The 10 Commandments are FOREVER

[BarneyFife]

I go to church on Sunday, not because of any commandment, but because that is the day Christians have always gotten together to worship Jesus. Hebrews 10:25. But NO CHRISTIAN goes to church on Sunday because of pagan gods or the sun, not even in the beginning. It has ALWAYS been because Jesus chose to raise from the dead on Sunday (His fulfillment of the feast of First Fruits Romans 8:29), and 50 days later to come back in the form of the Holy Spirit to start HIS OWN NEW COVENANT AND CHURCH on Sunday, which was the anniversary of the giving of The Ten Commandments that are now written on our hearts by His blood - the cup being the sign of the New Covenant. (The Sabbath that pointed to Jesus as the Creator and hidden in the Old Covenant as its sign, was now constantly present and abiding in each follower by the blood of Jesus so that we can be like God with a divine nature.) Can't you see how absurd that accusation is and how untrue any of those accusations by Adventists are to any denomination, starting with the Roman Catholic Church? And another thing you've been taught - Constantine didn't have anything to do with choosing Sunday. It had already been established before Constantine was even born, and all Constantine did was stop the killing of Christians and made Christianity legal, instead of a death sentence. He also allowed Christian slaves to not have to work on Sunday. Those were good things. He didn't deserve the hatred I learned against him as a child. But even as a child I never bought into the sun worshiping accusation. Don't forget Saturn - just as absurd, to say nothing of bearing false witness. It hurts that you could be duped like that.

Galatians was written because Judaizers told them they had to keep all Jewish laws to be saved.

Galatians 4:9 But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? 10 You observe days and months and seasons and years. 11 I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain.

You are, of course, at liberty to worship and rest upon any day of the week you choose, for whatever reason you like. However, the sense of urgency and detail in your defense of worshiping on Sunday would seem to me to venture fairly close to what is being reproved in Galatians 4:10. That is, unless, you feel it is only Jews who can "observe days."

I believe Sunday sacredness has its roots in pagan, heathen, sun worship, long before Christ was even born into this world. I do not for a minute believe that the apostolic age Christians rested and worshiped on Sunday in place of the 7th day Sabbath at all, much less in honor of the day of the week upon which Christ arose from His death by the Cross. I do not agree with your views of emperor Constantine's role in the change of the Sabbath, nor that "all Constantine did was stop the killing of Christians and made Christianity legal, instead of a death sentence." I do know this much: for whatever good he did, he made the most tragic mistake of linking church and state, which is the worst thing a leader of any kind can do.

I do not believe that Christians today go to Church on Sunday with the intent of worshiping the Sun and I have already stated that I probably shouldn't have used the term "venerable day of the sun" in my reply to Mary, Mother Of God. I have no awareness nor conviction of having borne false witness. "Duped," you say? That seems rather insulting but, be assured, all is forgiven.

I have little knowledge of Saturn worship, but I do know that people will worship just about anything they can imagine or perceive by their five senses, and I tell you truly, I would take no offense whatsoever if the whole world believed that by keeping the Seventh-day Sabbath, I was worshiping Saturn. I couldn't care less.

Your assumption that having gone through the Adventist school system, you have special insight into what I have been taught and might have accepted or adopted as truth is misguided, if not presumptuous. I came to the Adventist faith as an adult convert from the Southern Baptist Convention faith. I retain much of my former beliefs. My daughter went through the Adventist school system and has an altogether different view of faith and morals as do I. I assume nothing derogatory about you. You used to call yourself CharismaticLady. You probably know what the Adventist church generally teaches about the charismatic faith and practice. Do you recall me ever calling into question that aspect of your faith?

I think that as long as you insist your friends must see things the way you do, you're going to have very much difficulty. Your tone in this discussion is becoming more and more tense. It leads me to fear that this issue might be made a test of our friendship. I assure you, it is a test I will fail. I will have no one dictate to me what I must believe or express in matters of faith. I demand nothing of you and I accuse you of nothing.

Who to you that rubbage that it describes him AFTER his conversion? It was under the Law of Moses as a Pharisee. Why can't you people read the whole chapter to see the context. In fact read 6, 7 and 8.

Who are "you people?"

