THE SABBATH TRUTH!

[Studyman]

NO.

But I can see how someone who does not accept the Word of God might.

This question is a key difference between biblical Christianity and most of the “Christian” cults. Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works? Am I saved just by believing in Jesus, or do I have to believe in Jesus and do certain things?

But the Holy Scriptures I posted were from HIM. Inspired by HIM. Why will you not even engage in them?

Ephesians 2:8-9........
"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God- not by works, so that no one can boast."

This one sentence doesn't reveal the message of Paul to the Ephesians. Look what happens to the message when we include the Context.

Eph. 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of (mans) works, lest any man should boast.

There are "Works" necessary for our Salvation. Great Selfless Loving Works. It's just that these Works are not ours, they are HIS.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

What are these Work's foreordained that we should walk in them? We know it isn't the "works" we lived in, in times past when we were "Children of Disobedience". So we are saved unto Good Works. What are they?

1 John 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

So we know the Works the Christ walked in are "Good", even perfect Works, and we are to walk in them. Did Jesus walk in the Works foreordained by His Father that HE should walk in them?

How else could God have had Paul write those words that would make them more easily understood????

How can you understand Paul by omitting the very context of His teaching?

Jesus himself explains in John 6:27-29 that the “work” we must do is to believe. Thus we are not saved by what we do; we cannot get to heaven by what we do. HERE WE HAVE THE THESIS OF GRACE THROUGH FAITH DEMONSTRATED IN THE NEGATIVE.

Titus 3:5......
"He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit".

4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Again, no one is saying they did something to make the Christ sacrifice Himself for them. It is by HIS Mercy that we are saved. But it is Biblical Fact that not Everyone is given this gift of Mercy. The Holy Scriptures I posted and asked questions about tells us we have a part to play in our own salvation.

There is no Mercy without Repentance.

Acts 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

2 9Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Without Repentance there is no Mercy. Without self denial, there is no repentance. Without humility there is no self denial. Without the Gospel, there is no humility. Without the Word of God there is no Gospel.

We will most likely never agree. But these conversations are still good to have among men.

 

[guevaraj]

I know men who believe Jesus when HE said He created the Sabbath for them, who have never been a member of this religious franchise. For me, 30 years.

Brother, have you considered my point of view of the Sabbath? It is not official SDA church teaching. Based on the first day in Genesis, from first light to light again in the morning until the first Sabbath from morning to morning.

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day. (Genesis 1:3-5 NIV)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

 

[SwordmanJr]

The Scribes and Pharisees were ruled by a spirit that they believed and told others was from God, but it wasn't.

Reference please.

They taught against the Law of God and promoted doctrines and Commandments of men that could not be supported by the Holy scriptures.

Reference please.

Jesus said we would know who a religious man served by their works, not their words.

Religious man? Reference please.

I respectfully disagree with your religion which preaches the Letter of God Kills.

Translation: You reject what the very word of God says, and that I quoted to you verbatim.

I understand that the LAW "The soul that Sins shall die" if followed to the "Letter", does Kill. But the Christ's Words, who said Himself are Spirit and are Life, doesn't kill.

This is yet another straw man argument because I never said the word of Jesus kill. Creating a conflict in my words that I never stated is dishonest.

So then I am not under the Law that Kills, but under the Word of God which became Flesh that gives life.

The Jesus described in the Bible established a new Covenant not at all defined by the Law of Moses, nor was it a part of that previous Covenant.

I kindly request that you Please just address and answer the questions posed when you interject yourself into a dialogue.

Oh, but I have answered your questions, and you continue rejecting what the inspired word of God says.

Jr

 

[bbbbbbb]

Probably the most significant application of this discussion relates to the differences between monergism and synergism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monergism and [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synergism"]Synergism - Wikipedia[/URL]

One can observe various days and diets, being weak in faith, yet be the same sort of monergist that Paul was. As well, one can reject Sabbath-keeping, as many synergistic churches do.

I might start a new thread on this topic. Stay tuned.

