To Obey God rather than tradition is legalism? Really??

[BobRyan]

In Mark 7 God says it is wrong to obey tradition instead of the Commandments of God also called "the Word of God" Mark 7:13.

But there are "some" who would argue that it is wrong - in fact legalism, salvation by works - to obey the Word of God as God gave it - rather than tradition.

For example - God's Word says -

Exodus 20
8 ""Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 "" Sixdays you shall labor and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.
11 "" For in six days the LORD made theheavens and the earth, the sea and allthat is in them, and rested on the seventh day;therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day andmade it holy[FONT=&quot].[/FONT]


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

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2006881&highlight=wrong#post2006881
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2006881&postcount=75

The Biblicist;2006881


1. You will NEVER find the words "of the week" in any account of the creation Sabbath law anywhere in Scripture - NEVER!

2. SDA and other Saturdarians use logical inference to justify restricting the Sabbath law to the seventh day "of the week." There rationale goes something like this. Our week is based upon the first seven days of creation, therefore, since the seventh day in creation is the Sabbath it follows that the Sabbath is the seventh day "of the week." This is faulty logic as I will point out shortly.


8. It is now wrong to apply it to the seventh day "of the week" as it has been applied by God to the first day "of the week" first by type in the Messianic feasts of Lev. 23 and Lev. 25 and by Messianic prophecy (Psa. 118:20-24 with Acts 4:10-11; Mk. 16:9; heb. 4:2-11) and by Messianic example (Jn. 20; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; Rev. 1:10) and by historic custom consistenly after the aposolic age right up to BEFORE Constantine.

9. The "first day of the week" is preceded by six working days, making the "first day of the week" the seventh day Sabbath in that PATTERN of seven.

10. The permanent application to the "first day of the week" is a BETTER Sabbath day observance because it commemorates the greater and finished work of redemption wiht the resurrection of Christ and a BETTER sinless creation of a new heaven and earth to come that begins in the EIGHTH and eternal age to come.

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

By contrast -

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, ""Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: " THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
7 " BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'
8 ""Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.''
9 He was also saying to them, ""You are experts at setting aside the commandment of Godin order to keep your tradition.
10 ""For Moses said, " HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER';(Exodus 20:12) and, " HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH';
11 but you say, "If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),'
12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother;
13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.''

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

Once your theology gets so turned around sideways that you actually argue that to obey the Word of God over the tradition of man is "wrong" or "works of the law" or ... shouldn't that be a big red flag that "something is wrong" in your theology?

Thoughts?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

But beyond this - a recent video shows a Baptist Pastor agreeing with the Catholic Church claim that the 4th Commandment has been changed by man - and yet also agreeing with the Baptist Confession of Faith - not only about the change of the 4th commandment - but also the fact that the TEN commandments were given to mankind in Eden.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HO8kVXUQ3ZU


So also does the Baptist Confession of Faith agree with this idea that the Bible Sabbath as given by God is not Sunday.

Quote:
22.7 As it is the law of nature that a portion of time by God's appointment should be set apart for the worship of God, so in his Word he has given a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all people in all ages. In particular he has appointed one day in seven as a Sabbath to be kept holy to him.1 From the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ this was the last day of the week, but from the resurrection of Christ it was changed to the first day of the week which is called the Lord's Day. This is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished.2

(1) Gen 2:3; Exo 20:8-11; Mar 2:27-28; Rev 1:10
(2) Joh 20:1; Act 2:1; 20:7; 1Co 16:1; Rev 1:10; Col 2:16-17
​

They admit that a CHANGE was made in what the BIBLE states to be the Sabbath day - Saturday. Almost every Baptist on this board today - knows that the Bible Sabbath is Saturday.


Spurgeon's own edit of the Baptist Confession of Faith admists to the fact that in the actual BIBLE the Sabbath is the SEVENTH day of the week - Saturday not the FIRST day of the week - SUNDAY.

