My Position on the Fourth Commandment

[savedbymercy]

dw:

There is no defeat here at all. Adam was not the head of the elect but the head of the human race

The elect were the whole race in Adam at Creation, for He was a Son of God Lk 3:

38Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Also the Messiah was to be of His Seed according to the Flesh Gen 3:15

15And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Her seed here is Eve, Adam's wife, if Christ was Her seed, then he was Adam's seed as well as the genealogy in Lk 3 gives proof of, tracing Christ birth in the flesh back to Adam. Now was the seed line of Christ according to the flesh an elect seed line ? Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Moses and ect..

The whole human race in Adam in the beginning was elect, the Godly seed Mal 2:15

And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed

BTW thats why only an Elect Nation was given the creation sabbath,because Adam was an elect at creation..

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



The elect were the whole race in Adam at Creation, for He was a Son of God Lk 3:

38Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Also the Messiah was to be of His Seed according to the Flesh Gen 3:15

15And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Her seed here is Eve, Adam's wife, if Christ was Her seed, then he was Adam's seed as well as the genealogy in Lk 3 gives proof of, tracing Christ birth in the flesh back to Adam. Now was the seed line of Christ according to the flesh an elect seed line ? Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Moses and ect..

The whole human race in Adam in the beginning was elect, the Godly seed Mal 2:15

And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed

BTW thats why only an Elect Nation was given the creation sabbath,because Adam was an elect at creation..

Find one text of scripture that states Adam was the head of the elect? Certainly the elect were in Adam but the very text you quoted (Gen. 3:15) clearly demonstrates there was more in Adam than the elect. There is not a scripture anywhere that says Adam was the head of the elect. Romans 5:12-18 makes it very clear that Adam was the head of ALL MANKIND - elect and non-elect only IN THE FLESH. Christ alone is the head of the elect of God as none but the elect are "in Christ" whereas both non-elect and elect were "in Adam" and only ACCORDING TO THE FLESH.

The very term "elect" means to "choose out of" and your theory invalidates the very meaning of the term. If all mankind were the elect then FROM WHOM did God choose "OUT OF"? Election occurred BEFORE the world began (Eph. 1:4; 2 Thes. 2:13) and there were those who were NOT CHOSEN. It was the RACE of Adam from which the elect were chose OUT OF - which means not all of "in Adam" were the elect.

The elect were chosen "IN CHRIST" before the world began (Eph. 1:4) and not all who are "in Adam" are "in Christ." According to your theory God's eternal covenant failed as part of the elect were eternally damned!

 

[savedbymercy]

dw:

Find one text of scripture that states Adam was the head of the elect?

Find one scripture that states adam was not the head of the elect. I have given you my evidence why He is.

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



BTW thats why only an Elect Nation was given the creation sabbath,because Adam was an elect at creation..

I will take Christ's word over yours. He said the creation sabbath "was made for man" not for "jews" (Mk. 2:27). No Jews existed at Creation and it was at creation the sabbath "was made" as it was only REMEMBERED in Exodus and Deuteronomy not "made." The context of Mark 2:27-28 is a declaration that Christ is "LORD" over the Sabbath - a clear declaration that He is the CREATOR and thus institutor of the Sabbath in Genesis 2:2-3. He is not referring to Exodus or Deuternomy but to Genesis. He is declaring that the Creator has the right to correctly interpret the true meaning and design of the Sabbath over the misguided traditions of the Pharisees and SDA and Gerardites.

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



Find one scripture that states adam was not the head of the elect. I have given you my evidence why He is.

You gave no evidence. You gave no scripture that explicitly stated that Adam was the head of all the elect. Indeed, your logic and interpretation deny the very meaning of "elect." The elect where chosen "IN CHRIST" before the world began not chosen "IN ADAM" before the world began (Eph. 1:4).

The very idea of an "elect" demands there is a non-elect but you have the entire race of mankind as the elect and therefore some elect will be sent to hell.

Your theory cannot distinguish between IN THE FLESH and IN CHRIST. All mankind was represented IN ADAM according to the flesh.

