sabbath day

[Guest shiloh357]

44 minutes ago, Remnantrob said:

I guess we'll have to get a New Covenant Vs. Old Covenant Thread going if there isn't already one open.  I'm well aware of the fact that you believe that my stance on the covenant is borderline heresy if not altogether antisemtic, but maybe breaking down the covenants could clarify what appears cloudy.   

Well, that would not really do any good.  Jer. 31 isn't' talking about THE New Covenant cut in Jesus' blood.  It is talking about a covenant renewal with Israel and Judah, which is not the Church.  That is completely inescapable.  

If you are trying to say that the church replaces Israel and if you are trying to say that God's promises restore Israel are not really for Israel/Judah, I will demolish that argument rather handily.  It's up to you where you want to go with it.  But Replacement Theology isn't borderline heresy.  It is full-on heresy in the first degree and it is the fruit of the anti-Semitism that dates back to the earth church fathers.

[Remnantrob]

2 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Well, that would not really do any good.  Jer. 31 isn't' talking about THE New Covenant cut in Jesus' blood.  It is talking about a covenant renewal with Israel and Judah, which is not the Church.  That is completely inescapable.  

If you are trying to say that the church replaces Israel and if you are trying to say that God's promises restore Israel are not really for Israel/Judah, I will demolish that argument rather handily.  It's up to you where you want to go with it.  But Replacement Theology isn't borderline heresy.  It is full-on heresy in the first degree and it is the fruit of the anti-Semitism that dates back to the earth church fathers.

I'm sure it would do good for someone.  I'm not inviting you debate the New covenant because I've been watching you for years and I know that is your forte.  But I also know that the truth can speak for itself.  Do I have all of the answers to questions regarding the topic of the New covenant, of course not.  I understand that people are reading and making judgments based on how the evidence is presented and I like to jump in every now and then to share what I've learned.  I disagree that replacement theology is heresy but me saying that will never convince you.   

[Guest shiloh357]

17 minutes ago, Remnantrob said:

I disagree that replacement theology is heresy but me saying that will never convince you.   

If God replaced the Jews with the Church and transferred his promises made to the the Jews/Israel to the Church, it means that God is not faithful.   He cannot be trusted to keep His promises and there is nothing to stop Him from taking His promises to us, away from us.    So Replacement Theology is a direct assault on the integrity and faithfulness of God.   It is an assault on His Character and a denial of His most basic attributes revealed about in Scripture.  And that is what makes it genuine heresy.

If you hold to Replacement Theology, you are calling God a liar. 

[brakelite]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

If God replaced the Jews with the Church and transferred his promises made to the the Jews/Israel to the Church, it means that God is not faithful.   He cannot be trusted to keep His promises and there is nothing to stop Him from taking His promises to us, away from us.    So Replacement Theology is a direct assault on the integrity and faithfulness of God.   It is an assault on His Character and a denial of His most basic attributes revealed about in Scripture.  And that is what makes it genuine heresy.

If you hold to Replacement Theology, you are calling God a liar. 

Israel, as a nation came into covenant with God. God's promises within that covenant were conditional on Israel's faithfulness. They were not faithful. God did not break His side of the bargain, Israel broke theirs. God did not promise Israel everything regardless of their spiritual condition. He tried many times of course to get them back onto the right track, but they stubbornly refused to heed the warnings, killing the prophets sent to them.

Matt. 23:30  And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
31  Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
32  Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
33  Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Matt 21:33 ¶  Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:
34  And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.
35  And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.
36  Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.
37  But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.
38  But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
39  And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.
40  When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
41  They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
42  Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
43  Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
44  And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.

The prophets sent to Israel gave messages that were in content and meaning, judicial presentations. They would recite history...lay the charges....present evidence....warn the hearers of the consequences of not hearing and obeying the warning. All the prophets of the OT in some form or another presented their pleas to the nations in this form, right up to John the Baptist, who many believe or claim to be the last prophet sent to Israel as a nation. Not so. There was  more. Jesus Himself said there would be more. Notice continuing from Matt 23:33 above....

34 ¶  Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35  That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
36  Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
This took pace in the manner described as the apostles and disciples of Jesus continued the ministry of reconciliation and pleading for the repentance of Israel after Jesus' ascension. However, there was one particular man who appeared before the rulers who came with the same message of the O prophets who had gone before. Stephen.

