Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I think yeshuaslavejeff was responding to you in one of the posts I responded to. No big deal really, I was just trying to lighten things up a bit.I missed whatever happened, but whatever it was, not a problem.
Uncle!Yes, but God didn't stop creating, he ceased from working on the earth and the creation of life because it was finished. He also created the nation of Israel for instance. At the end of the age he will create a new heavens and a new earth, but he stopped working on the original creation because it was finished.
What exactly are you trying to do here BK, just curious.Uncle!
bugkiller
A Warning Against Traditions of MenRomans 14 explains:
Who are you to judge another's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. -- (Romans 14:4-6).
Paul is saying that the Sabbath day, as well as food, festivals, or religious celebrations are not standards by which we judge whether a person is right or wrong, good or evil, righteous or unrighteous, sinner or saint
Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. -- Colossians 2:16-17
Paul is saying that these religious practices only served as religious symbols pointing forward to the true reality, the true righteousness, that would come to us through faith alone in Christ alone, who alone is our standard.
Before this faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept until faith should be revealed. The law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus -- (Galatians 3:23-26).
Paul is saying that the seventh-day Sabbath is irrelevant to our Christian walk with Christ. He is saying the seventh-day Sabbath has no bearing on who we are in Christ. We are free to observe it and we are free not to. It does not matter either way, as mentioned in Romans 14.
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant -- not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory...will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? -- (2 Corinthians 3:6-8)
The seventh-day law was engraved in letters on stone tablets. Paul is telling us that we are called to minister in the new covenant of the Spirit, and not in the old covenant of the letter engraved on stone, which included the seven-day law.
I might ask the same of you. I do not think I would get a real answer.What exactly are you trying to do here BK, just curious.
Forgive me about being short here. I want to know why others especially people who promote the law as a requirement are judging other because they do not keep the sabbath. The verse says in respect of meaning a particular aspect, point, or detail. This would include not keeping your version of the sabbath (holy day).A Warning Against Traditions of Men
Colossians 2:16-17 (KJV) "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.”
The answer I would give to your question can be found in my most recent post, under the section entitled, Another Matter.Forgive me about being short here. I want to know why others especially people who promote the law as a requirement are judging other because they do not keep the sabbath. The verse says in respect of meaning a particular aspect, point, or detail. This would include not keeping your version of the sabbath (holy day).
I may come back to this post tomorrow.
bugkiller
I might ask the same of you. I do not think I would get a real answer.
You are frustrated by my last post. God's Sabbath rest is not a weekly seventh day rest
God did not create Israel. Israel is a natural linage of the human race set apart for a specific purpose. I would not deny God had His finger in (influenced) what happened. I say this in line with God creating the earth. Essentially you are denying Gen 2. The word translated rested is the same word translated cease in speaking about the sabbath. You are abusing the word rest in your post to prove God did not do as Gen 2 says. My view is you are simply arguing for the sake of arguing. The Hebrew/Chaldee word is "shabath" a verb. The primary definition is "to cease, desist." This is not a periodic thing. Legal terminology of our day would be to cease and desist as in do not do again.
The verb "shabath" is where SDA loses its argument. They argue the verse is talking about the sabbath (shabbath a noun) which does not appear in Scripture until Ex 16. I suppose you might want to say Moses did not know what he was saying. But then that would mean you do not believe the Scripture is inspired. Please notice I did not say KJV is inspired.
Then you must consider the wording of Ex 20. It KJV says specifically wherefore. Wherefore is a word denoting cause. The word is ki and is literally translated as for meaning because. It is not proof of nor admission the sabbath was in Gen 2.
Ok now I'm annoyed, I have no past association with 'adventism', in any way shape or form. I'm not sure if I have a problem with it but this is a gross mischaracterization of me and anything I've ever posted and I've done this for years.The fact that God will create a new earth has nothing to do with what I am discussing. I did not say God would not create something else. That simply is not in the picture of Gen 2. In Gen 2 there is no indication God would return to work as in taking a rest break. Just is not what the words say. This same thing is also done with Mat 5:17-18 to support the OC merely being renewed. Jeremiah 31 does not allow for that. You are still having problems with your past association with adventism.
So forgive me about being short with frustration.
bugkiller
But you have not shown it to be clearly stated in the Bible. You have only stated your opinion.Something that has been clear to most everyone, Christian or Atheist for thousands of years , because it's clearly stated in the bible is now just my opinion?
