Legalism

[TheMatrixHasU71]

20 minutes ago, brakelite said:

You are doing here what the magisterium do for Catholics...decide how we are to interpret scripture. Your commentary is unwarranted...unscriptural...and impossible. Why? Because it was God who blessed the Sabbath day. It is not up to us to decide that every day is alike, nor was it up to Paul or any of the apostles, nor was it up to the church. No-one has that authority.

Then you are calling God a liar because He said that we can decide what day to honor because that is precisely what those two above passages mean. We are no longer under the Jewish dispensation where we would be stoned for not keeping the Saturday Sabbath which was meant for Israel, and not us.

It is no longer important to our salvation. 

And as I have said over...and over....and over again (which you keep ignoring), nowhere does it say that the Sabbath has changed to Sunday. The Sabbath has always been Saturday but Christ rose on SUNDAY. So early Christians honored THAT day as opposed to Saturday because Saturday is a day of earthly rest while Sunday is a day of heavenly rest.

And God gives us the wisdom to understand and interpret Scripture. I am not in any way doing what the Magisterium down for the Catholic church, the Lord rebuke you. 

And the fact that you say that nowhere in scripture can one find any support for our interpretation only shows that you are among those of 2 Timothy

2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

 

You see only what you want to see. You insist on listening to the lies of a woman who is waiting for her sentencing the the lake of fire over the truth of Scripture and nearly 2000 years of honorable scholarship. 

If I continue to answer you in the future, it is only for the benefit of silent readers so they arent deceived by your false church

[TheMatrixHasU71]

35 minutes ago, brakelite said:

Scripture please?

Umm I posted Scripture to you and one or two others in weeks past and you ignore it

[TheMatrixHasU71]

39 minutes ago, brakelite said:

You are doing here what the magisterium do for Catholics...decide how we are to interpret scripture. Your commentary is unwarranted...unscriptural...and impossible. Why? Because it was God who blessed the Sabbath day. It is not up to us to decide that every day is alike, nor was it up to Paul or any of the apostles, nor was it up to the church. No-one has that authority. No-one! Only God can unbless, unsanctify, and remove the sacredness from a day He made sacred. And there is absolutely NO evidence anywhere in scripture that such has been the case. You have not provided any, nor has anyone else. The day is not made holy by our observance of it, nor do we add to it. However, we can mix the holy with the profane, thus dishonouring what God has deemed honourable. 

I am not trying to convince you to keep the 4th commandment. But I will defend to the death the true Biblical mandate for my doing so and resolutely deny any hint or suggestion that my doing so contributes to my salvation. That said, I will also resolutely deny any suggestion that once truth is known and accepted, a rejection of that truth will not affect salvation. 

Scripture please?

 

I follow no prophet...true or false. No-where on this forum have I once used the writings of anyone other than in the Bible as the foundation for my belief, except perhaps as in cases of better elucidating my thoughts. But scripture is the foundation of my faith and practice. Always was, always will be. When you can produce scripture that teaches that the Sabbath is no longer binding on Christians, without your personal commentary to decorate it, I will listen. For example, you declare that there is a day called the 'Lord's Day'. True. However, the only time such a day is directly mentioned is in Revelation 1. Because at that point there is no mention of any explanation as to what day is explicitly the 'Lord's Day', then we must go elsewhere in scripture for our answer. There are only two real contenders. The first day of the week known as Sunday, or the 7th day we know as Sabbath. That the resurrection took place on Sunday is no more evidence for a appellation being attached to the first day of the week such as 'The Lord's Day' any more than that the crucifixion took place on Friday...why not call that the "Lord's Day'? Or what about the ascension? 

Another point. Are you aware that John wrote his gospel after he wrote the book of revelation? And that in the gospel he never referred to the first day of the week as the Lord's Day, only as the first day? No evidence anywhere else of the first day being called the Lord's Day, nothing other than church tradition. 

So is there any evidence that the Lord's Day is the Sabbath? Yes, indeed. Jesus own words declaring "I am Lord even of the Sabbath Day". Here we have harmonious  agreement with many other scriptures which quote God as saying of the Sabbath being "My holy day"(Isa 58:13)... "My Sabbaths" Exodus 31:13; Levit. 19:3; 23:3; ...the "Sabbath of the Lord thy God"  (Deut. 5:14)...even Nehemiah prayed in Nehemiah 9:14 "and made known unto them thy holy Sabbath....see also Ezek. 20:12,13,16,20,21,24;22:8,26; 23:38...all declaring that the Sabbath day is the Lord's Day. I could give numerous other examples. It is the Lord's Day...not mine, not yours, not the Jews...but HIS!  This echoes across the pages of scripture from Genesis to Revelation without even the slightest hint or suggestion of any change or alteration. I would suggest that any honest man or women would declare such evidence entirely conclusive. Therefore the aged apostle John on the island of Patmos had received the revelation on the Sabbath. The Lord's Day. And to claim because the 4th commandment  isn't directly and repeatedly commanded in the new testament must mean it has been done away with is ludicrous. As if God changes such an integral precept of His holy law without as much as a whimper, or that by changing the practice of observing the day 'spiritually' by 'resting in Christ' , another assumed doctrine, the commandment is thus superseded. Also nonsense. Therein is the perfect example of God's commandments being cast aside by tradition. 

