You failed to answer the question that was asked. We all know what is in Exodus 20.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You failed to answer the question that was asked. We all know what is in Exodus 20.
You sound like the Accuser.So do you claim for yourself that you keep the ten commandments?
I cited Jesus. Whatever is needful... To keep the day holy... How you do that...Is according to your own conscience. How you live your life and honor God and obey His commandments is not up to me to explain to you. But I can remind you of the scripture that declared the day as being holy, sanctified, and worthy of honor. What you do with that is between you and God.You failed to answer the question that was asked. We all know what is in Exodus 20.
Learn some history Backlit.If you are quoting this guy and using his writings as your benchmark for Christian faith and practise, you have already taken the first bold steps into apostasy, whether or not you keep Sunday.
Are you following the other holy days?Can you stand before The Eternal and tell him its ok to not follow the Sabbath Commandment, like he told us, and worship on Sunday instead. Its called respect for Gods word. Bible Study...What did God say he would bestow on all who follow his commandments and Holy Days.
Very Catholic of you. But the history you think supports your post is somewhat different. The Catholic Church, under the auspices and sponsorship of Constantine certainly put together a Bible, 50 copies in fact. But are we to suppose that the hundreds of thousands of believers, from Britain to Africa, from Palestine to Persia, India and beyond, didn't have the scriptures? Think about it. How did the church survive for 300 years without scriptures? Do you think all the learned men of that era didn't copy the letters of Paul, the gospels, etc., and pass them on?I'm really tired of hearing this.
If YOU listen to "these guys" then you must be reading the bible THEY assembled.
And they knew what it said better than we do since they learned from the Apostles.
The premise of the question is faulty. It assumes that in order for the 4th commandment to be valid it must have a thorough endorsement of either Paul or John. That assumption is arbitrary and ludicrous.You failed to answer the question that was asked. We all know what is in Exodus 20.
You did not cite Jesus or Paul, why is that? Maybe the Pharisees thought they were keeping it holy. I don't think God meant for His rest day for man to be like that.KJV Exodus 20:8-11
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Not everyone could meet or have a day off on either of those days. What would that make them if they just loved God wherever they were doing what they needed to do?On whose and on what authority did they base this change? Even if you have evidence that the apostles themselves changed the day, on what authority did would they offer in support?
It is not accusing to ask if people advocating doing something do it themselves. Calling someone an accuser for doing so however is accusing.You sound like the Accuser.
Maybe to avoid the sort of sin that led to the guy getting taken over by demons?When Jesus met the demoniac among the gravestones I can imagine all the disciples hightailing it outa there and leaving Jesus standing on His own. So what happened? The Word was spoken and the man freed. Sat down right there and then and in his right mind. Doesn't mean however he never sinned again, but he certainly got off to a good start.
So what would Jesus have recommended to him in order to keep from sinning? "Abide in the vine". The branch cannot bear fruit in its own power...nor can we stop sinning in our own power. But by beholding we become changed...by abiding we bear fruit...by reading, believing, the word of God, our minds take on the character of Christ.
Sounds reasonable. There are many things we should do. Some of these we may even do.Our work is to discipline ourselves to read the word, prayer, and witness. The results of these activities, victory over sin, power to walk the walk, and souls saved for the kingdom, are God's responsibility.
He has plenty of power.We so underestimate not only the (re-creative) power of God , but also His willingness to do for us what things without Him we find impossible.
You've already said this Enoch.Morality has to do with our behavior as dictated by our conscience (which is given to all mankind). It applies to human relationships. Spirituality has to do with our relationship to God with our spirits and through the Holy Spirit. So the first four laws are in fact spiritual, but Paul calls all the Ten Commandments spiritual (Rom 7:14).
Aren't we under the Noahic covenant still? Or should we turn our backs when we see a rainbow? Are we not under the 2nd part of the Adamic covenant or has God not put enmity between the seed of the woman and the serpent's seed? What about the curse on the soil and pain in childbirth? Was that nullified at the cross?The sign of the Abrahamic Covenant was circumcision.
Are Christian males obligated to be circumcised?
No.
Because we are no longer under any of the O.T. Covenants, but under the New Covenant.
