Yes Sabbath! because neither OT nor NT can be ignored!

[BobRyan]

The moon matters, but the sun is what we notice the most.

Ok - are you saying the sun deletes the moon or just that the sun shines brighter?

 

[BobRyan]

Therefore I said "Christians were even doing this for centuries in addition to observing the Lord's Day, .

Just not in the Bible? Just not mentioned by Bible writers? Isn't that a bit convenient that we have to imagine that the NT church was taking on key doctrine and practice but not letting the new Christian church "know about it" in the gospel letters of Paul and others in the first century?

Notice the OP post claim again. It is arguing for the NT text itself instead of making the case that those four key points are examples of what we do not find in scripture.

 

[SkyWriting]

have you considered some text of explanation as to how you are connecting that to this topic (other than everyone agrees that God is the Creator of course)

No Bible is required for salvation.

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived,
ever since the creation of the world,
in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

 

[BobRyan]

No Bible is required for salvation.

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived,
ever since the creation of the world,
in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Ok -- but on this thread we are talking about what the Bible says - so the premise is that this discussion is for those who do have a Bible.

Aside from that -- I agree with you that Romans 2:13-16 and Romans 1 shows a certain level of conviction on points of truth that God makes available to those who do not have the Bible.

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

Scripture does matter - all of it.

I have a post on another thread #481- where I emphasize that Bible details matter in BOTH the NT and the OT - when it comes to doctrine on the Bible Sabbath

It is my view that "Scripture matters" and so that means we have to accept the teaching of BOTH the NT and the OT - not just one or the other.

Sometimes we hear this from those opposed to the Bible Sabbath as the primary day of worship for Christians.

1. the primary worship service on the Lord's Day (meaning week-day-1) is embodied in the New Testament
2. (as well as established by the history of the Church),
3. and we are further instructed not to any longer be governed by days, etc.
4. Since the New Testament counts - we notice in it that the decision to make the day that the Lord rose from the grave be the main day of worship for the church of Christ is part of that word of God .​

In response I would begin with this

1. I think we all agree that - We either believe the revealed word of God or we don't.
2. If Bible Sabbath keeping Christians could find the 4 statements above in the Bible (in the NT for example) this would be a much less actively debated topic.
3. One of the biggest drivers for people keeping the Bible Sabbath - who used to keep week-day-1 as the primary day of worship - is due to the fact that they could not support statements such as the above -- sola scriptura.
​

In other words for many Bible Sabbath keeping Christians "sola scriptura testing - results in Bible Sabbath keeping" because both OT and NT do count and need to be considered.

If the 4 affirmations of the Sunday keeping groups as noted above cannot be supported "sola scriptura" then .. "Houston - we have a problem".

============================== Simple illustration

One of these two examples is actually in the bible:

Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, because this was the new weekly day of worship for the church, Paul discoursed with them, and he prolonged his speech until midnight.

Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, intending to depart on the morrow; and prolonged his speech until midnight.

(Acts 20:7 would be the perfect place to inform the reader that this is not a one-off week-day-1 service... but rather it is the WEEKLY - LORD's Day service which is now the name of honor given to week-day-1. And since the text goes to the trouble of explaining why they are doing what they are doing - all the more reason to include this bit of news)

Hi I was in a recent debate with SDA'a on this topic and noted a disproportionate amount of time and energy was being spent on this subject and I questioned weather 7th day adventist had filled their churches preaching the Sabbath to other Christians or the gospel to the lost. I looked at your post history and 118 out of your last 120 posts were indeed about the Sabbath. One of the two posts that were not on this topic was excellent of a atheist who became a Christian. Now one of the rules on this forum is not to question others salvation and in my recent discussion I proposed a reprobate turns from his sins confesses Christ and is showing the fruit of the Spirit but does not keep Sat Sabbath and a SDA member continued to argue that the person would be lost implying that they don't love God because they are no keeping His commandments. So if you are saying you are not saved if you do not keep Saturday Sabbath your entire idea is a violation of the policy. If you are saying like the guy in the video you posted you who was saved through faith in Christ then why are you spending all of your time and energy discussing the Sabbath? Over 98.5% of your responses are on a single idea. When i read my bible this idea comes up less than 1% of the passages.

 

[BobRyan]

Hi I was in a recent debate with SDA'a on this topic and noted a disproportionate amount of time and energy was being spent on this subject and I questioned weather 7th day adventist had filled their churches preaching the Sabbath to other Christians or the gospel to the lost.

1. Barna research did a study and found that the SDA denomination is the best in North America when it comes to evangelizing the unchurched.
2. Recent studies continue to show that the SDA denomination in America is one of the fastest growing of all Christian churches.
3. In our sola-scriptura Bible studies for evangelizing the unchurched (which is all of our evangelism sets of Bible studies) a few are on this topic but there are more then 22 lessons in that set of Bible studies rather than "just this one". Topics covered include

a. Creation of Angels, Earth, mankind etc
b. The Trinity - God as Creator, the nature of God
c. The nature of man - the fall of man, the fall of the Angels
d. The Gospel, the flood, the new birth, the new Covenant
e. God the Son , incarnate as Christ - Savior of mankind
f. Baptism
g. Free will
h. Law vs Grace
i. Heaven
j. The second coming
k. The millennium
l. The lake of fire
m. Spiritual Gifts
n. The Rev 14 - three angel's messages
o. Judgment​

4. I notice you did not address a single Bible detail in this thread.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Ok - are you saying the sun deletes the moon or just that the sun shines brighter?

