The Gift Of The Sabbath - Is It For Us? - NEW AND IMPROVED??

[BarneyFife]

@Christ4Me Good to remember (even though some ppl don't want to) that the law was changed. (Hebrews 7.12).

Good to remember (even though some ppl don't want to) that what we now have is better than the law (Hebrews 7.19).

I would never passively-aggressively accuse you of not wanting to recognize that the entire 7th chapter of Hebrews is about the Levitical priesthood and the ceremonial law, and that not one mention is made of the moral law of which the Sabbath commandment is the centerpiece. I think you probably just overlooked that.

 

[farouk]

I would never passively-aggressively accuse you of not wanting to recognize that the entire 7th chapter of Hebrews is about the Levitical priesthood and the ceremonial law, and that not one mention is made of the moral law of which the Sabbath commandment is the centerpiece. I think you probably just overlooked that.

I wasn't even referring to you, @BarnyFife I've made similar comments previously. The rest day is Creational. But the Sabbath's part in the Old Economy is not central to the Gospel age; indeed, since the Resurrection is a fulfillment of the feasts of firstfruits, it's hard to go back to the Old Economy with its prescriptions.

 

[Christ4Me]

@Christ4Me Good to remember (even though some ppl don't want to) that the law was changed. (Hebrews 7.12).

Good to remember (even though some ppl don't want to) that what we now have is better than the law (Hebrews 7.19).

Thanks for sharing those verses, brother.

 

[BarneyFife]

Not sure why you saw it that way. I do not recall sharing that post before with you, have I?

Spam is limited to the act of reposting?

Well I had boldened portions of Matthew 19:16-17 that plainly states it was for obtaining eternal life, so I will not repeat it then.

How could commandment-keeping save someone who has already broken them. The conditions of eternal life are perfect obedience, and the wages of sin is death so everyone who was ever born needs a Substitute.

I reckon only the Lord can help us to see what commandments are still in effect for why we keep them

...unless the Giver of the law says that one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from it.

One can say that honoring the Lord on the sabbath day just went to everyday for living that reconcile relationship with God in Jesus Christ, but there should be a difference for why we honor Him each day because we are saved as opposed to how the Jews were to do it on the sabbath day.

Couldn't one also say that zebras are polka-dotted?

Let's take a break, because you seem to be offended.

No offense taken whatsoever.

I love you in Christ's love.

That's very nice. I love you, too. So much so, that I very much want you to experience the joy of the Sabbath of the LORD, thy God, that you might delight yourself in the LORD; and that He would cause you to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed you with the heritage of Jacob. (Isaiah 58:14)

 

[BarneyFife]

I wasn't even referring to you, @BarnyFife I've made similar comments previously.

So "some ppl" doesn't refer to those who hallow the Sabbath and disagree with your interpretation of Hebrews 7 (about which I noticed you made no comment)? You referred to "some ppl" in parentheses twice. It was dark outside when I was born, but it wasn't last night. Does the fact that you've made similar comments before mean something I should understand? Because I don't. If your post wasn't a backhanded insult, I confess I'm not sure for what purpose it was intended. Keep in mind, I'm not offended, personally, but I have a lot of friends who experience a lot of spiritual bullying in threads of this type. And a lot of drive-by comments that are constituted much like yours. A whole lot. I assume if I've misrepresented you in any way, you'll accept my apologies and forgive my bull-headedness.

 

[farouk]

So "some ppl" doesn't refer to those who hallow the Sabbath and disagree with your interpretation of Hebrews 7 (about which I noticed you made no comment)? You referred to "some ppl" in parentheses twice. It was dark outside when I was born, but it wasn't last night. Does the fact that you've made similar comments before mean something I should understand? Because I don't. If your post wasn't a backhanded insult, I confess I'm not sure for what purpose it was intended. Keep in mind, I'm not offended, personally, but I have a lot of friends who experience a lot of spiritual bullying in threads of this type. And a lot of drive-by comments that are constituted much like yours. A whole lot. I assume if I've misrepresented you in any way, you'll accept my apologies and forgive my bull-headedness.