Read his testimony in Acts 6 and his presentation before the council in Acts 7. We have there all the elements of a covenant law-suit against the house of Israel Listen to the words of Hosea...

Hosea 4:1 Hear (obey) the word of the Lord, ye children of Israel: for the Lord hath a controversy (covenant law-suit...I YHWH am laying charges against you for breaking my covenant)....for there is no truth, nor mercy (covenant love) , nor knowledge (experiential knowledge...relational knowledge) in the land.

2. By swearing, and lying, and killing and stealig and committing adultery, they break out and blood touches blood....

Hosea however, as all the other prophets, offers hope. If Israel should repent, God shall have mercy, forgive them, and fulfill His promises to them. Hosea 6:1 Come, and let us return unto the Lord, for He hath torn, and He will heal us.

Let us go back to Stephen's call to the rulers of Israel. Read Acts 7. Stephen lays out the history of Israel before the council. He repeats the covenant, stresses God's faithfulness throughout Israel's history, reveals without compromise where Israel failed to live up to the covenant, yet God was patient, sent His prophets, pleaded day and night with them, essentially repeating what Jesus had said in his parable in Matt. 21:33-44.

In verse 51 however the tone of his address changes markedly.

Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost (the unpardonable sin) as your fathers did, so do ye.

52  Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
53  Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it. You Israel have broken my covenant!
54 ¶  When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.
55  But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56  And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

Above is the classic prophetic covenant law-suit being brought against the nation of Israel as in times previous, but with one very important difference. No where is there a suggestion that this time is room for repentance. The time for Israel to respond positively to God's covenant with thme is now finished.

57  Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,
58  And cast him out of the city, and stoned him.

"Oh Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" On previous occasions Jesus had visited the temple, twice having to clear out the merchants and money-changers. The first time He  said "unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise." The second time doing the same, He quoted Isaiah 56:7, My house shall be a house of prayer. Now however, after 3 and 1/2 years giving the nation many signs and showing many wonders, and pleading with them to repent and return to their God, Jesus presents to them another covenant lawsuit (Matt. 23) at the end of which there is no further plea to repent. What does He say? Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. Notice, it is no longer God's house.

This does not exclude individual Jews from receiving Christ. The nation itself however was no longer to be God's servant in delivering His gospel of love to the world. That responsibility now lies with the church. What formerly applied to the nation of Israel now applies to the church which chooses to keep covenant with Him.

1 Peter 2:9  But ye (the church) are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
10  Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. (Exodus 9:16)
 

Both with Jesus' and Stephen's messages were the nation's last indictment laid out against them by God's messenger. They had been weighed in the balances, and found wanting. Now the promises, the responsibility for bearing fruit, was now given to another. And the same conditions apply. Obedience to God's laws. Faithfulness to His covenant. But by the grace of God we now have the Spirit of God Himself abiding in our hearts and lives, the very love of God which empowers and enables us to keep that law. We are crucified with Christ, yet we live, but not we ourselves, but Christ lives in us, and the life which we live we live by the faith of the Son of God, who who loves us and gave Himself for us. 

"Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." Revelation 14:12.

 

 

 

[brakelite]

16 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

So what do think the consequences will be for Christians who do not keep the Sabbath day?

What are to be the consequences of Christians who murder, lie, steal, and commit adultery, knowing those things to be wrong?

[Remnantrob]

4 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

If God replaced the Jews with the Church and transferred his promises made to the the Jews/Israel to the Church, it means that God is not faithful.   He cannot be trusted to keep His promises and there is nothing to stop Him from taking His promises to us, away from us.    So Replacement Theology is a direct assault on the integrity and faithfulness of God.   It is an assault on His Character and a denial of His most basic attributes revealed about in Scripture.  And that is what makes it genuine heresy.

If you hold to Replacement Theology, you are calling God a liar. 

You saying what my intentions are when I say that I hold to Replacement theology doesn't make it any truer than me saying you believing in OSAS makes God a liar... Abraham was aware of what how the promises would have been fulfilled in Jesus and he was glad. (John 8:56).  The word of God is much bigger than we think we know.  Take this for example.