 

[Studyman]

Reference please.

Jn. 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

Gen. 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

John 8: 41Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.

42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

So here is my reference in the Biblical truth that the Mainstream preachers of Jesus time believed they were directed by the Spiritual God of Abraham, but they were not. Will it make any difference to you and your religion? I would guess not.

They taught against the Law of God and promoted doctrines and Commandments of men that could not be supported by the Holy scriptures.

You said:
"Reference please."

Matt 15:7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

And again:

Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:

53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

And agian;

Matt. 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

4 For they (Mainstream preachers of Christ's time) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

And again;

23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

You asked for references, here is the Word of God you asked for.

Reference please, Religious man?

Matt. 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Lawlessness)

And again;

1 Jn. 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

And again;

2 Tim 3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.


You asked the question, I God answered it.

Translation: You reject what the very word of God says, and that I quoted to you verbatim.

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. (That means no in case you didn't understand it) But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

You might consider all of Paul's Words, not just those words which can be used to promote this religious franchise doctrine or that tradition of religious man.

This is yet another straw man argument because I never said the word of Jesus kill. Creating a conflict in my words that I never stated is dishonest.

The Word of God became the Man Jesus. This means HE created the Letter you preach to the world Kills. I have stated that there is a Law that HE created, which if followed to the "Letter" does in fact kill. It is the Law which proclaims the wages of sin is death. If I were to be judged by the Letter of the Law, I would be doomed because of a truth I have sinned. But the Lord's Christ offered His Life to God to pay for my past transgressions of God's Commandments, so then, I am no longer under the "letter" of the Law which says I must die. But am now under the Word of God which HE Himself says is Spirit and Life.

I don't believe you understand the implication of these Words.

The Jesus described in the Bible established a new Covenant not at all defined by the Law of Moses, nor was it a part of that previous Covenant.

The Christ of the Bible, before becoming a man in the person of Jesus, created and defined HIS new Covenant in Jer. 31. Hebrews 7-10 also goes into great detail as to what the New Covenant was and what changed as a result. It's in your own Bible. There is nothing, anywhere in the entire Holy Scriptures which teach the doctrine that God's Laws were eliminated, removed, or otherwise replaced by the New Covenant. The only Law that was changed, was the Priesthood Law that declared that only A person from the Tribe of Levi could become the High Priest. According to the Bible, only the ADDED Priesthood, that Abraham did not have, was changed. That is the manner in which God's Law is administered, and the manner in which sin are atoned for. It's in your own Bible.

I have asked you to provide Biblical evidence to the contrary, and all I get are your own words.

Oh, but I have answered your questions, and you continue rejecting what the inspired word of God says.

Jr

That is certainly a debatable statement, and I have printed all your responses for our study group. I must say that it doesn't appear that you have addressed even one of the Scriptures I have posted.

Maybe I am missing a post from you. Please show me again where you have answered all the questions I have posed to you. I look forward to your response.

 

[Studyman]

Probably the most significant application of this discussion relates to the differences between monergism and synergism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monergism and Synergism - Wikipedia

One can observe various days and diets, being weak in faith, yet be the same sort of monergist that Paul was. As well, one can reject Sabbath-keeping, as many synergistic churches do.

I might start a new thread on this topic. Stay tuned.

So then, was Jesus weak in the Faith as a man, given He walked in the Way of the God of the Bible and was obedient unto death? No offence, but it seems like a man who would cling to God regardless of the religions which surrounded Him wouldn't be "weak" in the Faith.

Do you believe Caleb was Weak in the Faith for trusting the Word of God over all those religious men who surrounded him? Also, the Pharisees rejected God's Sabbath and created their own. And the Jews polluted and despised God's Sabbath through out the Law and Prophets. Just from a Biblical point of view, were these men considered "Weak" in the Faith, or strong in their Faith?

When Abraham obeyed God's Commandments, Statutes, and Laws, was he considered "weak" in the Faith?

It seems we should consider these Examples written for our admonition, in our determination what is considered Faithful to God, and what is not.

