@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

And I will remind you constantly that the word "man" in Mark 2:27 is used generically to mean mankind. Go do some research and you'll see that truth. One doesn't need a command to see the obvious, or what is implied in both Mark and Genesis. The fact that God on day seven sanctified or set aside the day, its pretty obvious that the moment He did it, it meant that any person whom He created would have come to that realization, especially when we stop to think how beneficial the sabbath is.

Your research would have lead you to understand that the Lord Jesus in Mark 2:27 did not refer to Genesis at all, but rather to the Law of Moses as confirmed in Matt. 12:5. You cannot use a Law that was enacted centuries later to imply anything upon Adam who was never given such a Law.

That is why I again and again asked for such a "command" for Adam, and in all cases as recently again, you confirmed that no such command exists! As long as you say that no such command exists, then plainly Adam was not given such a command that did not exist!

Bobbyaf:

In other words God set an example for mankind. He didn't rest becasue He was tired, but set aside a day in which we can celebrate His creative works. Each time the 7th day came around, Adam and Eve were to rest in celebration of God's creatorship. So, the coined argument about there not being a command for Adam and Eve to have kept the sabbath can be taken for what it was, pointless and meaningless.

Okay then - I take it that if there was no such command for Adam and Eve, all your argument about God having commanded them to keep the Sabbath is pointless and meaningless! As long as you hold onto the this "pointless and meaningless" argument, please rest your misguided non-existent command for Adam and Eve.

Bobbyaf:

It means nothing. There are a lot of things that were not explicitly said in scriptures for which we have used other passages to explain, and the ones in Mark and Genesis are no exception.

I know that SDA has championed this art of "using other passages to explain" what is not in the Scriptures! And that's what you have been doing all along and still can't unknot yourself from your misconceptions.

Bobbyaf:

So according to you by virtue of your understanding of the whole issue, is that only the hebrews/jews were previlaged to be able to appreciate that God was Creator? All those righteous patriarchs like Jared, Enoch, and others were never made aware of the need to commemorate God's creation. So God had to suspend the purpose of the sabbath some 2000 years after creation for a people called the Hebrews. This is the most ridiculous argument among Sunday-keeping christians. It makes God look partial.

You miss the whole purpose of the Sabbath in Genesis, and that's why SDA thinks 'God looks partial' (sorry, I don't take that careless vacancy of thought). I have already discussed this in my previous rejoinder, and you can just go over it again. But it would again be interesting for you to provide texts for Jared, Enoch and others about HOW they kept the Sabbath (at least, someone has asked that question earlier).

It may be the most ridiculous argument by Sunday-keeping Christians because the SDA is so confused about issues relating to the Sabbath and are very quick to condemn others for not keeping a Saturday observance. As you asked earlier, "Why merely follow rules for rules sake?"

Bobbyaf:

Re-creation not in that sense of the word. Besides, playing football is not considered resting.

Simply check out the meaning of "recreation" - and then you'll understand that everyone doesn't have to banter to your meaning alone.

Regards.

God bless you bari_kade for this highly divine answers to the topic at hand.

@ bobbyaf,
Please go back to study the tenets of SDA, and be plain to see that the truth is not fully embraced in all its totality by SDA.
Again I say the true Church is Christ, and bari_kade has done a great work in bringing out the instruction of the Lord as to the sabbath.

@mrpataki,

Many thanks and God's blessings be yours as well. I have not shared extensively on the subject of the Sabbath, but only in part. I had hoped that our SDA.f would have seen the point, but he has chosen not as yet.

The Sabbath is a very great blessing God intended in Genesis for man, and its real, full import was only to be realized in Christ, and not in the Law - as I shared earlier. The Law served only as a shadow; but Christ is the reality of whatever blessings God intended for man (Col. 2:17).

The SDA clearly has mixed issues about the true Sabbath, and any Christian not keeping Saturday comes under their condemnation. Rather than assume such an accusative position, one would have hoped that Bobbyaf learns from others what he does not yet understand.

Blessings.

@ bari_kade

Your research would have lead you to understand that the Lord Jesus in Mark 2:27 did not refer to Genesis at all, but rather to the Law of Moses as confirmed in Matt. 12:5.

My research bari_kade would then lead me to ask you to please tell the forum as to when Jesus instituted the sabbath. Was it instituted at the time of Moses, or was it at the beginning as reported by Genesis.

You cannot use a Law that was enacted centuries later to imply anything upon Adam who was never given such a Law.

The law as given to Moses might not have existed in its form then at the time of creation, but the principle of it did. What did Eve commit when she stole the forbidden fruit? When Eve listened to Lucifer's voice rather than God's did she commit idolatry? When Adam put her before God did he commit idolatry also? When Cain killed Able there was no written law saying "thou shalt not kill" but such laws were already built in their hearts and they were vey much familiar with its principles.

Besides, I never had to use any law to clearly show why I believe Adam, Eve and the rest of God's righteous people kept the sabbath. Genesis 2:1-3 has already explained about God "sanctifying" the seventh day. As I have told you repeatedly the word sanctify means to set apart for holy use. This also begs the question, why would a wise God set apart a day immediately after creation and watch it being profaned by His people? What would be the purpose of making a day holy, and then have that day mean nothing to those who lived in the time the day was made holy?

That is why I again and again asked for such a "command" for Adam, and in all cases as recently again, you confirmed that no such command exists! As long as you say that no such command exists, then plainly Adam was not given such a command that did not exist!

Thats because your brain is so wired that you're not able to see the command. You're looking for a direct command written in words. The act of God in making the day holy and sanctifying it needs no explanation. The question to ponder, was Adam aware that God sanctified the day? If he was, then he knew what he aught to have done with the seventh day. He knew that at every seventh day, he and Eve would cease attending the garden and rest in order to commune with their Creator.

I know that SDA has championed this art of "using other passages to explain" what is not in the Scriptures! And that's what you have been doing all along and still can't unknot yourself from your misconceptions.

Isn't your statement a contradiction? Are you accusing us of something that the bible itself says we aught to do? Are you saying that you have never used scripture to explain scripture? Are you saying that everything in scripture is clear cut and direct at all times? The misconception lies in your frontal lobe.

If Jesus said the sabbath was made for mankind, who are you to argue against that? Cannot you see that you're the one who is mis-concieved?

You miss the whole purpose of the Sabbath in Genesis, and that's why SDA thinks 'God looks partial' (sorry, I don't take that careless vacancy of thought). I have already discussed this in my previous rejoinder, and you can just go over it again. But it would again be interesting for you to provide texts for Jared, Enoch and others about HOW they kept the Sabbath (at least, someone has asked that question earlier).

The same principle would apply to all the patriarchs. They lived in the same time era as Adam. They were comtemporaries.

It may be the most ridiculous argument by Sunday-keeping Christians because the SDA is so confused about issues relating to the Sabbath and are very quick to condemn others for not keeping a Saturday observance. As you asked earlier, "Why merely follow rules for rules sake?"

And I still maintain it is the most ridiculous argument because its true. Its you and your kind who have rejected the plain "thus saith the Lord", by keeping a day that was established by the RCC under Rome.

Let me give you an example of how one can use one passage to shed light on another that isn't so clear. Look at:

Genesis 5:23,24, And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: 24 And Enoch walked with God:

and he was not; for God took him

.

Any honest person reading a text like this would go away wondering what was meant by "and he was not; for God took him"

Listen to Paul as he expounds in Hebrews 11:5, 5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

What was not made very clear in Genesis is now made clear in Hebrews 11. Thats just one of many examples.

God is far wiser than you're able to give Him credit. Long before there was ever a covenant that was administered by Moses, and long before Moses recieved the law of the covenant, God reminded His people to be faithful in observing the seventh-day sabbath. This re-inforces my point that the sabbath was still being observed by God's people, and that God intended for it to have been kept, long before it was written on tables of stones, listen:

Exudus 16:4, Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.

I wonder what law God was talking about? I wonder if that law also had anything to do with the sabbath. Lets see.

23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.

If as you say that the sabbath was introduced under the Old Covenant which never materialised until they got to mount Sinai some time after this part of the wilderness journey, then how come Moses reminded the Hebrews about the sabbath if they weren't keeping it before?

Listen again as Moses speaks living truth: 26 Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none. 27 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. 28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

So now you see that God's law that included the sabbath command existed in the people's hearts long before it was written on tables of stones.

Let me see you spin a web around this one now!

@Bobbyaf,

You will keep puffing up empty heat on the subject if you can't find Scripture to defend what you're arguing.

Bobbyaf:

My research bari_kade would then lead me to ask you to please tell the forum as to when Jesus instituted the sabbath. Was it instituted at the time of Moses, or was it at the beginning as reported by Genesis.

Jesus did not institute the Sabbath given already in Exodus 20 (if you know the meaning of 'institute'). I have already asked you umpteen times to clearly state what Law you are using in your argument of the sabbath, and as usual you dodged the questions and gave no answer. See again:

#1.

bari_kade:

Question #1: On what basis did Christ "bring back the true purpose of the sabbath" - on the basis of God's command to Adam in Genesis; or on the basis of the Law?

Question #2: If you say Genesis, why then has it been so difficult for you to provide a verse in Genesis for that command??

Question #3: If you deny it was on the basis of the Law, why then did Christ speak in reference to the Law in Matt. 12:5 on the same subject?

#2.

bari_kade:

Question #12: Where do you find the 4th commandment - in Genesis or in Exodus? The reason for this is that I'm concerned about your making a Judaic law wider than its context. So, what commandments are you referring to - the one God gave Adam, or the one given to the Jews? If God gave the 10 commandments to Adam, please find me the verse in Genesis for that!

Since you're very fond of dodging questions, your rhetoric is not surprising at all. When you clearly state what basis (Genesis or Exodus) your arguments are put across, then I'll take it up from there.

Bobbyaf:

The law as given to Moses might not have existed in its form then at the time of creation, but the principle of it did. What did Eve commit when she stole the forbidden fruit? When Eve listened to Lucifer's voice rather than God's did she commit idolatry? When Adam put her before God did he commit idolatry also? When Cain killed Able there was no written law saying "thou shalt not kill" but such laws were already built in their hearts and they were vey much familiar with its principles.