Quote:
As it is the law of nature that in general a proportion of time, by God's appointment, should be set apart for the worship of God, so He has given in His Word a positive, moral and perpetual commandment, binding upon all men, in all ages to this effect. He has particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath to be kept holy for Him. From the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ this was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ it was changed to the first day of the week and called the Lord's Day. This is to be continued until the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week having been abolished.


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


The Catholic position on this topic appears to be something like this when it comes to this subject and tradition vs the Bible --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrB21mc2fmI

 

[evangelist-7]

Sorry, I don't need any Scriptures to know that
trying to obey Jesus' commands ...and... trying to co-operate with the Holy Spirit
have nothing to do with legalism, works, or anything else.

And I have only said "trying".

If one is not into "doing", he/she will miss heaven!

This is a warning, not a threat.

I'll leave the threats to the Scriptures! ... God knows there are plenty of them there to see.

Oh, but wait, one needs to have eyes to see and ears to hear.
Jesus said that, not me.

And DHK loves me to death ... 'cause I'm using proper English again!
Whoopie!
.

 

[Salty]

the Baptist Confession of Faith - ...

There is no such thing as THE Baptist Confession of Faith. You need to specify which one you are talking about


Could it be that this is The Official Baptist Confession of Faith

 

[Alcott]

Next time you stone somebody for gathering wood on the sabbath, be sure they don't have a traditional funeral.

 

[BobRyan]

But beyond this - a recent video shows a Baptist Pastor agreeing with the Catholic Church claim that the 4th Commandment has been changed by man - and yet also agreeing with the Baptist Confession of Faith - not only about the change of the 4th commandment - but also the fact that the TEN commandments were given to mankind in Eden.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HO8kVXUQ3ZU


So also does the Baptist Confession of Faith agree with this idea that the Bible Sabbath as given by God is not Sunday.

Quote:
22.7 As it is the law of nature that a portion of time by God's appointment should be set apart for the worship of God, so in his Word he has given a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all people in all ages. In particular he has appointed one day in seven as a Sabbath to be kept holy to him.1 From the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ this was the last day of the week, but from the resurrection of Christ it was changed to the first day of the week which is called the Lord's Day. This is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished.2

(1) Gen 2:3; Exo 20:8-11; Mar 2:27-28; Rev 1:10
(2) Joh 20:1; Act 2:1; 20:7; 1Co 16:1; Rev 1:10; Col 2:16-17
​

They admit that a CHANGE was made in what the BIBLE states to be the Sabbath day - Saturday. Almost every Baptist on this board today - knows that the Bible Sabbath is Saturday.


Spurgeon's own edit of the Baptist Confession of Faith admists to the fact that in the actual BIBLE the Sabbath is the SEVENTH day of the week - Saturday not the FIRST day of the week - SUNDAY.

Quote:
As it is the law of nature that in general a proportion of time, by God's appointment, should be set apart for the worship of God, so He has given in His Word a positive, moral and perpetual commandment, binding upon all men, in all ages to this effect. He has particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath to be kept holy for Him. From the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ this was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ it was changed to the first day of the week and called the Lord's Day. This is to be continued until the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week having been abolished.

There is no such thing as THE Baptist Confession of Faith. You need to specify which one you are talking about


Could it be that this is The Official Baptist Confession of Faith

No it is the 1689 original followed by the edited version in the 1800's that C.H Spurgeon authored.

http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm


The quote above is from Section 22.7 in Spurgeon's version completed in the mid 1800's

Section 22 is - 22. Worship and the Sabbath Day



Also Section 19 is of interest


http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm#Ch19


And section 19 as modified by Spurgeon
[FONT=&quot]http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/bcof.htm#part19[/FONT]

 

[Salty]

No it is the 1689 original followed by the edited version in the 1800's that C.H Spurgeon authored.

That would be A Baptist Confession of Faith
NOT
THE Baptist Confession of Faith
Would you agree with this?

 

[DHK]

Exodus 31:13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.
14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.
17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

Whoever keeps the Sabbath should, at the very least, declare what tribe they are from.

