1. 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!

Featured Irrefutable new public day of worship - Psa. 118:20-25

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by The Biblicist, Aug 7, 2013.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 3
  1. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Above is your first post on this thread. It does not contain one single scripture that I quoted in all three of my posts - not one! Hence, my charge that you have gone OUTSIDE of both the primary text (Psalm 118:20-26) that I have dealt with and OUTSIDE the scriptures I used to support each point I dealt with.

    Hence, my charge of PITTING scripture against scripture stands.

    Hence, my charge of DIVERSION from the OP stands

    Hence, my charge of INCOMPETENCE to deal honestly and straightforward with my expositon stands.
     
    #21 The Biblicist, Aug 10, 2013
  2. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    This is your second post on this thread. Not one text you quote deals with my OP. Neither do you deal with any scripture in my OP. Neither do you deal with primary text in my OP.

    YOu are simply PITTING scripture against scripture, using DIVERSION and incompetent of dealing with the OP fairly or honestly.
     
    #22 The Biblicist, Aug 10, 2013
  3. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    This is the third post by you on this thread. You simply cut and paste a portion of my post and then make a one line comment that has nothing to do with what you cut and pasted.

    Hence, my charge against you of DIVERSION stands.

    Why can't you simply go toe to toe with me?? Why not simply start with my first post in this thread and take it item by item and show the forum you are competent of a scholarly response or scholarly rebuttal????? I will tell you why because you fully well know you can't respond or provide a rebuttal in any scholarly manner because what I have stated is irrefutable if HONESTY is the measure of scholarship.
     
    #23 The Biblicist, Aug 10, 2013
  4. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian

    You keep arguing that these are "outside texts" -- when in fact they are from your own post.

    Indeed the smoke screen you are attempting is the charge that quoting your own post and showing that your own texts are a good example of texts not saying anything at all about a weekly holy day, a weekly day of rest... is considered by you as 'a diversion" because it exposes an inconvenient detail in your post.

    So be it - the inconvenient details lined up for that post are quite long.

    If your only response to the "obvious" is going to be that we should not notice... then it is left to you to defend such a practice.


    You are playing a game - taking texts with no reference at all to a weekly day of rest and trying to string a story together that you "hope" at the end concludes with a new day of rest.

    From the very start your long winding story fails because it is clear that you want to base it on Ps 118 and yet that chapter is lacking the essential elements contained in the 4th commandment.

    All you have is "Made" and "day" from your cut-and-paste of Ps 118.

    And there your story pretty much ends.

    unless we count your foray into the Thursday events and the Friday events of Passion week - which still leaves you far from a "weekly week-day 1 day of worship".

    I cannot be blamed if your winding story starts off with a dead end.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #24 BobRyan, Aug 10, 2013
  5. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    It is hard to be civil with such a deceptive individual. I quoted all three of your posts and ONLY your third post contained scriptures from one of my posts, but your comments attached to it had nothing to do with my post or any other posts I made. Your two previous posts contained scriptures that are found nowhere in my posts.

    So stop playing your silly little deceptive mind games.

    However, you cannot deal with my exposition by honest scholarship so diversion, confusion and perversion are your only other alternatives. Bob, if you can't stand the heat then go somewhere else and play your little deceptive games.
     
    #25 The Biblicist, Aug 10, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 10, 2013
  6. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    You had the chance to rise above merely ranting and point to "Actual details" - and all you got to was "day" and "made".

    I on the other hand pointed to the "missing details" in your long winding story telling.

    If your response to that is simply to rant... .well then so be it.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #26 BobRyan, Aug 10, 2013
  7. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    You sir, are a dishonest and deceptive human being that does not deserve a response- you are simply lying and you know it. You lied when you said you only quoted verses used in my post as you first two posts had no such verses and your third post make absolutely no reference to any such verses in your short little comment. You are not honest enough or scholarly enough to simply address the OP. You are playing your silly little game of diversion simply because you cannot deal honestly and straightforward with my expostion.