I am saddened.

 

[BarneyFife]

So you quote as fact a writer from Ministry Magazine.com and think it is true? Do you have any historical evidence to support your accusation?

Curious Mary

Genetic fallacy ("How can any good thing come out of Nazareth?"). Why not just judge the material by its merits or lack thereof? I don't dismiss out of hand everything that originates from Catholicism.

For instance, I could just as easily have quoted from Catholic sources:

"Pope Miltiades worked diligently in a difficult time of transition. His edicts included forbidding the Christians to fast on Thursday and Sunday (the days during which the pagans kept their fasts) and directing that the Eucharist plate blessed by the bishop be carried to the various churches." -- From: Thursday of the Second Week of Advent - December 10, 2015 - Liturgical Calendar

No, the context does not suggest that. That is what you have been taught by your men.
If Paul did not mean the sabbath and only meant ceremonial feast sabbaths in that passage then why did he ask for his disciples to have ready "On the first day of every week,... a sum of money" if he just gathered with them for church services on the sabbath? Why didn't he just ask them to have it ready on the sabbath?
What you have been taught by your men, who make up less than .1% of Christianity, is bizarre.

So did you manage to come to the knowledge of the truth you hold without the aid of any "men?"

This is not from one of "my men":

"This verse can hardly be said to imply any religious observance of the Sunday. Lay by him in store. The Greek phrase implies that the laying up was done at home, but when the money was accumulated, it was doubtless brought to the assembly and handed over to the presbyters. As God hath prospered him; rather, whatsoever he has been prospered in; i.e. all that his prosperity may permit. That there be no gatherings when I come; rather, that, when I come, there may then be no collections. When he came he did not wish his attention to be absorbed in serving tables."--Pulpit Commentary

_______________________________________

"Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do you. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come." 1 Cor. 16:1-2.

We are supposed to find here a picture of a religious service when a company is gathered together, and the offering is being taken up. The reasoning, of course, is that if a service was held on Sunday, that proves Sunday is sacred, and, by inference, that the Sabbath of the Ten Commandments has been-abolished. This is a very great deal to attempt to find in one text, especially when the text will not permit of the deductions drawn from it.

Instead of describing a church offering, where the communicants pass over their gifts to a deacon, the record says that each one was to "lay by him in store." One widely accepted version of the Scriptures translates the text thus: "On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and save, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come." R.S.V. In other words, when the first day of the week had come, each one was to decide from the last week's earnings how much he wanted to set aside for the special collection that Paul was going to take to the poor at Jerusalem. And lay it by in a special place apart from the other money of the house. This was an act of bookkeeping rather than an act of worship.

That this is the correct understanding of this passage is admitted by scholarly Sunday-keeping theologians, whose desire to translate the Scriptures accurately exceeds their desire to find proofs for Sunday. Take, for example, the typical comment that is found in The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, a commentary on the Scriptures, published by the Cambridge University Press, and edited by Church of England clergymen. Speaking of this text, the commentator declares that, as to the practice of Christians to meet on the first day of the week, "we cannot infer it from this passage." Then follows his comment on the phrase "lay by him" - "i.e., at home, not in the assembly, as is generally supposed.... He [Paul] speaks of a custom in his time of placing a small box by the bedside into which an offering was to be put whenever prayer was made." - The First Epistle to the Corinthians, edited by J. J. Lias, p. 164.

Certainly it requires much more than the fact that the disciples were gathered together in fear in their abode on the first day of the week, or that Paul preached one sermon on that day. Or that he commanded the Corinthians to set aside some money in their homes the first of each week--much more than this to give any believer in the Bible a reason for violating one of the precepts of the eternal Ten Commandments, which declares that "the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God."

________________________________________

What you have been taught by your men, who make up less than .1% of Christianity, is bizarre.

I wonder what percentage of the population of the earth Noah's family constituted before the great flood. Percentages and prominence are of no consequence in matters of faith and practice.

 

[GEN2REV]

ALL 10 Commandments are FOREVER - not just the 9!!

"The works of His hands are verity and judgment; all His Commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in Truth and uprightness."
Psalms 111:7-8

Who are the 10 Commandments written to?
They are written to all God's Children.