 

[bbbbbbb]

So then, was Jesus weak in the Faith as a man, given He walked in the Way of the God of the Bible and was obedient unto death? No offence, but it seems like a man who would cling to God regardless of the religions which surrounded Him wouldn't be "weak" in the Faith.

Do you believe Caleb was Weak in the Faith for trusting the Word of God over all those religious men who surrounded him? Also, the Pharisees rejected God's Sabbath and created their own. And the Jews polluted and despised God's Sabbath through out the Law and Prophets. Just from a Biblical point of view, were these men considered "Weak" in the Faith, or strong in their Faith?

When Abraham obeyed God's Commandments, Statutes, and Laws, was he considered "weak" in the Faith?

It seems we should consider these Examples written for our admonition, in our determination what is considered Faithful to God, and what is not.

I recommend you take up this matter with Paul.

Romans 14:1 Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. 2 One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. 3 The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. 4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

5 One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.

In the meantime, please tell me whether you consider yourself to be a synergist or a monergist.

Thank you.

 

[Bob S]

Since you asked, I will tell you. My disagreement with your religious philosophy is based 100% on the Holy Scriptures alone.

According to your interpretation. Funny I base what I believe on the Holy Scriptures alse.

For instance, according to the Bible, Jesus is the Word of God. He is the creator of The Sabbath Days. You do believe Jesus is God of the OT, Yes?

Sure, why do you even question my belief. Jesus was the Word.

So you are preaching that the Sabbath of the Bible is a "defunct Holy day of Israel."

Absolutely, it was given to one nation as part of the covenant. Israel broke the covenant and all the ritual laws of the Sinai covenant became void. Sabbath was a ritual. Paul wrote in 2 Cor 3:6-11 KJV that the ten commandments were done away. I believe Paul do you?

But the Word of God which became Flesh says;

Lev. 23:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts.

My(the Word's) feasts to Israel.

Not Israels Holy Day, not the Jews Holy Day, but the Sabbath of the Bible is the Lord's Sabbath, Holy unto the Lord.

The Lord's Holy days were a gift to Israel and not to any other nation on Earth. Since Israel is no longer and we have a new and better covenant with better promises for all mankind, the Holy days are no longer either. Jesus said He came to fulfill the law and prophets. If He didn't then He was not the Word, but we know he did bring an end to the law and prophets because if not Israelites would still be under the sacrificial system of the law. Not one thing could be removed from the Sinai covenant's laws until Jesus fulfilled them. He did that while on the Cross at Calvary. He shed His blood to ratify the new covenant.

And when this same Lord came to earth as a man, HE said; Matt. 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

I don't deny that, but He surely didn't give it to every nation did He?

So why do you call His Sabbath a "defunct Holy Day of Israel", when The Christ of the Bible Himself calls it the "Sabbath of the Lord?", "HIS Feast".

It was His feast to Israel and no one else. Scripture tells us Israel is still God's special people, but He is not at this point of time giving them special treatment.

This is true, man can obey whomever they want.

But How is it you keep preaching that the New Covenant calls for the elimination of the Lord's Sabbaths and Laws, when the Christ Himself, which defines His New Covenant, teaches no such thing?

Hold on there partner, Jesus didn't say anything to eliminate any of the Sinai covenant laws. That is a very poor argument in my estimation. When a covenant is broken do the rules of that covenant continue? You know they don't. The covenant has absolutely no power and might as well be burned. In the case of the Sinai covenant we can glean much from it, but we are not subject to it because it is void.

I keep asking for Biblical support for this religious philosophy and no one provides anything other than popular religious traditions.

Well now you cannot say that. I answered your question.

Doesn't this Same Christ promise to write HIS Laws, which would most certainly include His Sabbath, on the hearts of His People "After those days" in HIS Definition of HIS New Covenant?

No! if you are trying to tell us the laws written on our hearts are the laws of the Sinai covenant.

Where does the God of the Bible say HIS Laws doesn't include His Holy Sabbath?