    The term "sanctify" simply means "set apart" and Psalm 118:24 is clearly God setting apart ANOTHER DAY other than the Jewish Sabbath to be observed and that observation is spelled out in the very text, "we will rejoice and be glad IN IT.

    The term "blessed" means "happy" and Psalms 118:25 sets it apart as a blessing "we will REJOICE AND BE GLAD IN IT."

    The text is setting apart the first day of the week, the resurrection day as a day to be observed because "THIS IS THE DAY" the Lord raised Christ from the dead in response to Israel killing him. You can't deal with it honestly so you use subtility and diversion and dishonesty as that is your common modus operandi.
     
    #27 The Biblicist, Aug 10, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 10, 2013
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Earth to Biblicist... come in...

    correction- I pointed out that in your OWN post where you whine that I am using "outside texts" you yourself quote a post of mine - where I am quoting YOU!.

    I think we all see that clearly. Not sure what you think is going on here or why this is at all confusing to you.

    I keep repeating the post - with the same list of texts - taken from your OWN post - showing repeatedly that those texts provide none of the details that your story needs.

    1. No reference to a weekly day of worship.
    2. No reference to a weekly cycle of any kind.
    3. No reference to week-day-1
    4. No claim that someday in the future week-day-1 replaces the seventh day.

    I list the texts and the missing details.

    From that ... you blow your stack as if that solves the problem.

    Why do that?



    Those texts I keep quoting over and over again - come from your OP and from you quoting your OP.

    What part of this is confusing???

    As already pointed out --

    Neither the word "sanctify" nor the word "blessed" is found in Ps 118 in reference to any day of the week.

    By contrast in Gen 2:3 AND in Ex 20:11 it is.

    Pretty hard to ignore those "details".


    The word for "blessed" is never translated "be glad" and we both know it.

    Blessed - barak (Ex 20:11)
     way·ḇā·ră·ḵū (Gen 2:3)

    And the word for Sanctified is pretty much "consecrated, hallowed, made it holy)

    Sanctified -     qadash (made it holy, consecrated, hallowed) - Ex 20:11
    Gen 2:3 -     way·qad·dêš (sanctified , consecrated, hallowed)

    With not a single reference to the "first day of the week"
    Except you don't actually believe that the Jews started keeping the first day of the week in Ps 118 and the second problem is that there is not mention of the "first day of the week" in Ps 118.

    Which is a "Detail" pointed out numerous times so far.


    Your wild speculation that week-day-1 was made centuries after Ps 118 or that Ps 118 points forward to "week day 1" being "made" many centuries in the future - has a lot of holes in i

    In your story - Ps 118 'needs to say' - that "many years in the future week-day-1 WILL be the day that the Lord makes and should be kept on a seven day cycle not a monthly or yearly cycle AND it replaces the 4th commandment Sabbath as it exists now. But for now there is no need to keep week day 1".l

    As we both know - nothing like that in Ps 118.

    Which apparently you want to claim is all the reason you need to rant at me.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #28 BobRyan, Aug 10, 2013
  9. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Sadly that is not the post that YOU selected in your "pitting scripture against scripture" response to me.

    http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2019152&postcount=11

    In that post of yours - and in your next post #15 you keep selecting the post I made where I WAS just quoting YOU - and where I was pointing out that your post did not have the details in it that you needed. You keep selecting that one and saying that it is outside the scope of this thread and pitting scripture against scripture. (it is as if you are not only not reading my posts - but you are not even reading your own posts.)

    And I keep saying I don't know why you are doing that.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #29 BobRyan, Aug 10, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 10, 2013
  10. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Context is "everything" - the post you just selected from me - is one where I responded to Yeshua1 --

    So the sequence went like this...

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


    To which I posted in response to what Yeshua1 just said --


    I was showing Yeshua1 that the Bible actually does support the Sabbath not only of the OT - the one that your own "Baptist Confession of Faith" says is the SAME "day of the week" from Creation to the resurrection" but the one that the Bible says is still valid today.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #30 BobRyan, Aug 10, 2013
  11. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481

    More deception and diversion!