Who are God's Children? Let's see.

God is a spirit. Those who worship Him (His Children) must worship Him in spirit and in Truth.
John 4:24

Spiritual Israel are God's Children; NOT any physical/fleshly race - for "...they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God:.."
Romans 9:8

Is God's Law a physical Law or a Spiritual Law?
"For we know that the Law is spiritual:..."
Romans 7:14

"Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, (those who do them and keep them may go to heaven.)...Ye shall not add unto (them), neither shall ye diminish (them)..., that ye might keep the Commandments of the Lord your God ..."
Deuteronomy 4:1-2

NOTE: this chapter speaks nothing of the Mosaic/Ceremonial laws. It is ONLY referring to the 10 Commandments which ARE God's Law.

"And He declared unto you ... Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on tables of stone."
Deuteronomy 4:13

And what if His Children stop obeying His Commandments?

"... the Lord shall scatter you among the nations, and ye shall be left few in number among the heathen,..."
Deuteronomy 4:27

We are living this reality today. Scattered far and wide; few and far between among the nations.

"But if from thence thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find Him, if thou seek Him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.
(This next verse is PROOF POSITIVE that the Commandments are still valid to this very day.)
When thou art in tribulation, and all these things are come upon thee, even in the latter days (end times), if thou turn to the Lord thy God, and shalt be obedient unto His voice; (For the Lord thy God is a merciful God; ) He will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers (10 Commandments) which He sware unto them."
Deuteronomy 4:29-31

"The works of His hands are verity and judgment; all His Commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in Truth and uprightness."
Psalms 111:7-8

"My covenant will I not break nor alter (forever) the thing that has gone out of My lips."
Psalms 89:34

"For I am the Lord, I change not; ..."
Malachi 3:6

 

[1stCenturyLady]

You are, of course, at liberty to worship and rest upon any day of the week you choose, for whatever reason you like. However, the sense of urgency and detail in your defense of worshiping on Sunday would seem to me to venture fairly close to what is being reproved in Galatians 4:10. That is, unless, you feel it is only Jews who can "observe days."

I believe Sunday sacredness has its roots in pagan, heathen, sun worship, long before Christ was even born into this world. I do not for a minute believe that the apostolic age Christians rested and worshiped on Sunday in place of the 7th day Sabbath at all, much less in honor of the day of the week upon which Christ arose from His death by the Cross. I do not agree with your views of emperor Constantine's role in the change of the Sabbath, nor that "all Constantine did was stop the killing of Christians and made Christianity legal, instead of a death sentence." I do know this much: for whatever good he did, he made the most tragic mistake of linking church and state, which is the worst thing a leader of any kind can do.

I do not believe that Christians today go to Church on Sunday with the intent of worshiping the Sun and I have already stated that I probably shouldn't have used the term "venerable day of the sun" in my reply to Mary, Mother Of God. I have no awareness nor conviction of having borne false witness. "Duped," you say? That seems rather insulting but, be assured, all is forgiven.

I have little knowledge of Saturn worship, but I do know that people will worship just about anything they can imagine or perceive by their five senses, and I tell you truly, I would take no offense whatsoever if the whole world believed that by keeping the Seventh-day Sabbath, I was worshiping Saturn. I couldn't care less.

Your assumption that having gone through the Adventist school system, you have special insight into what I have been taught and might have accepted or adopted as truth is misguided, if not presumptuous. I came to the Adventist faith as an adult convert from the Southern Baptist Convention faith. I retain much of my former beliefs. My daughter went through the Adventist school system and has an altogether different view of faith and morals as do I. I assume nothing derogatory about you. You used to call yourself CharismaticLady. You probably know what the Adventist church generally teaches about the charismatic faith and practice. Do you recall me ever calling into question that aspect of your faith?

I think that as long as you insist your friends must see things the way you do, you're going to have very much difficulty. Your tone in this discussion is becoming more and more tense. It leads me to fear that this issue might be made a test of our friendship. I assure you, it is a test I will fail. I will have no one dictate to me what I must believe or express in matters of faith. I demand nothing of you and I accuse you of nothing.


Who are "you people?"

I am saddened.

