Understanding the Sabbath

[deu58]

Seeing you are the schoolmaster here how about an answer to my simple question? Also I notice You do not mention your position that it is not possible
for John to be brought into the future by the power of God. Although I agree he probably was not, Still by the power of God I beleive it Most certainly is Possible. Consider Pauls experience in 2Cor12:2. It was so intense he was not really sure if he was not there phsyically. Maybe he was,maybe he was not.

I see now that William has discovered that the text in Rev.1:10 is a mistranslation. Wonderful. So just what should we trust now as the true word of God? You guys are the experts here and we novices are just wondering what your counsel will be. As a schoolmaster, do you think we should use external writings to test the Scriptures or should we use the Scripture to test external writings? You did make a statement about what you termed uninspired writers. I go by 2Tim.3:16 but maybe that is a mistranslation also.
How can we tell?

I am wondering if the woman you are talking about is Rachel Oaks of the Seventh Day Baptists. Tell me, is she also the one that taught them that Sunday is the Mark of the Beast? That Sunday is now part of the test to see if a person is truly saved? Truthfully I would like to know because as far as I know she never bacame an Adventist and to be honest I never really did a follow up of what ever bacame of her. Maybe I should have but it did not seem important at the time.

As to the Adventists there is actually much to be admired. When I discuss Ellen White with Adventists here I do not tell them to give up what they have learned, but how they have learned it. I use 1 Thess5:19 for this. Sure hope that is not a mistranslation to. There are groups here that teach if you are not a vegetarian you can not be saved. Vegetarianism in and of itself is a very good thing. But it should not be taught as a part of the doctrine of salvation. It is the same with the Sabbath. There is nothing wrong with worshipping on the Sabbath. But when you use it as a yardstick to measure others, You are right and everybody else needs to drop what they are doing and get it right with you it becomes a form self exaltation and judgment.

We have every book, pamphlet and periodical that Ellen White ever wrote.
Many Adventists are not even aware of the many things she wrote. More than once I have shown things to Adventists here that shocked them and they were not even aware she ever wrote these kinds of things. Before you get into an argument on Adventism with me you are going to have to buy a stack of books about six feet high and go back to school yourself.

If you are interested in Adventism you can buy all the writings of Ellen White
on CD for about $160.00. Also it was Joseph Bates who brought the Sabbath doctrine to the Adventists. He studied with Rachel Oakes of the Seventh Day Baptists. At first most Adventists dismissed this teaching until Ellen White claimed in 1846 she had a vision in which she saw the original Ten Commandments tablets in Heaven with a halo around the fourth commandment. From that point forward the Sabbath became an Adventist doctrine. The teaching of Rachel Oakes had little influence among Adventists until Ellen White had her vision. Infact with out that vision the teaching would eventually have been dismissed completly. From 1844 to 1846 most Adventists, including sister White, were Sunday keepers. But maybe sister White is right. maybe there is a world wide conspiracy to hide the truth of the Seventh Day Sabbath that is so powerful they have purposly mistranlated the Scriptures that now we can not even trust our own bibles. That is why most Adventists will not except any other translation other than KJV.

yours in Christ
deu58

 

[deu58]

Hi Forum,

I got some interesting replies to my question, thank you all very much.

This is a quote from Uriah Smith, a SDA author:

The second position, that it is the day of judgement, cannot be correct. Though John might have had a vision concerning the day of judgement, he could not have had one on that day when it is yet future. The word translated "on" is {GREEK CHARACTERS IN PRINTED TEXT}, en, and is defined by Thayer when relating to time: "Periods and portions of time in which anything occurs, in, on, at, during." It never means "about" or "concerning." Hence those who refer it to the judgement day either contradict the language used, making it mean "concerning" instead of "on," or they make John state a strange falsehood by saying that he had a vision upon the Isle of Patmos, nearly eighteen hundred years ago, on the day of judgement which is yet future.
******************************************

Here his reasoning for it being incorrect is because it does not agree with his doctrine about when it says the judgement(great tribulation) is. For those who believe the great tribulation was in 70 AD, Rev 1:10 becomes another proof text. John's vision was a Heavenly view of the day of the Lord and John had the vision on that day would be what the verses literally say.