Your election occurred IN ADAM and IN TIME but Bibical election occurred IN CHRIST and BEFORE TIME (Eph. 1:4).

Your election has NOBODY to choose OUT OF as your election is INCLUSIVE of everybody and thus invalidates the very meaning of the term "elect."

 

[savedbymercy]

dw:

I will take Christ's word over yours. He said the creation sabbath "was made for man"

What do you think Adam was a mule ? lol

 

[savedbymercy]

dw:

You gave no evidence.

None that you are able to see, i cannot help you on that.

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



What do you think Adam was a mule ? lol

A very foolish response. However, that is about all you can muster when you have nothing to support your interpretation that the creation Sabbath was given to Israel. It was given to "man" - generic not JEWISH in distinction from generic mankind. It was "made" for man generic not Jewish in distinction from generic man.

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



None that you are able to see, i cannot help you on that.

It has to be written to see it and there is nothing written in Scripture to see! You used scriptures that do not state your positon explicitly, you misapplied scriptures to support your position and most glaringly you contradicted scriptures to support your position and denied the very necessary inferrence of the word "elect."

Your position has ALL MANKIND as the elect "in Adam" when Scripture has SOME of mankind as the elect "in Christ." Ephesians 1:4 and the precreation of election in Christ contradicts your postcreation election in Adam. Both cannot be right as one contradicts the other. The elect "in Christ" before the foundation of the world refer to the elect "in Adam" in contradistinction from the non-elect in Adam.

If the Bible is our guide then NNE can see your position in Scripture if honesty is our guide.

 

[savedbymercy]

dw:

It has to be written to see it

Well I posted it, you still do not see it, I cannot help that.

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



None that you are able to see, i cannot help you on that.

When did your election take place? In Christ before the world began or in Adam when the world began?

Are the elect in Epheisans 1:4 the same elect you have Adam representing? Did God elect ALL MANKIND in Ephesians 1:4 and if so, then, from whom, from what were they "chosen out of"????

Jesus says ALL that the Father gave him would be saved and not one lost (Jn. 6:37-39) and distinguishes those given from "all flesh" (Jn. 17:2). How does your position on the elect distinguish them from "all flesh"?

 

[savedbymercy]

dw:

When did your election take place?

This is not about me personally. Rabbit trail !

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



This is not about me personally. Rabbit trail !

It is not about the scriptures either! bogus response! I gave you an explicit Biblical text (Eph. 1:4) with questions that dealt with the specific language of that text in direct connection to YOUR unbiblical interpretations. You made a claim that not one single text of Scripture explicitly states while I made a claim that is explicitly stated in clear Biblical langauge! Ephesians 1:4 explicitly states election took place prior to Adam and was in Christ. The very term "chosen" and "elect" demands that SOME were not chosen and the only sphere of choice is confined to the human race as angels are not the objects of salvation.

I gave you an explicit text (Mk 2:27-28) that says "man" rather than "Jew" and in reality the Greek text says "the man" or mankind but you give the unbiblical response that the creation Sabbath was for the elect Israel or Jews. No scripture to support your theory again.

You can only give bogus responses because you hold to a bogus position that cannot be supported with scripture.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I asked Dr Walter in connection with his claim,

“Both you and DHK must add to the Scriptures what the scriptures do not say in order to maintain your position. The Scriptures do not use or say "OF THE WEEK" - nada, zip, nowhere!”,
Do you consider any English translation “the Scriptures”?

I now ask you, Dr Walter, Do you consider ANY (good) translation, “the Scriptures”?

Then what about the Septuagint? Would you agree the Septuagint is the Old Testament Scriptures?
You would?
Good!
Then have a look here in the Septuagint, in …

Exodus 31:15,
variant “hebdomehi sabbata anapausis” for “hebdómehi HÉBDOMOS anapausis”, “on the Seventh(-day-the-) Seventh(-day) is rest” = “on the Seventh-(day-)OF-THE-WEEK is rest”.

