Which is the Jewish Sabbath - Saturday or Lunar?

[BobRyan]

Since God's Word is "something for Linda to ignore" so far --

Lets go meet her where she prefers to post - outside of Scripture.

Posted by Kamaroso -

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
Constantine's Sunday Law of 321 A.D.
:
"One the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country however persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits because it often happens that another day is not suitable for gain-sowing or vine planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost. (Given the 7th day of March, Crispus and Constantine being consuls each of them the second time." Codex Justinianus, lib. 3, tit. 12, 3; translated in History of the Christian Church, Philip Schaff, D.D., (7-vol.ed.) Vol. III, p.380. New York, 1884

Dr. A.Chr. Bang: regarding this Law :
"This Sunday law constituted no real favoratism to Christianity..... It is evident from all his statuatory provisions that the Emperor during the time 313-323 with full consciousness has sought the realisation of his religeous aim: the amalgamation of heathenism and Christianity." Kirken og Romerstaten (The Church and the Roman State) p.256. Christiania, 1879

15. In A.D. 321, to please the bishops of the Catholic Church, he issued an edict commanding judges, townspeople, and mechanics to rest on Sunday. Yet in this also his paganism was still manifest, as the edict required rest on "the venerable day of the sun," and "enjoined the observance, or rather forbade the public desecration, of Sunday, not under the name of Sabbatum, or Dies Domini, but under its old astrological and heathen title, Dies Solis, familiar to all his subjects, so that the law was as applicable to the worshipers of Hercules, Apollo, and Mithras, as to the Christians." - Schaff. ( The Great Empires of Prophecy by Alonzo Jones page 391 )

The following is from the council of Laodicea ( about 364 AD )

CANON XXIX.

CHRISTIANS must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.

It was during the reign of Constantine that the adulterous form of Christianity that sought relations with, and the power of, the kings of the earth, attained their goal. The Roman Catholic church is rightly named, for she is that apostate Christain institution which first abandoned the power of the Holy Spirit, in favor of the power of the state. It was Constantine, the emperor of Rome, that the for-runners of the Catholic church gave their support to, with the intention of gaining the power of the state. Thus, the Catholic church, is the Church of Rome.

63. Then came Constantine, the best imperial representative of the new paganism, and the most devout worshiper of the sun as the supreme and universal deity, with the avowed purpose, as expressed in his own words, "First to bring the diverse judgments formed by all nations respecting the Deity to a condition, as it were, of settled uniformity." In Constantine the new paganism met its ideal, and the New Platonism - the apostate, paganized, sun-worshiping form of Christianity - met its long-wished-for instrument. In him the two streams met. In him the aspiration of Elagabalus, the hope of Ammonius Saccas and Clement, of Plotinus and Origen, and the ambition of the perverse-minded, self-exalted bishops, were all realized and accomplished -a new, imperial, and universal religion was created.

64. Therefore, "the reign of Constantine the Great forms one of the epochs in the history of the world. It is the era of the dissolution of the Roman Empire; the commencement, or rather consolidation, of a kind of Eastern despotism, with a new capital, a new patriciate, a new constitution, a new financial system, a new, though as yet imperfect, jurisprudence, and, finally, a new religion." - Milman.
65. The epoch thus formed was the epoch of the papacy; and the new religion thus created was the PAPAL RELIGION. ( The Great Empires of Prophecy by Alonzo Jones page 361 )

By instituting the first Sunday laws, Constantine gave the Church of Rome the power of the state. For this law commanded all, those in, and out of the faith, to observe this apostate Christian institution. In this way, the one who would think to change times and laws, obtained the power to do so. Thus began the rule of the Papacy, an institution that would go on to trample upon the individuals conscience.

At present, the church of Rome does not exercise her authority over any but her own. Indeed, she even espouses religious liberty. However, at the same time, Pope John Paul 11 pursued an almost identical course to that of Constantine's, which resulted in the establishment of the Church of Rome.

He was also pushing for unity of all faiths, Christian, and non Christian alike. The Pope himself, would naturally be the visible leader of this union when it is accomplished. At the same time also, he called for civil legislation supporting the Sunday Sabbath. The following quote is from his APOSTOLIC LETTER DIES DOMINI.

