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

[DHK]

As we both know - my claim from Mark 7 is that the principle is established - of not setting aside one of the Commandments of God for the sake of the religious traditions.

This IS what Jesus is teaching. If you come away from this passage not realizing that this is what Jesus is teaching you have missed the point.

And we both also know that at the time Jesus was speaking in Mark 7 the TEN Commandments were indeed in full force.

NO! As much as you would like him to be teaching about the 10 Commandments, HE IS NOT!!
He is using one of the Ten Commandments as an example to condemn their use of ungodly traditions. You are so blind to your devotion to the sabbath that you can't see the truth in this passage of Scripture which says nothing of the sabbath!

 

[BobRyan]

[FONT=&quot]Mark 7[/FONT]
” 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 God in order to keep your tradition.
10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is tobe 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.”

...

Even your own doctrine will at least admit that all 10 Commandments were valid before the cross.



But Jesus used specific terms "The WORD of God" the "Commandment of God".

This is a perfect illustration of the religious traditions of man - trying to set aside one of the Commandments of God.


He condemns the practice "in general" when He says "and you do many things such as that.”

NO! As much as you would like him to be teaching about the 10 Commandments, HE IS NOT!!
He is using one of the Ten Commandments as an example to condemn their use of ungodly traditions. !

Well there you have the contrast.

I am going to stick with the Bible on this one.

He condemns the practice "in general" when He says "and you do many things such as that.”

Your any-old-excuse-will do is like the response to Act 17:11 where we argue "Sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine - and Catholics argue "oh no - only of that ONE doctrinal issue in Acts 17:11 - whether Jesus is the Messiah".

You can find that sort of any-ol-excuse will do response to these air tight examples - all day long.

So then the Commandment of God -- is in fact the "Word of God", and "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine - again would not allow for setting aside the "Word of God" -- the "Commandment of God" in favor of man made tradition.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by DHK

NO! As much as you would like him to be teaching about the 10 Commandments, HE IS NOT!!
He is using one of the Ten Commandments as an example to condemn their use of ungodly traditions. !

So might the RC christian say about his idea of replacing the 2nd command with the "traditions of the church".

Any ol excuse will do - for getting around this teaching of Christ - has almost no end.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

So might the RC christian say about his idea of replacing the 2nd command with the "traditions of the church".

Any ol excuse will do - for getting around this teaching of Christ - has almost no end.

in Christ,

Bob
[/I]

There are 613 commands of the OT. The NT had not been written yet; keep that in mind. So no need to throw the number of commands in the NT at me; it is irrelevant. Jesus did not specify which command, he just chose one of 613 commands and it happened to be one of the Ten. So what! He could have chose any one "of the commands of God," written in the OT. It didn't matter.
They were transgressing the commands of God with their tradition. That was the only point he was making.

 

[BobRyan]

There are 613 commands of the OT.

And 1023 in the NT. Is this supposed to be an argument against either OT or NT?

The NT had not been written yet; keep that in mind. So no need to throw the number of commands in the NT at me; it is irrelevant.

If 613 commands is not an argument against the OT - then 1023 is not an argument against the NT.

I am good with that.

Jesus did not specify which command

He did specify that 5th commandment.

But the principle applies to all 10.

He calls all of them "the Word of God".

If your point is that this also applies to all the word of God - the entire OT and that man made tradition does not have authority over any of it - and cannot set aside any of it - since it is as Christ said "The Word of God" -

I am good with that as well.

But if you point is that the TEN Commandments are not to be accepted as the "Commandments of God" - when in fact these are those spoken directly by God, written with the finger of God, kept inside the ark of the covenant - and all the rest of scripture - written by man - and kept outside of the ark of the covenant. -- well selecting THIS special document as "NOT the Commandments of God" seems to be the wrong way to go.

They were transgressing the commands of God with their tradition. That was the only point he was making.

He was not approving of setting aside the Commandment of God - the Word of God - and replacing it with the tradition of man.