The Bible does not tell us that Adam and Eve committed idolatory. Rather, it simply states:

"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" - I Tim. 2:14.

Again and again, I have appealed that you don't try to make the Bible say what it does not say!

Bobbyaf:

Besides, I never had to use any law to clearly show why I believe Adam, Eve and the rest of God's righteous people kept the sabbath. Genesis 2:1-3 has already explained about God "sanctifying" the seventh day.

Do you recognize your own contradiction? If you never had to use any law about Adam and Eve being commanded to keep the sabbath, why then have you been arguing for such a law that did not exist, and for which you cannot find any verse to substantiate?

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

As I have told you repeatedly the word sanctify means to set apart for holy use. This also begs the question, why would a wise God set apart a day immediately after creation and watch it being profaned by His people? What would be the purpose of making a day holy, and then have that day mean nothing to those who lived in the time the day was made holy?

This is your own ranting, not mine. I have discussed this enquiry to show the full import of why God made a statement about the rest in Genesis. Your problem is that you keep reading a law in Genesis and can't find the verse for it!

Bobbyaf:

Thats because your brain is so wired that you're not able to see the command. You're looking for a direct command written in words. The act of God in making the day holy and sanctifying it needs no explanation. The question to ponder, was Adam aware that God sanctified the day? If he was, then he knew what he aught to have done with the seventh day. He knew that at every seventh day, he and Eve would cease attending the garden and rest in order to commune with their Creator.

Again, you have no verse for the command you force into Genesis - this is classic eisegesis (forcefully reading your own thoughts into Scripture)! That is why I have asked you umpteen times to state HOW the sabbath was to be kept or observed according to the Law; but you have been evading the question. When you take time off and search out the stipulations for observing the Sabbath according to the Law, then issues will become simpler for you.

Bobbyaf:

Isn't your statement a contradiction? Are you accusing us of something that the bible itself says we aught to do?

Sorry, the Bible did not say anywhere that you ought to use other passages to explain what is not in the Scriptures! That is what cultists do; so my statement was not contradictory.

Bobbyaf:

If Jesus said the sabbath was made for mankind, who are you to argue against that? Cannot you see that you're the one who is mis-concieved?

I did not argue against what Jesus said, so your cheap accusations and empty drivel are simply eristic. I only provided the context of Jesus' answer to the Pharisees by comparing Mark 2:27 with Matt. 12:5 to show the Lord made no reference to Genesis, but rather to the Law.

Bobbyaf:

The same principle would apply to all the patriarchs. They lived in the same time era as Adam. They were comtemporaries.

Would you please do the one thing everyone is asking: provide texts in Genesis for your arguments.

Bobbyaf:

And I still maintain it is the most ridiculous argument because its true. Its you and your kind who have rejected the plain "thus saith the Lord", by keeping a day that was established by the RCC under Rome.

Let me show you what ridiculous cultists like the SDA do. They push their own thoughts into the precious Word of God; and when asked to provide verses for their superstitions, they have none, and then will launch into attacks of all sorts. I have also asked you to check the historical antecedence to Sunday if you had any doubts, which obviously you did not do - but rather came back with this tattered accusation against the RCC.

On the contrary, the Lord Himself set the principle of a good understanding of His Word -

             "Take heed WHAT ye hear" (Mark 4:24), and
             "Take heed therefore HOW ye hear" (Luke 8:18).

It is not enough to noise a "thus saith the Lord" without seeking a contextual understanding of what is being spoken by the Lord. Both principles of WHAT and HOW are brought together by the Lord Jesus Himself in Luke 10:26 -

"He said unto him, WHAT is written in the law? HOW readest thou?"

And that is precisely the approach I have sought after in my discussions and in the questions I offered you, rather than your cultic noise and vexed disregard for context.

Bobbyaf:

Let me give you an example of how one can use one passage to shed light on another that isn't so clear. Look at:

Genesis 5:23,24, And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: 24 And Enoch walked with God: .

Any honest person reading a text like this would go away wondering what was meant by "and he was not; for God took him"

Listen to Paul as he expounds in Hebrews 11:5, 5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

What was not made very clear in Genesis is now made clear in Hebrews 11. Thats just one of many examples.

I don't disparage that, and that is what I followed in the case of Mark 2:27 and Matt. 12:5 to show that the Lord was pointing to the Law of Moses and not to any law in Genesis. If you apply the same principle as you just did above, you will find that what was stated in Heb. 11:5 is referenced clearly in Gen. 5:23-24. However, you have no verse in Genesis for what you proposed in Mark 2:27 - and you have said so yourself many times!

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

God is far wiser than you're able to give Him credit. Long before there was ever a covenant that was administered by Moses, and long before Moses recieved the law of the covenant, God reminded His people to be faithful in observing the seventh-day sabbath. This re-inforces my point that the sabbath was still being observed by God's people, and that God intended for it to have been kept, long before it was written on tables of stones, listen:

Exudus 16:4, Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.

I wonder what law God was talking about? I wonder if that law also had anything to do with the sabbath. Lets see.

23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.

I'm glad for your sake that you're coming close to the stated precepts instead of just making unsubstantiated implications. However, if you follow closely the background to this incident, you find that this was the first time God specifically made reference the sabbath. The fact that "all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses" what happened on the sixth day (vs. 22) shows that they hitheto were not keeping the Sabbath - not even when they were in Egypt! On that occasion, Moses then said, "This is that which the LORD hath said" (vs. 23) - and please notice the tense of his reply and see that Moses was reminding the elders of what he earlier said to the congregation of Israel in vs. 4-5.

In the history of Israel as a covenant people of the Lord, it is on record that anytime reference was made to the Sabbath as a Law/commandment, it was often in reference to the time God spoke of it to Moses. This is clear in Nehemiah's prayer in Neh. 9:14 -

"And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant."

Again, in Jer. 17:22, God Himself hinted that this commandment was given to the patriarchs of Israel:  "Neither carry forth a burden out of your houses on the sabbath day, neither do ye any work, but hallow ye the sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers."

Now, I wonder why God did not state in the latter that they should hallow the sabbath day as He commanded Adam?? This is why I have asked you many times to please go into Scripture and see WHAT and HOW God said the sabbath was to be observed and kept.

Bobbyaf:

If as you say that the sabbath was introduced under the Old Covenant which never materialised until they got to mount Sinai some time after this part of the wilderness journey, then how come Moses reminded the Hebrews about the sabbath if they weren't keeping it before?

Answers as above. Besides, do you have any references in the entire Bible to show that the Israelites were keeping the Sabbath while in Egypt before they got to the wilderness?

Bobbyaf:

Listen again as Moses speaks living truth: 26 Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none. 27 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. 28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

So now you see that God's law that included the sabbath command existed in the people's hearts long before it was written on tables of stones.

Let me see you spin a web around this one now!

Tall hope - I'm not the one spinning a web around the issue, and that warp and weft is best suited to your exercise. Now your contradiction has come to the fore by stating now that God's law existed long before it was written, while stating the opposite earlier that no such command existed! See again what you stated:

Bobbyaf:

I already said to you that no such command exists, but that Mark 2:27 implied a purpose for God giving the sabbath to mankind generally, and more specifically, Adam, and no doubt strengthens Genesis 3:1-3.

Then. . .

Bobbyaf:

So now you see that God's law that included the sabbath command existed in the people's hearts long before it was written on tables of stones.

Besides, if these laws and commandments existed long before they were written on stones as you said, then it all the more confirms that you're spinning a web into God's precious Word, for these reasons:

1. The Law written on our hearts is under the New Covenant and not before. How do you explain the New Covenant as existing before the Old Covenant?

2. The prophets of the Old Testament recognized that the laws and commandments were not enacted in Genesis, but rather by the hand of Moses:

Neh. 9:14 - "And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant."

I King 2:3 - "And keep the charge of the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and his testimonies, as it is written in the law of Moses, that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself."

John 1:17 - "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."

My simple premise is that you cannot apply the Mosaic Law wider than its context; and if you take the time to read the Scriptures, then you wil see what the Law of the Sabbath is and HOW it was stipulated to be observed/kept.

Regards.

@ Bari_kade

I'm glad for your sake that you're coming close to the stated precepts instead of just making unsubstantiated implications. However, if you follow closely the background to this incident, you find that this was the first time God specifically made reference the sabbath. The fact that "all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses" what happened on the sixth day (vs. 22) shows that they hitheto were not keeping the Sabbath - not even when they were in Egypt! On that occasion, Moses then said, "This is that which the LORD hath said" (vs. 23) - and please notice the tense of his reply and see that Moses was reminding the elders of what he earlier said to the congregation of Israel in vs. 4-5.

The fact that there was no mention of the sabbath before Exudus 16 doesn't mean that there wasn't one. You're assuming that because scripture is silent on something that it doesn't exist. What if you're wrong?  

In the history of Israel as a covenant people of the Lord, it is on record that anytime reference was made to the Sabbath as a Law/commandment, it was often in reference to the time God spoke of it to Moses. This is clear in Nehemiah's prayer in Neh. 9:14 -

Then why would God from creation sanctify the seventh day? You're still going around this fundamental principle. If one sanctifies something don't you expect that one to go into details about the purpose of sanctifying that something? You're harping about a direct law telling Adam to observe the sababth as if that will absolve you from the responsibility of being obedient to God.

Bari_kade no amount of theological expositions can absolve you from seeing the plain trut of scripture. There has to eb a connection between the creation sabbath of which Jesus made reference to in Mrk 2:27 and the very same one mentioned in Exudus 16.

If you notice how the question was posed by God to Moses. God asked: And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

If at that point of the experience it was the first time that God introduced the sabbath then why ask "how long refuse ye to keep my commandments and laws" This suggests to me in an obvious way that there were previous experiences before which God's people refused to obey.

Besides, long before Moses heard anything about God's laws Abraham did. Listen:

Genesis 26:5
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

"And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant."

