Ten Commandments Keep them or break them?

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
I too have some areas where I differ with some Baptists.

But I agree with your view that the Sabbath commandment cannot be edit or changed by man.

And I agree with D.L. Moody that the Sabbath commandment - and all the Ten Commandments - are still binding on all the saints - such that the Sabbath commandment given to Adam in Eden is still applicable to the saints today.

Do I care? This thread is not about a "Who's who in church history?"
I really don't care if the person is a Baptist, congregationalist, a novelist or a tinker, a watchmaker, a cobbler, an African, a European, etc.

You are free to be wrong - I have always said that.

I believe in sola scriptura.

Hint - you dodging the Bible texts I have been posting as of late.

Ranting is not the same thing as "sola scriptura" testing of something.

I think we all knew that.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I too have some areas where I differ with some Baptists.

But I agree with your view that the Sabbath commandment cannot be edited or changed by man.

And I agree with D.L. Moody that the Sabbath commandment - and all the Ten Commandments - are still binding on all the saints - such that the Sabbath commandment given to Adam in Eden is still applicable to the saints today.

And then of course I give the quotes and the long list of Bible texts which DHK chooses to whine about rather than show that his position "Survives a careful reading of it".

Only the Seventh Day Baptists actually keep the Sabbath, and then they only keep a revised manner of it, not the Biblical Sabbath.
All others, whom you continue to post about keeping the Sabbath--they don't keep the Sabbath, and you know that very well. So stop the nonsense. They have redefined the Sabbath. They don't keep it.
You have shown yourself to be a hypocrite and dishonest.
None of your sources actually keep the Sabbath. Sunday, which they do keep, is not the Sabbath. All your points are therefore moot.
Moody does not keep the Sabbath and never did.
He preached that believers should gather for church on Sunday.
That is not keeping the Sabbath; don't be so foolish.

You have often made the nonsensical argument that on the points where D.L. Moody and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and I agree - I should not point out the agreement.

But the nonsense there is obvious to all -- especially as I point out that I agree with you that the Sabbath commandment cannot be edited to point to Sunday. Because by your own nonsensical argument - I should not agree with you on anything either - since I have pointed out that you are wrong on almost every other point you make on this subject according to scripture.

Yet "in reality" we can ALL see that there are some points where I agree with you (at least one anyway) and some points where I agree with D.L. Moody and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" - so you need to find a way out of that hole you have dug for yourself.

My serious question is this - is there not ONE Baptist on this entire board who agree with DHK about the Law of God being downsized or else abolished - who will help him out of that problem where he must deny agreement when it exists - as long as there is also some disagreement on any point at all??

It would mean that I cannot agree with DHK that the Sabbath commandment cannot be edited - since I know him to be wrong on so many other points on this subject. And that is pure nonsense.

Why keep doing it?

Why has no one come to DHK's help on this point?

That is the part that I find a bit of a mystery.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
So what is the response to these bible texts?

Ahh yes the response to the texts could always be "a focus on HOW the texts get posted rather than on WHAT the texts say".

There is always that.

I prefer a discussion on the actual texts posted - thanks anyway.

I also accept that EVERY example in the NT of "Scripture" that is quoted or "It is written" that is quoted - is from the OT.

The OT where we find "from one Sabbath to another shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship" Is 66 is the predicted state for all saints for all of eternity in the New Heavens and New Earth -- for as Christ said in the NT "the Sabbath was MADE for mankind - and not mankind MADE for the Sabbath" Mark 2:27 - speaking of the "making" of both in Genesis 1-2:3.

in Christ,

Bob

What you prefer is of no consequence. Scripture unexplained, as above, is simply scripture. We all accept the Scripture. Even the Muslim accepts the Scripture, but translated in his way.

Is. 66 has nothing to do with today. As per usual you take it out of context. I demonstrate that to you over and over again. It has nothing to do with the Gentile believer of today, and yet you quote it anyway. There is not a verse in the Bible that commands the Gentile believer to keep the Sabbath (Saturday). Not one. You have never been able to prove this.
Why? It is a command given to the Jews. It is a sign of the covenant given to the nation of Israel and their generations forever. Why don't you quote Exodus 31 which gives a full explanation of the purpose of the Sabbath??

I suppose then that this statement of yours then:

"I also accept that EVERY example in the NT of "Scripture" that is quoted or "It is written" that is quoted - is from the OT."

is a lie, isn't it?

 

[DHK]

You are free to be wrong - I have always said that.

