Understanding the Sabbath

due
Just had a a message from John.

God'sWatchman

No Law of God is Ever done away with.

Click to expand...

A agree with that.

Symes said:

due
Just had a a message from John.

God'sWatchman

A agree with that.

Click to expand...

not sure if I am talking to symes or godswatchman

done away no. changed yes. Remember circumcision was not only given to the Jews
but Abraham also. that law has also been passed to us. but through circumcision of the heart, not the flesh. Now we need to discover further the changes in the Sabbath commandment. I am not ready to discuss that because there are other issues involved in interpretation between us {all of us! } that need to be sifted through first.

yours in Christ
deu58

adam332 said:

The problem is that "the first of the week" could have been what we call Sunday night. Which would have made it technically the 2nd day. As I said...Luke gave it no significance to even point out what day it was...yet, many of you choose it as a source for doctrine.

Click to expand...

the scripture says "mia sabbatton" mia is greek for first and "sabbaton" is the greek equal of "shabbath" Both are a word for day that is a specific kind of day. because luke did not use the word for a generic day makes no difference.

Out of all that has been written on this subject here and all that I wrote in that post...that's all you have as a rebuttal?

Also, thinks for mentioning the traditional language for how a specific day is recognized.

This phraseology pointed to the Sabbath...let me explain. Today we say the first day of the week...the second day of the week...etc....

At that time the phrase would have actually sounded something like this...the first day towards the Sabbath....the second day towards the Sabbath...etc....

Yet these Sunday advocates try to say this passage and others are proof that the first day had become the new Sabbath. That is ridiculous! The first day towards the Sabbath, is the new Sabbath? That makes no sense whatsoever and is never even hinted at anywhere in the scriptures.

adam332 said:

It would be my understanding that he is speaking of dead works performed out of obligation and not love. Does your spouse not want you to have an affair simply because you shouldn't, or because you love them so much you would never want to be unfaithful and break the covenant of marriage? This is why Christ spoke of the spirit of the law...before one ever breaks the letter of the law they had already broken the spirit. Therefore the mere thought of breaking it, is breaking it.

When the law is performed out of love the burden is removed, the love makes it YOUR desire to keep it. When it becomes your own desire, it is not a burden.

Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.

1Jo 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.

1Jo 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

2Jo 1:6 And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.

Click to expand...

need some help here. "If you love me keep my commandments." What are his (the speaker is Jesus) commandments. Where can you show Jesus taking ownership of the 10 commeandments? If Jesus did not keep (observe, obey) the law He could not have been our sacrifice. He came to fulfill the law, that is meet all the requirements of the law. He did so and said "It is finished" Now the jot and tiddle of the law can pass away.

Christ is the one who blessed the Sabbath on the seventh day of creation. He is the one who wrote them with His finger on tables of stone. Do you need proof the Christ is our creator and not the Father?

If you want to doubt Christ' divine work as our creator and the fact that all men must go though Christ to get to the Father as Biblical principles...maybe you should start another thread on that subject...it does have relevance here but it is still a subject unto itself.

May I direct you to Isa 54:5 and Mat. 22:40 for starters about the law and the identity and role of Christ.

William1 said:

John;

Let me see if I got you straight. You do not keep the Sabbath, yet you would like to instruct me as to what is permissible and what is not permissible for me to do on the Sabbath? Would you like to bind me with instructions which aren’t from God but supposedly apply to the Sabbath so that I might have a distaste for one of the highest Covenants man can enter with the Most High God?

You say that the Sabbath under the old covenant means, no fires, no cooking, no driving, no working and the such. Let me ask you, did YaHVeH tell you this? Where do you get this from?

Then you suggest that you in fact have a new and better way of keeping the Sabbath under a new covenant in listening to the still small voice which comes from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. John, let me assure you, that if you do not keep the Commandments of God physically, there is no Holy Spirit dwelling within you, you have mistaken the small voice. You have trusted your heart rather than the written Word of God.

Yes John, I live by the law under the old convenant for righteousness, I live by each one perfectly. Whether I have broken them all or just one is hardly the issue, for you break each one. Ands yes, John, I obey all the Commandments, I do not sin. After all, why would I? Have you no idea what the penalty for sin is? Why would anyone take instructions from the blind, the sinner?

You say, “The new convenant is spiritual or inward, applied to our minds”. How convenient. Try telling your spouse this while you are having an affair. Try telling it to the officials of the land when you are guilty of murder. Better yet, try telling it to the Almighty Judge on that DAY when you are being tried for violating His Sacred Statute.

Again John, it really doesn’t matter to me one way or the other, I walk among sinners everyday, that doesn’t sway me. I just wouldn’t want you to think that you actually have instructions from the Father. Go ahead, sin all you want, but there is no Messiah from God that can help you if you do not take His Lead.

