Sabbath breaking - becomes the mark of the Beast in the future

[BobRyan]

I would agree that the Ten Commandments present the principles of morality and obedience to God and interaction with our neighbor, but again we still have no command to specifically worship on the Sabbath.

Do you agree that the 4th commandment is one of the Ten Commandments that you say is moral law applicable to all mankind then??

If so - then how is it removed so that you have ten commandments but not the 4th commandment.

I find the logic in that idea "illusive" given that the Bible itself identifies the Ten Commandments for us.

You can deny that the Weekly Sabbath is in view here...


Colossians 2:15-17

We know that there are shadow Sabbaths in Lev 23 - given at the very start in the form of animal sacrifices and that those annual Sabbaths end because their animal sacrifice ends and no other way is given to observe them.

We know that drinking has not ended.

We know that eating has not ended.

We know that food still exists.

Col 2
15 Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.
16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,
17 which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. NKJV


Those who do not judge pastors that commit adultery - please raise your hands.


In any case - Matt 7 before cross - while EVEN the ceremonial law is in full effect - Jesus said "Judge not that you be not judged".

In Col 2 - Paul does not void a single text of scripture - not does he declare the "end of eating" or the "end of drinking" or the "end of the Sabbath" -- rather HE condemns "making stuff up".

In Mark 7 they were "making stuff up" about sin getting on fingers then on wheat then inside the person who ate food without dipping fingers in baptism.

In Col 2 the same problem of their "making stuff up" is being addressed. It is not declaring the "end of eating and the end of the Sabbath". It is not the commandments of GOD that Paul is attacking - but rather the "Commandments of Men"

4 Now this I say lest anyone should deceive you with persuasive words.
16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, 17 which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. 18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God.
20 Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations— 21 “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” 22 which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men?

This may help us understand why D.L. Moody and even the "Baptist Confession of Faith" continue to insist that the Sabbath Commandment remains. (Though they claim it is bent to point to week day 1 after the cross)

in Christ,

Blob

 

[BobRyan]

Having specific days can be a snare for some, who think that because they fulfill a "charge" they are being obedient to God.

That is like saying "have a specific tree that you do not eat from is a snare"

Or "having a specific wife that you are faithful to is a snare".

That sort of logic never worked for any of God's Commands - I don't think we would want to adopt that sort of dismissal of the Commands we find in scripture.

And I would again point out that the shadow of the Covenant of Law was only meant to be temporary. Again, the magnitude of Christ's Work and the difference between the external compliance of man in religion (Judaism) can in no way be compared with the internal and eternal realities of that which has been bestowed upon us.

In Matt 5 - Christ shows how magnifying the Law does not abolish it - rather it strengthens it in every case. That includes the 4th Commandment.

And again...the Old Testament Saint had not received what we have.

Consider:

John 20:19

King James Version (KJV)

19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.


Meeting on the First Day of the Week had as a reason the fact that Christ was rejected of Israel on a National level.

It was okay then, and we see the Lord coming unto them. Not saying, "You can't meet today, have you forsaken the Law?"

The title of the post is not "having a meeting on Tuesday is the mark of the beast in the future".

The meeting on Sunday in John 20 is done AFTER they had "rested on the Sabbath according to THE Commandment" Luke 23:56


Christ before the cross -- at a time when EVEN the ceremonial law is in full effect -- never says "we dare not having a meeting on Tuesday for it would break the 4th commandment" --- and I think we all know that.

Don't be surprised that demanding Sabbath observance is viewed as being reminiscent of the demands of Judaizers.

Even your own Charles Swindoll and D.L. Moody argue that the 4th commandment is still to be obeyed.


It is not just Moody that thinks Commandment breaking is wrong.

Christ's thinking on the subject of breaking one of God's Commandments by claiming to bend-edit slightly-modify one of them.


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.

That is a case of Christ demonstrating the way that the magisterium is hammered "sola scriptura" in the cases where it's traditions and "doctrines of men" are at odds with scripture.

[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]The elders consisting of scrib[FONT=&quot]es and ph[FONT=&quot]arise[FONT=&quot]es [/FONT]are in fact the "magisterium" even Paul admits to this. And Jesus shows how they claim to "sit in the chair of Moses" as church magisterium[FONT=&quot].[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, “The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice. (Matthew 23:1-3)

[FONT=&quot]=============================

[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]Notice that [FONT=&quot]Christ points us to the fact that it voids[FONT=&quot]/[FONT=&quot]negates/ worship[FONT=&quot]. And in Rev 14 i[FONT=&quot]t[/FONT] is the "matter of wor[FONT=&quot]ship" that is being [FONT=&quot]warned about.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

And keep in mind that Paul went in to witness and teach the Jews on their turf.