 

[evangelist-7]

Every thread is Sabbath City ... WOW!
I thought Col 2:16 put an end to all of this?
But, I'll ask the experts on Sabbaths ... you guys.

No-Sabbath-freako signing off, e-7

 

[BobRyan]

Every thread is Sabbath City ... WOW!
I thought Col 2:16 put an end to all of this?
But, I'll ask the experts on Sabbaths ... you guys.

No-Sabbath-freako signing off, e-7

To be fair to Biblicist - the part of his argument that does ring true with the Baptist Confession of Faith - is the part where he admits that the Sabbath Commandment - the Fourth Commandment - in the TEN Commandments - is STILL binding on the saints today just as it was for Adam and Eve.

Here is the Baptist Confession of Faith 1689 - section 19. Notice that it is all TEN of the TEN Commandments that are given to all mankind starting in Gen 2 and holding true - to this very day. It is the "moral law" of God even for the saints.

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

http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm#Ch19

THE LAW OF GOD

19.1 God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience written in his heart,1 and a specific precept not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.2 By this he bound him and all his descendants to personal, total, exact, and perpetual obedience. God promised life on fulfilling it, and threatened death on breaching it, and he endued him with power and ability to keep it.3
(1) Gen 1:27; Ecc 7:29; Rom 2:12a,14-15
(2) Gen 2:16-17
(3) Gen 2:16-17; Rom 10:5; Gal 3:10,12




19.2 The same law that was first written in the human heart continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness after the fall.1 It was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai2 in TEN commandments (written in two tables) the first four containing our duty towards God, and the other six our duty to our fellow beings.3
(1) For the Fourth Commandment: Gen 2:3; Exo 16; Gen 7:4; 8:10,12. For the Fifth Commandment: Gen 37:10. For the Sixth Commandment: Gen 4:3-15. For the Seventh Commandment: Gen 12:17. For the Eighth Commandment: Gen 31:30; 44:8. For the Ninth Commandment: Gen 27:12. For the Tenth Commandment: Gen 6:2; 13:10-11
(2) Rom 2:12a,14-15
(3) Exo 32:15-16; 34:4,28; Deu 10:4




19.3 Besides this law, commonly called the moral law, God was pleased to give the people of Israel ceremonial laws containing several typical ordinances. These were partly concerning worship, and in them Christ was prefigured—his graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits.1 They also gave instructions about various moral duties.2 All of these ceremonial laws were appointed only until the time of the New Testament, when Jesus Christ abrogated them and took them away, for he was the true Messiah and only law-giver, and was empowered to do this by the Father.3
(1) Heb 10:1; Col 2:16-17
(2) 1Co 5:7; 2Co 6:17; Jude 1:23
(3) Col 2:14,16-17; Eph 2:14-16



19.4 To the people of Israel he also gave various judicial laws which lapsed when they ceased as a nation. These are not binding on anyone now by virtue of their being part of the laws of that nation,1 but their principles of equity continue to be applicable in modern times.2
(1) Luk 21:20-24; Act 6:13-14; Heb 9:18-19 with 8:7,13; 9:10; 10:1
(2) 1Co 5:1; 9:8-10



19.5 Obedience to the moral law remains forever binding on all, both justified persons and others,1 both in regard to the content of the law, and also to the authority of God the Creator who gave the law.2 Nor does Christ in any way dissolve this law in the Gospel, on the contrary, he strengthens our obligation [to obey the moral law].

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

And obviously they are right about the 4th commandment not being deleted at the cross - and so ALL TEN still applicable - since as we see in Isaiah 66 EVEN in the New Earth of Rev 21 - "From Sabbath to Sabbath .,.. shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship".


I am simply pointing out that -

The command of God to the saints to "Worship Him who MADE the heavens the earth the seas and the springs of water" is a command NOT just for the 4th commandment keeping saints of the OT - but ALSO for the NT 4th commandment keeping saints as well - Rev 14:7.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Whoever keeps the Sabbath should, at the very least, declare what tribe they are from.