Again, in Jer. 17:22, God Himself hinted that this commandment was given to the patriarchs of Israel:  "Neither carry forth a burden out of your houses on the sabbath day, neither do ye any work, but hallow ye the sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers."

Now, I wonder why God did not state in the latter that they should hallow the sabbath day as He commanded Adam?? This is why I have asked you many times to please go into Scripture and see WHAT and HOW God said the sabbath was to be observed and kept.

Mark 2:27 clears that up when Jesus said: "the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath" So if Adam was a man, which you seem to deny, then the sabath was made for him. Simple ABC.

Tall hope - I'm not the one spinning a web around the issue, and that warp and weft is best suited to your exercise. Now your contradiction has come to the fore by stating now that God's law existed long before it was written, while stating the opposite earlier that no such command existed! See again what you stated:

Typical confuser of the real issues. There is no contradiction in what I said and more so what I meant. You know as well as I do that there was no direct wording or command as such of God instructing Adam re sabbath keeping. We agree on that, but I went on to argue the point of God's sanctifying the day and hence the fact that He did made it highly improbable that He never made Adam and Eve aware of such an act. So when I say God's law existed before it was written what I meant was that God's law in principle existed even before it was written on tables of stones. What is so hard to grasp about that?

John says in 1 John 3:4 the following: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law."

My question to you is. Did Adam and Eve sin? And if they sinned there must have been a set of principles that they transgressed. The same set of principles has come to be known as the 10 commandments. Listen to David as he descirbes them:

Psalms 111:7,8., The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure. 8 They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.

Psalms 119:142, "Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth."

I still contend that God could not have blessed, sanctified, and hallow a day for Himself. He did it for mankind in order that they might remember His act of creation. Hence the seventh-day sabbath is a memorial of God's creation. The scripture is very clear on this as stated in the 4th commandment.

Notice how the 4th commandment ends in verse 11:

Ex. 20:8-11, 8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

That verse carries a reason why God's people should keep the sabbath. It is to be kept as a memorial of creation and the fact that God Himself rested. Now, if in a sinful environment God still desires that His people remember Him as Creator, then why wouldn't God also not desire that His upright humans at the very beginning remember His acts of Creation?

I find that a very strange piece of arguiment.

Not only was the sabbath kept by the patriarchs, despite the OT's silence on such, and which is no reason to believe that the sabbath was kept anyway, but there remains a sabbath day of rest for God's people. Listen to Paul as He speaks:

"There remaineth therefore a rest [margin: 'keeping of a sabbath'] to the people of God," Hebrews 4:9.

Lets revisit Ex. 16 for a bit.

Exodus 16:4-5,  Then said the Lord unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no. And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily

I contend that God's law was always there. David says His law and statutes are forever. No one can change them. Exudus 16 is one prime exampe of a people who had forgotten His law. God doesn't just up and create laws just to prove a point if there weren't any in the first place, and especialy to a people who had forgotten. For over 400 years they had adopted the ways of the Egyptians, and even complained about desiring to go back on more than one occasions. The manna experience was to be a fore-runner of the time God would once again re-establish what was forgotten by His people in Egypt, hence the mount Sinai renewal of the covenant, the basis of which was the 10 commandments.

The very fact that an agreement was made and then broken by the chidren of Israel shows how spiritually immature those people were, and how deep they were in the idolatrous ways of the Egyptians. For the very first time God's set of divine precepts would be transferred to two sets of stones, the first four representing love for God and the second six representing love for one another. The best way to instill memory is to have visuals, and that is exactly what they needed considering their level of spirituality.

Once again no truthful argument has come forward to explain why God would sanctify, bless, and hallow a day, right after creation and not desiring for the first couple who represented mankind to enjoy such rest with their Creator. Unless ofcourse the words sanctify, bless, and hallow have totally different meanings.

Bari_kade you can quote all you want it doesn't make sense quoting out-of-context passages that have no bearing on whether God made the sabbath for mankind, inclusive of which was Adam, and all the rest of the righteous patriarchs.

You're the biggest spider on this forum.  , Keep spinning your way straight into oblivion, because sooner or later the truth will stare you in the face and I wonder what you will do when its too late.

Its a pity that you can't think for yourself rather than having to copy and paste what others have to say on the internet. Its no wonder your dribblings are so long.  

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

The fact that there was no mention of the sabbath before Exudus 16 doesn't mean that there wasn't one. You're assuming that because scripture is silent on something that it doesn't exist. What if you're wrong?

I'll oblige you this much: I'm not arrogant as not to change my views where solid evidence exist. So far, you failed to provide even one, and I'm still hopeful you'll have a turn around.

Bobbyaf:

Then why would God from creation sanctify the seventh day? You're still going around this fundamental principle. If one sanctifies something don't you expect that one to go into details about the purpose of sanctifying that something? You're harping about a direct law telling Adam to observe the sababth as if that will absolve you from the responsibility of being obedient to God.

If you missed where I treated the seventh day mention in Genesis, please scroll back and read, or better still, ask.

Bobbyaf:

Bari_kade no amount of theological expositions can absolve you from seeing the plain trut of scripture. There has to eb a connection between the creation sabbath of which Jesus made reference to in Mrk 2:27 and the very same one mentioned in Exudus 16.

Bobby, please answer simply stated questions. In this connection, I asked you these questions:

#1.

bari_kade:

When you clearly state what basis (Genesis or Exodus) your arguments are put across, then I'll take it up from there.

#2.

bari_kade:

In other words, the same question could be asked this way: What "10 comamndments" are you referring to - the one you cannot provide from Genesis; or the same Law of Moses in Exodus that you initially rejected?

Restating it: what is the basis of your Mark 2:27 argument - Genesis or Exodus?

Bobbyaf:

If you notice how the question was posed by God to Moses. God asked: And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

If at that point of the experience it was the first time that God introduced the sabbath then why ask "how long refuse ye to keep my commandments and laws" This suggests to me in an obvious way that there were previous experiences before which God's people refused to obey.

Dealt with earlier. Read my rejoinders and find the answers as intimated by Neh. 9:14 and Jer. 17:22.

Bobbyaf:

Besides, long before Moses heard anything about God's laws Abraham did. Listen:

Genesis 26:5
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

I hope you understand that Genesis 26:5 cannot be called the Law of Moses which God gave to Israel?

Bobbyaf:

Mark 2:27 clears that up when Jesus said: "the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath" So if Adam was a man, which you seem to deny, then the sabath was made for him. Simple ABC.

Would you please remove your religious goggles for just a moment and read my rejoinders? Where in one line did I deny that Adam was a man? Your dribbling round this issue because you can't find a Genesis verse for the Law of the Sabbath for Adam is not scoring these cheap accusations.

Bobbyaf:

Typical confuser of the real issues. There is no contradiction in what I said and more so what I meant. You know as well as I do that there was no direct wording or command as such of God instructing Adam re sabbath keeping. We agree on that, but I went on to argue the point of God's sanctifying the day and hence the fact that He did made it highly improbable that He never made Adam and Eve aware of such an act. So when I say God's law existed before it was written what I meant was that God's law in principle existed even before it was written on tables of stones. What is so hard to grasp about that?

Nothing substantial in your entries as long as you again admit your humongous confusion of having no verse in Genesis for such a command or law for Adam. You stated that God's law existed in people's hearts long before it was written on stone; and you haven't been able to stand up to my counter on that.

Bobbyaf:

John says in 1 John 3:4 the following: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law."

My question to you is. Did Adam and Eve sin? And if they sinned there must have been a set of principles that they transgressed. The same set of principles has come to be known as the 10 commandments.

The desperate twisting of Scripture in your arguments is hillarious. Put it simply - did Adam and Eve transgress the 10 commandments which God never gave them? Did you miss what the Bible specifically spelt out in their case in the same Genesis?

Gen. 2:16-17 ~~ "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

Is that part of the 10 commandments? What did God ask Adam following the Fall? See for yourself ~~ "And He said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? (Gen. 3:11).

So, Bobbyaf, is eating of the tree a part of "the same set of principles" which have come to be known as the 10 commandments, as you chanted above? I've asked you to calm down and carefully read the Bible contextually; but it seems you only make word searches using concordance so that anywhere you see "law" and "commandment" must be the 10 commandments to you! Read God's Word prayerfully, and God Himself will show you what you're missing.

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

I still contend that God could not have blessed, sanctified, and hallow a day for Himself. He did it for mankind in order that they might remember His act of creation. Hence the seventh-day sabbath is a memorial of God's creation. The scripture is very clear on this as stated in the 4th commandment.

Again, at the risk of repeating myself, let me offer you this:

bari_kade:

When you clearly state what basis (Genesis or Exodus) your arguments are put across, then I'll take it up from there.

It seems you're running out of steam and that's why you're now mixing your own quotes between Genesis and Exodus.

Bobbyaf:

That verse carries a reason why God's people should keep the sabbath. It is to be kept as a memorial of creation and the fact that God Himself rested. Now, if in a sinful environment God still desires that His people remember Him as Creator, then why wouldn't God also not desire that His upright humans at the very beginning remember His acts of Creation?

Is it too difficult for you to specify where in Genesis God gave such a law/commandment to Adam? At least, I've offered you texts in Genesis to show what Adam was specifically commanded to do and not do by God; and isn't it obvious that eating or not eating of the tree is not a part of the 10 commandments that you confused?

Bobbyaf:

Not only was the sabbath kept by the patriarchs, despite the OT's silence on such, and which is no reason to believe that the sabbath was kept anyway, but there remains a sabbath day of rest for God's people. Listen to Paul as He speaks:

"There remaineth therefore a rest [margin: 'keeping of a sabbath'] to the people of God," Hebrews 4:9.

I was waiting for you to desperately rush to Hebrews - and let me ask you:
Question #16: what did Paul mean by Hebrews 4:9?