Worship is due to the Creator and it is not confined to the Sabbath. We are to pray without ceasing, which is an act of worship. There are ceremonial elements throughout our relationship with God. The 4th commandment is primarily about rest. Is rest ceremonial? It is very strange to me that folks can be so insistent that a law that God has deliberately placed in the midst of His moral code for human beings must be academically proven to be moral. Strange, indeed.The first commandments may be about God and how we are to behave toward Him...
that is Moral.
Worshipping, it seems to me, is Ceremonial.
No one has yet explained how it could possibly be moral.
Thank you. I value your contribution to this and other discussions very much. :)I respect your position and we probably agree on everything else. (of course it depends on what TYPE of baptist you are!)
No, Sunday-sacredness is not a modern error. The idea that all ten commandments are no longer compulsory for the Christian is what developed in the 20th centiuiry.I'd just have to disagree regarding this antinomian thing.
Worshipping on Sunday is a construct of the 20th century?
They worshiped every day in the Temple according to Acts 2:46. They also kept the Sabbath according to Luke 23:56.The Christians were worshipping on Sunday during the century when Jesus died and ascended and before John wrote the book of Revelation.
Yes, but not primarily, or else it would have been listed only in the handwritten statutes and ordinances of Moses.Isn't going to church/synagogue ceremonial?
Weekly worship? Not that I'm aware of.Isn't it called a Wedding Ceremony?
At my church we have communion every 3 months. There is no frequency specified for the ordinance in the Bible.A Communion Ceremony?
This is of no consequence. "We ought to obey God rather than man." (Acts 5:29)And, yes, Sunday was being observed in the 1st century.
The early church fathers were not inspired interpreters of the Bible, contrary to popular belief.If you don't believe the ECFs, then you shouldn't believe your bible either....
They're the ones that assembled it.
NO longer under the Mosaic law, as now under the new and better Covenant, as now under the Law of Christ!The lack of response to this thread reveals the depraved state of this forum.
This thread contradicts a great majority of the opinions, and threads, here - and uses solid scriptural evidence to do so, yet nobody wants to touch it.
It's a shame.
Mostly because there are some here who need to know this.
The Bible tells us most will never discover it.
What can ya do?
![]()
Revelation 22:11
What makes you think I'm Catholic?Very Catholic of you. But the history you think supports your post is somewhat different. The Catholic Church, under the auspices and sponsorship of Constantine certainly put together a Bible, 50 copies in fact. But are we to suppose that the hundreds of thousands of believers, from Britain to Africa, from Palestine to Persia, India and beyond, didn't have the scriptures? Think about it. How did the church survive for 300 years without scriptures? Do you think all the learned men of that era didn't copy the letters of Paul, the gospels, etc., and pass them on?
I would also ask the question. If such as Ignatius kept Sunday as a result of the teaching of the apostles, I would very much like to read of that instruction in scripture.
I take pictures when I see a rainbow. :)Aren't we under the Noahic covenant still? Or should we turn our backs when we see a rainbow? Are we not under the 2nd part of the Adamic covenant or has God not put enmity between the seed of the woman and the serpent's seed? What about the curse on the soil and pain in childbirth? Was that nullified at the cross?
Worship is due to the Creator and it is not confined to the Sabbath. We are to pray without ceasing, which is an act of worship. There are ceremonial elements throughout our relationship with God. The 4th commandment is primarily about rest. Is rest ceremonial? It is very strange to me that folks can be so insistent that a law that God has deliberately placed in the midst of His moral code for human beings must be academically proven to be moral. Strange, indeed.
Thank you. I value your contribution to this and other discussions very much. :)
I am no longer a Southern Baptist. Have not been so for 32 years. I admire many of their convictions--especially concerning religious liberty and common grace.
No, Sunday-sacredness is not a modern error. The idea that all ten commandments are no longer compulsory for the Christian is what developed in the 20th centiuiry.
They worshiped every day in the Temple according to Acts 2:46. They also kept the Sabbath according to Luke 23:56.
Yes, but not primarily, or else it would have been listed only in the handwritten statutes and ordinances of Moses.
Weekly worship? Not that I'm aware of.
