GODS 10 COMMANDMENTS

And this passage in Isaiah 8 proves what? It says nothing about Christianity. It is solely directed to the the nation of Israel. It speaks of their problems, their distresses, and the judgements which shall compe upon them. So what is your point here?
DHK

 

quote:Bob said
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...Christ the Creator's Holy day - made for mankind in Gen 2:3 as a blessing to be kept before sin - and continuing even into the New Earth (Isaiah 66).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I belong to the tribe "All Mankind" (I think the Hebrews belonged to that tribe as well).

So When I observe that Christ the Creator's "Sabbath was made FOR mankind" Mark 2:27 - I believe it.

When Is see that the "Words of the Covenant" given to Israel Ex 34:28 (the Ten Commandments) contain the words "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain" I conclude "the Hebrews too were members of the tribe - All Humanity" and the fact that God gave them this commandment - does not mean that I am not to observe that restriction as well.

However in the case where Christ the Creator makes His Own Holy Day for mankind in Gen 2:3 before the fall and then problaims in Mark 2:27 4,000 years later that it is still "made For Mankind" - I conclude that I as a member of "mankind" have the benefit of the blessing as well as the Hebrews.


When I observe that God also blesses the gentiles (Isaiah 58) who honor Christ the Creator's Holy day made "for mankind" and when I observe that God intended Christ the Creator's Holy day to continue "for mankind" EVEN into the New Earth "From Sabbath to Sabbath ALL mankind" is to come before God to worship (Isaiah 66) then I see the blessing continued and the "scope" to remain as God states it -- "All Mankind".

In Christ,

Bob

 

And indeed as the scholars I quoted have pointed out - this is exactly how those pagan days WERE to be "observed" in that pagan system to which the Galatian Christians were "reverting" "Turning back again" to forms and practices of the pagan system regarding their pagan "days, months, seasons and years" a formula never used in all of scripture to refer to God's Word, God's commands, God's Holy days.

The verb includes sin - and the days themselves are simply pagan times being observed not only by heterodox Jews - but also promoting heterodoxy among the gentile Christians in Galatia.

However - in your efforts to make the "sin" isolated to the evil practices of those who were judging Christ pre-cross "observing to see IF " He would slip up -- you have utterly destroyed your own argument.

"Your argument" was "supposed to be" using Gal 4 to attack Christ the Creator's Holy Seventh-day made for mankind - pointing out that the observance of it in its pure form, in its OT form as Christ the creator made it FOR mankind -- was causing NT followers of Christ to fail.

INSTEAD - you have taken one of the "Two" options that are available for MY argument. In my Sabbath-defending argument I have the choice of either agreeing with the scholars that point out that the days in Gal 4 are pagan does OR I HAVE the choice of pointing out that the verb itself denotes sin - sin that has nothing to do with the Seventh-day Sabbath but is sin "on its own" as you point out with those who "observe Christ to see IF" they can catch Him slipping up.

BOTH of those options work for the Sabbath-defending models because NEITHER of them point to "A change in LAW" or a "Change in the Sabbath".

Rather they point to an error in the NT that was JUST AS wrong in the OT - "no change at all".


So in your enthusiasm to embrace "my other argument" - you fail to notice that indeed - it is "mine" and is not usuable as an argument for saying "so no more keeping of Christ the Creator's Sabbath as a day that HE cares about and HE would continue to call for honoring".

(Unless of course you were to turn your own argument around to say that the sinful-observing was "approved" in the OT and commanded by Christ the Creator for OT saints - but now we are not supposed to sinfully-observe. This is something I don't think you can bring yourself to argue.).

