The Sabbath Day

[Jim B]

It is no accident that a NT maxim says... The doers of the law shall be justified.
Romans 2:13

Galatians 2:16, " yet we know that no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified."

I am tired of your legalism! Read your Bible!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I don't understand what's going on here, Ron.
This is nonsense. You're just trolling.

Only according to you.

I was addressing "Q" and you chimed in on an answer I wrote to him and started making all sorts of judgments.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Ron, buddy, you teach only traditions of men.

Well to you I do because I am not a legalistic pharisee kind of guy! But we have entered in to Sabbath rest. We have ceased from our labors! As is writtenb:

Hebrews 4:3-5
King James Version

3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.

5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.


the traditions of men teach we must observe the Sabbath, then like you they redefine the bible to move it to Sunday instead of Saturday!

 

[BarneyFife]

But it seems to me that the term "law of Christ" is so vague and the evidence for Sabbath abrogation so weak that I don't see how anyone can conclude that God changed His moral code for human beings. I know we don't agree on the substantive relationship between Christ and Jehovah but, after all, Jesus did say "I and my Father are one" and if by that He didn't mean that they were one in purpose and principle, what did He mean?

It is very vague, and only occurs that one time. But even though we call it that based on that Scripture, commandments are still commandments and violating them is sin.

Agreed, of course.

Christians are under different laws that our pre-Christian brothers and sisters were.

(If you'll grant me the liberty, I'd like to approach this as a conversation more than a contention. So you really shouldn't take anything I say as an attempted rebuke or any other such related personal opposition.)

Surely something as important as this would be stated unequivocally somewhere. And I simply don't find it anywhere. In contrast with the very spectacular drama surrounding the entire event of the giving of the law at Sinai, I find only vagueries in support of the now common "New Covenant" view of morality. And the various theologies that oppose the devolvemenmt of the 4th commandment upon Christians seem to differ from one another and only complement each other amid the effort to justify setting aside the commandment.

Paul said not to judge anyone over a Sabbath, although I don't keep it, I don't frown on anyone who does, however I do find disdain for hypocrisy as you may yourself, I believe that is someone teaches you should keep the Sabbath, then they should be a prime example of observing it, correct?

Under the law covenant, a violation of the Sabbath, was to result in the death of the violator, by his brothers and sisters. You, me,, and everyone you know (I bet) has violated it, I would have been gone years ago. In this time period there would be all kinds of consequences of a faith killing Sabbath violators.

The entrance of hypocrisy into the discussion strikes me as odd since I find no occurrence of it in the way that modern Sabbath-keepers observe and teach the doctrine. If I misstep in keeping it, and no one chooses to come forth to stone me, should I somehow attempt to stone myself in order to avoid hypocrisy? Or, perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comment?

And generally speaking, I really don't understand why this objection always comes up since other commandments also warranted the death penalty during the theocracy of Israel. Also, since the wages of sin is death, all sin is either under a deferred death sentence, or imposed upon Christ Himself.

There is also the consideration of the phrase "let no man judge you in..." This is assumed by those who object to the 4th commandment as meaning "Let yourself not be bothered with..." After all, how can I keep someone else from judging me? The phrase could just as easily mean "Let no man stone you for..." according to the definitions given by the Greek lexicons. This leads back to the theocratical framework of government, which was largely concerned with the management of a traveling camp of possibly 2 million or more barbarians, since all sin has been worthy of death in all ages.

To my poor, finite mind, the more one thinks about the implications of altering or overturning the ten commandments, the more troublesome and numerous become the revelation of inevitable difficulties.

All things operate by law. God is unchanging and His law is a mirror of His character:

Righteous
* God—“The LORD is righteous in all His ways” (Psalms 145:17).
* Law—“All Your commandments are righteousness” (Psalms 119:172).

Truth
* God—“You have redeemed me, O LORD, God of truth” (Psalms 31:5).
* Law—“Your law is truth” (Psalms 119:142).

Goodness
* God—“Good and upright is the LORD” (Psalms 25:8).
* Law—“The law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good” (Romans 7:12).

Everlasting
* God—“Then Abraham called on the name of the LORD, the Everlasting God” (Genesis 21:33).
* Law—“All His precepts are sure, they are upheld forever and ever” (Psalms 111:7 8).

Holiness
* God—“Be holy, for I am holy” (1 Peter 1:16).
* Law—“Therefore the law is holy” (Romans 7:12).