In Ex 20:1-3 God says that the TEN commandments are for Israel who is delivered from Egyptian slavery - do we then argue that whoever keeps the 1st commandment must identify the Egyptian that they used to be slaves of??

No??

I see.

Notice then - that the Baptist Confession of Faith also does not demand that Adam and Eve or any other person - be required to "first identify their tribe" before knowing that they must keep God's Ten Commandments - His "moral law" written on the heart.


http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm#Ch19

that text is quoted in my prior post.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Salty]

Notice then - that the Baptist Confession of Faith also.

I will be glad to answer/comment on this post, when you answer my question from post # 7

 

[DHK]

In Ex 20:1-3 God says that the TEN commandments are for Israel who is delivered from Egyptian slavery - do we then argue that whoever keeps the 1st commandment must identify the Egyptian that they used to be slaves of??

No??

I see.

Notice then - that the Baptist Confession of Faith also does not demand that Adam and Eve or any other person - be required to "first identify their tribe" before knowing that they must keep God's Ten Commandments - His "moral law" written on the heart.


http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm#Ch19

that text is quoted in my prior post.

in Christ,

Bob

You can stop appealing to a straw man.
There is no THE Baptist Confession.
It doesn't exist.
Baptists are not a credal people.
We are independent and autonomous.
We do not live in the 17th and 18th centuries when creeds and confessions were written for the sake defining themselves against the state-church. Perhaps you should do a historical study on why Baptist confessions of faith exist in the first place. Most of us don't use them. I certainly don't.

 

[BobRyan]

You can stop appealing to a straw man.
There is no THE Baptist Confession.
It doesn't exist.
.

Well click on the link and read it - then get back to me.

Apparenly C.H. Spurgeon read it - and liked it enough to revise it - and make it look almost exactly like the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Apparently Andy Stanley has read it - and has a sermon on the TEN Commandments that sounds a lot like it.

Apparently R.C Sproul has read the twin of it (The Westminster Confession of Faith) and so has a view of the moral law - the TEN Commandments given to Adam and Eve and applicable still to the saints today - that is in perfect agreement with both of those documents in their section 19.


It is one thing to differ with it - it is another to say it does not exist.

BTW - I am not the one that gave it that title.

The idea of blaming me for things you object to in your own Baptist history - is not the compelling form of debate that you may have at first imagined.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

That would be A Baptist Confession of Faith
NOT THE Baptist Confession of Faith Would you agree with this?

You are the Baptist - I am not. I did not title the document - the Baptists did. I cannot "re-title Baptist documents" just because this or that Baptist comes along and objects to his own Baptist history of documents.

I think we can all see that point.

Not sure why you would even think to go there.

And also - you cannot pretend that only an SDA would agree with this or that point of your own Baptist Confession of Faith.


====================================================================================
In Ex 20:1-3 God says that the TEN commandments are for Israel who is delivered from Egyptian slavery - do we then argue that whoever keeps the 1st commandment must identify the Egyptian that they used to be slaves of?? (A rhetorical question)

No??

I see.

Notice then - that the Baptist Confession of Faith also does not demand that Adam and Eve or any other person - be required to "first identify their tribe" before knowing that they must keep God's Ten Commandments - His "moral law" written on the heart.


http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm#Ch19

that text is quoted in my prior post.

I will be glad to answer/comment on this post,

It was a rhetorical question.

when you answer my question from post # 7

Ok - well now you have my answer in the first pat of this post above.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

There seems to be a mistaken impression here on the part of "some" that I think all Baptists should be forced to agree with their own Baptist Confession of Faith either in 1689 or in the mid 1800's as C.H. Spurgeon edited it.

I don't argue that - I only argue the existence of the document and its importance to Baptist history -- and the fact that in some respects Biblicist here actually posts in favor of it. And in many respects D.L. Moody, Andy Stanley, C.H. Spurgeon, R.C. Sproul and others wrote in favor of its position on certain subjects like the TEN Commandments being binding on all mankind - even the saints from Eden to today.

The part where these historic facts, details - are "inconvenient" to "some" here is where they were trying to spin a story something like "Only SDAs would believe that all TEN of the TEN commandments applied to mankind or are still applicable" - is a nice "fiction" but has no basis in actual fact.'