In Christ,

Bob

 

At first, you're still making the days evil in themselves, which is totally unsupported in the language there used.
Then you go back to your old "error in the NT that was JUST AS wrong in the OT" argument. But the evil here, I should have added included "judging" over the days, as Rom. 14 talks about. Now, that verse you believe is referring to annual days only. But if it's wrong to judge over those now, even the "observance of them in their pure [OT] form", then would it have been JUST AS wrong to judge in the OT as well? No, because the practice was mandatory back then, and God ordered punishment for those who broke it. So it WAS OK to "judge" over it back then, but not now. So this "just as wrong in the OT argument doesn't work either. Things have changed, by God's orders ("no change at all" is obviously FALSE), and things that were mandatory then are not now, and judging over these things was right then, but wrong now.
In addition to this, what the Jews and Galatians did not take into consideration was the fallen nature. (see Rom.7) So even man's attempts to keep the Law in its pure OT form was the cause of the Jews trying to trap Jesus--they really thought He was violating the sabbath, and their added rules were to safeguard against it and try to prevent anyone from coming close to breaking it. That's why there is a new covenant of grace, rather than Law. Even our attempts to keep the Law in its pure form can turn into "sinful observance", and before you go mentioning the faithful OT saints, remember they were not perfect, and were justified by grace through faith like everyone else. It nowhere says they did not sin or do things that would be corrected by NT teaching. The "times of ignorance God winked at, yet now commands men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30) So if we're going to keep the day, keep it unto the Lord as personal devotion. Else, if you try to judge others over it (including thinking that you're more obedient, others are deceived, etc), it becomes "watching with evil intent".
But "love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance" cannot become sinful observance, so "against which there is no law" (Gal.5:23), so these are what Christians seek to live by, not the Law of Moses.

 

First you admit that Christ the Creator DID make the 7th-day for "ALL mankind" Mark 2:27 --

Then you hope to "restrict it to Jews only" - but Christ comes along 4000 years after Creation to say that STILL the Sabbath is made for "ALL mankind".

And of course God states that this continues EVEN into the New Earth.

Your only response is that the millenium has Sabbath keeping - AS IF the New Earth that we see in Rev 21 is BEFORE the end of the Millenium described in Rev 20.

The fact is that the New Earth is not in place until AFTER the Millenium as we see in the clear sequence of Rev 20 and 21.

Might as well just as accept Christ The Creator's "Word" for it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

"For," meaning "for the benefit of." The Sabbath was made for the benefit of mankind, but mankind in general was never commanded to keep it. In Genesis, God rested on the seventh day. One might respond: "So what?" There is no command there for anyone pre-law to keep the Sabbath. There is simply an example to rest one day out of seven, and then, it is simply an example and not a command. Certainly one could never impose all the restrictions of the law of Moses on those who lived before or after the law. To do so, would first of all assume that all men living before the law would have some special revelatory knowledge of what the law would say before the Israelites themselves ever received it. Did the have ESP?
Secondly, those after the law were never commanded that law which Paul said was nailed to the cross. That includes the Sabbath. He also calls it a shadow, an image of the reality. There is no command for any person living after the law to keep the Sabbath. In fact, the only nation commanded keep the law is the nation of Israel.

It is for the nation of Israel alone. Jesus did say that it was made for man. Who was he speaking to and when did he say that? He was speaking to Jews, and He was speaking before He died, pre-cross still under the law.
The principle, however, remains the same. The Sabbath was made for the benefit of mankind. He does not command mankid to keep the Sabbath. Perhaps man should take rest one day in seven. But the Gentile is never obligated to keep the Sabbath in the same way that the Jew was. That was made clear in Acts 15.

To be more accurate, the Lord will re-establish worship on the Sabbath when he comes again and sets up his Kingdom on earth.

No, Christ's coming is described in Revelation 19. Then He will set up His Kingdom. After the thousand year reign, God will let Satan loose for one final rebellion where Satan will be quickly defeated. There will be the Great White Throne Judgement of Revelation 20, and then the Lord will make a new heaven and a new earth.
DHK

 

Cherry,

Have you ever seen a little child argue with himself?

That is what you are doing.

I never said that DHK BELIEVED that Jesus was created.

I also never said that he SAID that Jesus was created.

I dare you to prove it.

Quote away. I never once QUOTED him as SAYING something.

I said 'you are saying' that does not mean 'YOU SAID'.

I said 'you are making Him out to be...' not 'you believe He is'.

You are wrong.

And since when does he need someone to defend him?

He's never had a problem defending himself!

