The Decline of the Sabbath

The problem is that the word "ALIKE" is not even in the letter. Paul argues that ONE group "OBSERVES ONE day ABOVE another" and the other group "OBSERVES EVERY DAY" in that "list of days" given by God in scripture (Lev 23)

Also Paul says nothing in Rom 14 about this being an issue BETWEEN Jews and Gentiles. We know in Acts 13 and Acts 17 and Romans 2 that Paul has no problem identifying problem-Jews vs Christian Gentiles - but in Rom 14 that is not the problem and so he never mentions it.

Rather it is a problem for ALL Christians that HAVE THE BIBLE and READ IT in the Romans 14 age of the first century NT church.

Recall that all of their First century NT church leaders were Christian Jews and EVEN the Gentiles were looking to the Acts 15 Jerusalem council to solve their disputes. Paul was not in a "death to Jews" mode in Romans 14 and he clearly was not saying "JEWS observe EVERDAY in Lev 23 because they are Jews. Gentiles OBSERVE NO DAY".

That argument is not in Romans 14 at all.

in Christ,

Bob

 

GE:

Two further huge mistakes in this post of yours, TC.

You mistake Colossians and Galatians for Acts 15 it appears. In Acts heathen Judaist proselytes infiltrated the Church and tried to upset it. You won't find that in either Colossians or Galatians the case, where the battle raged between heathen Christians and Christian faith on the one hand, and heathen power and putrifaction on the other hand.

Then you err in saying Paul wrote to them to get them not to keep the Law. Paul hoped to get the faithful back to God's Law, to get them back to faith in Christ! Never are the Law of God, and Christ, exclusive of one another. The Law's honour is to honour Christ, and Christ's honour, is to honour the Law of God. The mere fact you oppose Christ and God's Law, should tell you you are wrong.

 

BR:

"And in Romans 3 Paul argues against your view explicitly "Do we then abolish the Law of God? God forbid!! In fact we ESTABLISH the Law of God"."

GE:

You will agree, Bob, that Paul using the First Person, actualy means, God, "Does God then abolish the Law of God? God forbid!! In fact, God ESTABLISHES the Law of God."

How come?
The whole chapter three tells how and why, summed up in 21-26a! How does God then, establish the Law of God? Read these verses!

In Christ Jesus we have the whole Law of God, indeed, all the Scriptures, every particular of it, so that we have even the Fourth Commandment, "in Him"! "But now the righteousness of God (His Law) without the Law is manifested ... even the Righteousness of God by faith of JESUS CHRIST". This Law of God, "God has SET FORTH a Propitiation (an Atonement) -- through faith in HIS, blood". The Law in the Person and work of Christ! God "declare(s)", Christ, "His Righteousness".
"If there were a law that could give life", Paul somewhere says - the Law he has here, found and discovered! The Law surrenders all the glory it has, and had, to Christ; it has no honour but to. The law that does not vanish in surrendering all its glory to Christ, is not the Law of God; is not the Law of God; is not "the Law unto Life", but the law of own righteousness and self-justification -- "the law unto death".

 

Where on earth do you get that? Circumcision was strictly the covenant sign given specifically to Abraham, and kept by the Children of Promise, Israel. Now, you're calling it a heather idolatrous practice? Is that what God int he LAw calls it? I know of no nonAbrahamic people who keep it. Paul uses "uncircumcision" as synonymous with "gentile", so he did not know of any gentiles keeping it that had not been influenced by Jewish Proselytizers and Christian Judaizers.

Uh, haven't you criticized Bob in the past for keeping the Sabbath because of the Law, and made that different from the new meaning in Christ?

Again, "krino" is "decide", which is closer in meaning to "esteem", not "observe". It is also translated elsewhere as "aconclude", "condemn", "decree", "determine", "judge", "go to (sue at the) law", "ordain", "Call in question", "sentence to", "think". Nothing anywhere near "observe".
If Paul wanted to say "observe", he would have used tereo ("watch", used in Mt.23:3 (2×), 28:20), or phulasso (used in Mk.10:20) both of which, regarding "observing" of Laws.

If this was talking only about "annual days of Lev. 23", SDA's don't keep any of the annual days, (at least not mandatorily) so actually, you yourself would fit in the category of "observ[ing] NO DAY"! So again, it must not mean that.

You guys are really pushing it to explain away the scriptures.

 

Well we know they are not "going to law against one day over another" - i.e. you are grasping at straws sir.