So now the next step would be to determine if there is any documentation of when John was in Patmos, Does anyone here know of anyhing?

Thanks
Justme

I was doing a study on preterism just recently and came across an article about John on patmos at a sight called Daily Bible Study I would not really call it documentation but it could give you a lead on an author also it is a big site. you may be able to contact someone there who can be more help to you. Hope this helps. I tried to type the url but then this would not let me post so Lets see if we can do this. 3wexeculink.come

yours in Christ
deu58

 

[deu58]

Hey William
in Colossians who are the men he was warning them about? In this case it would be teachers of the Mosaic Law. Now why would he say do not let these people judge you about sabbath days. If they were already obeying the Sabbath then why did he not confirm that there is only one Sabbath you need to be mindful of but the rest have passed away? But anyway you look at it this puts a dent in your idea that we should observe all the Sabbaths. Notice in 2:17 he speaks of these things as the shadow. In Heb8:4-5 and 10:1 we are told the shadow is the law. Now you could claim that he is only talking about the law of sacrifice but the fact remains the law is the shadow and Col2:17 goes beyond the sacrifices. God is not the author of confusion
Yours in Christ
deu58

 

[Yitzchak]

I would like some input please on the passage in hebrews which for our purposes seems to begin in chapter 3 and through chapter 4.

Hebrews 3:10,11 (according to the text this is the Holy Spirit speaking concerning the children of Israel in the wilderness)
" Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter my rest. "

Now fast forward to chapter 4 (skipping precious verses which can be revisited later only for the purpose of relating this to the current discussion).

Hebrews 4:3-6
" For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. And in this place again, if they shall enter my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief.

It continues, but I will leave my post at this for now. it seems to me that this passage is clearly linked to the sabbath and that a proper understanding of this passage will likely go a long way towards an understanding of the sabbath as well.

 

[William1]

‘Morning deu

It feels as if we are almost friends. As for the group which Paul warns his readers about, is none other than “the flesh”. “The flesh” were of the opinion that they had superiority. That is why they were cut off. They did not mingle with the converting Gentiles however as Paul goes to great length to explain, that they are all one. Never mind what nationality one is.

Paul too had been of the flesh, however he abandoned that sect. Most people deem Paul to infer “the inherit tendency to sin” when he speaks of the flesh, but the truth is far from them. There are in fact several “flesh” issues but by far the worse group was the sect called “the flesh” for they were of the blood lines, thus endless arguments about genealogies.

As for Col. 2:16 ff, Col. 2:16: Therefore no one should judge you in your eating or in your drinking or in portions at the Feasts or New Moons or Sabbaths. Colo 2:17 Their intent casts a shadow, but live that of the Anointed.

The problem with Paul’s letters is that they are just that, letters. We as the readers constantly have to try and guess what the issue he is addressing, is all about. Well one needs to be able to read between the lines and if you look at the above, obviously “the flesh” didn’t want to eat with the converts and not only that, they wanted to restrict them so that they could not eat of the sacrificed meats. Well, they were partially right, for the sacrificed meats were only to be eaten by the holy and no the sinners. What “the flesh” couldn’t overcome was that they thought that these Gentile sinners could never be men of honor, so therefore they should not eat of the holy food. I think it is all of Romans 14 which addresses this same issue, it’s been a while since I had to explain these thing to anyone. Bottom line, bout the only thing that did change was that the converts now had equal right to everything, if they stopped sinning and walked in obedience.

