Try This Testimony of Sabbath

[Overaged]

"There is a good reason for this and it has to do with a fallen angel that desires to be worshipped as God but on his chosen day in favour of Sun worship and a day that is detestable to God."

This always amuses me. Saturday is a day to worship Saturn, if we want to pick on the names of days. And of course, only the SDA worships the sun, by determining that the sun decides when they can worship.

" If those that enjoy keeping the Sabbath and do so are wrong, God will have no punishment whatsoever for those who just wanted to obey Him in love. "

This is also a crazy statement. If I do what God doesn't want me to, but I am doing something sincerely, God doesn't mind that I am ignoring what He said ?

You wouldn't be "sincere" if you were ignoring God.

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: BobRyan

......

In Rom 14 "one man OBSERVEs one day aBOVE the others " in the list of Lev 23 annual holy days - while "another man observes them all".

This text limits the list of observed annual holy days to those that you find in Lev 23.

By contrast in Gal 4 Paul condemns the observation of pagan holy days "you OBSERVE days months seasons and years" and says "you have believed in vain" if you do such things - returning again to the observation of pagan days from which the gentile believer had come.

Thus Paul does NOT allow observation "of any day" the papacy might select.

in Christ,

Bob

GE:

Quite right ....

except ... be more precise and cut out the use of the word "observe" here. "Regard" is far better and more accurate literally, coming from the idea of 'to judge'.

And in the case of Galatians 4:10, the correct idea is expressed more literally and BETTER with calling the spade a spade; NOT "observe" merely; but "SUPERSTITIOUSLY WORSHIP" --- common idolatry of the time with the day of the lord SUN the chief of the objects of pagan WORSHIP!

Sunday worshippers, take NOTE!

In Rom 14 the result of "regard" is to "observe the day" according to Rom 14:6 - so when we see "regard" in vs 5 we are told in vs 6 that is is "regard" so as to "observe" the day.

hence we get one man observes one of the Lev 23 days above the others - while another observes them all when you take both verses 5 and 6 into full context.

But in Gal 4 we have a very different process - and a very different set of days. Days not sanctioned with approval in the Bible.

Thus the Bible does not allow mankind to "edit" the commandments of God and observe man-made days as if they were holy or approved of God.

in Christ,

Bob

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

that is why there are several formulae for the dates and order of the Spring Feasts – and why, to this day, there is no consensus re the Biblical “three days and three nights” or the day upon which Jesus Christ was crucified, or the day when He arose.

>>Yes, because everybody looks for the one successful attempt at 'harmony', everywhere but in the Scriptures.<<

Indeed, that may be, however, searching for ‘harmony’ in Writ often proves willowy.

>>Three days NT texts

All these Scriptures are in PERFECT AGREEMENT in every respect :

Abib 14, Wednesday night and Thursday day = Fifth Day ....<<

1A) HERE BEGINS the NIGHT and the FIRST of the “three days”, “according to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–

wherein Jesus ENTERED IN in “the Kingdom of my Father” (Jesus’ Jonah’s descent to hell) :–

Mk14:12/17; Mt26:17/20; Lk22:7/14; Jn13:1.

1B) HERE BEGINS the MORNING of the FIRST of the “three days”, “according to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–

in which Jesus was delivered and crucified :–

Mk15:1/Mt27:1/Lk23:1/Jn19:14

1C) HERE is the LATE NOON AND MID–AFTERNOON of the FIRST of the “three days”, “according to the Scriptures” – the passover–Scriptures :–

when Jesus DIED and was deserted by all :–

Mk15:37–41; Mk27:50–56; Lk23:44–49; Jn19:28–30<<

Disabuse me should I err, but no matter how I read the above – I keep arriving at an argument for a Thursday crucifixion. Am I right?

Well then, if so, you underline a portion of what I stated, to wit:

Quote:

Quote:jasd

...that is why there are several formulae for the dates and order of the Spring Feasts – and why, to this day, there is no consensus re the Biblical “three days and three nights” or the day upon which Jesus Christ was crucified, or the day when He arose.

Yes, there are the Friday crucifixionists, the Thursday crucifixionist, and the Wednesday crucifixionists. And there are the Saturday morning resurrectionists, the Saturday end/late resurrectionists, and the Sunday morning resurrectionists.

