if the YECists are literalists then why aren't they Sabbatarians?

rmwilliamsll said:

Following up on your suggestion just reinforces what appears to be happening. Most evangelicals in the US are dispensational to a degree in their thinking about the law. Only in reformed thought and especially in covenant theology is something like reconstructionism possible or logical. There simply is no well developed theology of law in the general evangelical community, having accepted a break between the OT and NT that invalidates the OT Law, even if they call it fullfilling the law. it is still abandoned as a model, something the reformed churches have not done.
...

Click to expand...

I don't know any evangelicals that suggest the law has been invalidated. Jesus affirmed that the law would not change until all things had been accomplished. I still believe that it is still in full effect, for those who are not covered by grace since Paul said that those who are justified under the law are not justified by grace. He also said that the purpose of the law is to be a tutor to bring us to Christ. I am not abandoning the law, it has done its job in my life and now I no longer need it for justification, which would have been impossible for me anyways.

It is not that we TE's are advocating works salvation. It is rather something like a reductio ad absurdum as I explained on a similar thread: if YECs believe the historicity of Gen. 1, why don't they believe something that flows naturally from this very historicity? And rmswilliams has been suggesting (if I'm not mistaken) that it's because YEC has not really looked carefully at its philosophical implications, because it is not really as concerned about proper theology as it is about popular theology.

Sojourner: Is it wrong to eat "unclean food"? And is it wrong to say unclean words? and why?

I'm a bit late to this and this his issue may have already been answered.

statrei said:

Why: The Creator wanted company. Why else would he come down and hang out with Adam and Eve in the cool of the day?

Click to expand...

The Creation was a gift from God the Father to God the Son. "All things were created by him and for him." Col 1:16

shernren said:

It is not that we TE's are advocating works salvation. It is rather something like a reductio ad absurdum as I explained on a similar thread: if YECs believe the historicity of Gen. 1, why don't they believe something that flows naturally from this very historicity? And rmswilliams has been suggesting (if I'm not mistaken) that it's because YEC has not really looked carefully at its philosophical implications, because it is not really as concerned about proper theology as it is about popular theology.

Click to expand...

First of all you've mistakenly assumed that all YEC'ists share the same beliefs regarding the Sabbath. If we assume that all YEC'ists are not concerned with proper theology and therefore ignore the creation mandate of the Sabbath, then we can conclude that Orthodox Jews also share in this practice and congregate on a day of the week other than Saturday. That is a reduction to the absurd and therefore the original assumption must be false.

shernren said:

Sojourner: Is it wrong to eat "unclean food"? And is it wrong to say unclean words? and why?

Click to expand...

If you have a point to make, shoot.

rmswilliams, I think it's simply laziness. Why waste magazine space for complex theological discussions when you can just describe another "evolutionist misconception debunked" or another "scientific creationist honoured"? YECism tackles the atheism that seems to be inherent in evolution with a direct-causation attribution to God, complete with an ultra-literal hermeneutic that seems new enough to be popular or old enough to be established orthodoxy. Because antinomianism doesn't come with the package of evolutionism, however, they don't see the need to respond with a proper understanding of how the Law relates to the Creation.

Sojourner basically speaking: while we are freed from the regulation / the letter of the law by Jesus' death, we are still bound to the lifestyle / the spirit of the law by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Because of that, we are allowed to eat non-kosher food. However we are still forbidden from uncleanliness of the tongue and the heart, even though we are allowed "uncleanliness of food". The first is the component of the character of God that inspires the second. Thus we are to keep the first, in keeping with emulating God, even though we are freed from the second.

Now if you say that the Sabbath is a literal day of creation, you are giving it a literal high authority over all creation. It is not something that started with the Torah, apparently, but something that predates and over-sees the Torah. So that even when Jesus fulfilled the Torah, we are still required to keep its requirement as part of God's demands over the human. (Although Jesus fulfilled the Ten Commandments, murder is still wrong - now that He has, even harboured anger and grudge is wrong.) So if the creation mandate behind the Sabbath Commandment is a literal Saturday of absolute rest, why don't the YEC community practice a literal Saturday of absolute rest? And more indicting still, why hasn't the thought occurred to them?