I say that at the very least this includes the TEN commandments - you seem to say that at the very least this includes all of the OT - I am good with that as well because I was going to be happy just to get you to accept the smaller set - if you want to go for the whole enchilada -- well all the better.

No argument from me.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

And 1023 in the NT. Is this supposed to be an argument against either OT or NT?



If 613 commands is not an argument against the OT - then 1023 is not an argument against the NT.

I am good with that.


Bob

Your argument goes like this:
At the time that Paul wrote First Corinthians there were more chapters in Second Corinthians, First and Second Thessalonians, and First and Second Timothy combined.
But that is not true. The latter books had not been written yet. 1Cor. was written in 55 A.D., the first of his epistles, an epistle of 16 chapters. At the time of his writing 16 chapters had been written only. All other chapters had not been written. Therefore they are irrelevant to the teaching in 1 Corinthians when looking at that book alone.

When looking at the OT, the commands of the NT are irrelevant. The book had not been written. The earliest books were written in 50 A.D., well after the death of Christ.
Thus we are confined by context to 613 "commands of God". The "commands of God" do not exist for there is no NT. at the time of Christ. Your argument makes no sense.

The command of God, again could be any one of those 613 commands. That he chose one of the Ten was his prerogative. He could have chosen: "Thou shalt not wear clothing of diverse kinds." But he didn't.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by DHK

Jesus did not specify which command
He did specify that 5th commandment.

He did specify that 5th commandment.

But the principle applies to all 10.

He calls all of them "the Word of God".

If your point is that this also applies to all the word of God - the entire OT and that man made tradition does not have authority over any of it - and cannot set aside any of it - since it is as Christ said "The Word of God" -

I am good with that as well.

But if you point is that the TEN Commandments are not to be accepted as the "Commandments of God" - when in fact these are those spoken directly by God, written with the finger of God, kept inside the ark of the covenant - and all the rest of scripture - written by man - and kept outside of the ark of the covenant. -- well selecting THIS special document as "NOT the Commandments of God" seems to be the wrong way to go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DHK

They were transgressing the commands of God with their tradition. That was the only point he was making.

He was not approving of setting aside the Commandment of God - the Word of God - and replacing it with the tradition of man.

I say that at the very least this includes the TEN commandments (yes all TEN) - you now seem to say that at the very least this includes all of the OT - I am good with that as well because I was going to be happy just to get you to accept the smaller set - if you want to go for the whole enchilada -- well all the better.

No argument from me.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Your argument goes like this:
At the time that Paul wrote First Corinthians there were more chapters in Second Corinthians, First and Second Thessalonians, and First and Second Timothy combined.
But that is not true. The latter books had not been written yet. 1Cor. was written in 55 A.D., .

My argument in my reference to the NT is that the teaching of Christ in Mark 7 applies to all of the Word of God - all of scripture - not just the OT.

I am also saying that Jesus does not pick some obscure text - but one of the TEN Commandments themselves (what many today call the "moral law of God") - to illustrate the point.

Most specifically instead of Christ argument that in the OT text of scripture you find the Commandments of God - but the TEN Commandments are not included - as the "Commandments of God" - or not included in the "Word of God" -- Christ specifically points to the one of the TEN Commandments pointing out that they are indeed "the Word of God" and in fact "the Commandment of God".

Which brings us to the fact that the saints are those who "KEEP the Commandments of God" Rev 14:12.

I think we both knew that.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

My argument in my reference to the NT is that the teaching of Christ in Mark 7 applies to all of the Word of God - all of scripture - not just the OT.

Your argument is false. The NT had not been written yet.
Your argument might as well be from the Koran. That had not been written yet as well. (Neither one was inspired, and not even the NT was inspired for it wasn't written!) You cannot argue from silence. There was no NT. Deal with it.

I am also saying that Jesus does not pick some obscure text - but one of the TEN Commandments themselves (what many today call the "moral law of God") - to illustrate the point.