That is not to mention the contested days upon which the various Spring Feasts should be kept – or not.

Anyway, you have presented a well thought-out argument and done so impressively. However, that is not to say that it is completely impervious to indictment re its harmony with text per se.

For example:

Matt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

A Thursday crucifixion fails to provide the third night “in the heart of the earth” – entombed. That is, unless the Thursday crucifixionist also holds to a Saturday through Sunday morning entombment – arising sometime around ‘dawn’ on Sunday, First day of the week.

Additionally, it seems that a Thursday crucifixion would have the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem occurring upon a Sabbath, which would not have been kosher for the then Jews. To cut palm fronds to lay before Jesus Christ would have entailed strenuous labor. Moreover, that sort of celebration would have been profane by Sabbath standards of the time.

The most egregious argument against a Thursday crucifixion is that it would throw a humungous chock into the well-greased gears of an interpretation of the Seventy-weeks prophecy which did not provide for a parenthetical gap. A Thursday crucifixion could only have occurred in AD 34 by today’s calendar.

[jasd]

>>Thus the Bible does not allow mankind to "edit" the commandments of God<<

I believe that a casual read of Lamentations and Hosea will show that though the text does not ‘allow’ those prophets to “edit” the commandments of Gd – it shows that they were commanded by the impressment of the HS to edit only the one concerning Sabbaths.

>>and observe man-made days as if they were holy or approved of God.<<

Doesn’t Writ tell us that Jesus Christ attended/observed a particular festival not commanded by Gd?—and doesn’t ‘Holy’ simply mean – set aside?—and don’t the texts following

Prov 16:3 Commit thy works unto the LORD, and thy thoughts shall be established.

1 Cor 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, [do] all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Col 3:23 And whatsoever ye do, do [it] heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;

Col 3:24 Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.

...indicate that the person not living in the Jewish economy arrives upon reading the NT the adjuration to do and to keep all things unto the LORD and for the glory of Gd.

Sounds like authority and/or approval...

The adjuration to particularly keep this or that day is missing.

[BobRyan]

>>Thus the Bible does not allow mankind to "edit" the commandments of God<<

I believe that a casual read of Lamentations and Hosea will show that though the text does not ‘allow’ those prophets to “edit” the commandments of Gd – it shows that they were commanded by the impressment of the HS to edit only the one concerning Sabbaths.

[Overaged]

Hey Rob; Happy New Year! Glad to see you survived the holidays.

I was just thinking as I read this last reply of your's that there is something even more unfortunate, than when we see a church, or an individual using "tradition" to make void the expressed Word of God. When we present one text against another text; it basically does the same thing - but with "Bible reasons."

You presented the passage from Mark, which is great, but by leaving it where you did, the way you did; it makes me think that we are telling the world that it's OK to use the Bible, against the Bible; as in pitting one text against the other like this. I understand that this may not have been your intent; but I think it could be seen that way by people reading this. How would you combine/present both sets of texts that you & jasd have submitted to each other so that we do not pit one verse against another like this??

[BibleOnly]

Well, I feel like a week away has opened my eyes. I find the twisting of the passage in Romans 14 to suit your beliefs a perfect example of why I decided to stop talking to you guys about your fixation with Saturday worship and your worship of the cycles of the earth around the sun. I'm definitely dropping this topic, it's a total waste of time, and certainly immaterial. That you don't worship in Spirit and in truth is far more fundamental than what day you go to church.

[Overaged]

Well, I feel like a week away has opened my eyes. I find the twisting of the passage in Romans 14 to suit your beliefs a perfect example of why I decided to stop talking to you guys about your fixation with Saturday worship and your worship of the cycles of the earth around the sun. I'm definitely dropping this topic, it's a total waste of time, and certainly immaterial. That you don't worship in Spirit and in truth is far more fundamental than what day you go to church.

Howdy BibleOnly. I am glad to see you survived the holidays OK. I am coming into this topic a little late, and hope that you will wait a bit before abandoning it.

I know sometimes people see our beliefs as twisting the scriptures, and in some ways; I don't blame them. It's not like all Adventists have been very kind to others who don't see it as we do; and also, so many of us just give a wrong impression about our belief.

