spiritual power, like Samson, because he is not straight on this question. Can you say that you observe the Sabbath properly? You may be a professed Christian: are you obeying this commandment? Or do you neglect the house of God on the Sabbath day, and spend your time drinking and carousing in places of vice and crime, showing contempt for God and His law? Are you ready to step into the scales? Where were you last Sabbath? How did you spend it?

I honestly believe that this commandment is just as binding today as it ever was. I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place.

"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27)

It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was- in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.

The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins with the word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?

I believe that the Sabbath question today is a vital one for the whole country. It is the burning question of the present time. If you give up the Sabbath the church goes; if you give up the church the home goes; and if the home goes the nation goes. That is the direction in which we are traveling.

The church of God is losing its power on account of so many people giving up the Sabbath, and using it to promote selfishness.

"Sabbath" means "rest," and the meaning of the word gives a hint as to the true way to observe the day. God rested after creation, and ordained the Sabbath as a rest for man. He blessed it and hallowed it. Remember the rest-day to keep it holy.
…

Mr. Gladstone recently told a friend that the secret of his long life is that amid all the pressure of public cares he never forgot the Sabbath, with its rest for the body and the soul.

When I was a boy, the Sabbath lasted from sundown on Saturday to sundown on Sunday,
…

Make the Sabbath a day of religious activity. First of all, of course, is attendance at public worship. "There is a discrepancy," says John McNeill, "between our creed about the Sabbath day and our actual conduct. In many families, at ten o'clock on the Sabbath, attendance at church is still an open question. There is no open question on Monday morning- 'John, will you go to work today.'"
…
Someone has said that without the Sabbath, the Church of Christ could not, as a visible organization, exist on earth.
…
Parents, if you want your children to grow up and honor you, have them honor the Sabbath day.


Men seem to think they have a right to change the holy day into a holiday. The young have more temptations to break the Sabbath than we had forty years ago.


No nation has ever prospered that has trampled the Sabbath in the dust. Show me a nation that has done this and I will show you a nation that has got in it the seeds of ruin and decay. I believe that Sabbath desecration will carry a nation down quicker than anything else. Adam brought marriage and the Sabbath with him out of Eden, and neither can be disregarded without suffering. When the children of Israel went into the Promised Land, God told them to let their land rest every seven years, and He would give them as much in six years as in seven. For four hundred and ninety years they disregarded that law. But mark you, Nebuchadnezzar came and took them off into Babylon, and kept them seventy years in captivity, and the land had its seventy sabbaths of rest. Seven times seventy is four hundred and ninety. So they did not gain much by breaking this law. You can give God His day, or He will take it.

On the other hand, honoring the fourth commandment brings blessing:

"If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on My holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: then shalt thou delight thyself in the LORD; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it." (Isaiah 58:13-14)

…

? Hasn't the time come to call a halt if men want power with God? Let men call you narrow and bigoted, but be man enough to stand by God's law, and you will have power and blessing. That is the kind of Christianity we want just now in this country. Any man can go with the crowd, but we want men who will go against the current.

Sabbath-breaker, are you ready to step into the scales?

These sources continue to affirm all TEN even the SABBATH, they do grant some license to man's proclivity to edit God's law as Christ condemns that very tradition practice in Mark 7:7-13... yet man does so enjoy doing it.

Still they admit that all TEN remain... some folks won't even do that.

notice the "please don't keep the Sabbath, Sabbath is not for mankind" language is entirely missing from the following

=========================================Westminster Confession of Faith 1646

http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/

Chapter 19. Of the Law of God.

19.1. God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which he bound him and all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience; promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it; and endued him with power and ability to keep it.

19.2. This law, after his Fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in ten commandments, and written in two tables; the first four commandments containing our duty toward God, and the other six our duty to man.

19.3. Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a Church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, his graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly holding forth divers instructions of moral duties. All such ceremonial laws are now abrogated under the New Testament.

19.4. To them also, as a body politic, he gave various judicial laws, which expired together with the state of that people, not obliging any other, now, further than the general equity of it may require.