Where in the Bible does God tell us the Sabbath was given to everyone. Maybe you should ask an Aboriginal that question and while you are at it ask the Chinese and Japanese.

What is it about God's Holy Sabbath that causes religious men to despise and pollute and reject it?

Where did you conjure up the idea that anyone despises the day given only to Israel? We don't have to reject something that was never the intended to be an obligation.

 

[Studyman]

Brother, have you considered my point of view of the Sabbath? It is not official SDA church teaching. Based on the first day in Genesis, from first light to light again in the morning until the first Sabbath from morning to morning.

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day. (Genesis 1:3-5 NIV)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

I have considered it some, thank you for asking.

It is my understanding that there is a Sabbath Rest at the end of the age for God's Children.

In the nature God created there is a theme. Life starts in darkness before the light. It was dark first, the Light came. Mortality come first, then immortality. We are a child first, then adult. Evil and Sin come first, then repentance and righteousness. God's Sabbath begins at the END of the Week, not the beginning. Six days of work come first, then the Sabbath Rest.

I believe God's Day was created from Evening to Evening with the dark coming first, then light. On Calvary it was important for HIS People to take Him down from the Cross before the Sun went down, and the New Day began.

I have more I could say, but this pretty much sums up my understanding regarding when God's Day Starts.

I have spent some time, years ago, in the study of God's Day, and the above is what I recall. I have not spent a whole lot of time looking directly into your point of view here, to be fair.

 

[Studyman]

I recommend you take up this matter with Paul.

Romans 14:1 Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. 2 One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. 3 The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. 4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

5 One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.

I'm not sure why the religious view of this man or that man should influence me. It seems Paul taught we should listen to God.

When they do they will find out if God deems one Day above another, and then make a choice to either believe HIM, or a religious man who might believe something different.

Let each man be convinced in their own mind whose word's to abide by, man's or Gods. The Christ is perfectly capable of directing those who have come unto Him and denied themselves as HE instructs.

Paul is a perfect example of a person who was persuaded in his own mind about days.

1 Cor. 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

In the meantime, please tell me whether you consider yourself to be a synergist or a monergist.

Thank you.

In all due respect, I don't mess around with labels created by religious men, to make judgments on other religious men. God's Word is much more simple than that in my view. I would have to close my Bible, and go to another voice to even find out what these words mean, and why would I do that?

The way I see it, there are two kinds of people in the land I am born into.

#1.
Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

#2.
And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

As this same Christ inspired it to be written.

Ecc. 12:11 The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd.

12 And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.

13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind.

 

[Bob S]

First by those children of Abraham God rescued from the Yoke of Bondage in Egypt, to modern religions who God cleansed of their past transgression by the Blood of His Son? Why do religious men despise this Commandment that the Christ created Specifically for men, so much?

Sounds like a pity party to me. If Sabbath observers would stop criticizing Christians because we worship on another day like is continuously done, I don't believe anyone would raise their voice in protest. I realize you are not SDA, so maybe you don't preach that we are going to Hell because we don't observe the Sabbath and the eight Holy days that were given only to the Israelites.

Doesn't "Christian" mean "Christ Like"? Is there not more to being a Christian than man's definition of love, or doing good deeds in His Name? Didn't Jesus say "If we Love Him, keep His Commandments?"

His commandments not the ones Jesus kept as He tells us in Jn 15: 9 ‘As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. 10 If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12 My command is this: love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.

Do you have a problem with Jesus own statement? If so how about this one: 1Jn 3: 19 This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: 20 if our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. 21 Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22 and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. 23 And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: we know it by the Spirit he gave us.

I live by Jesus words to me. not what you or any other Sabbath observer has conjured up in their minds.

One reason for my replies and questions are because of Paul's instruction in 1 Cor. 10.

1 Cor. 10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.

11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

What does lusting have to do with the subject we are on? It sounds like you are using scripture to threaten us because we don't agree with your false theories.

