SDA's and the Sabbath

BOB said -
IF I were to go to a sunday keeping congregation where the elders and deacons rejected the scriptures that each about Christ the Creator's Holy memorial of creation - while all the others fully rejoiced in it - I would not say "Lets come back again NEXT Sunday at this same place to hear more of the same" since the leaders of that church were clearly rejecting it. RATHER I would say "lets meet outside this church and on Sabbath lets all celebrate at a church that does keep Sabbath".

Obviously.

But in Acts 13 when we see the Jews all REJECTING the message - they do not decide to "meet tomorrow on Sunday for more Bible lessons and worship since the Jews are not accepting this anyway". RATHER what they do is WAIT - and only meet SABBATH AFTER SABBATH even when it is ONLY the Gentiles that are accepting the message!!!

A more devastating case could hardly be imagined for your position Eric!!

In Christ, Bob

You seem determined to turn a blind eye to the text of scripture Eric. Why not embrace it instead. For your analogy to work the Acts 13 text must be REWRITTEN so that ONLY Jews are in attendance - and then the Jews BEG Paul to SPEAK AGAIN to them on the subject of the Gospel so the NEXT SABBATH all the Jews show up and eagerly LISTEN!!

IF the text HAD said that - then I would not argue against your view that this was merely a way to talk to Jews in their own comfortable churh setting.

BUT INSTEAD OF THAT - we see the JEWS REJECTING The message right from the start.

We see that it is primarily GENTILES - (whom you say have no reason at all to limit their worship times or listening time to SABBATH after SABBATH) who are insisting that this be brought back to them THE NEXT SABBATH and then for Sabbath after SABBATH we see that GENTILES are the ones that are being reached - NOT JEWS!!

WHY wasn't paul saying "HEY Gentiles I have good news - you want to hear more about this? Come on over to our place TOMORROW because that is when WE MEET to share the Gospel among friends" !!!!

Your entire mythology is debunked by this very direct GENTILE evangelism event taking place NOT ONLY in Acts 13 but also in Acts 17 and 18.

These are "SABBATH after SABBATH" services that reach gentiles and Jews - EVEN in cases where only the Gentiles are inclinded to HEAR MORE!

But then you already knew that -- I think you are simply "gaming" around on this one.

In Christ,

Bob

 

We do not keep the whole Law God gave, so something changed; a lot of things changed!

Who's choosing not to see? I have said time and time again;
Those are NOT QUOTES!
NOT QUOTES!
NOT "Quotes"!

It is NOT "UNIQUE" to the Sabbath, but rather is the unique description of GOD.

Do you see that now?

Acts 4 and Rev 14 do not even MENTION the sabbath! Other OT passages use the same words and are not talking about the sabbath! They're talking about GOD. Why would they quote it when it is not even the topic? This is supposed to be their way of [indirectly] teaching it is still in effect, instead of simply coming out and saying "You shall start (and Jews continue) keeping holy (refrain from work) the sabbath day"? Again, God is playing riddles with us! Why isn't that done with any other commandment? We see blasphemy condemned all throughout the NT. We do not have to go around and scratch up words and bits of statements such as "hold blameless" or "in vain" and conclude the third commandment is being "quoted from".
If you make them "unique to the sabbath", then you are taking the praise off of God and worshipping the sabbath as creator and no better than those who "worship bread" or pictures as Creator saying they "represent" God the Creator!

You have to PROVE your assertions, not just come back with some accusation of me being blind or "rebelling against God's Law", and you aren't even ADDRESSING that fact!

I'm tired of your accusations, and this is why I have been trying to take it easy. The only reason I even took the chance and joined the discussion again is that the inconsistency of your believing people not keeping the sabbath now are basically "held innocent" needed to be pointed out. (If we're saying "Rebel against God"; If God said it-ignore it", then we are NOT "innocent", so YOU'RE the one playing games!) You don't even read your own prooftexts, but then do nothing but accuse me of "gaming" and everything else like that.

Verse 13:42, it was the Jews who "went out of the synagogue". They did not at that point kick the Christians out, and the apostles are NOT "moving them to their own Church now, and bringing the sabbath with them", as YOU would have to "rewrite" it! They asked that Paul might return to the synagogue the next sabbath. I am not arguing for any change in the day of fellowship to Sunday, so why would they ask for another day? Where do they suggest that they meet? Noting is said of any such thing. They ask for the day when "the whole city" is gathered in the place where the city goes to worship. Chapter 17 and 18 too, you still see this evangelism taking place at synagogues!
And this still does not even address the fact that "requesting them to preach on the next sabbath" says NOTHING about any command for the Christians to KEEP the sabbath, which you think this proves!

