• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Where was the Sabbath Abolished?

Gary K

an old small town kid
Aug 23, 2002
4,660
1,016
Visit site
✟111,932.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I can agree with that statement.
Our opinion of what scripture means is not scripture.

Have I given an opinion on what scripture means?
No, I simply ask questions, or consider person's questions, and let the Bible supply the answer.

On the other hand, if you were to read through the thread, and see how much commentary the sabbath keepers have, on the few scriptures they use, you will notice quite a lot of opinions.

What about you? How many scriptures did you use? Post #585; Post #587; Post #632; Post #640
None.
Why are you giving so many opinions, if you feel the way you do about your statement?

I see why.
You see it as each person giving their "position on a subject.

That is so sad. :(
What has the churches done to people.
They have minimized the value of the Bible.


I think you will say that I misapplied every verse that contradicts your "position".
That's okay. Thanks for sharing that opinion, although, you know It doesn't mean anything without evidence though... I hope.
I contradicted your opinion of what scripture says a bunch of times and all you did was tell me I had no knowledge of scripture just like you do with SB and others. To what purpose is there for me to keep on giving you scripture? You have made it abundantly clear you refuse to listen to anyone who contradicts your opinion.
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
3,053
616
64
Detroit
✟79,495.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I contradicted your opinion of what scripture says a bunch of times and all you did was tell me I had no knowledge of scripture just like you do with SB and others.
If you can find this on the forums, it is the truth. Otherwise, it is lies.
Since it doesn't exist, it's the later.

To what purpose is there for me to keep on giving you scripture?
Those posts I referenced were not to me alone. Only two were.
Are you sure you have the right person?

You have made it abundantly clear you refuse to listen to anyone who contradicts your opinion.
This seems to be a trend here - maligning and slandering posters.
I have and always do listen to persons, even when they disagree with me.
You do know whom the father of the lie is, and why it's not good to lie, don't you?
 
Upvote 0

Gary K

an old small town kid
Aug 23, 2002
4,660
1,016
Visit site
✟111,932.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
If you can find this on the forums, it is the truth. Otherwise, it is lies.
Since it doesn't exist, it's the later.



Those posts I referenced were not to me alone. Only two were.
Are you sure you have the right person?


This seems to be a trend here - maligning and slandering posters.
I have and always do listen to persons, even when they disagree with me.
You do know whom the father of the lie is, and why it's not good to lie, don't you?
Hmmmm..... Did you see where SB liked my post? That's confirmation of what I said.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,118
5,487
USA
✟688,290.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
"Sabbath started at Creation" is not an answer to the question "Where did God give the Sabbath commandment?"
A commandment is, "An order or injunction given by authority; a command; a charge; a precept; a mandate."

The question was not "when did God make the Sabbath", but "Where did God give the Sabbath commandment?"
So thank you.
The scriptures do not say God commanded the keeping of a Sabbath at creation.

I believe you already know this, hence why you attempt to answer after three pages had gone.


You missed these. Exodus 24:3-8; Exodus 34:27, 28; Deuteronomy 31:9, 11


The flesh side of me is tempted to say, Oh please... but I will refrain.
"If you disagree, then..." is not an accusation. It's a condition. I think you know this as well.
You certainly are older than 14.


Is there a point to this?


Did I not say "God rested on the seventh day from all his creative work"?
I'm not seeing your point. Is there a point?


This sounds like an idea you are sharing.
What's the point of all this though? Why are you going into all this. This is not a sermon, is it?


Okay, it's a sermon. Why?
Why are you preaching a sermon, if you don't believe you know the truth?


Ah. Preaching accomplished.
I'll take care. Thanks. You do the same. :)
Thanks for the response. There are things you are not really reading or fully understanding like Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13 Exo 32:16 Deut 5:22 which is not Deut 31:24-26 Moses is not God, God writing on Stone is not the same as Moses writing in a book, holy and blessed does not mean contrary or against, inside the ark is not the same as being placed outside the ark, but thats okay, I think we are worlds apart on our understanding of God’s Word, but I still wish you all the best.