"You people" is every Protestant from the Reformation on these forums that has been taught a bunch of rubbish that could easily be discarded if they took the time to read Romans 7:14-23 in CONTEXT of the verses before and after. That goes for 1 John also. I haven't seen you do that so far. But Peter calls it "twisting scripture."

It is a biblical known fact that Paul was reprimanding the Galatians because of the Christian Jews who were still keeping the Old Covenant laws, just as Peter was keeping the food laws when God gave him the vision of the sheet of unclean meats, and he said he would never touch such things, and that meant even since Pentecost. But God then told him what He cleansed let no man call common (or unclean). Up to that time after Pentecost, the gospel was only for the Jews. But now it was going to the Gentiles also which "unclean" meats represented. In the Jewish culture and even before to Adam and Eve they were taught what was "clean" meats to use in offerings to God. But for man and beasts, everyone and animal ate vegetables and other plants. Then came the flood and God then gave Noah the first allowance for man and beast to eat "anything that moved, but not the blood," Genesis 9:3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.", and again to the church in 1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, 3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

As for observing days, there are NO LAWS concerning certain days any longer, especially the ones that were looking to the future appearing of the Messiah. Once the day has been fulfilled by Christ, it is not to be observed any longer as LAW. As for the Sabbath day, that is fulfilled when instead of the day, we have Himself.

I have little knowledge of Saturn worship,

Me neither. That's the point. Its not true, so why say it. I did because of the absurdity of the same lie I've heard all my life coming out of you as if you believed it to be true, thus the "duped." All we know in history is that by the end of John's life the church was gathering together on Sunday, and Justin Martyr told us why. And Justin died centuries before Constantine, so again believing a lie.

You used to call yourself CharismaticLady. You probably know what the Adventist church generally teaches about the charismatic faith and practice. Do you recall me ever calling into question that aspect of your faith?

I was taught at the Adventist college near Chattanooga, that speaking in tongues was of the devil. You KNOW better than to think that about me, so of course, you are not going to accuse me of being possessed. You wouldn't want me as a close friend as our friendship would be unequally yoked.

 

[GEN2REV]

And 9 of the Commandments are still obeyed by ALL churches.

Except Catholics, of course. If I'm not mistaken, I think you can still ... PAY for murdering, or robbing people?

(Yes, that's a joke.)

But seriously, I think they only obey like ... 8?

Not sure what their policy is on Idols, etc.

 

[BarneyFife]

And 9 of the Commandments are still obeyed by ALL churches.

Except Catholics, of course. If I'm not mistaken, I think you can still ... PAY for murdering, or robbing people?

(Yes, that's a joke.)

But seriously, I think they only obey like ... 8?

Not sure what their policy is on Idols, etc.

Not a very good joke unless you're just trying to alienate Catholic folk.

 

[GEN2REV]

Not a very good joke unless you're just trying to alienate Catholic folk.

Oh, I'm just trying to alienate certain specific Catholic folk like Mary or others I've had run-ins with here, not necessarily all of 'em. But it's all in good fun.

Sometimes it takes a touch of humor and a little elbow in the ribs to get things back on track.

Now, ... where were we?

YES, the 10 Commandments!

You do know the 10 Commandments were given long before Mt. Sinai, don't you?

Which is more proof that they were not given only to the Israelites (Jews) present at that time.

 

[BarneyFife]

Oh, I'm just trying to alienate certain specific Catholic folk like Mary or others I've had run-ins with here, not necessarily all of 'em. But it's all in good fun.

Sometimes it takes a touch of humor and a little elbow in the ribs to get things back on track.

Now, ... where were we?

YES, the 10 Commandments!

You do know the 10 Commandments were given long before Mt. Sinai, don't you?

Which is more proof that they were not given only to the Israelites (Jews) present at that time.

Well, Joseph seemed to be quite familiar with the 7th commandment.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Well, Joseph seemed to be quite familiar with the 7th commandment.

What is interesting, Joseph ran out of there naked so as to not commit adultery. But Abraham took Hagar, Isaac had two or more wives, and so did Jacob and David. Men seem to be able to get away with murder!


I think he is talking about Abraham.

Genesis 26:
There was a famine in the land, besides the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went to Abimelech king of the Philistines, in Gerar.