 

Adam- The beginning/entrance of sin

Noah-sin and its results

Abraham-OT Israel/God's people

Isaac-Jesus Christ his sacrifice and his father  found him a wife

That is a pic of the entire old testament up until Christ in the NT in just the first 4 most prominant figures in the OT in their order.

Who's next?  Jacob.     Who was he?  He was a twin?  He was the younger twing right?  But what happened? The older sells his birth right and the younger one ends up getting it right? His name was changed to israel.  The NT church is a twin.  OT Israel was the older brother.  The promise was made to them, but they forsook it and the younger twin(the Church) inherited the promises.    God is far from a liar and everyone is invited to enter into these promises including the Jews(individually).  Sin began before there was a Jew and salvation through a savior was sought after immediately there after.  I'll preach that to the jew, the atheist and anyone else who is willing to listen until Jesus returns and that happens to be soon.  God was, is and will continue to be faithful to those who put their faith in him just as Abraham did.(Gal. 3:7) 

[Remnantrob]

4 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

But you quoted this passage:  "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."  You quoted in the context of keeping the Sabbath.  The implication is that it is God's will that we all keep the Sabbath day and those who don't will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
 

The author makes rather huge blunder in how he handles I John 2:3-6.   John, when he refers to commandments, uses a word that he only uses when speaking of Christian obedience.   He doesn't use "nomos" often used to refer to the commandments of the Mosaic law.  He uses the word, entole, which the word that John uses for the precepts and commands given personally by Jesus while on earth.   So the "commandments"  referenced are the commandments of Jesus found in the Gospels and has absolutely nothing to do with Sabbath observance.

John is not linking our relationship with Jesus with keeping the Sabbath or any of the 10 commandments.  So keeping the Sabbath day has nothing to do demonstrating that we love God or know Him.   The New Testament never sets that up as the standard.   It's our obedience the commands of Jesus given in the Gospel and our adherence to the doctrine of Christ.

I Peter 2:21 isn't talking about imitating Jesus' Sabbath observance. I Peter 2:13-25 is an entire section about humility and suffering.  Paul speaks of the same thing when he says, "For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake" (Phil._1:29).

So you need to really do a closer examination of the context of these passages, 'cause they really don't have anything to do with keeping the Sabbath.

If Observing the 7th day sabbath is the will of the Father  and a Christian is only a hearer of that word then it is up to the reader to make the determination if the shoe fits or not.  As I mentioned before if a person is not knowledgeable of the sabbath then God winks at their ignorance if they've followed the light given them up to that point. 

Quote

The author makes rather huge blunder in how he handles I John 2:3-6.   John, when he refers to commandments, uses a word that he only uses when speaking of Christian obedience.   He doesn't use "nomos" often used to refer to the commandments of the Mosaic law.  He uses the word, entole, which the word that John uses for the precepts and commands given personally by Jesus while on earth.   So the "commandments"  referenced are the commandments of Jesus found in the Gospels and has absolutely nothing to do with Sabbath observance.

when you say nomos is "often used to refer to the commandments of the Mosaic law" are you saying entole is NEVER used to describe the commandments of the Mosaic Law?  Also, if it referred to commands given personally by Jesus while on earth, do we have examples of those commandments in the gospels? In Matthew22:35-40 which law was Jesus referring to?
 

Quote

 

³⁵ Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,

³⁶ Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

³⁷ Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

³⁸ This is the first and great commandment.

³⁹ And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

⁴⁰ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

 

If he was referring to the 10 commandments then I would venture to say that you can include the sabbath as part of the discussion from 1 John 2:3-6.

1. Love God with all your heart soul and mind (first 4 commandments)

2. Love your neighbor as yourself( last 6 commandments)

[Guest shiloh357]

7 hours ago, Remnantrob said:

You saying what my intentions are when I say that I hold to Replacement theology doesn't make it any truer than me saying you believing in OSAS makes God a liar... him just as Abraham did.(Gal. 3:7) 

I didn't say anything about your intentions.  Replacement theology is an assault on God's integrity, whether you intend to do that, or not.   The difference is that I can prove that point, and as evidenced by your response, it is a point that you cannot refute. You can complain about what I said, but you cannot raise up any refutation against the substance of my argument.