 

Eric B:
"I think that translation is questionable at best. I forget at the moment where people are getting it from, but in the more reliable KJV, it is "therefore there remains the keeping of a sabbath for the people of God" (nothing there about "DUTY"!) The whole context is about ceasing from our "workS", and "entering" in contrast to those being barred entry. That cannot be a literal rest on a literal day."

GE:
The Greek is, 'apoleipetai sabbatismos tohi laohi'. The 'questionable translation' in no way contradicts the KJV; it only brings out a factor absolutely contained in the KJV although not in so many words, the factor of 'duty'. According to you, Eric B, the Christian does have his Christian duties, only not if it comes to the Sabbath. Now that is not only a simple inconsistency of yours, but it gnaws away at the very heart of Christian duty, for this text gives the reason, the cause and origin of the Christian duty of - literally and correctly - "Sabbath-KEEPING". It says namely, "ara-THEREFORE" which is the direct referring Jesus' works and accomplishments, namely: to have "GIVEN THEM REST" (vs. 8) and, to have "ENTERED INTO HIS OWN REST AS GOD" -- which was through resurrection from the dead.
Now the whole idea of the New Testament is to say, What need we a written Law for? We have the true, real and living Law in the Person and Life of the Lord Jesus Christ! If ever REASON had been given for practicing what is acceptable religious 'duty' before God, the Christians are The People who have received that privilege through Grace. In comparison the Jews have NO reason to feast Sabbaths' Feast, for they reject the true basis of it, namely Jesus Christ.

 

EricB:
"...So everything is taken for granted? Then why do we have all the instruction in the NT we have? "

GE: I think you don't 'get me' -- may be won't want to. Doesn't matter, I'm glad to see you still think the Scriptures necessary. Yes, indispensible they are, in fact the written Word of God - which many today, won't accept what confess! So thank God we agree on the Scriptures!
All the Scriptures should be defined the Law of God, I'm sure you'll agree.
That says duty, duty, duty! The Christian has his Christian duties - it's the heart of Calvinism; although Calvin was mightily mistaken as far as the Christian's Sabbath-duty was concerned. Hebrews 4:9 takes this Christian duty for granted, otherwise it would not have stressed it so with direct bearing on the works of God through Jesus Christ.

 

BobRyan:
"There is no "keeping the first commandment but CHANGED in the NT to the NEW first commandment" in all of scripture."

Jesus Christ:
"A new Law I give you."

 

Christ's "New Law" is Christ!

 

BobRyan:
"I SHOW you the quotes that you claim are not there - and you simply turn a blind eye to them!!"

GE:
BobRyan HIDES the quotes he claims are not there or just turns a blind eye to! For example, his favourite text, Ex20:11, "Six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is; RESTED He the Seventh Day WHEREFORE the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day". (The "and" is supplied; "but" would have been better because it contrasts better God's deeds of first the six days then of the Seventh Day only. God's deed of resting on the Seventh Day is what gives reason for God blessing it the Sabbath Day! God's creating is NOT the reason for the Sabbath - the OLD Testament says so; the NEW Testament confirms it. BobRyan refuses to see it.

 

Christians may have "duties", but the word is not mentioned here. In fact, "KEEPing" of the sabbath is not what the Greek even says! It may be in the margins, but the margins are not inspired (AS I forgot to tell Bob who also used marginal "references" to try to prove his idea of "quotes"). This was apparently a special form of the word that was used only in this place. What the actual Greek definition says is "(fig.) a repose of Christianity, i.e Heaven".

I wasn't speaking of a new written Law, but still, we do still need instruction on Christian practice. We cannot just say "this is our duty and it doesn't even have to be mentioned in scripture, because it is just so", for that is what the Catholics say with all of their practices.

 

Jesus said "who seeks to abolish the least commandment will be called least in haven"

Jesus said "think NOT that I have come to abolish the law of God".

Paul said "do we then ABOLISH the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the Law of God". Rom 3:31

Paul said " I AGREE WITH THE LAW of God.. it is spiritual... it is holy just and good" Rom 7

But of course there are those who want to do away with that Law today - I have to admit that much.

In Christ,

Bob

 

#1. It is the 3rd commandment that is "not quoted - not even in part" in the NT.

#2. The Sabbath commandment language IS Quoted in part - VERBATIM in the NT in SEVERAL places.

Rev 14 is one.

In Rev 14:7 We see explicitly the unique language of the Sabbath commandment – is seen in vs 7
“worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters.''”