Thanks for the chat and God bless.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,631
4,675
Hudson
✟333,491.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
You said that Paul did that earlier. Didn't you?
So, when Paul then says, "What then shall we say? Is the law sin?", he is not now contrasting the law of sin with the Law of God.
You asked the question, so I answered it. It is extremely important to discern between what Paul said about the Law of God and the law of sin because if you conflate them, then according to God we should consider Paul to be a false prophet who was not speaking for Him (Deuteronomy 13).

This is not a comparison, or contrasting of anything, is it.
Paul made a point, and then he asks a question concerning the point he made.
What was the point Paul made?
Romans 7:6
But now, having died to what bound us, we have been released from the law, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Therefore he asks the question...
What then shall we say? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed, I would not have been mindful of sin if not for the law. For I would not have been aware of coveting if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” Romans 7:7

So, if we are following Paul's reasoning, we see he first uses an illustration, that will get his listeners to understand the point, he will make.
I will give focus to the main point, so we don't get distracted from that by minor details.

The illustration... Romans 7:1-3
Do you not know, brothers (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has authority over a man only as long as he lives?
For instance,
a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage.
So then, if she is joined to another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law and is not an adulteress, even if she marries another man.

The application of the illustration.... Romans 7:4-6
Likewise, my brothers, you also have been put to death to the Law through the body of Christ, for you to belong to another, to the One having been raised out from the dead, so that we should bear fruit to God.
For when we lived according to the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law*** were at work in our bodies, bearing fruit for death. *** Galatians 3:19; Romans 3:20; Romans 4:15
But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that which we were bound, in order for us to serve in newness of the Spirit, and not in oldness of the letter.

Paul is referring to the same Law in verse 4, 6, 7, and the illustration makes the point those who now belong to another, are released from that Law, and are not bound by it.
This is a reasonable, ordered line of reasoning used by the apostle to drive home an important point regarding the Law, which includes the command, "thou shall not covet", that this law is not binding on them.
They can thus serve in newness of the Spirit, and not in oldness of the letter.

Thank you for your effort.
May you have peace.
You restated your position, but you neglected to deal with the major problems that I raised with your position. A law that stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death is a law that is sinful, so Romans 7:5 and 7:7 can't both be referring to the same law. In Romans 7:22, Paul delighted in obeying the Law of God, so verses that you interpret as referring to the Law of God should make sense for it to be referring to something that Paul delighted in doing, and it would again be absurd to think that Paul was saying that we need to die to what he delighted in doing, that he delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, and that he delighted in being held captive to sin, but rather it is the law of sin that he described as holding him captive to sin (Romans 7:23). Likewise, it is absurd to think that the way to bear fruit for God is not by following His instructions for how to do that, but by dying to His instructions. Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Law of God by word and by example, so it is absurd to think that the way to be unified with him is by rejecting everything he taught, especially when the Law of God is God's instructions for how to be unified with Jesus. Furthermore, the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Law of God (Ezekiel 36:26-27), so it is absurd to think that the way to walk in the Spirit is by rejecting the Law of God, especially when Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God (Romans 8:4-7). Paul was not an enemy of God, but rather he was a servant of God, so it is again absurd to interpret Him as speaking against obeying the Law of God. Your position is utterly absurd, but you don't seem to care.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HIM