2 Then the Lord appeared to him and said: “Do not go down to Egypt; live in the land of which I shall tell you. 3 Dwell in this land, and I will be with you and bless you; for to you and your descendants I give all these lands, and I will perform the oath which I swore to Abraham your father. 4 And I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; 5 because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.”

God talked to Abraham directly, just like He was doing to Isaac now. Anything God said was a law, a charge, statues or laws. How else was Abraham to know about burnt offerings. And was Abraham the first person to give a tithe to the King of Salem?

 

[GEN2REV]

Yes, you can see evidence all throughout scripture of the committing of sin, and punishments for sin; Sodom & Gomorrah, Cain being punished, Israelites being tested in the wilderness, etc. all long before Mt. Sinai.
Romans 5:13

If sin is not imputed to one's account without the Law, then all those who were punished prior to Mt. Sinai were being punished because the Law had already been given to all.

The angels who sinned were well aware of God's Law.
2 Peter 2:4
Jude 1:6
Noah was a preacher of righteousness.
2 Peter 2:5
What is righteousness besides the 10 Commandments?

Also the Israelites were tested by God on who would obey the 4th, Sabbath, Commandment in chapter 16 of Exodus. Well before the dramatic presentation of the Commandments on Mt. Sinai in chapter 20.

Sin is mentioned many times in scripture prior to Exodus 20. And what is sin?
1 John 3:4
The breaking of the 10 Commandments.

Fascinating.

The Commandments were given to all mankind. To God's Children that they may be declared righteous and to the rest of humanity that they may have grounds for judgment.

All Glory to God Almighty!

 

[BarneyFife]

"You people" is every Protestant from the Reformation on these forums that has been taught a bunch of rubbish that could easily be discarded if they took the time to read Romans 7:14-23 in CONTEXT of the verses before and after. That goes for 1 John also. I haven't seen you do that so far. But Peter calls it "twisting scripture."

I have no idea what to make of this. Very impassioned. It doesn't seem very friendly, being addressed to me, personally, if I'm being honest.

It is a biblical known fact that Paul was reprimanding the Galatians because of the Christian Jews who were still keeping the Old Covenant laws, just as Peter was keeping the food laws when God gave him the vision of the sheet of unclean meats, and he said he would never touch such things, and that meant even since Pentecost. But God then told him what He cleansed let no man call common (or unclean). Up to that time after Pentecost, the gospel was only for the Jews. But now it was going to the Gentiles also which "unclean" meats represented. In the Jewish culture and even before to Adam and Eve they were taught what was "clean" meats to use in offerings to God. But for man and beasts, everyone and animal ate vegetables and other plants. Then came the flood and God then gave Noah the first allowance for man and beast to eat "anything that moved, but not the blood," Genesis 9:3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.", and again to the church in 1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, 3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

I'm at a loss as to why you're lobbing extraneous objections to Adventist doctrine at me that I never even brought up to you. Have I ever said anything about clean/unclean meats to you?

As for observing days, there are NO LAWS concerning certain days any longer... As for the Sabbath day, that is fulfilled when instead of the day, we have Himself.

I realize it's bound to come up in a thread of this sort, but we both know we don't agree on this, so I don't see any point in arguing over it. Do you?

Me neither. That's the point. Its not true, so why say it. I did because of the absurdity of the same lie I've heard all my life coming out of you as if you believed it to be true, thus the "duped." All we know in history is that by the end of John's life the church was gathering together on Sunday, and Justin Martyr told us why. And Justin died centuries before Constantine, so again believing a lie.

And I'm sort of confused about the word "lie" being tossed around among friends. Frankly, I don't understand what's become of this discussion.

God has not preserved the writings of the church fathers in the same way that He has preserved His Word. In fact, I'm inclined to grant them very little weight at all compared to Scripture. (Uncomplimentary) textual criticism of these manuscripts is much more prolific than that of Scripture, from what I gather. The First Apology of Justin Martyr has come under quite a bit of scrutiny, by the way. It has been demonstrated that chapter 67 from which the statements about Sunday observance come are inconsistent with the rest of the document and that the last 2 of the 3 emperors' "epistles" that come after chapter 67 are questionable, as well. I'm not an expert on these things, but I have read about it.

