The Irrefutable Sabbath Facts

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Your answer makes no sense.
I believe the number is 613, and it refers to the OT, but I think you know that. The unverified 1050 is irrelevant.
God put a limit on "10" when he handed them to Moses, written with his own hand, on two tablets made of stone. There were not nine, and not eleven, but ten.
However, in the rest of the law were far more than just ten. All together there was 613. God put it there. And God limited the revelation that he gave to man to 613 in the law of the OT. Keep things in context and don't throw in red herrings.
There are also commands given in the Koran. But like the NT, it wasn't written yet. Both then are irrelevant.

... and Jesus Christ put back the limit on "1" when He handed it to the JEWS mind you telling them HIMSELF, on it hangs all Law, even the one to love one's neighbour as oneself. This time you - the Gentiles AS the Jews - wrote with your own hands all the laws you all of you all ages your history transgressed, "on my back" with "furrows" of blood LIKE God, on “the two tablets made of stone”, with his own finger "ploughed".

There were not nine, and not eleven; not ten, and not 613, or 1050, but 1. Ironically on that 1 hang and still hangs one to human nature so repugnant law: It says, "Thou shalt ... NOT LIE!" None hated more by humanity except perhaps another: "Remember the day The Sabbath Day OF THE LORD GOD."

Could it be hated MORE "FOR ON" it - "FOR ON the day The Seventh Day", God, SAVED?! Hate, yes, like Sundaydarians like Sabbatharians rejoice in.

Hate --- is it included in the 613 or and in the 1050? I wonder; every Christian seems he couldn't care less the fact he so easily and eagerly feels FREE to hate definable and or un-definable but most of all the Fourth of the Ten.

Hate --- is it included in the 613 or and in the 1050? Or do the 613 or and 1050 HANG ON IT, HATE?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

............
There are also commands given in the Koran. But like the NT, it wasn't written yet. Both then are irrelevant.

You say you are a --- Christian --- missionary?!

The New Testament not relevant in the Old?!

The Koran relevant in the Old Testament?!

Amazing to say the least as 'with grace' as far as possible ....

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It is a Charismatic website which believes that the evidence of being baptized by the Spirit is speaking in tongues.

Incidentally there are Baptists who teach that the evidence of being saved by the Spirit is having been water-baptised.

... if they're not 'charismatic' who are?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

EXODUS 24 [12] And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, AND a law, AND commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them.

We can see that the law AND the ten commandments are separate. They are not lumped into 600 plus commandments called the law as the "many" claim. The reason they make this claim is to point to one liners which are usually talking about the law of circumcision and apply that one liner to the ten commandments.

I like that ... <one liners>!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

No it is not seen clearly.
Absurd claim: "There are 1050 commands in the NT.

Seen clearly: it is JUST AS <absurd claim>: There are 613 commands in the OT.

 

[Chowmah]

Actually of the 1050 many are repeats. The site I found says theres actually 69 more commandments given in the new testament.

 

[Chowmah]

Hey GE
You in one of those places that their finding gold. Have ya ever done any prospecting?

 

[BobRyan]

Actually of the 1050 many are repeats. The site I found says theres actually 69 more commandments given in the new testament.

Indeed - playing the "counting game against the OT scriptures" is a flawed strategy.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Actually of the 1050 many are repeats. The site I found says theres actually 69 more commandments given in the new testament.

JESUS numbered the laws of God differently. HE said, "Man shall live of EVERY WORD" God has spoken. God's every word, is God's Word and LAW. There are COUNTLESS laws from God to every single believer.

The whole endeavor to find any quantity of God's Laws is futile; it is the QUALITY of God's SINGLE WORD "true believers" yearn to obey.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Hey GE
You in one of those places that their finding gold. Have ya ever done any prospecting?

A prospector who knows his job knows where to do prospecting and for what to prospect.

To be honest, I started out a real rookie, knowing not where to look or for what to look. But I was a rookie under the guidance of the Master Prospector ... and I KNEW THAT, right from the start. In the end it turned out I was prospecting for most precious 'BONES-of-gold' or 'gold-of-BONES'!

What a discovery -- and LIFE-CHANGING -- of worth far, far more than gold to me.

The more I think of it the humbler I feel and the humbler I feel the SURER AND MORE JUBILANT. It's a GREAT feeling (to deny I must lie), real discovery of WORTH gives one.

 

[Chowmah]

Indeed - playing the "counting game against the OT scriptures" is a flawed strategy.

in Christ,

Bob

You bet it is Bob.

 

[DHK]

You say you are a --- Christian --- missionary?!

The New Testament not relevant in the Old?!

The Koran relevant in the Old Testament?!

Amazing to say the least as 'with grace' as far as possible ...