Whe it compes to God's word in Lev 23 We know they are not "condemning one day above another" - you are grasping at straws sir.

When it comes to Lev 23 we know they are not exercising god-like authority OVER scripture and "judging, or decreeing" one day above another.

Again - your approach here is seen to be grasping at straws.

No wonder so many Bible translators do not take your "straw man" option here Steaver -


NKJV vs 6
6He who [b]observes the day, observes[/b] it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks.

NASB vs 6
6He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord[/b], and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.[/quote]

Amplified Bible vs 6
6He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.

English Standard Bible – vs 6
6The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.

Oh no "wait" -- now you're going to say that all these Bible scholars doing those translations were "SDA"??!!:laugh:

(Sorry - couldn't resis that one)

in Christ,

Bob

 

Every now and then Steaver - you make a good bullet-proof point... but this is not one of them. Here you observe correctly that SDAs do not have a horse in this race - since we would not object either to someone who "observes EVERY ONE of the Lev 23 annual holy days" nor would we object to one who "Observes one above another" NOR would we object to someone not OBSERVING any of the Lev 23 annual holy days.

But this is also the case with the vegetarian issue in Romans 14 regarding meat offerred to idols and it does NOTHING to prevent us from reading about the fact that Paul IS dealing with those subjects here.

In the first example Paul deals with the issueof meat offerred to idols and argues that some are vegetarian to avoid that problem while others with more mature faith go ahead and eat the meat offerred to idols.

SDAs do not mention this issue at all in our doctrinal statements regarding meat offerred to idols - but that DOES NOT negate or STOP us from seeing that Paul IS dealing with this very real first century problem.

So ALSO in the second example we have an early NT Christian church being viewed as nothing more than a "SECT of Judaism" by not only the Romans but ALSO by the JEWS and having it's "Jerusalem Council" deciding all matters needing arbitration between Gentiles and Jewish Christians (See Acts 15).

In THAT context we have BIBLE-reading, BIBLE-Believing -- 7th-day honoring Christians who "hear Moses preached every Sabbath day" (See Acts 13 and Acts 150 - and THEY find IN THE BIBLE the list of holy days in Lev 23. It is not surprising then that SOME OBSERVE all the days while OTHERS observe one of the days ABOVE another.

As we note in this case (AS WITH the case regarding meat offerred to idols) - SDAs do not have a horse in this race either other than to observe and admit to the first century controvsey without trying to SPIN it into a Seventh-day Sabbath question.

Unfortunatily those opposed to Christ the Creator's Seventh-day memorial of HIS creative act in Gen 1-2:3 do not often share that same level of objectivity as Steaver seems willing to point out.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Of course, nobody "judges", "condemns", or "goes to law against" one day over another. That was just showing the different things the word krino is translated into and they all convey in some way a sense of ESTEEMING, not "observing". Just because those words would not make sense does not give us the license to plug any ol' word in there. Paul used krino in this verse. The literal meaning is "to distinguish". "esteem" is the best meaning that fits it in this context.
Now you go to v.6, but that is a completely different word, "phroneo" (exercise the mind, entertain or have a sentiment or opinion; to interest onesself in with concern or obedience). That better fits "observe", but phroneo is not used in v5, but rather verse 6. Just because some versions translate both with the same English word "observe" doesn't mean Paul meant the same word. So Paul is telling us, that some "distinguish" one day above another, or all the same, and that whoever "has a sentiment or interests oneself in" the day should do it unto the Lord (not to judge others over it). There is no need to speculate on "they read of the Lev. 23 days in the synagogues, and now some are keeping some of them, and others are keeping all of them". That is going WAY beyond what this simple chapter says.

You keep saying "observing `every day alike´ is not `observing NO day´; there is no option to observe NO day" or something like that; but since you insist these are the Lev.23 days, and SDA's do not keep any of them; you in fact "observe NO day" in that sense, so you might as well accept "observe NO day" as an option being taught by the text.

 

This is the part where you explain why you think the NASB was written by ME??

NKJV vs 6
6He who [b]observes the day, observes[/b] it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks.

NASB vs 6
6He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord[/b], and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.

Amplified Bible vs 6
6He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.

English Standard Bible – vs 6
6The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.

