Are all of God's Ten Commandments still valid?

[BobRyan]

What?


Not directly I guess, as in quoting your OP. I can if you would like. I did however challenge the main presupposition of your OP.

Ok then.... "details".

1. do you consider it Compelling to ignore the OP subject/point when debating on a thread???

2. Do you wish to identify yourself as being at war against all 7 points listed in the OP and so fully opposed to what the many pro-sunday scholars in the groups identified so far - affirm regarding those first 6 points?

3. Do you believe that you can make a case showing that the groups listed do not hold to all 7 points listed in the OP??

How is replying to you, and pointing out that you never actually answered my point at all, running away? I would LOVE to hear you explain that.

Because the points in the OP on any given thread must be addressed/answered/refuted/agreed to ... to be substantive on a thread.

If your point is that you oppose all 7 points fine - say so.

If your point is that you admit that these groups do oppose your views on the 7 points but that you would like to argue the case for opposing them fine - you can say that as well.

The point of the thread was simply to point out that this is not a "just SDAs notice these Bible details" - matter of fact because many other groups affirm the 6 points.

And of course the OP also lists a number of Bible texts supporting the Ten Commandments affirmed in the Bible both OT and NT to help explain how it is that even the majority of pro-sunday scholars admit to these basic Bible facts.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

SDAs believe in the Trinity, sola scriptura testing of all doctrine, the virgin birth and bodily resurrection of Christ, saved by grace through faith - and that the bible is the Word of God.

So sorry to hear that nonsensical idea that Moody rejected any truth held in common by SDAs.

Let me know when the period of grieving and mourning among Moody Bible Institute trained pastors and missionaries has ended.

That's a lie. If SDA believed in Sola Scripture they would not have accepted the words of a false prophet.

And so we did not --

We only accept true prophets - as the Bible instructs.

That was easy.

I have a great place for you to debate SDA doctrines on other topics other than the OP if that is your interest. My point in that post was that it is nonsensical to declare Moody to be at war with any of the 6 points in the OP just because SDAs also affirm them.

Pure nonsense.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

As for 1Cor 9

17 For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me. 18 What then is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may offer the gospel without charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel. 19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; 21 to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. 23I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.
24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. 25 Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. 26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; 27 but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached (the Gospel) to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

"what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God." 1 Cor 7:19

Your contradiction of Paul's letter to corinth is that God's Law - God's Commandments are not Christ's, or that the OT is not the Word of Christ -- "all scripture given by inspiration from God" even though Christ calls the writing of Moses the "Word of God" in Mark 7 as I pointed out to you already and you dismissed as if this was of little importance --- though it is the teaching of Christ Himself in Mark 7

================================
Bible texts both NT and OT about God's Commandments - Showing that the TEN Commandments are assigned the title "in scripture" as being "Commandments of God" -- and as also being "The Word of God"

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

Mark 7

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.

Note that in 1John 5 - John contrasts "LOVE", to the Commandments of God. He does not say "By this we know that we Love God -- if we Love God".

Rather John points to obedience to the WORD of God "the Commandments of God" as the sign that we truly to LOVE God. Being at war against his Word is not such a great sign of "loving God" as some had perhaps imagined.

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 affirms the Ten Commandments (see point 5 below) AND He never claims that "if I did not write it -- it is not scripture for us today" -- as one or two have imagined for us.

1. Paul never commands gentiles to "Love God WITH ALL your heart".
2. Paul never commands gentiles "not to take God's name in vain"
3. Paul never commands gentiles to ignore the writings of Moses.
4. Paul DOES tell gentiles that Moses' writings are still authoritative scripture in 1Cor 9:8-9 and 1Tim 5:18 and binding as being "Law" and as being "scripture".
5. Paul quotes from Moses and the TEN Commandments Eph 6:2. Full 5th commandment
6. Paul DOES teach that there remains therefore a "Sabbath rest for the people of God" Hebrews 4.
7. Paul DOES tell gentiles that "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD" 1 Cor 7:19
8. Paul does tell gentiles "it is not the HEARERS of the Law that are just before God but the DOERS of the Law will be justifIED... on the day when according to my GOSPEL God will judge all mankind" Rom 2:13-16
9. Paul DOES ask that gentiles consider the doctrine of LAW "Do we then make void the LAW of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31
10. Paul DOES tell gentiles that it is only the lost who will "not subject themselves to the LAw of God neither indeed CAN they" Rom 8:6-8
11. Paul DOES tell gentiles that "The Law" is in fact "The LAW of Moses" and is to be used for testing doctrine 1Cor 9:8-9
12. Paul DOES tell gentiles that the OT text is to be used for Doctrine 2Tim 3:16

What?

