• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Irrefutable Sabbath Facts

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gerhard Ebersoehn

Active Member
Site Supporter
Talk about turning a "blind eye"! First, you mean Isaiah 66:22, not v. 23. Secondly, to insist this is Isaiah pointing to the cross requires total ignorance of context of the passage, which begins several verses before.

Isaiah 66, NASB
18 "For I know their works and their thoughts; the time is coming to gather all nations and tongues. And they shall come and see My glory.
19 "I will set a sign among them and will send survivors from them to the nations: Tarshish, Put, Lud, Meshech, Tubal and Javan, to the distant coastlands that have neither heard My fame nor seen My glory. And they will declare My glory among the nations.
20 "Then they shall bring all your brethren from all the nations as a grain offering to the LORD, on horses, in chariots, in litters, on mules and on camels, to My holy mountain Jerusalem," says the LORD, "just as the sons of Israel bring their grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD.
21 "I will also take some of them for priests and for Levites," says the LORD.
22 "For just as the new heavens and the new earth
Which I make will endure before Me," declares the LORD,
"So your offspring and your name will endure.
23 "And it shall be from new moon to new moon
And from sabbath to sabbath, All mankind will come to bow down before Me," says the LORD.
24 "Then they will go forth and look
On the corpses of the men
Who have transgressed against Me.
For their worm will not die
And their fire will not be quenched;
And they will be an abhorrence to all mankind."​

According to your interpretation, and given vv. 22-24, Israel should have been restored on a permanent eternal basis the day of the Cross. But instead she was utterly destroyed when Jerusalem fell to Rome, an empire fed up with insurrectionists and Israel's refusal to bow down to the emperor. Unlike v. 20, promising the Jewish people will be returned to the land, that fall of the City of David 40 years after the Cross, scattered the people from the land in the final diaspora for over 1,900, before the recognition of Israel as a nation again by the rest of the world.

The preterist belief system is seriously flawed, failing to accurately interpret Scripture and ignoring "inconvenient" passages that prove them wrong. Such as here, in your post.

Now what have you actually said re the Sabbath still remains for the People of God? Since verses 23,24 are YET to be fulfilled and as surely as Isaiah spoke as a prophet of the true God, it shall happen really and 'literally' which includes that both verses shall be fulfilled simultaneously which shall be with the Return of Christ Jesus?

Now whose bodies shall lie by the side as who, shall 'GO TO WORSHIP ON THE SABBATH" in that day?!




 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
I say they are bending the 4th commandment to point to Sunday after the cross - and I say I object to their doing so.

You say they "redefine the Sabbath to mean Sunday" -- potato Potahto.
There is often more than one definition to a word.
Definition of SABBATH

1
a : the seventh day of the week observed from Friday evening to Saturday evening as a day of rest and worship by Jews and some Christians
b : Sunday observed among Christians as a day of rest and worship
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sabbath

The Bible always defines the word "sabbath" as the first definition: "the seventh day of the week..." (i.e., Saturday), and never as Sunday.

However, men like Moody and others have chosen to define it as Sunday, a secondary meaning that is in the dictionary. It came much later in history.
Here is what Wikipedia says:
For such worshipers the term "Lord's Day" came to mean the first day or Sunday. From the 4th century onwards, Sunday worship has also taken on the observance of Sunday rest in some Christian traditions, such as the Puritans of the 16th and 17th centuries. Among these "first-day Sabbatarians", Sunday worship and/or rest eventually became synonymous with a first-day "Christian Sabbath".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath_in_Christianity

There is no such thing as "the Christian Sabbath" in the Bible.
However, the Bible does speak of "the Lord's Day." Every time "The Sabbath" is mentioned, it always refers to the seventh day or Saturday, not the first day or Sunday--as both Moody and the Confessions were using it.
 

Gerhard Ebersoehn

Active Member
Site Supporter
I read through Isaiah 66 - It's definitely speaking about the physical reign of Christ from Jerusalem.

I read through all of Isaiah -- It's definitely speaking about the Son of Man the Suffering Servant of Yahweh in, around and from Jerusalem "unto the ends of the world".

Old, Reformed, Protestant, Christian Faith! Since Him, it's NOW! And shall be since now, until He COMES AGAIN!
 