No text of Scripture is obscure; non-essential; not important.
"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable..."
He could have used any one of the 613 commands such as: "Thou shalt not wear divers kinds of clothing," but he chose to use another command instead. Remember his target audience was still the Jews.

Most specifically instead of Christ argument that in the OT text of scripture you find the Commandments of God - but the TEN Commandments are not included - as the "Commandments of God" - or not included in the "Word of God" -- Christ specifically points to the one of the TEN Commandments pointing out that they are indeed "the Word of God" and in fact "the Commandment of God".

Your argument makes no sense.
All 39 books of the OT, and every verse in them are "the Word of God," and every word is profitable.
Jesus scolded them for not searching the Scriptures, for in them were the words of eternal life--not in the Ten Commandments.
"The commandment of God" does not necessarily refer to any one of the Ten Commandments. You cannot force that meaning out of that passage. It is only there because of the subject matter Jesus illustrated. Their tradition, "Corban," related to that particular command. He could have given another example, using another tradition, relating to another command not in the Ten Commandments. But you don't get that.

Which brings us to the fact that the saints are those who "KEEP the Commandments of God" Rev 14:12.

non sequitor.
Revelation had not been written yet.
Furthermore, you don't even know what that verse means. You simply force your own interpretation into it.

 

[BobRyan]

Most specifically instead of Christ argument that in the OT text of scripture you find the Commandments of God - but the TEN Commandments are not included - as the "Commandments of God" - or not included in the "Word of God" -- Christ specifically points to the one of the TEN Commandments pointing out that they are indeed "the Word of God" and in fact "the Commandment of God".

Your argument makes no sense.
All 39 books of the OT, and every verse in them are "the Word of God," and every word is profitable.
Jesus scolded them for not searching the Scriptures, for in them were the words of eternal life--not in the Ten Commandments.

1. The last time I checked Ex 20 was part of the 39 books of the OT.
2. The last time I checked - Mark 7 is a place where Christ Himself selects one of the TEN Commandments to make his point about the "Commandment of God" and the "Word of God" not being up for deletion by the traditions of man.
3. The last time I checked the TEN Commandments were the only part of the OT 39 books written by the finger of God (in stone), spoken directly by God to the people and kept inside the ark of the Covenant.

"The commandment of God" does not necessarily refer to any one of the Ten Commandments. [You cannot force that meaning

1. The last Time I checked Christ selects violation of the 5th commandment as an example of the error being condemned in Mark 7.

2. The Bible itself refers to the TEN Commandments as the "Commandments of God" as we already saw repeatedly pointed out.

3. In Mark 7 Christ is condemning all the cases where this is done - not just the one in the case of the 5th commandment.

13 thus invalidating the Word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

John says that the saints "Keep the Commandments of God" 1John 5:2-3 and Rev 14:12. John is the same author reminding us in John 14:15 of the quote of the Ex 20:6 statement to "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments" where Christ affirms it - saying "If you Love Me Keep My Commandments".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Yeshua1]

[FONT=&quot]Mark 7[/FONT]
” 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 God in order to keep your tradition.
10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is tobe 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.”

...

Even your own doctrine will at least admit that all 10 Commandments were valid before the cross.



But Jesus used specific terms "The WORD of God" the "Commandment of God".

This is a perfect illustration of the religious traditions of man - trying to set aside one of the Commandments of God.


He condemns the practice "in general" when He says "and you do many things such as that.”




Well there you have the contrast.

I am going to stick with the Bible on this one.

He condemns the practice "in general" when He says "and you do many things such as that.”

Your any-old-excuse-will do is like the response to Act 17:11 where we argue "Sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine - and Catholics argue "oh no - only of that ONE doctrinal issue in Acts 17:11 - whether Jesus is the Messiah".

You can find that sort of any-ol-excuse will do response to these air tight examples - all day long.

