The Sabbath by Christ in Isaiah

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

...............................

The church is not Israel and are not under the Law.​

Acts 15

1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
...
5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?​

11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.12 Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.

...
22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren:
23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia:
24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:​

................................................

GE:

From the Covenant and Faithful God derives, and is, the Sabbath Day the ‘sign’— as the Scriptures say; and not as I say or you, may like to deny.

The loosed from the God of the Eternal Covenant of Grace Sabbath, is as unreal as unthinkable. Yet people like HankD and DHK and even Dr Walter, cannot conceive of the Sabbath or they misconstrue a covenant as must the Eternal make repeated and temporary covenants to human demand. With their perception of the temporary fleshly covenant of the circumcision of the Jews, they strangle the life out of God’s Everlasting Covenant of Grace, which being the “Everlasting Covenant”, forbids that any other covenant can be the Covenant of GOD’S Grace. God has ONE Covenant, The EVERLASTING Covenant of Grace, which _HE_ made between _HIMSELF_ and the People of God— “The People of God” THROUGHOUT the Scriptures called, the “ISRAEL” of God.

Which misconception of the Eternal Covenant of Grace of the dispensationalists as the temporary fleshly covenant of the circumcision of the Jews, becomes even more obvious with their referring to Acts 15 as were “this matter” (v6) discussed with that first Synod of the Christian leadership, a case of the ‘legality’ or validity of the “Covenant-sign” of “the Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD God” that NOWHERE WHATSOEVER was a “matter” in that Synod!

Also mark, that the “circumcision” that was to be discussed, was NOT the circumcision according to “the Law of Moses”, but a works-righteousness ‘circumcision’ which was the teaching of “certain of the sect of the PHARISEES”!

Yes, the dispensationalists try make it look as if “this matter” of dispute for the Synod to be decided on, were a “matter” even of the Covenant ITSELF which God ONCE FOR ALL time and peoples, had made between Himself and the ONLY True People or Israel of God!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

HankD:

"....10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they...."


GE:

This is what I say, ".... why tempt ye God", as though it was God who ".... put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear" WHILE IT WAS THE SECT OF THE PHARISEES WHO DID SO!

But here you are doing it again and again, pretending _God_ enslaved the believers of times past with a yoke upon their necks which they --- or us today --- cannot bear.

You try say this with the very Scripture that declares God never treated any believers different than others, it being written right HERE in Acts 15 WHICH YOU QUOTE .... ".... that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they" in fact, were, SAVED!

How do you read?

Then don't TEACH like you read! It is disastrous.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

HankD:

“…. but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.
4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.”


GE:

Here is another example of you do it again and again …. reversing the thrust of the Scriptures to prove your point and sway the accusing finger towards God.

Because here “…. but Israel doth not know, (and) my people doth not consider (and are) a sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters” BECAUSE “they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward” exactly by having TRANSGRESSED His Law and PARTED from Him and went their OWN way --- THIS, you make look like Israel did BECAUSE THEY ADHERED TO SABBATH-KEEPING AND THE DOING OF GOD’S LAWS!!!

You are ‘twisting’ the Word of God if ever someone twisted it!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

HankD:

“The Book of Isaiah is prophetic and Israel/Judah is the focus:
------
The church is not Israel and are not under the Law.”


GE:

I say you are contradicting yourself hopelessly.

If the Book of Isaiah is prophetic and Israel/Judah is the focus: then surely the church is Israel under the Law.

Also, since when is it, and where is it that you read in the New Testament that the church is “not under the Law”? Because I am reading where Paul attentively observed that “for as long as he lives the Law has dominion over man” Romans 7:1 regardless if he is in the Church or not? ONLY IF HE “BE DEAD, is (he) LOOSED from the Law.” (verse2) Because “the Law is for the transgressor” and no man is there who is no transgressor of the Law!