You see deu, you have ben taught that most if not all of the Old is gone and so you read it in such a manner. I read it as if we are to walk like Abraham, therefore I still sacrifice. Try this shoe on for size, there ain’t nothing new under the Son. What Messiah did, we have to do, what Abraham did we have to emulate. Did Yahoshua get circumcised? Did He eat kosher? Did He obey the Sabbath? Did he sacrifice a lamb for the Passover? Etc etc. Answer to all, YES. Now He tells us to follow His lead, so what does that say to you. Please interpret for me, “follow me”.
William

 

[deu58]

William
Ihave no problem with being your friend. But when it comes to Scripture friendship must be set aside.For as Paul said do we now please man or God. Again Paul rebuked peter to his face. Does that mean they disliked each other? It eas Peter who stood for Paul and Barnabas and stood for him again supporting his writings and calling him a beloved brother 2peter3:15. I hold no anymosity toward you or any other human being.
I even found myself feeeling sorry for Saddam when I saw his capture picture. Thats how I am. Serious, Not afraid to offend if necessary and always willing to forgive and let bygones be bygones. Remember I am A non Adventist living in a house that is ALWAYS full of Adventists. We have many heated arguments and debates and then we sit down at the table and break bread together discussing every topic under the sun. And I enjoy my time with these people. Many are truly Godfearing and seeking to please God. one point you and i agree on is we are in a sanctifacation process. but as to your Sacrificing and trying to keep the basically the whole law well you just keep blowing my mind. I did not realize you were a trained priest descended from levi, But considering the mantle of the priesthood now rests on Christ and the tribe of Judah I do not see where this makes much difference. As to follow me I'll get back to you on that.
yours in Christ
deu 58

 

[deu58]

I would like some input please on the passage in hebrews which for our purposes seems to begin in chapter 3 and through chapter 4.

Hebrews 3:10,11 (according to the text this is the Holy Spirit speaking concerning the children of Israel in the wilderness)
" Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter my rest. "

Now fast forward to chapter 4 (skipping precious verses which can be revisited later only for the purpose of relating this to the current discussion).

Hebrews 4:3-6
" For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. And in this place again, if they shall enter my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief.

It continues, but I will leave my post at this for now. it seems to me that this passage is clearly linked to the sabbath and that a proper understanding of this passage will likely go a long way towards an understanding of the sabbath as well.

The quick answer is this. It depends which side of the Sabbath fence you are on.The Sabbath keepers basically claim we did not receive a rest from Christ so the sabbath still stands, The other side says this is talking about the rest to come in the new Jerusalem with Christ.To us this is the fulfillment of Is.66:23 Its alot more involved than this and we could start a whole new thread just on this topic.

yours in Christ
deu58

 

[Symes]

Hebrews 4:3-6
" For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. And in this place again, if they shall enter my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief.

It continues, but I will leave my post at this for now. it seems to me that this passage is clearly linked to the sabbath and that a proper understanding of this passage will likely go a long way towards an understanding of the sabbath as well.

Amen!

 

[Justme]

Hi forum,

Concerning the Greek word for Lord's in Rev 1:10..............

Strong shows it as kuriakos, and that word only appears twice. The other place is talking about the Lord's supper.

To read Rev 1:10 as On the ladies day I was in the spirit makes no sense, but neither does Ladies supper in 1 Cor 11:20.

The context of 1 Cor 11:17 to 34 clearly shows us it would be 'Lord's.'

I think we can trust Strong.

Justme

 

[deu58]

Hi forum,

Concerning the Greek word for Lord's in Rev 1:10..............

Strong shows it as kuriakos, and that word only appears twice. The other place is talking about the Lord's supper.

To read Rev 1:10 as On the ladies day I was in the spirit makes no sense, but neither does Ladies supper in 1 Cor 11:20.

The context of 1 Cor 11:17 to 34 clearly shows us it would be 'Lord's.'

I think we can trust Strong.

Justme

It really did not dawn on me at first because I just glanced at your letter and saw John, Patmos, any documentation? Unfortunatly nobody really knows rocksolid when John was on Patmos. Opinions on the dating of revelation range from 65 to 95 ad.