Matthew 12

8For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

 

The implication here is that the Lord is the Lord of EVERY day, including the Sabbath day. That does not say that the Lord's Day is Saturday. The Lord did not rise on Saturday. That is something that arose out of paganism, not Scripture

Edited February 1, 2018 by TheMatrixHasU71

[brakelite]

Just now, OneLight said:

I'm not going to get into the useless discussion on the Sabbath as even Jesus did His Fathers work on the Sabbath.  What I'd like to know about your statement above is if you reject the teachings of Paul?

Not at all. But even Paul did not have the authority to overturn a commandment. All he could do was repeat what he had been previously shown or what the Lord had previously stated Himself. And nowhere does he teach that Sabbath observance has been done away with. He certainly had plenty of opportunities, his dissertations and debates with the Jews and his counsel to the gentiles throughout the book of Acts is utterly devoid of any reference to such a change in faith and practice among God's people. To claim Romans 14 refers to Sabbath keeping is an assumption, as the Sabbath is not mentioned, and Colossians 2 doesn't do what most hope because the Sabbaths mentioned are those that were shadows. The weekly Sabbath was never a shadow, but a memorial. The fact is there is NO conclusive evidence for a change in the 4th commandment as having no further application to Christians, thus to cast upon the heads of Sabbath keepers such epithets as heretics and legalists, is unfounded and reckless. 

What turns my head is the fact that some admit we don't charge people with sin on disobeying (true), but then charge us with claiming people are unsaved if they don't obey!!! What kind of contradictory language is that? Then those same ones charge us with believing and teaching that in order to be saved, we must keep the Sabbath! That my friend is a cute twist, but nevertheless a lie. The truth is, is that if truth is revealed to someone and they either 

a. reject it without investigation or

b. reject it knowing it to be true, 

then it is sin. Wilful ignorance and disobedience is sin. To know to do good and not doing it, it is sin. It is not my work here to judge peoples' consciences. I do not know where their hearts lie, or what motivates them. I simply choose to reveal what I believe scripture teaches, and thus far what many purport to be 'rebuttals' and/or 'corrections', are nothing but inflammatory condemnation and baseless unbiblical assumptions. The only counter is to attack my personal choices regarding my church affiliation, or to judge my Sabbath keeping on their erroneous legalistic interpretations. They think a Sabbath keeper should be offering animal sacrifices in the temple. Little do they realise that the Sabbath was a holy day long time before any sacrifice was necessary...that the sacrifice did nothing to make the day more holy. In Exodus 16 the Lord remonstrated with the Israelites (before Sinai note) that they weren't keeping his laws, statutes, or commandments. Why? Not because they weren't acrificeing anything, because such ceremonies had yet to be introduced...it was because they refused to stop work. Period. 

[TheMatrixHasU71]

2 minutes ago, brakelite said:

And nowhere does he teach that Sabbath observance has been done away with.

Paul didnt specifically teach that but James did in Acts, in response to the Pharisees who claims that Gentile converts should both be circumcised and obey the Law of moses. We are not longer under the schoolmaster. 

 

 

[TheMatrixHasU71]

7 minutes ago, brakelite said:

What turns my head is the fact that some admit we don't charge people with sin on disobeying (true), but then charge us with claiming people are unsaved if they don't obey!!! What kind of contradictory language is that? Then those same ones charge us with believing and teaching that in order to be saved, we must keep the Sabbath! That my friend is a cute twist, but nevertheless a lie. The truth is, is that if truth is revealed to someone and they either 

As we have already told you a continuing theme with EGW is that we are responsible for our salvation....one of her quotes, which I have quoted before is...

But the way to life is narrow and the entrance [139] strait. If you cling to any besetting sin you will find the way too narrow for you to enter. Your own ways, your own will, your evil habits and practices, must be given up if you would keep the way of the Lord. He who would serve Christ cannot follow the world's opinions or meet the world's standard. Heaven's path is too narrow for rank and riches to ride in state, too narrow for the play of self-centered ambition, too steep and rugged for lovers of ease to climb. Toil, patience, self-sacrifice, reproach, poverty, the contradiction of sinners against Himself, was the portion of Christ, and it must be our portion, if we ever enter the Paradise of God.

This is works based salvation. What can people do to make that clear to you?

I have said it over and over again we are to strive for perfection but there is no such thing as perfect obedience while we are in this flesh. And our works, giving up our sin by our own will doesnt save us, for we will fail every time;  but only the cross of Christ.

Ephesians 2

8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9Not of works, lest any man should boast.

[brakelite]

46 minutes ago, brakelite said:

Your response to my previous comment above was also completely in error for God always intended that we remember SUNDAY as the Lord's day, (knowing that we would not follow a sundown to sundown day) as the day of His resurrection.

I asked for scriptural evidence for the above statement. One would think it would be very easy to do considering how popular Sunday observance is, and how prevalent it is in the church. But all you could reply was ....