“ACCORDING TO THE GLORIOUS GOSPEL OF THE BLESSED GOD … the Law is not made for a RIGHTEOUS MAN” : Jesus Christ THE ONLY who Himself is The Law and the Righteous One "THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS".
But “the Law is made for” : “US ALL (who) LIKE (BAD) SHEEP have gone ASTRAY” --- that is, have “TRANSGRESSED”.
“The Law is made for US”, “the lawless and disobedient”. 1Timothy 1:9.
Jesus was “called” WHAT WE ALL _ARE_ : “A TRANSGRESSOR”! Isaiah 48:8.

“Let as many SERVANTS as are under the yoke count their own MASTER WORTHY OF ALL HONOUR, that the Name of GOD, and his Doctrine, be not blasphemed”— by haughty, self-righteous, man. 1Timothy 6:1.

As “ALL have been concluded UNDER SIN”,
we ALL “were KEPT (down) under the Law”
“UNTIL faith is come” and
we _ALL_ no longer are under Schoolmaster Law :
FOR YE ARE _ALL_” — ‘pre-cross’ like ‘post-cross’, NOW LIKE THEN —
“the children of God by Faith in Christ Jesus”. Galatians 3.

WHAT HAS OUR STATUS OF BEING SINNERS UNTO DEATH UNDER THE LAW, GOT TO DO WITH GOD’S GOOD GIFT OF HIS SABBATH DAY FOR THE PEOPLE OF GOD AND BODY OF CHRIST’S OWN?!
ONLY OUR OWN GOOD AS THAT PEOPLE OF GOD AND BODY OF CHRIST'S OWN!

 

[HankD]

OK the sentence structure I gave was poor.

The church is not Israel and are not under the Law.”

s/b The church is not Israel. The church is not under the law.

Also you said:
"If the Book of Isaiah is prophetic and Israel/Judah is the focus: then surely the church is Israel under the Law".

Why?

In this age, believers are not under the law but led of the Spirit.

Galatians 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.​

HankD​

 

[HankD]

HankD:

"....10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they...."


GE:

This is what I say, ".... why tempt ye God", as though it was God who ".... put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear" WHILE IT WAS THE SECT OF THE PHARISEES WHO DID SO!

But here you are doing it again and again, pretending _God_ enslaved the believers of times past with a yoke upon their necks which they --- or us today --- cannot bear.

You try say this with the very Scripture that declares God never treated any believers different than others, it being written right HERE in Acts 15 WHICH YOU QUOTE .... ".... that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they" in fact, were, SAVED!

How do you read?

Then don't TEACH like you read! It is disastrous.

I didn't say it GE, I quoted the Scripture.

Indeed the pharisees were those who were trying to put the yoke of the law on the gentile believers.

HankD

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

GE:

I learned to distinguish between general grace and saving grace. God gave saving grace to ONLY Israel - the very Israel He ONLY gave the Sabbath to.


DHK:

If this last paragraph is true then you should apostatize from the Christian faith and become a Jew. You claim that only they (not Christ) have saving faith. This is a denial of the Christian faith; a denial of Christ and his atoning sacrifice; a denial of Christ as the Messiah.


GE:

I deny, of course. You attach meanings of your own to what I stated as my belief. You attach to my believing “only Israel”, your after the flesh only Israel. You deny the reality of the Spiritual Israel of God; you say physical or political Israel is the only Israel of the Bible or and of God.

You falsely deduce from this false premises of yours, I claim that “only they”— according to you, the ‘genealogical Israel’ —, “have saving faith”. Which is an open lie thrown at me, while I in fact say “they”— the, according to you, ‘genealogical Israel’ —, HAVE NO SAVING FAITH. Because ONLY ‘the Israel of God’ or ‘Spiritual Israel’ – according to me and my faith, which I believe is the Bible-Faith – have the “Gift of God”, the saving Faith. “For by GRACE are you (everyone and all) saved through faith.” Ephesians 2:8
It is written: “Not of works, lest any man should boast”; and genealogical descent is the works of man per definition and boasting.