Quote

 

Abraham was aware of what how the promises would have been fulfilled in Jesus and he was glad. (John 8:56).  The word of God is much bigger than we think we know.  Take this for example.

 

Adam- The beginning/entrance of sin

Noah-sin and its results

Abraham-OT Israel/God's people

Isaac-Jesus Christ his sacrifice and his father  found him a wife

That is a pic of the entire old testament up until Christ in the NT in just the first 4 most prominant figures in the OT in their order.

Who's next?  Jacob.     Who was he?  He was a twin?  He was the younger twing right?  But what happened? The older sells his birth right and the younger one ends up getting it right? His name was changed to israel.  The NT church is a twin.  OT Israel was the older brother.  The promise was made to them, but they forsook it and the younger twin(the Church) inherited the promises.

 

No, that is not how it works.   You need to read your Bible.   The Church is not Jacob.   The Bible never equates the Church with Jacob.   Both "Israel" and "Jacob"  are used interchangeably to refer only to physical descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob.  In the New Testament, Israel and the Church are radically separate. They are never mixed. 

The 71 times "Israel" is mentioned in the New Testament, all of those references are to the physical descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob. "Israel"  is never spiritualized to refer to the Church.  The Bible also never spiritualizes "Jacob" to refer to the Church.  The Church is never referenced in tribal terms, nor is the Church ever called "Jacob."  So your attempt to draw some correlation between the Church and Israel/Jaocb doesn't hold water.

Furthermore, it should be pointed out that God is faithful to His promises irrespective of our faithfulness.   The Abrahamic Covenant is an unconditional covenant.  It is the Covenant of promise and it was an unbreakable, blood Covenant.   God obligated Himself to an eternal Covenant (Gen. 17:, 8-9) to Abraham and his descendants forever.  

Replacement Theology is lie.   It is a heretical lie, at that.  

   

[Guest shiloh357]

7 hours ago, Remnantrob said:

If Observing the 7th day sabbath is the will of the Father  and a Christian is only a hearer of that word then it is up to the reader to make the determination if the shoe fits or not.  As I mentioned before if a person is not knowledgeable of the sabbath then God winks at their ignorance if they've followed the light given them up to that point.

Why don't you just come out and say it???  You're not the only member of the SDA cult we have had on this board.   The SDA believes that keeping the Sabbath is essential for salvation.   We have had SDA members on here before that teach it.  They ultimately teach the 10 commandments must be observed for salvation.   Some have even told us that we have to keep the dietary commandments to be saved.

Quote

when you say nomos is "often used to refer to the commandments of the Mosaic law" are you saying entole is NEVER used to describe the commandments of the Mosaic Law? 

I am just talking about I John 2:3-6 and I Peter 2: 21. I am addressing the texts your author raised.

Quote

Also, if it referred to commands given personally by Jesus while on earth, do we have examples of those commandments in the gospels? In Matthew22:35-40 which law was Jesus referring to?

That was a question about what the greatest commandment in the Bible is.  It wasn't a discussion over what commandments to keep.

[Jaydog1976]

17 minutes ago, Giller said:

Well I would disagree with you on these matters, but I do appreciate the way you brought this posting, with no negativity.

One thing I like to do is to reread scriptural passages, and always look at the context, one thing I want to do, is definetly reread all of Colossians chapter 2.

When someone tells me something, I do not just take them at their word, I tend to check it out, I even check out my own self at times.

Love ya in the Lord Jaydog.

Giller you shouldn't take my word for it. Definitely search it out for yourself. What we always need to remember is that God has each of us in different places in our spiritual walk. I used to be a huge proponent that you must worship on Sundays. Then as they years went by circumstances and events took place that caused me to rethink my position. God worked on my heart in that area and I then changed. God does the working on the heart. We just need to be willing to listen. When it comes to this matter of what day to focus on the Lord this is my conviction: I don't care if you worship on Sunday or Saturday or Tuesday for that matter. Why? Because that is between you and the Lord. Not me, you and the Lord. Unless it is sin things like this are not my place to say when and where you worship. What I care about is are you worshiping in the right manner and are you fellowshipping with other believers at some point during the week. 

Thanks for the great response Giller. I love that we can agree to disagree in the Lord. Take care and God Bless.