Love
* God—“God is love” (1 John 4:8).
* Law—“Love is the fulfillment of the law” (Romans 13: 10).

Perfection
* God—“You shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Matthew 5:48).
* Law—“The law of the LORDis perfect, restoring the soul” (Psalms 19:7).

Spiritual
* God—“God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24).
* Law—“For we know that the law is spiritual” (Romans 7:14).

Just
* God—“He is the Rock. His work is perfect; for all His ways are justice” (Deuteronomy 32:4).
* Law—“The law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good” (Romans 7:12).

Light
* God—“God is light and in Him is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5 ).
* Law—“The commandment is a lamp, and the law is light” (Proverbs 6:23).

There had to have been a time in Witness history that the Sabbath was considered compulsory for believers, no? I've actually been thinking of trying to hunt down some old Witness teaching material to see if that is the case.
Yes sir, from 1513 BCE till 33/36 CE, I put in 36 because the Law covenant was kept in force till the end of the week Barn Dan. (Daniel 9:27) 27 “And he will keep the covenant in force for the many for one week; and at the half of the week, he will cause sacrifice and gift offering to cease.. . .

The obvious differences we have in the interpretation of Daniel 9:27 aside, the point of my question was that there appears to be a discrepancy in the Sabbath-keeping history within the time period since C. T. Russell founded the Bible Student movement and the position you take on Sabbatarianism, isn't there?

And I can't see how folks can believe that the Christian church was out of the loop for almost 2000 years on their duty to God as regards the 4th commandment. Aren't the main Kingdom Hall worship services held every Sunday?
Lengthy subject Barn, in a nut shell, there would be a period of apostasy until the end of the appointed times of the nations at which point Jesus would sit on God's throne. 2 Thes 2:3. By the end of the apostles life, that apostasy was already well established and John penned about the many antichrists that had came on the scene. It was prophesied that when Jesus took the crown, and we entered into the last days God's people who were growing among the weeds would be brought together again. Isa 2:2,3 repeated at Micah 4:1,2. We believe that we have been in this period for over 100 yrs now, so one should be able to identify those people by Scripture.

This reply really has me scratching head, Bob. The two queries I posed here seem straightforward enough to me, anyway. Are we to believe that the Christian church as a whole was wrong in assuming that the 4th commandment was enjoining upon them? And isn't the question of whether or not main Kindom Hall worship services were held on Sunday quite the antithesis of a lengthy subject?

Aren't these questions worth asking, Bob?
Amen Barn, when everlasting life is on the line, there are no stupid questions sir. In fact I truly appreciate your asking me, and allowing me to bear testimony for my God on those concerns.

I, in turn, appreciate your kind attention, consideration, and feedback, Bob. You might just have earned a high-ranking position on my unwritten shortlist of people who are a pleasure to reason with. You are definitely winning people over with your polite and friendly manner of discussion. Sorry it took so long to get back to you (I've been very busy this week). I hope nothing I've presented here is offensive. :)

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Do you understand the principle of reductio ad absurdem? To whom are you referring when you describe believers who "practice homosexuality, fornication, adultery, pedophilia, bestiality or are an unrepentant porn watcher"? Do you know any such person or do they simply exist in your fertile imagination? I don't believe you when you write "If one is struggling and recognizes the sin in these, we are to come alongside and help them grow out of these', as you are clearly judging and condemning them instead of loving them (as Jesus commanded).

Your concept of abortion outside of a mother dying is naive. (BTW, if your wife's fetus was aborted, isn't that murder? If not, what other exceptions are okay with you?) Have your ever heard of fetal anomalies in which the fetus, when born, has zero chance of survival? For example, a fetus that has lungs which will never function normally? Would you like to witness that baby struggle for breath until it dies within a few minutes? How about a fetus with an abnormal heart that guarantees certain death?

What you're doing is implying that the woman and her physician are murderers, so demonic that they are incapable of making difficult decisions for all concerned. Should a girl/woman be forced to give birth to and raise a child that is the result of rape or incest?

Who made you and others judge and jury?

I don't care about human principles. I care about what the Word of God says! It says practicing homosexuals, adulterers, pedophiles and all who commit illicit sexual sin as a prractice will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. Someone who knows it is sin and practices 1 John 1:9 we need compassion on- despite what you falsely accuse me of.

As for abortion? Maybe it is simply human logic, but saving one life instead of losing two is a sound biblical principle. YOU have allowed 50 years o0f legalized butchering of babvies to dull your conviction.