The point is simply this.
During the time of Christ, there was nothing that you had written, nor I, nor the Apostles, nor Mohammed, nor Confucius, nor your favorite pastor, nor anyone in this century or the last that was in existence.
Don't point me to future writings that don't exist!

This is Bob Ryan's argument.
Christ is speaking of the Law. The Law is in existence--extant. There are 613 laws in the OT according to the Jews.
But in the time of Christ, when Christ is speaking of the law, the NT had not been written, neither any other writing of any person I mentioned (whether inspired or not). If it was future it was irrelevant. That makes his 1050 number completely irrelevant because the NT wasn't even written.

 

[BobRyan]

Your point is irrelevant since the only "scripture" in common use by the saints in the NT as they started the NT church was the OT - and there could be no "pay no attention to scripture - after all it has 660 commands" type of argument by NT saints.

In the same way - there can be no argument against the NT text of scripture using that same odd "too many commands for God to have in scripture that we pay attention to" style argument.

There is no point of time in which those arguments could have been used by the saints. Which is the point I keep raising.

And you keep ducking.

In 2 Tim 3 when Paul makes the case with Timothy that the OT scriptures known to Timothy as a child are "all sufficient" he simply continues to affirm and up hold them for NT saints instead of arguing that they have over 660 commands in them and should now be ignored.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The point is simply this.
During the time of Christ, there was nothing that you had written, nor I, nor the Apostles, nor Mohammed, nor Confucius, nor your favorite pastor, nor anyone in this century or the last that was in existence.
Don't point me to future writings that don't exist!

This is Bob Ryan's argument.
Christ is speaking of the Law. The Law is in existence--extant. There are 613 laws in the OT according to the Jews.
But in the time of Christ, when Christ is speaking of the law, the NT had not been written, neither any other writing of any person I mentioned (whether inspired or not). If it was future it was irrelevant. That makes his 1050 number completely irrelevant because the NT wasn't even written.
[/SIZE]

Yes DHK; I only hope for you that you understand yourself.

As far as I am concerned, the whole New Testament is relevant in the whole Old Testament and the whole Old Testament is relevant in the New Testament. That has been Reformed Protestant Faith long before me, yet is relevant non the less for me.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Your point is irrelevant since the only "scripture" in common use by the saints in the NT as they started the NT church was the OT - and there could be no "pay no attention to scripture - after all it has 660 commands" type of argument by NT saints.

In the same way - there can be no argument against the NT text of scripture using that same odd "too many commands for God to have in scripture that we pay attention to" style argument.

There is no point of time in which those arguments could have been used by the saints. Which is the point I keep raising.

And you keep ducking.

In 2 Tim 3 when Paul makes the case with Timothy that the OT scriptures known to Timothy as a child are "all sufficient" he simply continues to affirm and up hold them for NT saints instead of arguing that they have over 660 commands in them and should now be ignored.

in Christ,

Bob

Sane and well-answered. Much more likely, <the point is simply>, yours

 

[DHK]

Yes DHK; I only hope for you that you understand yourself.

As far as I am concerned, the whole New Testament is relevant in the whole Old Testament and the whole Old Testament is relevant in the New Testament. That has been Reformed Protestant Faith long before me, yet is relevant non the less for me.

Understand this.
As much as Bob keeps quoting from Isaiah (and that out of context), Isaiah wrote ca. 700 B.C. Christ lived from 4 B.C. to ca. 29 A.D. The NT was written between 50-98 A.D.
Nothing written in the NT was available to Isaiah or even to those in the time of Christ. For Bob to use the NT against itself is illogical and contradictory.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Understand this.
As much as Bob keeps quoting from Isaiah (and that out of context), Isaiah wrote ca. 700 B.C. Christ lived from 4 B.C. to ca. 29 A.D. The NT was written between 50-98 A.D.
Nothing written in the NT was available to Isaiah or even to those in the time of Christ. For Bob to use the NT against itself is illogical and contradictory.

I'm sorry, but the Spirit of Jesus Christ Himself <<written [of] in the NT was available to Isaiah ... 700 B.C.>> : as real as He was <<to those in the time of Christ>> or to those <<between 50-98 A.D.>>. "Christ the same Christ yesterday today and forever more."

To <<use the NT against itself>> is less <<illogical and contradictory>> than to use the Author of the NT against Himself. It is the SAME "Lord of the Sabbath Day" and the same "Sabbath Day of the Lord" in both the Old and New Testaments. That is the only 'logic' and 'harmony' possible for <<quoting from Isaiah>> in defense of TRUTH--- of the truth that "a rest of observance of the Sabbath Day still remains valid FOR THE PEOPLE OF GOD" --- for CHRISTIANS : "BECAUSE JESUS GAVE THEM REST".

Hebrews 4 like the Gospels like Paul speaks of the SAME "PEOPLE OF GOD", of the SAME GOD of the People, and, of the same "SABBATH remaining for the People of God".