If you are researching preterism you will find different groups who accept before the destruction of the temple and some who hold that the 95 ad date is the correct date.

Incase you haven't found this out yet there are three schools of preterist thought. Mild,moderate and extreme. Mild being they still believe the second coming is future. Moderate they hold the second coming and the rapture have already taken place{70ad} and the extreme, all prophecy has been fulfilled including the new heavens and new Jerusalem. They hold that all these things are symbolic or spiritual fulfillment and there will be no end to this earth. it will just continue on.

Here in the Philippines there are not that many english speaking churchs so I go where ever I can find one. Right now I am worshipping at the Church of Christ.
this particular group is a mix of mild to moderate preterists. I really enjoy the modest type of worship but doctrinally you could class me as pre-mill. We have done some bible studies together but what strikes me strange is, at least this particular group,
do not seem to be 1000% convinced of their qwn doctrines. Nice bunch of people though. good luck on whatever research you are doing.
yours in Christ
deu58

 

[deu58]

Hello William

First of all you can not have two Covenants that deal with the same thing existing at the same time. Your sins are either forgiven by animal sacrifice and obediance to the Law, which is not possible. Or through Gods chosen sacrifice Jesus Christ. Which today is the only way possible.

Heb 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

So the Old Testament had to pass away.
2co 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

Now you say I have been taught that the Old Testament has been done away with. Yes you are right I have.

2co 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ

Mt 9:17 Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved

We should not make animal sacrifices today for we have a better sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin.

1jo 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous

1jo 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Notice how John addresses the sin of the Christian first, For we are not without sin, and then mentions the rest of world also. There is no instruction anywhere in the new Testament that we are supposed to walk like Abraham.
Abraham, although I agree he was a great man and I to admire and respect his example, is not the one we are supposed to follow. I see nowhere in Scripture where we are to develop an Abraham like mind and character. Abraham has already recieved his portion of glory by being preserved and honored in Scripture. the first model he provides for us is his rightousness by faith, not animal sacrifice.

Jas 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

The second is he did follow God. God said leave your home and kindred.he did
God said go here. He went.God said Circumcise yourself and your family. he did. God said sacrifice your only son and he would have if God would not have stopped him. For he trusted that God would resurrect Isaac.

Ge 22:5 And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ***; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.

Notice that Abraham expected that both would go to worship and that both would return together. Thats faith. But William please don't try this at home ok? This was a one time thing. I am not trying to make fun of you. You claim you still sacrifice the Old Testament way and to me that means your out there somewhere hacking up goats sheep dove's etc. I really hope I misunderstood you brother. And you claim you want to follow Abrahams example. I have never heard a Christian claim he still sacrifices according to the Old Testament. In Christian love I am very worried about and for you.

Now if you tell me you want to walk in obediance like Abraham that I could understand and applaud for he obeyed every word that came to him from God.
Just as we should obey every word that God gives us today. In Abrahams day there were requirments he was expected to fulfill. We have our own requirements that God Expects us to fulfill today.

De 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
De 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

As God made a covenant with Israel that the Patriarchs did not have, so to he made a covenant with us through Christ that Old Testament Israel did not have.

Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Joh 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

This is the first step in learning to follow Jesus. With out it we accomplish nothing no matter what we do.
Ro 13:10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

The second step of following
Ro 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

Ro 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

The third step
Jas 1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

The fourth step
Lu 9:23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

The fifth step
Jas 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

In Romans chapters 12 and 13 there is 100 foot ladder worth of steps. God does not want your animal sacrifices. He wants you to sacrifice your self daily being ready to accept death if necessary to keep obedient to his instructions to us not through Moses, for in Moses man made a blood sacrifice to God,but through Jesus, For through Jesus God made a Blood sacrifice for us. By trying some other way of sacrifice you are telling God his sacrifice, once and for all, is not enough for you. That was the reason for the destruction of the Temple. To show that God wanted no more animal sacrifices period. They did not take the hint when the vail was torn so he gave them something they couldn't miss. He caused the temple to be destroyed completly. All though you disagree, The crucifixion triggered the beginning of the fulfilment of the Prophecy of Amos 8:5-14. On that day the vail of the temple was torn in two signaling the end of the law and over a 40 year period of time, the rest of the prophecy of the destruction of Israel unfolded ending with them being cast out like a flood and scattered to the four corners of the earth.