-Kelly

 

Yes, Jehovah establishd a testimony with His people of that time period--the nation of Israel, clearly identified--a testimony in Jacob, a law in Israel. The children referred to are the children of Israel--their direct descendents,and none other. It has nothing to do with the church or with Christians or with the Book of Revelation. Where you get these things I will never know. You need a course on hermeneutics
DHK

 

Christ said "The Sabbath was MADE for MAnkind" Mark 2:27

DHK said

God said that this was done in Gen 2:3 when "mankind" consisted of only two people - Adam and Eve. It is then that Christ the Creator's Holy day was given to mankind as a blessing "for mankind".

But DHK said

God then say in the OT that "ALL MANKIND" would eventually be obedient and would all come before him to worship "from Sabbath to Sabbath" Is 66.

But DHK said

IN Genesis 2:3 God not only rests on the Seventh-day but Christ the Creator sanctifies it it makes it a holy day.

Genesis 2 :: (NASB)

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts.
2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.
3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

But DHK said

So in the DHK model -

Christ the creator makes the holy day FOR mankind - when there is only TWO of mankind - but fails to let mankind in on the day made FOR mankind. Christ the Creator makes the day as a memorial to His creative act - a blessing FOR mankind - but forgets to tell mankind how to receive the blessing.

For the DHK model - Christ continues to affirm that the Sabbath was STILL a blessing FOR mankind in Mark 2:27 but is not calling mankind to the obedience that would bring the blessing.

In Exodus 20:8-11 God Himself argues that the Gen 2:3 event "alone" establishes the basis for the Law of Christ the Creator regarding His own holy day.


In this next commandment - the 4th commandment we are drawn back to the Gen 1-2:3 facts themselves and shown how they establish the Sabbath - God himself shows us this explicitly.

First identifying the duty of mankind - an obligation that brings with it a blessing --(for the Sabbath was made for "mankind" and not "mankind for the Sabbath" mark 2:27).

Then the commandment presents the "argument" the facts that demand the obligation of man and establish the first part of the commandment.

The duty of man - that brings with it the blessing:

notice - no mention of "i hereby make a holy day - the 7th day a holy day and call it Sabbath".

Rather we are already to "remember it" and then are pointed back in time to when it was made the holy day of God.

.

Again notice the format.

The action commanded - the reason that establishes the commandment
[quote
for in six days the Lord... And rested on the seventh-day therefore the Lord blessed, ...and made it holy
[/quote]
Some are required by their traditions to turn a blind eye to this. But many - many others see this text, read it just as it is written and accept its clear concise format showing that the commandment is based on summary of the Gen 1-2:3 facts that God gives - not man.

Oh that everyone would embrace God's Word just as it reads.

But DHK says

Notice that the Sabbath was "MADE" in Gen 2:3 according to the texts above.

Notice that the concept of Sabbath was never "any day you choose in 7" and this forms a key part of exegeting the actual meaning of "The Sabbath was MADE for mankind" as spoken by Christ to His Jewish followers.

So although this focuses on the creative act of Christ the Creator in Gen 1-2:3 and the word of God Himself in the ten commandments - DHK is hoping to cloud the issue by including all of Leviticus saying

The idea that they would "need ESP" to know about Christ the Creator's act on the 7th day of Creation week - when it was only God and His children Adam and Eve in perfect open and full fellowship is simply a blatant indicator of the lengths to which you view must deny the text of Gen 2:3 and Exodus 20:8-11 as both of them reference the facts of creation week and Christ the Creator's actions on the 7th day of that week.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Col 2:13 says

Here Christ is presented as the only solution for our sin problem. The goal of making us alive by accomplishing forgiveness of sins for us.

Christ represents all of God - not some small nice-but-insufficient bifurcation of God. The totality of God in power, word, knowledge and love is embodied in Christ. The error then (as today) was apparently in dissecting God - Christ was "this part of God but not that old part of God".

Paul focuses on the problem - sin causing separation and requiring forgiveness of sin via payment of our eternal death - debt - for us to survive.

Christ's death (payment for our sin) that accomplishes the solution "forgiving us all our transgressions". In this way Paul eliminates the basis for false teachers to come in and say that Christ was "insufficient". That we still owe a debt of sin, and must achieve the goal (forgiveness) by some other means.

Notice the context is that of making you alive
solving the problem of you being dead in transgression.