If my post was too strongly worded, my apologies. I guess part of my point is that these arguments occur over and over again, decade after decade, with astonishing similarity; but yes it is true that those who espouse them are individuals in their own right with their own, unique spiritual experiences.

 

[BarneyFife]

Sorry, I forgot to address your points.

The rest day is Creational.

That's pretty much baked into the commandment's actual verbiage. Not sure how that pertains to its validity.

But the Sabbath's part in the Old Economy is not central to the Gospel age;

This is just a statement of opinion, really.

since the Resurrection is a fulfillment of the feasts of firstfruits,

Is this a reference to Sunday sacredness or something?

it's hard to go back to the Old Economy with its prescriptions.

Prescriptions?
?

 

[BarneyFife]

If my post was too strongly worded, my apologies. I guess part of my point is that these arguments occur over and over again, decade after decade, with astonishing similarity; but yes it is true that those who espouse them are individuals in their own right with their own, unique spiritual experiences.

Class act, Brother. Whatever offences might've occurred, all is forgiven.

To be fair, almost every doctrinal subject discussed on this board is beaten as a dead horse so that wouldn't seem to be any more true regarding the Sabbath and the perpetuity of the moral law, I guess.

 

[Curtis]

The Sabbath is also a remembrance of God’s saving us by coming to die on the cross for our sins: “Moreover I also gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between them and Me, that they might know that I am the LORD who sanctifies them” (Ezekiel 20:12). We are sanctified not on our own merits, but rather through Christ’s righteousness when we receive Him as Savior and Lord. What a beautiful day, expressly given to us that we, by our worship and study, may give thanks to the One to whom we owe our very lives, both at creation and at the cross!

It was given only to the nation of Israel, as a covenant sign, between God and Israel, after the Exodus, and as a remembrance of Israel being delivered from bondage in Egypt.

The SDA claims that the sabbath has been kept ever since God rested on the seventh day of creation, but while its true that God rested one time after 6 days of creation, He never COMMANDED anyone to keep the sabbath as a law - until He gave it to Israel as a memorial of remembrance, of being set free from Egyptian slavery after their Exodus - and as a covenant sign only between the nation of Israel, and Himself:


Deu 5:15 And thou shalt remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and Jehovah thy God brought thee out thence by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm: therefore Jehovah thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.

REMEMBER that YOU (Israel) were slaves in Egypt and I took you out with a mighty hand and outstretched arm, THEREFORE (because of your deliverance from Egyptian slavery) I gave YOU (Israel) this sabbath day command.

That wouldn’t be much of a memorial of REMEMBRANCE and a covenant SIGN - as God calls the sabbath day command in Exodus 31:13 - to give them a command that was ALREADY kept since the 6th day of creation, now would it?

Obviously not.

Yes, the sabbath day command was a covenant sign only between God and the nation of Israel:


Exo 31:13 Speak thou also unto the children of ISRAEL, saying, Verily YE shall keep my sabbaths: for it is A SIGN between ME and YOU throughout YOUR generations; that ye may know that I am Jehovah who sanctifieth YOU.

Shalom Aleichem

 

[BarneyFife]

Precious friend, now Ang (Andy) might say "good work, Barn"

Concerning "the shadow" vs The Reality, I believe the following have been
Overlooked!:

1) "One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day
alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the
day, regardeth it unto The LORD; and he that regardeth not the day, to The LORD
he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to The LORD, for he giveth God
thanks;..." (Romans_14:5-6)

Therefore, IF I "am Fully Persuaded in my own mind" that I should "rest In The
Reality (The True Sabbath), The LORD JESUS CHRIST, 24/7 ("esteeming Every Day Alike), I don't see a problem, And, Neither would I judge you, since you would have the Same liberty and freedom, In CHRIST, "being fully persuaded to esteem one day above another," Correct?

Thus, "The gift of the sabbath -53 thanksgivings a year," is, for me:

"The Gift Of The Reality (The True Sabbath), The LORD JESUS CHRIST =
365 Thanksgivings A Year!"

2) "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an
holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath: Which are a shadow of things
to come; but the body is of Christ." (Colossians_2:16-17)

'Tis Far Better to live in The Light Of The Reality, The LORD JESUS CHRIST,
rather than in the darkness of the shadow, wouldn't you agree, Precious friend?