Heb 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

It is true that God is love,But it is also true that he can be terrible in judgment

Oh I forgot to mention I never said Ignatius was the author of Reveleation
I said he was a disciple of John the Apostle who wrote the book of revelation.
This man whom you have labled a sellout {Adam} is one of the most famous martyrs in Christian History. He was torn to pieces by the lions in a Roman arena Because he would not deny his faith. Congradulations you have just judged a martyr for Christ as an unfaithful servant

Also the meat issue in Romans 14 comes from the abstaining from meat sacrificed to idols. during these sacrifices any left over meats would sold through the Butcher shops and there were Christians who chose vegetarianism rather than risk eating meat that may have been sacrificed to idols. Those of a stronger faith realized that if they gave thanks to God for the food they were going to eat they did not have to worry about where it came from. Those who ate had a tendency to look down on those who did not. Paul was correcting this problem.
yours in Christ
deu58

 

[adam332]

William,
you said;
"I am reading from the Greek Vaticanus Codex. I do not find “Kurios” = lord in Rev 1:10 but in place of it I find, “kuria” = lady. The same spelling as in 2 John 1 and 5. Soooo, Revelations 1:10 has absolutely nothing to do with the Lord’s Day. I suppose the translators were trying to support Sunday worship when they translated this passage."
First of all I have not found access to the Vaticanus Codex online so I can not verify your findings to that claim. But I will say that it is quite an authorative manuscript, due to it's age(325 AD) and thorough method of transcription. But therein the problem lies, the book of Revelation was not in that codex. It was added anywhere from 6 to 9 centuries later to complete its NT. So unfortunately your claims, while attempting to use a very authorative source, fall short due to the fact that it's copy of Revelation does not hold the same authority.


You said;
"By the way, the byz, n26 and the tr manuscripts all agree with my findings."

First forgive my ignorance...but enlighten me as to n26. Secondly, the byz and the tr do not agree with you in any place that I could find. They do however agree with the KJV which says that this word is "Lord's", not "ladies". I double checked this by reffering to the verses in 2 John which they clearly see as being different from the greek word found in Rev. 1:10. So please show where your claims for those two sources are from. Just for the record, you can find the byz and tr findings, that I am claiming, at the sight below amongst other places.....

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

Assuming that you do have some text that you have found that does imply the word "Lady's" and not the word "Lord's", it is definitely not authorative enough to be found considered correct in any translation that I have ever seen or heard of.

Which brings us back to the issue of what day is the Lord's...please note what was mentioned in my earlier post....

"If this were the universal designation of the first day of the week at the time the Revelation was written, the same writer would most assuredly call it so in all his subsequent writings. But John wrote his Gospel after he wrote the Revelation, and yet in that Gospel he calls the first day of the week, not "the Lord's day," but simply "the first day of the week." For proof that John's Gospel was written at a period subsequent to the Revelation, the reader is referred to standard authorities."

Also...

Exo. 20:10 "But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God..."

Lev.23:3 "... the seventh day...it is the sabbath of the LORD ..."

Deu.5:14 "But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God..."

Mat.12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

Mark 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

Luke 6:5 "... the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath."

There are still, 15 additional instances which all show clearly that the Christ calls the seventh day “my Sabbath(s)”, again laying ownership of only one special day, (Exo. 31:13, Lev. 19:3, 30, 26:2, Isa. 56:4, Eze. 20:12,13,16,20,21,24, 22:8,26, 23:38, 44:24).