Exodus 16:26,27,
“hex hehmeras sulleksete: tehi de hehmerai tehi hebdomehi sabbata hoti ouk estai en autehi. Egeneto de en tehi hehmerai tehi hebdomehi eksehlthosan tines.”

Note: “hebdomehi” = “hebdomehi sabbata”.
“On the Seventh Day, “hebdomehi” = “on The (identical) Seventh-Day-Sabbath-OF-THE-WEEK”, “hebdomehi sabbata”.

Exodus 16:29,
“Kurios edohken humin sabbata tehn hehmeran tautehn … tehi hehmerai tehi hektehi artous (sulleksete).”
Note the NAMES of the days-OF-THE-WEEK, “Sabbata” for ‘The Sabbath’, and “Heh Hekteh (Hehmera)” for ‘The Sixth (Day)’.
‘The Sabbath’
= “Sabbata” Plural
= “heh Hebdomeh”
= “heh Hehmera heh Hebdomeh” (20:11)
= “heh Hehmera-TOHN-SABBATOHN” (20:8)
= “Sabbaton” Singular.
All the above NAMES, ‘the Seventh’, ‘the Seventh Day’, ‘the Seventh Day Sabbath’, are names OF, ‘The Sabbath’, “the Seventh Day-OF-THE-WEEK-SABBATHS’-Sabbath”, “heh Hehmera-TOHN-SABBATOHN”.
‘The week’ is _derived from_, “the Seventh Day Sabbath” from Plural - “sabbaths” FOR: “Sabbath” – Singular GIVING ORIGIN TO THE CONCEPT of Western (and English) thought, “OF-THE-WEEK”.

That is why ‘The Sabbath’-“Sabbata” IS THE PLURAL! The Plural MORE than the Singular, stronger, and better than the Singular, indicates and specifies “The Seventh-Day-OF-THE-WEEK-Sabbath of the LORD GOD”.
The Seventh Day Sabbath is uniquely the ‘WEEKLY Sabbath’ of the Bible, of Hebrew, Greek, Western, and since time immemorial, of universal thought-reference.

But let’s go on….

Exodus 31:13 et al,
“My Sabbaths” English and Greek Plural, always from Hebrew Singular. Hebrew has ‘shabbath’ Singular, only, each time, 110 times.
So the Singular (Hebrew) often has a Plural meaning.

In the Greek the opposite occurs, the Plural has a Singular meaning. So the Greek ‘sabbaton’ or ‘sabbata’ (together 110 times) always represents the Hebrew Singular but a Singular with Singula OR, Plural meaning.

Context determines, common sense, and most important, IDIOM! In several cases then where Greek uses the Plural, the idea, “OF-THE-WEEK”, may apply.

And that – again – explains where the unmistakable, ingenious and useful concept, “OF-THE-WEEK”, especially in the New Testament, comes from, and WITHOUT which, most modern languages will be unable to render the proper idiomatic and literal connotations of the Hebrew word, “shabbath”, ‘sabbath’.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

When did your election take place? In Christ before the world began or in Adam when the world began?

Are the elect in Epheisans 1:4 the same elect you have Adam representing? Did God elect ALL MANKIND in Ephesians 1:4 and if so, then, from whom, from what were they "chosen out of"????

Jesus says ALL that the Father gave him would be saved and not one lost (Jn. 6:37-39) and distinguishes those given from "all flesh" (Jn. 17:2). How does your position on the elect distinguish them from "all flesh"?

GE:

AMEN!

This makes me feel good and happy, Dr Walter! How nice for a change. Thanks!

 

[Dr. Walter]

I asked Dr Walter in connection with his claim,

“Both you and DHK must add to the Scriptures what the scriptures do not say in order to maintain your position. The Scriptures do not use or say "OF THE WEEK" - nada, zip, nowhere!”,
Do you consider any English translation “the Scriptures”?

I now ask you, Dr Walter, Do you consider ANY (good) translation, “the Scriptures”?