I think that some Adventists actually do worship our Lord in Spirit and truth, just as some Christians do from your faith tradition...May I please ask you what in Romans 14 you are referring to in your comment? I would actually be really interested to discuss it with you a bit; and my object is not to "win" or to convince you of anything.

I have friends from almost all faith traditions, and I truly enjoy discussing with them - both the good and the bad, both the agreement and the disagreement.

May I also ask what is your personal view of the Sabbath? In my next post; I will also share some of my view on the Sabbath.

In conclusion, BibleOnly, I don't blame you for feeling the way you do. What some call a "testimony" about Sabbath, is sometimes not that at all. it is used as a way to theologically bludgeon "the evil Sunday keepers;" as some misled Adventists would have the world believe about them.

Please let me know your thoughts; I am interested.

[BibleOnly]

Hey - thanks for your measured reply.

My view of the Sabbath has been stated here many times. Jesus said He came to give us rest, and to fulfil the law. Hebrews in particular covers this, the Sabbath did not give rest, so Jesus had to come and give 'another rest'. Just as the law required I not kill my brother, and Jesus says I must love him as I love myself, so too, I now am not tied to one day a week to bring myself in to the presence of God, but I am the temple of God every day, and I rest in Him all the time, that is what the Gospel is about. So, the Sabbath is not done away with, but, it was never said that it was the day we had to have the equivalent of church meetings, only that we had to rest from our work and think about God. In the New Testament, I do not stop physical labour, I still need to work, but I rest in Him no matter what I am doing. That's the fulfillment of the Sabbath and the rest that Jesus promised to the church.

[Overaged]

I now am not tied to one day a week to bring myself in to the presence of God, but I am the temple of God every day, and I rest in Him all the time, that is what the Gospel is about.

I am so glad to hear you say this. really; I am. This is a truth that many Adventists could learn from you. There is no day when we should not rest in Him.

It might sound a little strange; but I first learned about resting in Him when a very kind fellow in our church started to talk to me about the sabbath. It was just in the way that he kept talking about how wonderful Jesus is, as he talked about the sabbath; well, I ended up seeing the sabbath doctrine as a Love letter, from God to me. I took it very personally. This is one of the few doctrines that made me feel this way; about how sweet it is to really rest in Jesus, all the time, every day, just as you described.

And you know what? I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that you also rest in Christ, in just the way that he has spoken to you, in your circumstances, and in your life. You don't have to believe in the sabbath; to rest in Him.

I am running out of time for tonight; so I will end by enclosing a video that helps describe the kind of "Love Letter From God" that I have experienced, regarding the Sabbath. I hope you enjoy it; and that you have a great "rest" tonight!

[BibleOnly]

I am pleased to hear you say this, because most people here have mocked the idea that I could find any sort of rest, when I have to do natural work, as if the Sabbath were not a spiritual thing.

Interesting video. I can see the scriptures being paraphrased, and I think it's mostly correct. It's amusing that we all know a good looking guy with a beard in a robe is Jesus :-) I have a book called 'The right of your life' on my desk, given to me by an SDA. It is 125 pages of paraphrased scripture and conjecture without a clear salvation message. This video was somewhat the same, it paraphrased the Bible, but if it was aimed at unsaved people then a lot of what it said was not actually true ( we are not God's Children from birth, but by adoption in Christ, for example ). I was surprised it did not mention the Sabbath, after you said it was your understanding of the Sabbath ?

To be clear, I think the Sabbath is salvation in the NT age, and that salvation means repenting, being baptised, and receiving the Holy Spirit with evidence, that is, speaking in tongues. I believe that worship in the Spirit is tongues, that's the only definition of the term that the Bible offers. So, that is what I mean when I say, arguing over what day people go to church, while failing to establish what the church should believe and be doing, is what I think is a waste of time.

But I certainly appreciate what you've added to the discussion, and I almost feel bad to have to say something I'm sure will upset you, when you've gone out of your way to present what you believe in an open and thoughtful way. I don't mean to offend, but, I can't help but tell you what I believe the Gospel to be.