 

[William1]

Oh deu;

When you go out on a limb, you pick a twig. If you suppose that a few letters and accounts of the historic events of Christ to be the sum total of all that is required, you are deceived. Remember this, if you dare take away any of God’s Words, or add to it, you are a doomed man.

Lastly if you suppose that Abraham’s walk is not to be emulated, then I suppose you are not of His Seed.

Too bad, so sad.

His son
William

 

[William1]

Adam

N26 is also known as the majority text. The Vatican Codex actually dates back some 1800 years, so I have no idea where you are getting your information from.

I have four witnesses that read kuria, and only you who say Lord! What was your name again, and how did you receive your calling?

William

 

[adam332]

deu,
you said;
"Seeing you are the schoolmaster here..."

Well, if you don't like my sarcasm may I suggest that you learn how to apply the word of God in contextual relevance. Instead of murdering scriptural intent by quouting a single verse out of a chapter and applying it to a completely different subject.

Such behavior leads me to believe one of several things....

1.You didn't notice the relevance and it was an honest mistake.
(This I do not believe for one second; in light of the fact that you have already shown your knowledge in the area of scripture, and history. If this was the case then you are spending far too much time learning about mans writings and history instead of the Bible, which means you never had the knowledge of your claims in the first place. Therefore, you shouldn't be here making claims but instead, asking questions.)

2. You did know that it is irrrelevant, but you were hoping that I didn't.
(If this was the case it would be very deceitful on your part, and possibly damaging if some less knowledgable person was reading and believed you.)

3. You still actually believe that such scripture is relevant.
(This also I do not believe, otherwise my rebuttals to your claims would have been countered by some evidence as to their relevance.)

So, since number 2 is the likely candidate I did not take kindly to it, and I find your approach whichever of these it may be to be in the wrong place. I am here for objective and honest Bible discussions, not to play these inane games with someone 17 yrs my senior. If I put you in your place, then so be it...I call it like I see it.

Now, if you want continue this without the games and in an honest and objective manner....I'll be here. Assuming that you want to continue...here we go.

You said;
"...how about an answer to my simple question?"

I am assuming that these are the question(s) you are referring to....

"As he was teaching Pagans who knew nothing about Moses or The Law, why did he not instruct them that the Sabbath must be kept as the proper day to worship? How could something that you and others like you deem so vitally important not be taught by the Apostles in New Testament scriptures?"

A to1st Q-
It should strongly noted that Israelites stood out like a sore thumb in regards to their Sabbath keeping. Any culture who was in contact with them for more than seven consecutive days would no doubt see this enormous change in the behavior of this entire race of people on this particular day. This day of rest was a major defining charcateristic of them and I see no historical mention that they were difficult to distinguish in this regard. IOW everyone in contact with them already knew that their Lord demanded Sabbath keeping.

A to 2nd Q-
This logic behind it does not hold water. The NT does not go into such detail about the first four commands(pertaining to God), as they do with the last six commands(pertaining to men). They do however touch on them slightly, as well as through example. So, to put such emphasis on the fourth command as a major teaching any more than the first three would be inconsistent. Secondly, it is taught through repetive example, through absence of another day instructed in it's place, and through more than one area of scripture.
_________
_________

I gotta' go for now but will be back to finish ASAP.

 

[adam332]

William I am quite aware of the age of the Vatican codex...but revelation was not found in that ancient manuscript. It was added to it 6 to 9 centuries later so that the codex would have the entire NT. like I said this means that it's copy of revelation does not hold the same authority of age that the rest of it holds. Do a little deeper research and you will see that revelation was not found in that original manuscript.

What 4 witneses? No one here agrees with you..it is I who have placed a source link from the byz and the tr that says lord's. You have shown nothing.

You said;
"What was your name again, and how did you receive your calling?"

What is that supposed to mean?

 

[adam332]

William,
read please...