And more specifically something like "to accept all TEN of God's Ten Commandments instead of man made traditions to replace one or two -- is legalism".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Well click on the link and read it - then get back to me.

Apparenly C.H. Spurgeon read it - and liked it enough to revise it - and make it look almost exactly like the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Apparently Andy Stanley has read it - and has a sermon on the TEN Commandments that sounds a lot like it.

Apparently R.C Sproul has read the twin of it (The Westminster Confession of Faith) and so has a view of the moral law - the TEN Commandments given to Adam and Eve and applicable still to the saints today - that is in perfect agreement with both of those documents in their section 19.


It is one thing to differ with it - it is another to say it does not exist.

BTW - I am not the one that gave it that title.

The idea of blaming me for things you object to in your own Baptist history - is not the compelling form of debate that you may have at first imagined.

in Christ,

Bob

I don't need to read it. There are many Baptist Confessions of faith, not just one. There is not just one document that speaks for all Baptists. It doesn't speak for me. There are many kinds of Baptists. You should have learned that by now.
Do you think I am a "Michael Wrenn"? or do you remember him?
Have you read any of Luke24 posts. He is a full preterist who believes Christ already has come; came in 70 A.D., and all the prophecies of Matthew 24 were fulfilled then. Do a search on preterism, and read what they believe. We have some on the board.
There are Baptists that are "Millennial Exclusionists." They were banned some time ago.
The document you refer to is no doubt Calvinistic in nature; I am not.

I came out of the RCC with a high regard for the Bible and a belief that it was inspired. The problem was that it had to be interpreted through the catechism.
There are Baptists around that believe the same thing. They have a high regard for the Bible, the inspiration of the Word of God, but believe it has to be interpreted through a Confession. I detest such an attitude and will take no part or parcel in it. I repudiate any such attitude and therefore have nothing to do with confessions, creeds or catechisms.

 

[The Biblicist]

In Mark 7 God says it is wrong to obey tradition instead of the Commandments of God also called "the Word of God" Mark 7:13.

But there are "some" who would argue that it is wrong - in fact legalism, salvation by works - to obey the Word of God as God gave it - rather than tradition.

For example - God's Word says -

Exodus 20
8 ""Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 "" Sixdays you shall labor and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.
11 "" For in six days the LORD made theheavens and the earth, the sea and allthat is in them, and rested on the seventh day;therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day andmade it holy[FONT=&quot].[/FONT]


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

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2006881&highlight=wrong#post2006881
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2006881&postcount=75

The Biblicist;2006881


1. You will NEVER find the words "of the week" in any account of the creation Sabbath law anywhere in Scripture - NEVER!

2. SDA and other Saturdarians use logical inference to justify restricting the Sabbath law to the seventh day "of the week." There rationale goes something like this. Our week is based upon the first seven days of creation, therefore, since the seventh day in creation is the Sabbath it follows that the Sabbath is the seventh day "of the week." This is faulty logic as I will point out shortly.


8. It is now wrong to apply it to the seventh day "of the week" as it has been applied by God to the first day "of the week" first by type in the Messianic feasts of Lev. 23 and Lev. 25 and by Messianic prophecy (Psa. 118:20-24 with Acts 4:10-11; Mk. 16:9; heb. 4:2-11) and by Messianic example (Jn. 20; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; Rev. 1:10) and by historic custom consistenly after the aposolic age right up to BEFORE Constantine.

9. The "first day of the week" is preceded by six working days, making the "first day of the week" the seventh day Sabbath in that PATTERN of seven.

10. The permanent application to the "first day of the week" is a BETTER Sabbath day observance because it commemorates the greater and finished work of redemption wiht the resurrection of Christ and a BETTER sinless creation of a new heaven and earth to come that begins in the EIGHTH and eternal age to come.