Exodus 20:11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them”

Acts 14:15
15 and saying, "Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM.

Acts 4:24
“And when they heard this, they lifted their voices to God with one accord and said, ""O Lord, it is You who MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA, AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM,”

Quote:
Eric said
No, you debunked your own position and proved my point! Those references in Acts were not about the sabbath at all

You have changed your tune Eric in a classic bait and switch. You first claim that the Sabbath commandment - the 4th commandment is "NOT QUOTED at all not even in PART" -- THEN when SHOWN that this is false - you switch to "QUOTES of the Sabbath commandment in the NT are not really quote of the Sabbath commandment"

Why do you keep up this "gaming" approach to scripture Eric?

I SHOW you the quotes that you claim are not there - and you simply turn a blind eye to them!!

Any child can look at Exodus 20:8-11 and SEE IT BEING QUOTED in the NT!! Almost all modern Bible translators PROVIDE the uppercase quotes IN THE NT text when you get to those sections listed above and SHOW in the marginal links that this is a direct quote of the Exodus 20 commandment.

None are sooooo blind as those that subbornly choose NOT to see!

How in the world can you be satisfied with these tactics of yours Eric?

------------------------------------

Oh wait I know how you do it -- by "pretending" that a quote of Exodus 20:8-11 IS NOT A QUOTE of it no matter HOW the Bible translators of today SHOW US ALL that these ARE QUOTES!!!

What a compelling argument Eric!!!!

Nice to see that it boiled down to such a glaring failure.

In Christ,

Bob

 

#1. It is the 3rd commandment that is "not quoted - not even in part" in the NT.

#2. The Sabbath commandment language IS Quoted in part - VERBATIM in the NT in SEVERAL places.

Rev 14 is one.

In Rev 14:7 We see explicitly the unique language of the Sabbath commandment – is seen in vs 7
“worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters.''”

Exodus 20:11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them”

Acts 14:15
15 and saying, "Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM.

Acts 4:24
“And when they heard this, they lifted their voices to God with one accord and said, ""O Lord, it is You who MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA, AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM,”

See Eric "you are the one making stuff up"!

See Eric "you are the one making stuff up"!

 

You seem determined to turn a blind eye to the text of scripture Eric. Why not embrace it instead. For your analogy to work the Acts 13 text must be REWRITTEN so that ONLY Jews are in attendance - and then the Jews BEG Paul to SPEAK AGAIN to them on the subject of the Gospel so the NEXT SABBATH all the Jews show up and eagerly LISTEN!!

IF the text HAD said that - then I would not argue against your view that this was merely a way to talk to Jews in their own comfortable churh setting.

BUT INSTEAD OF THAT - we see the JEWS REJECTING The message right from the start.

We see that it is primarily GENTILES - (whom you say have no reason at all to limit their worship times or listening time to SABBATH after SABBATH) who are insisting that this be brought back to them THE NEXT SABBATH and then for Sabbath after SABBATH we see that GENTILES are the ones that are being reached - NOT JEWS!!

WHY wasn't paul saying "HEY Gentiles I have good news - you want to hear more about this? Come on over to our place TOMORROW because that is when WE MEET to share the Gospel among friends" !!!!

Your entire mythology is debunked by this very direct GENTILE evangelism event taking place NOT ONLY in Acts 13 but also in Acts 17 and 18.

These are "SABBATH after SABBATH" services that reach gentiles and Jews - EVEN in cases where only the Gentiles are inclinded to HEAR MORE!

But then you already knew that -- I think you are simply "gaming" around on this one.

As compelling as that response is... lets take a look at the text - "anyway".

42 As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.

43 Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.

44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.
45 But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began contradicting the things spoken by Paul, and were blaspheming.

46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, ""It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.

The obvious and "easy" part for all readers - is that the Jews themselves were not "begging to hear more the next Sabbath" much as Eric would like to invent such a thing in this text.

Also note - "Sabbath" does not mean "week-day-1"

And note that it is still given the title of honor "Sabbath" not mererly "week day seven". Yet "week day 1" can still be shown as the proper name for Sunday in the NT.

In Christ,

Bob

 

if you're gonna quarrel about the SDA's and the shabbat - then are you bustin caps about Messianic Jew's who are observing Shabbat?

 

In fact - Seventh-day Baptists, Seventh-day Church of God, Messianic Jews, Seventh-day Adventists etc --

These are all groups that admit to the existence of the 10 commandments and argue FOR our honoring Christ the Creator's Holy day.