Do you suppot abortion on demand through the first two trimesters for any all reasons as is legal now in the USA? If not why not?

Rape and incest are horrible crimes and yes women have gotten pregnant from these terrible crimes. But is the deliberate killing of that human being growing in her going to swab her conscinece clean of that crime committed on her? Until it was no longer politically correct, medical textbooks used to write of P.A.S. or Post Abortion syndrome! Women going through a post partem like depression, melancholy and depression at teh babies due date and holidays, and depression when she gave birth to other children.

That child from conception is a complete gentic human being! It is living and has all the genetic information all other humans have!

Thomas Road Baptist Church established houses called Rachels house. they were designed specifically for women talked out of aborting their babies. In the early 2000's over 10,000 women had passed through their doors and were glad they kept their babies. It is not easy and yes there are difficulties, but with love, care and compassion and a helping hand lioke Rachels House gave, these women thrived!

Saorry but nowhere in the bible are we allowed to kill another human except if they take another's life! That is why I do not have a bad conscience about the abortion my wife had to have. The baby was dead no matter what! And if we did nothing, that baby would kill its mother. we were sad, mourned th eloss etc. but this is the only instance where ending the life of a baby is allowed.

 

[Jim B]

I don't care about human principles. I care about what the Word of God says! It says practicing homosexuals, adulterers, pedophiles and all who commit illicit sexual sin as a prractice will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. Someone who knows it is sin and practices 1 John 1:9 we need compassion on- despite what you falsely accuse me of.

As for abortion? Maybe it is simply human logic, but saving one life instead of losing two is a sound biblical principle. YOU have allowed 50 years o0f legalized butchering of babvies to dull your conviction.

Do you suppot abortion on demand through the first two trimesters for any all reasons as is legal now in the USA? If not why not?

Rape and incest are horrible crimes and yes women have gotten pregnant from these terrible crimes. But is the deliberate killing of that human being growing in her going to swab her conscinece clean of that crime committed on her? Until it was no longer politically correct, medical textbooks used to write of P.A.S. or Post Abortion syndrome! Women going through a post partem like depression, melancholy and depression at teh babies due date and holidays, and depression when she gave birth to other children.

That child from conception is a complete gentic human being! It is living and has all the genetic information all other humans have!

Thomas Road Baptist Church established houses called Rachels house. they were designed specifically for women talked out of aborting their babies. In the early 2000's over 10,000 women had passed through their doors and were glad they kept their babies. It is not easy and yes there are difficulties, but with love, care and compassion and a helping hand lioke Rachels House gave, these women thrived!

Saorry but nowhere in the bible are we allowed to kill another human except if they take another's life! That is why I do not have a bad conscience about the abortion my wife had to have. The baby was dead no matter what! And if we did nothing, that baby would kill its mother. we were sad, mourned th eloss etc. but this is the only instance where ending the life of a baby is allowed.

This irrational, accusatory rant doesn't deserve an answer. Your mind is clearly closed.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Brakelite said: ↑
It is no accident that a NT maxim says... The doers of the law shall be justified.
Romans 2:13
Galatians 2:16, " yet we know that no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified."

I am tired of your legalism! Read your Bible!

You are the one who must read your Bible HONESTLY!

"YET we know that no one is justified by the works of the law
BUT by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ
we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that
we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ
and NOT by (our doing of) the works of the law, because
by (our doing of) the works of the law,
NO ONE WILL BE JUSTIFIED."

So: "though we know that no one is justified by the works of the law" nevertheless "THE DOERS of the Law shall be justified" and none above or not under the Law shall be justified, and that's a fact whether you are tired of it or not!

 

[BarneyFife]

Only according to you.

I was addressing "Q" and you chimed in on an answer I wrote to him and started making all sorts of judgments.

Judgments, Schmudgments. I'm used to that false accusation so don't expect to get any kind of reaction you might be hoping for.

We're all the same person: BarnyFife, Qoheleth, Barney Fife. Admin Sister Agelina can verify this. I can tag her if you want but I'd rather not bother her. I changed my username a month or so ago and then she changed it back (kinda) for me.

Your replies just got more and more childish until I had to assume you're just being a pest.

People love to chime in when the 4th commandment is being discussed. It generates a lot of hate (not that other things don't). People don't like being told that they might need to consider whether they are ignorantly involved in disobedience to God.