Bobbyaf:

Lets revisit Ex. 16 for a bit.
Exodus 16:4-5, Then said the Lord unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no. And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily

I contend that God's law was always there. David says His law and statutes are forever. No one can change them. Exudus 16 is one prime exampe of a people who had forgotten His law. God doesn't just up and create laws just to prove a point if there weren't any in the first place, and especialy to a people who had forgotten. For over 400 years they had adopted the ways of the Egyptians, and even complained about desiring to go back on more than one occasions. The manna experience was to be a fore-runner of the time God would once again re-establish what was forgotten by His people in Egypt, hence the mount Sinai renewal of the covenant, the basis of which was the 10 commandments.

In all, there is no indication that Exodus 16 proves they had forgotten "the Sabbath"; much less "the Law" (the Law which was not even in existence in Genesis).

Bobbyaf:

The very fact that an agreement was made and then broken by the chidren of Israel shows how spiritually immature those people were, and how deep they were in the idolatrous ways of the Egyptians.

It's very easy to make accusations like these especially when you ignore what the Scriptures teach. If Israel was steeped in Egyptian idolatory, why then would the Egyptians have persecuted them with such hatred for simply the Jews' faith in the LORD? If the Jews/Hebrews were deep in Egyptian idolatory, to whom were they praying/crying out to that the LORD God heard them? See for yourself ~~

Exo. 2:23-25 & 3:9 - "And it came to pass in process of time, that the king of Egypt died: and the children of Israel sighed by reason of the bondage, and they cried, and their cry came up unto God by reason of the bondage; And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. And God looked upon the children of Israel, and God had respect unto them. . . Now therefore, behold, the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me: and I have also seen the oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppress them."

I'd rather you don't let your imaginations fly wildly to make accusations against God's people every which way.

Bobbyaf:

For the very first time God's set of divine precepts would be transferred to two sets of stones, the first four representing love for God and the second six representing love for one another. The best way to instill memory is to have visuals, and that is exactly what they needed considering their level of spirituality.

If the best way to instill memory is to have visuals, how come those "visuals" have been nailed to the cross? "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross" (Col. 2:14).

Bobbyaf:

Once again no truthful argument has come forward to explain why God would sanctify, bless, and hallow a day, right after creation and not desiring for the first couple who represented mankind to enjoy such rest with their Creator. Unless ofcourse the words sanctify, bless, and hallow have totally different meanings.

Is this the third or fourth time you have missed it completely in my rejoinder where I treated it?

Bobbyaf:

Bari_kade you can quote all you want it doesn't make sense quoting out-of-context passages that have no bearing on whether God made the sabbath for mankind, inclusive of which was Adam, and all the rest of the righteous patriarchs.

Oga Mr. SDA, I have offered texts contextually that you have been unable to refute; and not an answer to my previous 15 questions have you attempted! On the other hand, your postulations have become puffing smoke that have no verses in Genesis to your arguments for Adam!

Bobbyaf:

You're the biggest spider on this forum. , Keep spinning your way straight into oblivion, because sooner or later the truth will stare you in the face and I wonder what you will do when its too late.

Again, this is not new, because I've met many SDA members who will launch into attacks and name-calling where their superstitions have been deflated. If your accusations are worth the dust on Damascus road, please answer my questions; otherwise keep foaming out your empty vexations.

Bobbyaf:

Its a pity that you can't think for yourself rather than having to copy and paste what others have to say on the internet. Its no wonder your dribblings are so long.

I challenge you to bring up one website where I copied and pasted my rejoinders from. Second, my lengthy rejoinders are testimony to the fact that I'm not leaving any line in your 30-year-SDA-confusion unpunctured, not to mention that yours are as long as your accusations!

When you have something worthwhile from carefully studying God's precious Word free from SDA manuals, share it on the Forum - and I'll be willing to oblige you answers to every line of your subsequent misconceptions.

Regards.

@bari_kade,

I'm really impressed by the way you handled the subject, and how you've related issues by comparing scripture with scripture. Thank you for clearly outlining which commandments were given to Adam as distingushed from what is called the Law of Moses. It would be interesting to read some more of your thoughts about the Sabbath, and how this applies to the Christian position.

Cheers!

@ Bari_kade

I was waiting for you to desperately rush to Hebrews - and let me ask you:
Question #16: what did Paul mean by Hebrews 4:9?

Hebrews 4:9, There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.


Exactly what it said. The greek word sabbatismos as found in the Greek Interlinear means "a sabbath rest"

If we are to go by the exact translation, and most translations seem to use the term "sabbath rest" then the evidence is clear that God expects His people to keep the sabbath, which is a fitting symbol of the eternal rest to come.

Not only does God expect us to utilize the sabbath rest while on earth, but He will see to it that that eternal institution remains forever. In the new heaven and earth that God will re-create the sabbath will again be kept as it was intended to be. Listen:

Ish. 66:22-23, For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

This is clear scripture as to how God feels about His holy day.

@Bobbyaf,

If only you knew that God's New Covenant is not about a Saturday or Sunday, much less any day ~~

Gal. 4:9-11
"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain."

Rev. 4:8 - "And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come."

With regards to the "rest" in Heb. 4:9, have you carefully considered why the word sabbatismos [σαββατισμός] occurs only once in the entire NT, besides several mention of 'sabbath' [sabbton - σάββατον] in other verses? 'Sabbath' does not even appear in the book of Hebrews, and this alone should lead us to study the 'rest' in Heb. 4:9 by seeing the surrounding texts, which I quote below:

Heb 3:18-19 ~~ 'And to whom sware He that they should not enter into His rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.' [compare Psa. 95:11 - 'Unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest', which was spoken while the Israelites already had a Sabbath that they were keeping!]

Heb 4:4-5 & 7-8 ~~ '⁴For He spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all His works. ⁵And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest. . . ⁷Again, He limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear His voice, harden not your hearts. ⁸For if Jesus [i.e., Joshua] had given them rest, then would He not afterward have spoken of another day.

From all the highlighted words, you can see that the text in Heb. 4:9 cannot be used as a proof-text for a seventh-day sabbath law/commandment. Why? Simply because the Bible itself said that God limited 'a certain day' (vs.7) and spoke of it as another day (vs. in contra-distinction to the seventh day (vs.4)! The argument of the passage is that God set aside ("limiteth" a certain day even though the Mosaic Law of seventh-day sabbath was still in operation (see again Psa. 95:11) - He names that day by 3 terms:

'a certain day' - vs.7
'another day' - vs.8
'Today' - vs.7

Then it follows through with the core statement - "⁸For if Jesus [i.e., Joshua] had given them rest, then would He not afterward have spoken of another day."

You can now see that the sabbatismos [σαββατισμός] in Heb.4:9 is not pretext for a law/commandment for keeping seventh-day sabbath. This is why when Jesus came, He openly declared: "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls" (Matt. 11:28-29). The real rest and full import of what God intended in Genesis 2:1-3 can only be realised in Jesus Christ, the Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:28)! This "rest" is a matter of the soul and not an outward ceremony for the sake of serving a Law of seventh-day sabbath. And that was what the writer of Hebrews wanted us to understand by the single mention of sabbatismos in Heb.4:9 - the only place where the word appears in the entire NT.

At least, I appreciate your latest attempt to answer question #16. If you only take time and think through the earlier 15 questions, more light will help your understanding as to why Christians are not under a Law of seventh-day sabbath observance.

Regards.

Hi @shahan. It's been a while, but I trust you're doing okay.

shahan:

I'm really impressed by the way you handled the subject, and how you've related issues by comparing scripture with scripture. Thank you for clearly outlining which commandments were given to Adam as distingushed from what is called the Law of Moses. It would be interesting to read some more of your thoughts about the Sabbath, and how this applies to the Christian position.

Hey, I thought you'd share something with us on the subject, lol. Afterall, you have my respects as an erudite expounder of issues.

Well, here are a few of my concerns about the issue of the seventh-day sabbath Law.

The Sabbath

The word 'sabbath' simply means rest, and the first time it was specifically mentioned by that term in Scripture is in Exo. 16:23 where it is called "the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD." The concept traces its origin back to Gen. 2:2-3 which simply declares what God did on the seventh day -

"And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made."

It is important to note that there was no command/law issued to Adam and Eve to observe/keep the seventh day as a sabbath; and there is no record of any such command or law given to any generation up until the emergence of Israel as a called nation in Exodus. Anyone implying that Adam was given such a commandment or Law to keep the sabbath, will only confuse issues for themselves because they will look in vain for a verse in the Bible for that, and only have to admit that there is none.

The Institution of the Sabbath Law

Although the first specific mention of the sabbath was in Exo. 16:23, it was not until the giving of the Mosaic Law in Exodus 20 that we find it mentioned as a direct commandment. Up until chapter 16, Moses had not mentioned any "sabbath" to Israel, although he had hinted about it in chapter 12 vs. 16 when Israel prepared the Passover ~~ "And in the first day there shall be an holy convocation, and in the seventh day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you.". No one could have taken for granted that it was already being observed before this time, because clearly the historical antecedents of Israel in Egypt negate such an idea.

In Exodus 20, we find the 10 Commandments given to Israel, the 4th of which appertains to the Sabbath and is found in verses 8 to 11 -

"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."

Volumes could be written on just these 4 verses; but for the present concern I'll just highlight the salient points for our study:

(a) six days were designated for work (that would include working on Sunday for sabbatarians)
(b) the seventh day was reserved for the sabbath
(c) no manner of work was to be done on the sabbath
(d) reason for the sabbath was about God's creative acts.

Please note that no specifications were detailed here for HOW the sabbath was to be observed - and we would have to consider other texts for its stipulations. Shortly.

Following on, we now come to ~~

The Force of the Law

The Law of Moses only came into effect after having been ratified by blood. This is doubly made plain in the following texts:

Heb 9:16-20
¹⁶For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. ¹⁷For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. ¹⁸Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. ¹⁹For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, ²⁰Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

The above is in allusion to the event recorded in Exodus 24:3, 7 & 8 --

³And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do ⁷And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. . .⁸And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words

While it was being progressively revealed, the people of Israel would not have understood all the implications and ramifications of the Law, especially because no serious retributions were spelt out (until later on) for the various ways that the Sabbath could be profaned. When once the Law was ratified as a covenant of the LORD, any contravention thereof was treated with the most dire consequences - "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses" (Heb 10:28). How this is spelt out will be seen shortly.