So your insistence on God’s Covenant with Israel in the flesh “ONLY”, DHK, “is a denial of the Christian faith; a denial of Christ and his atoning sacrifice; and a denial of Christ as the Messiah”. … your own words, that turned against the sayer, DHK, biting the hand that fed them with treacherous intent.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

...............

In this age, believers are not under the law but led of the Spirit.

Galatians 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.​

.............

GE:

I agree with you on this and I also disagree; and in more than one respect.

First I am more radical than you.
I believe 'The Law' for and of the Christian Believer IS NOT THE WRITTEN LAW, BUT IS JESUS CHRIST IN LIVING PERSON UNTO THE BELIEVER.

But for as long as we are this side of the resurrection and glorification we STAY sinners and as such never escape from being "under the Law" in the sense of being under the Claim, the Condemnation and the Curse of the Law.

Christ for us is both the Beginning and the End of the (NEW) creation of God every second of our lives until we shall have exchanged immortality for mortality at His Coming.

Next, I differ with you in that "the law" supposed in Galatians 5:18 is NOT the Law of God in whichever form or appearance, written, or personified in Christ; the 'law' spoken of here should never be written with a capital letter, it being the WICKED 'law', of "LUST" --- SIN!

So, "If ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law of SIN AND (eternal) DEATH" because to "be led of the Spirit" implies to lead the victorious LIFE OVER SIN AND LUST AND EVEN OVER THE THREAT OF ETERNAL DEATH.

Such a person that is thus "LED of the Spirit" so much the MORE shall “call the Sabbath a delight and shall turn away his foot from the Sabbath to do his own pleasure on God's Holy Day”, but "shall honour HIM – GOD – and shall delight himself in the LORD".
Now I should better have written with the pronouns in capital letters, and have said it of "The Man" and "The Son of Man that keepeth the Sabbath", Jesus Christ, 'Maker', and, "LORD of the Sabbath Day".

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I didn't say it GE, I quoted the Scripture.

Indeed the pharisees were those who were trying to put the yoke of the law on the gentile believers.

HankD

GE:


Still, No!

The Pharisees did not care about God's Law even were it God's Law on circumcision.

They ONLY cared about THEIR 'laws' which were the doctrines and commandments of men and vipers and which had NOTHING in common with God's Law or Laws. But spiritually any honest Christian will admit there was BIG and important a difference!

 

[DHK]

GE:
I learned to distinguish between general grace and saving grace. God gave saving grace to ONLY Israel - the very Israel He ONLY gave the Sabbath to.

We know this is not true. It is not what the Bible teaches.

DHK:

If this last paragraph is true then you should apostatize from the Christian faith and become a Jew. You claim that only they (not Christ) have saving faith. This is a denial of the Christian faith; a denial of Christ and his atoning sacrifice; a denial of Christ as the Messiah.

GE:

I deny, of course. You attach meanings of your own to what I stated as my belief. You attach to my believing “only Israel”, your after the flesh only Israel. You deny the reality of the Spiritual Israel of God; you say physical or political Israel is the only Israel of the Bible or and of God.

Read your own quote. You never said a thing about so-called "spiritual Israel," did you? Words have meanings. You said:
"God gave saving grace ONLY to Israel."
Those were your exact words. There was no mention of spiritual Israel.

Furthermore, when I testify to others I tell them I am a Christian, a follower of Christ. I tell them I am in Christ. I tell them I belong to a Christian Church, and may give them a name. I have never told anyone that I am of Israel or even spiritual Israel, never! I don't identify with Israel. No Christian does. We are followers of Christ; not of Israel; not of Islam; not of any other religion, but of Christ alone.

You falsely deduce from this false premises of yours, I claim that “only they”— according to you, the ‘genealogical Israel’ —, “have saving faith”. Which is an open lie thrown at me, while I in fact say “they”— the, according to you, ‘genealogical Israel’ —, HAVE NO SAVING FAITH. Because ONLY ‘the Israel of God’ or ‘Spiritual Israel’ – according to me and my faith, which I believe is the Bible-Faith – have the “Gift of God”, the saving Faith.