When you quote others instead of Scripture, then who is in the wrong?
It is not me.
Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
--You are not speaking according to "this word." You are speaking according "to Moody," according to Spurgeon, according to the confession, etc. Is it because there is no light in you, that you cannot speak "according to this word?" That is what the Scripture says. Now who is wrong?

Hint - you dodging the Bible texts I have been posting as of late.

I have answered your lame texts, taken out of context--proof texts that mean nothing.

Ranting is not the same thing as "sola scriptura" testing of something.

You don't believe in sola scriptura and everyone on this board knows that.

I think we all knew that.

Yes, we all know your position on sola scriptura.

 

[DHK]

And then of course I give the quotes and the long list of Bible texts which DHK chooses to whine about rather than show that his position "Survives a careful reading of it".

The J.W.'s give Scripture too. When not thoroughly explained they are meaningless. Are you like them?

You have often made the nonsensical argument that on the points where D.L. Moody and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and I agree - I should not point out the agreement.

You are a hypocrite. You don't agree. Moody does not keep the Sabbath nor believe in the Sabbath. It is hypocritical and slanderous of you to say that he does. It is an example of you not believing in sola scriptura that you have to go to church history to show what you don't believe instead of what you do believe.

But the nonsense there is obvious to all -- especially as I point out that I agree with you that the Sabbath commandment cannot be edited to point to Sunday. Because by your own nonsensical argument - I should not agree with you on anything either - since I have pointed out that you are wrong on almost every other point you make on this subject according to scripture.

You don't agree with me, and you don't agree with Moody. You have no need to bring such men into the conversation. It is sad you don't believe in sola scriptura.

Yet "in reality" we can ALL see that there are some points where I agree with you (at least one anyway) and some points where I agree with D.L. Moody and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" - so you need to find a way out of that hole you have dug for yourself.

There are some points where you believe with the RCC.
In Islam and Christianity we are both monotheistic--believing in one God. Thus there are some points where we believe the same also. Does that make you a Muslim? Because some points are the same that doesn't mean we agree on all things. Your point is ridiculous.

My serious question is this - is there not ONE Baptist on this entire board who agree with DHK about the Law of God being downsized or else abolished - who will help him out of that problem where he must deny agreement when it exists - as long as there is also some disagreement on any point at all??

There are no two people who agree exactly the same on anything unless they are a cult and are forced by their leader to do so.
Among Baptists we are free to think as we believe the Holy Spirit leads us to believe. Thus there is a variety of beliefs among us all. We are not forced to believe the writings of EGW, as you are. But you don't get that do you?

It would mean that I cannot agree with DHK that the Sabbath commandment cannot be edited - since I know him to be wrong on so many other points on this subject. And that is pure nonsense.

Among Baptists we agree to disagree on many things. That is the nature of soul liberty, a Baptist distinctive that our forefather shed their blood for. You don't understand that because you blindly follow the teachings of EGW, just as the J.W.'s blindly follow the teachings of Charles Taze Russell, and the RCC blindly follow the teachings of the Magesterium. Whatever they say is the gospel truth for them. All of you cannot deviate from the "truth/error of your leaders.

Why keep doing it?

Why has no one come to DHK's help on this point?

That is the part that I find a bit of a mystery.

Because people are not wanting to enter into this debate between you and I. They have chosen not to. They are not coming to your assistance either if you have not noticed. BTW, Yeshua has made a few posts that have agreed with me. You ignore them.

 

[BobRyan]

And then of course I give the quotes and the long list of Bible texts which DHK chooses to whine about rather than show that his position "Survives a careful reading of it".



You have often made the nonsensical argument that on the points where D.L. Moody and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and I agree - I should not point out the agreement.

But the nonsense there is obvious to all -- especially as I point out that I agree with you that the Sabbath commandment cannot be edited to point to Sunday. Because by your own nonsensical argument - I should not agree with you on anything either - since I have pointed out that you are wrong on almost every other point you make on this subject according to scripture.

Yet "in reality" we can ALL see that there are some points where I agree with you (at least one anyway) and some points where I agree with D.L. Moody and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" - so you need to find a way out of that hole you have dug for yourself.

My serious question is this - is there not ONE Baptist on this entire board who agree with DHK about the Law of God being downsized or else abolished - who will help him out of that problem where he must deny agreement when it exists - as long as there is also some disagreement on any point at all??

It would mean that I cannot agree with DHK that the Sabbath commandment cannot be edited - since I know him to be wrong on so many other points on this subject. And that is pure nonsense.

