There are contradictions found in the three versions of the Ten Commandments contained in the Bible (Exodus 34:1-28, Exodus 20:1-17, Deuteronomy 5:1-21). How can all three versions be true
Because we don't like "making stuff up".. apparently.
If a Gentile for some reason wanted to become an Israelite God allowed it. In all of history, we cannot find any other nation that was ever commanded to observe a day. Jethro, Moses' father-in-law was a believer yet there is no evidence either of them observed a day until after Israel's escape across the Red Sea when God introduced the Sabbath to all of them.Is 56:6-8 gentiles specifically singled out for Sabbath keeping in the OT.
Is66:23 is pure nonsense when trying to prove He is referring to the Heaven Jesus has in place for us. In Isaiah 66 Sabbath worship and walking among the dead bodies is the plan for those who make it to heaven In Is 65 man will live to over 100 and then die. Those that rebel in heaven will not make it to 100. This account certainly does not represent the Heaven I believe. Adventists teach that men and women will not propagate in heaven yet Isaiah tells a different story. And another thing about those two chapters that do not jive is that in chapter 65 Isaiah tells us that we won't remember the past life, but in chapter 66 we will walk among those that didn't make it alive to heaven, but their bodies made it. Yep, an absolutely poor proof text Bob.Is 66:23 ALL MANKIND specifically singled out for Sabbath keeping for all eternity AFTER the cross in the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship" Isaiah 66:23
None of you Sabbath salespeople ever mention that Israel was God's children. You never mention that all the remainder of God's family were never asked to observe a day.
Is66:23 is pure nonsense
nonsense when trying to prove He is referring to the Heaven
True but then they are no longer called gentiles... "the uncircumcision" of Eph 2.If a Gentile for some reason wanted to become an Israelite God allowed it...
Is 9
3 You shall multiply the nation,
You shall increase their gladness;
They will be glad in Your presence
As with the gladness of harvest,
As men rejoice when they divide the spoil.
4 For You shall break the yoke of their burden and the staff on their shoulders,
The rod of their oppressor, as at the battle of Midian.
5 For every boot of the booted warrior in the battle tumult,
And cloak rolled in blood, will be for burning, fuel for the fire.
6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.
7 There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace,
On the throne of David and over his kingdom,
To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness
From then on and forevermore.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this.
So we point out that vs 6 applies to the birth of Christ -- yet other aspects of chapter 9 do not happen at the birth of Christ. So it is with other sections of Isaiah ...
No "news" there.
Now back to Is 66:23
Is 66:23 ALL MANKIND specifically singled out for Sabbath keeping for all eternity AFTER the cross in the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship" Isaiah 66:23
"one Sabbath to another" in practice means "week to week" and likewise "one new moon to another" in practice means "month to month". the meaning of the verse is not that all mankind will observe the Sabbath which would be inconsistent with the "new moon" example. It means that mankind will worship all days. .
Bob, why won't you address the following from my last post? Is66:23 is pure nonsense when trying to prove He is referring to the Heaven Jesus has in place for us.
Nope.
There is no text in all of scripture where "from Sabbath to Sabbath" means "every day" and we all know it ... even you would like to have quoted such a text I suppose.
"From year to year" does not mean 'every day of the year' -- in any text in all of scripture
And "from Sabbath to Sabbath" does not mean every day of the year or every day of the week.
As we all know.
Example - feast of unleavened bread
Exodus 13:10
You shall therefore keep this ordinance in its season from year to year.
Judges 21:19
19 So they said, “Behold, there is a feast of the Lord from year to year in Shiloh, which is on the north side of Bethel, on the east side of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and on the south side of Lebonah.
1 Sam 2:19
19 And his mother would make him a little robe and bring it to him from year to year when she would come up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice.
did not mean "every day of the year" as we all know.
no "news" there. (Creative writing not withstanding)
please refrain from using the "creative writing" claim, it is derogatory and unproductive to the conversation. This is not the first time I have informed you about this. I will be more clear, it is offensive in nature and violates CF rules as such.
These type of conclusions require a more in-depth study of the grammar in Hebrew. to start there is no other "Sabbath to Sabbath" or "Month to Month" example
As far as I have seen - this is the first time I have seen such a greeting from you.
is everyone who disagrees with you called "creative writing" why don't I call your ideas "creative writing" too. these broad platitudes are unproductive to the conversation and enter into ad hominem attacks. Let's keep our discussion by assuming the best out of each other not the worst. Calling someone's post "creative writing" is implicit a fabrication, aka a lie, this is not becoming a conversation and not something I wish to engage in. Let's take the next steps in our discourse by respecting each other.
I am happy to read the rule that says creative writing is not allowed and/or creative writing may not be identified
This statement I make to you is a case of creative writing on my own part because I am not quoting anything, not writing for an academic text and not engage in contributing to a journal. Should I be offended at myself according to CF forum published rules? If so I would like to be able to at least read that rule.