Gerhard Ebersoehn

Active Member
Site Supporter
Ok so that was me asking DHK to be objective and serious for a second - and deal with the details in that question at the top of the post.

It was not a post about "Ellen White" - -- obviously




I can't believe you are answering the question above with an Ellen White diatribe.

Oh well I guess if you have no answer to the actual question I asked - this is as good a diversion as any. Surely there is at least one person on this board that will go for it.

But just know - that if you ever do decide to answer the actual question in my post - I remain interested.




My question above is not about "who is an authority" it is about a simple obvious post - where I complained that Moody and others were bending the 4th commandment to point to Sunday - but at least they did not make the mistake of throwing that commandment under the bus entirely - since obviously that does not work with Isaiah 66:23.

This point that you are so desperate to avoid - is not that difficult. You can continue not answering it - but be assured that if you ever do have an inclination to give an answer - I am interested.




In my post I did not ask that you agree with Moody.

The point remains - how is quoting Moody on a point where you do not agree with him a "violation of the rules" at Baptist Board??? Since you brought this point up in the first place - you should have at least an ounce of interest in addressing the question.



In my post I said that he was trying to bend the 4th commandment and make it point to Sunday after the cross just as does the Baptist Confession of Faith. I stated that I do not agree with that.

This cannot be more simple.



Sadly you are not answering the question -- you don't even attempt to prove that Moody was not trying to do the very thing he said he was doing - bending the 4th commandment to point to Sunday after the cross.

Sadly you continue to ignore anything like an actual quote of Moody to make your case about my exact verbatim quote of him and my complaint that I do not agree with his effort to bend the 4th commandment to point to Sunday. In fact I am quoting from HIS sermon on the TEN Commandment where HE says he is talking about the FOURTH commandment.

This is very simple. Very obvious.

So much so - that I seriously wondered if you had even one other Admin here who could bring himself/herself to look at the actual post and then declare it to be "a lie" about Moody or a "violation of known Baptist board rules".






I hear pulpit pounding and rage - but you do not actually address the question or provide one objective voice here that actually reads the post and concurs with those wild claims you keep making.

Does it not bother you that you are pointing to zero statements in Moody's own text on the 4th commandment?

Does it not bother you in the least that your accusation piled on accusation avoids all efforts to be objective and deal with the simple obvious points of the question raised. Really???



I get that you are fully capable of ad hominem attack. That is not what is being questioned.

in Christ,

Bob

Dear Bob Ryan, accept a little advice from a former Seventh-day Adventist, one 'Gerhard Ebersöhn'.

Just this only time in your life, admit or and accept you are wrong?
 

Gerhard Ebersoehn

Active Member
Site Supporter
No there isn't Bob.
As in the "Mark of the Beast" scenario--applicable only in the Tribulation--a future event yet to come;
So this "sabbath to sabbath" and "all mankind" takes place in a future event yet to come, a future event called the Millennial Kingdom.

It has no relevance to us who live today.
You have yet to provide any Scripture with any relevance to this day and age that commands Gentile believers to keep the sabbath.
Just admit you are wrong.

Denied: <<applicable only in the Tribulation>>;

Denied:
<<this "sabbath to sabbath" and "all mankind" takes place in a future event yet to come, a future event called the Millennial Kingdom.>>

DENIED:
<<It has no relevance to us who live today.>>

Mocked at:
<<You have yet to provide any Scripture with any relevance to this day and age that commands Gentile believers to keep the sabbath.>>

Why should one? The Sabbath is commanded ONLY FOR THE ELECT OF GOD, THE ISRAEL OF GOD.

Only legalists demand 'Law'. "The Law is for transgressors", ONLY.

You need not admit you are wrong. You are, wrong.

 

Gerhard Ebersoehn

Active Member
Site Supporter
The early church met on every day of the week (Acts 2:42ff).

Halve a truth is as good as full a lie; not the whole truth is whole a lie; not the truth only is only a lie.

But I am glad you specified part of the whole truth, that

1) the <<early>> Church met on every day of the week;

2) the early Church met on <<every>> day of the week;

3) the early Church <<met>> on every day of the week.

That's good, man! That is, GOOD!
 

Gerhard Ebersoehn

Active Member
Site Supporter
The fourth commandment was given only to Israel, and never to any Gentile believer. Check Exodus 31.