What defines what sin is??
(Rom 5, 7 tell us that the law defines what sin is - it is not a "record of guilt" but a standard of perfect sinless righteousness.).

What defines our transgression?

Clearly it is defined by a record of which sins we commit and how often. A record of some kind must exist to show what each individual owes "according to his deeds"

Clearly the "decrees against us" are written in these books out of which each person is judged "according to their deeds".

So then, what records/defines what each person's debt is? The law is the basis for knowing what is sin, but it is not the transaction of judgment specific to each individual - it is not a “record of guilt” it is instead a standard of judgment. It is the authoritative legal basis upon which judgment is rendered the standard that is compared to the life and actual deeds of each human. The resulting judgment then shows exactly where each one falls short of the glory of God. All are placed under condemnation and incur a debt of sin specific to their actual sins. The Holy Just and true “the spiritual Law of God” (Rom 7) is not that record of sin – it is not the “certificate of debt owed”.

Christ took the "stroke due us" the debt of death (Rom 623) was paid, nailed to the cross. It is the debt that is paid - the "certificate of debt" which itself "consists of decrees against us" faithfully records our deeds and what is owed individually -- and Christ pays the debt accumulated by each one of us.

Obviously when the police write out a ticket with a fine attached, then when the fine is canceled (via payment) - the law that defines obedience and violation - is not also cancelled.

Also note that the law that defines our sin - is not some local law specific only to the Hebrew nation. (as if only Hebrews need a savior)

So while Col 2:14 points to our "certificate of Debt" as nailed to the cross - not the Law of God

.. and while Paul says in Romans 3:31 "Do we then abolish the Law of God by our faith! God forbid! In fact we Establish the Law of God"[/b] Rom 3:31

DHK counters with

Then how is it in your view that God also nails the "certificate of debt"? In fact where do you find "the Law is nailed to the Cross"?

And how is it that God pulls the Sabbath "back off the cross" in your view - so that "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship" Isaih 66.

Clearly - your idea does not work.

So although "ALL MAKIND" is to keep the Law of God regarding Christ the Creator's Holy day made FOR "Mankind"

DHK counters with

And there is the view that - mankind "only consists of the Jews". Something I don't agree with.

But rejecting that - DHK argues in response

Sounding the depths of the obvious gap that DHKs statement leaves by contrast - is left as an exercise for the reader.

How then WAS mankind to reap the benefit of the Sabbath (in the context of Christ pre-cross Mark 2:27 - exegetically speaking) and how IS mankind to CONTINUE to benefit from Christ the Creator's holy day made FOR mankind after the cross IF Mankind is not under oblication to yield to Christ's stipulation regariding His own Holy day that HE made "for mankind"?

Would it be "ok" as long as mankind "ignores Christ" in the specifics of the day - and simply "sanctifies HIS OWN" day out of the seven? What that "humanistic-man-instead-of-god" form of participating in a 7th-day holy day - BE the act Christ the Creator was mentioning aout "THE Seventh day"?

In fact did Christ EVER give this as "ANY day you want out of seven"??

Ahh - the gap again.

Left as an exercise for the reader.

Do You mean "any day you want out of seven?"

(a form Christ never mentioned but "you" do).

Do you mean "taking the Sabbath back down from the cross where you claim he went through all the pain and effor to nail it?"

In Christ,

Bob

 

The idea that they would "need ESP" to know about Christ the Creator's act on the 7th day of Creation week - when it was only God and His children Adam and Eve in perfect open and full fellowship is simply a blatant indicator of the lengths </font>[/QUOTE]Bob, you need to stop relying on your own scary powers of ESP and crack open a dictionary. DHK was writing about everyone who lived before Moses and you (I'm tempted to say "intentionally," but are starting to believe you don't even know you're doing it. Get some help.) twisted it around to be about only Adam and Eve.

Isn't it a whole lot easier dealing with what you wish DHK wrote, rather than what he actually wrote?

 

DHK said

Ahhh "the details".... "again".

