Ellen White on the Sabbath

[MoreCoffee]

Historically "the Lord's day" is the day of Christ's resurrection, the day on which the Holy Spirit was given, the day on which Christians gathered to worship God and receive communion. We have the testimony of the early church for that. That day is the first day of the week and not the 7th day. It is Sunday, not Saturday.

The day before.

The day before what?

 

[bugkiller]

So How could God charge Cain? How could God have condemned those before the Flood? How could God have destroy Sodom? Why did kings think it evil to take Abraham wife? Explain these things if there were no law against them!

And yet it is ceremonies that are blotted out. How are ceremonies against us?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

You and all others condemn yourselves with your own words. You tell me "no law" and then tell me no stealing. Get it right. What is meant, if I may venture to do so, is that there is law but we don't want #4.

The focus point is wrong.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Oh I see, tha't called a fast in the bible. Do you fast every 7th day?

And of course he fasts the 7th year which is necessary to comply with the law.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

None of apostle ever instructed the keeping of the first day of the week!

Technically you are correct. Now where is that verse where an apostle instructed us to keep the sabbath?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

You get so caught up with commandments!

Yes the gift is refused.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Paul made the point that you have highlighted that there was sin. Paul have also made the point that where there is no law there is no sin. Rom. 4: 15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
So did Paul mean that God had no law or that it was not written on stone?

Is Paul telling the truth? Yes or No, please.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

That the whole point the Lord's day is not Sunday but Sabbath.

On what basis is the above statement made?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

You've left out the correct interpretation; specifically, that there was no law given by God to human beings until Moses. This is sufficient to set aside the claims by SDAs that the 7th day was observed as a commandment from Adam to Moses. Obviously it was not.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

The apostles gave no such instruction--that is man made tradition.
The mark of the beast will not be incured until it is mandated by law that you receive it or else--it is then that the decision becomes do you follow God or man---hasn't happened yet.

And what does worshipping on Sunday have to do with the mark of the beast?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

dollarsbill, Lysimachus is taking the same path that the Mormons did with polygamy; when the USA government threatened to send in the troops the Prophet had a revelation rescinding polygamy. The USA government would arrest SDAs who killed family members for sabbath breaking so they have a 'discovered' a biblical reason for not obeying the sabbath laws that Israel had.

I think that all religions take the same approach until they have political power and then they do what they think the bible, the qur'an, or whatever religious rules they have tell them to do.

Yea watch what happens as Islamic law continues its progression here in the US.

Then the SDA will have no cop out for disobeying the law in this respect.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

So you do admit the Lord's day of Rev. 1 is the Sabbath?

No and I wager MamaZ feels the same way. But I have no idea why the question was asked based on the post responded to.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

O! He worked so hard that He needed rest? What does Jesus mean when He said that Sabbath was made for man? Do you supersede Jesus? Mark 2:27

I would be pleased if you would kindly respond to this post - http://www.christianforums.com/t7691102-60/#post61651995

bugkiller

 

[from scratch]

OK I had to revisit this post on the argument "the man" in the Greek. My challenge is where else is "the man" mentioned in Scripture? And just who is "the man?"

I came up with I Tim 2:5 - For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

But the Greek only says anthropos Christ Jesus. It does not use the adjective "the." So some would argue that Christ Jesus is just a mere man like the rest of us and does not have a dual nature as in God and man. That would be great for some people's doctrine. However the Scripture clearly states Jesus is God. Remember the argument of John 8:58? The Jews understood this very plainly and sought to kill Jesus for blasphemy. Jesus is called the second Adam (second man). Jesus the man came into being without sin. Jesus' Father was not a man, but God. Jesus is the only begotten man (Son of God - Jn 1 and 3). All others were made by God.

But Jesus says "the man." Who is "the man?" "The" is a specific and exclusive article and not an inclusive article used as an adjective to identify. Most other verses I checked have some other adjective identifying anthropos such as every, no, a, that, this, righteous, etc. Some of these mean to identify a certian but not exclusive man. But the the identifies an exclusive man. Jesus is and was like no other man. Jesus is a supernatural man not having the seed of a man and only the seed of a woman Gen 3:15. This is very abnormal and no one else but Jesus can claim this fact.

So my question is did this slip by the Jews and us? It certianly is miniscule and very common speech. But the eyes (understanding) of the Jews was blinded. Is ours to also blinded? Thinking about it some I can see how the language experts failed us here. Men are dense and hard to be convinced of thing that are contrary to us naturally.

I think that Jesus really said the sabbath was made for Me (God) the God-man and the God-man (Me - Jesus) not made for the sabbath. That would be absolutely true.

Yep ya can argue the literal words all ya want. Is there something about the natural man understanding spiritual things? I say let the spiritual eyes be opened.

I can not say thank you enough for pointing out the Greek says "the" man in MK 2:27.

bugkiller

It will be very interesting to see how this post is responded to by the pro law camp. If they dare. I have noticed that there has been a few hours since posting. Let us give it some more time.

I hope you bring it up till they do respond.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by mmksparbud

The apostles gave no such instruction--that is man made tradition.
The mark of the beast will not be incured until it is mandated by law that you receive it or else--it is then that the decision becomes do you follow God or man---hasn't happened yet.
​

According to those of the "Amill/Preterist" view, it has
​

And what does worshipping on Sunday have to do with the mark of the beast?

bugkiller

Must be a "sabbatarian" thang.........

http://www.christianforums.com/t7444322/
Is Sunday worship mark of the beast?


.

 

[from scratch]

And yet it is ceremonies that are blotted out. How are ceremonies against us?

bugkiller

Excellent question. I don't think it has ever really been dealt with here at CF.

 

[MamaZ]

So you do admit the Lord's day of Rev. 1 is the Sabbath?

No I don't but what does this have to do with the post I wrote?

 

[MamaZ]

O! He worked so hard that He needed rest? What does Jesus mean when He said that Sabbath was made for man? Do you supersede Jesus? Mark 2:27

2 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created [a]and made.

 

[MamaZ]

How is resting on the Sabbath works? How can not working be works? Does rest equal work?

It is a work because you insist it has to be done and preach it. It is trying to work the law in your life.

 

[MamaZ]

Paul made the point that you have highlighted that there was sin. Paul have also made the point that where there is no law there is no sin. Rom. 4: 15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
So did Paul mean that God had no law or that it was not written on stone?

Not really. It means that since we are no longer obligated to the law written in stone for it was fulfilled by Christ there is no transgression for we are declared justified.