Reference for the above could be seen in Num. 15:32-34 ~~ "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him."

Although it had been expressly declared that anyone doing work on the sabbath day should be put to death (Exo. 31:14 & 35:2), the point with the case in Num. 15 above was that the detail and specific interpretation for that action had not been revealed up until that time. It is to be understood that this unfortunate man chanced upon the provision of Exo.12:16 ~~ ". . . no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you." Thereafter, it came to light that he was to be put to death, and he was (Num.15:35-36).

All these concerns were reasons why I requested of Bobbyaf to calm down and search the Scriptures for the specifications of the Sabbath according to the Law.

Stipulations of the Sabbath Law

The collective testimony of the Law shows that the Sabbath involved some detailed stipulations for its observance. We shall look at a few of these. In order to minimise any misconceptions, it would be best to quote the relevant texts in full rather than make the points in soundbites.

(a). The Sabbath to be kept Holy
Exo 20:8 - 'Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.'


(b). No (Servile) Work To Be Done on the Sabbath
Exo. 20:10 - 'But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates.'
Exo. 12:16 - 'And in the first day there shall be an holy convocation, and in the seventh day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you.
Num. 28:25 - "And on the seventh day ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work."

(c). Anyone Defiling The Sabbath Be Put To Death
Exo 31:14 - "Ye shall keep  the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people."
Exo 31:15 - "Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death." (See also Exo. 35:2).

(d). The Sabbath Meant to Be Perpetual
Exo 31:16 - "Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath , to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant."

(e). No Domestic Fires To Be Kindled In The Home
Exo 35:3 - "Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath day."

(f). Sabbatarians To Afflict Their Souls Forever or Be Put To Death
Lev. 16:31 & 23:29 - "It shall be a sabbath of rest unto you, and ye shall afflict your souls, by a statute for ever. For whatsoever soul it be that shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people."

(g). Sabbath Was to be Celebrated From Evening to Evening
Lev. 23:32 - "It shall be unto you a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls: in the ninth day of the month at even, from even unto even, shall ye celebrate your sabbath."

(h). A Holy Convocation; No Domestic Work At Home
Lev. 23:3 - "Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings."

There certainly are more than the 8 stipulations given above, and the cogent questions to ask here are:

Q.#1 - If the Sabbatical Law was given to Adam and all the generations in Genesis, did they include or exclude these stipulations?

Q.#2 - Since the Sabbitical Law was enacted under the Old Covenant as a perpetual statute to Israel, are they still in force today for the Christian - with all the stipulations?

Q.#3 - If the Law of the Sabbath as given to Israel still holds true in the Christian life in the New Covenant, are we then not to follow the same stipulations for the Sabbath?

Q.#4 - If the Sabbatical Law does not hold true for the Christian (since one cannot divorce the sabbath from its stipulations), then why are some sabbatarians accusing other Christians of being "babylon" over an issue they themselves do not understand?

Next, we examine the various Sabbaths in the Old Testament, because God clearly meant that they were more than one type of Sabbath ~~ "Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you" (Exo. 31:13).

@ Bari_kade

Its only a pity that with all that long windedness on your part you've still not arrived at the truth re the Lord's sabbath.

If only you knew that God's New Covenant is not about a Saturday or Sunday, much less any day ~~

If only you had a thorough knowledge of what the New Covenant is all about. In fact it has to also do with God's law, among other things. The scriptures reveal that Christ came as a Mediator of a better covenant (Heb. 8:6) The popular belief that the NC has abolished God's law of 10 commandments mis-represents both the OC and the NC. That notion is an insult to God and what He is really trying to reveal to us.

What our anti-law friends fail to see is that a covenant cannot change, but the terms under which it was first made can. Hebrews 8:6 did not say that God's law was abolished. It said this:

Heb. 8:6, But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

As you know a covenant is an agreement between two or more parties. Bear that in mind as we discuss the subject of the NC. Paul goes on to say why God had to re-establish the NC on better promises.

Heb. 8:, 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. 8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

In verse 8 Paul qualifies what made the covenant faulty in the first place, and the fault rested squarely with the people with whom God made the covenant. These people who were once in Egypt and who have failed as a whole to continue in God's covenant before they left, found themselves in the wilderness with the same rebellious spirit. Listen as Paul explains in verse 9.

Verse 9, Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

Please note that this mount Sinai covenant was not the only one that was introduced to God's people, and it was certainly not the only one to have been dis-regared by God's people either.

Under the OC at Sinai God had written the law on stones which was external to their mind set and motives, seeing they were not converted as a whole. Sometime ago in your response you raised the point about Israel crying out to God for deliverance as proof that they somehow were faithful to God. This was your rejoinder:

It's very easy to make accusations like these especially when you ignore what the Scriptures teach. If Israel was steeped in Egyptian idolatory, why then would the Egyptians have persecuted them with such hatred for simply the Jews' faith in the LORD? If the Jews/Hebrews were deep in Egyptian idolatory, to whom were they praying/crying out to that the LORD God heard them? See for yourself ~~

Exo. 2:23-25 & 3:9 - "And it came to pass in process of time, that the king of Egypt died: and the children of Israel sighed by reason of the bondage, and they cried, and their cry came up unto God by reason of the bondage; And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. And God looked upon the children of Israel, and God had respect unto them. . . Now therefore, behold, the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me: and I have also seen the oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppress them."

I'd rather you don't let your imaginations fly wildly to make accusations against God's people every which way.

Compare that with what Hebrews 8:9 says: , "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord."

The fact is God did make a previous covenant with their fathers even before they had landed in Egypt, and not even that covenant did they keep, and God allowed them to suffer under the hands of another Pharoh. He regared them not. I will hasten to say that God did indeed hear their cry, and did eventually deliver them in order that His promise to Abraham become effective.

Now verse 10 unequivocally shows that God's law is better served when it is internalised, when it is planted in our minds, when true conversion takes place by God's Holy Spirit. Listen to Paul as he continues:

Heb. 8:10, For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

To enable people to internalize His law, to love it and obey it eagerly and willingly, God makes this promise: "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them" (Ezekiel 36:26-27). God's Spirit enables His people to obey His laws!

Nowhere does Paul or the prophets Jeremiah, and Ezekiel intimate that God would have done away with His law, and hence the galations and other passages you have introduced into the discussion, are your typical out-of-context use of scripture to continue believing a lie. Its people like you and your kind that make it appear that scriptures cantradict themselves.

So because I know better than to believe your mis-conceptions of scripture, I will hold the forte. You have a responsibility to ensure that whenever Paul speaks about law, you make it your duty to distinguish between he is talking about the law of ceremonies, or the law of 10 commandments. Look at how obvious it is to make such a distinction. I hope you're paying attention.

This is your misuse of a text in galations, Gal. 4:9-11"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain."

Compare the above with the same Paul who wrote to the Romans concerning the law of 10 commandments:

Romans 7:12-14 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. 13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. 14vFor we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Any one who is led by God's Spirit could not in their right mind not see that Paul is making a big distinction between the law of ceremonies and the law of 10 commandments. One set is considered as "beggarly elements" and one set is regared as holy, just, good, and spiritual.

Bari_kade if you build a set of beliefs on lies, whethr kowingly or not, you'll be forced to see the scriptures the way you have been seeing them. You go about the forum quoting from one section to another to prove what? That you're versed? Far from it!!!

Sooner or later and I hope for your sake sooner, that you will see the truth as it is in Christ Jesus.

Bless!!!

@ Shahan

Welcome! I just want to ask you a simple question.

Before the law of 10 commandments was given on the mount how did the people who existed before Moses know how to distinguish right from wrong?

Are you 100% certain that there were no standards of righteousness before the mount Sinai experience, and how was that standard expressed if there was any?

Whenever people, including the patriarchs sinned how did they know that what they did was wrong if they were not told about what was wrong and what was right?

I want you to view those questions in the light of:

Roman 2:14,15, For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

Its only a pity that with all that long windedness on your part you've still not arrived at the truth re the Lord's sabbath.

The truth you continue to spin will continue to elude you if you fail to put aside your religious goggles and take God's Word as it is.

Bobbyaf:

If only you had a thorough knowledge of what the New Covenant is all about. In fact it has to also do with God's law, among other things. The scriptures reveal that Christ came as a Mediator of a better covenant (Heb. 8:6) The popular belief that the NC has abolished God's law of 10 commandments mis-represents both the OC and the NC. That notion is an insult to God and what He is really trying to reveal to us.

You like making overblown statements like "an insult to God" since you arrogate to yourself positions He never meant. I have asked you again and again to clearly state on what basis you're basing your arguments - on Genesis or Exodus. You can't have it both ways because they're clearly not the same. When you do so, then you'll get a good grasp of the subject.

Bobbyaf:

What our anti-law friends fail to see is that a covenant cannot change, but the terms under which it was first made can. Hebrews 8:6 did not say that God's law was abolished. It said this:
Heb. 8:6, But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Your anti-grace fog is feeding your contradiction. If a covenant cannot change, what is the meaning of Heb 8:13 - "In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away"? And what about Heb. 10:9 - "Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second"? Clearly the Bible negates what you're arguing.

Bobbyaf:

As you know a covenant is an agreement between two or more parties. Bear that in mind as we discuss the subject of the NC. Paul goes on to say why God had to re-establish the NC on better promises.

Heb. 8:, 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. 8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah

Your despearation to force your thoughts into Scripture (eisegesis) is hilarious. Where did Paul ever hint in those verses that God had to re-establish the NC? When did He first establish the NC, suspend/abandon it for the OC, and then come back to re-establish the NC? Do you understand the meaning of the word RE-establish? I'd appreciate it if you could elucidate a bit more with verses clearly showing WHERE and HOW God first established the NC before coming back to RE-establish it! Hebrews 8:7 said simply that God would make a new covenant; and not RE-establish the NC.