3) IF I Fulfil ALL Of His Law, In "ONE Word: LOVE your neighbor
as yourself!" (Galatians 5:14; Romans 13:8-10 KJB!)

I don't understand HOW this has anything to do with obeying the "shadow of the
sabbath," which has nothing to do with "my neighbor." What Does matter, is
sinning against them in adultery, coveting, lying, cheating, deceiving, stealing, or
killing them (Romans_13:9)

Where is obedience to "the shadow" here or Anywhere In God's GRACE Gospel To our apostle, Paul, In Romans Through Philemon?

4) Concerning God's FREE Gift Of ETERNAL Salvation, please consider Much
Confirmation, According To The Scriptures, Please, Precious friend?:

God's OPERATION On All HIS New-born babes In CHRIST!
God's Eternal Assurance

Please Be Very RICHLY Encouraged And Edified In The LORD JESUS CHRIST!

Well, Friend, I don't understand the 4th point, but the first 3 I haven't overlooked at all. I've been fielding these arguments for decades. Head over to Sabbathtruth.com and you'll find answers to all of these and more. I can't fathom what it is that Christians find so objectionable about obeying a command to rest and commune with God every 7th day. Especially considering that as recently as the mid 20th century, virtually no Christian objected to it at all, only most of them were doing it on the 1st day of the week rather than the 7th. If you really want me to answer your arguments I can, but you'll probably get a clearer answer at the website I mentioned earlier. It's in my signature, too.

 

[BarneyFife]

That wouldn’t be much of a memorial of REMEMBRANCE and a covenant SIGN - as God calls the sabbath day command in Exodus 31:13 - to give them a command that was ALREADY kept since the 6th day of creation, now would it?

Do you think things like not bowing down to idols, not murdering, stealing, lying, etc. were novel ideas to the Hebrews? By the way, they were tested on their willingness to keep the Sabbath in Exodus 16, several months before the giving of the law at Sinai.

The objections to Sabbath-keeping are just inexplicable and never consistent. Odd that the one commandment God began with the word "REMEMBER" is the one that so many Christians want to FORGET. Even weirder is the idea that God would put a ceremonial law right in the middle of the moral code, when He planned all along to jettison it later. Kind of a dirty trick if you ask me. An honest, loving God just wouldn't do it, I don't think.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

Do you think things like not bowing down to idols, not murdering, stealing, lying, etc. were novel ideas to the Hebrews? By the way, they were tested on their willingness to keep the Sabbath in Exodus 16, several months before the giving of the law at Sinai.

The objections to Sabbath-keeping are just inexplicable and never consistent. Odd that the one commandment God began with the word "REMEMBER" is the one that so many Christians want to FORGET. Even weirder is the idea that God would put a ceremonial law right in the middle of the moral code, when He planned all along to jettison it later. Kind of a dirty trick if you ask me. An honest, loving God just wouldn't do it, I don't think.

I'm good with anyone who wants to observe a literal Sabbath. I mean, if it hadn't been for the Catholic's so-called authority to change things we'd be recognizing the original Sabbath in one way or another, not the Catholic version of it. But anyway, I don't observe a literal Sabbath because I am convinced that it was a foreshadow of the requirement for rest that is fully satisfied by our faith in God. And so by faith in God we enter into the rest from the taskmaster of sin, and, the relentless task of working our own salvation, that he has provided. It's the same reason we don't observe the laws of animal sacrifice. They were foreshadows of requirements that are fully and totally met in Christ through our faith. And so we don't seek to accomplish through the old that which has now been completely and utterly accomplished for us through the new.

I'm not trying to dissuade you from your convictions. I just want you to understand why there are people like me who do not feel compelled to keep various literal requirements of the law of Moses. Animal sacrifice for sin, which we all understand why we don't have to do that anymore, is how we understand the 'passing away' of other literal requirements of the law.

 

[Christ4Me]

Spam is limited to the act of reposting?

I guess I do not understand what you mean about me spamming then. Care to explain?