Again, you ignore what Paul plainly says - He is not (and by extension all Christians) under the Law, referring to the Mosaic Law particularly the Decalogue as codified in the Mosaic Covenant. That is clear from the text. He also says that thought he is not under the (Mosaic) Law he is not without the law of God and identifies the law that he is under as Christ's Law. The ONLY logical deduction is that Christ's law is at least in some way separate and distinct from the codified law handed down at Sinai. The conclusion is inescapable.

The level of continuity between the two laws - Mosaic and Christ's - is another discussion. But to say that they are identical is exegetically impossible.

The argument as even section 19 of the "BAPTIST confession of Faith" notes is that the TEN Commandments are included in the Moral Law of God applicable to all men in all ages - even the saints.

And many texts prove this as noted from the OP -- including

5. Paul quotes from Moses and the TEN Commandments Eph 6:2. Full 5th commandment.

Paul demands (as does James in James 2) that Christians are obedient to the TEN Commandments and gives as an example the 5th commandment as "The FIRST Commandment with a Promise" - a statement that is ONLY TRUE in the context of the TEN commandments.

As noted - Andy Stanley and others admit to the TEN Commandments till applicable to the saints - maybe he too reads the "Baptist Confession of Faith"??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[RLBosley]

The argument as even section 19 of the "BAPTIST confession of Faith" notes is that the TEN Commandments are included in the Moral Law of God applicable to all men in all ages - even the saints.

And many texts prove this as noted from the OP -- including

5. Paul quotes from Moses and the TEN Commandments Eph 6:2. Full 5th commandment.

Paul demands (as does James in James 2) that Christians are obedient to the TEN Commandments and gives as an example the 5th commandment as "The FIRST Commandment with a Promise" - a statement that is ONLY TRUE in the context of the TEN commandments.

As noted - Andy Stanley and others admit to the TEN Commandments till applicable to the saints - maybe he too reads the "Baptist Confession of Faith"??

in Christ,

Bob

What Baptist Confession are you referring to? There are many.

Regardless, my conscience is not bound to any confession of faith. If they say that we are obligated to the Decalogue as law, then they are wrong and I disagree, based on the testimony of scripture.

You still ignore my argument.

 

[BobRyan]

Here is an example of claims made by the pro-Sunday sources - and 6 of the 7 are actually correct according to the Bible!.


Yes that is right - 6 of the 7 are actually common ground between Sabbath keeping and Sunday keeping Christians.


1. That the Sabbath Commandment is first given to mankind in Gen 2:1-3
2. That all mankind was obligated by the TEN commandments in the OT and to this very day.
3. That the seventh day as the Sabbath was Saturday the seventh day of the week from Gen 2:1-3 until NT times - including at the cross.
4. That the Ten Commandments are the moral Law of God
5. That the moral law of God is written on the heart under the New Covenant
6. that the Ten Commandments as the moral law of God are in no way opposed to grace and the Gospel.
7. That the Sabbath commandment can rightly be BENT by man-made-tradition to point to week-day-1 after the cross.

I agree with 6 out of 7 as listed above - and yet many who post against God's TEN commandments object to all of the points listed above. And sometimes they will even go on to complain that so many of the points above are in agreement with my position and opposed to the war-against-the-Ten-Commandments position.

And I disagree with them. Yay.

Then we differ.

. The 10 as law, are not binding on the Gentiles or on Christians.

That is proven to be false - in Romans 7, Mark 7:6-13, Romans 13, Eph 6:1-2, James 2...

And in Gal 3 and Romans 3 both which affirm that in both OT and NT the Law of God -- the moral law of God - declares ALL to be sinners and ALL to be in need of salvation.