Therefore, also in the particular circumstances of our own time, Christians will naturally strive to ensure that civil legislation respects their duty to keep Sunday holy. In any case, they are obliged in conscience to arrange their Sunday rest in a way which allows them to take part in the Eucharist, refraining from work and activities which are incompatible with the sanctification of the Lord's Day, with its characteristic joy and necessary rest for spirit and body. (112)

If all faiths unite, and Sunday observance is decreed by law, then another apostate form of religion will have the power of the state on a world wide level.

</font>[/QUOTE]

 

[BobRyan]

This is from the catechism of the Catholic church, the official guide for every Catholic in obeying the laws of God and the church, paragraph 2172 & 2173.

" 2172 God's action is the model for human action. If God "rested and was refreshed" on the seventh day, man ought to "rest" and should let others especially the poor, "be refreshed." the Sabbath brings everyday work to a halt and provides a respite. It is the day of protest against the servitude of work and the worship of money.

" 2173 the Gospel reports many incidents when Jesus was accused of violating the Sabbath law. But Jesus never fails to respect the holiness of the day. He gives this law its authentic and authoritative interpretation: ' the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.' with compassion, Christ declares the Sabbath for doing good rather than harm, for saving life rather than killing. The Sabbath is the day of the Lord of mercies and a day to honor God. ' the son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath.' "

Dies Domini is a papal encyclical on the subject of Sunday and how it is regarded by tradition to be a holy day rooted in the 10 commandments as a continuation of the 4th commandment (numbered 3 by Roman Catholics).

Dies Domini pt 11
"the rest of the Sabbath..discloses something of the nuptial shape of the relationship which God wants to establish with the creature made in his image, by calling that creature to enter a pact of love". Pt 15 "unlike many other precepts it (the Sabbath) is set not within the context of strictly cultic (Jewish) stipulations but within the Decalogue, the "ten words" which represent the very pillars of moral life inscribed on the human (not merely Jewish) heart".

Dies Domini pt 13 -
"the Sabbath ...is therefore rooted in the depths of God's plan. This is why unlike many other laws - it is not within the context of strictly cultic (Jewish) stipulations but within the Decalogue the "ten words" which represent the very pillars of moral life inscribed on the human heart!! In setting this commandment within the context of the basic structure of ethics, Israel and then the church declare that they consider it not just a matter of community religious discipline but a defining and indelible expression of our relationship to God, announced and expounded by biblical revelations.

Some non-Catholics argue “Sunday is called the Lord's day because it is the "eighth day" which celebrates the new creation and the new covenant and, according to catechism para. 1167, is "the pre-eminent day for the liturgical assembly when the faithful gather” – but what is the position of the Catholic Church as noted from the quotes above?

Dies Domini pt 11 "if the first page of the book of Genesis presents God's work as an example for man, the same is true of God's rest - on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done therefore God blessed the seventh day and made it holy...it is a gaze which God casts upon all things, but in a special way upon man, the crown
of creation. It is a gaze which already discloses something of the nuptial shape of the relationship God wants to establish with the creature made in his own image, by calling that creature to enter a pact of love."

Dies Domini asserts that Sunday is not the Sabbath as God gave it.

Dies Domini 21

Pt 23. .

.21) Saint Augustine notes in turn: "Therefore the Lord too has placed his seal on his day, which is the third after the Passion. In the weekly cycle, however, it is the eighth day after the seventh, that is after the Sabbath, and the first day of the week".

(22) The distinction of Sunday from the Jewish Sabbath grew ever stronger in the mind of the Church, even though there have been times in history when, because the obligation of Sunday rest was so emphasized, the Lord's Day tended to become more like the Sabbath. Moreover, there have always been groups within Christianity which observe both the Sabbath and Sunday as "two brother days".(23)

The entire argument for Sunday as authoritative (not merely arbitrary) and as applying to all mankind is based on the continued authority of the Sabbath commandment according to the pope's argument above.


The Catholic commentary on the Baltimore catechism post
Vatican ii explains that keeping Sunday is in obedience to the Sabbath commandment. Catholics attend "in obedience to the third commandment of God 'remember thou keep holy the Lord's day'"
((from "The Faith Explained" pg 241.))

The Faith Explained (a commentary on the Baltimore catechism post Vatican ii) states on

Page 242 that changing the Lord's day to Sunday was in the power of the church since "in the gospels ..Jesus confers upon his church the power to make laws in his name".

page 243

"nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day From Saturday to Sunday. We know of the change only from the tradition of the Church - a fact handed down to us...that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many Non-Catholics, who say that they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and Yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church"

. (from "The Faith Explained" page 243.))