Then what about the Septuagint? Would you agree the Septuagint is the Old Testament Scriptures?
You would?
Good!
Then have a look here in the Septuagint, in …

Exodus 31:15,
variant “hebdomehi sabbata anapausis” for “hebdómehi HÉBDOMOS anapausis”, “on the Seventh(-day-the-) Seventh(-day) is rest” = “on the Seventh-(day-)OF-THE-WEEK is rest”.

Exodus 16:26,27,
“hex hehmeras sulleksete: tehi de hehmerai tehi hebdomehi sabbata hoti ouk estai en autehi. Egeneto de en tehi hehmerai tehi hebdomehi eksehlthosan tines.”

Note: “hebdomehi” = “hebdomehi sabbata”.
“On the Seventh Day, “hebdomehi” = “on The (identical) Seventh-Day-Sabbath-OF-THE-WEEK”, “hebdomehi sabbata”.

Exodus 16:29,
“Kurios edohken humin sabbata tehn hehmeran tautehn … tehi hehmerai tehi hektehi artous (sulleksete).”
Note the NAMES of the days-OF-THE-WEEK, “Sabbata” for ‘The Sabbath’, and “Heh Hekteh (Hehmera)” for ‘The Sixth (Day)’.
‘The Sabbath’
= “Sabbata” Plural
= “heh Hebdomeh”
= “heh Hehmera heh Hebdomeh” (20:11)
= “heh Hehmera-TOHN-SABBATOHN” (20:8)
= “Sabbaton” Singular.
All the above NAMES, ‘the Seventh’, ‘the Seventh Day’, ‘the Seventh Day Sabbath’, are names OF, ‘The Sabbath’, “the Seventh Day-OF-THE-WEEK-SABBATHS’-Sabbath”, “heh Hehmera-TOHN-SABBATOHN”.
‘The week’ is _derived from_, “the Seventh Day Sabbath” from Plural - “sabbaths” FOR: “Sabbath” – Singular GIVING ORIGIN TO THE CONCEPT of Western (and English) thought, “OF-THE-WEEK”.

That is why ‘The Sabbath’-“Sabbata” IS THE PLURAL! The Plural MORE than the Singular, stronger, and better than the Singular, indicates and specifies “The Seventh-Day-OF-THE-WEEK-Sabbath of the LORD GOD”.
The Seventh Day Sabbath is uniquely the ‘WEEKLY Sabbath’ of the Bible, of Hebrew, Greek, Western, and since time immemorial, of universal thought-reference.

But let’s go on….

Exodus 31:13 et al,
“My Sabbaths” English and Greek Plural, always from Hebrew Singular. Hebrew has ‘shabbath’ Singular, only, each time, 110 times.
So the Singular (Hebrew) often has a Plural meaning.

In the Greek the opposite occurs, the Plural has a Singular meaning. So the Greek ‘sabbaton’ or ‘sabbata’ (together 110 times) always represents the Hebrew Singular but a Singular with Singula OR, Plural meaning.

Context determines, common sense, and most important, IDIOM! In several cases then where Greek uses the Plural, the idea, “OF-THE-WEEK”, may apply.

And that – again – explains where the unmistakable, ingenious and useful concept, “OF-THE-WEEK”, especially in the New Testament, comes from, and WITHOUT which, most modern languages will be unable to render the proper idiomatic and literal connotations of the Hebrew word, “shabbath”, ‘sabbath’.

Again, your interpretation is based upon unstated INFERENCES not the explicit scriptures. Again, your interpretation restricts the sabbath to the seventh day "of the week" making God a violator of His own Sabbath law from which all Sabbath applications are derived.

No one denies the seventh day "of the week" is a legitimate application but I wholly deny that it is the restrictive application of the creation Sabbath or fourth commandment.

Again, the Biblical calander provided in Genesis through Deuternommy is based upon a Lunar year of 360 days and 30 day months not equally divisible by seven. If God intended or designed the set of seven days to be the basis for calendar calculations we would read of 28 day months and years divisible by seven.

The truth is that we simply have a set of seven days, six days preceding the Sabbath and six days following the Sabbath and that set of seven days can fit any calander at any time regardless of the number of days in the month or days in the year.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

There is no defeat here at all. Adam was not the head of the elect but the head of the human race - see Romans 5:12-18. Christ alone is the head of the elect (Rom. 5:15-18).