The Codex Vaticanus (Vatican City, Bibl. Vat., Vat. gr. 1209; Gregory-Aland no. B or 03) is one of the oldest extant vellum manuscripts of the Bible, written in uncial letters. It is slightly older than Codex Sinaiticus, both of which were probably written in the 4th century.

Codex Vaticanus originally contained a complete copy of the Septuagint and the New Testament, but pages 1519-1536 containing Hebrews 9:14 through Revelation were lost and replaced by a 15th century minuscule supplement (no. 1957).

Codex Vaticanus has been housed in the Vatican Library (founded by Pope Nicholas V in 1448) for as long as it has been known, appearing in its earliest catalog of 1475.

Its previous history is unknown, but there has been speculation that it had previously been in the possession of Cardinal Bessarion because the minuscule supplement has a text similar to one of Bessarion's manuscripts. T.C. Skeat, a paleographer at the British Museum, has argued that Codex Vaticanus was among the 50 Bibles that the Emperor Constantine I ordered Eusebius of Caesarea to produce.

Codex Vaticanus is a leading member of the Alexandrian text-type and was heavily used by Westcott and Hort in their edition of the Greek New Testatment (1881). In 1995 double dots ("umlauts") have been discovered in the margin of the new testament, which seem to indicate positions of textual variants. The date of these is disputed among scholars.

from....

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus

 

[William1]

To cut to the chase;

If one was to supposedly walk as Christ, yet did not obey the Sabbath, (obviously no one can walk as Christ if they do not obey the Sabbath) they would be condemned eternally. The violation of the Sabbath carries the same sentence as that of murder or adultery.

It really doesn’t matter to me, deu, if you do not want to submit to the Law Giver now, in time you will ,but it will be too late. Your way is that which fits into the laws of the land. When the land condones same sex marriages, deu, you will give your blessing to that as well, after all, we the church, are all sinners, right deu?

If any Commandment was ever given by God to those who would want to embark on the True Path, and if this Command was found to be impossible to keep, and yet had carried the sentence of death, then the Devil Himself would have to be granted Clemency and an apology given to Him by the Almighty One of Israel.

If any Commandment was ever changed by God for those who would want to embark on the True Path, and if this Command was made null and void, then the Israelites whom the Almighty One of Israel slue for disobedience, would not only have to be given an apology and compensation paid, but they too would have to be granted Clemency.

God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Thank God for something solid. To be as fluid with one’s doctrine as the water is on a hot summers day, is foolishness.

Let me guess, deu, in your Bible it says that God’s name is I AM. It also quotes the Messiah as saying, “go and sin some more, I will take care of your debt, after all, poor deu, it is way to hard to obey. Or else, just change the Commandments to suit your need.”

Joyful to the helm
William

 

[adam332]

William read again please...

Codex Vaticanus (designated B), containing ALMOST the whole New Testament, (c. 325)

from...

http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/byzantine.htm

there are many more that tell the same story. The fact is it was not complete and the book of revelation was added. I'm sorry to prove you wrong...but that happens to the best of us.

 

[William1]

Adam

Reve 1:10 (byz) egenomhn en pneumati en th kuriakh hmera kai hkousa fwnhn opisw mou megalhn wV salpiggoV

Reve 1:10 (n26) egenomhn en pneumati en th kuriakh hmera kai hkousa opisw mou fwnhn megalhn wV salpiggoV

Reve 1:10 (tr) egenomhn en pneumati en th kuriakh hmera kai hkousa opisw mou fwnhn megalhn wV salpiggoV

Please find enclosed three different sources which clearly show the word “lord” should be lady, the Greek word kuria. 2959 Kuria {koo©ree'©ah}
from 2962; TDNT - 3:1095,486; n f
AV - lady 2; 2
1) a Christian woman to whom the second Epistle of John is addressed

Reve 1:10 (byz) kuria

Reve 1:10 (n26) kuria

Reve 1:10 (tr) kuria