    1. Your post was not addressed to Yeshua1. No quotation of his post, no mention of his name - no mention of anything contained in his post - NADA!

    2. Nothing in your post addressed anything said by Yeshua 1. Yeshua referred to Ellen White as a false prophetess and her false revelations. You said NOTHING about ANYTHING contained in his post - NADA

    3. Your second and third post continued the same theme started in your first post.Which again said NOTHING about anything contained in either Yeshua1 or my post!

    4. None of the Scriptures you cite in your own posts have anything to do with the exposition in the OP or anything contained in Yesua1's post. Thus you are PITTING scripture against scripture attacking the OP from the OUTSIDE and doing it deceitfully.

    You are being dishonest and it is evident to anyone who reads the content of your posts. Again, diversion and deception are your modus operandi.

    Again, you can't deal with the OP in a scholarly manner so you are intent on causing diversion and confusion but will not simply deal directly and honestly and with integrity with the OP.
     
    #31 The Biblicist, Aug 11, 2013
  12. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Can anyone point out anything in the above exposition that is expositionally incorrect either by context or by use of other scriptures used to apply to this context?
     
    #32 The Biblicist, Aug 11, 2013
  13. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Can anyone point out anything in the above exposition that is expositionally incorrect either by context or by use of other scriptures used to apply to this context?
     
    #33 The Biblicist, Aug 11, 2013
  14. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Can anyone point out anything in the above exposition that is expositionally incorrect either by context or by use of other scriptures used to apply to this context?
     
    #34 The Biblicist, Aug 11, 2013
  15. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Can anyone point out anything in the above exposition that is expositionally incorrect either by context or by use of other scriptures used to apply to this context?

    1. Psalm 118:23-24 is God SANCTIFYING (setting apart) this particular day to be kept, observed in a particular manner by God's people for a specificed purpose.

    2. Psalm 118:24 is God making this day a BLESSING to His people - "We will REJOICE AND BE GLAD in it."

    3. Psalm 118:24 is God sanctifying and blessing this day for the contextually expressed design to commemorate God's power in raising Christ from the dead - Acts 4:10-11.

    4. This day is the first day of the week (Mk. 16:9) SET APART BY GOD HIMSELF Psalm 118:24 and that command is followed in the New Testament (Acts 2:1, 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; Rev. 1:7).

    5. This day is the day "he" finished a greater work than the work of creation and is the day set apart to commemorate that greater work as a "sabbatismos" as God set apart a day to commemorate creation work (Heb. 4:9-10) and is thus a BETTER Sabbath day observance.
     
    #35 The Biblicist, Aug 11, 2013
  16. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Originally Posted by BobRyan [​IMG]



    I was showing Yeshua1 that the Bible actually does support the Sabbath not only of the OT - the one that your own "Baptist Confession of Faith" says is the SAME "day of the week" from Creation to the resurrection" but the one that the Bible says is still valid today.

    No quote of you, no mention of your name -- nada in that post of mine that immediately follows Yeshua1's post.

    AND -- I am the author of my post as it turns out -- so we not only have the fact that it is posted in immediate response to Y1's post - but I myself am confirming that point - since I alone am the author of it.

    Now - let me see.. you are going to challenge me on what my intent was in making my own post??

    Seriously??

    :type:

    Y1 appeared to imply that the only way to get this support of the Bible Sabbath - was to read Ellen White.

    So I pointed to Bible evidence in favor of the Bible Sabbath.

    I did not quote you - and I did not mention your name.

    And then later you quote an entirely different post of mine - one where I AM quoting you directly - and claim that the texts are out of bounds and are pitting scripture against scripture. But in that case the content in my post was a verbatim quote of your texts. How in the world did you think it was going to help you to bash your own text selection?

    Your logic on this thread is indeed - illusive.

    Why do you keep doing it??