I'm not aware of any authority imputed to the "epistle of Barnabas."

If you want to call these things "lies," you're perfectly free to do so.

I might tell you that I believe you are, or might be, mistaken about something, but I don't think I would single you out as believing lies.

I was taught at the Adventist college near Chattanooga, that speaking in tongues was of the devil. You KNOW better than to think that about me, so of course, you are not going to accuse me of being possessed. You wouldn't want me as a close friend as our friendship would be unequally yoked.

I believe there is a legitimate gift of tongues in the church, but I don't know what that has to do with what we've been discussing. I was simply making the point that I don't make assumptions about what you think or believe based on what little I do know about you, which I think might not be as much as you think I do. I don't believe friendship involves a yoke, necessarily.

I'm very close friends with a fine Christian gentleman who prays in tongues, I believe. I never speak to him about it, and he rarely speaks of it to me. I don't assume that he's a spirtualist because he holds to a different view of one or more of the Spiritual gifts and has been a member of a Pentacostal church. In fact, I believe we're in agreement about the state of the dead. I'm not in a habit of majoring in minors. What I care about mostly are the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, as laid down in the Law, the Prophets and the Apostles.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

I have no idea what to make of this. Very impassioned. It doesn't seem very friendly, being addressed to me, personally, if I'm being honest.

How can you say that when I explicitly said, I HAVE NOT SEEN YOU DO THIS. So, it was about other denominations, and has never been about SDAs. That is why I usually am a mother hen when others attack SDA.

Others twist God's word to turn grace into lasciviousness. Jude 1:4

As far as the gifts of the Spirit go, because of EGW, SDAs usually are for and not against the gifts and are not Cessationists. The gifts are part of this New Covenant, so Cessationists must be under a third covenant I don't know anything about.

 

[BarneyFife]

How can you say that when I explicitly said, I HAVE NOT SEEN YOU DO THIS. So, it was about other denominations, and has never been about SDAs. That is why I usually am a mother hen when others attack SDA.

Others twist God's word to turn grace into lasciviousness. Jude 1:4

As far as the gifts of the Spirit go, because of EGW, SDAs usually are for and not against the gifts and are not Cessationists. The gifts are part of this New Covenant, so Cessationists must be under a third covenant I don't know anything about.

Complete misunderstanding, Sis. When you said "I have not seen you do this," I thought you meant that you have not seen me read Romans 7 and 1 John correctly. That's completely my fault, I guess I should have known better. Well, now you see why my sister and I haven't talked for years. She hates my guts. Everything I do she thinks is meant to slight or injure her in some way. I know I'm going off on a little tangent here, but up until about 12 years ago she practically idolized me. And then, since about the time her marriage to my best friend from high school fell apart, I can't seem to do anything right. It's so weird. Anyway, the point is, I can be a bit dense at times and forget things that should be well set in my mind, like what you were saying about your SDA mother-hen thingamajig. I'm sorry.

 

[GEN2REV]

It's interesting how many atheists use the example of stoning people for breaking the Sabbath in a failed attempt to prove that the Sabbath Commandment is no longer valid.

Again, the other 9 Commandments are obeyed by almost all churches/denominations and absolutely none, zero, of any of those stone their people for breaking any of those other 9 Commandments.

The lady in the Bible who was caught in adultery was almost stoned for her sin. Nobody today stones Christians for committing adultery.

It's implied that, if the Commandment is valid to observe the Sabbath today, we must immediately stone people for breaking the Sabbath Commandment, but there are countless examples in the Bible of people committing sins that they were not immediately punished for. How about the angels who sinned? They still haven't been destroyed.
2 Peter 2:4
Jude 1:6

And their "sin" was committed long before Mt. Sinai proving that the 10 Commandments were not given only to the Jews.