These examples show the Israelites did not fall in the wilderness because they lusted after honoring and respecting God's Laws and Sabbaths. I know many believe they are all set in their religions, even the Pharisees were convinced they were "Abraham's Children". But Paul is telling specifically those who "think they stand" "not be ignorant" of these examples, so as not to make the same mistakes they made, "AND FALL"..

So, if I don't agree with your theories you threaten me with the results of the mistakes the Israelites made? May I remind you that you are not the judge. And may I remind you that I have presented scripture that has proven that you are wrong.

Therefore the reason for my questions prompted by 30 years of serving God outside the religious doctrines and traditions of the land I was born into.

Serving God by observing a day that He has not ever ask you to keep? In fact Jesus fulfilled the Sabbath along with all the other rituals given only to Israel. He did what the Israelites didn't or couldn't do, took it away nailing it to the Cross He was nailed. Eph 2: 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace,

You seem not to believe what Jesus did for all mankind and live by commands He has set aside, all because of your preconceived beliefs.

If these questions make you uncomfortable, or you don't want to have at discussion about them, that is fine. The purpose of the reply is to point out, what I see, as an elephant in the room.

Did you think you could make me "uncomfortable" enough that I would not challenge your theories?

I have never backed down from debating Messianic believers and you surely do not frighten me.

 

[Bob S]

But the Holy Scriptures I posted were from HIM. Inspired by HIM. Why will you not even engage in them?



This one sentence doesn't reveal the message of Paul to the Ephesians. Look what happens to the message when we include the Context.

Eph. 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of (mans) works, lest any man should boast.

There are "Works" necessary for our Salvation. Great Selfless Loving Works. It's just that these Works are not ours, they are HIS.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

What are these Work's foreordained that we should walk in them? We know it isn't the "works" we lived in, in times past when we were "Children of Disobedience". So we are saved unto Good Works. What are they?

1 John 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

So we know the Works the Christ walked in are "Good", even perfect Works, and we are to walk in them. Did Jesus walk in the Works foreordained by His Father that HE should walk in them?



How can you understand Paul by omitting the very context of His teaching?



4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Again, no one is saying they did something to make the Christ sacrifice Himself for them. It is by HIS Mercy that we are saved. But it is Biblical Fact that not Everyone is given this gift of Mercy. The Holy Scriptures I posted and asked questions about tells us we have a part to play in our own salvation.

There is no Mercy without Repentance.

Acts 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

2 9Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Without Repentance there is no Mercy. Without self denial, there is no repentance. Without humility there is no self denial. Without the Gospel, there is no humility. Without the Word of God there is no Gospel.

We will most likely never agree. But these conversations are still good to have among men.

The works Christians are admonished to perform are good deeds, not the works of the Law. You have as much told us we are pseudo Christians because we don't keep the ritual laws of the Sinai covenant. Are you also implying that because we don't we are doomed to Hell?

 

[Studyman]

According to your interpretation. Funny I base what I believe on the Holy Scriptures alse.

The Christ made a Covenant with Levi on Sinai, on Israel's behalf. This is the Covenant that became obsolete. This Priesthood was created and given "Til the Seed should come" and included priesthood duties such as Administering God's Laws to the People and providing for the atonement of sins. This is the Covenant that changed.

Heb. 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

The Christ of the Bibles New Covenant promised of a time "After those days" when HE Himself would write God's Laws on the hearts of His People. No more would men "receive" God's Laws from Levite Priests.

Jesus is now our High Priest because this Covenant of Levi changed.

12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

But before Jesus could take over the office of High Priest, there had to be a change in the Priesthood Law, because according to the Covenant with Levi, only a Levite could become a High Priest. And Jesus was from the tribe of Judah.

I asked you once two questions that you did not answer. I will ask again.

Before "After those days" how was God's Laws administered?

Before "After those days" how were sins atoned for?

If you were to answer according to scriptures you could see that I am telling you the truth.

The ministry of death is this Priesthood which required the death of so many animals for the atonement of the transgressions of God's Law. The Ministry of Death was not the Sabbath the Christ made for man, or His Law which define How to Love one another, and How to Love God, which is the Law and Prophets.