"we know that in the o.t it was the seventh day of the week - the Sabbath day - which was observed as the Lord's day. that was the law as God gave it...'remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.. the early Christian church determined as the Lord's day the first day of the week. That the church had the right to make such a law is evident...

The reason for changing the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday lies in the fact that to the Christian church the first day of the week had been made double holy...

nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday..that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many non-Catholic who say they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church

 

[EdSutton]

Someone once asked me the following question.
"Speaking as an impartial outsider, what do you think of the human race?"

I am still a bit of an 'outsider' in this crowd, but I do have a couple of observations.
What in the world does the questionn of whether or not the Sabbath of the OT/Mosaic Law/Saturday was or was not changed into 'The Lord's Day/Sunday/first day have to do with the original topic of whether the Jewish Sabbath was Saturady or a 'lunar' day?
I simply fail to see the connection, here.
And I am glad to find out about Mr. Mark Martin. Just think! Going from the pulpit to NASCAR!

Ed

 

[Linda64]

First of all, you continually quote from the RCC documents--I asked for SCRIPTURES to prove that Sunday is the Mark of the Beast. You have none. All you do is copy and paste from RCC websites. Until you can come up with some Scriptures, then your doctrine of Sunday being the Mark of the Beast is false.

Second, Baptists are not Protestants. Do a study of church history--Protestants were former Catholics who "protested" some of the RCC doctrines. Protestants also persecuted the Baptists. Luther and Calvin came out of the Catholic Church, but not far enough out. The Protestant churches still hold to some of the Catholic doctrines, like infant baptism. Check it out.

Originally posted by EdSutton:

And I am glad to find out about Mr. Mark Martin. Just think! Going from the pulpit to NASCAR!

What do you mean by this statement about Mark Martin? I have heard the man preach--he was an SDA pastor--he got saved and is now the pastor at Calvary Community Church in Phoenix, AZ

 

[Eliyahu]

Shalom Linda,
It's a powerful explanation on Sabbath!
You are correct in view of the protestants. I would call them RRCC: Reformed Roman Catholic Church, far far better than RC but keeping some pagan worship, human theories.
I do respect some people who try to keep some Galatians' legalism as long as they are saved truly. But it will hurt them very much.
I have a fellowship with Messianic Jewish Congregation and they gather together on Sabbath. When I talked about Acts 20:7, they excuse it as Habdallah.
If one can learn that Sabbath teaches us about Yeshuah, then she or he will realize that the actual body of Sabbath is Christ.
I think the ceremonial law does not apply to the gentile believers.

 

[Boanerges]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:

If one can learn that Sabbath teaches us about Yeshuah, then she or he will realize that the actual body of Sabbath is Christ.

Just a clarification Eliyahu. Yeshuah(H3444) written Yod/Shin/Vav/Ayin/Hey, is a feminine noun. It means salvation. Yeshua (H3442) written Yod/Shin/Vav/Ayin, is a masculine noun that means "He is salvation/He saves." It is the shortened form of Yehoshua (H3091). Yeshua is the name that Iesous/ Jesus was derived from. In Matthew 1:21 we find "for He will save His people from their sins"

 

[Claudia_T]

I forgot to include something in my former posts.

I noticed someone on here was saying that Seventh Day Adventists make a big deal out of keeping the Sabbath (as if to say it isnt such a big deal as we make it out to be).

First of all, we know the Bible prophecies warn that the Beast power would "think to change times and laws".

"And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws. " Daniel 7.25.

Secondly we know the Roman Catholic Church claims it was by her authority that that Sabbath was changed from the 7th day of the week to Sunday the first day of the week, also claiming that the Pope stands in the place of God Himself:


"The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret, even divine laws....The Pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man but of God, and he acts as vicegerent of God upon earth with most ample power of binding and loosing the sheep."-From the Prompta Bibliotheca published in 1900 in Rome by the press of the propaganda.

"The pope has power to change times, to abrogate laws, and to dispense with all things, even the precepts of Christ."-Decretal de Translat, Episcop. Cap.


"The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday."-Catholic Mirror, Sept. 23, 1893.

Thirdly, the Roman Catholic Church actually revels in the fact that the entire Protestant world who claims to "protest" against the Catholic Church, has actually bowed down in respect to the Catholic Church by adopting her man-mad Sabbath:

"I have repeatedly offered $1,000 to any one who can prove to me from the Bible alone that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no such law in the Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone. The Bible says, 'Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.' The Catholic Church says, 'No; by my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day, and command you to keep holy the first day of the week.' and lo! The entire civilized world bows down in reverent obedience to the command of the holy Catholic Church. 'Priest Enright, C.S.S.R., Kansas City, Missouri.