So then the Commandment of God -- is in fact the "Word of God", and "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine - again would not allow for setting aside the "Word of God" -- the "Commandment of God" in favor of man made tradition.

in Christ,

Bob

Jesus was still under the Old Covenant, OT law still in force, as He stated came NOT to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it and keep it, which He did , and we are now no longer under the OT law, but under NT Grace!

Do you remember where hebrews states that the Law came thru Moses, but tht grace came thru Jesus, and we are now under a superior Covenant, so why do you want to stay under the yoke and burden of the OT law?

 

[DHK]

Jesus was still under the Old Covenant, OT law still in force, as He stated came NOT to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it and keep it, which He did , and we are now no longer under the OT law, but under NT Grace!

Do you remember where hebrews states that the Law came thru Moses, but tht grace came thru Jesus, and we are now under a superior Covenant, so why do you want to stay under the yoke and burden of the OT law?

Here also is what Bob cannot understand; and fails to see.

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.

He judges us in respect to keeping the sabbath. If we don't it is sin.
When the tribulation comes, those that don't will have the mark of the beast. That is how serious it is to him.
The Bible specifically says not to judge in respect to these things.

Furthermore, it explicitly calls "sabbath days" and "holy days," including the "Sabbath" as shadows of things to come. The Sabbath was a shadow. A shadow is not real. It is only a semblance, or a resemblance of the real thing. We have the real thing--Jesus Christ. The shadow is no longer needed. Christ is our Sabbath. That is the teaching in Hebrews four. The Sabbath is done away with. We, who are saved, have entered into the sabbath of Christ, His eternal rest.
The OT sabbath is only a shadow of the real thing. The real thing is Christ.
As TCassidy, previously pointed out, they that are depending on the OT sabbath and have not entered into the NT sabbath of Christ are not saved. Christ is not a day; not an inanimate day or thing.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
[FONT=&quot]Mark 7[/FONT]
” 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 God in order to keep your tradition.
10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is tobe 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.”

...

Even your own doctrine will at least admit that all 10 Commandments were valid before the cross.



But Jesus used specific terms "The WORD of God" the "Commandment of God".

This is a perfect illustration of the religious traditions of man - trying to set aside one of the Commandments of God.

He condemns the practice "in general" when He says "and you do many things such as that.”

I am going to stick with the Bible on this one.

Jesus was still under the Old Covenant, OT law still in force, as He stated came NOT to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it and keep it, which He did

So then even by your own standards - in Mark 7 Jesus is defending the Commandments of God against the traditions of man.

And even by your own standards - Christ's Word spoken in John 14:15 "IF you Love ME KEEP My Commandments" is a quote of the Ex 20:6 statement of God Himself blessing those who "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments" - a quote in full harmony with the Law of God.

Do you remember where hebrews states that the Law came thru Moses,

Hebrews 4:2 says "The Gospel was preached to US just as it was to THEM also".

Hebrews 8 says that the Law of God is "written on the mind and heart" under the New Covenant.

Rev 14:12 says the saints of God "KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus".

1John 5:2-3 says the same thing.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Here also is what Bob cannot understand; and fails to see.

Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday

Same rule as before the cross Matt 7 "Judge not that you be not judged".

Before the cross,... after the cross - -- no change in that "Judge not" rule.

But after the cross - and in the new earth - and for all eternity "From Sabbath to Sabbath" the Bible says "Shall ALL mankind come before Me to worship" Is 66:23.

Furthermore, it explicitly calls "sabbath days" and "holy days," including the "Sabbath" as shadows of things to come.

The annual shadow Sabbaths are listed in Lev 23 - they are based in animal sacrifice.

The sabbath of Gen 2:3 was not based in animal sacrifice - nor is it to this very day. And as the "Baptist Confession of Faith" admits - the very same day is kept as the 7th day Sabbath "from creation to the resurrection".

Nor will it be when in the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath" we will see that "ALL mankind comes before God to worship".