Acts 13:14-17

King James Version (KJV)

14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

15 And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.

16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience.

17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought he them out of it.

God bless.

I don't think anyone would be surprised that Paul might find Godly Jews and gentiles in the Synagogues who would be good Bible-informed audiences for the Gospel

what is downright shocking is that Paul does NOT say to those who are accepting the Gospel "Meet with us tomorrow for our normal week-day-1 gospel worship, gospel preaching, Bible study time".

Nor do we see "And all the Jews were accepting the Gospel and so asked for it to be presented on the following Sabbath". Instead we find a mixed group accepting the Gospel.. nobody insists that Paul only speak next Sabbath - and Paul does not invite them to a week-day-1 service.

So then who is waiting for next Sabbath - the entire Gentile town!! And it only makes the Jews mad!

=========


42As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath. 43Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.

Paul Turns to the Gentiles

44The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord. 45But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began contradicting the things spoken by Paul, and were blaspheming.

And then more Gospel preaching Sabbath after Sabbath in the Synagogues - 'as we his custom" in Acts 17.

Then more Sabbath after Sabbath Gospel preaching in Acts 18.

Where are the week-day-1 after week-day-1 services for Gospel preaching, Bible study, sermons in the NT???

NOT even one week-day after-week-day-1 sequence in all of the NT for gospel preaching, Bible study and worship etc.

Repeatedly in the NT after the cross the 7th day is not merely "week-day-7" but always - "the Sabbath".

And not once in the NT do we have " and week-day-1 is blessed, is sanctified, is the Lord's Day". (which is somewhat of a defeat for the pro-sunday sources I quote on page 1)

 

[BobRyan]

Why do you bring this man up. I have pointed this out to you before. It is deception, lies, dishonesty, hypocrisy and a whole lot of other things.

You have scored very high in false accusation - that much can be shown as fact.

I quote moody -- you do not on this thread. you quote "you" when making false accusations.

When I claim moody is a "pro-sunday source" you come in with the somewhat nonsensical "Moody did not believe in the Sabbath.
Moody did not keep the Sabbath." where you mean "the Bible Sabbath of the 7th day" all the while we can all read Moody claiming that the Bible Sabbath it bent to point to week-day-1.

The point remains.

Moody' sermon--the purpose of it--was simply to urge people to set aside time from their busy work seek so they would be in church on Sundays, not the Sabbath.

"Sundays not the Sabbath' is you "quoting you" Moody imagines for us that Sunday is the newly bent Bible Sabbath as he states in his own text.

He had no interest in laboriously keeping the Sabbath.

Again "you quote you".


Let's contrast your method of false-accusation with Moodys' own "rigorously keeping" language in HIS text.

SDAs are not the only ones to claim that the Sabbath Commandment was given to all mankind in Eden and is still binding on us to this very day --

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

- D.L. Moody notices that some are opposed to the Sabbath Commandment - but notice how this sermon on the TEN Commandments also fits the summary of 7 points listed here on page 1??

BY THE
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]DWIGHT L. MOODY[/FONT][/FONT]​

The Ten Commandments:
Exodus 20:2-17 ​

.
The Fourth Commandment

​

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

[FONT=&quot]THERE HAS BEEN an awful letting-down in this country regarding the Sabbath during the last twenty-five years, and many a man has been shorn of spiritual power, like Samson, because he is not straight on this question. Can you say that you observe the Sabbath properly? You may be a professed Christian: are you obeying this commandment? Or do you neglect the house of God on the Sabbath day, and spend your time drinking and carousing in places of vice and crime, showing contempt for God and His law? Are you ready to step into the scales? Where were you last Sabbath? How did you spend it?

I honestly believe that this commandment is just as binding today as it ever was. I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was[/FONT][FONT=&quot]- in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.

The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins with the word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?

I believe that the Sabbath question today is a vital one for the whole country. It is the burning question of the present time. If you give up the Sabbath the church goes; [/FONT]

First the false claim;

He had no interest in laboriously keeping the Sabbath.

Now we will all "READ" how it is that Moody ends his SABBATH commandment section this way

• A FIRM STAND

We have a fighting chance to save this nation, and what we want is men and women who have moral courage to stand up and say: "No, I will not touch the Sunday paper, and all the influence I have I will throw dead against it. I will not go away on Saturday evening if I have to travel on Sunday to get back. I will not do unnecessary work on the Sabbath. I will do all I can to keep it holy as God commanded."
But someone says: "Mr. Moody, what are you going to do? I have to work seven days a week or starve."

Then starve! Wouldn't it be a grand thing to have a martyr in the nineteenth century? "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church." Someone says the seed is getting very low; it has been a long time since we have had any seed. I would give something to erect a monument to such a martyr for his fidelity to God's law. I would go around the world to attend his funeral.