 

12 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

Umm I posted Scripture to you and one or two others in weeks past and you ignore it

....and I am sorry to say, is quite untrue. As for the following....

 

10 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

The implication here is that the Lord is the Lord of EVERY day, including the Sabbath day. That does not say that the Lord's Day is Saturday. The Lord did not rise on Saturday. That is something that arose out of paganism, not Scripture

I gave more than a dozen examples among many many more (thus not just "proof texts', that explicitly and forcefully declare that the Sabbath Day is the Lord's special sanctified holy day...a day set aside to commemorate creation and redemption. No other day in all scripture is so treated in such a special and careful way. And where does The Lord did not rise on Saturday. come from???? Whoever suggested He did?????

[brakelite]

5 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

Your own ways, your own will, your evil habits and practices, must be given up if you would keep the way of the Lord.

You disagree with this????? What kind of Christianity is it that teaches we must not give up sin and evil habits???? For goodness sake, what does the "death of self " mean to you if not the forsaking of sin? And I will stress most assuredly, that this....

 

8 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

He who would serve Christ cannot follow the world's opinions or meet the world's standard.

Agrees with and is in complete harmony with all the gospel writers, including John who said "If any man love the world the love of the Father is not in him". 1 John 2:15. As for the following, 

 

11 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

there is no such thing as perfect obedience while we are in this flesh.

This simply reflects a lack of faith in the power of our risen Saviour. "All things are possible to them that believe". 

[brakelite]

20 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

Paul didnt specifically teach that but James did in Acts,

No, he did not. If the Gentiles and Jewish Christian believers were meeting on Sundays and ignoring the Sabbath, do you honestly believe the Jewish legalists would be concerned only about circumcision? Do you honestly think that with all the ruckus and controversy, the debates and arguments, the persecutions and counsels that resonated throughout Paul's ministry was bereft of any mention of Sabbath keeping because the Jews quietly laid down their Torah and kept silent on that issue but raised Jihad over circumcision? The ONLY explanation for the silence, is that Paul, the apostles, and every Jewish and Gentile convert to the new faith kept the Sabbath therefore giving the Judaisers and legalists no argument to make. Think about that. Take a look carefully at the book of Acts. Count the number of times the Sabbath is mentioned. Not just Paul's observance of it, but the number of times Gentiles came to the synagogue to hear Paul's preaching...on the Sabbath! Not the first day of the week. 

[OneLight]

36 minutes ago, brakelite said:

Not at all. But even Paul did not have the authority to overturn a commandment. All he could do was repeat what he had been previously shown or what the Lord had previously stated Himself. And nowhere does he teach that Sabbath observance has been done away with. He certainly had plenty of opportunities, his dissertations and debates with the Jews and his counsel to the gentiles throughout the book of Acts is utterly devoid of any reference to such a change in faith and practice among God's people. To claim Romans 14 refers to Sabbath keeping is an assumption, as the Sabbath is not mentioned, and Colossians 2 doesn't do what most hope because the Sabbaths mentioned are those that were shadows. The weekly Sabbath was never a shadow, but a memorial. The fact is there is NO conclusive evidence for a change in the 4th commandment as having no further application to Christians, thus to cast upon the heads of Sabbath keepers such epithets as heretics and legalists, is unfounded and reckless. 

What turns my head is the fact that some admit we don't charge people with sin on disobeying (true), but then charge us with claiming people are unsaved if they don't obey!!! What kind of contradictory language is that? Then those same ones charge us with believing and teaching that in order to be saved, we must keep the Sabbath! That my friend is a cute twist, but nevertheless a lie. The truth is, is that if truth is revealed to someone and they either 

a. reject it without investigation or

b. reject it knowing it to be true, 

then it is sin. Wilful ignorance and disobedience is sin. To know to do good and not doing it, it is sin. It is not my work here to judge peoples' consciences. I do not know where their hearts lie, or what motivates them. I simply choose to reveal what I believe scripture teaches, and thus far what many purport to be 'rebuttals' and/or 'corrections', are nothing but inflammatory condemnation and baseless unbiblical assumptions. The only counter is to attack my personal choices regarding my church affiliation, or to judge my Sabbath keeping on their erroneous legalistic interpretations. They think a Sabbath keeper should be offering animal sacrifices in the temple. Little do they realise that the Sabbath was a holy day long time before any sacrifice was necessary...that the sacrifice did nothing to make the day more holy. In Exodus 16 the Lord remonstrated with the Israelites (before Sinai note) that they weren't keeping his laws, statutes, or commandments. Why? Not because they weren't acrificeing anything, because such ceremonies had yet to be introduced...it was because they refused to stop work. Period. 

Your reply leads me to ask if you believe Paul was writing under his our authority or do you believe he wrote as the Spirit moved him?  Are we not told in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 ...

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

As for your argument about the sabbath, if you choose to keep the sabbath, that is your choice.  Instead, I will leave you to ponder Colossians 2:11-23

In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.  And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.  Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.

So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.  Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God.

Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations— “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men?  These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.