Honestly, this thread seems more like finger pointing than anything. Let us not forget that if we break 1 commandment of the Law, we break every commandment of the Law. We are all Law breakers, period. There is not one here who doesn't break the Law.

Well Critias I don't tell people that since Jesus fulfilled the Commandment "Thou shalt not murder", I can therefore get away with holding anger against others in my heart. If "literal seventh day of creation" is to "Sabbath" as "hold anger against others" is to "murder" then this is pretty much what popular YECism is doing by omission of teaching.

shernren said:

Well Critias I don't tell people that since Jesus fulfilled the Commandment "Thou shalt not murder", I can therefore get away with holding anger against others in my heart.

Click to expand...

And neither do I Shernren.

shernren said:

If "literal seventh day of creation" is to "Sabbath" as "hold anger against others" is to "murder" then this is pretty much what popular YECism is doing by omission of teaching.

Click to expand...

Your comparison is not exactly equal. You are taking what Christ said about murder and comparing it to what Genesis says about the Sabbath. Why not take the first and then compare it to what Christ said about the Sabbath? Did Christ work on the Sabbath? Did He heal on the Sabbath? Did the Jewish leaders want to stone Jesus because they claimed He violated the Sabbath?

Is not Jesus our example in everything? If so, why do you insist on hold yec's to old Jewish laws rather than the teachings of Jesus Christ?

If you don't show me love as you expect to receive, then you have not only broken the second commandment given by Christ - thou shall love thy neighbor - but you have also broken the first - thou shall love thy God with all thy heart, mind and soul.

That is just an example of how if we break one law, we break all of the laws. If we don't keep one of God's law, we haven't loved God will all of our being, because if we did, we wouldn't be breaking His laws.

This thread is a classic example of a person telling another to get the speck out of their when they themselves have one in their eye.

The Sabbath is about putting God first in ones life. Do you do that everyday, every moment in your life? I don't, I know I don't. So I will not criticize your or another for not doing so, until I do so every waking moment in my own life. So why are people gathering here to criticize yec's when most likely they aren't putting God first in their own life, in everything they do. Why can I make that claim? Because this thread is about being a false witness, saying yec's do not keep the Sabbath; yec's don't put God first in their lives, when people on here don't live with those or know those who they are accusing. No one here has evidence for or against what or who is in my thoughts, only God. Therefore you cannot make a judgment against my thoughts on whether God is always first or not.

This is a judgment thread as well as false witness thread. Continue accusing and pointing the figure if that is what you or another wants to do.

Lastly, concerning the Sabbath itself, do you care what Jesus had to say about it or what the Jewish leaders had to say about it? Who are you going to follow?

That is all I have to say for this thread. This is what continues a divide between two camps.

This is a judgment thread as well as false witness thread. Continue accusing and pointing the figure if that is what you or another wants to do.

Click to expand...

Hmm I think I have mis-structured my argument to give that impression. What I'm trying to stress as my main point is not that YECs don't keep the Sabbath Commandment. What I'm trying to stress is that YECs don't understand the Sabbath Commandment in the way that they're quoting it. Because if they understood the full implications of their interpretation of Sabbath they would be living a literal Sabbath.

I dare not judge anybody here of breaking the Law, except myself. But I do think that they have either under-emphasised or mis-understood it.

Sojourner<>< said:

Being a YEC'ist, I interpret the seventh day to be just as literal as the preceding six days. God blessed the seventh day, made it holy and He rested, but He did not command Adam to do the same. It's not until the ten commandments that we find any mention of our requirements to do so.

Since I am not justified under the law, but am under grace, I am not required to follow Jewish law. Why else would Paul write that all things are lawful but not all things edify the spirit?

Why would Peter say: "Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are" (Acts 15:10-11)

And James in Acts 15:19-21: "Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorailty, from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath."

And Paul: "You are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read by all men; clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart." 2Cor3:2,3. "... but our sufficiency is from God, who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." 2Cor3:5,6.