What is more -- regarding that SAME law - Paul says in Rom 3:31 "do we then make void the LAW of God by our faith.. God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the Law of God"

And in 1John 3:4 "Sin IS - Transgression of the LAW"

And so EVEN the majority of pro-sunday scholars "get the point".

"Baptist Confession of Faith"
"Westminster Confession of Faith"
C.H. Spurgeon
Andy Stanley
Matthew Henry
[FONT=&quot]Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
R.C Sproul
"D.L. Moody"
"Dies Domini"
and many others
Yes that is right - 6 of the 7 are actually common ground between Sabbath keeping and Sunday keeping Christians.[/FONT]

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

What Baptist Confession are you referring to? There are many.

Hint: Find two called the "BAPTIST Confession of Faith" that are held by as many Baptists. -- and look at section 19.

Meanwhile --

[FONT=&quot]Links that remain as of today[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc01.html[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc19.html[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Links that have been removed[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm#Ch19 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As revised by Spurgeon 1855[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/bcof.htm[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/bcof.htm#part19[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[RLBosley]

Hint: Find two called the "BAPTIST Confession of Faith" that are held by as many Baptists. -- and look at section 19.

Or, how about not being a jerk and just saying? I'm sure simply typing "the 1689 LBC" or "The New Hampshire" would have been must faster and simpler.

 

[OldRegular]

Our LORD and Savior Jesus Christ came out of the grave on the First Day of the Week. That Resurrection was the the single most important event in all of history. I would remind you what the Apostle Paul said about the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

1 Corinthians 15:12-19
12. Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13. But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
14. And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
15. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
16. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
17. And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
18. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
19. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

Note also in the following Scripture that it was the custom of the Saints to gather on the First Day of the week to worship, that day undoubtedly chosen to celebrate the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Act 20:7. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

1 Corinthians 16:2. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.

Now if you choose to take the teachings of Ms. White over the example presented in Scripture of the Saints celebrating the single most important event in history and the basis of the Christian Faith then you are free to do so. But don't get overly pious over the erroneous teachings of Ms. White!

I realize there are Scripture in the New Testament in which the Apostle Paul preached to the Jews in the synagogue on the sabbath and that Gentiles were sometimes present. However it should not be expected that Jews would meat any other day than the sabbath!

 

[RLBosley]

Let me encourage you to read a book titled "Tablets of Stone" by John Reisinger. Though it is really directed to those who hold to Covenant Theology (and Dispensationalism to a lesser extent) it will still help you clear up some of your misapprehensions about the law.

It's free online. Here's a link: http://solochristo.com/theology/nct/stone/stonec.htm

I'm going to excuse myself from this conversation now. You are not interested in honest conversation and your intolerable attitude is frustrating me and I'd rather not sin in anger.

 

[BobRyan]

I already posted these links here on this thread to Salty when he was confused about what the "BAPTIST confession of faith" is -- I posted the reference "again" for you in my prior post.

And my challenge to you is the same - find "another one" that has that level of historic acceptance to prove your "there are too many to know which one" you are talking about.

And look at section 19.

 

[DHK]

hint -- pay attention to the actual discussion. IF you think your wild claim that the first 6 points in that post - points you are totally at war with - are NOT held by the sources listed -- -then ... show.... it.

I have repeatedly told you that I don't care about "other sources listed."
You don't get that do you? They don't matter to me.

Responding with vitriol,acrimony and loud "harrumph" -- followed by nothing of substance demonstrates to ALL - that you have nothing to offer but factless assertion.

If you want debate it must be based on the Bible not the opinions of others.
I do not debate anything based on other people. The Bible alone is my authority.

how long could the Baptist church survive on a meal of "factless assertion"???

Why choose that form of collapse??

You show your confusion once again.
There is no BAPTIST CHURCH! AKA denomination.
I go to an independent Baptist church, unaffiliated, separated from all other Baptist churches. It is Baptist in name only. It is Baptist because it adheres to Baptist distinctives, those beliefs which make that broad group of churches different from others, not because it is a denomination. In fact Baptists in general are opposed to denominationalism.
What would I be if I wasn't a Baptist? I would be ashamed.