Fourthly, I could give you a great list of Protestant Church Leaders who realize the fact that the Bible just does not anywhere tell us the Sabbath has been changed by God:

Dr. Edward T. Hiscox, author of The Baptist Manual, before a group of ministers, made this candid admission:

"There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week, with all its duties, privileges, and sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I have studied for many years, I ask, Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament, absolutely not. There is no Scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week.

"Of course," he continues, "I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of Paganism, and christened with the name of the sun god, when adopted and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism!"-From a paper read before a New York Ministers' Conference, held Nov. 13, 1893.


and last but not least, THE BIBLE ITSELF indicates that keeping God's Commandments is most definitely A BIG DEAL:

1Jn:2:4: He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

Mt:5:19: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Mt:15:9: But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mt:19:17: ...if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Jn:14:15: If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Jn:14:21: He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Jn:15:10: If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

1Jn:2:3: And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

1Jn:3:22: And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.

1Jn:3:24: And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

1Jn:5:2: By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.

1Jn:5:3: For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Rv:12:17: And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rv:14:12: Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rv:22:14: Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.


Claudia

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Linda64:
First of all, you continually quote from the RCC documents--I asked for SCRIPTURES to prove that Sunday is the Mark of the Beast.

You have already stated that you don't really care what "scripture says" if it debunks your own idea that "the Sabbath was NOT made for mankind" Mark 2:27 says the "Sabbath WAS made for Mankind" and you say "that is only 17 words" of Christ - easy to ignore.

So - since He is so easy for you to ignore - "what" do you propose as "proof" for ANY question you could possibly ask here?

You seem to have lost all credibility here.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Linda64:
First of all, the Sabbath was never changed to Sunday.

Except in man-made tradition.

Second, the Sabbath was never given to the Church.

Just to "MANKIND" Mark 2:27 as it was "MADE for mankind".

And just to "MANKIND" in the NEW HEAVENS and NEW EARTH Isaiah 66.

(All just "so much more scripture to ignore" for those who simply "count the words" in texts they don't like instead of reading them)

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Ben W:
Interesting website!

http://www.lunarsabbath.com/

The real Bible based New Moon and also 7 day Creation Week Holy day of Christ the Creator are certainly "of God" -- but the link above tries to some some "creative accounting" with history without ever actually dealing with the Bible texts on Christs Creation week Sabbath.

http://www.yahwehmusic.com/covenants/burningquestion.htm

 

[Boanerges]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ben W:
Interesting website!

http://www.lunarsabbath.com/

The real Bible based New Moon and also 7 day Creation Week Holy day of Christ the Creator are certainly "of God" -- but the link above tries to some some "creative accounting" with history without ever actually dealing with the Bible texts on Christs Creation week Sabbath.

http://www.yahwehmusic.com/covenants/burningquestion.htm </font>[/QUOTE]Yet another goofy sacred name site that sometimes quotes from a corrupt version. (ISR)

 

[Eliyahu]

Boanerges,

Thanks for your comments. Grammar tells many things.
One thing that I would like to expect from everybody here on BB is that our enemy is not the Brethren who were born again apparently, even though we may differ in some doctrinal issues because we cannot agree on all the issues each other. Therefore please be patient about the issues other than the Salvation connected matter, as long as someone seems to be born again believer.

I disagree with SDA on Sabbath issue, but have found some good people out of there, and therefore I respect their belief and am quite patient with them. We need some more time, discussing in the lower tones.

 

[Boanerges]

Originally posted by Eliyahu:

One thing that I would like to expect from everybody here on BB is that our enemy is not the Brethren who were born again apparently, even though we may differ in some doctrinal issues because we cannot agree on all the issues each other.

No one on this board is my enemy. I only debate errant doctrine. I have two very close friends who are SDA. The traditional SDA's study the Word with fervor, and love God. This is not the problem. They have, like most other denoms, allowed stuff to creep in that can not be clearly proven using scripture.

Hell is clearly eternal according to the Hebrew in Dan 12:2. There is no way around it. Ellen White prophesied falsely. It is a matter of record. Celebrating the sabbath on saturday is fine, no problem scripturally. Jesus is not Michael, as Michael has never been named properly as receiving worship in scripture. (only by "allusion")

I could list a huge list of errant doctrine in the other denoms. Error is error, and has to be reproved.I am not on here to defend the Baptists, as they have their own issues. I am here to defend the Word.