In Pursuit of Clemency
William

Click to expand...

william, I am so sad for you. what happened to "there is none righteous, no not one." Of course you are the exception. You are only righteous by declaration that imputed righteousness (something forced on you) if you like i'll get the exact ref for you.

Trucker are you going to respond to any rebuttals or will you continue to throw out quick responses to old comments while not defending them.? If so please do not waste everyones time here having to scroll through your comments that are simply wasting space. A discussion is two sided back.... and forth, get it?

Hello Adam

Bet you will be glad when the Holidays are over! I want you to understand I am not being critical. I am simply stating from my own experience why I beleive trying to use a hebrew greek dictionary can cause more harm than good.

1. The church I have been going to lately is preterist in thier doctrines.
Mt 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

See the word world? it can also be interpreted as age. which is what the preterists do because it helps them to support their own particuler belief system which is the second coming of Christ was in 70 a.d, the Great tribulation is past, the Anti christ has not only been revealed but has been dead for almost 2000 years there is no future millenial kingdom because it began in 70 a.d and a whole slew of other changes simply because they decided to use the word age instead of the word world simply because it is the best word to support their doctrine. And technically the word age is exceptable.

2 Here in the Philippines when we first started doing studies with the locals those who spoke english as a second language all wanted to study in english. Seeing as how you are in retail ,you understand what the customer wants the customer gets, so I went out and bought a bunch of english bibles. When I would have them read a verse I would have them explain what the verse meant to them. some of the answers I got were so far away from the real meaning of the verse that I was not sure if we reading the same bibles. The problem was even though they could read english, that did not mean that they understood the words to their fullest content. They could not think in english. So back to the book store I went and bought another bunch of bibles this time in the native tongue and there was a 100% improvement.

The point being I do not speak Greek or Hebrew. I do not understand it and I can not think in it and I believe there is more risk of interpreting something incorrectly by trying to figure out the original tongues than reading the plain ole english I already have.

I am aware that people claim there are translational errors in the scriptures which only ,in my opinion, adds to my position. These errors were made by highly educated people experienced in document translation. Now with all their Phd's and experience if they made mistakes, How many would I make with no experience at all?

I use scripture to interpret scripture mixed with prayer and a belief in the Holy Spirit. And I am not trying to imply that you do not for I am sure you do. I am simply saying we need to be careful trying to put to much stock on interpreting the hebrew and greek for ourselves

Let us not forget "ladies day" for the truth of the matter is if you made a mistake in translation, unless grossly obvious, I would never know. Maybe my next go around at sea I will try to experiment with some greek and hebrew but as of today, I simply am not qualified

yours in Christ
deu58

I made no claim about Ladies' day. That was william. If you find any error in some point I make about the original hebrew or greek please point it out.

Also beware that the majority text that the KJV came from is no longer the majority text. Thousands of additional manuscripts, some of which hold more authority in their age and many other areas of criteria, have since been discovered. There are many determining factors in which the majority text and the authority thereof are established, these are the same criteria that the KJV translators used, and would surely applaud that they are still in use, in light of the many later text discoveries. There should be no doubt, that if they had access to all the text that have been found to date their version would have had some differences.

I still use the KJV exclusively...but when I find a contradiction in their translation I rightfully assume that the fault does not occur on the part of the original inspired writers, but instead I assume that it lies in the translation. That being the obvious case I refer back to the original text, I compare scripture with scripture, I take into consideration the time and culture, I even will see EVERY time that word was ever used in the Bible(sometimes thousands of references) and read them in context to understand how the inspired writers used them. I try my best to be a Berean.

The truth of the matter is the the majority of Biblical evidence is the best gauge for doctrine. therefore the only real reason for trying to discover why any verse would give a different impression than the majority is to placate those who choose the minority of evidence for doctrine. IOW... if I was the only man alive I would have no need for any original text because the majority of Biblical evidence is obviously the truth and the minority of conflicting scripture is obviously the error.

deu,
if you want... we can stop at Gal. 4 and discuss it and then I will proceed onto the next passage you gave. If you have no problem with my discernment of that chapter and feel that it does not validate your point I will move on without further discussion. What say you?

trucker said:

need some help here. "If you love me keep my commandments." What are his (the speaker is Jesus) commandments. Where can you show Jesus taking ownership of the 10 commeandments? If Jesus did not keep (observe, obey) the law He could not have been our sacrifice. He came to fulfill the law, that is meet all the requirements of the law. He did so and said "It is finished" Now the jot and tiddle of the law can pass away.

Click to expand...

hello every one

Actually trucker has brought up an issue that I was planning to bring up later.