We want today men who will make up their minds to do what is right and stand by it if the heavens tumble on their heads. What is to become of Christian Associations and Sunday schools, of churches and Christian Endeavor societies, if the Christian Sabbath is given up to recreation and made a holiday? Hasn't the time come to call a halt if men want power with God? Let men call you narrow and bigoted, but be man enough to stand by God's law, and you will have power and blessing. That is the kind of Christianity we want just now in this country. Any man can go with the crowd, but we want men who will go against the current.

Sabbath-breaker, are you ready to step into the scales?

For you to use Moody's material either shows ignorance (which is not the case) or crass dishonesty, which is the case. Why are you so dishonest, Bob. This man hated the doctrines of the SDA!

Your own statement is so contrary to Moody's text and devoid of all fact reference to my stated claims on this thread - that you embarrass yourself each time you do it - supposing that none of us can read the text in Moody's sermon on the TEN commandments.

Why keep doing that?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Those who took the time to 'read" page 1 found this

Here is my very short summary of the pro-Sunday scholarship statements affirming the still-binding TEN Commandments.

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 so I often use this as my signature line on other boards.

I am glad these Sunday sources all affirm the Ten Commandments for Christians.

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism.

And of course 7th day groups

Seventh-day Baptists
Seventh-day Adventists
(and 100's of others)

So then - that is not me claiming that Moody or any of the pro-sunday sources on page 1 keep the 7th-day Bible Sabbath - rather that is me claiming that they BEND it to point to week-day-1.


As all readers of this thread - already knew from page 1.

That leaves nothing but "false accusations" to be had about some odd case of claiming Moody was arguing that we should all keep Saturday as Sabbath.

A false accusation that can only work with those who are not actually "reading" the claims I have been making.

If you are one who makes false accusations without first reading the points under discussion when you post -- Please read.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

On second thought - DHK may have just answered the question I raise in this post.

Certainly the thought-version of the Ten Commandments where the mere thought that is dwelt upon and engaged in is also sin according to Christ Matt 5 - requires a spirit-filled life so that we are "Taking every THOUGHT captive to the OBEDIENCE of Christ" as we are said to be doing in 2Cor 10:4-5

No wonder Paul says in Rom 8:4-9 that this is not even possible for the lost.

1. The "Ten Commandments" include the "4th Commandment".
2. Gentiles are said to be given this command in Is 56.
3. Christ said it was for 'all mankind' Mark 2:27 which includes Gentiles.
4. Is 66:23 - it is "for ALL Mankind"

Notice what Chuck Swindoll says about it.


=========

I think you might agree that Chuck Swindol does agree with D.L Moody on that point - far more than those who argue that the Sabbath commandment is the one commandment we should ignore.

[FONT=&quot]Chuck Swindol[/FONT]l

===============================================
Quote:
[FONT=&quot]It's interesting what our Creator did on the seventh day of creation. Do you remember? Just in case you forgot, read Genesis 2:2 for yourself: "[/FONT][FONT=&quot]By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done[/FONT][FONT=&quot], and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done."[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Now, why? Why did Almighty God need to rest? He didn't need to, He chose to. But why? Being God, He certainly wasn't tired (an absolute impossibility). He rested because He considered His work complete. He also rested to leave us an example to follow . . [/FONT][FONT=&quot]. to pattern our lives after[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. Many, many [/FONT][FONT=&quot]years later,[/FONT][FONT=&quot] He very deliberately included the importance of resting [/FONT][FONT=&quot]in His top ten priorities.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] These have come to be called the Ten Commandments. Obviously, they represent the ten things God cares about the most when it comes to wholesome human behavior. Number four on that list is found in Exodus 20:8-11, which reads:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the L[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ORD[/FONT][FONT=&quot] your God; in it you shall not do any work. . . . For in six days the L[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ORD[/FONT][FONT=&quot] made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the L[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ORD[/FONT][FONT=&quot] blessed the sabbath day and made it holy."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"Sabbath" is actually a Hebrew term, meaning "seventh." The seventh day of the week is Saturday. It was tradition that transferred Saturday to Sunday, but in God's original plan, He never had Sunday in mind, only the seventh---or last---day of the week. On that final day, REST![/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]My concern at this point is not which day you choose to rest and relax---only that you take time to do so. As Jesus taught, "[/FONT][FONT=&quot]the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath[/FONT][FONT=&quot]" (Mark 2:27)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]http://daily.insight.org/site/News2?...ticle&id=13409[/FONT]

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

Of all the points where we COULD differ on this thread/subject the one key point where we DO differ most directly is the ONE point where both the majority of pro-Sunday scholars AND also the Bible Sabbath Christians DO Agree - which is that the TEN Commandments are still binding on all the saints and that this includes the Sabbath Commandment.