How could commandment-keeping save someone who has already broken them. The conditions of eternal life are perfect obedience, and the wages of sin is death so everyone who was ever born needs a Substitute.

Let us read that reference again, because Jesus did not say he could do it, but that was what the rich man was asking about & what he was doing fand like it or not, Jesus did confirm what the Old Covenant was about and what it was for to have eternal life.

Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. 23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? 26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

So man cannot keep the law as you say for why we need Jesus as our Saviour. Under the New Covenant where He says He will do it, all He asks from us is to believe Him, John 6:28-29 not just as our Saviour for how we are saved, but believing Him as our Good Shepherd to help us to follow Him. That is why it is written that the just shall live by faith in Jesus Christ for everything.

 

[Christ4Me]

...unless the Giver of the law says that one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from it.

Let us read that in context by comparing the comments below with the scripture.:

Jesus fulfilled the law which we could not do by paying the ransom for our sins which was death on the cross in verses 17-18.

Matthew 5:19 cites those in His kingdom were called the least for breaking the least of His commandments and teaching others so. So how did they get into His kingdom of Heaven even though they are called the least?

Verse 20 signifies that the only way we can enter the kingdom of heaven is when our righteusness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and the Pharisees.

Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

So how did you become born again of the Spirit and thereby had that righteousness to have entered into the kingdom of heaven? By believing in Jesus Christ.

Couldn't one also say that zebras are polka-dotted?

We are known as the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ; not by the Jews keeping the sabbath day. Galatians 3:26

No offense taken whatsoever.

I am glad we can continue this iron sharpening iron part where the Lord ministers to both of us..

That's very nice. I love you, too. So much so, that I very much want you to experience the joy of the Sabbath of the LORD, thy God, that you might delight yourself in the LORD; and that He would cause you to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed you with the heritage of Jacob. (Isaiah 58:14)

It seems the joy of our salvation in the Lord should take precedent over any other joy. Just saying.

 

[GRACE ambassador]

I can't fathom what it is that Christians find so objectionable about obeying a command to rest and commune with God every 7th day.

Precious friend, Barn, what's been objectionable for decades is the deceit of religions:

1) Back then, a group came to our city, did not identify which they were, just that they were prophecy experts. Most like to know more, so we attend. Only THEN did they identify themSELVES as SDA.

2) Interesting is that some of them claim That The Saviour, JESUS CHRIST,
is actually Michael, the archangel. (following so-called prophetess EGW?). Please
make up our minds; this schism is Inconsistent with those (following Jesus?)
of SDA, who Biblically agree with God's Sound Doctrine:
"Complete" Case For JESUS Is Almighty God!!

3) Alongside the deceit, also comes the judgment of others. ie:

Jesus: "IF you love Me, keep My commandments." = SDA, claiming that THEY
and THEY ALONE "are the ONLY true remnant (Rev_12:17), who keep the commandments." (condemning the rest of Christianity). Sound like the Romanist religion?

So, Now the question: "keep only the sabbath"? OR: "keep ALL Of the commandments, as Jesus PLAINLY says?

"...Teaching them TO OBSERVE ALL things WHATSOEVER I Have Commanded..." (Mat_28:20), Correct? @Christ4Me Already pointed out
ONE of these commandments:

a)

Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow Me.

b) Also, Jesus DID COMMAND This, Correct?:

"Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to His disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: ALL therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not." (Mat_23:1-3)

Again, Inconsistent, Correct? How can ALL who Disobey these commandments possibly be in "the remnant that keeps [ALL] the commandments"? How can the rich who "keep the sabbath" be in the remnant, when they disobeyed Jesus, and still have their money?

How can those who "keep the sabbath" yet disobey the Law of Moses be in? What is up with this "pick And choose" theology of "what we will and will not obey"? Makes NO sense, I have Certainly objected to this (what Christ Calls hypocrisy, Correct?) for decades.

FurtherMoreOver, this judgment "held over others" with ENDLESS religious "merited" Conditions is absolutely Contradictory to God's ETERNAL Salvation, Which, Today, Paul Clearly says Is by God's UNmerited Favor (GRACE!).