Bobbyaf:

In verse 8 Paul qualifies what made the covenant faulty in the first place, and the fault rested squarely with the people with whom God made the covenant. These people who were once in Egypt and who have failed as a whole to continue in God's covenant before they left, found themselves in the wilderness with the same rebellious spirit. Listen as Paul explains in verse 9.

Verse 9, Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

What "covenant" did you suppose Paul was discussingas "faulty" in vs. 8 - the NC or the OC?

Bobbyaf:

Please note that this mount Sinai covenant was not the only one that was introduced to God's people, and it was certainly not the only one to have been this-regared by God's people either.

What other covenants were there? In other words, are you suggesting that there were more than one OC? _{(please note the spelling is "disregard/disregarded" and not "this-regard"}

Bobbyaf:

Under the OC at Sinai God had written the law on stones which was external to their mind set and motives, seeing they were not converted as a whole. Sometime ago in your response you raised the point about Israel crying out to God for deliverance as proof that they somehow were faithful to God.

Nope - that point was to debunk your accusation against the Hebrews that they were "deep in idolatory in Egypt".

Bobbyaf:

This was your rejoinder:

Compare that with what Hebrews 8:9 says: , "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord."

The fact is God did make a previous covenant with their fathers even before they had landed in Egypt, and not even that covenant did they keep, and God allowed them to suffer under the hands of another Pharoh. He regared them not. I will hasten to say that God did indeed hear their cry, and did eventually deliver them in order that His promise to Abraham become effective.

You miss the point, Bobby. What covenant was God speaking of in Heb. 8:9? I'll quote the line again for you - "the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt" Does that prove that God made a covenant with them before they landed in Egypt? Nope, and incase you still missed it, He was referring to the Covenant He made in the day He led them out of Egypt and not before they landed in Egypt!

@Bobbyaf

Bobbyaf:

Now verse 10 unequivocally shows that God's law is better served when it is internalised, when it is planted in our minds, when true conversion takes place by God's Holy Spirit. Listen to Paul as he continues:

Heb. 8:10, For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

To enable people to internalize His law, to love it and obey it eagerly and willingly, God makes this promise: "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them" (Ezekiel 36:26-27). God's Spirit enables His people to obey His laws!

And what Law/Commandment/Covenant are you speaking about? Merely quoting verses were the words "Law" or "Commandments" or "Statutes" or "Covenant" appear does not mean you're convey the sense of the verses about them.

Bobbyaf:

Nowhere does Paul or the prophets Jeremiah, and Ezekiel intimate that God would have done away with His law, and hence the galations and other passages you have introduced into the discussion, are your typical out-of-context use of scripture to continue believing a lie. Its people like you and your kind that make it appear that scriptures cantradict themselves.

Thanks for the usual typical SDA slabber. Not one time have I hinted that Scripture contradicts itself, and I've often compared scripture with scripture and answered every line of your convulsions. So far, you are unable to offer answers to my questions nor refute my points. Keep slobbering - I'm used to it.

Bobbyaf:

So because I know better than to believe your mis-conceptions of scripture, I will hold the forte.

Your pride isn't surprising. Only thing is that your "forte" doesn't go beyond the allegations and calling non-SDA Christians "babylon"! You really know better - well done.

Bobbyaf:

You have a responsibility to ensure that whenever Paul speaks about law, you make it your duty to distinguish between he is talking about the law of ceremonies, or the law of 10 commandments. Look at how obvious it is to make such a distinction. I hope you're paying attention.

This is a joke, right? Nice one, but I'm not amused as yet. How many times have I asked you to state clearly as to which Law/Commandments you were basing your arguments - and one and all you evaded any answers thereto? You haven't even the moral spine to quote a Genesis verse of a non-existent commandment for Adam about the Sabbath; and you have the temerity to twaddle about distinguishing between the Law and 10 Commandments!

Bobbyaf:

This is your misuse of a text in galations, Gal. 4:9-11"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain."

Compare the above with the same Paul who wrote to the Romans concerning the law of 10 commandments:

Romans 7:12-14 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. 13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. 14vFor we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Any one who is led by God's Spirit could not in their right mind not see that Paul is making a big distinction between the law of ceremonies and the law of 10 commandments. One set is considered as "beggarly elements" and one set is regared as holy, just, good, and spiritual.

However you delineate the Law or 10 Commandments, you still are skipping verses to show Paul's inference about the subject you know nothing of. Here, take it or leave it ~~

Rom. 7:4, 6 - "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. . .But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter."

It is only as a matter of convenience that the SDA arbitrarily sees some laws of ceremonies and other laws of sabbath and yet other of rituals. On the contrary, the New Testament position does not bring Christians under the Law of the OC - including the seventh-day sabbath! That is why Paul states clearly that, "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 days" (Col. 2:16). You cannot use the seventh-day sabbath (which you do not even understand) to judge other Christians and call them "babylon" - that is the only language the accuser of the brethren understands (Rev. 12:10).

Bobbyaf:

Bari_kade if you build a set of beliefs on lies, whethr kowingly or not, you'll be forced to see the scriptures the way you have been seeing them. You go about the forum quoting from one section to another to prove what? That you're versed? Far from it!!!

Is this the best of your carping because your intellect fails you? As daft as you've made yourself, what have you been trying to prove - that your IQ intimidates you when you encounter bari_kade and the best you can do is attack and slobber about? Sorry, but you'd have to grow up and be schooled.

All I asked were questions - which you evaded perennially. I offered contextual inputs by comparing scripture with scripture - and you had none in Genesis to prove your case. I answered everyline of yours and offered calm exchange of ideas - and the best you could do is drivel about with silly lullabies.

Bobbyaf:

Sooner or later and I hope for your sake sooner, that you will see the truth as it is in Christ Jesus.
Bless!!!

My dear, it is the truth you've been mixing up that I've been offering you. If you could see it sooner, bless your soul.

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

@ Shahan

Welcome! I just want to ask you a simple question.

Before the law of 10 commandments was given on the mount how did the people who existed before Moses know how to distinguish right from wrong?

Are you 100% certain that there were no standards of righteousness before the mount Sinai experience, and how was that standard expressed if there was any?

Whenever people, including the patriarchs sinned how did they know that what they did was wrong if they were not told about what was wrong and what was right?

Thank you for welcoming me. Lol, Bobby. . . when are you going to be open to discussions? Right, you wanted to ask "a simple question" and you ended up asking 3 questions! I'm tempted to answer them, but i'll refrain as Bari_kade has comprehemsively done so.

I'll urge you to humbly consider his rejoinders and see his germane inputs - especially the recent ones dealing with the Institution and Stipulations of the Sabbath. It won't hurt to carefully consider his points, especially because they are founded on God's sure Word and offer a contextual balance.

Perhaps these verse might help to throw some light to your questions though - Rom. 3:21-22 >> "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference."

Bobbyaf:

I want you to view those questions in the light of:

Roman 2:14,15, For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

One question to help this - on what covenant is verse 15 speaking of a "law written in their hearts" - the Old Covenant or the New?

Cheers.

@bari_kade,

Needless to say, I have enjoyed your treatise on the Sabbath, especially on the stipulations thereto. Indeed, anyone who seeks to be justified by a sabbatical Law based on the Old Testament and OC is missing the point of God's New Covenant in Jesus Christ.

Meanwhile, I know you started out calmly offering a good exchange of ideas with Bobbyaf; but your recent rejoinders sound like a no-nonsense approach towards him. This, perhaps, is due to the fact that he was "launching" attacks on you instead of stating his points. Could I offer that you keep your calm and share the good insight on the subject that God has blessed you with? It will both help your readers appreciate your valid points and praise God for His grace upon you.

On the whole, solid arguments in yours - and please keep up the approach of highlighting your inputs with Biblical references.

Cheers.

@ Bari-kade

Now verse 10 unequivocally shows that God's law is better served when it is internalised, when it is planted in our minds, when true conversion takes place by God's Holy Spirit. Listen to Paul as he continues:

Heb. 8:10, For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

To enable people to internalize His law, to love it and obey it eagerly and willingly, God makes this promise: "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them" (Ezekiel 36:26-27). God's Spirit enables His people to obey His laws!

And what Law/Commandment/Covenant are you speaking about? Merely quoting verses were the words "Law" or "Commandments" or "Statutes" or "Covenant" appear does not mean you're convey the sense of the verses about them.

There is one moral law and that is the 10 commandments. There is one covenant that is built around the law. It is this law that will be placed in our hearts when the NC begins between us and God.

This is a joke, right? Nice one, but I'm not amused as yet. How many times have I asked you to state clearly as to which Law/Commandments you were basing your arguments - and one and all you evaded any answers thereto? You haven't even the moral spine to quote a Genesis verse of a non-existent commandment for Adam about the Sabbath; and you have the temerity to twaddle about distinguishing between the Law and 10 Commandments!

I have always based my arguments on the moral law of 10 commandments which you insist have been abolished. Jesus said in matthew 5 that you'll will be regarded as the least from a heavenly point of view. It is you who continue to mis-represent God.

However you delineate the Law or 10 Commandments, you still are skipping verses to show Paul's inference about the subject you know nothing of. Here, take it or leave it ~~

I am afraid its you who don't know anything about the subject. Its always you who use out-of-context passages to continue a lie.

Rom. 7:4, 6 - "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. . .But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter."

A case in point is this very text. Being dead to the law doesn't mean that the law is abolished. What it means is that we can never be affected by the law as long as we remain in Christ. s long as we are alive in sin the law will always condemn us, bu tif we are dead to sin it cannot condemn us, because we are alive in Christ. Jesus said "if you love me keep my commandments"

You see the way you apply scripture is with the motive to discount God's law, when Paul was not necessarily writing with that purpose in mind. Paul simply pointed out the reality of the struggle between sin, faith, and the law. You have taken that to mean what you want it to mean, so as to continue your anti-law agenda.

It is only as a matter of convenience that the SDA arbitrarily sees some laws of ceremonies and other laws of sabbath and yet other of rituals. On the contrary, the New Testament position does not bring Christians under the Law of the OC

God's law of 10 commandments is eternal and belongs to both the OT and the NT. That is why I quoted Psalms 111:7,8 to show you that His law is eternal. They are done in truth and righteousness. Hence my constantly reminding you of the necessity to make a difference betwen the various codes of laws.