If you answer this in your usual "I know you are but what am I?" fashion instead of making a viable case against the 4th commandment (something that would make a good refutation of what I wrote in my reply to Brother Robert G. above), then we'll know what's going on here, I guess. Have at it, Ron.

 

[BarneyFife]

I don't care about human principles. I care about what the Word of God says! It says practicing homosexuals, adulterers, pedophiles and all who commit illicit sexual sin as a prractice will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. Someone who knows it is sin and practices 1 John 1:9 we need compassion on- despite what you falsely accuse me of.

As for abortion? Maybe it is simply human logic, but saving one life instead of losing two is a sound biblical principle. YOU have allowed 50 years o0f legalized butchering of babvies to dull your conviction.

Do you suppot abortion on demand through the first two trimesters for any all reasons as is legal now in the USA? If not why not?

Rape and incest are horrible crimes and yes women have gotten pregnant from these terrible crimes. But is the deliberate killing of that human being growing in her going to swab her conscinece clean of that crime committed on her? Until it was no longer politically correct, medical textbooks used to write of P.A.S. or Post Abortion syndrome! Women going through a post partem like depression, melancholy and depression at teh babies due date and holidays, and depression when she gave birth to other children.

That child from conception is a complete gentic human being! It is living and has all the genetic information all other humans have!

Thomas Road Baptist Church established houses called Rachels house. they were designed specifically for women talked out of aborting their babies. In the early 2000's over 10,000 women had passed through their doors and were glad they kept their babies. It is not easy and yes there are difficulties, but with love, care and compassion and a helping hand lioke Rachels House gave, these women thrived!

Saorry but nowhere in the bible are we allowed to kill another human except if they take another's life! That is why I do not have a bad conscience about the abortion my wife had to have. The baby was dead no matter what! And if we did nothing, that baby would kill its mother. we were sad, mourned th eloss etc. but this is the only instance where ending the life of a baby is allowed.

...none of which has anything to do with the subject of the thread.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

the way that modern Sabbath-keepers observe and teach the doctrine.

Your (whoever's) ENTIRE problem...
The Bible way is that the LORD GOD made the Sabbath, keeping-hallowing-sanctifying the Seventh Day, blessing the Seventh Day, finishing the Seventh Day, and, RESTING, HONOURING the Seventh Day IN AND THROUGH JESUS WHO GAVE THEM, THE PEOPLE 0F GOD, REST -
And that's what the Bible doctrine of the Sabbath teaches, rest assured.

 

[BarneyFife]

Your ENTIRE problem...
The Bible way is that the LORD GOD made the Sabbath, keeping-hallowing-sanctifying the Seventh Day, blessing the Seventh Day, finishing the Seventh Day, and, RESTING, HONOURING the Seventh Day IN AND THROUGH JESUS WHO GAVE THEM, THE PEOPLE 0F GOD, REST -
And that's what the Bible doctrine of the Sabbath teaches, rest assured.

I think you might be making too much of my use of the word "modern," GE. :)

 

[Jim B]

You are the one who must read your Bible HONESTLY!

"YET we know that no one is justified by the works of the law
BUT by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ
we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that
we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ
and NOT by (our doing of) the works of the law, because
by (our doing of) the works of the law,
NO ONE WILL BE JUSTIFIED."

So: "though we know that no one is justified by the works of the law" nevertheless "THE DOERS of the Law shall be justified" and none above or not under the Law shall be justified, and that's a fact whether you are tired of it or not!

I have no idea what your self-contradictory post means. a) No one is justified by the law but b) the doers of the law shall be justified and c) none above or not under the law shall be justified. Which of the three do you mean?

The fact stated in Scripture is that nobody will be justified by the law. Galatians 2:16b, " And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified."

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Your replies just got more and more childish until I had to assume you're just being a pest.

a future classic!

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I have no idea what your self-contradictory post means. a) No one is justified by the law but b) the doers of the law shall be justified and c) none above or not under the law shall be justified. Which of the three do you mean?

All three.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I think you might be making too much of my use of the word "modern," GE.

I don't think so. SDA are frontline.

