Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
Not all historicists. Shall I quite Froom, Samuele Bacchiocchi, Hardy? Or how about the Puritans, Reformed Baptists, and most other Protestant "divines", who although they were in error in thinking the Sabbath Commandment was transferred from the seventh day to the first day of the week, nevertheless were generally historicists (and amillennialists!) and affirmed everything I maintain about the Sabbath (again, with the exception of which day of the week it applies to)?
|
I quoted their words about Sabbath being a shadow to show my reasoning is not absurd or stupid, but repeated by scholars identically. I was not saying everything those guys say about the bible is true, but proved a point that my reasoning on the issue is not ridiculous.
You speak of your view clearly being shown in these references we debated, yet they weren’t clearly seen to other scholars.
Quote:
Speaking of Adam Clarke, whom you cited:
From his Commentary:
Verse 8
Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy - See what has been already said on this precept, Genesis 2:2, and elsewhere. See Clarke's note on Genesis 2:2. As this was the most ancient institution, God calls them to remember it; as if he had said, Do not forget that when I had finished my creation I instituted the Sabbath, and remember why I did so, and for what purposes. The word שבת shabbath signifies rest or cessation from labor; and the sanctification of the seventh day is commanded, as having something representative in it; and so indeed it has, for it typifies the rest which remains for the people of God, and in this light it evidently appears to have been understood by the apostle, Hebrews 4. Because this commandment has not been particularly mentioned in the New Testament as a moral precept binding on all, therefore some have presumptuously inferred that there is no Sabbath under the Christian dispensation. The truth is, the Sabbath is considered as a type: all types are of full force till the thing signified by them takes place; but the thing signified by the Sabbath is that rest in glory which remains for the people of God, therefore the moral obligation of the Sabbath must continue till time be swallowed up in eternity.
Well, so much for Clarke being an antisabbatarian.
|
Who said he was antisabbatarian? You’re starting to put words in my mouth and make strawman arguments.
I said he agreed with me about what Sabbaths being a shadow referred to and did not agree with you about the intention of that reference in Paul's verse to the shadow.
He also agreed with me about the "elements of the world" being law's elements.
I do not agree with everything Clarke says, and you know you do not. I was pointing out hat my reasoning of what elements of law are are not ridiculous but agreed upon by scholars.
To the weak and beggarly elements - After receiving all this, will ye turn again to the ineffectual rites and ceremonies of the Mosaic law - rites too weak to counteract your sinful habits, and too poor to purchase pardon and eternal life for you? If the Galatians were turning again to them, it is evident that they had been once addicted to them. And this they might have been, allowing that they had become converts from heathenism to Judaism, and from Judaism to Christianity. This makes the sense consistent between the 8th and 9th verses.
...
The elements of the world - A mere Jewish phrase, יסודי עולם הזה yesodey olam hazzeh, “the principles of this world;” that is, the rudiments or principles of the Jewish religion. The apostle intimates that the law was not the science of salvation, it was only the elements or alphabet of it; and in the Gospel this alphabet is composed into a most glorious system of Divine knowledge: but as the alphabet is nothing of itself, unless compounded into syllables, words, sentences, and discourses; so the law, taken by itself, gives no salvation; it contains indeed the outlines of the Gospel, but it is the Gospel alone that fills up these outlines.