Interesting that D.L MOODY argues FOR the 4th commandment while many today urge us to transgress it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I notice how you repeat the same exact assertions, and do not even quote the parts of my responses where I actually answer them. How dense and evasive! Looks like you have no answer, when your wild theories are debunked. Here they are again:

Acts 4 and Rev 14 do not even MENTION the sabbath! Other OT passages use the same words and are not talking about the sabbath! They're talking about GOD. Why would they quote it when it is not even the topic? This is supposed to be their way of [indirectly] teaching it is still in effect, instead of simply coming out and saying "You shall start (and Jews continue) keeping holy (refrain from work) the sabbath day"? Again, God is playing riddles with us! Why isn't that done with any other commandment? We see blasphemy condemned all throughout the NT. We do not have to go around and scratch up words and bits of statements such as "hold blameless" or "in vain" and conclude the third commandment is being "quoted from".
If you make the statement of God as Creator "unique to the sabbath", then you are taking the praise off of God and worshipping the sabbath as creator and no better than those who "worship bread" or pictures as Creator saying they "represent" God the Creator!

You have to PROVE your assertions

Also, "Bible translators" ARE NOT INSPIRED!

Verse 13:42, it was the Jews who "went out of the synagogue". They did not at that point kick the Christians out, and the apostles are NOT "moving them to their own Church now, and bringing the sabbath with them", as YOU would have to "rewrite" it! They asked that Paul might return to the synagogue the next sabbath. I am not arguing for any change in the day of fellowship to Sunday, so why would they ask for another day? Where else do they suggest that they meet? Noting is said of any such thing. They ask for the day when "the whole city" is gathered in the place where the city goes to worship. Chapter 17 and 18 too, you still see this evangelism taking place at synagogues!
And this still does not even address the fact that "requesting them to preach on the next sabbath" says NOTHING about any command for the Christians to KEEP the sabbath, which you think this proves!

 

The obvious and "easy" part for all readers - is that the Jews themselves were not "begging to hear more the next Sabbath" much as Eric would like to invent such a thing in this text.

Also note - "Sabbath" does not mean "week-day-1"

And note that it is still given the title of honor "Sabbath" not mererly "week day seven". Yet "week day 1" can still be shown as the proper name for Sunday in the NT.
------------------------------------------

Another easy and obvious fact that must be ignored to reject Christ's memorial of creation - is that Paul does NOT invite the "whole city" the "vast majority" of gentiles who ARE favorable to hearing the Gospel to "tomorrows church service" IN ADDITION to seeking out Jews "NEXT Sabbath" in the synagogue.

This is incredibly obvious - Paul was relying on the fact that BOTH Jews and Gentiles are gathering on Sabbaths for worship -- just as HE did.

The idea that "the whole city of Antioc was Jewish" is atrocious bending of scripture AND lousy history! It is merely a desperate act to save a failed argument.

The text SHOWS that the Gentiles were happy to hear that the Gospel was going to go to them - even in the condition where Jews rejected it!

If being "FAVORABLE" to the Christian Gospel meant "wanting to hear MORE the next SABBATH" for the "entire city" for the "gentiles" THEN the "Sabbath of Christ is dead" gospel imagined so often today - was not being preached.

If being "favorable" to the Christian Gospel meant "death to Christ's Sabbath" then the gentiles (the whole city) should at the very least "ask to have the gospel preached THE NEXT DAY" allowing the contentious Jews to stew over this a bit more - until next Sabbath!

Oh - but wait! Possibly this is another clear fact of scripture to turn a blind eye to - if you are "on a mission" when it comes to Christ's Holy Day and rejection of it.


Granted.

Your argument against Christ's Holy day AND against having Sunday as a weekly day of worship and Gospel preaching by NT saints - is a total rejection of every aspect of the 4th commandment of God. STILL it makes no sense for Gentiles NOT to be asking for "the message to be preached TOMORROW" if in fact they were NOT aware of the 4th commandment calling for the SEVENTH day as God's holy day reserved for worship.

In Christ,

Bob

 

The Lord's day - known to the those in the NT observing a "sola scriptura" basis for Doctrine.

Is 58
13 ""If because of the Sabbath, you turn your foot From doing your own pleasure on My holy day, And [b]call the Sabbath a delight, The Holy Day of the LORD[/b] honorable, And honor it, desisting from your own ways, From seeking your own pleasure And speaking your own word,
14 Then you will take delight in the LORD, And I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; And I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father, For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.''