So I am not surprised when you quote one section of the bible to contradict another, just so that you can continue in a lie.

including the seventh-day sabbath! That is why Paul states clearly that, "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 days" (Col. 2:16).

This is a perfect example of someone who doesn't understand this passage in question. Paul wasn't using this passage to show that the creation sabbath was a shadow. How could he when the creation sabbath was made before sin manifested. He was referring to those other sabbaths that were institutionalised during the time of Moses, under the Old Covenant, which included the feast days, and which served as shadows pointing to Christ who was the sunstance. Different days meant different things to some jews who often argued which of those ceremonial days was more significant.

You cannot use the seventh-day sabbath (which you do not even understand) to judge other Christians and call them "babylon" - that is the only language the accuser of the brethren understands (Rev. 12:10).

As long as you continue to mis-represent God's truth about the sabbath, and push Sunday as the Lord's day, when it is not, then you are in babylon. By so doing you pay homage to the anti-Christ, rather than Christ. In time you will see that reality.

Is this the best of your carping because your intellect fails you? As daft as you've made yourself, what have you been trying to prove - that your IQ intimidates you when you encounter bari_kade and the best you can do is attack and slobber about? Sorry, but you'd have to grow up and be schooled.

Who are you to encounter? A god perhaps? Hahahaha, , you're making me crack up Bari_kade.

All I asked were questions - which you evaded perennially.

Questions that flooded the thread you mean with your repeated dribblings. You keep raising the same old issues we had argued about before.  

I offered contextual inputs by comparing scripture with scripture - and you had none in Genesis to prove your case. I answered everyline of yours and offered calm exchange of ideas - and the best you could do is drivel about with silly lullabies.

I dealt with that Genesis issue ages ago.  I have made my point and that is it. There is nothing more to discuss about the Genesis issue. I have been a witness to you on that, so i will leave you to discover the truth in time.

Your anti-grace fog is feeding your contradiction. If a covenant cannot change, what is the meaning of Heb 8:13 - "In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away"? And what about Heb. 10:9 - "Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second"? Clearly the Bible negates what you're arguing.

The covenant has been re-newed. Its the same agreement. The only thing that is different is the terms of the agreement and how it has been ratified. So even though the bible uses the term "new" its really the terms under which the renewal takes place is new.

Originally it was the people of Israel who promised God to obey even though they were not ready to obey. Its the same principle of obeying and live, and disobeying and die as was layed out in the agreement. The blessings and cursings that God pronounced then has not changed because His Son has died. This time around God has promised to place His law in our minds, and to give us the enabling power to obey. This power is recieved when we accept Jesus as our supreme sacrifice who will give us His Spirit.

The NC has never been about God abolishing His law. Its been about changing the terms and conditions under which this NC would have been established and ratified. That is why Jesus made it clear to the jewish leaders who thought that He came to somehow radicalise the system, that in actual fact He came not to "destroy the laws or the prophets" He came to fulfill, and by fulfill He meant to broaden the scope of the spirituality of the law. The word fulfill as used in Matthew 5 simply meant to fully utilise or to fill to the full. The law had lost its true meaning under the jewish leaders, and especially the sabbath, and Jesus made sure to teach the people that true purpose, by the way he lived, and through His death.

I am glad I am sharing a lot with you though. Keep praying and studying and you will see the truth. Whether or not we see eye to eye on interpretation, the fact is the truth is out there. Its only a matter of time.

Bless.

@ Bari_kade
You need to write a complete treatise on THE SABBATH. I have learnt a whole lot from you. I'm even tempted to do "copy and paste" of all your posts and read. Stay really, truly blessed.

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

Now verse 10 unequivocally shows that God's law is better served when it is internalised, when it is planted in our minds, when true conversion takes place by God's Holy Spirit. Listen to Paul as he continues:

Heb. 8:10, For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

To enable people to internalize His law, to love it and obey it eagerly and willingly, God makes this promise: "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them" (Ezekiel 36:26-27). God's Spirit enables His people to obey His laws!.

You haven't stated the basis of your argument as yet, and I'm not sure why you're evading the question.

Bobbyaf:

There is one moral law and that is the 10 commandments. There is one covenant that is built around the law. It is this law that will be placed in our hearts when the NC begins between us and God.

Please don't dribble around the question asked earlier. Kindly state the basis of your argument for the "Law" and "Covenant" - is it the non-existent one you could not find in Genesis; or is it the Sinaitic Law/Covenant you keep mixing up in Exodus?

And your last clause "when the NC begins" is confusing issues for you because you don't seem to know that the New Covenant has already begun!

Bobbyaf:

I have always based my arguments on the moral law of 10 commandments which you insist have been abolished. Jesus said in matthew 5 that you'll will be regarded as the least from a heavenly point of view. It is you who continue to mis-represent God.

Again, you are not my Judge; so using Scripture to pretend such attacks on me is hillarious. Until you state the basis of your argument (Genesis or Exodus), you will continue to miss the point.

Bobbyaf:

I am afraid its you who don't know anything about the subject. Its always you who use out-of-context passages to continue a lie.

My questions are yet unanswered, besides the fact that your lack of contextual reading has forced you to admit you have no verse in Genesis for your argument. Keep slobbering.

Bobbyaf:

A case in point is this very text. Being dead to the law doesn't mean that the law is abolished. What it means is that we can never be affected by the law as long as we remain in Christ. s long as we are alive in sin the law will always condemn us, bu tif we are dead to sin it cannot condemn us, because we are alive in Christ. Jesus said "if you love me keep my commandments"

The Scripture is clear, but you are sweating to confuse your head about it. Rom. 7:4 - "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God."

When Scripture says that we are dead to the Law, it does not contradict itself by suggesting we are alive to it! We are not married to the Law; rather, we are married to another - even to Him who is raised from the dead! "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace" (Gal. 5:4).

Bobbyaf:

You see the way you apply scripture is with the motive to discount God's law, when Paul was not necessarily writing with that purpose in mind. Paul simply pointed out the reality of the struggle between sin, faith, and the law. You have taken that to mean what you want it to mean, so as to continue your anti-law agenda.

I'm not anti-Law. My entries are clearly stating the distinction between Law and grace. "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" (John 1:17). If you lack an understanding between the two, your slabber and accusations are hardly surprising.

Bobbyaf:

God's law of 10 commandments is eternal and belongs to both the OT and the NT. That is why I quoted Psalms 111:7,8 to show you that His law is eternal. They are done in truth and righteousness. Hence my constantly reminding you of the necessity to make a difference betwen the various codes of laws.

Again, don't dribble round the question. Please find me a verse for your Genesis argument; or otherwise provide the stipulations of the 4th commandment. Since you evaded that question and screamed that you were not aware, scroll up and see where I provided them for you.

Bobbyaf:

So I am not surprised when you quote one section of the bible to contradict another, just so that you can continue in a lie.

Bobbyaf, don't sweat it if you have no text in Genesis for your drivel. I'm used to your accusations, and indeed keep up your forte of being the accuser of the brethren.

Bobbyaf:

This is a perfect example of someone who doesn't understand this passage in question. Paul wasn't using this passage to show that the creation sabbath was a shadow. How could he when the creation sabbath was made before sin manifested. He was referring to those other sabbaths that were institutionalised during the time of Moses, under the Old Covenant, which included the feast days, and which served as shadows pointing to Christ who was the sunstance. Different days meant different things to some jews who often argued which of those ceremonial days was more significant.

I would like you to state clearly how the 4th of the 10 commandments was different from "the creation sabbath" - especially HOW the 4th commandment was to be observed with its stipulations. This shadow boxing of yours round Col. 2:16 is not helping your denials.

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

As long as you continue to mis-represent God's truth about the sabbath, and push Sunday as the Lord's day, when it is not, then you are in babylon. By so doing you pay homage to the anti-Christ, rather than Christ. In time you will see that reality.

I told you before - the SDA knows nothing more than accusing the brethren when their superstitions have been punctured. I asked that you check the historical antecedence if you were in doubt about Sunday; and more than 7 replies later you still have been blind to that request.

Bobbyaf:

Who are you to encounter? A god perhaps? Hahahaha, , you're making me crack up Bari_kade.

Keep crying - your inflated ego and confused hoo-ha will be continually exposed on the Forum.

Bobbyaf:

Questions that flooded the thread you mean with your repeated dribblings. You keep raising the same old issues we had argued about before.

Not one time have you answered one out of the 15 questions - and you even had to admit in two of them that you had no Genesis verse for and you were not aware of what stipulations exist for the sabbath. Nice try at evading issues, but it's not working.

Bobbyaf:

I dealt with that Genesis issue ages ago. I have made my point and that is it. There is nothing more to discuss about the Genesis issue. I have been a witness to you on that, so i will leave you to discover the truth in time.

The weak defence you put up for the Genesis issue was that you had no verse! Doesn't that speak volumes about your supersitions? Well done - the SDA cult hasn't helped you much.

Bobbyaf:

The covenant has been re-newed. Its the same agreement. The only thing that is different is the terms of the agreement and how it has been ratified. So even though the bible uses the term "new" its really the terms under which the renewal takes place is new.

Question #17: Where in the Bible did you read of the Covenant RE-established or RE-newed?

Question #18: What are the specific terms of of the Old and New Covenants?

Bobbyaf:

Originally it was the people of Israel who promised God to obey even though they were not ready to obey. Its the same principle of obeying and live, and disobeying and die as was layed out in the agreement. The blessings and cursings that God pronounced then has not changed because His Son has died. This time around God has promised to place His law in our minds, and to give us the enabling power to obey. This power is recieved when we accept Jesus as our supreme sacrifice who will give us His Spirit.

Refer to the two questions above (#17 & #18).