I quoted your words, and did not falsely deduce anything. You clearly said:

"God gave saving grace to ONLY Israel - the very Israel He ONLY gave the Sabbath to."

That statement has only one meaning. The group you are referring to refers to only one group. It excludes all Gentiles, all NT believers.

“For by GRACE are you (everyone and all) saved through faith.” Ephesians 2:8
It is written: “Not of works, lest any man should boast”; and genealogical descent is the works of man per definition and boasting.

And that runs contrary to what you previously posted.

So your insistence on God’s Covenant with Israel in the flesh “ONLY”, DHK, “is a denial of the Christian faith; a denial of Christ and his atoning sacrifice; and a denial of Christ as the Messiah”. … your own words, that turned against the sayer, DHK, biting the hand that fed them with treacherous intent.

I am not the one that said: "God gave saving grace ONLY to Israel," you are. Words have meaning. You are caught up in your own words. This is not time for a "simple" clarification. This is a time to admit that you were wrong, and tell the truth.

 

[HankD]

GE:


Still, No!

The Pharisees did not care about God's Law even were it God's Law on circumcision.

They ONLY cared about THEIR 'laws' which were the doctrines and commandments of men and vipers and which had NOTHING in common with God's Law or Laws. But spiritually any honest Christian will admit there was BIG and important a difference!

The issue of Acts 15 is not the sincerity of those Pharisees who were making this requirement but whether it was/is necessary to keep the 613 mitvouth of the mosaic law in this age of grace.

It is not.

We are led of the Spirit.

Galatians 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law

Gerhard, if you have been saved and entered into the rest provided by the finished work of Jesus Christ and the Spirit of God has given you peace concerning the observing of the sabbath in your own way then it is allowed and judgment is not.

Colossians 2

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.​

Neither the keeping or the non-keeping of the seventh day sabbath should lead to one brother judging another unless the sabbath keeping is a work mingled with faith unto justification (or the attempt thereof).​

HankD​

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Now the great mystery to me is,
Why is all this as you say, so condemning when someone believes the Seventh Day Sabbath, but so conducive and congruent when someone believes Sunday is the Christian Day of Worship?
Because it is a predisposition biased to the point it gets self-contradictory and self-destructive.

“Certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.”
That means the ‘rule’ of the Apostles’ teaching was a circumcision that was NOT “after the manner of Moses” – or after the manner of the flesh. The doctrine of the Established Christian Church was a circumcision “after the circumcision of Christ” Colossians 2:11c which was spiritual and of the heart – not of these “certain men”, whose propagated circumcision was a proselytising and apostatising gimmick of self-righteousness at the expense of the trusting reliance of the true and original missionary Church, on Christ and God’s Grace for justification and salvation.

“This question” in Acts 15 was a direct onslaught against things spiritual and of pure Christian Faith (such as naturally was the keeping of the Sabbath Day). The issue in Acts 15 was the direct onslaught on pure Christianity through literally fleshly practices of Judaistic collective idealism; a spiritual warfare against the individuality of “the circumcision of Christ” that is the ‘circumcision’ of “the body of the sins of the flesh”; in other words, of the heart.

The fly in the salve in “the matter” in Acts 15 was never the Laws of God; not even the laws of Moses; it was the abominations of “CERTAIN MEN” AS TODAY STILL it is taught by the refined hypocrisy of “certain sects” of contemporary Pharisee-ism, “THAT IT IS NEEDFUL” FOR SALVATION OVER AND ABOVE THE MERCY AND FORGIVENESS OF GOD THROUGH JESUS CHRIST, that Sunday should be kept instead of “the Seventh Day Sabbath” (‘OF THE JEWS’, mind), and instead of “God made choice among us that the Gentiles should HEAR the word of the Gospel, and believe …. giving them the Holy Ghost, EVEN AS HE DID UNTO US” and be SAVED!!

Because “God, which knoweth the hearts, put NO difference between US and THEM, purifying their HEARTS, BY FAITH”!!

