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

The Sabbath law in principle is merely six days preceding and following the seventh day Sabbath. In Application it can be applied to any day of the week and still six days precede and follow and it is the seventh day Sabbath.

Leviticus 23 and the FIXED DATE Sabbaths prove that God's understanding of the PRINICPLE of the fourth commandment cannot be restricted/limited only to a particular day "of the week." When God applies it to a particular day "of the week" then that particular day is the sabbath until God changes the APPLICATION (not the law). God did change the APPLICATION due to a greater work finished on another day "of the week" that is yet to be fulfullied (Heb. 4:11, 14) when all the elect enter into an eternal eighth day Sabbath of a new heaven and new earth where God once again can look upon all that he has made and pronounce "very good."

In the mean time, all the levitical Sabbath restrictions under Moses are abolished and the "Lord's Day" is "made" to be observed (Psa. 118:24; Mk. 16:9; Heb. 4:9) as a day of rejoicing and gladness (Psa. 118:24) in going to the public house of God for worship and fellowship with God's people and rest for our souls. That does not mean we cannot gather together every day of the week if we so choose, it only means that not every day of the week is "The Lord's Day" as that would make that phrase meaningless.

 

Re:
<<The Sabbath law in principle is merely six days preceding and following the seventh day Sabbath.>>

Incorrect and by now, plain untrue: How on earth in any case can <six days> be <<preceding and following>>? FLOL!

Re:
<<In Application it … the seventh day Sabbath … can be applied to any day of the week>>?

Incorrect and by now, plain untrue; can’t you see contradiction when it is a contradiction? FLOL!

Re:
<<The Sabbath law in principle … can be applied to any day of the week>>—while <<in principle in the Sabbath law>> it actually is “the day The Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD GOD” that is applied??

Incorrect and by now, plain untrue; when plain illogical, can’t you see it is illogical? FLOL!

Re:
<<When God applies it …>> <it>, <<that particular day … the seventh day Sabbath>>, <<to a particular day "of the week" then that particular day … the seventh day Sabbath … is the sabbath until God changes the APPLICATION (not the law).>>

At last it is correct, yet the Biblicist himself never got it right because fact ignored: God never changed <<the APPLICATION>> OR, <the law>, “the day The Seventh Day is the Sabbath of the LORD GOD”, FLOL!

Re:
<<Leviticus 23 and the FIXED DATE Sabbaths prove that God's understanding of the PRINICPLE of the fourth commandment cannot be restricted/limited only to a particular day "of the week.">>

Incorrect and by now, plain untrue! FLOL, <<the FIXED DATE Sabbaths prove that>> they are <fixed>—that is, <<restricted/limited>> by <DATE> to NO <<particular day "of the week">> and NOT at all, <<by the PRINICPLE of the fourth commandment>>, FLOL!

Re:
<<God did change the APPLICATION due to a greater work finished on another day "of the week" that is yet to be fulfullied (Heb. 4:11, 14) when all the elect enter into an eternal eighth day Sabbath of a new heaven and new earth where God once again can look upon all that he has made and pronounce "very good.">>

Incorrect and by now, plain untrue!
Where do you read <<a greater work finished on another day "of the week">>?! Which <<Heb. 4:11, 14>> do you have in your Bible?
And didn’t you know there is a difference between fulfil and <<change the application>>? By having fulfilled, God in fact confirmed the <application>. FLOL!

No! Your wasted ink on wasted paper is totally ridiculous.

 

I don't have to look at the history; you have to understand Baptist history.

By your logic no Baptists existed before Spurgeon or before the London Confession of Faith for they all would have had to adhere to it. Your position is ludicrous. There were Baptists during the Reformation, and long before the Reformation. Baptists are not Protestants. Which of the Protestants was a Baptist? There isn't one. They did not come out of the Catholic Church but were always outside of the RCC and can trace their roots back to the Apostles through similar groups having similar beliefs though different names.
The fact that various confessions exist is totally irrelevant to most Baptists. It has historical value and that is all. I don't know of any Baptist today that claims Spurgeon's Confession, as their own. The Baptist churches I know, ALL of them, make up their own statements of faith. They would disagree in some parts with Spurgeon.

The Sabbath Day is given to the Jews as a sign between them and Jehovah for their generations forever. You cannot run from Exodus 31. If you are so adamant on keeping the Sabbath, what tribe are you from. It was a law given to the Jews. It was not a law at creation. There is no command at creation to keep the Sabbath. That is a bogus argument.