Now suppose Andy Stanley, D.L. Moody, Chuck Swindoll , C.H. Spurgeon, Matthew Henry .... are all wrong to say that the TEN Commandments are the moral law of God, include the 4th Commandment, are still binding on all the saints ...etc.

All that much more important the question "then why has NOT whatever brilliant solution there is to this - been presented each Sunday so that none be confused"??

Why is this one point where both sides agree on this one detail - also the point that is being swept under the rug, such that (according to some) even Swindoll, Stanley, Sproul etc are confused on the issue?

What if the answer to this

"Now suppose Andy Stanley, D.L. Moody, Chuck Swindoll , C.H. Spurgeon, Matthew Henry .... are all wrong to say that the TEN Commandments are the moral law of God, include the 4th Commandment, are still binding on all the saints ...etc.

All that much more important the question "then why has NOT whatever brilliant solution there is to this - been presented each Sunday so that none be confused"??"

And what if the answer is that each time this is posted -- (30 or more times probably on this board)

Here is my very short summary of the pro-Sunday scholarship statements affirming the still-binding TEN Commandments.

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 so I often use this as my signature line on other boards.

I am glad these Sunday sources all affirm the Ten Commandments for Christians.

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism.

And of course 7th day groups

Seventh-day Baptists
Seventh-day Adventists
(and 100's of others)

Where I claim these Pro-SUNDAY sources are bending the Commandment to Point it to week-day-1....

We get this nonsense just as many times in response

Why do you bring this man up. I have pointed this out to you before. It is deception, lies, dishonesty, hypocrisy and a whole lot of other things.

Moody did not believe in the Sabbath.
Moody did not keep the Sabbath.
Moody' sermon--the purpose of it--was simply to urge people to set aside time from their busy work seek so they would be in church on Sundays, not the Sabbath.
He had no interest in laboriously keeping the Sabbath.
Moody distanced himself deliberately from all SDA teaching on the Sabbath.

For you to use Moody's material either shows ignorance (which is not the case) or crass dishonesty, which is the case. Why are you so dishonest, Bob. This man hated the doctrines of the SDA!

What if name-calling and empty-fluff false-accusation non-factual response were the common "answer" being handed out just as DHK has exemplified for us?

What if that explains why we have Andy Stanley, D.L. Moody, Chuck Swindoll , C.H. Spurgeon, Matthew Henry .... are all (supposedly) wrong to claim a continued TEN Commandments and a continued (though bent) 4th commandment to this very day - applicable to all the saints.

What if these men looked at the supposedly all-inclusive-impressive solution of the sort that DHK has offered above - and then dismissed it as fluff?

What if that sort of thing was being presented as the "solution" and so they logically rejected it and stuck with the Bible on the Ten Commandments still being valid - and including some down-sized, edited, bent form of 4th Commandment?

Food for thought.

 

[DHK]

You have scored very high in false accusation - that much can be shown as fact.

I quote moody -- you do not on this thread. you quote "you" when making false accusations.

When I claim moody is a "pro-sunday source" you come in with the somewhat nonsensical "Moody did not believe in the Sabbath.
Moody did not keep the Sabbath." where you mean "the Bible Sabbath of the 7th day" all the while we can all read Moody claiming that the Bible Sabbath it bent to point to week-day-1.

The point remains.

My accusations were not false. You continue to libel this man which in public arena would land you in court.
You quote Moody falsely. Words change meaning. D.L. Moody lived between 1837-1899. Many of our words have changed in meaning since then. One of them is the common meaning of "Sabbath." To Moody, "Sabbath" meant "Christian Sabbath" or Sunday.
And he did not "keep the Sabbath," according to OT laws. He worshiped or went to church on the Sabbath. He urged others to do the same. That is not keeping the Sabbath.

"Sundays not the Sabbath' is you "quoting you" Moody imagines for us that Sunday is the newly bent Bible Sabbath as he states in his own text.

No, I read the full sermon and I have other works of his as well. You not quoting relevant parts of his sermon shows more deceit.

Again "you quote you".

I know what Moody believed; what the Bible teaches.

Let's contrast your method of false-accusation with Moodys' own "rigorously keeping" language in HIS text.

First the false claim;


Now we will all "READ" how it is that Moody ends his SABBATH commandment section this way

Selective quoting by an SDA does nothing to prove your point. Why didn't you quote the disclaimer to distance himself from the SDA movement?

Your own statement is so contrary to Moody's text and devoid of all fact reference to my stated claims on this thread - that you embarrass yourself each time you do it - supposing that none of us can read the text in Moody's sermon on the TEN commandments.

Why keep doing that?