Something being know as truth isn't necessarily truth, especially when you haven't demonstrated it to be biblical truth.Folks, beware of long winded explanations that change what has always been known as truth. Don't always just dismiss it because of just that, but that can be a huge tip off that something isn't right.
I did.It's clear the point you are trying to make, but I have to add, you need to reread your op.
Just more criticism without any biblical support.If you do believe what you do, fine, but you did a very bad job of making your point by simply not telling the truth about the Sabbath, then arguing things that are clear in the bible aren't what the bible states on the subject.
Buggy is talking about the 4rh commandment in Exodus 20:8-11 and you can't find the word wherefore. What version of the Bible are you using? I'm pretty sure Buggy uses the KJV. Buggy said the word is ki translated wherefore, literally for. This (ki) is original language. Buggy also posted the definition of the word ki for support. Buggy discussed English usage of the KJV. How much more clear can he be?Regardless of the subject matter, trust me, you will get a real answer.
I'm not frustrated, just confused what the problem is.
What are you talking about? I'm not denying anything about Genesis 2, you have offered no quotes and certainly offered nothing substantive to accuse me of such a thing. The fact that 'shabath' is a verb is hardly relevent and I'm puzzled that you would think it pertains to anything having been said. It does mean to 'cease', so what? It makes no inferences as to what God would do in the future, only what he did in creation.
I'm not SDA and I have no problem with the KJV. What I'm seeing is the passage in Exodus 16.
And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning. (Exodus 16:23)
The Sabbath is mentioned in this passage, did you want to make a point with regards to grammar because your not making a lot of sense here.
Ok this is getting nonsensical. What is the specific word, verse and how is it translated in the KJV?
Calvinism doesn't teach your view. Maybe you're claiming calvinism while participating in another religious system. My bet is if your were posting calvinist beliefs Buggy would have no problem with you.Ok now I'm annoyed, I have no past association with 'adventism', in any way shape or form. I'm not sure if I have a problem with it but this is a gross mischaracterization of me and anything I've ever posted and I've done this for years.
Clean it up, I'm getting tired of this.
God did no such thing. God commanded Israel only and not the world.The idea that God commanded us to rest 1 day a week to dwell on Him sounds good too, but it has no biblical basis. It's just your opinion.
God did not rest 1 day a week, and we are commanded to rest just as God did:
There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own works, just as God did from His. - Hebrews 4:9-10
I didn't see the contradiction.You know you contradict yourself here ?
Scripture was already posted by several that you directly oppose.
Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh H7637 (shebii not shabbath) day, which is the sabbath (H7676). "Which is" is supplied indicated by the italics could change the meaning in your favor.
I did read it. This is Paul’s intent of the “therefore”:A Warning Against Traditions of Men
Colossians 2:16-17 (KJV) "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.”
The word, “therefore,” tells us we need to pay attention to the verses that come before it to understand the intent of Paul’s words in Col. 2:16-17. I encourage anyone reading this post to read the entire chapter before moving on.
It is true that Paul is not against Sabbath keeping, but he is certainly against Sabbath-day observance being binding on Christians. Paul made it clear that observing days is not a standard by which a Christian is to be judged:Having said that, Paul’s argument wasn’t against keeping a commandment of God, but rather a warning against falling victim to a legalistic system "according to the tradition of men” (Col. 2:8). It was a salvation by works theology that Paul was objecting to, not the binding nature of the fourth commandment.
Sabbath-day requirement is indeed a human effort, indicating that what Jesus accomplished on the cross wasn’t good enough. We are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, no Sabbath-day observance required:Instead of looking to Jesus as the only way to salvation (John 14:6), advocates of this false gospel relied heavily on human effort to secure a place in heaven. What Jesus accomplished on the cross wasn’t good enough for them, they had to add something more to that sacrifice, as if to give the impression God needed an extra pair of hands to save the elect.
Sabbath-day observance is a rule or regulation by which we are not to be judged.The Colossians were warned not to let such people judge them in this way, for their thoughts weren’t right with God. When the righteousness of Christ should have been the focal point of their faith, their eyes were locked on a list of rules and regulations.
That’s correct, the Sabbath-day rest was only a temporary reminder of the eternal Sabbath-rest we now have in Christ. The religious laws given to the Jews by God all pointed to Christ in whom we now find true rest:I’m reminded of something Jesus said to the Pharisees: John 5:39 (NKJV) “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.”