I don't believe God's Laws are obsolete because there are no scriptures which preach such a thing. Only ancient religious traditions of men. But a Change in the Priesthood, prophesied by the Christ himself, this I do agree with.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Curiously, none of the Sabbath-keepers here at CF (nor any I have encountered elsewhere) show the slightest interest in the Sabbath year commanded by God as well as the year of Jubilee. At best they fob it off as applying to farmers only. That same line of rationalization could equally be used for the weekly Sabbath.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I'm not sure why the religious view of this man or that man should influence me. It seems Paul taught we should listen to God.

When they do they will find out if God deems one Day above another, and then make a choice to either believe HIM, or a religious man who might believe something different.

Let each man be convinced in their own mind whose word's to abide by, man's or Gods. The Christ is perfectly capable of directing those who have come unto Him and denied themselves as HE instructs.

Paul is a perfect example of a person who was persuaded in his own mind about days.

1 Cor. 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

In all due respect, I don't mess around with labels created by religious men, to make judgments on other religious men. God's Word is much more simple than that in my view. I would have to close my Bible, and go to another voice to even find out what these words mean, and why would I do that?

The way I see it, there are two kinds of people in the land I am born into.

#1.
Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

#2.
And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

As this same Christ inspired it to be written.

Ecc. 12:11 The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd.

12 And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.

13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind.

Thank you for your brusque appraisal of Paul. I now understand that you do not believe that all scripture, including Paul's epistles, is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

Like most legalists it is quite evident that you have chosen to cherrypick the scriptures that suit your purposes.

 

[SwordmanJr]

Jn. 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

Gen. 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

John 8: 41Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.

42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

So here is my reference in the Biblical truth that the Mainstream preachers of Jesus time believed they were directed by the Spiritual God of Abraham, but they were not. Will it make any difference to you and your religion? I would guess not.

What are you talking about? Of course Abraham was a man of faith. It is his faith the Lord accounted unto him righteousness. God blessed the descendents of Abraham because of his faithfulness to the statutes, commands and laws of God. The Law of Moses did not exist at the time until he had written them in his lifetime. So, what's your point?

Matt 15:7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

And again:

Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:

53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

And agian;

Matt. 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

4 For they (Mainstream preachers of Christ's time) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

And again;

23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

You asked for references, here is the Word of God you asked for.

Ok, so given those references, what's your point?

Matt. 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Lawlessness)

And again;

1 Jn. 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

And again;

2 Tim 3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.


You asked the question, I God answered it.

The Law of Moses established the priesthoods for the temple. Where are they today if the Law of Moses is still binding and in effect for us? Where are all the other established items of the Law that you claim are relevant for today? What is relevant for today, and what is not? How do you pick and choose among them all as to what applies and what does not?

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. (That means no in case you didn't understand it) But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

You might consider all of Paul's Words, not just those words which can be used to promote this religious franchise doctrine or that tradition of religious man.

The problem is that you continue lumping together the Law given by the Spirit to us, and the Law of the Old Covenant under which Israel was bound. They are not one and the same. Your problem with God and His sovereignty is that you simply don't like it that the Lord chose to deal differently with us in relation to how He dealt with the stiff-necked Jews.

Before you leap off that cliff again, don't assume from my words that there are not similarities, because there are SOME similarities. But you really need to get a grip in your habitual exercise of authority for picking and choosing what you wish to lump together simply because it appeals to your sensibilities. The Lord nowhere empowered you to rope together Covenants over which you have no control. I am not bound by the Covenant made with Abraham, and the other made with Israel. We cannot lay claim to all the promises made to them. If you think you can, then by what reference do you point for such?

The Word of God became the Man Jesus. This means HE created the Letter you preach to the world Kills.