Nothing illogical or contradictory in that!

 

[DHK]

I'm sorry, but the Spirit of Jesus Christ Himself <<written [of] in the NT was available to Isaiah ... 700 B.C.>> : as real as He was <<to those in the time of Christ>> or to those <<between 50-98 A.D.>>. "Christ the same Christ yesterday today and forever more."

To <<use the NT against itself>> is less <<illogical and contradictory>> than to use the Author of the NT against Himself. It is the SAME "Lord of the Sabbath Day" and the same "Sabbath Day of the Lord" in both the Old and New Testaments. That is the only 'logic' and 'harmony' possible for <<quoting from Isaiah>> in defense of TRUTH--- of the truth that "a rest of observance of the Sabbath Day still remains valid FOR THE PEOPLE OF GOD" --- for CHRISTIANS : "BECAUSE JESUS GAVE THEM REST".

Hebrews 4 like the Gospels like Paul speaks of the SAME "PEOPLE OF GOD", of the SAME GOD of the People, and, of the same "SABBATH remaining for the People of God".

Nothing illogical or contradictory in that!

Yes it is illogical and contradictory.
Look. Eve had only one promise concerning the coming of the Messiah--Genesis 3:15. That is all the revelation she had.
Noah was given some more information but not much.
To Abraham was revealed the Abrahamic Covenant, that he would be the father of many nations. The picture of a sacrifice was given in his son being offered up.
To Moses was given the Law. He also spent 40 days and 40 nights with the Lord.

Revelation is progressive. Each one learns more as they move on in history and build on the knowledge of those that went before them. Eve did not have the knowledge Isaiah did, and Isaiah did not have the knowledge Paul did. To say otherwise is foolish.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Yes it is illogical and contradictory.
Look. Eve had only one promise concerning the coming of the Messiah--Genesis 3:15. That is all the revelation she had.
Noah was given some more information but not much.
To Abraham was revealed the Abrahamic Covenant, that he would be the father of many nations. The picture of a sacrifice was given in his son being offered up.
To Moses was given the Law. He also spent 40 days and 40 nights with the Lord.

Revelation is progressive. Each one learns more as they move on in history and build on the knowledge of those that went before them. Eve did not have the knowledge Isaiah did, and Isaiah did not have the knowledge Paul did. To say otherwise is foolish.
[/SIZE]

Now, that is true!

Nothing GE says is otherwise.

You do not see things to the core, DHK, yet.

WHEN did Eve receive her <<only one promise concerning the coming of the Messiah>>?

On the day after her and Adam’s creation and FALL.
Genesis 3:15 is seven verses after 3:8—after “in the evening cool” some three hours after “it was late the Sixth Day” in 1:31. Genesis 3:15 is “ON the day The Seventh Day : GOD”, “worked”. <He gave Eve the Promise>; and CLOTHED her in skin of SACRIFICE; and “SWORE they shall NOT enter into My Rest” – 3:22 – until far in the future she and Adam and all God’s children THROUGH CHRIST “shall enter in …”, “because JESUS, GAVE THEM REST.”

Yes, “My Rest” and God’s Sabbath-Rest, would COME in Jesus Christ and his Salvation would be “WROUGHT [“finished”, “blessed”, and “sanctified”] by the exceeding greatness of his power [God’s REST “WHEN GOD RAISED CHRIST from the dead”].

The Rest of God is NOT the Sabbath Day BUT HIS REST IN CHRIST “on the day The Seventh Day”. The Rest of God was not because of the Sabbath Day but “BECAUSE JESUS gave them Rest = HIMSELF and there THEREFORE remains for God’s People their Sabbath-observance”.

You are 100% right: <<Revelation is progressive. … Eve did not have the knowledge>> which God “worked” by his “Rest” in CHRIST on the Seventh Day the first day after her creation and fall. Isaiah seems to have <learned more> as God <moved on in history> towards “the Son of Man who lays HOLD ON the Sabbath and KEEPS it”, even “the Lord of the Sabbath” Jesus “Christ the ALL in all fulfilling FULLNESS OF GOD”.

Christians are the first generation Sabbatharians.

The devil diverted them onto the route of first generation Sundaydarians.

 

[BobRyan]

Revelation is progressive. Each one learns more as they move on in history and build on the knowledge of those that went before them. Eve did not have the knowledge Isaiah did, and Isaiah did not have the knowledge Paul did. To say otherwise is foolish.
[/SIZE]

all name calling aside - (if possible).

John 8 "Abraham saw my day and was glad".
Gal 3:7-8 the Gospel was preached to Abraham.
Heb 4:1 the Gospel was preached to us just as it was to them also.

Act 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to see IF those things (spoken to them by Paul ) were SO" -- we call it "sola scriptura".

in Christ,

Bob