Mt 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Mt 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

This is a verse many Adventists use to help support their contention that the Sabbath is still relevant to the Christian today. So by this verse every thing still stands and nothing has changed.

Lu 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

It is his words in this verse that tell us that now the way is open for a change in the law that was not open before. So now we find ourselve discussing just what changes in the law took place. We need to remember that Jesus also gave commandments during his earthly ministry. So would these not be of a higher law than the Moaic ten?

Heb 3:5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;
Heb 3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end. .

The Apostles also had been given the authority to add commandments

Mt 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mt 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Here he gives Peter his own authority to speak,forgive and command in his name.

1jo 2:7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning. 1jo 2:8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.

Here John explains the commandment he is about to write is not to replace the old command that they have already recieved, but to add to it for a fuller explanation.

And again I have met Adventists who use these verses to support their Sabbath view.
But the problem with that argument is which old commandment from the beginning is he reffering to? The old commandment of the mosaic law, or the old commandmet that was givien by Christ during his time here on earth?

The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

Considering they were teaching Christ risen, It would seem to me that they are reffering to the beginning of the gospel message.

Every time the bible mentions keep or obey the commandments the Adventists automatically jump to the Eternal Ten of Moses, which it is impossible for them to be
eternal in the first place. The fourth commandment DID have a beginning
and if some thing has a beginning then obviously it is not eternal.

yours in Christ
deu58

Does a righteous servant of the Lord have a beginning? Yet, will he not be the inheritor of eternal life?

I will be happy to address this last post as with the many other positions you hold, but let's not jump around. You mentioned Gal. 4 and I have addressed it...do you have any rebuttal or do you acknowledge my view in regards to it? I am ready to get this moving again...are you not?

You seem to generalize alot particularly about Adventists...let me generalize about Sunday advocates, if I may. What I have seen is that Sunday advocates throw out a verse as an alleged proof text for their position...a rebuttal is given which shows their clear error of said position and suddenly they fall silent about their claim of that passage.

They then produce another passage with another claim. Again, the next claim is sufficiently refuted and they have no adequate response....they then throw out another passage and claim...ad infinitum.....

At a later date they will throw out the original claim(s) and passage(s) as if they have never been refuted. They have no position for the rebuttals, showing that their claims fall short of the mark or miss it completely, yet they continue to use them as though they had never been disproven. What's up with that?

adam332 said:

Does a righteous servant of the Lord have a beginning? Yet, will he not be the inheritor of eternal life?

I will be happy to address this last post as with the many other positions you hold, but let's not jump around. You mentioned Gal. 4 and I have addressed it...do you have any rebuttal or do you acknowledge my view in regards to it? I am ready to get this moving again...are you not?

You seem to generalize alot particularly about Adventists...let me generalize about Sunday advocates, if I may. What I have seen is that Sunday advocates throw out a verse as an alleged proof text for their position...a rebuttal is given which shows their clear error of said position and suddenly they fall silent about their claim of that passage.

They then produce another passage with another claim. Again, the next claim is sufficiently refuted and they have no adequate response....they then throw out another passage and claim...ad infinitum.....

At a later date they will throw out the original claim(s) and passage(s) as if they have never been refuted. They have no position for the rebuttals, showing that their claims fall short of the mark or miss it completely, yet they continue to use them as though they had never been disproven. What's up with that?

Click to expand...

I just want to have my thought on this

Dr. Bacchiocchi is the first non-Catholic to have graduated from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. There, in response to his Ph.D. dissertation, From Sabbath to Sunday, he received a gold medal from Pope Paul VI for academic distinction. He has also earned degrees in the USA and has served as a missionary in Ethiopia. He is author of numerous articles and twelve books, and has recently retired from his role as professor of church history and theology at Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan.

The topic of Dr. Bacchiocchi's dissertation at the Pontifical Gregorian University was the history of Jewish Sabbath-keeping and its evolution into Christian Sunday-keeping. Much of the early-centuries historical material on this web site is taken by permission directly or indirectly from Dr. Bacchiocchi's dissertation, published by the Pontifical Gregorian University Press in 1977.

At the university in Rome, Dr. Bacchiocchi had hands-on access to rare and unpublished documents by obscure early-century authors, which shed light on his study. It was the possibility of access to such documentation that had originally attracted Dr. Bacchiocchi, a Protestant, to the Pontifical Gregorian University.

For many years since the publication of his dissertation, Dr. Bacchiocchi has conducted Lord's Day Seminars in many parts of the world, discussing and defending the seventh-day Sabbath of the Bible.


-----------------

And that guy was banned from the Vatican University and did not have the permission to come see his dying teacher who have left him write the essaie about the Sabbath.