[Neil D]

Well, I feel like a week away has opened my eyes. I find the twisting of the passage in Romans 14 to suit your beliefs a perfect example of why I decided to stop talking to you guys about your fixation with Saturday worship and your worship of the cycles of the earth around the sun. I'm definitely dropping this topic, it's a total waste of time, and certainly immaterial. That you don't worship in Spirit and in truth is far more fundamental than what day you go to church.

Hmmmmmm......Concidering that my post was totally regarding what Jesus did, and my relationship with Him, I find this post to be .....rather sad commentary on your post....

Oh, well,...wish you well....that restlessness that you feel in which you need to talk to Sabbathkeepers....is still God tugging at your heart...

[BibleOnly]

Oh, well,...wish you well....that restlessness that you feel in which you need to talk to Sabbathkeepers....is still God tugging at your heart...

The core issue is, if you have the Holy Spirit, the evidence is speaking in tongues. That is not all of salvation, there's 8 other gifts that all Christians have, and we live our lives displaying fruits, but, that is what worshipping in spirit and truth is, both being able to worship in Spirit ( tongues ) and believing the truth ( true doctrine ). That is far more important than what day you choose to gather. Jesus said we have to love our brother as ourselves, instead of just not kill him. The SDA believes the 4th commandment is the only one Jesus did not fulfil. Jesus said He came to give us rest, but the SDA believes He gave us no rest, b/c we already had the Sabbath and one day off work is enough for you guys.

The honest truth is, I work from home, alone, and so I welcome the chance for some discussion and a chance to be challenged in what I believe, to think about how I understand the Bible, instead of just always talking to people who agree with me. But, that time has long past, and I've said many times that I think my time here is done, I keep staying b/c people keep asking me to, and saying something that catches my interest. God has my heart, I am in fact the temple of the Holy Spirit. I don't feel restless, I feel a combination of sadness and amusement, because the way you guys twist when Paul says things like 'you are free to keep every day the same' and 'the sabbath concept has been fulfilled in the rest we recieve in the Gospel' is both astounding, and tragic. Having had a new years break, I can see that most of what goes on here is 'vain disputing' which does not benefit the Gospel. So, I am pretty sure that I won't post here for much longer, unless someone new to the discussion wants me to cover the Gospel for them again, or perhaps even obey God.

[Neil D]

The core issue is, if you have the Holy Spirit, the evidence is speaking in tongues. That is not all of salvation, there's 8 other gifts that all Christians have, and we live our lives displaying fruits, but, that is what worshipping in spirit and truth is, both being able to worship in Spirit ( tongues ) and believing the truth ( true doctrine ). That is far more important than what day you choose to gather. Jesus said we have to love our brother as ourselves, instead of just not kill him. The SDA believes the 4th commandment is the only one Jesus did not fulfil. Jesus said He came to give us rest, but the SDA believes He gave us no rest, b/c we already had the Sabbath and one day off work is enough for you guys.

[BibleOnly]

In the NT there were backsliders. If I am right, then to be a backslider, one must speak in tongues. The bible says it's unwise to compare ourselves to each other and not the bible. Tongues was always the sign in Acts. What people do when they are saved, is not God's fault.

".I don't see/read anywhere in the bible where He uttered words that another had to interpret...In fact, I don't read anywhere where He spoke some tongue (a non-sensical noise) anywhere. I do read where He spoke different languages...but that's different than your speaking in tongues. "

1 Cor 14:2 defines tongues as words only God understands. Further down Paul says if there is no interpreter, we are to speak to God, so that's what tongues is for, to speak to God. Other verses also make this clear. There is not one example of tongues being used to bridge a language barrier in the NT, not once. That is a fiction. Peter still had to preach in the common language in Acts 2. 1 Cor 12-14 is the longest passage on tongues in the Bible and it does not ever suggest we use it in the way you suggest. It's just a made up story, which is easy to do when you're explaining something you claim never happens in your church anyhow.

Jesus did not have to speak in tongues, nor could He. The Spirit could not be given until He died. But, in Acts 11, Peter refers to Acts 2 as the beginning. Not when he walked with Jesus, but when he recieved the Spirit that JEsus died to give.

"I am sorry though...You will not be able to recieve the blessing.."

ROTFL - that's a little condescending, but still funny.