To demonstrate your hypocrisy. Everyone on this board knows that Moody did not believe as you do, and that it is pure hypocrisy for you to quote him. A change in definition of terms does not equate a belief in the same theology. He doesn't believe the same as you do, and neither do the others that you have quoted. Your hypocrisy and deceitfulness is shameful.

 

[DHK]

Where I claim these Pro-SUNDAY sources are bending the Commandment to Point it to week-day-1....

Such stupidity.
Either a person keeps the Ten Commandments or he doesn't.
There is no such thing as "bending" the commandments.
You either keep them or you don't.

 

[vooks]

[FONT=&quot]


Christ helps us with that task in Mark 7:6-13 as noted above.

As does Paul in Romans 7.

As does Paul in Eph 6:1-2.

As does James in James 2.

BobRyan,
What is a commandment?
No need for much glib.

Is this a commandment?
Leviticus 15:19-20,29-30(ESV)
When a woman has a discharge, and the discharge in her body is blood, she shall be in her menstrual impurity for seven days, and whoever touches her shall be unclean until the evening. 20 And everything on which she lies during her menstrual impurity shall be unclean. Everything also on which she sits shall be unclean......,

29 And on the eighth day she shall take two turtledoves or two pigeons and bring them to the priest, to the entrance of the tent of meeting. 30 And the priest shall use one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. And the priest shall make atonement for her before the Lord for her unclean discharge.

 

[vooks]

There are four positions on the Christian day of worship;
1. The Sabbatarians position- Christian day of worship is Saturday
2. The Catholic position- the pope changed the Christian day of worship from Saturday to Sunday
3. The Protestant view- Sunday is the Christian sabbath
4. The TRUE position- sabbath was abolished on the cross and Christians have since Pentecost worshipped on the First day of the week

Protestants who worship on Sunday BECAUSE. They think it is the Lord's sabbath can't explain why and when the day shifted from Saturday to Sunday. So in a Sabbatarian-Sunday keeper debate, the Sabbatarian wins

The Catholics can't explain how they changed from Saturday to Sunday seeing Sunday worship predates the earliest organized Catholicism institutions. A Sabbatarian-Catholicism position wins because they can then fantasize about the beast who attempts to change seasons bla de bla

The Sabbatarian position is an awkward one because sabbath is the only commandment without the sin of breaking it recorded in NT, the one expressly abrogated by Romans and Colossians and the one without historical precedence. Sabbath commandment of the ten is the only one supposed to be kept 'throughout your generations' just like circumcision. And don't Sabbatarians stop to think how an eternal commandment can be a sign of a covenant between Israel and God? If everyone kept sabbath, how would Israel stand out?

The Sabbatarians have nothing on the true position holders. Am one. I don't keep Sunday, it is a tradition. Am free to keep any day and I choose Sunday because I commemorate the resurrection of Jesus as well as it is expedient for me to worship in this day seeing may others do the same. I don't need a REASON for esteeming Sunday. I may as well esteem Tuesday. God is INDIFFERENT to my esteeming any day or not.

 

[BobRyan]

There are four positions on the Christian day of worship;
1. The Sabbatarians position- Christian day of worship is Saturday
2. The Catholic position- the pope changed the Christian day of worship from Saturday to Sunday
3. The Protestant view- Sunday is the Christian sabbath
4. The TRUE position- sabbath was abolished on the cross and Christians have since Pentecost worshipped on the First day of the week

Protestants who worship on Sunday BECAUSE. They think it is the Lord's sabbath can't explain why and when the day shifted from Saturday to Sunday. So in a Sabbatarian-Sunday keeper debate, the Sabbatarian wins

Those 4 positions are pretty close.

1. The Sabbatarians position- Bible Sabbath day of worship is Saturday
2. The Catholic position- pope Peter changed the Bible Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday at the time of the cross
3. The Protestant view- Sunday is the Christian Sabbath as of the time of the cross and fulfills the Sabbath Commandment instead of the Bible Sabbath as given in the OT
4. The Bible sabbath was abolished by Christ on the cross (and Christians might have since Pentecost worshipped on the First day of the week - but there is no record of it in the actual Bible as a weekly week-day 1 event just in man-made tradition and ECF documents centuries later )

My added parenthesis to position 4.

But even given them as you state them

1. - someone in position 4 would have a hard time claiming "position 3 does not exist" or "SDAs made Protestants take that view' etc.

Position 3 cannot be reduced to "just SDAs" or "SDAs make that happen" or "SDAs should be falsely accused and condemned when they notice people taking position 3"

2. The solution 4 idea so recently created - needs to be better understood so that more evangelicals and protestants become informed and aware of just how compelling it is - from the Bible. sola scriptura. The "sola name-calling" and "sola-false-accusation" method of supporting group 4 does not satisfy most Bible students.