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

By contrast -

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, ""Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: " THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
7 " BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'
8 ""Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.''
9 He was also saying to them, ""You are experts at setting aside the commandment of Godin order to keep your tradition.
10 ""For Moses said, " HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER';(Exodus 20:12) and, " HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH';
11 but you say, "If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),'
12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother;
13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.''

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

Once your theology gets so turned around sideways that you actually argue that to obey the Word of God over the tradition of man is "wrong" or "works of the law" or ... shouldn't that be a big red flag that "something is wrong" in your theology?

Thoughts?

in Christ,

Bob

These distorted view of yours have been answered in full MANY TIMES on the other threads about the fourth commandment. You can't answer there and you can't answer here - so all you do is repeat the same invalid objections.

The Fourth commandment provides only the PRINCIPLE of six days work preceding and following the seventh day sabbath. The APPLICATIONS of this principle are numerous in the scripture as proven by the various Sabbath applicaitons of various FIXED DATED sabbaths in Leviticus 23 that occur on various days "of the week." The application to the seventh day "of the week" does not violate the fouth commandment principle any more or less than the various Leviticus 23 applications - all are equally valid and consistent with the fourth commandment principle.

God has the right to arbitrarily apply that principle to any day HE CHOOSES and He does. He also has the right to apply that PRINCIPLE to periods greater than 24 hour days and HE DOES in Lev. 23-25 (month, year) as the creation Sabbath is directly associated with the use of the term "day" or Hebrew "yom" as a greater period of time than 24 hours in Genesis 2:4.

You repeatedly pervert the Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689. You pervert thier view of justification, their view of the Law IN REGARD TO JUSTIFICATION and their view of the Sabbath as they say nothing that is either contrary to the fourth commandment PRINCIPLE or its applications.

DHK is correct, there are numerous Baptist confessions of faith as many as there are different kinds of Baptists and anyone vaguely familiar with Baptist history ought to know that.

Your Sabbath theory has been totally invalidated and exposed as erroneous as is your perverted use of one particular Baptist confession of faith. You continue to ignore the problems presented, you continue to deceive and pervert all in order to protect your SDA erroneous view of the Sabbath. Indeed, nearly every thread you post is somehow devoted to protecting the now invalid application of the fourth commandment to the seventh day "of the week."

Your view of justification is a flat contradiction as you state one is justified without works, forgiven sin without works and yet ultimately sin can be revoked if it is WITHOUT WORKS and one can be unjustified by the very same thing you deny can justify them.

Your whole soteriology is false and has been exposed as false but you are so committed to your false doctrine and your mind so seared by it that you will stop at nothing to simply resurrect a DEAD and condemned soteriology that centers around a false application of the fourth commandment. So it will be peat and repeat, peat fell over and who is left? Repeat!

 

[The Biblicist]

In Ex 20:1-3 God says that the TEN commandments are for Israel who is delivered from Egyptian slavery - do we then argue that whoever keeps the 1st commandment must identify the Egyptian that they used to be slaves of??

No??

I see.

Notice then - that the Baptist Confession of Faith also does not demand that Adam and Eve or any other person - be required to "first identify their tribe" before knowing that they must keep God's Ten Commandments - His "moral law" written on the heart.


http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm#Ch19

that text is quoted in my prior post.

in Christ,

Bob

I dare you to quote their article on justification and its relationship to the law???? NO, you won't do that because you like cherry picking statements and jerking them out of their context.

Your view of salvation is flawed and contradictory. You assert that we are justified (remitted sins, imputed righeousnes - Rm. 4;6-8) WITHOUT WORKS and then turn around and flatly contradict that by saying no man "WITHOUT WORKS" will be ulitmately justified and WITHOUT WORKS forgiveness is revoked.

Anyone can see this is a flat contradiction and just another way of denying justification by faith without works but looking like you don't. You are preaching a gospel of salvation by works and it is plain as the nose on your face. Look at the way you defend your "justiication by faith without works" by quoting WORKS OF THE LAW to maintain and thus obtain eternal salvation. Get a grip on reality!

 

[Salty]

to http://www.creeds.net/baptists/1689/kerkham/1689.htm#Ch19

link is broke