That's true. The Jews were commanded by God to observe about eight different Sabbath days during the year, including the seventh-day Sabbath.Sabbaths
Regarding the word, “Sabbath” (v. 17), it appears in some translations like so. However, the underlying Greek is “sabbaton,” which can be singular or plural depending on the context. Here, it is plural. This can be seen even in the NIV, which makes use of the indefinite article, “a Sabbath day”.
The NKJV has a more accurate rendering, “sabbaths”.
Paul did not make any distinction, and neither should we.I am not convinced that verse 17 is inclusive of the fourth commandment.
The entire old covenant law, which included the seventh-day Sabbath, was called a shadow:For I see no place in Scripture where the seventh day Sabbath is called a “shadow”.
Actually, Paul was speaking out against religious practices that are based on the old covenant law given by God to the Jews. He was not merely talking about man-made laws:Moreover, Paul was speaking out against traditions of men (v.8), not commandments of God. The Sabbath is not the byproduct of a man made tradition, but was made by God (Gen. 2:2-3). Therefore, it doesn’t seem likely Paul was referring to the fourth commandment here.
They are called traditions of men because the Jewish law is no longer binding. It is only practiced as a tradition, and not as a requirement. The seventh-day Sabbath can still be observed as a tradition without being a requirement.Nevertheless, I am open to the possibility that “sabbaton” is inclusive of the Sabbath here. But it will take some strong evidence to persuade me to accept this. For the context referring to traditions of men doesn’t seem to support this conclusion.
The entire old covenant law, which included the seventh-day Sabbath, is done away with:But even if it is inclusive of the fourth commandment, that doesn’t mean Paul is suggesting that God no longer requires us to keep the command. I don’t see Paul saying that the Sabbath has been done away with or changed.
That’s correct, the seventh-day Sabbath has no bearing on our salvation. It’s now only observed as a tradition.What I see him saying to the Colossians is that it’s our faith in Jesus that leads to salvation, not the traditions of men.
Notice the verse does not say keep the “Ten Commandments”. It says keep "His commandments". You are simply assuming the verse refers to the “Ten Commandments”.Another Matter
But now there’s another matter that needs to be discussed, which puts a twist on things.
Paul warned the Colossians not to let others judge them according to the tradition of men. But what about judgement according to the Spirit?
John 16:8 (NKJV) “And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment”
The Bible is clear that God expects us to keep His commandments.
1 John 2:4 (NKJV) “He who says, "I know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.”
Again, God’s word is not a mere ten commandments. Every word that proceeds from the mouth of God is God’s commandments.Furthermore, we are instructed to test the spirits.
1 John 4:1 (NKJV) “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”
So if God’s word tells us that we must keep His commandments, and someone who claims to be His messenger says we don’t have to keep God’s commandments, then according to the Bible, that man is a liar. Was it a tradition of man that exposed him as a liar or did we arrive at that conclusion because the Scriptures opened our eyes to the truth?
It’s not our judgment that exposed the lie, but God’s word that made it known to us.
If keeping the Sabbath day holy is required, then you would be correct. But if keeping the Sabbath day holy is not required, then you would be incorrect.Having said that, if keeping the Sabbath day holy is required, and I go out and tell others to keep the command, but some pastor comes along and says, "Paul said it doesn’t matter anymore.” then who is the liar? The liar is the person who twists the Scriptures in order to support a tradition of men.
Paul is indeed warning the Colossians against liars, he is warning against those who promote unnecessary religious practices as a requirement for Christians, which includes the Sabbath day tradition:It's not I who judges the man, but God's word which judges him, exposing him as a liar.
That person is no better than those whom Paul warned the Colossians of.
Actually, He did.God did no such thing.
God commanded Israel only to observe the seventh-day rest, but God commanded all people everywhere to find true rest in Christ:Yes, God commanded Israel only and not the world.
Yes, Christ died to bring true rest to the entire world, a rest which the Israelites rejected.True about the rest we're to enter. This rest is what God said the Israelites would and couldn't enter.
You are simply being critical of my explanation without actually refuting it.
Do you have a point?
Where?You've been refuted several times by myself and others.
Where?
I see five posts by you, but no refute.
Any refute must be supported by scriptures, otherwise it's just an opinion.
An opinion is not a refute.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?