 

You still don't get it.
I didn't say the whole city was Jewish. But it was the Jews who had the synagogues that the Apostles preached in, and the Gentiles who were converting came to the synagogues to hear them preach. They kept meeting in the synagogues until the synagogues put them out for good, which was mostly after the apostolic age.
So why would they try to change the day? You're making up "what they should have done if it were not so", but there is no reason for that. They weren't trying to "make the Jews stew over it". Where do you get this stuff from? There was no sabbath vs. Sunday or another day dispute, but while they met there on the sabbath, they were never instructed to KEEP the sabbath. That is a far cry from what we actually see recorded. The most you can get from this is GE's concept of sabbath reverence (feasting). They are never told to cease from work and quit their jobs.

That "sabbath" is used instead of "seventh day" like "first day" says nothing also. Sabbath means "seventh day". Even in Romance languages such as Spanish and Portuguese, Sat. is called "sabado". There was no reason to change the name of the day. But with your logic, all of those references to the first day, in connection with Christian activities, (including the disciples meeting consecutive Sundays after the resurrection) should prove that Sunday was the new day, as many argue. Yes, I reject both, because they are shallow "inferential" arguments, and God is always very clear on what He wants from us. This does not reject every aspect of the fourth commandment, because our rest now is spiritual. But funny, you would rather have someone interpret Sunday as the fourth commandment than to not argue for either.

 

A nice "Story".

But the facts we found in the text are that the Gentiles were accepting the message but STILL not being invited by Paul to "meet tomorrow and hear more about the Gospel" during a sunday church meeting.

The facts remain that NOTHING is said about "Jews kicking out the gentiles".

The facts remain that NOTHING is said about the Gentiles "only showing up on Sabbath because they all knew ahead of time that they wanted to hear Paul speak". Rather the Gentiles meeting on Sabbath WERE ALREADY meeting on Sabbath.

Acts 15 relies on this fact pointing out that the Gentiles are hearing the OT scripture each Sabbath.

It is very "instructive" that you find "no reason" for Paul to tell Gentiles to meet him "tomorrow" for a Sunday Service in which the Gospel will be presented.

I am amazed at how far you are willing to climb out on that limb Eric.

ONLY if they were abiding by "sola scriptura" rules would they have a "reason" to KNOW what Sabbath is AND that it is the Lord's Holy day.

ONLY if they were actually abiding by "sola scriptura rules" would they consider "scripture" authorotative.

ONly by IGNORING those scriptures can you make the argument that you eisegete for us in Acts 13 - yet those scriptures OBVIOUSLY form the context for SABBATH MEETINGS in the synagogues SABBATH after SABBATH.

Impossible to miss.

Turning a blind eye to this fact as you do only exposes the extent of your failed argument.

Sabbath does NOT mean "seventh day" - it the honnored term for Christ the Creator's Holy day. NEVER is it used in scripture to convey "nothing" about the SABBATH commandment. The fact that this term of honor is applied to Christ the Creator's Holy day in almost every civilized culture on earth - should be "instructive" for you.

But your turning a blind eye to these incredibly glaring errors in your own position speaks volumes Eric.

I just can't believe you are so willing to expose the weakness of that argument the way you are doing it.

I much prefer D.L Moody's acceptance of God's Ten Commandments than the rejection of them so popular today.

In Christ,

Bob

 

That whole Sunday thing is YOUR straw man. I said nothing of it, and don't see any reason for him to mention it, or for you to bring it up, except to assume I "should" believe Sunday is the new day; so I wish you would stop projecting it on me.

BECAUSE they were going to the synagogue, and the synagogue had its services on the sabbath.
Nothing there about the apostles instructing them to KEEP the sabbath. If it's not written there, don't assume it.

Yes, they knew what the sabbath was, just like the knew what the Temple rituals and circumcision and all the rest of the Laws were from "scripture", but that doesn't mean they they were instructed to keep all of them. You cannot paste this together with "the MET in the SYNAGOGUES sabbath after sabbath", to teach theyt KEPT the sabbath. You find a scripture saying they KEPT it by not working, from sundown to sundown, etc; not substitute "they knew what the scripturee said" to fill in, because again, they were never required to keep all that was written in the OT to Israel.

And you again prove my point, because "almost every civilized culture on earth" does NOT keep the sabbath; yet they have the word for the day. So it DOES mean "seventh day".

So first, the sabbath does not mean the seventh day, and then, you "prefer" Moody who said it was the first day! :eek: Hey, you are so desperate now, you are going directly against your own SDA beliefs! Twisting the Word of God every which way will do that to you! It's better to just speak where it speaks and be silent where it is silent.