Bobbyaf:

The NC has never been about God abolishing His law. Its been about changing the terms and conditions under which this NC would have been established and ratified. That is why Jesus made it clear to the jewish leaders who thought that He came to somehow radicalise the system, that in actual fact He came not to "destroy the laws or the prophets" He came to fulfill, and by fulfill He meant to broaden the scope of the spirituality of the law. The word fulfill as used in Matthew 5 simply meant to fully utilise or to fill to the full. The law had lost its true meaning under the jewish leaders, and especially the sabbath, and Jesus made sure to teach the people that true purpose, by the way he lived, and through His death.

Again, the two questions above.

Bobbyaf:

I am glad I am sharing a lot with you though. Keep praying and studying and you will see the truth. Whether or not we see eye to eye on interpretation, the fact is the truth is out there. Its only a matter of time.

Bless.

Your problem is that you are sweating out SDA superstition while thinking it is "the truth" - and you're glad? Whenever those superstitions are punctured by God's precious Word, then your mask falls off to reveal who you really are. It's only a matter of time: dress warm and keep reading the expositions they're hiding from you in SDA.

Regards.

@shahan,

shahan:

@bari_kade,

Needless to say, I have enjoyed your treatise on the Sabbath, especially on the stipulations thereto. Indeed, anyone who seeks to be justified by a sabbatical Law based on the Old Testament and OC is missing the point of God's New Covenant in Jesus Christ.

I'm glad to know the entries on the subject have been of some help to you. A few more will follow to expound the subject a bit more so that we can all see why the SDA promoter cannot use a Law he does not understand to condemn other Christians on the Forum.

shahan:

Meanwhile, I know you started out calmly offering a good exchange of ideas with Bobbyaf; but your recent rejoinders sound like a no-nonsense approach towards him. This, perhaps, is due to the fact that he was "launching" attacks on you instead of stating his points.

Precisely. And my no-nonsense approach will continue as long as he refuses to grow up.

shahan:

Could I offer that you keep your calm and share the good insight on the subject that God has blessed you with? It will both help your readers appreciate your valid points and praise God for His grace upon you.

I'll do my best to take that on board. And God bless you on that.

shahan:

On the whole, solid arguments in yours - and please keep up the approach of highlighting your inputs with Biblical references.
Cheers.

Will continue the approach. Blessings.

@lafile,

lafile:

@ Bari_kade
You need to write a complete treatise on THE SABBATH. I have learnt a whole lot from you. I'm even tempted to do "copy and paste" of all your posts and read. Stay really, truly blessed.

Lol, maybe someday I'll take up your challenge. If you find the previous ones of any help, please feel free to copy them for your use. May God bless you more in His love.

Applying the Sabbath Stipulations Today

Now Let me recap for just a moment about the Stipulations of the Sabbath Law according to its revelatory Commandment ~~

(a). The Sabbath was to be kept Holy - Exo. 20:8

(b). No (Servile) Work To Be Done on the Sabbath - Exo. 20:10; 12:16 & Num. 28:25

(c). Anyone Defiling The Sabbath Be Put To Death - Exo. 31:14-15

(d). The Sabbath Meant to Be Perpetual - Exo. 31:16

(e). No Domestic Fires To Be Kindled In The Home - Exo. 35:3

(f). Sabbatarians To Afflict Their Souls Forever or Be Put To Death - Lev. 16:31 & 23:29

(g). Sabbath Was to be Celebrated From Evening to Evening - Lev. 23:32

(h). A Holy Convocation; No Domestic Work At Home - Lev. 23:3

It is by reason of the above stipulations that I have severally requested Bobbyaf to provide answers to my questions. Germane to this concern is the question: On what basis was he arguing the sabbath - (a) on a non-existent Law/commandment in Genesis for Adam; or, (b) on the Sinaitic Law/10 Commandments in Exodus for Israel?

One cannot be said to be fully obeying God's commandment of the sabbath as in Exodus unless all the stipulations thereto are also practically and absolutely acknowledged and obeyed as well. Failing to recognize that there actually were stipulations for HOW the sabbath was to be observed, Bobbyaf only confirmed that he did not know the implications of what he was arguing in the first place.

Let's even for a moment assume that one bases his arguments on the Sinaitic Law from where he derives some knowledge of the sabbath stipulations. Such people would quickly quote from Exodus to prove an argument for a non-existent Law in Genesis. For example, Exo. 20:8 & 10 is often used as cover for a present-day sabbath observance.

However, the simple question is that, if the sabbath-day in Exodus is to be observed as a present-day religious duty, why not follow all the stipulations connected to the 4th Commandment as outlined above? For instance, in order for someone to keep the sabbath-day as spelt out in Exodus, sabbatarians must afflict their souls forever or be put to death ("by a statute for ever" - Lev. 16:31 & 23:29)! The SDA cannot claim to be keeping the sabbath-day by picking and choosing a few stipulations and disregarding the rest of the perpetual statutes. That would be hypocrisy - and Bobbyaf earlier confirmed that in stating ~~

Bobbyaf:

Its the same principle of obeying and live, and disobeying and die as was layed out in the agreement. The blessings and cursings that God pronounced then has not changed because His Son has died.

This simply means that, since it is the same "disobeying and die" and the "blessings and cursings that God pronounced then has not changed"; then SDA seventh-day sabbatrians should not be hypocritical with the pronouncements in Lev. 16:31 & 23:29 as it is required of keepers of the sabbath to "afflict their souls forever or be put to death" as the Law says!

I'm sure they know better than that - and we can now begin to appreciate the grace of Jesus Christ in John 1:17 - "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."

A Friend's Question:

Before I continue, a friend of mine reading my inputs had asked me the salient question:

"Are you saying that people must keep working everyday non-stop and have no rest?"

That is not my inference at all. The thrust of my argument has been that, as Christians we are not under the Sinatic Law of seventh-day sabbatism as a religious duty. Rather, I have stated earlier in one of my entries that God meant the true Sabbath as a rest for the soul by faith in His Son Jesus Christ - the Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 11:28-29).

Of course, rest is good - both for the body and the soul. The Lord Jesus even called His disciples away to a desert place for some rest - "And he said unto them, Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place, and rest a while: for there were many coming and going, and they had no leisure so much as to eat" (Mark 6:31). But when you read the context surrounding that verse, you find that it was not the Sinaitic sabbath that was being observed there.

I have said repeatedly that Christians are not under the Law of a seventh-day sabbath as a religious duty. Keeping the sabbath as a religious observation does not assure anyone of salvation for heaven; and many times people who have no understanding of what they argue have often used their flawed doctrines of the sabbath to condemn others.

Such SDA people reject the testimony of God's Word in the Bible in preference for their prophetess, Ellen G. White. If you ask an SDA member if he or she has the assurance of salvation in his or her heart, some of them will pretend they do; others will excuse themselves on just any excuse. On the whole, they can't provide a clear answer, because they anchor their faith on the heresies of Ellen White who taught that: "Those who accept the Saviour, however sincere their conversion, should never be taught to say or feel that they are saved". [Christ's Object Lessons, p. 155].

Is that the same thing as what the apostle John wrote in I John 5:13? "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God: that ye may know that ye have eternal life."

Now we come to a very important question on the subject:

                      To WHOM Specifically Did God Give The Sabbath As A Law?

Let us also remember to whom specifically God gave the Sabbath as a Law/Commandment. He did not broadly give it to all the nations regardless of their background. Rather, it was specifically to Israel that He establish the Sabbath as a Law and Commandment. We read in Exodus 31:17 ~~ "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed."

As already discussed, the Old Covenant was ratified by blood; and without this important ratification, the Covenant would not have been in force: Exodus 24:8 - "⁸And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words"; Heb. 9:17-18 ~~ ¹⁷For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. ¹⁸Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood."

This is why it is of utmost importance to understand to whom the Law applied. God never meant for the Sinaitic Law to be quoted against Adam or any of the Gentile nations who were not under never given the Law in the first place. Again and again, Scripture bears testimony to this fact --

(1). Rom. 2:17; 3:1-2 - "Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God. . . What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God."

No other nation was given such a Law as is being discussed here, including the sabbath-law. Moses clearly enunciated this fact in stating: "Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for? And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?" (Deut. 4:6-.

Those who often make reference to "the Law" or  the "Commandments/Covenant" by quoting Exodus will do well to remember that such were enactedand ratified specifically for Israel.


(2). Another confirmation of the point is found in Deuteronomy 5:1-22. Now please carefully see that the same Sinatic Law in Exodus 20 is here given in Deuteronomy; however, we observe in the first few verses to whom these were made -

¹And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them.
²The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
³The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.
⁴The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,
⁵(I stood between the LORD and you at that time, to shew you the word of the LORD: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount saying,
⁶I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
⁷Thou shalt have none other gods before me.
⁸Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth:
⁹Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,
¹⁰And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.
¹¹Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
¹²Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.
¹³Six days thou shalt labour, and do all thy work:
¹⁴But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou.
¹⁵And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.
¹⁶Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
¹⁷Thou shalt not kill.
¹⁸Neither shalt thou commit adultery.
¹⁹Neither shalt thou steal.
²⁰Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.
²¹Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.
²²These words the LORD spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.

Once we can see to whom the Law was specifically given (and clearly it is to Israel), then it becomes easier to understand that the Christian position is not to be predicated on the Law of Exodus that rested on the Sinatic Covenant.

Having established to whom specifically the Law was given and ratified, we shall be looking at the different types of sabbaths, and then see what they mean in the New Testament.

@bari_kade,

May God continue to increase His blessings upon you for your efforts on this very interesting subject. Like lafile, I have learnt so very much from your inputs and will like to copy and save as reference for later study. Looking forward to your sequel.

@4get_me,

The one thing that gladdens me is that my inputs make some sense to some of you. I have chosen to lay out my arguments point-by-point with relevant Scriptures, while comparing other verses to each point.

The bottomline is that no careful reader of the Bible will miss the point that the Christian position is not predicated upon the Sinaitic Law/Commandment/Covenant given specifically to Israel and ratified by the blood of calves and goats.

As you very well know, the Christian position is an exceedingly far more glorious calling than the Old Covenant. This is the core of my argument on this subject, and in due cause we shall come to that point.

God be praised for the benefits anyone receives here, and blessings to all.