The denominations of all of Christendom do not matter to me.
There were a number of denominational churches I could have attended when I went to the mission field, but there were no fundamental Baptist churches.
We started one instead of attending something that we could not agree with.
Do you understand yet?

 

[BobRyan]

Our LORD and Savior Jesus Christ came out of the grave on the First Day of the Week.

I think we all know that and agree that that day was Sunday "week day 1". Even the "Baptist Confession of Faith" admits to it.

And Paul reminds us that Christ said that at the Lord's table we "do show the Lord's DEATH until He comes".

1 Cor 11:25
“This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.

Two facts that are irrefutable.

That Resurrection was the the single most important event in all of history.

He resurrected-- ONCE and He was born -- ONCE and church tradition eventually got around to celebrating easter and Christmas in true man-made-tradition fashion. Not really violating any part of God's moral Law to do so.

Christ did not die "once every week" nor was we resurrected "once every week".

Note also in the following Scripture that it was the custom of the Saints to gather on the First Day of the week to worship, that day undoubtedly chosen to celebrate the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Act 20:7. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

Not every week - rather that one day that one week because Paul was about to leave that next morning. In Acts 20 -- it is travel plans for... week day 1.

The 7th day is repeatedly called "Sabbath" in the NT AFTER the cross but never is week-day-1 called "The LORD's day" in the NT -- it is only called 'week day 1".

1 Corinthians 16:2. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.

Nothing in 1 Cor 16 about a worship service on "week-day-1".

Rather "lay by him in store" -- savings at home rather than a group worship service on "week day 1".

I realize there are Scripture in the New Testament in which the Apostle Paul preached to the Jews in the synagogue on the sabbath and that Gentiles were sometimes present. However it should not be expected that Jews would meat any other day than the sabbath!

Then you need to read Acts 13 "Again" where :"almost the entire city" shows up on Sabbath - and were in fact told to meet NEXT Sabbath instead of "Tomorrow on week-day-1".

Paul present the Gospel to BOTH Jews and Gentiles on Sabbath in Acts 13 (and Acts 17 and Acts 18) but in Acts 13 most Jews whine yet gentiles accept so then they are told to "meet the NEXT Sabbath for MORE" -- and then "almost the entire city shows up" not on WEEK-day-1... but on "the NEXT Sabbath"

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Which is a problem for your arguments on this thread.

Though we cannot say that the majority of "even" pro-sunday scholarship chooses to make your mistake as we notice in the following examples


"Baptist Confession of Faith"
"Westminster Confession of Faith"
C.H. Spurgeon
Andy Stanley
Matthew Henry
[FONT=&quot]Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
R.C Sproul
"D.L. Moody"
"Dies Domini"
and many others
Yes that is right - 6 of the 7 are actually common ground between Sabbath keeping and Sunday keeping Christians.[/FONT]

So then... as usual... your argument is "with the text"




I can also say "these are not SDAs" - nor "my authorities"

but can you also say "these don't believe in worship on Sunday"??

The point is EVEN those on your "pro-sunday" side the fence see the glaringly obvious point about the TEN commandments as the moral law of God.

Not just one or two.

The majority of pro-Sunday scholarship.

When will you get that into your head?
In the list given, neither Matthew Henry, nor Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown are SDA or saturday keeping and STILL they admit to "the obvious".


You say " I don't know who Andy Stanley was."

That says a lot. You are "Baptist" right? Hint Andy Stanley is not SDA even if he does have the largest Baptist church in America.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/an...things-127296/



Sproul is a strong sunday-keeping Calvinist. - which does not make him SDA by a long shot. yet even "he" admits to the point about the TEN Commandments.

.
--In short, not one of the sources I have given I would go to for any kind of "authoritative Pope" source for SDA and STILL they "know enough" not to be at war against the Bible - Ten Commandments..

Your turning a blind eye to these glaringly obvious details is just a red herring and that is all.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHK
What don't you get Bob?
I belong to an Independent Baptist Church. I don't subscribe to anyone else's Confession of faith.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobRyan
That still leaves you as "Baptist" not "SDA".

The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs notice that about God's Ten Commandments" is not a case that can be made in "real life".

