Works Relation to Salvation

[Gary K]

There’s more than one way to read it without hidden meanings?

The reading I gave you is the obvious one because every one who studies the Bible knows Paul was a Jew and a Pharisee.

 

[Gary K]

Also you never did clarify why you quoted Hebrews 8 in response to my post.

I should have to explain to you why I posted how I view Hebrews 8 to you?

 

[BNR32FAN]

The reading I gave you is the obvious one because every one who studies the Bible knows Paul was a Jew and a Pharisee.

It’s not obvious at all you’re just refusing to admit that it takes a lot of scriptural acrobatics to arrive at that conclusion.

 

[Gary K]

It’s not obvious at all you’re just refusing to admit that it takes a lot of scriptural acrobatics to arrive at that conclusion.

It's not obvious to you, but it is very obvious to me because of who Paul was. You don't want to think of Paul in terms of who he actually was? That's your prerogative. I think it's a mistake though because you will never understand what he wrote if you refuse to put yourself in his shoes.

There is a very wise saying that goes like this. Seek first to understand and then to be understood. No one can do that without putting themselves in the other person's shoes.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

And you completely missed the point about hidden meanings being attributed to the scriptures.

You mean the hidden meaning that is not there. . . leading people to break one of God's commandments, that Paul the same author of Colossians says what matters is keeping the commandments of God? When we need "secret meanings" to understand God's plain Word and leading people away from God's Word, that is not coming from God. Isa 8:20

 

[BNR32FAN]

It's not obvious to you, but it is very obvious to me because of who Paul was. You don't want to think of Paul in terms of who he actually was? That's your prerogative. I think it's a mistake though because you will never understand what he wrote if you refuse to put yourself in his shoes.

There is a very wise saying that goes like this. Seek first to understand and then to be understood. No one can do that without putting themselves in the person's shoes.

What Paul was is irrelevant to the statement. Even if Paul had been a Gentile it still has absolutely zero effect on the meaning of the statement that we are not to be judged for not observing the sabbath days. So no matter if Paul was a Gentile or a Jew the fact still remains that he is saying that observing the sabbath days has been abolished as a requirement for salvation. So your argument is pointless.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You mean the hidden meaning that is not there. . . leading people to break one of God's commandments, that Paul the same author of Colossians says what matters is keeping the commandments of God? When we need "secret meanings" to understand God's plain Word and leading people away from God's Word, that is not coming from God. Isa 8:20

So Paul was expecting these Gentiles that he is speaking to, to automatically know that he was not referring to the Saturday sabbath even tho he never specifically mentioned the Saturday sabbath being excluded from this statement and never once in any of his epistles to anyone ever wrote that we are to continue observing the sabbath? Furthermore Jesus never told anyone to continue to observe the sabbath nor did anyone in the entire New Testament ever say anything about continuing to observe the Saturday sabbath. You’re ignoring all the evidence that is stacked against your theology.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

So Paul was expecting these Gentiles that he is speaking to, to automatically know that he was not referring to the Saturday sabbath even tho he never specifically mentioned the Saturday sabbath being excluded from this statement and never once in any of his epistles to anyone ever wrote that we are to continue observing the sabbath?

Yes, they knew the difference between the feast days and the Sabbath commandment. They understood the Ten Commandments, they didn't need every one of the commandments repeated to know what law was being referred to because they came in a unit of Ten, you break one you break them all James 2:10-12 the only law in the entire Bible, both spoken and written by God alone, yes, they knew the difference. There was no argument which day was the Sabbath in scripture, there was only one weekly holy Sabbath day, the disagreements came on how to keep the Sabbath, not when is the Sabbath, that all came long after the cross after the apostles all died and was changed by man, just as predicted in scripture. Dan 7:25

Furthermore Jesus never told anyone to continue to observe the sabbath nor did anyone in the entire New Testament ever say anything about continuing to observe the Saturday sabbath. You’re ignoring all the evidence that is stacked against your theology.

You're looking at it backwards, if Jesus was going to change one of His own commandments, He would have told someone. But instead His faithful followers wouldn't even go to His grave to work on embalming His body until after the Sabbath Luke 23:56 and the apostles kept every Sabbath decades after the cross. Acts 13:42, Acts 13:44, Acts 18:4 will be kept in the New Heaven/New Earth Isa 66:22-23, not something that ended.

I agree some scripture can be confusing, especially Paul's writing, which came with a warning 2 Pet 3:16 we need to really study these confusing verses and see how it reconciles with the rest of God's Word.