Friend
Site Supporter
Mar 9, 2018
4,896
2,029
59
Alabama
Visit site
✟543,261.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I have not addressed your posts after you dismissed my invitation to have a reasonable discussion and ignored my post.
When someone does not want to listen to and respond to me, I determine that they want to preach to me, and not consider or address anything I say.
No thanks.
Okay Corey. However I am more willing to bet that, the fact that you can’t continue in respect to your line of theology because of the facts in the posts is more true than your excuse. Besides that if you had an argument you would have posted such that shows what was posted to leaf and youwas not true.. You didn’t. All you did was post an opinion with absolutely nothing objective to back it up. Here is one the post that was to you. That would be four left unanswered. And one of those four there is no wiggle room for a false interpretation. We will post that below so you can recant.
No it isn’t.
It is a verb and it means render idle. Look the word up in your concordance. Look at how it was used and how rendered idle fits in every instance. Look how it was used in Ezra in the text posted of the LXX I have no interest going on and on about this. That is why I dropped it with leaf. Why you picked up the conversation is beyond me when we have our own topic which is still in the wind. And btw what leaf posted from strongs was not from strongs. It is edited. The citation looks more like this. Take note to what it says in regard to literal and figurative.

ek: καταργέω
Transliteration: katargeō
Pronunciation: kat-arg-eh'-o
Definition: From G2596 and G691; to be (render) entirely idle (useless) literally or figuratively: - abolish cease cumber deliver destroy do away become (make) of no (none without) effect fail loose bring (come) to nought put away (down) vanish away make void.

Figutive is subject to what we think or feel not what is there in the text or what is known to be objective. Take care
Well first let us say Isaiah was written in Hebrew. And second you are mistaken the word every is in the text. Here is the text. The bold emphasis is mine.
Isa 56:6 וּבְנֵ֣י Also the sons
הַנֵּכָ֗ר of the stranger
הַנִּלְוִ֤ים that join
עַל־ and
יְהוָה֙ themselves to the LORD
לְשָׁ֣רְת֔וֹ to serve
וּֽלְאַהֲבָה֙ him and to love
אֶת־ שֵׁ֣ם the name
יְהוָ֔ה of the LORD
לִהְי֥וֹת become
ל֖וֹ לַעֲבָדִ֑ים to be his servants
כָּל־ every
שֹׁמֵ֤ר that keepeth
שַׁבָּת֙ the sabbath
מֵֽחַלְּל֔וֹ from polluting
וּמַחֲזִיקִ֖ים it and taketh hold
בִּבְרִיתִֽי׃ of my covenant

Since you brought up the Greek let's take a look at the LXX which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scripture compiled before Christ. As we look we see that πάντας is used which means all. And it is is used to translate כָּל־ which means every . What is nice about this forum is when we find we have made a mistake we can go back and edit it by deleting the mistake or making a note in the post so we do not lead others down the wrong path that we were in. But hey that is up to you.

Isa 56:6 και And
τοις to the
αλλογενέσι foreigners
τοις προσκειμένοις joining
κυρίω to the LORD,
δουλεύειν to serve
αυτώ him,
και and
αγαπάν to love
το the
όνομα name
κυρίου of the LORD,
του είναι to be
αυτώ to him
εις for
δούλους manservants
και and
δούλας maidservants,
και and
πάντας all
τους the
φυλασσομένους ones keeping
τα σάββατά
μου my Sabbaths,
μη to not
βεβηλούν profane,
και and
αντεχομένους the ones holding to
της διαθήκης μου my covenant.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gary K

an old small town kid
Aug 23, 2002
4,660
1,016
Visit site
✟111,932.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
3,053
616
64
Detroit
✟79,495.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Really? Liking a post is goading, at least it is in your eyes. You're the first person I've ever seen with those suspicions. Everyone on this forum could be kicked off it for that.
Come on what?
I was about to ask you a question, but then my eye caught your profile... "an old small town kid".
You have a good day Gary. It was a rewarding experience talking with you, and the other Sabbath keepers here. Cheers. :smile:
 
Upvote 0

Gary K

an old small town kid
Aug 23, 2002
4,660
1,016
Visit site
✟111,932.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I was about to ask you a question, but then my eye caught your profile... "an old small town kid".
You have a good day Gary. It was a rewarding experience talking with you, and the other Sabbath keepers here. Cheers. :smile:
I'm 70 and grew up in small towns and in the country, I hate the big cities. You couldn't pay me enough to live in one. Ergo, I'm an old small town kid.
 