Yes; so was the whole Law given only to Israel, and never to any Gentile or unbeliever;

---in fact, so was the Greatest Law given only to Israel, and never to any Gentile or unbeliever. Check Mark 12:29 cf. Deuteronomy 5:1 further; Hebrews 8:8,10 cf. Jeremiah 31:31.

Conclusion:
When one becomes a 'believer', one ceases to be a Gentile and became an Israelite of "The Israel of God". Why? BECAUSE <<by grace you are saved>> that's why -- not because you are not an Israelite or the Sabbath is not for you.


 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Yes; so was the whole Law given only to Israel, and never to any Gentile or unbeliever;

---in fact, so was the Greatest Law given only to Israel, and never to any Gentile or unbeliever. Check Mark 12:29 cf. Deuteronomy 5:1 further; Hebrews 8:8,10 cf. Jeremiah 31:31.

Conclusion:
When one becomes a 'believer', one ceases to be a Gentile and became an Israelite of "The Israel of God". Why? BECAUSE <<by grace you are saved>> that's why -- not because you are not an Israelite or the Sabbath is not for you.
1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

In this verse Paul delineates between three distinct groups of people: the Jews (Israel), the Gentiles, and the church of God. All three exist side by side; at the same time.
NOTE: The church never replaced Israel; Israel still exists.
When a person becomes a believer he has nothing to do with Israel.
When a Jew becomes a believer he no longer has anything to do with the Jewish religion. When Paul became a believer they chased him out of the Temple. He gave up the Jewish religion. He no longer practiced the OT sacrifices. He was no longer a Jew or part of Israel by religion, only by physical descent which he could do nothing about.

Read both Romans 9:1ff and 10:1ff. Paul prayed earnestly that his brethren in the flesh, the Jews (the nation of Israel) would be saved. They are no longer God's people. He has set them on the shelf for a season. He has blinded their eyes.
Someday they will come back to him; but not now. When Christ comes again they will be redeemed, but not now.

Christianity has nothing to do with Israel. Israel does exist as a separate nation. Look in the middle east. They fight and war with the nations around them at this very time. They are the center of attention. If that is not Israel then who are they?
If you are a part of Israel, then which tribe do you belong to?

It is Israel that is commanded to keep the Sabbath (Ex.31), not the Gentile believer. We are not in bondage to the Sabbath Day, not commanded to keep the Sabbath. There is no command to keep the Sabbath in this day and age, for the Gentile believer written in the Bible.
 

Gerhard Ebersoehn

Active Member
Site Supporter
[/SIZE]1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

In this verse Paul delineates between three distinct groups of people: the Jews (Israel), the Gentiles, and the church of God. All three exist side by side; at the same time.
NOTE: The church never replaced Israel; Israel still exists.
When a person becomes a believer he has nothing to do with Israel.
When a Jew becomes a believer he no longer has anything to do with the Jewish religion. When Paul became a believer they chased him out of the Temple. He gave up the Jewish religion. He no longer practiced the OT sacrifices. He was no longer a Jew or part of Israel by religion, only by physical descent which he could do nothing about.

Read both Romans 9:1ff and 10:1ff. Paul prayed earnestly that his brethren in the flesh, the Jews (the nation of Israel) would be saved. They are no longer God's people. He has set them on the shelf for a season. He has blinded their eyes.
Someday they will come back to him; but not now. When Christ comes again they will be redeemed, but not now.

Christianity has nothing to do with Israel. Israel does exist as a separate nation. Look in the middle east. They fight and war with the nations around them at this very time. They are the center of attention. If that is not Israel then who are they?
If you are a part of Israel, then which tribe do you belong to?

It is Israel that is commanded to keep the Sabbath (Ex.31), not the Gentile believer. We are not in bondage to the Sabbath Day, not commanded to keep the Sabbath. There is no command to keep the Sabbath in this day and age, for the Gentile believer written in the Bible.

Yes, it always takes hundred books to answer one.

NO ONE SINGLE thing you mention in your post, is not what I also believe. It depends on the HIDDEN interpretations to make the difference.

And the difference is like between day and night.