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #36 BobRyan, Aug 12, 2013
  17. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    One more time - this time with "feeling".

    1. No mention at all in Ps 118 of "making the first day of the week" or "making week day one holy" or "blessing week day one" or anyone in Ps118 keeping week day 1.

    2. No mention of any weekly cycle at all in Ps 118.

    3. No reference In the Gospels to week-day-1 blessed, sanctified or set apart as a day of worship.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #37 BobRyan, Aug 12, 2013
  18. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    All your objections have already been answered. However, nothing you have said disproves anything about the exposition I gave of Psalm 118:20-26. Indeed, the sanctified day by God certainly cannot be your Saturday! Hence, what day is it? This day God did make to be observed and the manner of observation is clearly spelled out in the same text. It is definitly by context the resurrection day of Christ (Acts 4:10-11). Your objections are lame.
     
    #38 The Biblicist, Aug 13, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 13, 2013
  19. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    One more time - this time with "feeling".

    1. No mention at all in Ps 118 of "making the first day of the week" or "making week day one holy" or "blessing week day one" or anyone in Ps118 keeping week day 1.

    2. No mention of any weekly cycle at all in Ps 118.

    3. No reference In the Gospels to week-day-1 blessed, sanctified or set apart as a day of worship.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BobRyan [​IMG]

    1. No reference to a weekly day of worship.
    2. No reference to a weekly cycle of any kind.
    3. No reference to week-day-1
    4. No claim that someday in the future week-day-1 replaces the seventh day.

    ...

    As already pointed out --

    Neither the word "sanctify" nor the word "blessed" is found in Ps 118 in reference to any day of the week.

    By contrast in Gen 2:3 AND in Ex 20:11 it is.

    Pretty hard to ignore those "details".


    The word for "blessed" is never translated "be glad" and we both know it.

    Blessed - barak (Ex 20:11)
     way·ḇā·ră·ḵū (Gen 2:3)

    And the word for Sanctified is pretty much "consecrated, hallowed, made it holy)

    Sanctified -     qadash (made it holy, consecrated, hallowed) - Ex 20:11
    Gen 2:3 -     way·qad·dêš (sanctified , consecrated, hallowed)

    By Contrast - Ps118 With not a single reference to the "first day of the week"

    BTW - you don't actually believe that the Jews started keeping the first day of the week in Ps 118 and the second problem is that there is not mention of the "first day of the week" in Ps 118.

    Which is a "Detail" pointed out numerous times so far.


    Your wild speculation that week-day-1 was made centuries after Ps 118 or that Ps 118 points forward to "week day 1" being "made" many centuries in the future - has a lot of holes in i

    In your story - Ps 118 'needs to say' - that "many years in the future week-day-1 WILL be the day that the Lord makes and should be kept on a seven day cycle not a monthly or yearly cycle AND it replaces the 4th commandment Sabbath as it exists now. But for now there is no need to keep week day 1"

    As we both know - nothing like that in Ps 118.

    In your post - you quoted yourself and then said that your objections have been answered. Is this really what you meant to do??

    Again - I find your logic "illusive".




    It is Saturday even by your own "Baptist Confession of Faith" standards where they admit that it is the "SAME DAY" that is kept "from creation to the resurrection". If even your own fellow sunday-keeping Baptists notice "this detail" so inconvenient to your statement above -- who am I to ignore it??

    Turns out - Ps 118 is in that time frame - I think we both know that.

    No new week-day-1 observance set up in Ps 118.

    No "some day in the future week-day-1 will be the new 4th commandment" in Ps 118.



    No reference at all in Acts 4 to week day one being related to Ps 118 in fact Acts 4 references the death of Christ - in connection with the Ps 118 text.

    How sad for your contention.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #39 BobRyan, Aug 13, 2013
  20. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Why do you keep bearing false witness, BoB?

    NONE of those that you list, Confessions or otherwise, agree with you that the Sabbath is still binding upon christians under new covenant!
     
    #40 Yeshua1, Aug 14, 2013
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 3
Loading...