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.
The reading I gave you is the obvious one because every one who studies the Bible knows Paul was a Jew and a Pharisee.There’s more than one way to read it without hidden meanings?
I should have to explain to you why I posted how I view Hebrews 8 to you?Also you never did clarify why you quoted Hebrews 8 in response to my post.
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.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 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.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.
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 8:20And you completely missed the point about hidden meanings being attributed to the scriptures.
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.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.
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.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.
Wrong. Paul was a Pharisee and Pharisees had a very proscribed way of thinking.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.
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.
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;
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.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.
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.Yes, they knew the difference between the feast days and the Sabbath commandment.
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.you break one you break them all James 2:10-12
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.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 law he is referring to is the Ten Commandments.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
No it doesn't. Being childlike is trusting God's word as it is written and accepting the obvious meaning of scripture.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.
Paul wasn’t referring to one sabbath he was referring to all of them.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,
No, he wasn't as the context I provided showes in detail.Paul wasn’t referring to one sabbath he was rev to all of them.
And the new moon feasts? Will those be kept as well in the new heaven?will be kept in the New Heaven/New Earth Isa 66:22-23, not something that ended.
Of courseIs that why he said Sabbath days?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?