If the Catholic Church can say that he is true about this but reject himn after because they didn't want him to spread the truth well there is something weird about this.

Anyway , the name is there , you can search for him , or go to his seminar ,,, He was in Canada not long ago ... unfortunately I did not have the chance to see him that time so I am just saying what I know.

I just gave you a little view about this , I don't want to have a debate , I just want to let people read about this ... This is all real , so if you don't believe me , well search for yourself because this thing really happened.

This was my only post because I know that the Sabbath question can't be debate on a forum (20 pages and still nobody have come to a conclusion ) , so I prefer posting 1 time with a good example , than 100 time and still have no real conclusion.


God Bless

adam332 said:

deu,
if you want... we can stop at Gal. 4 and discuss it and then I will proceed onto the next passage you gave. If you have no problem with my discernment of that chapter and feel that it does not validate your point I will move on without further discussion. What say you?

Click to expand...

hey adam

Actually I do not agree with your assesment and i apoligize that I have been side tracked. in several other disscusions here plus we are going tobe having company to day coming from another island, Another Adventist missionary and an old friend who I met before I married my wife. My Intention was to work on Romans 14 but again I have been sidetracked Also considering that I will be leaving for america in about 3 weeks the wife is getting upset that I am spending to much time with the pc and not enough time with her. I still am going to do the romans thing and hopefully i can start tonight.

yours in Christ
deu58

adam332 said:

Does a righteous servant of the Lord have a beginning? Yet, will he not be the inheritor of eternal life?

I will be happy to address this last post as with the many other positions you hold, but let's not jump around. You mentioned Gal. 4 and I have addressed it...do you have any rebuttal or do you acknowledge my view in regards to it? I am ready to get this moving again...are you not?

You seem to generalize alot particularly about Adventists...let me generalize about Sunday advocates, if I may. What I have seen is that Sunday advocates throw out a verse as an alleged proof text for their position...a rebuttal is given which shows their clear error of said position and suddenly they fall silent about their claim of that passage.

They then produce another passage with another claim. Again, the next claim is sufficiently refuted and they have no adequate response....they then throw out another passage and claim...ad infinitum.....

At a later date they will throw out the original claim(s) and passage(s) as if they have never been refuted. They have no position for the rebuttals, showing that their claims fall short of the mark or miss it completely, yet they continue to use them as though they had never been disproven. What's up with that?

Click to expand...

Hello adam

The same can be said about sabbath keepers. As to generalizing about adventism if you want a taste of what I know about adventism see my post to symes post #158 page 16 We jump around because their are other people on this discussion also. I am not here to take over this discussion, I am here to participate. Also I am talking to John {KC4} via email, I am married an it is christmas. I have alot of things going on to and by the way

MERRY CHRISTMAS To all AND MAY THE LORD OF HEAVEN BLESS YOUR NEW YEAR

yours in christ
deu58

http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/

The above link will show just about all there is to know about the Sabbath and how it was changed from Saturday to Sunday.

"
[font=Verdana, Geneva, Helvetica, Arial][size=-1]At a time when many Christians are influenced more by societal trends than by Biblical teachings, the author provides a refreshing Biblical perspective on important Christian beliefs and practices. Each of the 16 books authored by Dr. Bacchiocchi, represents months or even years of painstaking research into vital Biblical truths. You will find that a thoughtful reading of these books will change your life for the better by offering you a refreshing Biblical perspective on vital areas of Christian living."[/size][/font]

All his books are available and can be seen online at the above link

adam332 said:

Trucker are you going to respond to any rebuttals or will you continue to throw out quick responses to old comments while not defending them.? If so please do not waste everyones time here having to scroll through your comments that are simply wasting space. A discussion is two sided back.... and forth, get it?

Click to expand...

Adam

With due respect, brother this is a christian public forum. Not our own private web site. Please show some Christian love/respect for our other brothers and sisters who wish to post here. Personally I enjoy seeing other peoples concepts and ideas herewhether they are for or against.

what good does arguing over a day do us if we do not work to place the love of Christ in our hearts? I do not mean to offend you adam
for if I did I would not be so Gentle. I am only saying lets conduct our selves in a Godly manner rather rather than a worldy insultive manner.

I am now down loading all your posts relevant to our discussion. I have discovered I can use my frontpage editor to put together my reply and then paste it into the editor here to post. this way I can work off line giving more serious cconsideration and replies to our discussion. Also there are still things I have mentioned that you have made no comment on. I will touch on them again when I post to refresh your memory
I see no reason to move to new questions with out first properly addressing the old questions.

I know this is a very busy time of year for you and you must be exhausted. We will keep you in our prayers that our lord will provide you strength and keep you well

yours in Christ
deu58