“Now therefore why”, TODAY, “tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear”, denying them their believers’ freedom “of Feast : whether of (occasional) month’s or of (perpetual) Sabbaths’ …. eating and drinking … of Christ the Substance …. nourishment being ministered …. growing with the growth of God”, but teach the brethren, saying to them, Except ye keep Sunday after the manner of the traditions of the Church, ye ARE not saved, but “IS UNDER THE LAW” and its CONDEMNATION?!

For we Sabbaths’-feasting believers, “we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” that are saved of all times and dispensations.

Now you say by biased emphasizing and quoting,

“Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to …” JUDGE, “… after this manner….” that they nor God “gave such commandment” as that the Church of Christ should keep the Sabbath! Because, it is JUDGED, that, If you keep the Sabbath, quote, “you must keep every point of the law (613 commandments - mitzvouth) not just the 10 commandments”. “Therefore” it is JUDGED: “CURSED BE HE”, who confirms by faith the words of the Law of God – even by their freedom in Christ Jesus, QUOTE: “NOT TO LET THEMSELVES BE JUDGED BY ANYONE OF THE WORLD WITH REGARD TO FEASTING OF SABBATHS’ FEAST.”

And all the people AGAINST THEM JUDGE, and say, Amen!
And FURTHER JUDGE, AND CONDEMN, quote: “Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
The law brings condemnation
Romans 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.”

And JUSTIFY THEMSELVES claiming and SAYING, quote:
“BUT _WE_, WE are not under the Law!” Because “_WE_, “ARE NOT Israel, _WE_, are the church!”

WHAT DESPICABLE BOASTING : QUOTE: “In this age we are led of the Spirit which dwells within us. … For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God” EVEN _US_ WHO REJECT THE SABBATH OF THE LORD GOD AND CHOSE SUNDAY INSTEAD!

Go on boasting! Maybe your god will send down the fire you pray of him to consume your offering of abominations!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The issue of Acts 15 is not the sincerity of those Pharisees who were making this requirement but whether it was/is necessary to keep the 613 mitvouth of the mosaic law in this age of grace.

It is not.

We are led of the Spirit.

Galatians 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law

Gerhard, if you have been saved and entered into the rest provided by the finished work of Jesus Christ and the Spirit of God has given you peace concerning the observing of the sabbath in your own way then it is allowed and judgment is not.

Colossians 2

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.​

Neither the keeping or the non-keeping of the seventh day sabbath should lead to one brother judging another unless the sabbath keeping is a work mingled with faith unto justification (or the attempt thereof).​

HankD​

GE:

This ALL, is only, what YOU, HankD, are trying to soften your approach with; it is NONE of Scripture! It is ALL your surmising and philosophizing subtle JUDGMENT; judgment and beguiling for which I, thank God, do NOT FALL!

You are 'led of the Spirit' not to be 'under the law' FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER THAN NOT to delight in the Sabbath of the Lord, but in the SUNDAY of your worshiping.

Let's face the FACTS.

 

[DHK]

WHAT DESPICABLE BOASTING : QUOTE: “In this age we are led of the Spirit which dwells within us. … For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God” EVEN _US_ WHO REJECT THE SABBATH OF THE LORD GOD AND CHOSE SUNDAY INSTEAD!

Go on boasting! Maybe your god will send down the fire you pray of him to consume your offering of abominations!

"your god" with a small "g"? Are suggesting that Hank serves another God, or is not a Christian? Why the hostility here Gerhard?
Hank has been very polite and patient in all of his posts. It would be expedient for you to answer in the same manner.

 

[HankD]

GE:

This ALL, is only, what YOU, HankD, are trying to soften your approach with; it is NONE of Scripture! It is ALL your surmising and philosophizing subtle JUDGMENT; judgment and beguiling for which I, thank God, do NOT FALL!

You are 'led of the Spirit' not to be 'under the law' FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER THAN NOT to delight in the Sabbath of the Lord, but in the SUNDAY of your worshiping.