Just because people are not immediately punished severely today for breaking the Sabbath Commandment is no evidence of the Commandment being repealed by God. Many people commit all manner of sin today and are not immediately dealt with by God, but what does the scripture say?
Sin is the breaking of the Commandments of God.
1 John 3:4
And the wages of (reward for) sin is death.
Romans 6:23

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Complete misunderstanding, Sis. When you said "I have not seen you do this," I thought you meant that you have not seen me read Romans 7 and 1 John correctly. That's completely my fault, I guess I should have known better. Well, now you see why my sister and I haven't talked for years. She hates my guts. Everything I do she thinks is meant to slight or injure her in some way. I know I'm going off on a little tangent here, but up until about 12 years ago she practically idolized me. And then, since about the time her marriage to my best friend from high school fell apart, I can't seem to do anything right. It's so weird. Anyway, the point is, I can be a bit dense at times and forget things that should be well set in my mind, like what you were saying about your SDA mother-hen thingamajig. I'm sorry.

You're a great and wonderful man. Thanks for letting me know what the misunderstanding between us was about.

Today I have been making a list of all the people who have hurt me since I was a child. The name of the document is Forgive. Last night I read a little Christian pamphlet by a pastor named Thurman on healing. It hit me that the reason I'm in such physical pain is because of unforgiveness. It is amazing how just a little 4" X 5" pamphlet can be so compelling. There are 5 pamphlets in all, and one of the others was just as great.

 

[BarneyFife]

Today I have been making a list of all the people who have hurt me since I was a child. The name of the document is Forgive. Last night I read a little Christian pamphlet by a pastor named Thurman on healing. It hit me that the reason I'm in such physical pain is because of unforgiveness. It is amazing how just a little 4" X 5" pamphlet can be so compelling. There are 5 pamphlets in all, and one of the others was just as great.

PRAISE THE LORD!!!
HALLELUJAH!!!

 

[BarneyFife]

You're a great and wonderful man.

And you are a shameless flatterer - lol.

Thanks for letting me know what the misunderstanding between us was about.

Least I could do

 

[GEN2REV]

10 Commandments.

All 10 of 'em.

Forever binding all mankind to the foundations of righteousness.

He who casts any of these aside shall pay the due price for his rebellion.

Jesus died to seal His Spirit in a state of earthly righteousness; having obeyed all 10 Commandments, He could now send His Spirit to us to assist us to follow in His footsteps - to travel the trail He alone blazed in the wilderness of sin as our Master and Savior to defeat all the powers of darkness and set the captives free once and for all.

Jesus was not under law, as one is under law who breaks the law, but He was under obligation to His Father to accomplish His Father's work as a loyal Servant - just as we are under obligation to accomplish Jesus' will upon the earth. Not under law, as binding us to miserable servitude, but in harmony with the 10 Commandments of God written on our hearts and empowered to obey by the seal of the Holy Spirit of Christ which teaches us to walk just as He walked.

Being right with your church does not make you right with God.

 

[BarneyFife]

Paul made statements such as "i am sold under sin", "for what i am doing i don't understand", and "what i will to do, that i do not practice". You are trying to accuse me of taking his words out of context, but you lack the basic sense and the reading comprehension skills to realize Paul was using present tense verbs. A person does not use present tense verbs to describe past actions, as any English teacher would tell you.

It also makes no logical sense whatsoever to claim that Paul was simply alluding to his past as a Pharisee because Paul continued to identify himself as a Pharisee after his conversion:



As usual, you are confidently speaking about matters you don't understand. If Christians can't possibly sin, then explain John saying Christ is their Mediator when they sin, not if they sin. People who can't sin wouldn't logically need Christ to be a Mediator for them, would they?

So where, pray tell, is the logic in your assumption that Paul was incapable of sinning when Rom. 7:21 clearly shows Paul saying that the law of sin continued to exist in him? If the law of sin continued to exist in him as he clearly stated, that means Jesus didn't magically erase his capacity to sin, now did He?

Friend, do you think we will make good progress in our discussions with insults?

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Friend, do you think we will make good progress in our discussions with insults?

Barn, tell him if he wants to stay with the eastern teaching style of present tense, but read it with a western mindset, that's up to him. But then Paul would have been over 1300 years old to have been alive before and after the law was given on Mt. Sinai.

9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died.

Now keep reading...2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death.

There we have a past tense after a present tense. It is a bad practice to look at western tenses instead of context. Is Paul STILL the chief of sinners? NO! He is dead to sin just like I am.