Oh no "wait" -- now you're going to say that all these Bible scholars doing those translations were "SDA"??!!:laugh:

The point remains -- Krino in vs 5 shows a selection or preference "to approve, esteem, to prefer " to OBSERVE ("Preference to OBSERVE") as we can see in vs 6. IT is ALL the same chapter the same letter the same author the same subject. You are trying to mince words and parse verses apart when in fact they go together IN Context.

Let me make it even simpler for you - HERE we have an author who AGREES with you on the need to avoid Christ the Creator's Seventh-day Sabbath BUT STILL this well known Bible Scholar can not bring himself to bend things around in Romans 14 as you seem to want to do --

Adam Clark’s commentary

Chapter 14
In things indifferent, Christians should not condemn each other, 1. Particularly with respect to different kinds of food, 2-4. And the observation of certain days, 5,6. None of us should live unto himself, but unto Christ, who lived and died for us, 7-9. We must not judge each other; for all judgment belongs to God,

Verse 5. One man esteemeth one day above another
Perhaps the word ημεραν, day, is here taken for time, festival, and such like, in which sense it is frequently used. Reference is made here to the Jewish institutions, and especially their festivals; such as the passover, pentecost, feast of tabernacles, new moons, jubilee, Jew still thought these of moral obligation;.
http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=ro&chapter=014

Oops - it looks like you finally "came around" on that one.

Nice save sir.

You almost have it righ. The ISSUE Paul is addressing is between those who OBSERVE one day ABOVE another in the Lev 23 annual holy day list and those who OBSERVE EVERY DAY in that LIST of annual holy days.

He addresses conflict over a very specific issue. A conflict that SDAs do NOT engage in.

The text is not "TEACHING us to observe no day" he purpose of the text is to settle a dispute between those that OBSERVE ONE day ABOVE another and those that OBSERVE every day.

You keep trying to "spin this" into something else - and your SPIN efforts have failed you so far.

I thought you would have noticed by now - since it is incredibly obvious at this point..

Perhaps it is soooo blatantly obvious that once again we can simply appeal to the "objective reader" to see it for themsleves instead of playing this game where you "pretend" not to see something no matter how obvious and then suppose my goal is to take a "you can't make me" response like you are giving and "convince the unwilling" -- which has never been my goal.

My objective is fully reached as soon as the issue is so blatantly obvious to the objective reader that the point speaks for itself.

Kinda like you with J Jump on Matt 7 - at some point it does not matter if J Jump pretends not to see the glarlingly obvious point - the objective reader clearly sees it.


In Christ,

Bob

 

Galations 2 (NKJV)
11 Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.
14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews? 15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, 16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
17 “But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19 For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”

We see here that Paul disagrees with you. I am not wrong here, but you are.

Galations 3 (NKJV)
10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.” 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.” 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.”
13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

This once again shows that I am not in error. People came in and told the gentile Christians that they had to keep the law to be saved - i.e. get circuncised, ect. Paul writes to them that the works of the law do not make anyone righteous, but faith in Christ is what saves us.

 

Romans 14:5

NIV - One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

NASB - One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.

NLT - In the same way, some think one day is more holy than another day, while others think every day is alike. You should each be fully convinced that whichever day you choose is acceptable.

KJV - One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

ESV - One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

NKJV - One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind.

ASV - One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let each man be fully assured in his own mind.

TNIV - Some consider one day more sacred than another; others consider every day alike. Everyone should be fully convinced in their own mind.

HCSB - One person considers one day to be above another day. Someone else considers every day to be the same. Each one must be fully convinced in his own mind.

8 out of 9 Bibles say some esteem or consider every day alike.
1 out of 9 Bibles say some consider every day to be the same.

I will take the Bibles word for it over your word.

 

I don't have to say those scholars and translations are SDA. All I have to point out is that that is their particular translation, and as TC just showed, the overwhelming majority (beginning with the faithful KJV) use "esteem", as that is closer to the Greek meaning. And again, the words in v.6 are different from the words in v.5. You can't ignore that and attempt to interpret the Greek by an English translation. That is what the worst of the KJVO's do.
So you either judge one day as more special than another ("above"), or you judge them all alike.
And even if Clarke's interpretation were right, that principle would still include the weekly sabbath.

And that "list" is nowhere in the context, it is talking about ANY days the Jews esteem or judge as holy over others.

The issue that is so blatantly obvious is that you are forcing the text to say whaat you want it to say. We have shown you straight from the Greek that krinos is NOT "observe". And that a "list of Lev. 23 days ONLY is not in the context. But you think repeating it over and over makes it so.