To pick an obvious example - The phraseology of 'Gentile believer' is extremely problematic.
You ask me of which tribe of Israel I am. I before gave you answer: I am a Christian and therefore of the tribe of Judah because Jesus Christ was of the tribe of Judah. AT THE SAME TIME I am a 'Gentile' - a non-Jew or a person not of the tribe of Judah. I believe in Jesus Christ who after the flesh was of the tribe of Judah. Therefore I am a 'Gentile believer'.
But <Gentile believer> is a CONTRADICTION IN TERMS; an anomaly, a MALNOMEN. There is no such thing as a <Gentile believer>.
<Gentile believer> is not a Scriptural phrase for a 'believer'; the Scripture-definition and description of a 'believer' is an ISRAELITE - someone belonging to "SPIRITUAL ISRAEL".

You choose to apply airy meanings to spiritual things, like 'Gentile believer'; but won't apply SCRIPTURAL and therefore true spiritual meanings to other things, like "the TRUE Israel", "the Israel OF GOD".

DHK, you dislike non-Jews being Jews spiritually; you like Gentiles being 'Gentile believers'. Dr Jekyll and Hyde!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>

<Gentile believer> is not a Scriptural phrase for a 'believer'; the Scripture-definition and description of a 'believer' is an ISRAELITE - someone belonging to "SPIRITUAL ISRAEL".

My terms are Scriptural. The Book of Ephesians teach that we are one in Christ. The church had both Gentile and Jewish believers in it. Paul taught them this great mystery revealed to him that there was no difference now between them, but they were all one in Christ.

In Acts 6, the Hebrew widows and the Greek widows disputed one with the other. They were all believers.
The fact is that there are Hebrew believers, Greek believers, American believers, African believers, Irish believers, Japanese believers, German believers, Australian believers, etc. And we, as believers, are all one in Christ.

We are not spiritual Israel. There is no spiritual Israel. We are not mystics.
Are you saved? What part of you is saved? Your body? soul? spirit? All of you or part of you?
The body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit which dwells in you.
"Christ in you, the hope of glory."
Collectively, we all make up Christ's glorious bride, not some mystical Israel. That is not taught in Scripture. We have nothing to do with Israel.

Paul used Israel in an allegory, an illustration in the book of Galatians. That doesn't mean we are a part of it.
DHK, you dislike non-Jews being Jews spiritually; you like Gentiles being 'Gentile believers'. Dr Jekyll and Hyde!
Every believer is a non-Jew. Every believer has left their former religion, including the Jewish religion.
Just as the Muslim must leave Islam so the Jew must leave Judaism in order to be saved. Judaism is a false religion. One must leave it in order to be save. Only the blood of Christ can saved. The Jew has rejected Christ. They cannot be saved as long as they reject Christ.

If you claim to be part of Israel you are part of a false religion.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
There is often more than one definition to a word.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sabbath

The Bible always defines the word "sabbath" as the first definition: "the seventh day of the week..." (i.e., Saturday), and never as Sunday.

In my post I complain that they are trying to bend the Sabbath - Saturday - so that while it points to Saturday from Creation to the cross - they make it then point to Sunday from the cross onward. As we easily see in the case of Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Baptist Confession of Faith and D.L. Moody ( at least to some extent in the case of D.L. Moody).

So while I agree with their statement that the Sabbath - Saturday was kept from Eden until the cross. I do not agree with attempts to bend the Sabbath (or "redefine it" as you say) to point to Sunday after the cross.


However, men like Moody and others have chosen to define it as Sunday
Indeed - but only after the cross. He appears to be willing to admit that it was Saturday from Eden onward - - until the cross.

Every time "The Sabbath" is mentioned, it always refers to the seventh day or Saturday, not the first day or Sunday
A point about the Bible that I obviously agree with - hence my complaint about those documents and about Moody trying to "bend it" after the cross to point to Sunday.

At which point we find a "language infraction" by the Baptist Board for daring to quote D.L. Moody.

Instructive. (yet incredibly "odd".)

But to your credit - a leap of logic where inexplicably - GE might actually agree with you.

in Christ,

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
So while I agree with their statement that the Sabbath - Saturday was kept from Eden until the cross. I do not agree with attempts to bend the Sabbath (or "redefine it" as you say) to point to Sunday after the cross.