'Modern' with regard to the Sabbath means stereotype: never anything else than ''the Law the Law the Law" as your own Mrs White put it. You are very exemplary, Barny Fife, having never reasoned beyond OT Law, REFUSE POINT BLANK EVEN TO LISTEN TO A WORD "CONCERNING THE SEVENTH DAY GOD THUS SPOKE BY THE SON IN THESE LAST DAYS" - that "God will not speak of another day than the Seventh Day He thus concerning did speak .. if Jesus gave them not Rest". WHICH HE DID HAVING RAISED FROM THE DEAD "IN THE END-TIME-FULFILMENT OF THE SABBATH" Himself being "the ALL in all fulfilling FULLNESS OF GOD" having raised from the dead "IN THE END OF THE SABBATH BEING IN THE MID-AFTERNOON TOWARDS BEFORE the nearing First Day of the week" - literally, prophetically, physically, spiritually, whatsoever whichever Providential, Covenantal, Divine Way through Jesus Christ - which is very old fashioned because it is the "It is written" OTHER, THAN THE LAW-way, because it is the "Written of the Christ", -Way.

You will not for as long as you will to be a SDA - because you're 'modern'.

 

[GEN2REV]

the traditions of men teach we must observe the Sabbath, then like you they redefine the bible to move it to Sunday instead of Saturday!

No, traditions of men teach that the 4th Commandment (and really all 10) has been done away with; also that the Saturday has been changed to Sunday worship.

The Bible teaches none of that ... anywhere.

 

[BarneyFife]

SDA are frontline.
You will not for as long as you will to be a SDA - because you're 'modern'.
You are very exemplary, Barny Fife, having never reasoned beyond OT Law,

If that were true (OT law reasoning), how would that make me 'modern?'
And how am I 'exemplary' if there are 22 million of us 'frontliners?'
Isn't it all about '7th-day resurrection' with you?
Weird combination--kinda like 'theistic evolution.'
It's a long way down off a dead, high horse if you wait to fall, GE.
Climb down, Brother.
Just ribbin' ya.
You may now thrash me within an inch of my life.
(You always seem to bless me then turn on me like a cat.)

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I have no idea what your self-contradictory post means.

"John 12: 48 he that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spoke [from Genesis 1:1], the same shall judge him in the last day" ["God speaks by the Son" Hebrews 1:2"]
Just in case the colours confuse you:
"John 12: 48 he that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath ONE that judgeth him: the word THAT I SPOKE [from Genesis 1:1], the SAME shall judge him in the LAST day."

"GOD SPEAKS BY THE SON IN THESE LAST DAYS" THE SAME AS GOD SPOKE IN THE OT. Hebrews 1:2

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

If that were true (OT law reasoning), how would that make me 'modern?'
And how am I 'exemplary' if there are 22 million of us 'frontliners?'
Isn't it all about '7th-day resurrection' with you?
Weird combination--kinda like 'theistic evolution.'
It's a long way down off a dead, high horse if you wait to fall, GE.
Climb down, Brother.
Just ribbin' ya.

<how would that make (you) 'modern?'> Because you worship those learned dead fallen from on high dead horses, Bauer, Ginrich, Arndt and every little mimicker AS DEPEND YOUR ETERNAL LIFE ON IT THAT Mark 15:42 Matthew 27:57 Luke 23:54 and John 13:1,30 C0NTRADICT - ARE NOT TRUE - SAY GOD LIES -- exactly what you are for how long now refusing to avow or deny or AVOID BUT CAN'T - that you're a follower of Antichrist IN ALL AND EVERY MODERN TRANSLATION and that is why you, Doug Bachelor, Walter Veith, ET AL, are <modern>. Blind like drunk staggerers after the SEEING deceiving devils who threw - already threw you into the jaws of the Antichrist little horn big mouth BEAST!
That's why I always do bless you AND THE SDA who are the lonely little flock with still the guts to at least not resent God's Law and Sabbath Day -- I MUST then turn on you people like a cat, like a WOUNDED LION - God help me! YOU YOU YOU THE SDA are not doing the works of Righteousness, but are aids - no more than slavish aids of the Pope and Jesuits and world governments and MONEY MONGERS. You are going on TODAY to rob God's people of their rightful claim on BIBLE TRUTH. For you Christ' s Resurrection on the Sabbath IS NOT BIBLE TRUTH but gibberish from a fool who thinks he is high and preposterous while it's a dead horse he's mounted and tries beat alive. GOD IS WITNESS BETWEEN YOU SDA AND TRUTH TODAY. DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEART AGAIN and again as in the past - in the most recent, modern vogue past!

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

My last post disappeared when I posted it. I have many times experienced God's providence in events like this. It must have been for the better. Thank Him, fear his Name.

No, it's still here. I did not write it outside the last square bracket, so posted it as were it Barny's post. My apologies.