What some Baptists believe is totally irrelevant to me. They are not Biblically correct.
Here are what some Baptists believe.
One Baptist pastor would not allow any pastor to preach in his pulpit if he wore wire rimmed glasses.
Another pastor would not baptize any woman unless she promised to give up wearing pants and started wearing dresses or knee length skirts.
Many pastors will not admit into their membership those who use no other version but the KJV. Even the Greek and Hebrew are wrong.
I could go on. But I think you get the picture.

These confessions are written by men. Men are fallible. I stand by the Word of God, have written my own statement of faith--as required to do before I got ordained. We do not follow another man's Confession of Faith. You are putting up a bogus argument that has no weight.
Spurgeon's Confession? To that I say: So what!!!

I didn't say it didn't exist. In fact there are many confessions that exist. There is no standard confession among Baptists. Why would you use Spurgeon as a standard? He isn't God. I don't follow him. He is not my pastor. I have nothing to do with him. He is just a man, and very fallible like the rest of us.

I couldn't care less what these confessions say. They are not infallible.
Thus saith the Lord! What does the Bible say? I don't look to a confession for my beliefs. I did that when I was a Catholic; why would I do it now??

The details are in the Word of God; not in confessions.

 

First, The Sabbath or its day was NOT <<given to the Jews>>.

And at the creation God "made the Sabbath" for HIMSELF "for the sake of man" through Jesus Christ in the future. THERE and THEN "IN THE BEGINNING" when "GOD ...” wrought and was sole actor of every act except the act of Adam and Eve's sinning, the sinners’ destiny was fixed. The act of atonement for their sins on that very first of all subsequent Sabbaths, was God’s; only God’s. And every act of God on that first Sabbath Day ever, was ACT OF GRACE AND RECONCILIATION.

Grace and reconciliation were extended to the posterity of the two first sinners ---through "The Son of Man who [would] lay hold on the Sabbath ... TO SAVE / KEEP" it, saving and keeping each and every of Adam and Eve's children elected in all future to be saved and kept by the grace of God.

You cannot run from Exodus 31, "See, I have CALLED BY NAME ... OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH; and I have filled HIM with the Spirit of God." You cannot run from the TRUTH Exodus 31 is prophecy of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. You cannot run away from the fact in Exodus 31 it is the EVERLASTING COVENANT OF GRACE SWORN BY GOD with the children of Adam and Eve IN JESUS CHRIST The Called by Name of the tribe of Judah. Jesus Christ; none else!

You cannot get away from the fact it was in this CONTEXT OF GOD'S SAVING GRACE that God ---no man ---swore the Sabbath Day his "sign" with HIS OWN ---his own from the tribe of JUDAH—Jesus Christ; of no tribe but JUDAH'S!

O, DHK, o DHK! How legalistic do you look at Scripture!

 

This is typical of Bobryan...

Find some random document or statement written by a single individual and then try to attribute it as doctrine for whatever denomination the writer happens to associate with.

Meanwhile SDA hospitals are still performing abortions on demand and Bobryan has no problem with that because "it is against the SDA guidelines"...

Guidelines which by the way would matter not a wit to Bobryan if they got in the way of one of his strawman arguments.

 

“Whosoever doeth work in the Sabbath Day, HE, shall be put to DEATH surely.”

That’s why they put Jesus Christ to death.

Fathom the depths of the Love of God!

They would have put Jesus' Father to death as well, if they could.

 

This kind of nonsense allegorical method of interpretation does injustice to Biblical salvation and to what God says in his word concerning the atonement.
If you think you must keep the law, then keep all of it. There are 613 commands, not just ten. If you can keep just 600 and fall short in the other 13 you fail and are condemned under the law.
Under the law it is doubtful that you keep the Sabbath law.
Have you studied all that is involved in keeping the Sabbath?

 

<Allegorical method>? "I work and My Father works hitherto" ---it was on the Sabbath! And the Jews accused Him of having worked on the Sabbath Day for an excuse to kill Him; and you call it, my <allegorical method>? Then Allegory is BIBLICAL and my method for sure!

Hee hee hee hee

And I do not think I must keep the Law one or more Laws indifferent to me. What made you think I think I must keep the Law?!

What for? To earn my salvation?! You don’t know the truth if you so thought, DHK.

I do not even THINK in terms of ‘Law’ when I think of God’s Law. But you think of nothing than 600 short of or more than 613 ‘laws’ when you think of the Law of God, DHK, it’s so obvious!