At my church we have communion every 3 months. There is no frequency specified for the ordinance in the Bible.
This is of no consequence. "We ought to obey God rather than man." (Acts 5:29)
The early church fathers were not inspired interpreters of the Bible, contrary to popular belief.
:)
Duly noted :)I take pictures when I see a rainbow. :)
I think I stated, or should have, that a new covenant does not abolish the previous one. It just changes something about it or makes it better.
Abraham was told he'd be the father of many nations and David's offspring would be a King for all eternity and for everyone, not just Israel.
The O.T. looked for to the N.T. or New Covenant. The signs did change. Some remain and some do not. The Adamic Covenant's sign was the Tree...no more tree. This is also true of other signs...
I agree with you totally about resting in God's grace every day of the week.
You'll also find that I'm not very adamant about this Sabbath discussion because I DO realize that the 10 commandments were written in stone so I cannot disagree too much with those that wish to worship on Saturday. What does make me question it, however, is this idea that all the commandments are moral except for the 4th...which is ceremonial. This would exclude it, I believe. And many theologians would agree too, thus Sunday worship.
And I do believe that following the commandments is compulsory for every Christian.
Being under grace does NOT mean we no longer are required to obey the commandments...
it just means that we have a different and better way of being ABLE to obey them....
(the law written on the heart).
As to the ECFs not being inspired.
They certainly taught what the Apostles taught.
However, I also look to scripture when trying to learn something new.
Are you referring to the Law that Christ obeyed?NO longer under the Mosaic law, as now under the new and better Covenant, as now under the Law of Christ!
This is a pretty poor argument, considering the apostles personally taught many individuals who unfortunately became apostates and joined the counterfeit Christian movement. Just because someone was personally taught by an apostle, it doesn't automatically make them an authority on Christian doctrine. Paul personally taught the ministers in Ephesus, and at least some of them became apostates(Acts 20:29-30). Satan was personally taught in Heaven by the Creator of the Universe, and look at what happened to him: he became the original apostate.Learn some history Backlit.
I'm really tired of hearing this.
If YOU listen to "these guys" then you must be reading the bible THEY assembled.
And they knew what it said better than we do since they learned from the Apostles.
I don't follow any guy, BTW.
I follow Jesus.
Let's see if God approves of people leaning on their own conscience for moral direction:Morality has to do with our behavior as dictated by our conscience (which is given to all mankind). It applies to human relationships. Spirituality has to do with our relationship to God with our spirits and through the Holy Spirit. So the first four laws are in fact spiritual, but Paul calls all the Ten Commandments spiritual (Rom 7:14).
Backlit answered the question. The God that spoke all 10 of those commandments from Sinai was none other than the One who became Jesus in the NT. Anything He stated as the OT God holds just as true as anything He said as a human being in the NT, especially because He didn't spend His earthly ministry contradicting His OT statements. As both a human being and the OT God, Jesus said "man shall live by every word that came from the mouth of God"(Deut. 8:3, Matt. 4:4, Luk. 4:4).You failed to answer the question that was asked. We all know what is in Exodus 20.
Who do you think gave Moses the tablets of stone on Sinai?You did not cite Jesus or Paul, why is that? Maybe the Pharisees thought they were keeping it holy. I don't think God meant for His rest day for man to be like that.
On that premise then we can make anything up and claim... Jesus taught it but no-one wrote it down.What makes you think I'm Catholic?
Why do so many on these forums just assume stuff about a poster?
Are only Catholics aware of church history?
That speaks badly of we Protestants, doesn't it?
By the time of Constantine the church had already united itself with states.
I consider the early church and the ECFs to be before 325AD....the date of the Council of Nicea.
I agree with you that things began to change after that.
However, the bible, as we know it, was assembled by these men that very few seem to know about.
Your question to me regarding the letters already being circulated before they were put together in a book does not merit a response.
As to Ignatius...he was a student of both Peter and John.
Peter and John spent 3 years + with Jesus. I think they knew what Jesus taught, and passed that on.
As you must surely know, the gospels and letters do not contain everything that Jesus did or taught.
Not everything is in scripture...
John 21:25
25And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.