Plus, Only "God (The Righteous Judge), Knows the heart of Every man!"
Acts_15:8; Romans_8:27, NOT religions who insist that "we prove ourSELVES," Correct? Sorry, that is a joke of the worst kind, since you would have athiests who "rest on Saturday, love their their neighbors, and do good works," PROVING that "THEY ARE christians," Correct? However:

This Confusion could be solved Prayerfully/Carefully by "What Saith The Scripture?"!:

God's Approval/TWO Gospels In Prophecy vs Mystery

Again, Precious Barn, please by Very RICHLY Encouraged And Edified
In JESUS CHRIST, And In HIS WORD Of Truth, Rightly Divided!

 

[BarneyFife]

I guess I do not understand what you mean about me spamming then. Care to explain?

I probably used the term a little too loosely. One of the tactics debaters often use is to overwhelm their opponents by posing clusters of questions so voluminous that the opponent hasn't the allotted time to answer them all. I don't really suspect that you would purposely do such a thing, and I can be easily distractable and slow at times, so you probably should just disregard the spam accusations with my apologies.

Let us read that reference again, because Jesus did not say he could do it, but that was what the rich man was asking about & what he was doing fand like it or not, Jesus did confirm what the Old Covenant was about and what it was for to have eternal life.

You may safely trust me when I say that what I like or dislike has no bearing on my views of the Bible text. When I was initiated into the systematic theology I now hold, I was (eventually) very open to suggestion, and seeking to find objective truth. I now know that total objectivity is nearly impossible, but the basic framework of that theology has not changed one iota for me. And it is as simple as can be: Christ came into this world to restore the image of God (love) in man, in order to rid the universe of the disease of sin, thus making it secure and joyful.
I have said before that I do not believe in the old covenant as being one that was implemented for a period of earth's history, but actually a historic illustration of the universal principle that sinful man cannot keep the law in his own power. Christ knew that and was giving the rich young ruler a crash course. Nevertheless, the conditions of eternal life have forever been perfect obedience to God's law. If it were not so, Christ need not to have died sinless. This is about as logical as a thing could ever be.

So man cannot keep the law as you say for why we need Jesus as our Saviour... That is why it is written that the just shall live by faith in Jesus Christ for everything.

No man except Christ has ever kept the law his whole life. People begin sinning before they even know what sin is. Therefore salvation by works is a plain and simple impossibility. This, however, does not excuse our sin after we are initially forgiven and justified. The new covenant was in existence from the foundation of the earth. God speaks of it distinctively in Deuteronomy 5:29, during the time of Noah and the Levitical priesthood.

(Soteriology is a science that can enrapture the mind indefinitely. I learn new things about it even as I sit and contemplate the Word of God. Even as I'm driving.) When we say things like "live by faith in Jesus Christ for everything," we really have no idea of the depths and heights of that simple truth. We have no idea of how at variance we all are with it. Angels cry out, "Holy, Holy, Holy!!!" before the throne of God in awe of it. One single angel is more interested in the redemption of man than is the entire human race. Sorry, I digress.

But back to our topic, being dependent upon Jesus for everything doesn't mean accepting His sacrifice for us and trusting in Him to save us in the shallow form that kind of faith takes in us. Every loaf of bread we eat should be stamped with the cross of Calvary. His sacrifice literally provided that loaf of bread. He says we should be holy, or perfect, even as is our Father in Heaven. Is He just reciting cute things for us to say and take for granted? How much holiness to the Lord is too much? Why shouldn't the unsaved sinner expire at the moment he has his first sinful thought? Well, he should, but because Christ purchased our probation for us on the cross, he doesn't die. Behold the Lamb of that taketh away the sin of the world. (As you can probably tell, I'm actually much more interested in the Person that the Scriptures reveal than the books, chapters, and verses, etc.)

 

[BarneyFife]

Let us read that in context by comparing the comments below with the scripture.:

Really no need to do that unless the goal is to explain away the simple, plain reading of the text. There's nothing ambiguous about "Nothing can be removed from the law." Right?