Yes that I failed and will fail till the day I die of having failed and having been condemned all the days of my life, that I grant you, you are spot on in! Whatever else may also have played a role—like the love and grace of God—, of course is non of your business, thank heavens!

<<Under the law it is doubtful that (I) keep the Sabbath law>>. Sure! Worse, DHK, WORSE! For under GRACE it is absolutely certain that I do NOT keep the Sabbath or its law!
See, I’ve got a Substitute who in my place, kept the Sabbath. He – by the way – was “LORD OF THE SABBATH”—“the Sabbath” of course, He—The Son of Man—, “is Lord of”. So quite naturally the Sabbath Day He is Lord of, must be “The Lord’s Day”.

But MORE THAN THAT! “The Lord’s Day” is it ---the Sabbath now ---for “in the fullness of the Sabbath Day there was a great earthquake … and the rest you know: that it was then “AS GOD RAISED CHRIST FROM THE DEAD AND EXALTED HIM AND ENTRONED HIM ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD IN HEAVENLY GLORY OF HIS MAJESTY”: “this Jesus whom ye have crucified, GOD MADE: BOTH _LORD_, AND, CHRIST”.


Heee hee hee hee … o my, them Sundayers!

 

Just think about it GE. What follows the seventh day in order to get to another Sabbath????? The Seventh day stands in two relationships to six working days. It closes it and introduces it.

No contradiction unless it is with God's own application to other days "of the week" in Leviticus 23. Your restrictive interpetation of sabbath law condemns God's own application. Think about that GE! Your theory must condemn God before it can condemn me.

Have you noticed you have nothing to base your objections on except your own objections? Leviticus 23 is hard facts that God did apply the Sabbath law to other days "of the week." Nothing you can say can change that. No objection can change that. Your interpetation contradicts such a Sabbath law application.

Again, Leviticus demonstrates you are wrong in your strict limits placed on Sabbath law. My position includes the levitical application, the Jewish seventh day "of the week" application as well as God's clear application to the better Sabbath that commemorates the first day of the week resurrection or "the Lord's Day."

Incorrect. No solar and lunar calander is evenly divided by seven. Fixed dates fall on different days of the week.

Hebrews verse 9 is for the plural people of God due to the singular work of an individual whose finished work and way of commemorating it is comparable to God's commemoration of creation (v. 10). It is the finished work of our High Preist (Heb. 4:14). Psalm 118:20-24 is so Messianic and so many time applied to Christ and his death by the hands of the Jews even a blind man could see this. Psalm 118:22 predits what they would do - reject him by killing him. Psalm 118:23-24 gives God's response to what He would do in contrast - raise him and commemorate the resurrection day by commanding its observance "made" and how it is to be observed "we will rejoice and be glad IN IT."

No, your the one wasting your ink on something God has rejected and provide something better.

 

Again, you put up strawmen, and are not honest in debate tactics.
First you have chosen three men at random who are NOT representative of all Baptists, as you allege.
I am not a Calvinist; Spurgeon is.
Moody was an evangelist, not a theologian. He had a grade five education and was deficient in many areas of doctrine. Again his forte was evangelism.
If you look in the General Baptist section you will find an interesting discussion on whether or not Stanley was a mystic--quite an accusation! Either way I am no fan of the SBC, and never have been.

The examples you use are not representative of all Baptists, and are not representative even of the average Baptist when it comes to doctrine.
Your argument is bogus.

 

Exactly; now you talk SENSE!


The Seventh Day Sabbath stands in relationship to the six working days in that it closes the SEVEN days week, AT ONCE introducing the NEXT seven days week in order to WITHOUT BREAK FOREVER CLOSE the seven days week ad infinitum being the Seventh and last day of the seven days week.

The Sabbath as the Seventh Day of the week NEVER SWOPS position with another day of the seven days week. In that sense ONLY is it true,
<<The Seventh day stands in two relationships to six working days. It closes it and introduces it.>>

Just think about it, Biblicist, What follows the Seventh Day Sabbath in order to get to another “Sabbath, the day The Seventh Day”? The following SEVEN DAYS WEEK, Biblicist, the following SEVEN DAYS WEEK!

 

!

Why on earth are you trying so hard to bring your day that you worship on under the Law?
To bring yourself under the Law!

And that is totally incomprehensible for me.

I see no point in your cumbersome endeavour to get the Law to justify your doctrine and practice.