Let's face the FACTS.

Gerhard there is a definite disconnect here and I don't think it can be resolved.

Yes, I indeed worship God on "Sunday".

I also worship and delight in Him on every other day of the week.

HankD

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

"your god" with a small "g"? Are suggesting that Hank serves another God, or is not a Christian? Why the hostility here Gerhard?
Hank has been very polite and patient in all of his posts. It would be expedient for you to answer in the same manner.

GE:

Dear DHK,

THAT, was the very reason I wrote a small letter, because HankD did the exact same thing, ever so “patient and polite”, "suggesting" with the use (I should say 'a....', but shall refrain) of Holy Scriptures, verse upon verse, playing at the Sabbath-believer's LACK of everything good contained in those Scriptures and affluence in everything bad in those Scriptures.

SUCH is the 'defence' or arrogance of Sunday-believers' TIME WITHOUT EXCEPTION. HankD's is not the first nor the only; it is the STANDARD!

In polite and patient manner, it is defined subtle subterfuge.... 'Subterfuge' a term this plaasjapie has learned about 40 years? ago having never encountered the gist of the concept before and scarcely knowing its proper use in thought-process. But since, the concept has become more and more understandable to me ... via my half-a-century having been exposed to the 'methodologies and strategies' I thought only politicians are conversed in.

My statement has made THAT, strikingly CLEAR, I do see.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Gerhard there is a definite disconnect here and I don't think it can be resolved.

Yes, I indeed worship God on "Sunday".

I also worship and delight in Him on every other day of the week.

HankD

GE:

...confirming my conclusions above.

And just reckon, I also worship and delight in Him on every ... day of the week. Can you believe it?! No, you won't. Maybe that's 'OK' with "for me", "on Sabbaths"; but who says it's right with God .... there's where there is a kink in the cable.... it would have been alright with Him, were it on a Sunday a Sunday a Sunday but Never on a Saturday .... as the little song more or less or rather VICE VERSA, goes...

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

By the way, if someone wants to see how impatient and un-polite this gentleman CAN get, read him on Topix.com --- 'other' --- 'Seventh-day Adventist' .... His second name is rudeness; his first name, frankness.

But he has enough respect for the 'better Christians' here on Baptist Board, it may seem he's a psychopath so great the disparity.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

DHK:

The Sabbath has always remained the seventh day. On the seventh day, the last day God rested. This would never change, and has not to this day. But it is still for the Jews.


DW:

The sabbath command did not specify any particular day "of the week" nor does it specify such in Genesis 2 as your response suggests. Indeed, the Sabbath days in Leviticus 23 demand they were observed on what would be regarded as the first day "of the week" in a 28 or 29 day month. Indeed, the first, eighth, fifteenth and twenty second Sabbath days equal the 7th, 14th, 21st and 28th Sabbaths in the Jewish calendar Feast months.”


GE:

Re:
“The sabbath command did not specify any particular day "of the week" nor does it specify such in Genesis 2”

Answer:

“in Genesis 2”, to which “the sabbath command” refers and relies on, it is stated word for word in the Hebrew, “On the day the Seventh Day God ended his work which He had made; and He rested on the day the Seventh Day from all his work which He had made. And God blessed the day the Seventh Day, and sanctified (put apart “the day the Seventh Day”) BECAUSE THAT: in IT (“the day the Seventh Day”), He had rested from all his work which God had created and made : THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS / CREATING … WHEN, they were created.” Period.

The Sabbath was, therefore, specified in Genesis 2 “THE DAY THE” particular “Day The Seventh", of the first ever ‘WEEK’ of seven days in which God created and made and finished “all his work”. Thus does the Sabbath Command, specify “the day The Seventh Day” as such as “the day The Seventh Day” OF THE WEEK.

We are speaking English, which has a perfect equivalent of the first ever seven days in which God created and made and finished “all his work”, namely, the idiomatic expression, ‘THE WEEK’, which people who speak Hebrew, would express in the IDENTICAL PARTICULAR words as are found in the texts of Genesis 2 and Exodus 20. Don’t get too wise and be caught in your own conceitedness.