"You see, I know that you refuse to seek that 'rest' that comes from a Heaven. I know that it was an appointed time that was blessed especially for this type of activity...that is, improving relationships...It's not that you can't find and recieve that...It's just that you refuse the additional blessings that come associatied with that day..."

I get the blessings of teh Sabbath concept every day, and I am sure I get at least the blessings you get out of going to church, when I go, on Wednesday and Sunday. I also get to hear true doctrine, so I get to worship in Spirit and in truth, so I think I'm OK, thanks :-)

"There....you see...God is tugging at your heart...but you are resisting....You know that pride goes before the fall...If you really want to be challenged in your thinking, you also have to be open to change...otherwise, you are just listening to the Devil and wanting to be arguementive..."

I understand that your natural mind is all you ahve, so you have to justify your beliefs in this way. I am not thinking you are argumentative, I am sure you are sincere. You just don't have teh Spirit and don't want to know about it, because of your religion. But, again, I am not judging, I know you need to tell yourself things like this to justify your position.

[Neil D]

In the NT there were backsliders. If I am right, then to be a backslider, one must speak in tongues. The bible says it's unwise to compare ourselves to each other and not the bible. Tongues was always the sign in Acts. What people do when they are saved, is not God's fault.

[BibleOnly]

"What people do when they are saved, is not God's fault."

Say what??? Then who are they controlled by if not by God? If a saved person is truly saved, who are they controlled by???If, as you say, they have no control, then they have not the spirit. As Paul says in Galations 5But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. 17 For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. 19 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, 21 envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24 Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: hamilton-beach

Legalism and friendships will eventually clash and cause the death of one or the other...It depends upon the individual. Which does he choose...I choose friendship, because there is no law against friendships....And that is the Spirit of the friendship that I have with God. He provided a time, to especially work on friendships...which is a daily activity, but a day needs to be devoted to building them up...If that is legalism, then so be it...I will follow Jesus...

I follow Him every day, and in every way. He said twice that believers would speak in tongues, so I believe Him. He told me to rest in Him, so I do. Of course everyone who goes to church would say 'I follow Jesus' but the Jesus of the Bible is defined by the Bible. Not one NT verse says that the church has to keep the Sabbath and three different passages explain why we do not, without breaking the Law, which Jesus fulfilled so we did not have to, but so we could live in the Gospel.

And I show you a still more excellent way. If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

The bible is a book on relationships. It talks about relationships, it tells how to be a better person, it talks about how to treat other people..shoot, it even talks about how to be friends with God. God knows that relationships need to be tended to every day. But He set one day aside to build relationships especially.

I've talked about relationships... ..Tongues are of secondary importance at best. Love is about relationships...not tongues..

What is the Gospel if not about relationships? Is it about tongues?? No...Your concept of tongues, that is, to show unbelievers that you have the spirit, is nothing more than an attempt to show that you have something more special than another...A "Lording over someone"....That is not love. That isnot friendship. That is not good business...It is power over another....And, as I Corinthian 13 has just point out, that is just wrong...

[BibleOnly]

And I show you a still more excellent way. If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

[Overaged]

If there is a genuine; there is a false. This would apply to tongues.

The reason there are no artificial $3 bills, is because there are no real ones.

There is also a real Sabbath, and therefore, a false Sabbath.

Now I see you keep telling us you are "not bound" to the OT commandments. Only the NT you say. But did you know that the NT "new commandment of love" can also be found in Leviticus?

I guess you have some explaining to do.

BTW friend; I really enjoy your posts. I am learning lots from you.

[BibleOnly]

This is all a made up story. Just because God can give the gift of tongues, does not mean anyone else can. There is a false Sabbath, it's Sunday keeping, in this age. The true Sabbath is the infilling of the Holy Spirit with evidence. There is no such thing as 'fake tongues' nor is God so weak that He'd let the devil give fake tongues to people calling on Him for salvation.

"Now I see you keep telling us you are "not bound" to the OT commandments. Only the NT you say. But did you know that the NT "new commandment of love" can also be found in Leviticus?"

That's not really what I say. It's what the SDA would like to claim I say. I am bound by the law, as Jesus was, but also by the Spirit. When I am bound to love my neighbour as myself, I am bound to not murder him. When I am bound to rest in Christ every day, I rest in Him on the OT Sabbath as much as any other day. I am doing what you try to do, without the Spirit, once a week, every day, to the fullness that Jesus desires of me.