19.5. The moral law forever binds all, as well justified persons as others, to obedience to it; and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator who gave it. Neither does Christ in the gospel in any way dissolve, but much strengthen, this obligation.

19.6. Although true believers are not under the law as a covenant of works, to be justified or condemned by it; yet is it of great use to them, as well as to others; in that, as a rule of life, informing them of the will of God and their duty, it directs and binds them to walk accordingly; discovering also the sinful pollutions of their nature, hearts, and lives; so as, examining themselves by it, they may come to further conviction of, humiliation for, and hatred against sin; together with a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, and the perfection of his obedience. It is likewise of use to the regenerate, to restrain their corruptions, in that it forbids sin, and the threatenings of it serve to show what even their sins deserve, and what afflictions in this life they may expect for them, although freed from the curse of it threatened in the law. The promises of it, in like manner, show them God's approbation of obedience, and what blessings they may expect upon the performance of it; although not as due to them by the law as a covenant of works: so as a man's doing good, and refraining from evil, because the law encourages to the one, and deterres from the other, is no evidence of his being under the law, and not under grace.

19.7. Neither are the aforementioned uses of the law contrary to the grace of the gospel, but do sweetly comply with it: the Spirit of Christ subduing and enabling the will of man to do that freely and cheerfully, which the will of God, revealed in the law, requires to be done.

More examples where those came from ...

SabbathBlessings said:

He wrote the Baptist manual, not the 7th day baptist manual, which is a seperate denomination.

• Title: The Baptist Manual
• Author: Dr. E. T. Hiscox
• Denomination: Sunday-keeping Baptists
• Purpose:A standard handbook for Baptist churches covering:
  • Church order
  • Ordinances (baptism & the Lord’s Supper)
  • Articles of faith
  • Church governance
• It includes the New Hampshire Confession of Faith, commonly used by Baptist churches.

Most Sunday-keeping Protestant churches founders knew the Sabbath Truth, yet kept Sunday anyway (some have talked about the doubts of Sunday over the Sabbath issue towards the end of their life) . They broke away from the Mother church, why she has daughters, but kept some of the same teachings and never came out all the way. Baptists brought back the Truth in baptism that it has to be a decision and its by water submersion (at least they used to know sure what the do now) but never came out of all the teachings of the Catholic church.

Something the Catholic church pokes fun at

Click to expand...

None of the baptists church that I’ve attended nor the mainstream baptists conventions use the Baptist manual. As I’ve told you before there are different flavors of Baptists.

BobRyan said:

More examples where those came from ...

Click to expand...

My knees are trembling with expectation and fear.

BobRyan said:

These sources continue to affirm all TEN even the SABBATH, they do grant some license to man's proclivity to edit God's law as Christ condemns that very tradition practice in Mark 7:7-13... yet man does so enjoy doing it.

Still they admit that all TEN remain... some folks won't even do that.

=========================================Westminster Confession of Faith 1646

http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/

Chapter 19. Of the Law of God.

19.1. God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which he bound him and all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience; promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it; and endued him with power and ability to keep it.

19.2. This law, after his Fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in ten commandments, and written in two tables; the first four commandments containing our duty toward God, and the other six our duty to man.

19.3. Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a Church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, his graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly holding forth divers instructions of moral duties. All such ceremonial laws are now abrogated under the New Testament.

19.4. To them also, as a body politic, he gave various judicial laws, which expired together with the state of that people, not obliging any other, now, further than the general equity of it may require.

19.5. The moral law forever binds all, as well justified persons as others, to obedience to it; and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator who gave it. Neither does Christ in the gospel in any way dissolve, but much strengthen, this obligation.

19.6. Although true believers are not under the law as a covenant of works, to be justified or condemned by it; yet is it of great use to them, as well as to others; in that, as a rule of life, informing them of the will of God and their duty, it directs and binds them to walk accordingly; discovering also the sinful pollutions of their nature, hearts, and lives; so as, examining themselves by it, they may come to further conviction of, humiliation for, and hatred against sin; together with a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, and the perfection of his obedience. It is likewise of use to the regenerate, to restrain their corruptions, in that it forbids sin, and the threatenings of it serve to show what even their sins deserve, and what afflictions in this life they may expect for them, although freed from the curse of it threatened in the law. The promises of it, in like manner, show them God's approbation of obedience, and what blessings they may expect upon the performance of it; although not as due to them by the law as a covenant of works: so as a man's doing good, and refraining from evil, because the law encourages to the one, and deterres from the other, is no evidence of his being under the law, and not under grace.