You are ignoring the texts in the OP and pretending that these pro-sunday sources that you are at war against in your all-7-points-war ... still leaves the issue between your view and "just SDAs" as if the majority of even pro-Sunday scholarship "does not exist".

This is the incredibly obvious part of the discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DHK

NO I DON'T! Get it through your skull! I don't have to believe any Baptist concerning the Sabbath or Sunday.

Perhaps if I repeat this 3 times for you -- you will get it and respond to the point actually in the post.

1. The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs

2. The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs

3. The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs


I say that to address your "it is just SDAs" when the first 6 points of the OP come up.

I have repeatedly told you that I don't care about "other sources listed."
You don't get that do you? They don't matter to me.

1. I am curious as to how many times we can have that conversation and you pretend like you are having it for the first time.


1. The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs" is flawed

The nonsensical "no baptist is my pope" argument that you keep spinning is not even in the discussion because.... wait for it.... "The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details"




You raise the wild "it is just SDAs that notice those 6 points" that you are so at war with -- and then you object when I PROVE it is "not just SDAs".



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

If you want debate it must be based on the Bible not the opinions of others.
I do not debate anything based on other people.

That is false. You constantly try to "pretend" that these other groups do not make that 6 point case in the OP that you are so at war against - and that "only SDAs" make that case.

Were we simply "not supposed to notice"???

There is no BAPTIST CHURCH! AKA denomination.

Fragmented, fractured and splintered - and yet "Baptists exist" -- i think we all knew that by now.

1. The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs" is flawed

The nonsensical "no baptist is my pope" argument that you keep spinning is not even in the discussion because.... wait for it.... "The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details"

 

[BobRyan]

Bible texts both NT and OT about God's Commandments - Showing that the TEN Commandments are assigned the title "in scripture" as being "Commandments of God" -- and as also being "The Word of God"

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

Mark 7

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.

Note that in 1John 5 - John contrasts "LOVE", to the Commandments of God. He does not say "By this we know that we Love God -- if we Love God".

Rather John points to obedience to the WORD of God "the Commandments of God" as the sign that we truly to LOVE God. Being at war against his Word is not such a great sign of "loving God" as some had perhaps imagined.

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 affirms the Ten Commandments (see point 5 below) AND He never claims that "if I did not write it -- it is not scripture for us today" -- as one or two have imagined for us.

1. Paul never commands gentiles to "Love God WITH ALL your heart".
2. Paul never commands gentiles "not to take God's name in vain"
3. Paul never commands gentiles to ignore the writings of Moses.
4. Paul DOES tell gentiles that Moses' writings are still authoritative scripture in 1Cor 9:8-9 and 1Tim 5:18 and binding as being "Law" and as being "scripture".
5. Paul quotes from Moses and the TEN Commandments Eph 6:2. Full 5th commandment
6. Paul DOES teach that there remains therefore a "Sabbath rest for the people of God" Hebrews 4.
7. Paul DOES tell gentiles that "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD" 1 Cor 7:19
8. Paul does tell gentiles "it is not the HEARERS of the Law that are just before God but the DOERS of the Law will be justifIED... on the day when according to my GOSPEL God will judge all mankind" Rom 2:13-16
9. Paul DOES ask that gentiles consider the doctrine of LAW "Do we then make void the LAW of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31
10. Paul DOES tell gentiles that it is only the lost who will "not subject themselves to the LAw of God neither indeed CAN they" Rom 8:6-8
11. Paul DOES tell gentiles that "The Law" is in fact "The LAW of Moses" and is to be used for testing doctrine 1Cor 9:8-9
12. Paul DOES tell gentiles that the OT text is to be used for Doctrine 2Tim 3:16

If you want debate it must be based on the Bible not the opinions of others.
I do not debate anything based on other people. The Bible alone is my authority.

Either this is your "new way" of avoiding the texts in the OP -- post ONE!

Or this is your way of saying "no more fictions from DHK about SDAs being the only ones that accept the bible details in the first 6 points of the OP - that is a given".

Kind of hard to tell amid all the "harrumph!" posting.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I'm going to excuse myself from this conversation now. You are not interested in honest conversation and your intolerable attitude is frustrating me and I'd rather not sin in anger.

harrumph... noted.