I think what trips a lot of folks up is that they can't accept paradoxes. God's ways are not our ways, neither are our thoughts His thoughts. When we're faced with two texts that don't seem to be reconcilable we are naturally tempted to design or seek out a foolproof way to devalue one of them. But this is really impossible because God's Word stands. It cannot be moved. When God says two things that appear to be irreconcilable they are both, nevertheless, true. When a man says that things are compatible that are not it is often called "talking out of both sides of one's mouth," and men do it all the time. But God doesn't really have that option because His Word contains within itself creative power like we can't imagine. As soon as He says something that thing begins to materialize.

Isaiah 55:11 KJV: So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Jesus fulfilled the law which we could not do by paying the ransom for our sins which was death on the cross in verses 17-18.

There simply is much more to fulfilling the law than that. If it were not so we wouldn't have a book of 3/4 million words to study. The ancient Hebrew Sanctuary service is intricate and complicated, yet it is meant to be a lessonbook to understand the Atonement. Jesus said the entire Old Testament was a testimony about Himself. It is the ultimate paradox. The Gospel is simple. But the atonement (which one would think is the same thing and, indeed, it is) is intricate and complicated. It is easy for us to understand how to be saved, but it is infinitely complicated for Christ to save us.

Matthew 5:19 cites those in His kingdom were called the least for breaking the least of His commandments and teaching others so. So how did they get into His kingdom of Heaven even though they are called the least?

The problem here is in insisting that "the least" are yet a part of the kingdom of Heaven. Notice that the expression, "the least" is applied to both the party who breaks the commandment and to the commandment itself. Is there really a least important commandment? It is a form of expression we use today. The best example I can think of is one my parents use to say when I was achild: "You better stop crying or I'll give you something to cry about." Or if "If you think ____________, then you've got another think coming." These are probably not the best examples, but I think it might be called "hyperbole." Barring this, "the least" of commandment-keepers, would have to be considered the wicked, would it not? The least commandment-keeping a person can do is to be wicked.

And doesn't James 2:10 say that breaking any one commandment is the same as breaking them all? Wouldn't the one commandment that is broken apply to the least of the commandments, if there were such a thing?

Verse 20 signifies that the only way we can enter the kingdom of heaven is when our righteusness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and the Pharisees.

Which is why we so desperately need Jesus to justify and sanctify us. Since we cannot keep the commandments of our own power, we have to surrender our wills to God's so that Jesus can live His perfect life in and through us.

The difficulty here lies in the all-to-common belaboring of the erroneous idea that the grace which provides sanctification is different than that which justifies. A person cannot be justified without also experiencing a sanctifying influence and vice-versa.

So how did you become born again of the Spirit and thereby had that righteousness to have entered into the kingdom of heaven? By believing in Jesus Christ.

James 2:14 KJV: What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
James 2:15 KJV: If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
James 2:16 KJV: And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
James 2:17 KJV: Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
James 2:18 KJV: Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
James 2:19 KJV: Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
James 2:20 KJV: But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
James 2:21 KJV: Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:22 KJV: Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
James 2:23 KJV: And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
James 2:24 KJV: Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
James 2:25 KJV: Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
James 2:26 KJV: For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Also, Matthew 6:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:31 (among many others) illustrate that regeneration must be renewed every day.

We are known as the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ; not by the Jews keeping the sabbath day. Galatians 3:26

See the Scriptures quoted directly above.
And, I don't remember saying that the Jews keeping the Sabbath day identify me as a child of God.

It seems the joy of our salvation in the Lord should take precedent over any other joy. Just saying.

The passage I quoted was about keeping the Sabbath. I should have quoted the whole context. Sorry. Rest and joy in salvation are exactly what the Sabbath is all about. For me, it's like having a child's Christmas every Saturday.

 

[BarneyFife]

So, Now the question: "keep only the sabbath"? OR: "keep ALL Of the commandments,as Jesus PLAINLY says?

"...Teaching them TO OBSERVE ALL things WHATSOEVER I Have Commanded..." (Mat_28:20), Correct? @Christ4Me Already pointed out ONE of these commandments:

No argument there, so why aren't all Christians doing it? It was Christ who administered all TEN of the commandments from Sinai:

1 Corinthians 10:9 KJV: Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.

Christ,
Χριστόν (Christon)
Noun - Accusative Masculine Singular
Strong's 5547: Anointed One; the Messiah, the Christ. From chrio; Anointed One, i.e. The Messiah, an epithet of Jesus.