For the "Sabbath was made for mankind" Mark 2:27

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Yeshua1]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
[FONT=&quot]Mark 7[/FONT]
” 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 God in order to keep your tradition.
10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is tobe 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.”

...

Even your own doctrine will at least admit that all 10 Commandments were valid before the cross.



But Jesus used specific terms "The WORD of God" the "Commandment of God".

This is a perfect illustration of the religious traditions of man - trying to set aside one of the Commandments of God.

He condemns the practice "in general" when He says "and you do many things such as that.”

I am going to stick with the Bible on this one.



So then even by your own standards - in Mark 7 Jesus is defending the Commandments of God against the traditions of man.

And even by your own standards - Christ's Word spoken in John 14:15 "IF you Love ME KEEP My Commandments" is a quote of the Ex 20:6 statement of God Himself blessing those who "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments" - a quote in full harmony with the Law of God.



Hebrews 4:2 says "The Gospel was preached to US just as it was to THEM also".

Hebrews 8 says that the Law of God is "written on the mind and heart" under the New Covenant.

Rev 14:12 says the saints of God "KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus".

1John 5:2-3 says the same thing.

in Christ,

Bob

Weare commanded to keep the MORAL ASPECT of the law of God, no Chrsitians would desire to steal, covet, murder etc...

We are NOT lawless, but the new law is the Law of Christ towards us, is to live by abiding in jesus, and yeild and submit daily tothe Spirit, and by doing those things, WILL fulfill and keep his commands!

You majpr on theletter of the Law, as the Pharisees did, while the Lord commands us to keep the spirit of the Law, thru and by His Holy Spirit!

 

[BobRyan]

We are commanded to keep the MORAL ASPECT of the law of God, no Chrsitians would desire to steal, covet, murder etc...

Your claim that Christians would want to live in rebellion against the Word of God does not stand the test of scripture.

in Is 66:23 - God tells us that "from Sabbath to Sabbath" ALL MANKIND is to come before Him "to Worship".

your claim seems to be that it would not be a violation of law - to ignore God on that point.

The sunday-keeping D.L. Moody himself condemns fellow sunday-keeping Baptists that choose such a short-sighted solution for avoiding the 4th commandment.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

You majpr on the letter of the Law, as the Pharisees did, while the Lord commands us to keep the spirit of the Law, thru and by His Holy Spirit!

You argue that not to be in rebellion against the 4th commandment is displeasing to the God who gave it??

Your logic is illusive at that point.

By contrast - your own sunday-keeping D.L. Moody - condemns your own opposition to the Word of God in that regard. If even HE notices the gaping flaw in your argument - how much more should I who am not a Sunday-keeping Baptist!

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

D.L. Moody

.
The Fourth Commandment

Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:for in six days the LORD made heaven and Earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it.

​

THERE HAS BEEN an awful letting-down in this country regarding the Sabbath during the last twenty-five years, and many a man has been shorn of spiritual power, like Samson, because he is not straight on this question.

Can you say that you observe the Sabbath properly? You may be a professed Christian: are you obeying this commandment?

Or do you neglect the house of God on the Sabbath day, and spend your time drinking and carousing in places of vice and crime, showing contempt for God and His law?

Are you ready to step into the scales?

Where were you last Sabbath? How did you spend it?

I honestly believe that this commandment is just as binding today as it ever was.

I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place.

"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27)

It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was- in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.

The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins withthe word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stoneat Sinai.How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?

I believe that the Sabbath question today is a vital one for the whole country. It is the burning question of the present time. If you give up the Sabbath the church goes; if you give up the church the home goes; and if the home goes the nation goes. That is the direction in which we are traveling.

...
[FONT=&quot]Sabbath-breaker, are you ready to step into the scales?[/FONT]

====================================== end quote of D.L. Moody.

 

[Yeshua1]

You argue that not to be in rebellion against the 4th commandment is displeasing to the God who gave it??

Your logic is illusive at that point.