Gerard's arguments are based upon pure nonsense. He has an appearance of scholarship but when it is all boiled down it is only appearance and empty of truth.

He has to change not only the text of scripture to fit his nonsense but the obvious context. Anyone seeking the truth can see easily see that in Genesis 1:31-2:3 that "from his works" means that he ceased from doing the activities that he was formerly occupied with in the past six days - that is simple common sense.

Likewise, the point of the writer of hebrews is just as simple. God stopped working in regard to what He formerly was doing in those six days. The application is simple, in order for a person to be saved they must "pauo" CEASE from all works and simply trust in the gospel (Heb. 4:1-4) as it is "BY FAITH" in the gospel that we enter into "his rest." His rest is not merely the ceremonial observance of an actual sabbath day but more importantly, it is what that ceremonial observance typifies - the rest pictured in the first creation - a creation without sin in perfect harmony with God. By faith we are justified and have PEACE with God and thus enter into SPIRITUAL REST. However, that is not the COMPLETE fulfillment of entering into "his rest"! No, the complete fulfilment is when we enter not merely SPIRITUALLY by faith in the gospel as hebrew 4:2-3 explicitly states but when we enter into the NEW CREATION yet to come (Heb. 4:11) Spirit, soul and body when again God can look upon all that he has created and made and again say "it is very good" - that is the promised rest which is YET TO COME. However, Gerard cannot see the truth for the bias that blinds his eyes.

This is so straight forward and simple one must trip over it to miss it. Gerards ignorance is his attempt to APPEAR scholarly when in fact his scholarship is pure ignorance.

GE:

Re:
Dr Walter,
“He has to change not only the text of scripture to fit his nonsense”

You have made this accusation now several times; you have yet to substantiate it with an example or more. Thanks.

Re:
Dr Walter,
“in Genesis 1:31-2:3 … "from his works" means that he ceased from doing the activities that he was formerly occupied with in the past six days - that is simple common sense.”

Now show me where I did not admit or denied this implied ‘meaning in Genesis 1:31-2:3’ of “that he (God) ceased from doing the activities that he was formerly occupied with in the past six days”? I can say with a clear conscience I never did any. I never denied or rejected the obvious and “simple common sense” IMPLICATION, that God “ceased from doing the activities that he was formerly occupied with in the past six days”.

Not to repeat my answer which I had given, I would like to only point out Dr Walter’s conspicuously suspicious and covert methodology.

Again, Dr Walter QUOTES HIMSELF, alleging he quotes me, GE! It is getting boring, Dr Walter, it no longer is funny any more, you know….

Now I, GE, did NOT write, or, quoted you like this: “in Genesis 1:31-2:3”. I made a LABOURED point to DISTINGUISH between what YOU wrote, which was, “in Genesis 1:31-2:3”, and what I wrote, which was: “in Genesis 1:31”. Go back, see for yourself, here: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1685808#post1685808;
and you actually quoted me, here: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=71766&page=3, funny enough, correctly!

But let me in any case repeat, that I maintained consistently, that God stopped doing what He before He stopped, was doing, ON the Sixth Day WHEN He had FINISHED to form Eve from Adam’s rib bone, AND had given Adam and her Command AND, had pronounced, “Very good!”

That was NOT, as Dr Walter alleges, “at the closure of that day (Satan had fallen)” – which by the way as you may recall, was another instance where Dr Walter’s misquoted me. I mean that satan’s fall stuff he accused me about.
God did not “at the closure of that day” the Sixth Day on which Adam and Eve were created, declare, “Very good!” IT MUST HAVE BEEN WELL BEFORE “at the closure of that day”! It could have been ANY time EARLY on the Sixth Day. Who can say it wasn’t?! “God spoke, and it was!” … instantaneously.
Fact remains, Adam did not see one day through ere he fell in sin “Adam abode not one night” says a Psalm.