In Christ,

Bob

 

It's not really my idea Bob. It's an inference from your strict adherence to the Sabbath outside of the dispensation of the Law. Tell me did people like Seth, Peleg, Tubal-cain, and Methuselah, know that it was wrong to kindle a fire on the Sabbath? Did they know about a "Sabbath day's journey?" Did they know that it would be wrong to even cook a meal on the Sabbath, or pick up sticks on the Sabbath? Were any of them stoned for such practices? Can you give any evidence of keeping the Sabbath as such before the Law was given? Your whole argument is from silence, and therefore is no argument at all. You are the one that must argue from the vantage point that these men must have had some kind of ESP, (premonition into what the Law was going to say about the restrictions that would be put on the Sabbath) in order for them to keep it. They couldn't keep the Sabbath, for God had not ordained that the Sabbath be kept.
DHK

 

When God said that HE created Man on the 6th day -- that is not "God being silent".

When God said that HE then rested on the 7th day in Gen 2:1-3 that is not "God being silent".

When Christ the Creator said that the day was "made FOR mankind" it is not "God being silent".

When the Creator says in Gen 2:1-3 that "He Made the day Holy" on the 7th day of Creation week - that is not "God being silent".

When God speaks of the Clean and unclean animals in Genesis 6 that is not "God being silent".

When God tells Cain that sin is at his door - and punishes cain for murdering that is not "God being silent".

In all these cases - it is a matter of Noah being the SAME author in Genesis 1 and 2 as in Exodus 20. The "details" that follow regarding facts mentioned early in the book of Genesis - are a part of the story.

For this reason Moses can say about Abraham "He kept my Laws, Statutes and Commandments" Gen 26:5 JUST as He says in Deuteronomy of Israel Deut 27:10.

Which means that when we "see" that God is not silent about the Creators seventh-day holy day in Gen 2:3 the "information" is there.

Even God's own summary statement of the Gen 1-2:3 event in Exodus 20:8-11 shows the act to be "passed" "There for He MADE it Holy"

Christ the Creator's Holy day "MADE For mankind" was MADE - in Gen 2:3 just as He said in Gen 2:3 and has He said in Exodus 20:8-11.

We can not obliterate God's Words and then claim "well God was silent".

In Christ,

Bob

 

You are right God "was not being silent." He was recording history. The only time that He commands anyone to "Keep" the Sabbath is in the Ten Commandments, and in the Law that is given to the nation of Israel. To no other people did he ever command to keep the Sabbath holy, with all the conditions that He gave to the nation of Israel. Those that were pre-law had no such conditions, and we who live after the law are under no such conditions, neither do I know any person who keeps the law as the Jews kept the law, as pertained to the Sabbath--even on the this board, though they may say they do. They don't. They can't. In many places it is against the law for them to do so, especially when it comes to animal sacrifices.
DHK

 

Clever, but it is NOT "certificate of debt", but rather "handwriting of ORDINANCES", meaning the laws of Moses. If it was "the books of their works" that were nailed to the Cross, then how are they able to be brought up in the judgment of the wicked? Unless you were to hold to a limited atonement, and say they were only nailed to the Cross for the elect!

First, Noah was not the author. Moses was. As for "commandments": (from my sabbath page

But nowhere does it say that the Sabbath, (as well as annual feasts, dietary laws), were apart of His "commandments" back then. There were no set of laws listed, so this is adding to the scriptures. We know that what are known as the Noahide laws were around, and Jews would say that these are the universal laws that go back to Noah and before. Prohibitions of idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, sexual perversion, eating live meat/blood and the mandate to establish courts of justice are obviously universal, and God always expected man to obey these. Also as evident from Cain and Abel (and even God's killing an animal for skins to cover Adam and Eve), blood sacrifice for sin was universal. These are the "commandments and statutes and laws" God refers to regarding Abraham, and people who kept these laws were "righteous", or "walking with God". If God had not commanded the Sabbath then, then people could be righteous without it, so that logic is far from the truth. So it's doing whatever God tells you that is the "faith of Abraham". For instance, the main act of obedience that made Abraham such an example in the first place was his willingness to sacrifice his son, not any set of laws and rituals other than the universal commands. Hebrews 11, the "Faith Hall of Fame" mentions this plus the acts of faith of Sarah, Abel, Enoch, and Noah.

 

[double post deleted]