We have some Calvinists on the C-v-A board adopting the "take my toys and go home... but with insult and harrumph to you sir" solution as well.

Nothing new there.

As for me - I prefer the Bible and "details' in the discussion.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Either this is your "new way" of avoiding the texts in the OP -- post ONE!

Or this is your way of saying "no more fictions from DHK about SDAs being the only ones that accept the bible details in the first 6 points of the OP - that is a given".

Kind of hard to tell amid all the "harrumph!" posting.

in Christ,

Bob

It is very simple Bob.
In all the NT you cannot provide just one verse of Scripture that commands the NT believer to keep the Sabbath, can you?
Not even one!
The Sabbath was given to Israel. See Exodus 31.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It is very simple Bob.
In all the NT you cannot provide just one verse of Scripture that commands the NT believer to keep the Sabbath, can you?
Not even one!
The Sabbath was given to Israel. See Exodus 31.

Bob Ryan cannot because he believes JUST THE SAME AS DHK, that is why!

Why did the Israelites accept the OT command <to keep the Sabbath>?

Because God brought them "IN into the land (He) sware" unto them to bring them and redeem them in : "ON THE SEVENTH DAY SABBATH OF THE LORD YOUR GOD" your Almighty SAVIOUR.

That is what DHK like Bob Ryan refuse to see or admit, that it all happened as a FIGURE AND TYPE AND PROPHECY OF THE COMING CHRIST OF GOD.

So that, “when God RAISED Christ from the dead and SET / RESTED / EXALTED Him at his Own Right Hand”, and let Him “RIDE THE HEIGHTS of the earth because He called the Sabbath his delight and honoured it” … THEN, “… there was a great earthquake ON THE SABBATH when the angel of the LORD from heaven descending, CAST THE STONE FROM THE GRAVE” … “and God FINISHED all his works on the day The Seventh Day”—“the SABBATH of the LORD YOUR GOD” --- and brought you, o Christian man, “IN into the Kingdom of his dear Son”!

DHK rejects this just like Bob Ryan rejects it --- the only legitimate and LEGITIMATIZING work of God for the CHRISTIAN man’s ‘keeping’ of the Sabbath Day.

You are like two starving wolves in snow-covered wasteland who instead of to hunt together and be succesfull at finding some food for survival, go at one another’s throat for nothing but self-anihilation.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Paul present the Gospel to BOTH Jews and Gentiles on Sabbath in Acts 13 (and Acts 17 and Acts 18) but in Acts 13 most Jews whine yet gentiles accept so then they are told to "meet the NEXT Sabbath for MORE" -- and then "almost the entire city shows up" not on WEEK-day-1... but on "the NEXT Sabbath"
in Christ,
Bob

You, Bob Ryan -- or SDA-in-all for that matter -- have not <<present(ed) the Gospel … on the Sabbath>> anywhere in the Scriptures to anyone Jew or Gentile, UNTIL you throughout all the Scriptures eschatologically and historically have <<presented the Gospel>> of Jesus Christ in his RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD “ON THE SABBATH”.

 

[Salty]

It is very simple Bob.
In all the NT you cannot provide just one verse of Scripture that commands the NT believer to keep the Sabbath, can you?
Not even one! ...

Absoutely correct.

Yes, Paul went into the temple on the Sabbath to preach (as the manner was). Why didnt he go on Sunday - because no one would be there!

But as DHK said - Paul was NOT commanding to worship on Sat.

Salty

PS Still waiting on the asnwer about the hundrds of other OT laws - does Ryan keep those also?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Absoutely correct.

Yes, Paul went into the temple on the Sabbath to preach (as the manner was). Why didnt he go on Sunday - because no one would be there!

But as DHK said - Paul was NOT commanding to worship on Sat.

Salty

PS Still waiting on the asnwer about the hundrds of other OT laws - does Ryan keep those also?

God commanded not commanding.

That you and DHK and all the Sunday worshipping world thoroughly do see but pretend not to see.

Because God doing, speaks; and, going before, prescribes the Way; and following after, proscribes lawlessness like a lion overcoming Christian from behind.