 

[Gary K]

What Paul was is irrelevant to the statement. Even if Paul had been a Gentile it still has absolutely zero effect on the meaning of the statement that we are not to be judged for not observing the sabbath days. So no matter if Paul was a Gentile or a Jew the fact still remains that he is saying that observing the sabbath days has been abolished as a requirement for salvation. So your argument is pointless.

Wrong. Paul was a Pharisee and Pharisees had a very proscribed way of thinking.

Php 3:4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
Php 3:5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
Php 3:6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
Php 3:7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

So why would Paul say touching the law blameless? Because he was a Pharisee and the Pharisees were so legalistic they murdered Jesus because He rejected their traditions and was stealing their political power, or so they thought.

Joh 11:47 Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles.
Joh 11:48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
Joh 11:49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,
Joh 11:50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
Joh 11:51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;

 

[BNR32FAN]

It's not obvious to you, but it is very obvious to me because of who Paul was. You don't want to think of Paul in terms of who he actually was? That's your prerogative. I think it's a mistake though because you will never understand what he wrote if you refuse to put yourself in his shoes.

There is a very wise saying that goes like this. Seek first to understand and then to be understood. No one can do that without putting themselves in the other person's shoes.

How does this coincide with your claim about understanding the scriptures as a child would? The whole point of quoting Colossians 2:16 was to show how your interpretation doesn’t actually follow along with that line of reasoning.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yes, they knew the difference between the feast days and the Sabbath commandment.

And again you’re just making things up with no evidence to support it. If you’re going to make claims like this they don’t mean anything without evidence to back them up.

 

[BNR32FAN]

you break one you break them all James 2:10-12

You keep misquoting James on this. He didn’t say the 10 commandments he specifically said the WHOLE LAW. This means the entire Mosaic law not only the 10 commandments. This is just another one of the numerous examples of SDA advocates misquoting scripture.

“For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.”
‭‭James‬ ‭2‬:‭10‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

 

[SabbathBlessings]

And again you’re just making things up with no evidence to support it. If you’re going to make claims like this they don’t mean anything without evidence to back them up.

The burden would be on you to prove they didn't understand the difference between the annual sabbath ordinances and the weekly Sabbath commandment. Paul said what matters is keeping the commandments of God- the Sabbath is a commandment of God, the annual sabbath(s) ordinances is not.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

You keep misquoting James on this. He didn’t say the 10 commandments he specifically said the WHOLE LAW. This means the entire Mosaic law not only the 10 commandments. This is just another one of the numerous examples of SDA advocates misquoting scripture.

“For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.”
‭‭James‬ ‭2‬:‭10‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

The law he is referring to is the Ten Commandments.

He is only quoting and contrasting from the Ten Commandments when he said that.

James 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.


The unit James is quoting and contrasting is the Ten Commandments, not one of the commandments, with another law.

 

[Gary K]

How does this coincide with your claim about understanding the scriptures as a child would? The whole point of quoting Colossians 2:16 was to show how your interpretation doesn’t actually follow along with that line of reasoning.

No it doesn't. Being childlike is trusting God's word as it is written and accepting the obvious meaning of scripture.

 

[BNR32FAN]

There was no argument which day was the Sabbath in scripture, there was only one weekly holy Sabbath day, the disagreements came on how to keep the Sabbath, not when is the Sabbath,

Paul wasn’t referring to one sabbath he was referring to all of them.

 

[Gary K]

Paul wasn’t referring to one sabbath he was rev to all of them.

Is that why he said Sabbath days?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Paul wasn’t referring to one sabbath he was rev to all of them.

No, he wasn't as the context I provided showes in detail.

Paul does not have authority to countermand something that God blessed, one of the commandments inscribed by God's own finger, you need a thus saith the Lord for that. Num 23:20 We do have a warning that many people twist Paul's writings to their own destruction because he is hard to under 2 Peter 3:16 and sadly people still do this despite showing the context to some of these passages.

He called them sabbath(s) plural and verse before shows which ones - handwritten, ordinances, and placed on the outside of the ark -His readers understood this as the annual sabbaths and they were lower s in the NKJV and all weekly Sabbaths are capital S so even the translator of the NKJV understood it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

will be kept in the New Heaven/New Earth Isa 66:22-23, not something that ended.

And the new moon feasts? Will those be kept as well in the new heaven?

““For just as the new heavens and the new earth Which I make will endure before Me,” declares the Lord, “So your offspring and your name will endure. And it shall be from new moon to new moon And from sabbath to sabbath, All mankind will come to bow down before Me,” says the Lord.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭66‬:‭22‬-‭23‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

“Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2‬:‭16‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

If Isaiah 66:23 means that we must continue to observe the sabbath because it says they will worship from sabbath to sabbath then it also means we must observe the new moon feasts because it also says from new moon to new moon.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Is that why he said Sabbath days?

Of course