If Jesus Christ rose on the First Day of the week, THEN, you would have had ALL the Law AND the justification for your worshiping on it as "The Lord's Day"! You would not have needed the Law BECAUSE THE LAW WOULD HAVE AGREED that Christ would have raised on the First Day of the week.

Your trouble besides your fruitless and forced attempt to work out some way the Law might support your day of worship, is that the Law does not support and NEVER FORETOLD THAT CHRIST WOULD RISE ON THE FIRST DAY of the week!

Therefore go back and look for how the Law prophesied concerning the Christ how that his SUFFERING, DEATH, BURIAL AND RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD SHOULD HAVE PROVEN THAT HE WOULD RISE FROM THE DEAD ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK!

Then you would not need no Law NO MORE to worship on the First Day of the week. THEN and then only, you will have had succeeded in getting THE LAW to support your hopes and your doctrines and your practices.

Don't try to be a legalist if you are no legalist; it cannot ever make sense.

But I cannot let the opportunity pass and not warn you, any attempt to find or force the Law to support the notion that Christ rose from the dead on the First Day of the week, IS MORE FUTILE than the attempt to get the Sabbath Day or the Law of the Sabbath form the <principle> or <basis> of a supposed 'Lawful' keeping of the First Day of the week.

Because ALL THE SCRIPTURES breath the Divine Truth Christ WOULD, and "in the fullness of time", DID, RISE FROM THE DEAD, "IN THE SABBATH'S FULLNESS"—“in the Sabbath’s fullness” of FULFILMENT in Jesus Christ and by and through Him "who is the ALL in all fulfilling FULLNESS OF GOD."

 

Originally Posted by DHK
If you are going to carry on debate here at least do it honestly.
There is no "Baptist Confession of faith."[/quote]

Do you know what Spurgeon actually believed? Do you read the links that you post?

Often it was called the Christian Sabbath, or Sunday. I believe Moody believed in the same thing. Your arguments are still bogus.

 

Moody's Sabbath:

http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/Voice/Moody.Ten.Commandments.html

Bob you have been dishonest in your portrayal of these men by maintaining that they believe in the Sabbath. They don't. They believe that man should not work seven days; that they should have one day of rest out of seven; that that day of rest should be on a Sunday set apart to worship God. I believe the same thing. Their beliefs are no different than mine.

You are dishonest in your portrayal of their beliefs.

 

Do you know what Spurgeon actually believed? Do you read the links that you post?

Often it was called the Christian Sabbath, or Sunday. I believe Moody believed in the same thing. Your arguments are still bogus.

[/QUOTE]


DHK believes Spurgeon, that Christ rose from the dead on the First Day of the week.
That's his ---your, problem, DHK, to believe Spurgeon in this matter.

I love 'Spurgeon'. But in this instance he shows he too has only feet of clay.

DHK also in this matter shows he too has only feet of clay.

GE has feet of clay, too; but not in this matter.
Because ALL THE SCRIPTURES prove ALL Sunday-Christianity alleging Christ rose from the dead on the First Day of the week, in error and against the Scriptures.

THIS IS THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE on which day Christians should worship God corporately, on the Seventh Day Sabbath BECAUSE CHRIST ROSE FROM THE DEAD ON IT, OR, on the First Day of the week BECAUSE CHRIST ROSE FROM THE DEAD ON IT.

NOT THE LAW of Ten Commandments OR <the law of nature> , BUT THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST.

Bob Ryan, do you hear?

 

You are being just as dishonest as stating that Psalm 14:1 teaches "There is no God," for indeed that is what it says.

That is what you have done with Moody's sermon. You have only quoted it in part. Neither have you bothered to define terms. You ought to be totally ashamed of yourself.

First, Moody defines Sabbath as "Saturday sundown to Sunday sundown," in other words "Sunday," the first day of the week.
Secondly, he plainly identifies that the Sabbath has been changed to the first day of the week, and identifies it as Sunday.
Thirdly, the culture of the time was to "keep the Christian Sabbath," or Sunday.
Fourth, he admitted that he took his "day of rest" on Saturday, but advocated the rest of his congregation to set aside Sunday as a day of worship. For him Sunday was a day of work, a day that he preached.

If you bothered to read the entire sermon, you would not by hypocritical and only post a portion of it. Moody believes in the Sabbath the same way that I do--resting one day out of seven, and reserving Sunday as a day for corporate worship. That is what he teaches in the sermon from where you have taken that quote.
Why are you misquoting him?
Why be deceptive and dishonest?