19.7. Neither are the aforementioned uses of the law contrary to the grace of the gospel, but do sweetly comply with it: the Spirit of Christ subduing and enabling the will of man to do that freely and cheerfully, which the will of God, revealed in the law, requires to be done.

Click to expand...

Did you actually read 19.6? The law is not salvific, never was. This has been the point of my argument or the majority of the Protestant churches. Your church makes the law necessary for salvation while what you just posted and the first list of both people and groups do not consider the law to save anyone. My argument about the 10 has always been that 9 have been repeated into Jesus two love commandments and Jesus fulfilled the 4th commandment by becoming the Lord of the Sabbath and the Christian rest forever.

So your comparisons are apples to oranges and are not helping you at all. No one here that is not a legalist is all of a sudden going to change their minds and become a legalist. You need to stop preaching a faith plus the works of the law for salvation. That is not biblical.

SabbathBlessings said:

He wrote the Baptist manual, not the 7th day baptist manual, which is a seperate denomination.

• Title: The Baptist Manual
• Author: Dr. E. T. Hiscox
• Denomination: Sunday-keeping Baptists
• Purpose:A standard handbook for Baptist churches covering:
  • Church order
  • Ordinances (baptism & the Lord’s Supper)
  • Articles of faith
  • Church governance
• It includes the New Hampshire Confession of Faith, commonly used by Baptist churches.

Most Sunday-keeping Protestant churches founders knew the Sabbath Truth, yet kept Sunday anyway (some have talked about the doubts of Sunday over the Sabbath issue towards the end of their life) . They broke away from the Mother church, why she has daughters, but kept some of the same teachings and never came out all the way. Baptists brought back the Truth in baptism that it has to be a decision and its by water submersion (at least they used to know sure what the do now) but never came out of all the teachings of the Catholic church.

Something the Catholic church pokes fun at

Click to expand...

Here is what the actual manual by ET Hiscox say about the Sabbath in chapter 7 section xvi.

xvi. the lord’s day

We believe the Scriptures teach that the first day of the week is the Lord’s Day,[1] and is to be kept sacred to religious purposes[2] by abstaining from all secular labor, except works of mercy and necessity;[3] by the devout observance of all the means of grace, both private and public;[4]and by preparation for that rest that remaineth for the people of God.

[p. 72][1] Acts 20:7. On the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them.

[2] Exod. 20:8. Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Rev. 1:10. I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day. Ps. 113:2–4.

[3] Isa. 58:13, 14. If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on My holy day: and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour Him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words; then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord, and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob. Isa. 56:2–8.

[4] Heb. 10:24, 25. Not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together, as the manner of some is. Acts 13:44. The next Sabbath Day came almost the whole city together to hear the Word of God.

Hentenza said:

Here is what the actual manual by ET Hiscox say about the Sabbath in chapter 7 section xvi.

xvi. the lord’s day

We believe the Scriptures teach that the first day of the week is the Lord’s Day,[1] and is to be kept sacred to religious purposes[2] by abstaining from all secular labor, except works of mercy and necessity;[3] by the devout observance of all the means of grace, both private and public;[4]and by preparation for that rest that remaineth for the people of God.

[p. 72][1] Acts 20:7. On the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them.

[2] Exod. 20:8. Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Rev. 1:10. I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day. Ps. 113:2–4.

[3] Isa. 58:13, 14. If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on My holy day: and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour Him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words; then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord, and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob. Isa. 56:2–8.

[4] Heb. 10:24, 25. Not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together, as the manner of some is. Acts 13:44. The next Sabbath Day came almost the whole city together to hear the Word of God.

The Standard Manual for Baptist Churches

www.gutenberg.org

Click to expand...

So now you’re going to admit it’s the Baptist manual? Looks like he was coming around to God’s Truth by the quotes I posted from him.