Why keep doing it?

Why has no one come to DHK's help on this point?

That is the part that I find a bit of a mystery.

in Christ,

Bob

The J.W.'s give Scripture too. [

Surely then you can bring yourself to step up to at least their level - and offer to respond to the scriptures that deal with the subject substantively.

I highly recommend at least stepping up to that level. Every solution cannot be limited to little more than "another rant".

You don't agree. Moody does not keep the Sabbath

Acccording to your ever-winding-logic I should not agree with you even on that point (Though I do) because I find you to be so wrong on almost every other point.

You shoot your own logic in the foot each time you go down that short sighted road in favor of rant.

You don't agree. Moody does not keep the Sabbath
nor believe in the Sabbath.

In my quote of Moody i often begin by pointing to some error in Moody's position but then argue that we cannot lie along with DHK about what Moody actually said - we must let Moody speak for himself.

you call it "slanderous" not to "put words into Moody's mouth" and claim beliefs for him that HE himself does not claim --- so I much prefer just to quote him - let him speak for himself rather than always insisting that "DHK speak for Moody".

You don't agree with me

I said that I agree with you that the Sabbath cannot be changed and that Moody's claim that it can be pointed to Sunday is not correct.

Now you nonsensically claim that this is not an agreement with that part of your position.

Time for you to step down off the rant-soap-box and explain this convoluted "all-rant" idea that you are trying to defend.

Explain just how it is that my agreement that the 4th commandment - the Sabbath points to the 7th day despite Moody's claims that it now points to week-day-1 -- is not agreement that same point that you also make about Moody.

This should be fun.

Or else simply throw away your shovel and stop digging that whole for your argument.

you don't agree with Moody. You have no need to bring such men into the conversation.

It is sad that you try out such nonsense when you and I both know that Moody flatly condemns your down-sized and also your eliminated TEN Commandment ideas -- and he does so explicitly in his sermon.

You are circling back to your incredibly nonsensical "differ on any point then you must differ on all points" nonsense. Yet not ONCE have you made the case for why my agreement with you on where Moody was wrong to apply Sabbath to Sunday - is really not agreeing with this complaint that you have against Moody.

Time to make at least a little sense out of that convoluted position you have created.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Time to make at least a little sense out of that convoluted position you have created.

I have told you repeatedly: there is no sense in quoting people that disagree with you, and even distance themselves from you in their own writings, and then you slanderously pretend that they believe the same as you. Stop the hypocrisy.

 

[BobRyan]

I have repeatedly stated that I do not agree with Moody's claim that the 4th commandment can be changed to point to Sunday.

The nonsensical argument that I should not make this point and also 'notice' that in your posts you make the same point - is well... pretty nonsensical as I think every reader can see.

You are free to keep digging that whole for your argument - but I see no point to it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Yeshua1]

I have repeatedly stated that I do not agree with Moody's claim that the 4th commandment can be changed to point to Sunday.

The nonsensical argument that I should not make this point and also 'notice' that in your posts you make the same point - is well... pretty nonsensical as I think every reader can see.

You are free to keep digging that whole for your argument - but I see no point to it.

in Christ,

Bob

Did you get this sabbeth teaching from the bible yourself, or did the "revelations" of Ellen White teach you this?

 

[BobRyan]

I have repeatedly stated that I do not agree with Moody's claim that the 4th commandment can be changed to point to Sunday.

The nonsensical argument that I should not make this point and also 'notice' that in your posts you make the same point - is well... pretty nonsensical as I think every reader can see.

Did you get this sabbeth...

I may have spoken "too soon" when I said "every reader".

I grant you that might be going too far.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

That is not what Paul said, it is only your faulty interpretation of what Paul said.
Here is what Paul said:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2071900&postcount=184

Deal with those scriptures.

Also answer the question:
Do you keep the Ten Commandments, all of them, all the time?

Back in Post # 187 Bob was asked this question, which is the topic of this thread. He has dodged it ever since. He has taken the thread different directions. He will do many things. The one thing he will not do is answer this very basic question that pertains to this thread.

Do you keep the Ten Commandments, all of the, all the time?

 

[Yeshua1]

Back in Post # 187 Bob was asked this question, which is the topic of this thread. He has dodged it ever since. He has taken the thread different directions. He will do many things. The one thing he will not do is answer this very basic question that pertains to this thread.

Do you keep the Ten Commandments, all of the, all the time?