Genesis recorded the history of Adam and Eve, of but that the one day on which they were created, and after “Evening-cool of day had come”, the Seventh Day of the creation week, he and his spouse very early on the Seventh Day must have been sent out and locked out of the garden of Eden. The simple and bare and unabridged or embroidered, TEXT of the Scriptures!

Re:
Dr Walter,
“The application is simple, in order for a person to be saved they must "pauo" CEASE from all works and simply trust in the gospel (Heb. 4:1-4) as it is "BY FAITH" in the gospel that we enter into "his rest."”

I have said scarcely anything about the meaning of the Scripture “Heb. 4:1-4”. Of “Heb. 4:1-4” as speaking of the Sabbath Day, I never said a word! And I am NOT talking about the Sabbath Commandment either – but of the Sabbath, that IT, is ALL about what “_GOD_” did by either “saying” or “working” or “resting”. God is one and so is He and his work whether his work of creating, sustaining or resting. No matter what or which. God’s ‘rest’ or ‘ceasing’ NEVER IS DOING NOTHING. God is God; not a man!

Hebrews 4:9 specifically or Genesis 2:2-3 specifically or the Sabbath Commandment specifically, have absolutely NOTHING to do with Dr Walter’s fantasies about God’s “rest” that “is not merely the ceremonial observance of an actual sabbath day”, or that is “a creation without sin in perfect harmony with God”. That, is ‘merely’ reducing the Sabbath (and its Commandment) to ‘merely’ the work of men, his work of rest or not, it is man’s work.

Instead the Sabbath and in certain respect its commandment are about God, who “THUS CONCERNING the Seventh Day SPAKE: And _GOD_, the Seventh Day from ALL, HIS, _WORKS_ —which “works” are no “ceasing” but a FINISHING of and by the fact, God— _RESTED_”!

Therefore however ‘spiritually’ subjective Dr Walter interprets the in and through Jesus Christ objective Gospel-Rest of God, makes no difference to what the “Sabbath” and the “Sabbath-Rest” in the able hands of God, is, and means, and signifies.

Which is another story for another day.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Again, your interpretation is based upon unstated INFERENCES not the explicit scriptures. Again, your interpretation restricts the sabbath to the seventh day "of the week" making God a violator of His own Sabbath law from which all Sabbath applications are derived.

No one denies the seventh day "of the week" is a legitimate application but I wholly deny that it is the restrictive application of the creation Sabbath or fourth commandment.

Again, the Biblical calander provided in Genesis through Deuternommy is based upon a Lunar year of 360 days and 30 day months not equally divisible by seven. If God intended or designed the set of seven days to be the basis for calendar calculations we would read of 28 day months and years divisible by seven.

The truth is that we simply have a set of seven days, six days preceding the Sabbath and six days following the Sabbath and that set of seven days can fit any calander at any time regardless of the number of days in the month or days in the year.

GE:

Thanks, Dr Walter. I see you are on the other side of the line, now. But it is past 3 in the morning, and I am a bit tired. So God willing, we'll discuss further, tomorrow.

But let me close with showing on that which you wrote, on which I 100% percent agree, and in fact, take my own stand!!

which words of yours, are,

"No one denies the seventh day "of the week" is a legitimate application but I wholly deny that it is the restrictive application of the creation Sabbath or fourth commandment.

Again, the Biblical calander provided in Genesis through Deuternommy is based upon a Lunar year of 360 days and 30 day months not equally divisible by seven. If God intended or designed the set of seven days to be the basis for calendar calculations we would read of 28 day months and years divisible by seven.

The truth is that we simply have a set of seven days, six days preceding the Sabbath and six days following the Sabbath and that set of seven days can fit any calander at any time regardless of the number of days in the month or days in the year."

Therefore what is there LEFT which we might disagree on?

But this:

"Again, your interpretation is based upon unstated INFERENCES not the explicit scriptures. Again, your interpretation restricts the sabbath to the seventh day "of the week" making God a violator of His own Sabbath law from which all Sabbath applications are derived."

In God's Name as a Christian like you are, what is the truth about this matter?