3. Bible scholars, Protestants, Evangelicals that take position 3 do not do so as a favor to SDAs -- they genuinely believe they are affirming all TEN of God's TEN Commandments and their position is in complete contradiction to position 4 in that regard.

The Sabbatarian position is an awkward one because sabbath is the only commandment without the sin of breaking it recorded in NT,

And of course the 3rd commandment 'do not take God's name vain" also never mentioned in the NT.

And the third commandment also never stated in Is 66:23 as continued for all eternity in the NEW Heavens and New earth as we find for Sabbath.


... except for that of course.

the one expressly abrogated by Romans and Colossians

Nothing in Romans or Colossians abrogates, eating, or drinking, or food, or Sabbath, or the restriction against taking God's name in vain.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Each time I claim that Moody is a PRO-SUNDAY source

Or I quote him

OR I summarize the pro-SUNDAY position

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Here is my very short summary of the pro-Sunday scholarship statements affirming the still-binding TEN Commandments.

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.

We will eventually get this

My accusations were not false. You continue to libel this man which in public arena would land you in court.
You quote Moody falsely.

The nonsense in that argument is hard to excuse.

Why keep embarrassing yourself that way?

Words change meaning. D.L. Moody lived between 1837-1899. Many of our words have changed in meaning since then. One of them is the common meaning of "Sabbath." To Moody, "Sabbath" meant "Christian Sabbath" or Sunday.

That might explain why I keep insisting that Moody is a pro-SUNDAY source.

Which means the false accusations you pile on top of each other become that much more embarrassing for you -- why keep doing it??

You ask why I don't quote more NON-MOODY sources when quoting Moody - as if this "makes sense".

again - I find your argument to be lacking in attention to detail.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Yeshua1]

Each time I claim that Moody is a PRO-SUNDAY source

Or I quote him

OR I summarize the pro-SUNDAY position



We will eventually get this



The nonsense in that argument is hard to excuse.

Why keep embarrassing yourself that way?



That might explain why I keep insisting that Moody is a pro-SUNDAY source.

Which means the false accusations you pile on top of each other become that much more embarrassing for you -- why keep doing it??

You ask why I don't quote more NON-MOODY sources when quoting Moody - as if this "makes sense".

again - I find your argument to be lacking in attention to detail.

in Christ,

Bob

Did Ellen white plainly state that God revealed to her that in the end times, those worshipping on Sunday have received mark of the beast, or not?

And since she did state that as truth, how can you still see her as being from the lord?

 

[DHK]

You ask why I don't quote more NON-MOODY sources when quoting Moody - as if this "makes sense".

again - I find your argument to be lacking in attention to detail.

in Christ,

Bob

If you had any respect and argument to prop up the doctrine you propagate you would use the Scriptures and not others. On the one hand you claim to believe in sola scriptura and on the other you would rather quote others to look legitimate. Most can see through that ruse.

 

[BobRyan]

If you read the posts
-- #72,
#71

And respond to some detail in them - it works better than just making false accusations.

I don't simply argue "this is what Bible Sabbath keeping Christians know to be true about the Bible statements on the Ten Commandments" -- rather I add "and on certain points here is how some pro-SUNDAY groups have commented on that same point".


It is called "objectivity".


in Christ,

Bob

 

[vooks]

Those 4 positions are pretty close.

1. The Sabbatarians position- Bible Sabbath day of worship is Saturday
2. The Catholic position- pope Peter changed the Bible Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday at the time of the cross
3. The Protestant view- Sunday is the Christian Sabbath as of the time of the cross and fulfills the Sabbath Commandment instead of the Bible Sabbath as given in the OT
4. The Bible sabbath was abolished by Christ on the cross (and Christians might have since Pentecost worshipped on the First day of the week - but there is no record of it in the actual Bible as a weekly week-day 1 event just in man-made tradition and ECF documents centuries later )

My added parenthesis to position 4.

But even given them as you state them

1. - someone in position 4 would have a hard time claiming "position 3 does not exist" or "SDAs made Protestants take that view' etc.

Position 3 cannot be reduced to "just SDAs" or "SDAs make that happen" or "SDAs should be falsely accused and condemned when they notice people taking position 3"

2. The solution 4 idea so recently created - needs to be better understood so that more evangelicals and protestants become informed and aware of just how compelling it is - from the Bible. sola scriptura. The "sola name-calling" and "sola-false-accusation" method of supporting group 4 does not satisfy most Bible students.

3. Bible scholars, Protestants, Evangelicals that take position 3 do not do so as a favor to SDAs -- they genuinely believe they are affirming all TEN of God's TEN Commandments and their position is in complete contradiction to position 4 in that regard.