 

[Curtis]

The new covenant was in existence from the foundation of the earth. God speaks of it distinctively in Deuteronomy 5:29, during the time of Noah and the Levitical priesthood.

That’s absolutely not so. There’s been other covenants besides the two God has had with Israel, (which are called the old and new covenants).

There’s a Noahic covenant, and an Abrahamic covenant for two that preceded the old and New Israeli covenants. The new covenant in effect today took effect with the death of Jesus, as Hebrews clearly states, calling it the last will and Testament of Jesus Christ, that took effect with the death of the testator, like all wills do.

Therefore it’s unarguable that the Jeremiah 31 new covenant, that God said is with the Houses of Israel and Judah, absolutely couldn’t have existed before Jesus died, and especially can’t have existed before the house of Israel existed, and Israel didn’t exist until Abraham had a son named Jacob.

THE NEW COVENANT:

Heb 9:11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)

Heb 9:12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.

Heb 9:13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh,

Heb 9:14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

Heb 9:15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.
S
Heb 9:16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established.

Heb 9:17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.

Heb 9:18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood.


And Hebrews 8 specifies that the new covenant Jesus mediates is the Jeremiah 31 new covenant with the house of Israel, by quoting from Jeremiah 31:

Heb 8:6 But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises.

Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.

Heb 8:8 For he finds fault with them when he says: “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,

The problem with “systematic theology” is you’re using someone’s proof texting, that can be wrong.

Much better to use biblical theology from reading the Bible chapter by chapter and verse by verse, and study to show yourself approved, and not studying to show Ellen G. White approved.

Shalom Aleichem

 

[1stCenturyLady]

I don't mean to be dismissive at all, Brother, but I don't seem to be communicating effectively that I am 32 years past looking for reasons to break the commandments of God. It is completely foreign to me. I could look through the Bible and find 100 verses to support the idea that it was right for me to commit murder. But I'm not going to do that. It doesn't make sense to me because I have fully implemented the 10-part moral code (that has been in effect since Adam drew his first breath) into my thought processes.

I have accepted Christ as my personal Savior and He says "If you love Me keep My commandments." And what are His commandments? When the rich young ruler came to Christ asking what he should do to obtain eternal life, He said "Keep the commandments," after which he specified, listing 5 of the 10, and 1 of the 2 great commandments--which summarize the principles of the 10. Are we to assume that any of these commandments are different from His own?

Many point to the absence of the 4th commandment in this list as evidence that it has been nullified. But they never venture to point to the other 4 missing commandments or the missing first and great commandment as being obsolete. This instruction from Christ sounds pretty clear and definite. I would go so far as to say "serious." Shall we give these words of Christ less weight than an instruction to take up an offering on Sundays? Or the inclusion of a single meeting in the good doctor's account of the early church? I can't do it without suffering considerable cognitive dissonance.

If you really want something to consider about early church observance of the Sabbath, try to imagine the ruckus that would result from the Sabbath actually being changed amongst a people who were known to be very zealous for the day, being essential to the moral fiber of their entire way of life. Especially given that they had only the Old Testament Scriptures to consult, which absolutely nowhere gives a hint that the Sabbath was to be changed. It seems to me that something like that would have been given considerable coverage in the New Testament--not just a few vagueries like "esteeming one day above another," "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances," etc., etc.

I think I'll decline to comment on the website article citation except to say that the article was written by a thoroughly qualified Theology professor and editor, for 9 years, of a Sabbath School lesson guide that served millions of people all over the world.

The Sabbath commandment wasn't changed, dissolved, demoted to a suggestion, or any such thing.

And I do not subscribe in any way to the Eternal Security doctrine.

Hi Barny,

I haven't been online in a while - computer problems. You've already heard my thoughts on the substance of the New Covenant Sabbath being Jesus and His own commandments being written on our hearts, but wasn't part of what was on stone 1 John 3:23-24, so I won't bother to repeat all that. Just wanted to reach out and give you a great big New Year's hug! Love to you.

L