 

[EdSutton]

I have been somewhat delayed in gettig back to this line.

But I do need to respond to something Linda may have taken the wrong way by some wisecrack I made. Linda wrote quoting me (unfortunatly, without the laughing greamlins):

"Originally posted by EdSutton:

quote:And I am glad to find out about Mr. Mark Martin. Just think! Going from the pulpit to NASCAR!

What do you mean by this statement about Mark Martin? I have heard the man preach--he was an SDA pastor--he got saved and is now the pastor at Calvary Community Church in Phoenix, AZ [thumbs] "

Since she may not know (I could not tell if she were serious, or razzing back), I was in no way disparaging her pastor friend by the name of Mark Martin (I did not take the time to check out the web link) in any way. So by way of information: One of the most successful race car drivers in the history of stock car racing- i.e. NASCAR, is one Mark Martin. His success is both in the truck series and the top car series.

I don't think any other has been as successful in both series, at the same time, over the long haul as he, the driver of #6. I was amused at the identical names, and that is what led me to my 'funny' about NASCAR. I do admit to a warped sense of humor and being easily amused.
I am also somewhat familiar with the 'famous name' syndrome, and especially as it ties into the sports world. EdSutton is a shortened version of the name I usually go by here, Eddie Sutton. This is a big basketball state, and the UK coach, prior to his becoming Oklahoma State's coach was Eddie Sutton. He likewise as Mark Martin, is fairly successful in his field. To be exact, he is currently the #2 individual in Wins coaching Div. I basketball with well over 800, trailing only Bobby Knight in that category as an active coach. I have gotten a lot of mileage over the years relating the names, and considering some situations, myself, with such comments as "If I could coach as well as he, do you think I'd be here farming?" and "I wouldn't even need a driver!" I am a sometimes professional driver, myself.

I did not want Linda to think I ignored her, so here is what I meant.

In His geace,
Ed

 

[EdSutton]

Incidentally, Linda, I did not know there are 31,173 verses in the Bible. I musta' miscounted. I thought it was 31,174!

Ed

 

[Linda64]

Ed---
Thank you for the explanation of Mark Martin--I did think you were serious about the NASCAR thing. Actually, the man's name is J. Mark Martin. I don't know him personally, but I have heard some of his messages on tape. I was doing a study on SDA.
God bless,
Linda

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Boanerges:
. I am here to defend the Word. [/QB]

There has been sheer panic and "flight in terror" from the Words of Christ in Mark 2:27 on this board.

When they are brought up Linda says "I count 17 words there" as if this is the "substance" for the Christian when reading the Words of Christ tha so debunk their own false doctrines!

The same has held true for Isaiah 66 so far.

How can this "running and avoiding" God's Word that is so blatantly displayed here on this thread in regard to the "PAGE ONE" question put to you and Linda be regarded as "paying ANY attention at all to God's Word"??!!

When you see "inconvenient facts" in God's Word you simply run from them.

How could anyone be "convinced favorably" by such tactics as have been displayed here regarding the Words of Christ!

Even Worse - Linda has gone so far as to trash scripture IN GENERAL when it comes to the OT and to refuse to show how that even more gross error could be sustained by EVEN NT standards!

The tactics used here have been "instructive" as they are blatant!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Linda64:
What do you do with the rest of scriptures that says we (the Church) is not under the Mosaic Law? (Col. 2:16-17).

Tell you what - I will go into Col 2 since it does NOT say "We are not under the Mosaic Law" and you go into the "inconvenient detail" of the Words of Christ in Mark 2:27.

Me first.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]Then of course I proceded to show due diligence in "good faith" by following up on this offer with my review of Col 2

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/28/3598/4.html#000055

But of course - Linda is "in the business of ignoring" scripture that displeases her so "dead silence on the Mark 2 side of that deal".

How "surprising".

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]From the previous page of this thread...

Another short example of Bible based and careful review of Col 2 on my part debunking yet "another" false claim made. And yet we find on this thread "dead silence" is the response to this careful review of Col 2 and the "inconvenient details" of the text of God's Word for those those who merely here to "spin" what they have been told to think - and to avoid scripture that displeases them.

Oh the darkness of man-made tradtion!

In Christ,

Bob