- Jun 12, 2020
- 12,751
- 5,344
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
You understand this verse the way the Pharisees told it, not what Jesus was teaching.
Upvote
0
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.
You understand this verse the way the Pharisees told it, not what Jesus was teaching.If you simply went with the context of the verse, you would know what Jesus meant. You do not need to search dictionaries, you do not need to go to Genesis nor to Exodus.
The context was "why do your disciples do what is not allowed on sabbath". Translating his answer like "Because sabbath was made for all human race" makes no sense.
One can be a "disciple" without being born again.In being the operative word and one who does not do as he says cannot be his disciple as he says.
No, I am not.
One can be a "disciple" without being born again.
Did mine not address the hint?That was supposed to be a hint.
Where psuche is the individual living being, and zoe is the life of that being (Jn 10:10-11).In the following passages, "life" = G5590 ψυχη (psuche, soul).
Luke 14:26-27 KJV
26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life [G5590 ψυχη] also, he cannot be my disciple.
27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Luke 9:23-24
23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
24 For whosoever will save his life [G5590 ψυχη] shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life [G5590 ψυχη] for my sake, the same shall save it.
Feel free to demonstrate how your private dictionary translation makes logical sense as an answer to the question in the surrounding context. And do not forget to explain how "Therefore/So the Son of the human race is Lord even of the sabbath" logically follows from the sentence before it.You understand this verse the way the Pharisees told it, not what Jesus was teaching.
Feel free to demonstrate how your private dictionary translation makes logical sense as an answer to the question in the surrounding context. And do not forget to explain how "Therefore/So the Son of the human race is Lord even of the sabbath" logically follows from the sentence before it.
Here is the context with your translation:
One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”
He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.”
Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for the human race, not the human race for the Sabbath. So the Son of the human race is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
Do you have a "Jesus is our Sabbath" text?? OR are you offering yourself as the "source" for that idea?Jesus is our Sabbath in the NT
Acts 18:4 "every Sabbath" Paul was preaching the Gospel to gentiles and Jews.Do you realize, though, that none of the verses you use support the SDA teaching - that the Sabbath is given after Christ to Christians to keep as a literal day of rest.
The following translations are about as close to literal as one can get. The only problem I have is that the masculine plural form for days, yamim, could be a proper noun: in other words emphatic, which could be the reason why the definite article is not attached, (Hebrew proper nouns are already emphatic and do not allow the definite article).
Genesis 4:3 YLT
3 And it cometh to pass at the end of days [yamim] that Cain bringeth from the fruit of the ground a present to Jehovah;
Genesis 4:3 SLT
3 And it shall be at the end of days, [yamim] and Cain shall bring in from the fruit of the earth an offering to Jehovah.
Genesis 4:3 LSV
3 And it comes to pass at the end of days [yamim] that Cain brings from the fruit of the ground a present to YHWH;
The reason I say, and believe, that Yamim is a proper noun here is because of the opening creation account, wherein the gathering of the waters are also called Yamim, surely a proper noun because that is the name Elohim gave them, (Gen 1:10 "Seas" = Yamim), and the plural of yam, (sea), which is this word yamim, is the same as the masculine plural form for days, yamim.
Ok but why would that be an issue unless there was a text that said that either a sin offering or a grain offering could only happen on a weekly Sabbath - and thereby making the reader suppose that this is a weekly Sabbath.Why is the above important to this discussion? That is because in six yamim YHWH made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and He rested the seventh yom: wherefore YHWH blessed the yom of the Shabbat, and hallowed it.
Certainly that is true - but it would be true no matter which day of the week it is in Gen 4:3 from what I am reading.Thus the six yamim are the Yamim of creation and the seventh yom is the Shabbat.
In Exodus 20:8-11 KJV
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days [yamim] shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days [yamim] the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
I agree - it is not saying "at the end of the world".Genesis 4:3
3 And it comes to pass at the end of [the] Yamim that Cain brings from the fruit of the ground an offering unto YHWH:
So it is not "the end of days", (like as if the end of the world)
Cain and Abel are bringing their offerings either right before the Shabbat or in the Shabbat, and thus,
Are you saying they 'could be' doing that - or that the text specifically is speaking of Shabbat??they are observing the Shabbat of creation at the end of the six yamim.
Cain and Abel are observing the Shabbat of creation in this passage.
Agreed.And the Shabbat will be observed until the end of days.
I have to admit - I don't think I understand your point, nor do I see why the people here who oppose the Sabbath should have an argument against your point.