And of course the 3rd commandment 'do not take God's name vain" also never mentioned in the NT.

And the third commandment also never stated in Is 66:23 as continued for all eternity in the NEW Heavens and New earth as we find for Sabbath.


... except for that of course.

Nothing in Romans or Colossians abrogates, eating, or drinking, or food, or Sabbath, or the restriction against taking God's name in vain.

in Christ,

Bob

BobRyan,
Taking the name of God in vain is BLASPHEMY. And there are one too many injunctions against blasphemy in the NT

It all boils down to whether Christians are under any obligation to observe, regard or esteem any day above others. They are not.

Since they are under no obligation whatsoever, whatever reasons they have for esteeming whatever days is IRRELEVANT.

I repeat,
-I keep Sunday because it is expedient for me; everybody else I'd doing it in my circles.
-I keep Sunday because of its historical connection to the resurrection of our Lord going back to apostolic times, evidence of which exists both on and off scriptures

Sabbatarians who keep Saturday as a COMMANDMENT are essentially shadow chasers no different from Passover keepers. Weekly sabbath, New moon and annual Jewish feasts are all shadows whose reality is Christ

Paul would have no man judge me over shadows.
If Colossians is not abrogating sabbath, then neither is it abrogating Passover, Tabernacles. So, why don't you keep these WITHOUT no man judging you o hypocrite?

Paul under inspiration says God is INDIFFERENT to esteeming days

PS: Isaiah 66 also mentions New Moon which by your warped thinking is equally eternal
Isaiah 66:23 (ESV)
23 From new moon to new moon,
and from Sabbath to Sabbath,
all flesh shall come to worship before me,
declares the Lord.
And it says FROM not ON. New moon to New moon means worship is continuous

 

[BobRyan]

Interesting the "Commandment" language we see here.

SDAs are not the only ones to claim that the Sabbath Commandment was given to all mankind in Eden and is still binding on us to this very day --

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

- D.L. Moody notices that some are opposed to the Sabbath Commandment - but notice how this sermon on the TEN Commandments also fits the summary of 7 points listed here on page 1??

BY THE
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]DWIGHT L. MOODY[/FONT][/FONT]​

The Ten Commandments:
Exodus 20:2-17 ​

.
The Fourth Commandment

​

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

[FONT=&quot]THERE HAS BEEN an awful letting-down in this country regarding the Sabbath during the last twenty-five years, and many a man has been shorn of spiritual power, like Samson, because he is not straight on this question. Can you say that you observe the Sabbath properly? You may be a professed Christian: are you obeying this commandment? Or do you neglect the house of God on the Sabbath day, and spend your time drinking and carousing in places of vice and crime, showing contempt for God and His law? Are you ready to step into the scales? Where were you last Sabbath? How did you spend it?

I honestly believe that this commandment is just as binding today as it ever was. I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was[/FONT][FONT=&quot]- in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.

The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins with the word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?

I believe that the Sabbath question today is a vital one for the whole country. It is the burning question of the present time. If you give up the Sabbath the church goes; [/FONT]

 

[BobRyan]

There is also "Commandment" language used in the scriptures quoted here.

We find the subject of the mark of the beast first mentioned in Rev 13, then heavily referenced in Rev 14 in a warning to the world.

We find the Sabbath commandment spelled out in great detail in Ex 20 and it ends like this.

11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it



So does Rev 14 point us to Commandment keeping as the issue? To the Sabbath commandment focus??


Rev 14
6 Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth—to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people— 7 saying with a loud voice, “Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water.”


Rev 14
12 Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of Godand the faith of Jesus.


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


Some will conclude from what is presented on this first page of this thread "That is IT! I don't know why I did not see that before - the Sabbath is still binding and it is every bit as important as all those Christian sources claim - but they are wrong to think it could be edited/changed - and it is being pointed out for us in Rev 14 in the chapter that warns against taking the mark of the Beast".


Others may dismiss it all saying "I don't see anything here - (these are not the droids nothing to see here ) move along"


We all have free will.


in Christ,


Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Christ Himself uses that "Commandment language" in this example if you skip down to Mark 7

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

As for James 2

8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” (Lev 19:18) you are doing well.

9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.

11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,”
also said, “Do not commit murder.”

Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty

James argues the point based on "HE who said" -- in the text.

So then "in the text" - James is affirming "the whole law" and is giving example from THE Ten Commandments - saying that "HE who said" one of those commandments - ALSO Said - the others.


James 2 - in complete agreement with Prov 28 in a number of places.

Prov 28
Is like a driving rain which leaves no food.
4Those who forsake the law praise the wicked,
But those who keep the law strive with them.
..
9 He who turns away his ear from listening to the law,
Even his prayer is an abomination.


