The disputed ending of Mark 16.

RS,

Simply, in I Co it says that Christ rose on the third day and appeared. It is highly unlikely he rose the day before or the day after, but appeared the same day he rose. Turning to the Gospels, we see affirmation of this fact. Thus, we must negate Christ's Resurrection as occurring after the first day of the week, and because of I CO we must negate a resurrection occurring before that date.

Yet, let's say I am wrong, then how else could you interpret these texts?

 

Again, you are resorting to super literalism. Like the Trinity, you do not need to have a super literal statement to see that this is the only option and the likely option.

 

I have not read the whole thread, but is there a point you are trying to make, rstrats?

Or is this just a theological question without any real point? I am not saying that being pure theoloigcally is unimportant - it is vitally important - but is there a point you are trying to make?

 

So you think we ought to go back to a 7th day observance? Any other areas we ought to go back to observing the OT law?

 

As I suggested to him, and in highly doubting him being "Baptist" due to what is being said herein, let's then go back to the 613, not just the 10.

We are clearly taught we aren't able to pick and choose, but that we instead fall under complete obligation to do the entire Law.

It's a yoke of bondage and this judaizing is nothing but a snare.

 

I would agree about picking and choosing which laws you ought to carry over.

I do know there is a 7th day Baptist group. There are probably some areas of their doctrinal statement that I wouldn't agree with, but I didn't find major issues with them except the Sabbath Day issue that seems like their one distinguishing mark.

 

Thanks for the link.

The problem I see within all of this is if and when this becomes salvation conditional. One way this is brought in is if you don't believe this, then you were never saved, and that if you're truly saved you'll eventually observe this.

I'm also aware that at times there is a front saying that "Jesus is the only way" yet on the inside, those who are not observing are talked about as not truly being saved.

Then there is the further trouble with this, Sermons, teachings all become central and thematic to Sabbath observance.

 

I don't know... maybe it was something you said in the OP. But maybe I read your words wrong. I have been mistaken before and I might even be mistaken sometime in the future.

 

Actually I was being sarcastic. You brought up the issue of saventh day observance. I just read them. You told me to read the OP, I did. It was still unclear what you meant, so I asked.

So what then is your reason for taking all the time and effort in this?

 

So basically you came here to have other people do your research so you can win an argument?

 

I gave you authors.

I believe your intent is not for authors, but another agenda.

So, I have sincere doubts your objective is what you say it is.

Surely by now you could have found an author on your own. It's not what you're after.

Please provide the link to the forum/site where this alleged argument can be viewed that way we can see both your arguments, and the others.

 

I certainly haven't started a thread asking for others to provide me with the necessary information to win an argument on another forum. If you can't manage to provide a solid argument for your side on the other forum, maybe you should refrain from debating over there?