He has failed to keep the Sabbath as trhe Lord demanded it to be kept by isreal, so doubt kept any of the rest either fully!

Hope that he gets the hint that NONE have except for Jesus!

 

[BobRyan]

In a response to TrevorL we find this ...

It is true that obedience springs from faith.

It is true that the lost are not called to Keep the Commandments - but rather to surrender to the Gospel, confess, repent, Accept Christ, etc.

And it is true that as Romans 8:6-8 points out - obedience is an action only possible for the already saved saint.

But given that - your statement above is about the "motives and intent of the heart" when someone who is a born-again Christian speaks about the Bible texts calling for "keeping the Commandments of God" as if to say "well that is technically true if you have the right heart motivation".

So then - how is it you would be able to judge the motives of the heart among your fellow Christians? Why do it at all? Why not let God do that work?


As you can well suppose - Gal 2:20 is a text often appealed to among all Christian groups - even Seventh-day Baptists and yes even Seveth-day Adventists. There is no magic formula here for judging the intents of the heart of each person among believers. God alone does that.


One thing is clear - there is no Bible text that says that Paul or anybody else was supposed to pronounce upon themselves "absolute perfection attained" or that they "never sin day after day".

The degree to which one is found obedient to the Word of God - is a degree that God alone can measure.

But at the same time - we would not support the notion from our Catholic friends that the 2nd commandment must not be taken seriously until all Protestants were sinless. (And thankfully they don't make that argument - the way some non-Catholics do here appear to prefefer on this board.) Such arguments are straw.

Another point is that in 1Cor 10 "NO temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man - and God is faithful who will not ALLOW you to be tempted beyond that which you are able" so as a saved saint we cannot blame our sin on the idea that sin is stronger than God.

Furthermore Romans 6 says the saints must choose not to be enslaved by sin and Romans 8:6-8 makes it clear that only the lost have a rightful claim to the idea that "The law cannot be obeyed in this life".

Among Seventh-day Adventists there is the 1John 2:1 and Rev 15:8 scenario at the end of time - during the 7 last plagues that predicts a level of Gospel obedience that is to be taken seriously.

However this thread is not about being a Seventh-day Adventist - it is about not throwing the Ten Commandments under a bus - not tossing out what the Bible calls "the Word of God" in Mark 7:13 and the "Commandments of God" in 1John 5:1-4.

So then many non-SDA groups affirm that the Moral Law of God includes the TEN Commandments, is the heart of the New Covenant "Law written on heart and mind" and continues to be binding upon all the saints to this very day as seen in [FONT=&quot]a number of well known Sunday keeping source documents (Emphasis for DHK to note the detail so often skipped over each time I mention it) such as the "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 or the "Westminster Confession of Faith" Section 19 or in D.L. Moody's online sermon on the TEN Commandments, Seventh-day Baptists, Andy Stanley, [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]R.C Sproul. [/FONT] etc.
[/FONT]

I am a Baptist. Baptists are not homogenous, as I have already said. .

Indeed they are not.

Some agree with the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and with D.L.Moody on the subject of the TEN Commandments applicable to all saints from Eden to this very day - and some do not. I assume the Seventh-day Baptists also agree with those two on the subject of the TEN Commandments being applicable to all saints from Eden to this very day.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

But would those sources wish to "bail" or to "rant and rail" when they read a post that is rich in Bible texts like this one? Are these texts that D.L. Moody and "The Baptist Confession of Faith" writers (such as C.H. Spurgeon) would be upset about? Would they be going "all ad hominem" on anyone who dared to post these scriptures?

By contrast I think we should all reflect carefully on what the Word of God says on this subject -- especially you Steaver as it will prove a blessing as compared to man-made-tradition, and games.

=================================

God's Word on the subject of the TEN Commandments.

[FONT=&quot]10 Commandments are[/FONT][FONT=&quot] –[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Commandments of God” Neh 10:29[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Law of God” Neh 10:29[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Word of God” Mark 7:13[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Commandment of God” Mark 7:6-13[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]NT “Scripture” James 2:8[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]NT “Law” – James 2:9-11[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]NT Commandments[/FONT][FONT=&quot] Eph 6:2, Rom 13:9, Romans 7:7-10

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Mark 7[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.[/FONT]



Jesus said (before the cross) "IF you Love Me KEEP My Commandments".

It is not how unsaved people GET saved - but according to John it is an accurate description of what the saved people are supposed to actually do.

