The future

[BibleOnly]

I will say that rejecting the bulk of the New Testament is the easiest way to cling to the keeping of the Sabbath of the Old Testament, it's probably more intellectually honest than trying to worm out of Paul explaining why we don't need to keep the Sabbath . However, it's still tiresome, and sad.

You're right though, it's clear that all sorts of people justify all sorts of belief from the Bible alone, that's another reason God gives the Spirit with evidence, to show what message leads to salvation and give people a 'deposit' on their inheritance, something they can trust more than just men's ideas.

[12tribes]

No, Windsor, this is the usual empty SDA rhetoric. I don't want to take anything away. But, you can not kill your neighbour, I'll choose love him (you) as myself. You can observe the Saturday, but I entered fully in to permanent Sabbath rest when I became a Christian. You can keep the law, but no man can be saved by it. I'll walk in the Spirit and inherit eternity.

Romans 3:31

(31) Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

[BibleOnly]

Yes, that's right. Not because we keep it as an external law, but because it's principles are written on our hearts.

[12tribes]

Yes, that's right. Not because we keep it as an external law, but because it's principles are written on our hearts.

Yes and if we love God in our hearts then it will be shown in what we do. If we love God we will keep the sabbath.

[BibleOnly]

If we love God, we will go beyond the old testament law that Jesus fulfilled. Do you not kill your neighbour, or do you love him as you love yourself ? Paul told us we're not to be judged on Sabbath keeping and are free to regard every day as the same. He also said there was 'another' rest for us to enter in to, apart from Sabbath keeping.

[12tribes]

If we love God, we will go beyond the old testament law that Jesus fulfilled. Do you not kill your neighbour, or do you love him as you love yourself ? Paul told us we're not to be judged on Sabbath keeping and are free to regard every day as the same. He also said there was 'another' rest for us to enter in to, apart from Sabbath keeping.

You are misquoting the Bible to make an excuse for not keeping the sabbath

[BibleOnly]

"You are misquoting the Bible to make an excuse for not keeping the sabbath"

Of course I am misquoting what it says in plain English because I HATE the idea of taking a day off with friends once a week. I am determined to work, to show God who is boss by following my own ideas, and by not having any fun or ever relaxing.

That, by the way, is sarcasm.

I actually keep the Sabbath as it's been explained to me here, every Saturday. I catch up with people from church, don't work for profit, and relax. My only crime is to rest in God every day, and to read the Bible as a book designed to be understood, and not one of hidden codes and veiled salvation.

[Dr. Rich]

I will say that rejecting the bulk of the New Testament is the easiest way to cling to the keeping of the Sabbath of the Old Testament, it's probably more intellectually honest than trying to worm out of Paul explaining why we don't need to keep the Sabbath . However, it's still tiresome, and sad.

You're right though, it's clear that all sorts of people justify all sorts of belief from the Bible alone, that's another reason God gives the Spirit with evidence, to show what message leads to salvation and give people a 'deposit' on their inheritance, something they can trust more than just men's ideas.

God did not reject the tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden. It was placed there to give Adam a choice. This choice was to obey God or not.

God did not reject the words from others found in the NT who never knew him for the exact same reason and this was prophesied about in the Wheat and Tares story. IF Paul and Luke's words were not found in the NT, then no one would have a true choice to either believe what Jesus said or the words from someone else. It's just that simple!

IF the words from Paul and Luke were not found in the NT, then the words of Jesus found in Matt. 24:4-5, 11-12, 24-25 and Rev. 2:2 and 18-25 would have no meaning.

[BibleOnly]

"IF the words from Paul and Luke were not found in the NT, then the words of Jesus found in Matt. 24:4-5, 11-12, 24-25 and Rev. 2:2 and 18-25 would have no meaning."

You're saying that Jesus words are completed by the testimony of the New Testament saints ? I agree.

[Dr. Rich]

"IF the words from Paul and Luke were not found in the NT, then the words of Jesus found in Matt. 24:4-5, 11-12, 24-25 and Rev. 2:2 and 18-25 would have no meaning."

You're saying that Jesus words are completed by the testimony of the New Testament saints ? I agree.

No, what I am saying is what Jesus said--read them! You clearly did not take the time to read the texts that I gave you to read.

[BibleOnly]

I guess that tells you how much effort I think your ideas deserve

[Dr. Rich]

I guess that tells you how much effort I think your ideas deserve

It tells me that you don't believe the effort to know the truth by taking the time to weed out all of the lies found in the NT is about the same as how the Rich Young Ruler thought too.

Here is the thing: Many believe that the "Two Witnesses" found in Rev. 11 are the Old and New Testiments of the bible we have today. Why? Because they heard this or read it from someone who said they came in the name of Jesus either as a prophet or an apostle. They didn't stop to think that when Jesus gave this information to John by the way of an angel (Jesus said He would not return to this earth until He does so at the end--and therefore what Paul said about his conversion stories (all three of them) could not be true), that there was no such thing as any "Bible" nor was there any Old or New Testiments.