Re:
“Indeed, the Sabbath days in Leviticus 23 demand they were observed on what would be regarded as the first day "of the week" in a 28 or 29 day month.”

Answer:

The great flaw in your ‘argument’ is your indiscriminate generalizing “the Sabbath days in Leviticus 23” as were they “regarded as” all of the same category and kind and ‘day’ per se, “the day the Seventh Day” … OF THE WEEK surprise, surprise!

Maybe the even bigger misconception in your reasoning is YOUR – nobody’s than YOUR – taking for granted, “what would be regarded as the first day "of the week"”! Thus you ARE getting entangled in your own words and “demands” and “specifications” and stuff.

Now listen to yourself! “… the Sabbath days in Leviticus 23 demand they were observed on what would be regarded as the_first_ day "of the week" in a 28 or 29 day month”— that now, BESIDES the fact there is nothing like “… the Sabbath days in Leviticus 23 … in a 28 or 29 day month” to be found “in Leviticus 23”. I thought you meant the Sabbath Days as were they observed on what actually WAS, the _last_ or “the day The Seventh Day”, “…of the week” without exception! …according to you, of course.

But, forget about this and let the Sabbaths fall on the first or, on the last and Seventh Days “of the week”, how does your arithmetic work out “in Leviticus 23”? For example, in between verses 24 to 39…. “in a 28 or 29 day month”?
“In the FIRST day of the (Seventh) Month shall ye have a _sabbath_. … Also on the TENTH day of this Seventh Month … that same day … shall be unto you a sabbath of rest.” Now work out how these ‘sabbaths’, every time fell on “the day The Seventh Day” … “of the week”?!

Nonsense!

No, these ‘sabbaths’ “in the FIRST day” and “on the TENTH day” “of this Seventh Month”, ARE ONLY POSSIBLE IF they were ‘sabbaths / sabbath-days’ quote: “_BESIDE THE SABBATHS (—of “the day the Seventh Day Sabbath”—) of the LORD GOD”!

Therefore these ‘sabbaths’ were to be “UNTO YOU a sabbath” and, “YOUR sabbath”, verse 32, because, “THESE ARE THE FEASTS / ‘Feast-sabbaths’, of the LORD”, “DISTINCT FROM / BESIDE, the Sabbaths OF THE LORD”.
And thus it was made crystal clear right from the start “in Leviticus 23” but was simply discarded by Dr Walter because it doesn’t suit his agenda.
Leviticus 23:2-4…

“Concerning the feasts of the LORD which _YE_ shall proclaim holy convocations … (Now, before anything else,) these are MY feasts : Six days shall work be done, but the day The Seventh Day is THE Sabbath of Sabbath’s-rest, an holy convocation. Ye, shall do _NO_ work therein. (It is for the LORD’s work!) It is the Sabbath Day wherever you may dwell (over all the earth. It is not for you to declare or to connect to seasons of the earth.)
(But) the following, are the feasts of the LORD , even holy convocations WHICH _YOU_, MUST DETERMINE / PROCLAIM IN RESPECT TO THEIR _SEASONS_ (of the year: ‘days, months, seasons, years’).

 

[HankD]

GE:

...confirming my conclusions above.

And just reckon, I also worship and delight in Him on every ... day of the week. Can you believe it?! No, you won't. Maybe that's 'OK' with "for me", "on Sabbaths"; but who says it's right with God .... there's where there is a kink in the cable.... it would have been alright with Him, were it on a Sunday a Sunday a Sunday but Never on a Saturday .... as the little song more or less or rather VICE VERSA, goes...

I believe you Gerhard.

BTW, I have never even heard of topix.com.

I used the phrase "for you" because "for me" the Sabbath rest has been fulfilled in Christ as He has rested from His work of atonement.

That is not to say that you haven't, only God knows that for sure.

Since this has taken the path of ad hominem I am bowing put of this debate.


HankD