Should I refer to my writing as academic or journalistic instead?
There is no text in all of scripture where "from Sabbath to Sabbath" means "every day" and we all know it ... even you would like to have quoted such a text I suppose.
"From year to year" does not mean 'every day of the year' -- in any text in all of scripture
And "from Sabbath to Sabbath" does not mean every day of the year or every day of the week.
As we all know.
Example - feast of unleavened bread
Exodus 13:10
You shall therefore keep this ordinance in its season from year to year.
Judges 21:19
19 So they said, “Behold, there is a feast of the Lord from year to year in Shiloh, which is on the north side of Bethel, on the east side of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and on the south side of Lebonah.
1 Sam 2:19
19 And his mother would make him a little robe and bring it to him from year to year when she would come up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice.
did not mean "every day of the year" as we all know.
so then not even possible to wrench it into "every day" as if the Bible had ever done such a thing.
But we see cyclic time used as in "from year to year" and clearly it does not mean "every day" -- just a we find it in our modern usage of cycles of time. obviously
the point remains - not withstanding all the threats in the post you provided
And since I prefer to discuss with those who do not employ threats ...
have a nice day.
is everyone who disagrees with you called "creative writing" why don't I call your ideas "creative writing" too. these broad platitudes are unproductive to the conversation and enter into ad hominem attacks. Let's keep our discussion by assuming the best out of each other not the worst. Calling someone's post "creative writing" is implicit a fabrication, aka a lie, this is not becoming a conversation and not something I wish to engage in. Let's take the next steps in our discourse by respecting each other.
I went through the grammar of Hebrew to show that the aforementioned "from year to year" is actually using different words/grammar than "from sabbath to sabbath" .
Well, when it is believed that some scripture is inspired and some isn't, there's no possibility of agreement. The historical-critical method is a buffet, well-suited for the sin-loving, carnal heart. If you were using the text you would just say that verse 24 is metaphoric or perhaps a quick editorial piece, wouldn't you?Bob, why won't you address the following from my last post? Is66:23 is pure nonsense when trying to prove He is referring to the Heaven Jesus has in place for us. In Isaiah 66 Sabbath worship and walking among the dead bodies is the plan for those who make it to heaven In Is 65 man will live to over 100 and then die. Those that rebel in heaven will not make it to 100. This account certainly does not represent the Heaven I believe. Adventists teach that men and women will not propagate in heaven yet Isaiah tells a different story. And another thing about those two chapters that do not jive is that in chapter 65 Isaiah tells us that we won't remember the past life, but in chapter 66 we will walk among those that didn't make it alive to heaven, but their bodies made it.
Classy. Way to club people with impunity. What a racket.None of you Sabbath salespeople
Wonderful Video!Way to spin the loophole thing. Loopholes are for folks who are seeking to transgress.
Transparency, is it? The word "keep" (sha.mar--H8104) is coupled with the word "commandment" (mits.vah--H4687) constantly in the Old Testament, and quite often with the word "Sabbath," and even within the second commandment itself, referring to the entire ten. Why does the fourth commandment need to use a specific word at all? Unless we're looking to find a loophole, of course. Why rest? Why obey? 'Because God said so' seems like reason enough to me. Yes, quite reasonable. For furthering this belief, I am accused of deceit and trickery. By the way, you find Christ using this same form of discourse when dealing with the established religionists of His day. They were generally shrewd enough not to expose themselves verbally.
You are, of course, at liberty to "feel" deceived all you want, but I wouldn't bother to look any further than the mirror for the perpetrator.
Christ never depicted Himself as being a replacement for the Sabbath. He said the Sabbath was made for man, with whom He cast His own very lot. He said that he would give the weary rest, and not that He would replace that rest.
I don't know what you mean by "umbrella verse" in this case, and I can assure you that no such thing exists, anyway (although I can think of at least one person who seems to think the entire Bible can be jettisoned in favor of 2 Corinthians 3:7-8), but the reason I keep the Sabbath (even in my own pitiful, human way, sometimes) and the rest of the commandments is that someone was kind enough to point out to me that there is no annulment of them prescribed in Scripture. I fully understand the "dead letter" hypothesis (a term which isn't even used anymore, given the heresy has become widely-embraced orthodoxy) and I reject it outright. Writers of the Great Awakening new nothing of antinomianism, and would have laughed it to scorn. For those who feel that the 20th century has actually brought about enlightenment on the isuues of law vs. grace, I tremble for their souls.
If the Great Apostle felt comfortable saying that "the commandment is holy and just and good," which is about as simple a statement as a person could make, I won't be found trying to twist his other, more ambiguous statements to contradict himself. Sorry. That's just how my (undeserved but) regenerate heart rolls nowadays.
Bob, why won't you address the following from my last post? Is66:23 is pure nonsense ...
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?