A point about the Bible that I obviously agree with - hence my complaint about those documents and about Moody trying to "bend it" after the cross to point to Sunday.

in Christ,

Bob
Your continued use of this phrase "to bend" is instructive when defining the word "Sabbath." No one has bent a word. That is impossible to do. The word has two meanings according to the dictionary, and one meaning according to the Bible.
Therefore in history, the word was redefined. Or more specifically, a second meaning was added to it. Nothing was "bent." Another definition was added to the dictionary. There are many words that have more than one meaning. You ought to know that by now.

It was common in the 17th and 18th centuries to have what was known as a "Christian Sabbath," and for Christians to keep that "Sabbath" or Sunday as the holy day of the week. Thus the Biblical Sabbath (Saturday) was never kept. You duplicity in this matter is hypocritical and deceitful. Moody and others no more kept the Sabbath than I do and most others on the board do. We urge the others in our congregations to remain faithful in their attendance to their churches on Sundays. That is what Moody meant by keeping the Sabbath. We also teach the same thing, but we certainly don't call it "keeping the Sabbath." We are not Sabbatarians. Moody was wrong in calling himself a Sabbath-day keeper. He didn't keep the Sabbath. He was far from it.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Your continued use of this phrase "to bend" is instructive when defining the word "Sabbath." No one has bent a word.

Indeed they have. They have BENT the Word of God to point the SAbbath Commandment away from Saturday -- as even THEY admitted that it pointed to in Eden - from Eden to the cross... and then after the cross to try and get it to point to Sunday.

The problem with that is that it violates the rule Christ gives in Mark 7 saying that the traditions of man cannot be allowed to set aside the clear teaching of the WORD of God - in the TEN Commandments.

Notice that in Mark 7 the commandment being "bent" is the 5th commandment regarding the honoring of parents. Now Jews did not at that time claim to "Abolish the 5th commandment" only to "bend it" to make room for their man made tradition.

I have no objection to those people that "wish" to call this "BREAK" and not "BEND" - in their war against the Law of God. Arguing that unwittingly the Jews were in fact breaking the Ten Commandments in their efforts to simply "bend" them to the usages of man-made traditions.

But I do not cling to the ceiling going after people with ad hominem vitriol for using bend or break terminology as they complain about what is being done against the commandments of God.

It was common in the 17th and 18th centuries to have what was known as a "Christian Sabbath," and for Christians to keep that "Sabbath" or Sunday as the holy day of the week.

How true. The idea was to apply the full force of the Law of God - the commandments of God, the TEN Commandments and in this case the 4th commandment - to a man-made tradition for Sunday. That way they could argue that to violate their Sunday traditions was not simply a difference of preference and practice - but an outright violation of the Law of God.

They were bending the law of God to point to their own tradition for Sunday. Their idea was not to abolish the LAw of God but to bend it because they needed its authority for what they wanted to do with it.

in Christ,

Bob
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
They were bending the law of God to point to their own tradition for Sunday. Their idea was not to abolish the LAw of God but to bend it because they needed its authority for what they wanted to do with it.

in Christ,

Bob
No one bent the law. There is no such thing. You either keep the law or you don't. Do you keep the law? Do you confine the distance that you travel on the Sabbath to "a Sabbath Day's Journey" or 5/8 of a mile. Do you ever go over that limit?

Do you wear clothes of all one kind--all linen or all wool; no mix is allowed.
Do you actually keep the law as the Jews did?
No, you do not. No one here keeps the Sabbath. You just pretend you do. It is quite hypocritical for you to say that you keep the Sabbath when in fact you don't (if you study all that is involved in keeping the Sabbath).
And do you apply applicable penalties when one transgresses the Sabbath?
Are they taken "outside the camp" (or your church), and stoned to death?
Do you really take the Sabbath laws seriously?
No you don't. You don't keep the Sabbath laws because they were never for you in the first place. They were for the nation of Israel.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
It is obvious that the Jews were not trying to claim that the Ten Commandments had gone missing in Mark 7 - no not even the 5th commandment. When we take time to actually read the Baptist Confession of Faith and D.L. Moody's sermon on the Ten Commanmdents -- specifically the 4th commandment - it is impossible to escape the fact that they are argue for it continued authority in their efforts to condemn what Moody calls "the Sabbath breaker" (his words not mine).