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT] 1 John 5
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.
2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome. 1 John 5:1-3



Paul may need that "news" as well for Paul said
"what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God". 1 Cor 7:19

And John claims the saints are those who "KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12

And Paul says this in Romans 8 about those who claim that they "cannot" keep God's commands.

===========================


So then who according to Paul should be the ones complaining that they 'cannot submit to the Law of God"??



Rom 8
6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

=======================

Why fear the scripture and appeal to false accusation after false accusation instead of focused attention on the Word of God?



I claim my views are to be tested "Sola Scriptura" and that the "scriptura" in the actual post has to be "read" to do the test. I think you will agree with me that this is not all that hard of a concept to read and get right out of the post.


You keep coming back with "reflect upon what DHK just said " as your way around those scriptures.

I am fine with you taking that approach while I post the actual scriptures that apply to the subject.

I think it makes for a good contrast. So I am not complaining about it.

What say you?

 

[DHK]

But would those sources wish to "bail" or to "rant and rail" when they read a post that is rich in Bible texts like this one? Are these texts that D.L. Moody and "The Baptist Confession of Faith" writers (such as C.H. Spurgeon) would be upset about? Would they be going "all ad hominem" on anyone who dared to post these scriptures?

What say you?

Preachers like Spurgeon and Moody would be far more bold than I would.
They would come right out and say that such a fellow who avoids such questions and posts self-righteous Scripture is no doubt not saved and on his way to hell. But I am only speculating on what they would say.

IOW, knowing how to post scripture is not evidence of fruit.
I know of a Muslim who has the entire NT memorized. That doesn't make him a Christian.

What I say, is that you are still avoiding the question asked of you. You copy and paste, copy and paste, but never answer the question asked of you. Why is that Bob?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Bob Ryan apparently has vowed to ignore GE, but he cannot ignore DHK although nothing between them really is cause for concern.

 

[Yeshua1]

But would those sources wish to "bail" or to "rant and rail" when they read a post that is rich in Bible texts like this one? Are these texts that D.L. Moody and "The Baptist Confession of Faith" writers (such as C.H. Spurgeon) would be upset about? Would they be going "all ad hominem" on anyone who dared to post these scriptures?



What say you?

jesus sai that this is the ONLY work God requires to save a sinner, believe on Him, the One God sent!

How about the ole saved by grace of God ALONE, thru faith ALONE?

What I do to be saved?

believe upon the lord jesus, beleive in your heart that God raised him from the dead, confess with your month, and you shall be saved!

What say ye?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

jesus sai that this is the ONLY work God requires to save a sinner, believe on Him, the One God sent!

How about the ole saved by grace of God ALONE, thru faith ALONE?

What I do to be saved?

believe upon the lord jesus, beleive in your heart that God raised him from the dead, confess with your month, and you shall be saved!

What say ye?

Matters not what say I or ye. All that matters is what said Paul.

And one thing is undeniable: Paul GAVE ORDER / COMMAND / DUTY of man ...

... which ye say, you obey and fulfill?!

Amazing!

Yes, this is the victory that overcame the world, our Faith.

"OURS" -- which belongs to ALL of "us", the Faith of all ages and all peoples and all lands.

Your very boasting is proof of your arrogance--the arrogance of DISOBEDIENCE to God's Laws of the Everlasting Gospel.

 

[Yeshua1]

Matters not what say I or ye. All that matters is what said Paul.

And one thing is undeniable: Paul GAVE ORDER / COMMAND / DUTY of man ...

... which ye say, you obey and fulfill?!

Amazing!

Yes, this is the victory that overcame the world, our Faith.

"OURS" -- which belongs to ALL of "us", the Faith of all ages and all peoples and all lands.

Your very boasting is proof of your arrogance--the arrogance of DISOBEDIENCE to God's Laws of the Everlasting Gospel.

So you would agree with BOB that you do NOT have thr real Gospel IF you cannot agree with saved by grace alone, thru faith alone, as NONE shall be justified in sight of God by works of the law? Abraham couldn't, neither David, nor moses, or peter/paul/John, yet you and BOB somehow can?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

So you would agree with BOB that you do NOT have thr real Gospel IF you cannot agree with saved by grace alone, thru faith alone, as NONE shall be justified in sight of God by works of the law? Abraham couldn't, neither David, nor moses, or peter/paul/John, yet you and BOB somehow can?

Where do you get your misconceptions about me from?

But I don't want to hear it. Keep it for yourself!