Your lack of spiritual understanding is quite remarkable, and your lack of grasp for the verse quoted to you along this line is also remarkable. I leave you to your own devices in all this because your stone-hearted denials of what is clearly stated leaves me with no other conclusion than the fact that you subjectively pick and choose what you accept, and draw your own lines of parallel in some regards that is very much in line with that of the pharisees and scribes of old. Your appeals to the letter of the Law, as opposed to the Spirit of the Law, within true believers, that's also remarkable. You assume they are one and the same in totality in similarity, the basis for which you have never once established.

Had the written Law been sufficient for our ability to live in obedience to His Law, then there would have been no need for the indwelling of Holy Spirit within us. The stiff-necked Jews were supposed to learn this in the midst of living under the letter of the Law, and they did nothing but turn a blind eye to it all, thus Jesus wept when overlooking a people He had poured out so much Himself to bring unto Him as a hen would her chicks.

We can simply agree to disagree. You manically overlook my statements about it being a good thing to study the letter of the Law, and that the totality of the Law the Lord applies to us is written in our hearts. That seems not good enough for you. To that, I really don't give a hoot. You have bound yourself to something you don't even understand, and I leave you to that.

(shrug) Oh well....

Jr

 

[bbbbbbb]

I see that none of our Sabbath-keeping friends have joined the discussion on my other thread, Monergism vs. Synergism. I warmly invite them, as well as all of you to join the discussion. It just might help clarify the motivation(s) for keeping (or not) the Sabbath.

 

[Bob S]

The Christ made a Covenant with Levi on Sinai, on Israel's behalf. This is the Covenant that became obsolete. This Priesthood was created and given "Til the Seed should come" and included priesthood duties such as Administering God's Laws to the People and providing for the atonement of sins. This is the Covenant that changed.

Heb. 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

This is what the verse is telling us: 11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood – and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood – why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

There was no separate covenant given to the Levites, that is complete bunk and renders your remarks in the remainder of your post untrue.

 

[Studyman]

Sounds like a pity party to me. If Sabbath observers would stop criticizing Christians because we worship on another day like is continuously done, I don't believe anyone would raise their voice in protest. I realize you are not SDA, so maybe you don't preach that we are going to Hell because we don't observe the Sabbath and the eight Holy days that were given only to the Israelites.

My issue is with religious philosophies that the Scriptures don't seem to promote. Namely, the preaching regarding the New Covenant of the Christ of the Bible, and the implication that God's Sabbaths became obsolete through it.

There may be some verse somewhere to support the elimination of God's Sabbath, but it was not through the New Covenant, that is, the Christ's New Covenant defined in Jer. 31 and again in Heb. 7-10.

This is why I post His Definition of His New Covenant and strive to discuss them.

His commandments not the ones Jesus kept as He tells us in Jn 15: 9 ‘As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. 10 If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12 My command is this: love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.

Jesus said HIS Father sent Him to give us HIS Father's Words.

8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.

Jesus obeyed His Fathers Commandment and gave us His Father's Words.

Jesus also said HE and His Father are One. So to divide them by implying that God's Words and Jesus Words are different seems non-Biblical to me.

When asked which Commandments to keep Jesus pointed to His Fathers Commandments that the Christ gave us when He was the Word of God.

17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

He didn't name the First and Greatest, or His Commandment against images of God in the likeness of men, or not to hate your brother in your heart, but I believe they were implied?

These are the Word's of the Christ Himself?

Do you have a problem with Jesus own statement?

No, I believe them all. "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by Every word which proceeds from the mouth of God". It's hard to imagine that Jesus is deceiving me by telling me something that isn't truth. That is why I post HIS Word's and ask questions.

If so how about this one:

1Jn 3: 19 This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: 20 if our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. 21 Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22 and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. 23 And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: we know it by the Spirit he gave us.

I live by Jesus words to me. not what you or any other Sabbath observer has conjured up in their minds.

Jesus was one of those Sabbath observers, and HE said His Sabbath was made for man. Those are His Word's, not conjured up by me. We may disagree about what HE means, but the Word's are HIS, not mine.

Just saying.

What does lusting have to do with the subject we are on? It sounds like you are using scripture to threaten us because we don't agree with your false theories.