[doug yowell]

If we decide that the Prophets Jeremiah and Hosea did not, impressed by the HS, speak for Gd &#150; we enter the strange realm of the weird. And by my read,

the texts are direct and specific. They, thereafter written, perform the function of governors of the harmony of texts &#150; until it can be shown that Gd also caused remembrance and recommencement of the iterated Feasts, Sabbaths, etc.

Yes, a pronouncement of the doing away with the Sabbath,ect... was indeed foretold by the HOly Spirit.Yet that pronouncment was a direct response to the disobedience of God's chosen people and was obviously intended as a curse and not a blessing for them. The weekly Sabbath and all the attending feasts were intended to be a source of joy and interaction with the living God for Israel,not the burdensome restrictions that today's Christianity most often portrays them as. They,in fact, were still being enjoyed as such when God spoke thru Jeremiah and Hosea, ect... Yet, the temporary nature of their hiatus was also foretold by the Divine Word (Is.56,58,66 Jer.17,31 Ez.44,46) and remembered and recommenced by the same Divine Impression thru God's servant Nehemiah, hundreds of years after Hosea's prediction.Referring to the weekly Sabbath, God Himself,some 400 years later, reaffirmed it's original purpose by claiming;"The Sabbath was made for man..." The Bible should be clear that when the absence of the 7th day Sabbath is evident it does not reflect the presence of freedom but rather the evidence of bondage.

[doug yowell]

When I am bound to rest in Christ every day, I rest in Him on the OT Sabbath as much as any other day. I am doing what you try to do, without the Spirit, once a week, every day, to the fullness that Jesus desires of me.

Yet, the OT Sabbath commandment demands that you not rest and keep every day holy. It requires that you work for six days and that the 7th day is to be unique and separate (holy). How can the Holy Spirit drive you to do the opposite of what the commandment requires? Do you believe that the OT allowed for the believer to ignore a daily rest in Christ except on the seventh day?

[BibleOnly]

Doug, you're playing word games here. The OT Sabbath required I rest on Saturday. It did not require I work 6 days, it simply accepted that men had to work in order to live, and allowed that for 6 days. It was focused on the natural more than the spiritual. You're being legalistic and assuming that all of it is a detailed command for you to blindly follow. It's not. The command is to take a day of rest. The rest is the caveat, you can work on the other six days. In any case, are you saying that you work on your paid job on Sundays ? I am told the SDA ignores what the OT said in this regard, and thinks it OK to work on personal projects, just not paid work, so, if you keep this as you describe it, you must show up to your employer on Sunday, right ?

"Do you believe that the OT allowed for the believer to ignore a daily rest in Christ except on the seventh day?"

Those in the OT could not have what we have today, I've shown that already. They could not rest in Christ, that's why He said He came to give us rest, because they did not already have it.

[doug yowell]

Doug, you're playing word games here. The OT Sabbath required I rest on Saturday. It did not require I work 6 days, it simply accepted that men had to work in order to live, and allowed that for 6 days. It was focused on the natural more than the spiritual. You're being legalistic and assuming that all of it is a detailed command for you to blindly follow. It's not. The command is to take a day of rest. The rest is the caveat, you can work on the other six days.

Now who's playing word games? Misrepresenting what Scripture says is the lowest form of word games. The commandment does NOT command (or allow) anyone to rest everyday!! It DOES,in accordance with the principles of heaven (God worked 6 days and didn't rest 7 days)require that man do his work during the alloted time. God sanctified the 7th day NOT any day or no day. You are intentionally ignoring the fact (in the name of legalism!!)that God specifically determined A universal day of rest for mankind and recycle it as "a day of rest".How can that which God instituted specifically for man's happiness and which He Himself modeled in action, be legalistic, even if it is kept according to the detailed command? You are attempting to rewrite what actually occurred (caveat?)in order to sell your readers a false sense of the Sabbath meaning.Is it also blindly following the detailed command to become one with one spouse? Your Sabbath caveat requires the same mindset towards one of God's institutions as those who challenge the traditional model of marriage.I don't think you really want to do that.