I'm saying the moon is still there, but the sun takes precedence during the work day.

Also a thought came to me today while listening to scripture.

Do you have a bank account? If the laws written matter to you in the way you are saying, you probably shouldn't since they charge interest on loans.

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

my question was more personal regarding the ratio of your posts and then direct are non Sat Sabbath keepers saved? I really did not want to enter the rabbit trail of back and forth on this topic as I have been down that road before. I am trying to discover personally what it is you believe regarding non Sabbath keepers and why you spend over 98% of your time on this one issue.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

my question was more personal regarding the ratio of your posts and then direct are non Sat Sabbath keepers saved? I really did not want to enter the rabbit trail of back and forth on this topic as I have been down that road before. I am trying to discover personally what it is you believe regarding non Sabbath keepers and why you spend over 98% of your time on this one issue.

The better question I think is why 98% of the people believe God only wrote nine commandments when the Bible tells us He wrote Ten.

Exodus 34:28 So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.

And the one commandment we are told to forget is the one commandment God told us to Remember.

 

[BobRyan]

I'm saying the moon is still there, but the sun takes precedence during the work day.

Also a thought came to me today while listening to scripture.

Do you have a bank account? If the laws written matter to you in the way you are saying, you probably shouldn't since they charge interest on loans.

You are not reading the text - the Bible does not say that the saints cannot pay interest on loans. Is this really where you wish to redirect this topic? (saints paying on their loans? Something not forbidden in OT or NT?? seriously?)

 

[BobRyan]

my question was more personal regarding the ratio of your posts

Is that not somewhat ad hominem instead of dealing with the topic of this thread? CF forum rules are promoting staying on the topic of the thread, which is the kind of "substance" that promotes useful discussion.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Is this really where you wish to redirect this topic?

Right back at you, focus on my reply to your reply.

 

[.Jeremiah.]

Good point. I have that here #7 - in my post above

Absolutely.
Your OP was very thorough.
I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[BobRyan]

I'm saying the moon is still there, but the sun takes precedence during the work day.

Also a thought came to me today while listening to scripture.

Do you have a bank account? If the laws written matter to you in the way you are saying, you probably shouldn't since they charge interest on loans.

You are not reading the text - the Bible does not say that the saints cannot pay interest on loans. Is this really where you wish to redirect this topic? (saints paying on their loans? Something not forbidden in OT or NT?? seriously?)

Right back at you, focus on my reply to your reply.

Attempt noted.

We still have faith in God's Word - and the minor detail of "bank loans" permitted under some circumstances but not under others within a theocracy has not changed that..

While some may "wish" to ignore that inconvenient matter of "the theocracy" under which such rules apply - yet the "Baptist Confession of Faith", the "Westminster Confession of Faith", C. H. Spurgeon and almost all Bible scholars on Earth -- do not go along with ignoring that "detail".

You have free will you can ignore whatever details you wish.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

You are not reading the text - the Bible does not say that the saints cannot pay interest on loans. Is this really where you wish to redirect this topic? (saints paying on their loans? Something not forbidden in OT or NT?? seriously?)



Attempt noted.

We still have faith in God's Word - and the minor detail of "bank loans" permitted under some circumstances but not under others within a theocracy has not changed that..

While some may "wish" to ignore that inconvenient matter of "the theocracy" under which such rules apply - yet the "Baptist Confession of Faith", the "Westminster Confession of Faith", C. H. Spurgeon and almost all Bible scholars on Earth -- do not go along with ignoring that "detail".

You have free will you can ignore whatever details you wish.

I actually created thread for this topic, so we don't get off topic in this thread.

The part of the reply I wanted a reply to was the following:

I'm saying the moon is still there, but the sun takes precedence during the work day.

 

[SkyWriting]

Ok -- but on this thread we are talking about what the Bible says - so the premise is that this discussion is for those who do have a Bible. Aside from that -- I agree with you that Romans 2:13-16 and Romans 1 shows a certain level of conviction on points of truth that God makes available to those who do not have the Bible.

The Bible says.......there is nothing more than creation one needs to be saved. The rest is window dressing.

Jeremiah 1:5
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

Job 31:26-28
if I have looked at the sun when it shone, or the moon moving in splendor, and my heart has been secretly enticed, and my mouth has kissed my hand, this also would be an iniquity to be punished by the judges, for I would have been false to God above.

Psalm 8:3
When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,

2 Corinthians 3:3
And you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

Hebrews 8:10
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

 

[BobRyan]

The Bible says.......there is nothing more than creation one needs to be saved. The rest is window dressing.