These poor people, because they didn't want to read the truth from the words of Jesus for themselves, then by 'faith' believed everthing else these people had to say about Jesus--even the many hundred books written by this person. Sadly, these poor people will be the arch enemies of the small group found in Revelation 12:17 who, out of this group the real Two Witnesses will emerge during the time of trouble. If course this will upset those who believe in the person's writings who said they were the Old and New Testiment--so much so that they will want to kill the true 2 witnesses. How sad!

[Windsor]

The proof is in the pudding, BibleOnly. If Paul was really telling people to stop keeping the Sabbath, then it would only be logical that the earliest Christians did not keep the Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday. The facts as found in history, are that Christians kept the 7th day Sabbath throughout the first century, during the entire lifetime of every disciple as well as Paul. Sunday keeping, (which many still kept like the Sabbath day even in the 20th century) started during the time of Emperor Hadrian, somewhere in the AD 125-135 range.

[BibleOnly]

The proof is in the pudding, BibleOnly. If Paul was really telling people to stop keeping the Sabbath, then it would only be logical that the earliest Christians did not keep the Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday. The facts as found in history, are that Christians kept the 7th day Sabbath throughout the first century, during the entire lifetime of every disciple as well as Paul. Sunday keeping, (which many still kept like the Sabbath day even in the 20th century) started during the time of Emperor Hadrian, somewhere in the AD 125-135 range.

Paul said that if the church wanted to observe a certain day, they could, but they did not have to. So, it doesn't matter if they did, and if it took a couple of generations for the concept that the apostles were raised with, faded from use.

[BibleOnly]

Here is the thing: Many believe that the "Two Witnesses" found in Rev. 11 are the Old and New Testiments of the bible we have today.

I snipped all your self righteous waffle. Did I say I believe this ? I don't. But, I don't want to talk to you anymore, it's a drain on my time. You don't have enough faith in God to believe that He could protect His message, and I see no way past that.

[Windsor]

Sorry, but if Paul was really saying you can keep Sabbath if you want to but you don't have to, then somewhere in the early church history you would have a record of people doing exactly that or at least that point being debated. This is a total modern invention.

[BibleOnly]

I'm sorry, but what people did in the early church, in so far as we can tell, does not invalidate what the Bible says.

[John317]

The proof is in the pudding, BibleOnly. If Paul was really telling people to stop keeping the Sabbath, then it would only be logical that the earliest Christians did not keep the Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday. The facts as found in history, are that Christians kept the 7th day Sabbath throughout the first century, during the entire lifetime of every disciple as well as Paul. Sunday keeping, (which many still kept like the Sabbath day even in the 20th century) started during the time of Emperor Hadrian, somewhere in the AD 125-135 range.

Originally Posted By: BibleOnly

Paul said that if the church wanted to observe a certain day, they could, but they did not have to. So, it doesn't matter if they did, and if it took a couple of generations for the concept that the apostles were raised with, faded from use.

Windsor makes a valid point.

I would add that if Paul was telling people not to keep the Sabbath, we would have found somewhere in the NT a record of his being accused of this. Breaking the Sabbath was a capital offense among the Jews of that time. If they had known they could accuse him of Sabbath-breaking and have him killed for it, they certainly would have done it.

But instead, the record says:

Acts 28:17

After three days he called together the local leaders of the Jews, and when they had gathered, he said to them, "Brothers, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans."

[BibleOnly]

Yes, that's why Paul said he was careful to appear as a Jew to the Jews, so he could by all means, save some. I have no doubt he probably kept the outward appearance of the Sabbath, while regarding each day the same.

[John317]

...I have no doubt he probably kept the outward appearance of the Sabbath, while regarding each day the same.

What does the NT show that Paul and all the rest of the Christians were doing on the Sabbath?

If Paul actually regarded the Sabbath the same as any other day of the week, we surely should find him treating it the same in the NT. But where is such a record?

The fact is that there is absolutely no evidence in Scripture of Paul's behaving in a way that shows he considered the Sabbath the same as he did any other day of the week. If you disagree, show the evidence.

[BibleOnly]

There is absolutely no evidence that he didn't. You're the ones taking us down this path. All we know for sure is that Paul said that some people regard certain days and others regard every day the same, and that both are fine to do.

[John317]

How many Sabbaths are mentioned in the book of Acts?

Tell what the NT says Paul and other Christians were doing on each of the Sabbaths it mentions.

It calls the seventh day "THE Sabbath," and gives no suggestion that it is a thing of the past, even though the book of Acts was written some 40 years or so after the ascension of Christ.

[BibleOnly]

Yes, they went to preach on the Sabbath. Why NOT go on the day that people were meeting to discuss God ? None of these attempts at extrapolation from logic can change scripture.

Rom 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Rom 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

If this does not mean the Sabbath, why did Paul not make that clear ?

[doug yowell]

Yes, they went to preach on the Sabbath. Why NOT go on the day that people were meeting to discuss God ? None of these attempts at extrapolation from logic can change scripture.

Rom 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Rom 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

I think that's the quote the guy who gathered sticks in the wilderness (Num. 15)shoulda used.All that logic mighta made the Lord change His opinion.

[BibleOnly]

Are you saying that Paul was contradicting the will of God ?