So, if I don't agree with your theories you threaten me with the results of the mistakes the Israelites made? May I remind you that you are not the judge. And may I remind you that I have presented scripture that has proven that you are wrong.

I neither threatened, nor judged you. If you were stung, it was by Paul's Words, not mine.

I simply pointed out that Paul is teaching Gentiles that the Law and Prophets were written for them. That they should not be ignorant of this fact, especially those who think they stand.
I am not aware of any scriptures you posted which makes my understanding of Paul's Words here untrue or wrong. I may have missed something so feel free to re-post the scriptures which proven me wrong. And thank you for the correction.

Serving God by observing a day that He has not ever ask you to keep? In fact Jesus fulfilled the Sabbath along with all the other rituals given only to Israel. He did what the Israelites didn't or couldn't do, took it away nailing it to the Cross He was nailed. Eph 2: 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace,

Who were the two groups of people? What Law, what "wall of Hostility" did God create that divided them?

It would be great if you could find the Law of God that divided Jew and Gentile. How does the Christ's Sabbath, that He said was made for man, cause a "wall of hostility" between Jew and Gentile? I have always wondered about some of the modern interpretations of these scriptures.

I do believe Jesus when HE said the mainstream preachers of His time taught for doctrines the Commandments of men, and I know they created laws which divided Jews from Gentiles that God didn't make. These laws of man, taught as God's Law for centuries, were against us. But I can not find a single Law of God which caused a "Hostile Wall" which divided Jew and Gentile. Not one which taught that Gentiles were "without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, without God and without Hope in the world". These were the Laws of the Circumcision that Jesus called the commandments of men.

There is a lot to say about this, but I think Peter in Acts 15 dispels the teaching that God's Laws were taken out of the way.

Acts 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, (God's Law) and from fornication, (God's Law) and from things strangled, (God's Law) and from blood. (God's Law)

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

These Word's of Peter, and modern religious doctrines contradict each other here. Peter turned the Gentiles away from religious men who claimed to be furthering the Law of Moses. But Peter knew their doctrines was false, so he directed the Gentiles away from these preachers and directly towards the Laws of God. In this way these Gentiles would learn directly from Moses, and not from religious men who were not in sync with the Apostles.

This is the same instruction Jesus gave His Disciples in Matt. 23:

1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

It is no wonder that Peter sent the Gentiles to learn directly from Moses.

You seem not to believe what Jesus did for all mankind and live by commands He has set aside, all because of your preconceived beliefs.

Jesus did many things. One of the greatest things HE did was expose the mainstream religion of His Time of promoting religious doctrines and traditions of religious men who had corrupted His Gospel. Exposing their man made religious traditions ultimately cost Him His Life. He was killed because He dared question the mainstream preachers of His time.

He could have called on His Father who would have wiped these self righteous preachers off the planet, but HE didn't. He offered Himself to God by allowed these fraudsters to ridicule Him, call him a liar, torture Him and murder Him as a sacrifice to atone for my past transgressions.

When asked about the sign of the times and the future He told His Disciples to "take Heed" of one thing. Not Atheists, not Islam, not drug dealers. No, when asked what to watch for in the future, Here is what HE warned of.

Matt. 24:4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I (Jesus) am Christ; and shall deceive many.

There is only one religion in the land today that fit's this description. I think this is why we are told to "test the spirits" to see if they are of the Word of God, or religious men.

Did you think you could make me "uncomfortable" enough that I would not challenge your theories?

I have never backed down from debating Messianic believers and you surely do not frighten me.

I did not intend to frighten you. Only engage in a discussion about the difference between doctrines. I look forward to you answering my questions, and discussing the doctrines promoted in modern religions. After all, if it wasn't for the understanding men have regarding different winds of doctrines, we would all be Catholic.

 

[pasifika]

This is what the verse is telling us: 11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood – and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood – why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

There was no separate covenant given to the Levites, that is complete bunk and renders your remarks in the remainder of your post untrue.

Good post Bob...