Upvote 0

HIM

Friend
Site Supporter
Mar 9, 2018
4,896
2,029
59
Alabama
Visit site
✟543,261.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Paul is referring to the same Law in verse 4, 6, 7, and the illustration makes the point those who now belong to another, are released from that Law, and are not bound by it.
This is a reasonable, ordered line of reasoning used by the apostle to drive home an important point regarding the Law, which includes the command, "thou shall not covet", that this law is not binding on them.
They can thus serve in newness of the Spirit, and not in oldness of the letter.
Faith establishes the Law. It does not do away with it. For the Law is in our hearts and minds. His word in our hearts and mouths that we do it through His Spirit. That is the Faith in which we preach. And if not then we are preaching a faith that is not of God Corey.

You restated your position, but you neglected to deal with the major problems that I raised with your position. A law that stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death is a law that is sinful,
The text is not saying that my friend. We will explain below.
so Romans 7:5 and 7:7 can't both be referring to the same law.
But it is Soyeong.
In the KJV in verse 5 the word motions is used to translate the Greek word pathema. This word means something undergone, hardship or pain. (see below) Regardless of how it is translated, that which is undergone is that which is of sin not the Law.
As you so acutely put forward. To say the passion is from the law would be blasphemous.
What we have here is an issue with translations and thereby that is why there is so much confusion. All translations s use verbiage that it makes it seem that the passions, or motions are of the Law. It is a contextual issue. Sad really because the Passions are of the sins not the Law. The sins are known through the Law. For we would not know sin but by the Law. But sin taking advantage through the commandment wrought in me all manner of concupiscence, lust. Not the passion of the Law. The passion of the sin. The sin known through the Law.

G3804 πάθημα pathema (pa'-thee-ma) n.
1. something undergone, i.e. hardship or pain.
2. (subjectively) an emotion or influence.

Rom 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, the, through the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. (For the wages of sin is death)
Rom 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
Rom 7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.



Let's continue. The context starts in Verses1- 4 in Romans 7. In context he is speaking of the Law in verses 1-3. In that, thou shall not commit Adultery is of the Law. Then it says in relation to the example of adultery being used as analogy. He says in comparison to that we are dead to the Law through the Body of Christ. So it must be the Law of God because he has not distinguished that it wasn't. Please keep in mind it us who are dead to the law in verse 4. And delivered from the Law in verse 6 in the KJV. The word translated delivered in the KJV actually means rendered idle. Regardless, as was said, it is us who are idled and it is us who are dead to the Law. Not the Law idled or dead, but us.


So, the question should arise, how are we dead to the Law. How have we been rendered idle or delivered from it? Take note also as we ponder this. The word 'also' is used in the clause, "ye also are become dead to the law through the Body of Christ"

So, with that we must also ask what also have we become dead to besides the Law? The answer to that is in chapter 6 and throughout Romans. Which when answered will show us how we are dead to the Law.

It says How shall who are dead to sin live any longer therein in verse 2?

So we see that we also are dead to sin.

But how have we become dead to sin that we no longer live any therein?

It says in verses 3-7 that we whom have been baptized in Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death and Like Jesus who was raised by the Glory of the Father even so, we walk in newness of Life in Him. Then indicatively in respect to walking in newness of life he states that if we have been planted together in likeness of His death we shall also be likeness of His resurrection. Because we Know our old man, who we were was crucified with Him that the Body of sin should be destroyed. That hence forth we do not serve sin. For he, our old man is dead and therefore we are freed from sin and alive unto God IN Jesus Christ our Lord's resurrection. So we are not to let sin reign in our mortal bodies since it no longer has dominion over us. For he that is dead, the old man is freed from sin through being risen with Him.