By contrast - your own sunday-keeping D.L. Moody - condemns your own opposition to the Word of God in that regard. If even HE notices the gaping flaw in your argument - how much more should I who am not a Sunday-keeping Baptist!

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

D.L. Moody

.
The Fourth Commandment

Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:for in six days the LORD made heaven and Earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it.

​

THERE HAS BEEN an awful letting-down in this country regarding the Sabbath during the last twenty-five years, and many a man has been shorn of spiritual power, like Samson, because he is not straight on this question.

Can you say that you observe the Sabbath properly? You may be a professed Christian: are you obeying this commandment?

Or do you neglect the house of God on the Sabbath day, and spend your time drinking and carousing in places of vice and crime, showing contempt for God and His law?

Are you ready to step into the scales?

Where were you last Sabbath? How did you spend it?

I honestly believe that this commandment is just as binding today as it ever was.

I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place.

"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27)

It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was- in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.

The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins withthe word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stoneat Sinai.How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?

I believe that the Sabbath question today is a vital one for the whole country. It is the burning question of the present time. If you give up the Sabbath the church goes; if you give up the church the home goes; and if the home goes the nation goes. That is the direction in which we are traveling.

...
[FONT=&quot]Sabbath-breaker, are you ready to step into the scales?[/FONT]

====================================== end quote of D.L. Moody.

BOB, both the biblelist and DHK have pointed out several times to you that you misstate Moody and all other reformed that you keep quoting,misquote and misapply the Confessions, and still cannotprove the SDA at all from the bible!

Why do you keep quoting uninspired sources?

 

[BobRyan]

BOB, both the biblelist and DHK have pointed out several times to you that you misstate Moody

Your response to a verbatim quote of Moody that debunks your wild accusation is that verbatim quotes are "misstated"??

Do you really expect to be taken seriously using such methods?

Why not be serious?

As was already noted in the post above - your doctrine was debunked here -

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Originally Posted by BobRyan
[FONT=&quot]Mark 7[/FONT]
” 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 God in order to keep your tradition.
10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is tobe 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.”

...

Even your own doctrine will at least admit that all 10 Commandments were valid before the cross.



But Jesus used specific terms "The WORD of God" the "Commandment of God".

This is a perfect illustration of the religious traditions of man - trying to set aside one of the Commandments of God.

He condemns the practice "in general" when He says "and you do many things such as that.”

--------------------------------------

And as was already pointed out above - your methods and position is debunked EVEN by your own fellow sunday-keeping Baptist peers such as D.L. Moody.

To which you complain that Moody is even quoted - verbatim!!

how sad that your own argument has failed you both on Bible grounds and even by the standards of your own unday-keeping Baptist peers such as D.L. Moody. .

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Yeshua1]

Your response to a verbatim quote of Moody that debunks your wild accusation is that verbatim quotes are "misstated"??

Do you really expect to be taken seriously using such methods?

Why not be serious?

As was already noted in the post above - your doctrine was debunked here -

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Originally Posted by BobRyan
[FONT=&quot]Mark 7[/FONT]
” 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 God in order to keep your tradition.
10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is tobe 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.”

...

Even your own doctrine will at least admit that all 10 Commandments were valid before the cross.



But Jesus used specific terms "The WORD of God" the "Commandment of God".

This is a perfect illustration of the religious traditions of man - trying to set aside one of the Commandments of God.

He condemns the practice "in general" when He says "and you do many things such as that.”

--------------------------------------

And as was already pointed out above - your methods and position is debunked EVEN by your own fellow sunday-keeping Baptist peers such as D.L. Moody.

To which you complain that Moody is even quoted - verbatim!!

how sad that your own argument has failed you both on Bible grounds and even by the standards of your own unday-keeping Baptist peers such as D.L. Moody. .

in Christ,

Bob

Lets see!

moody and NONEothers that you continue tolist and quote held to Saturday sabbath as binding upon thge NT church, neither do the Confessions...

jesus and Paul also did not, nor did any other of the Apostles...

Who is doing "serious study" here?