 

These guys are not Sabbath keeping scholars -- and THEY still see the truth of Rom 14!!

I am sure the objective reader will be able to see right through that kind of response Eric. You need to look for something more convincing.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Originally Posted by BobRyan
The problem is that the word "ALIKE" is not even in the letter.
[/quote]

No answer.

Netx point

Now - trying to avoid the Rom 14:5-6 point that days from the Lev 23 list are being selected,considered,chosen ABOVE another or else ALL the days are being selected for (as vs 6 states) OBSERVANCE.

Simply look at the text ALL of these translations SHOW the reader that the word "ALIKE" is NOT IN the text.

Obviously.

The pont remains sir.

Second point.

The translations given SHOW that in vs 5 days are being preferred from the Lev 23 list in some cases one ABOVE another and in other cases aLL of the annual holy days are being selected for OBSERVANCE as vs 6 tells us.

Again - this is incredibly obvious given the combination of vs 5 and 6 - no hope of spinning it. Translations from your own LIST are telling this to you - you have to turn a blind eye to them to get around it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Hint: You guys are really making this toooo easy.

I should proably thank you - but come on -- you have to at least try.

 

The fact that "alike" is not in the Greek still does not change the meaning of "krino". In fact, it is krino that forced the translators of all those versions to add "alike".

You have to add something. They add "alike" to conform to the meaning of the Greek word chosen. You add a "list of Lev 23 days" that is nowhere in the text, and a practice of observing some but not all of them that was unheard of, to conform to your need to explain the passage away.

You haven't even answered anything I said, there. The objective reader will see right through this.

 

"Alike" is not in the text because the focus of vs 5 is that ONE regards ONE day ABOVE another and the other person holds in high regard ALL of the days in the Lev 23 list.

And as Vs 6 states the holding them in high regard is for the purpose of OBSERVING them!!

NKJV vs 6
6He who [b]observes the day, observes[/b] it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks.

NASB vs 6
6He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord[/b], and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.

Amplified Bible vs 6
6He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.

English Standard Bible – vs 6
6The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.



The facts have basically exposed the flaws in your debate tactic sir.

in Christ,

Bob

 

So you refuse to acknowledge that the Greek word in v6 is completely different from v5. You cannot deal with the meaning of krino, so you keep trying to dodge the issue, and turn to people's translations from centuries later. You pair Clarke's interpretation of v. 5 with those translations use of the word "observe" in v6, and you rewrite the Greek text based on that. And I only thought the most radical KJVO's did that. Sure gives them a point that we should stick with the KJV, which correctly translates the words closer to their actual meaning!

The actual FOCUS of the passage is not to JUDGE based on diet and days, because "for to this end Christ both died and rose...that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living" (v.9, 10ff). But you're so busy rewriting it, to try to get around this instruction, that you cannot see this clear focus.

 

GE:

Verse 5 has 'krinoh'-'judge'; verse 6, 'phronoh'-'mind'.
I think Paul uses the latter word to explain the first. Isn't it saying much the fact though, the negative of 6a "he who regards not the day to the Lord does not regard it", is not authentic? Everybody 'esteemed' days; there was no one who 'regarded not days'!
The real subject of contention was HOW everybody esteemed the days -- purely as a matter of "food and drink", which things Paul said, were not the constituents of the Kingdom of God!
For the Church members in Rome food and drink was the big thing; for Paul it was their pride and intolerance!

 

The text says that everyone "esteems" days, yet not everyone "observes" (regards) days. That right there tells you that "esteem"≠"observe", and the person who ""observes" NO days is the one who "ESTEEMS" them all "[ALIKE]". (the addition of "alike" made necessary by the grammar in the trasnaltion to English).
The same thing is then done with food and drink. Paul mentions both; which does not mean that "days only referred to feasting/fasting practices" as some claim. People judge others over days of worship and/or food and drink, and both were being condemned here, regardless of what we try to make the words mean.

 

Nope - that would be turning a completely blind eye to my post.

I SHOW that the evaluation being done in vs 5 is for the PURPOSE of OBSERVANCE in vs 6.

Either in OBSERVING ONE in the LIST of days in Lev 23 ABOVE the others OR in OBSERVING all of them.

The one who values one above the others is observing the one but not the others. The one who VALUES THEM ALL is observing ALL.

obviously

in Christ,

Bob