Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:Eliyahu:
"Not necessarily the Holy Spirit should order the same commandments."
GE:
Exactly. That brings us to this very thread's topic: The ESSENTIALS of Christian Faith.
The very first 'essential' one finds regulating God's whole Plan of Salvation in its working out in sphere and time of human existence, is this: "Today (it was the Sabbath) this Word is fulfilled IN YOUR EARS" --- yet you won't hear!
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:Eliyahu:
"Then I would ask this question:
Gal 3:
2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. 5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
You may answer " By the works of the Law", right?"
GE:
It's beyond me to see how you could presume my answer.
But it is further beyond my comprehension capabilities to see how you would want to make these statement bear on the Sabbath or on its observance.
Just ask, for eaxample, how it is nobody ever uses these silly arguments when they keep Sunday? Only when it is the Day of Obedience - true, Christian obedience - the Sabbath, "Seventh Day the Sabbath of the LORD your (unchangeable) God" that good Christian loose their minds completely and start with excuses like this.
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:Eliyahu:
"Because you are like these people:
Acts 15:
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."
GE:
At least you are manly enough to speak your mind. Nevertheless I must protest and deny --sinner that I am despite, I am not 'like they'.
One must distinguish in this demand from the Pharisees, what LUKE actually supposed, namely that from the Law (of God) still, "was needful". "Necessity", says our Oening Statement.
Now everything was needful for the time, for which it used to be needful. God is the Giver of all the Law -- although here said to be "Moses' Law". That explains what still -for Christians- remained 'needful'/necessary.
How did it remain needful?
Jesus took all the Divine Law in His own body to the cross; and in and with Himself raised all the Divine Law in His own and glorified body.
Thus Christians still believe the whole Divine Law but in Jesus Christ the Risen of God. He did the shedding of blood for our sins; therefore we don't sacrifice anymore. He also "gave them (His People) rest", by "Himself having entered into His own rest as God in His own". THAT IS THE STORY OF ALL THE GOSPELS!
Conclusion:
That His People now must start keeping the First Day of the week?
That His People from noe has no Day of worship-rest whatsoever?
That now His People would be condemned for being legalists if they kept the Sabbath?
OR
what the Word says,
"THEREFORE THEN there (now) REMAINS FOR THE PEOPLE OF GOD (the present-day christian Church) a keeping of the Sabbath Day".
That is New Testament 'Law'; that is New Testament freedom!
BobRyan said:You are confusing the civil laws of a theocracy with the moral law of God.
Violation of God's LAW incurrs the "second death" even today as Romans 3 points out. ALL the WORLD is STILL under that condemnation and if we do not accept the "way of escape" provided by Christ - we shall STILL suffer the penalty for sin - the second death (not stoning). And that is true of people living in the OT just as in the NT.
No change there.
The fact that "some sins" in the OT did call for the civil penalty of stoning - does not change that fact. When God priovides that the foreign nations should subjugate His people and take away their ability to enforce their own civil penalties - that does not change the moral law (100's of years pre-cross) NOR does it abolish the second death penalty that ALL will pay for ALL sins if they do not accept the Gospel.
No change.
So fine - John the Baptizer does not call for stoning - but he STILL warns against the fire and brimstone judgment of the second death as being a REAL penalty for REAL sins - not just big sins - but even coveting and lying. (Sins that did not call for stoning).
Your focus on stoning as if this is the substance of the law that we find in Romans 3 and 6 - falls short of the text.
Christ argues in Matt 5 that He is making no change at all to His Law and that those who teach such things are mistaken.
Now Back to Mark 7 and the opportunity to at least pay "Some" attention to what Christ said about the Law there.
BTW - it is instructive that your view needs to avoid the highlighted points here in Christ's teaching pre-cross regarding the Law of God as the Word of God and as the standard by which worship is judged to be valid.
In Christ,
Bob
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:Eliyahu:
"Acts 15:10 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? ( Could Peter keep the commandments before?)"
GE:
I find no issue with this verse while enjoying the previlege of Sabbath-keeping and can't see how any Christian could.
But let's look at the facts.
This verse speaks about circumcision; it has no bearing on the Sabbath. The Sabbath never has been a yoke of labour and suffering (you make it that); it has ever been the Day of God's "own rest" -- given by God to weary man for to rest on and on which to find the Divine Rest -- even Jesus Christ.
Now exactly "on the Sabbath", Jesus did most of His healing ministry; and "on the Sabbath", His ULTIMATE of saving acts, Resurrection from the dead. Then troughout the LATEST record of Jesus' redemptive works and words, the Four Gospels, we find this Day respected and applied by every believer in Jesus for the best part of the first century, never with a question ark hanging over its validity or necessity for Believers' Congregation --- only over the legalist misuse and misunderstanding of it as a way to salvation in itself.
That was the conditions and time in which Peter made his statement quoted by you from Acts.
BobRyan said:Can the reader easily see how Christ's Words regarding His Law - in Matt 5 fit perfectly with His statements in Mark 7 regarding "The Word of God"??
DHK said:The matter of keeping the Sabbath is not germane to the title of this thread and should be put to rest. Another thread can be started on that topic if so desired.
The real question about the Sabbath that has never been answered by the SDA's and those advocating their position is: Where in the NT is there any command for Gentile beleivers to keep the Sabbath. There isn't any. Thus no believer is under any obligation to keep the Sabbath. There is no command anywhere for any believer to keep the Sabbath.
At any rate this topic should be in another thread.
Eliyahu said:The reason why Paul preached the gospel at the synagogue on Sabbath was because Jews were gathering on Sabbaths as the Law commanded. Paul or other apostles didn't mind about the dates, but they wanted to preach the Gospel as much as possible. If they noticed Gentiles were gathering on Sundays, they would have preached it on Sundays as well. I hope this word will be fulfilled in YOUR EARS.
Dr. L.T. Ketchum said:Are you saying a person need not repent of "dead works" (Heb. 6:1), that it is not necessary to understand (Mat. 13:23) and believe the objective facts of the gospel (I Cor. 15:1-3), and that one need not "obey the gospel" (Rom. 10:16, II Thes. 1:8, I Pet. 4:17) in order to be saved? Are you saying God will save those He elected by grace regardless of what they believe or do not believe?
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:Eliyahu:
"2) I am not a Sunday-keeper. I can accept any days because everyday is the Sabbath for me as long as I am in Jesus christ.
My Sabbath is from Sabbath to Sabbath."
This comes as no surprise, as nothing new or original. It is the vainglorious cluthching at the straw of a desparate man.
My only answer is: Scripture? Hb4? Man o man!
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:Eliyahu:
"I have entered the Katapausin ( Rest) !"
GE:
"I judge no one; the words I have spoken, they shall judge ..." you, said Jesus.
You claim to have entered the 'Katapausin', yet refuse what "remains for the People of God", "AS THE RESULT OF" - 'ara', THIS VERY 'katapausis', namely, their "keeping of the Sabbath Day -- Sabbatismos"?
You explain that to me?