So We are not under the law but Grace. For by the Law is the knowledge of sin. And All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. So death reigned by sin. For all have sinned and the wages of sin is death. But while we were yet sinners Christ died for the ungodly, even while we were without strength the Holy Spirit is given unto us. That through the righteousness of the One many be made righteous. And through grace righteousness might reign unto eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Through the Holy Spirit given unto us, the Spirit of the Life in Christ Jesus He has set us free from the Law of sin and death. That the righteousness of the Law be fulfilled in us who walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh. So say not, who shall bring Christ down from above or up from the deep. For the Word is nigh unto us. In our hearts and in our mouths. That is the faith in which we preach. The faith that the just live by. In this the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith. The faith that establishes the Law. The faith of Jesus Christ. That is INTO all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference. Rom 3:22. For we have received grace and apostleship for obedience of the faith, His Word through Christ in our heart and mouth. Not the ministry of the Letter and Tables of Stone but of the Spirit. The Ministry of the Letter killeth. But the Ministry of the Spirit, His Word in our hearts and Mouths. His Law in our hearts and minds that we do it giveth Life. For God has said He will circumcise our hearts with the circumcision which is of Christ. He will give us a new Spirit and cause us to walk in His statutes and Laws. Us in Him He in us that the World might believe. For it is God that works in us both to will and do His good pleasure through His Spirit that dwells in us. For it is certain in Him we live, move and have our being. He has not left us comfortless, He has come unto us. He is the Vine we are the branches. Without Him we can do nothing. For with man this is impossible. But with God all things are possible!

We went from obeying the letter and tables of stone to the letter and tables of stone becoming part of us. For it is in our hearts, mouths, and minds. We are a new creature begotten by the word of truth, The Word manifested in our flesh. For He was the first among many brethren. Behold all is new and of God. So as
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
3,053
616
64
Detroit
✟79,495.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I'm 70 and grew up in small towns and in the country, I hate the big cities. You couldn't pay me enough to live in one. Ergo, I'm an old small town kid.
Old and kid, don't go together. :D

One of These Things (Is Not Like the Others)
1of3.jpg
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
3,053
616
64
Detroit
✟79,495.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
So kids don't grow old?
Yes. Are kids old?
When kids grow old, they are no longer kids.
Let me take that back. I just remembered Hebrews 5:12-14. There are still old people who are infants.
You aren't one of those though, are you?
 
Upvote 0

Gary K

an old small town kid
Aug 23, 2002
4,660
1,016
Visit site
✟111,932.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Yes. Are kids old?
When kids grow old, they are no longer kids.
Let me take that back. I just remembered Hebrews 5:12-14. There are still old people who are infants.
You aren't one of those though, are you?
LOL. You're bound and determined to make an issue out of a signature. Have at it.
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
3,053
616
64
Detroit
✟79,495.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
LOL. You're bound and determined to make an issue out of a signature. Have at it.
:) Buddy. I said goodbye.
CoreyD said:
I was about to ask you a question, but then my eye caught your profile... "an old small town kid".
You have a good day Gary. It was a rewarding experience talking with you, and the other Sabbath keepers here. Cheers. :smile:

You are the one who "make an issue out of a signature".
Gary K said:
I'm 70 and grew up in small towns and in the country, I hate the big cities. You couldn't pay me enough to live in one. Ergo, I'm an old small town kid.

I was merely correcting your errors.
However, admitting we are wrong is hard for most people.
That is an issue I won't take up with you though. Cheers. :)
 
Upvote 0

Gary K

an old small town kid
Aug 23, 2002
4,660
1,016
Visit site
✟111,932.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
:) Buddy. I said goodbye.
CoreyD said:
I was about to ask you a question, but then my eye caught your profile... "an old small town kid".
You have a good day Gary. It was a rewarding experience talking with you, and the other Sabbath keepers here. Cheers. :smile:

You are the one who "make an issue out of a signature".
Gary K said:
I'm 70 and grew up in small towns and in the country, I hate the big cities. You couldn't pay me enough to live in one. Ergo, I'm an old small town kid.

I was merely correcting your errors.
However, admitting we are wrong is hard for most people.
That is an issue I won't take up with you though. Cheers. :)
LOL. If a phrase doesn't meet with your approval then the one who said it has no clue as to what he meant.
 
Upvote 0