Just as we would all expect - before the cross. Yet this is the "scripture" being read by NT saints in all NT texts "scripture" is a reference to the OT.

As for teaching of Christ, the Words of Christ - not throwing Moses under a bus

Luke 16
17 ... it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.
31 But he said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”


[FONT=&quot]Matt 5
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


"do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31[/FONT]



As for not throwing Moses under a bus by setting aside one of the TEN Commandments - Christ makes that point in Mark 7.

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.

Notice that it is identified as "Moses said" and as "The Word of God"

AND as the "Commandment of God"??

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

Was Christ throwing Moses "under a bus" when in Mark 2:27 He said that "Sabbath was made for mankind -- and not mankind made for the Sabbath"??

Was Isaiah throwing Moses "under a bus" when he said God claims "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to bow down" for all eternity in the New Earth?

And in Is 56 where we are told that gentiles are specifically targeted as blessed for honoring and keeping God's Sabbath -- is God throwing Moses "under a bus" in that case?

No He is not - because Moses never claims "The Sabbath should not be kept by gentiles" or "is not applicable to gentiles" -- a point that even the majority of pro-sunday scholarship accepts.

The "only for Israel" argument does not work in Hebrews 8 or Jer 31:31-33 with the new Covenant even though there we see that the NEW Covenant is made "with Israel and with Judah".

The "only for Israel" argument does not work in Acts 13 even though there we see this regarding the Gospel

Acts 13
23 From this man’s seed, according to the promise, God raised up for Israel a Savior—Jesus—
24 after John had first preached, before His coming, the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.


The "only for Israel" does not work in John 4 even though there we see Christ states clearly 'salvation is of the JEWS"

John 4
22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.

The "only for Israel" argument does not work in Ex 20:1-7 even though there we see that taking God's name in vain is condemned in the commandment -- said to Israel - and yet applicable to ALL mankind.


And....

It does not work in Ex 20:8-11 where those same Commandments to Israel include the Sabbath "made for mankind" Mark 2:27 where "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to bow down" Is 66:23

 

[vooks]

Christ Himself uses that "Commandment language" in this example if you skip down to Mark 7

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

As for James 2

8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” (Lev 19:18) you are doing well.

9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.

11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,”
also said, “Do not commit murder.”

Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty

James argues the point based on "HE who said" -- in the text.

So then "in the text" - James is affirming "the whole law" and is giving example from THE Ten Commandments - saying that "HE who said" one of those commandments - ALSO Said - the others.


James 2 - in complete agreement with Prov 28 in a number of places.

Prov 28
Is like a driving rain which leaves no food.
4Those who forsake the law praise the wicked,
But those who keep the law strive with them.
..
9 He who turns away his ear from listening to the law,
Even his prayer is an abomination.


Just as we would all expect - before the cross. Yet this is the "scripture" being read by NT saints in all NT texts "scripture" is a reference to the OT.

As for teaching of Christ, the Words of Christ - not throwing Moses under a bus

Luke 16
17 ... it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.
31 But he said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”


[FONT=&quot]Matt 5
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


"do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31[/FONT]



As for not throwing Moses under a bus by setting aside one of the TEN Commandments - Christ makes that point in Mark 7.

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.

Notice that it is identified as "Moses said" and as "The Word of God"

AND as the "Commandment of God"??

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

Was Christ throwing Moses "under a bus" when in Mark 2:27 He said that "Sabbath was made for mankind -- and not mankind made for the Sabbath"??

Was Isaiah throwing Moses "under a bus" when he said God claims "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to bow down" for all eternity in the New Earth?

And in Is 56 where we are told that gentiles are specifically targeted as blessed for honoring and keeping God's Sabbath -- is God throwing Moses "under a bus" in that case?

No He is not - because Moses never claims "The Sabbath should not be kept by gentiles" or "is not applicable to gentiles" -- a point that even the majority of pro-sunday scholarship accepts.

The "only for Israel" argument does not work in Hebrews 8 or Jer 31:31-33 with the new Covenant even though there we see that the NEW Covenant is made "with Israel and with Judah".

The "only for Israel" argument does not work in Acts 13 even though there we see this regarding the Gospel

Acts 13
23 From this man’s seed, according to the promise, God raised up for Israel a Savior—Jesus—
24 after John had first preached, before His coming, the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.


The "only for Israel" does not work in John 4 even though there we see Christ states clearly 'salvation is of the JEWS"

John 4
22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.

The "only for Israel" argument does not work in Ex 20:1-7 even though there we see that taking God's name in vain is condemned in the commandment -- said to Israel - and yet applicable to ALL mankind.


And....

It does not work in Ex 20:8-11 where those same Commandments to Israel include the Sabbath "made for mankind" Mark 2:27 where "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to bow down" Is 66:23

You are incoherent and full of glib