The translations I am reading do not seem to require that the Gen 4:3 event be on a Sabbath - but they don't oppose it either given that a thank offering is allowed on Sabbath. However it looks like this is supposed to be a sin offering from the way Able's Sin offering is accepted but grain/harvest offering to Cain is not. Even so - sin offerings could be done on any day - including the Sabbath.
Genesis 4:3 — The New International Version (NIV)
3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord.
Genesis 4:3 — English Standard Version (ESV)
3 In the course of time Cain brought to the Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground,
Genesis 4:3 — King James Version (KJV 1900)
3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.
Genesis 4:3 — The New King James Version (NKJV)
3 And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the Lord.
Genesis 4:3 — New Century Version (NCV)
3 Later, Cain brought some food from the ground as a gift to God.
Genesis 4:3 — American Standard Version (ASV)
3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto Jehovah.
Genesis 4:3 — 1890 Darby Bible (DARBY)
3 And in process of time it came to pass that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering to Jehovah.
Genesis 4:3 — GOD’S WORD Translation (GW)
3 Later Cain brought some crops from the land as an offering to the Lord.
Genesis 4:3 — The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)
3 In the course of time Cain presented some of the land’s produce as an offering to the Lord.
Genesis 4:3 — The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
3 In the course of time Cain brought to the Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground,
Genesis 4:3 — The Lexham English Bible (LEB)
3 And in the course of time Cain brought an offering from the fruit of the ground to Yahweh,
Genesis 4:3 — New International Reader’s Version (1998) (NIrV)
3 After some time, Cain gathered some of the things he had grown. He brought them as an offering to the Lord.
Genesis 4:3 — New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update (NASB95)
3 So it came about in the course of time that Cain brought an offering to the Lord of the fruit of the ground.
-- here in the NLT they seem to argue for a thank offering, a grain offering ...
Genesis 4:3 — New Living Translation (NLT)
3 When it was time for the harvest, Cain presented some of his crops as a gift to the Lord.
Ok but why would that be an issue unless there was a text that said that either a sin offering or a grain offering could only happen on a weekly Sabbath - and thereby making the reader suppose that this is a weekly Sabbath.
Certainly that is true - but it would be true no matter which day of the week it is in Gen 4:3 from what I am reading.
I agree - it is not saying "at the end of the world".
Are you saying they 'could be' doing that - or that the text specifically is speaking of Shabbat??
Agreed.
Yes, its the SDA teaching, because the SDA interprets it as keeping, while the text in Acts is about preaching.Acts 18:4 "every Sabbath" Paul was preaching the Gospel to gentiles and Jews.
Acts 13 - Gentiles ask Paul for "more gospel preaching" to be scheduled for them "the NEXT Sabbath"
Is 66:23 - for all eternity after the cross in the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship"
... you mean "THAT" - SDA teaching?
Even the Baptist Confession of Faith (sectn 19) and the "Westminster Confession of Faith sectn 19" - affirm the TEN commandments as being included in the moral law of God written on the heart under the NEW Covenant. Are they all "SDA" in your post????
Do you have a "God is Trinity" text?Do you have a "Jesus is our Sabbath" text?? OR are you offering yourself as the "source" for that idea?
Clare73 said:
Jesus is our Sabbath in the NT
Do you have a "Jesus is our Sabbath" text?? OR are you offering yourself as the "source" for that idea?
I assume this is your way of saying you have no such text.Do you have a "God is Trinity" text?
Do you have a "God is sovereign" text?
We have you not quoting Heb 3:7-4:11 at any point saying something like "Jesus is our Sabbath"I have Heb 3:7-4:11.
Yes, its the SDA teaching
Preaching the Gospel "every Sabbath" in the Synagogue - reaching both gentiles and Jews --, because the SDA interprets it as keeping, while the text in Acts is about preaching.
No OT scholar today says that the phrase "from Sabbath to Sabbath" as used in the OT - was taken to mean something not at all literal by the contemporary readers - and my guess is that you and I both know it.Isaiah uses a prophetical, metaphorical language.
But not "I will be your Sabbath"“Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest."
Mt 11:28
Sabbath was about rest.But not "I will be your Sabbath"
And of course Matt 11 was not a change after the cross -- it is the fact of the Gospel as it was before the cross -- unchanged from today, since there is only one gospel.
Actually I very specifically point to the ENTIRE section 19 of the Baptist Confession of Faith (as well as that same section in the Westminster Confession of Faith sectn 19) since you make sweeping statements that no one believes such things.You cherrypick one baptist confession that has seemingly one thing with the SDA in common
The fact that Baptists eat breakfast and Adventists eat breakfast is not a claim that all baptists are adventists. Still it is true that both eat breakfast.Baptists do not accept Ellen White
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?