Thus they are not abolishing it - but rather bending it - and using its still authoritative voice to condemn anyone that does not support their Sunday as though that person is breaking the Law of God - the commandment of God. The idea is to take it out of the realm of preference as in "I prefer to keep Monday and you to keep Sunday" but rather to make it a case of 'Breaking the Law of God" to ignore the 4th commandment - as they apply it to week-day-1 and no longer the Seventh day as stated in the actual commandment.

I would argue that they are breaking the 4th commandment in the eyes of God. But I also argue that their own use of it - demands that the 4th commandment remain as "the hammer" that they can use for anyone that violates their "sunday". Which means they would flatly reject my claim that they are in fact breaking the commandment - or even bending it.

When people go to war against the Sabbath - the two ways are either to bend it to point to Sunday - (and then claim to be strong supporters of said - Sabbath commandment) or to toss it all under a bus as if we need not bother with the saints that obey the Commandments of God and their faith in Jesus. Moody and the Baptist Confession of Faith clearly condemn option two and clearly claim to be taking option 1.

I do not claim either option as my solution. I prefer to just keep the Sabbath commandment.

in Christ,

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
I do not claim either option as my solution. I prefer to just keep the Sabbath commandment.

in Christ,

Bob
You didn't answer my post Bob. You don't keep the Sabbath. You only claim to. I gave you clear examples how you do not keep the Sabbath, and you just failed to answer them. No man keeps the law or can keep the law, which the Sabbath is a part of. It was given to Israel, not Gentile believers. Again, read Exodus 31. It is a sign between Jehovah and Israel and their generations forever.

Just because you go to your church on Saturday does not mean you keep the Sabbath. There is far more to it than that.

You are just like the Charismatic who claims they have the have the gift of tongues, and speaks in "gibberish." They are hypocrites. They don't speak in tongues (actual languages), though that is what they claim.
And you don't keep the Sabbath, though that is what you claim--pure hypocrisy.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
The sources I quote - even Baptist ones - claim they believe that the Sabbath commandment is enforce for all mankind from Eden to today.

You say that no matter their own statements about their own beliefs - they are wrong to claim that they believe what they claim they believe.

Now you want to claim that I don't keep the Sabbath - because you believe that no one can obey God - no one can "Keep the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" in your mind is - in fact a direct contradiction of 1Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" - a direct contradiction of Rev 14:12 regarding the saints - a direct contradiction of 1John 5:2-4 regarding the saints who love God and love the children of God.

How is that deny-all solution to this Bible doctrine helping your case?

in Christ,

Bob
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The sources I quote - even Baptist ones - claim they believe that the Sabbath commandment is enforce for all mankind from Eden to today.

You say that no matter their own statements about their own beliefs - they are wrong to claim that they believe what they claim they believe.

Now you want to claim that I don't keep the Sabbath - because you believe that no one can obey God - no one can "Keep the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" in your mind is - in fact a direct contradiction of 1Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" - a direct contradiction of Rev 14:12 regarding the saints - a direct contradiction of 1John 5:2-4 regarding the saints who love God and love the children of God.

How is that deny-all solution to this Bible doctrine helping your case?

in Christ,

Bob

So you keep the sabbath on Sunday then?

For that is what Moody and the Puritans did...

And reformed baptists also do...

Point is that regardless of what ANY Confession teaches states, ONLY the Bible, not them nor you prophetess are the infallible and inspired revealtion from god, ONLY the scriptures are!
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
The Baptist Confession of Faith and the Westminster Confession of Faith state that the Sabbath is the same Saturday Sabbath kept from Eden all the way through the Gospels - and then they claim to bend/edit it to point to "Sunday" after the cross.

I have repeatedly affirmed their initial recognition of Bible doctrine and to repeatedly reject their attempts to edit the Law of God to apply the full force of the 4th commandment to their man-made tradition of Sunday.

Because in Mark 7 - God condemns the idea of bending or editing the Commandments of God just to serve man-made tradition. Which is the very mistake they make.

Some here have complained that if I do not agree with EVERY point that they teach -- I should pretend not to understand or agree with ANY point that they teach (with as much ad hominem and vitriol as possible presumably - judging from the nature of some of the responses we see on this thread). To DHK's credit - I believe GE has even joined him in support of that idea.

But as for me - I find that solution to be the result of a laps in logic.

in Christ,

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top