Have a Good day!

 

[DHK]

GE:
In God's Name as a Christian like you are, what is the truth about this matter?

Have a Good day! [/SIZE]

The truth? The truth is that God rested on the seventh day. Literally it says that He ceased from working, for God doesn't work. He spoke everything into existence. What is work for God? He is omnipotent!

I work on Saturday, and I work on Sunday. My day of rest is on Monday. If I had to have a day that was called a Sabbath I suppose it would be Monday.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

GE:

I'm not concerned about what you do on weekends; you sort that out between yourself and God.

I am referring to where we left off last night.

Dr. Walter:

Again, your interpretation is based upon unstated INFERENCES not the explicit scriptures. Again, your interpretation restricts the sabbath to the seventh day "of the week" making God a violator of His own Sabbath law from which all Sabbath applications are derived.

No one denies the seventh day "of the week" is a legitimate application but I wholly deny that it is the restrictive application of the creation Sabbath or fourth commandment.

Again, the Biblical calander provided in Genesis through Deuternommy is based upon a Lunar year of 360 days and 30 day months not equally divisible by seven. If God intended or designed the set of seven days to be the basis for calendar calculations we would read of 28 day months and years divisible by seven.

The truth is that we simply have a set of seven days, six days preceding the Sabbath and six days following the Sabbath and that set of seven days can fit any calander at any time regardless of the number of days in the month or days in the year.

GE:

Let me show you, on what I hundred percent agree, and in fact, on which I take my own stand!!

"No one denies the seventh day "of the week" is a legitimate application but I wholly deny that it is the restrictive application of the creation Sabbath or fourth commandment.

Again, the Biblical calander provided in Genesis through Deuternommy is based upon a Lunar year of 360 days and 30 day months not equally divisible by seven. If God intended or designed the set of seven days to be the basis for calendar calculations we would read of 28 day months and years divisible by seven.

The truth is that we simply have a set of seven days, six days preceding the Sabbath and six days following the Sabbath and that set of seven days can fit any calander at any time regardless of the number of days in the month or days in the year.”

Therefore what is there LEFT which we might disagree on …

But this:

"Again, your interpretation is based upon unstated INFERENCES not the explicit scriptures. Again, your interpretation restricts the sabbath to the seventh day "of the week" making God a violator of His own Sabbath law from which all Sabbath applications are derived."

In God's Name as a Christian to a Christian, what is the truth about this matter? Or what is awry, here?!

First, let us look at this statement, again,

“No one denies the seventh day "of the week" is a legitimate application but I wholly deny that it is the restrictive application of the creation Sabbath or fourth commandment.”

I would more exactly to my own opinion, have phrased your statement, as follows,

‘I believe the Seventh Day "of the week" is what it says in the Fourth Commandment, namely, “The Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD your (the People of God’s) GOD”,
which, in the reality of its CREATION-ORDER in the Commandment AND in the creation-saga,
is “accepted to a legitimate application”, in other words, is believed a legal requirement that must be obeyed by the People of God.

That is not to say though, that the Hebrew word for ‘the sabbath’, ‘shabbath’, or the Hebrew words for ‘the sabbath’, “in the day the seventh day”, ‘yom shebii’, are “the restrictive”, or are restricted, “to”, “application”, either,
the creation Sabbath or, the Fourth Commandment Sabbath.

BUT, in the combining of these words together into, “The Seventh-Day-Sabbath-of-the-LORD-your-God” ever so often WITHOUT EXCEPTION,
they are perfectly conditioned upon the reality of both “the Sabbath” and “The Seventh Day” BEING, LITERALLY,
“THE DAY, THE, SEVENTH, Day”-OF-THE-WEEK
and “SABBATH-OF,-the Lord God”: “The Sabbath” which,
within the seven-day-cycle KNOWN by any right-minded person upon earth today, is ‘the last day-OF-THE-WEEK’ (or also in some cultures, is ‘Saturday’).

You may regard this summary of mine of your statement and its implications above, as a statement of faith of mine on the issue.