Actually, I do try to observe the Sabbath, which makes me a bit of an oddity in my church. I do it for spiritual reasons, not for justification. I just don't consider myself bound under law to do so because of my literal interpretation of the writings of the Apostles.

Click to expand...

that sounds pretty sensible.

shernren said:

rmswilliams, I think it's simply laziness. Why waste magazine space for complex theological discussions when you can just describe another "evolutionist misconception debunked" or another "scientific creationist honoured"? YECism tackles the atheism that seems to be inherent in evolution with a direct-causation attribution to God, complete with an ultra-literal hermeneutic that seems new enough to be popular or old enough to be established orthodoxy. Because antinomianism doesn't come with the package of evolutionism, however, they don't see the need to respond with a proper understanding of how the Law relates to the Creation.

Sojourner basically speaking: while we are freed from the regulation / the letter of the law by Jesus' death, we are still bound to the lifestyle / the spirit of the law by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Because of that, we are allowed to eat non-kosher food. However we are still forbidden from uncleanliness of the tongue and the heart, even though we are allowed "uncleanliness of food". The first is the component of the character of God that inspires the second. Thus we are to keep the first, in keeping with emulating God, even though we are freed from the second.

Now if you say that the Sabbath is a literal day of creation, you are giving it a literal high authority over all creation. It is not something that started with the Torah, apparently, but something that predates and over-sees the Torah. So that even when Jesus fulfilled the Torah, we are still required to keep its requirement as part of God's demands over the human. (Although Jesus fulfilled the Ten Commandments, murder is still wrong - now that He has, even harboured anger and grudge is wrong.) So if the creation mandate behind the Sabbath Commandment is a literal Saturday of absolute rest, why don't the YEC community practice a literal Saturday of absolute rest? And more indicting still, why hasn't the thought occurred to them?

Click to expand...

Genesis is part of the Torah.

The YEC community is not based on beliefs regarding Sabbath. Different YEC'ists hold different beliefs about this so you have to be more specific.

Genesis is part of the Torah.

Click to expand...

But the event itself of the firstSabbath must have predated the telling of the first Sabbath, and therefore the first Sabbath itself (being an act of God and therefore reflecting some part of His character) predates and thus supersedes the Torah.

The YEC community is not based on beliefs regarding Sabbath. Different YEC'ists hold different beliefs about this so you have to be more specific.

Click to expand...

Do you want me to be specific? Well I'd simply say that: YECism as a whole hasn't really thought about its true theological implications. Mind you, when it comes to origins theology I'm pretty much an armchair theorist! But it has only taken me a little thought and a little Googling to come across these disturbing ideas:

- that separation of "process science" from "origins science" yields a Hindu-ish "only experience is real" relativism
- that condemning pre-Fall animal death for being offensive to God makes eating meat a sin
- that a literal creation week Sabbath demands the obedience of the Sabbath Commandment as another literal weekly Sabbath, complete with obligatory rest. (And I'm not convinced that early Gentiles did so.)

Now, why haven't these problems occurred to the folk at AiG and ICR? If YEC really is that solid written-on-the-back-of-the-Ten-Commandments (which Moses brought down Sinai, which actually weren't called the Ten Commandments in the Bible, but that's another story all together) philosophy that some Christians make it out to be, then there must be a highly convincing solution to these and other philosophical difficulties. But I don't see a solution, or even a reply. I don't see the YEC community even considering these interesting ramifications of YECism.

I could be less than charitable and say that creation science is basically about giving ignorant fundamentalism a cause to support. But I will instead say that I guess YECism is still young. (Except, of course, that YECs themselves say that it's been around since Genesis 1:1 - which should have given them all the time in the world to iron out their philosophical difficulties.)

To me the Sabbath problem is a good example of this. I'm not saying there is no YEC resolution for the issue. There probably is one, and I probably haven't probed deep enough to see where the community is coming up with it from. The question is: are the YECs really being "Berean" in their faith? Are they really considering what YECism truly means and says and compels?