Not true. There is no "the rest is window dressing" and a great example is found in Matt 16 - Peter is asked who Christ is and Peter gives a great answer. The response from Christ is "blessed are you Peter, flesh and blood has not revealed that to you - but my Father in heaven".

But notice what follows is the OPPOSITE of "the rest is window dressing".

In the next verses Christ reveals MORE truth to Peter --- the NEXT truth to Peter, that Christ was to be crucified and then resurrected on the third day. BUT PETER wants to STOP at the previous point of truth - so what is Christ's response to "the BLESSED Disciple Peter"? His response is "Git thee behind me SATAN".

In the model you use - all of that could be freely rejected since it is only "window dressing". But in Christ's teaching "drawing a line on God - is to choose the wrong path". The wayyyy wrong path.

2 Thess 2 says that in the end people "perish who did not receive a LOVE of the Truth so as to be saved". Not just "some truth" but in fact a "Love of the Truth".

The person who says they love chocolate - always wants more - they don't say "yes I had some chocolate 10 years ago ... I'm good with that now - so not really interested in any more".

 

[SkyWriting]

Not true. There is no "the rest is window dressing" and a great example is found in Matt 16 - Peter is asked who Christ is and Peter gives a great answer. The response from Christ is "blessed are you Peter, flesh and blood has not revealed that to you - but my Father in heaven".

But notice what follows is the OPPOSITE of "the rest is window dressing".

In the next verses Christ reveals MORE truth to Peter --- the NEXT truth to Peter, that Christ was to be crucified and then resurrected on the third day. BUT PETER wants to STOP at the previous point of truth - so what is Christ's response to "the BLESSED Disciple Peter"? His response is "Git thee behind me SATAN".

In the model you use - all of that could be freely rejected since it is only "window dressing". But in Christ's teaching "drawing a line on God - is to choose the wrong path". The wayyyy wrong path.

2 Thess 2 says that in the end people "perish who did not receive a LOVE of the Truth so as to be saved". Not just "some truth" but in fact a "Love of the Truth".

The person who says they love chocolate - always wants more - they don't say "yes I had some chocolate 10 years ago ... I'm good with that now - so not really interested in any more".

Then you are seeking answered prayer.
- Answered Prayer - God heard your prayer, planned, and laid out your answer for you to live through.


Ministers of a New Covenant
…2You yourselves are our letter, inscribed on our hearts, known and read by everyone. 3It is clear that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

 

[SkyWriting]

Not true. There is no "the rest is window dressing" and a great example is found in Matt 16 - Peter is asked who Christ is and Peter gives a great answer. The response from Christ is "blessed are you Peter, flesh and blood has not revealed that to you - but my Father in heaven".

But notice what follows is the OPPOSITE of "the rest is window dressing".

In the next verses Christ reveals MORE truth to Peter --- the NEXT truth to Peter, that Christ was to be crucified and then resurrected on the third day. BUT PETER wants to STOP at the previous point of truth - so what is Christ's response to "the BLESSED Disciple Peter"? His response is "Git thee behind me SATAN".

In the model you use - all of that could be freely rejected since it is only "window dressing". But in Christ's teaching "drawing a line on God - is to choose the wrong path". The wayyyy wrong path.

2 Thess 2 says that in the end people "perish who did not receive a LOVE of the Truth so as to be saved". Not just "some truth" but in fact a "Love of the Truth".

The person who says they love chocolate - always wants more - they don't say "yes I had some chocolate 10 years ago ... I'm good with that now - so not really interested in any more".

No mention of the scriptures there. But here? Yes, mentioned specifically.

Ministers of a New Covenant
…2You yourselves are our letter, inscribed on our hearts, known and read by everyone. 3It is clear that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

 

[BobRyan]

Not true. There is no "the rest is window dressing"

and a great example is found in Matt 16 - Peter is asked who Christ is and Peter gives a great answer. The response from Christ is "blessed are you Peter, flesh and blood has not revealed that to you - but my Father in heaven".

But notice what follows is the OPPOSITE of "the rest is window dressing".

In the next verses Christ reveals MORE truth to Peter --- the NEXT truth to Peter, that Christ was to be crucified and then resurrected on the third day. BUT PETER wants to STOP at the previous point of truth - so what is Christ's response to "the BLESSED Disciple Peter"? His response is "Git thee behind me SATAN".

In the model you use - all of that could be freely rejected since it is only "window dressing". But in Christ's teaching "drawing a line on God - is to choose the wrong path". The wayyyy wrong path.

2 Thess 2 says that in the end people "perish who did not receive a LOVE of the Truth so as to be saved". Not just "some truth" but in fact a "Love of the Truth".

The person who says they love chocolate - always wants more - they don't say "yes I had some chocolate 10 years ago ... I'm good with that now - so not really interested in any more".

No mention of the scriptures there.

Matt 16 and 2 Thess 2 mentioned there - are in "my Bible" --- how about yours??