7th Day Sabbath not for New Testament believers

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Brother Blume, you are attempting to say that in Gal 4:9 the Galatians desired to be under bondage to the elements. Then, in Gal 4:21 they are desiring to be under the law. Therefore, you conclude the elements are the law, this is bondage, and not for Christians.

But please notice something:

to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. (1 Cor 9:21)

If what you say is true, then Paul affirmed he was in bondage to the weak and beggarly elements of the world "under Christ" (as a Christian). This is clearly nonsensical, so the only rational conclusion is your interpretation of Galatians is ERROR.

The law Paul said he was under is not the law you espouse he was. He would not say he lived as someone without the law in order to win those without the law if he was required of God to live under law whether or not he was trying to reach those outside. He was saying he is not under law of Moses, but not that he is not under ANY law whatsoever. He is under the Law of Liberty, contrasted from the bondage and death that aw of Moses administered to. It did not administer death directly, but indirectly. Law of Moses WRITTEN AND ENGRAVED ON STONE was the TEN COMMANDMENTS What else was written and engraved on stones as issued by Moses? And it engendered death because, as I laid out earlier, law demanded one to keep ALL its commandments or DIE. Lev 18:5. Paul even said law was ordained to life but he found it to be UNTO DEATH in Romans 7. He explained the very thing we need to explain to you, when you accuse us of being lawless. It;s not that LAW is sin or evil, but MAN is sinful. And you cannot put a holy law with a sinful man and expect man to obey it successfully. Romans 7. So, there is a law of the Spirit of life that overrides the law of sin and death. And the law of sin and death kicks in when one tries to keep the law of Moses in OLDNESS OF THE LETTER. Making self obey the law without any faith or seeking strength from the Spirit.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Could you please post where I said this? I don't believe I ever said this.

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

I want to carefully clarify that "the law" as I will use it means the Mosaic law that was given to Moses by God on Mount Sinai. It REALLY was God's law, but we sometimes refer to it as Moses law because God gave it to him. This law includes the ten commandments, as well as the other laws that were delivered to Moses.

If you (or your family) don't own any land, AND you are NOT a Levite, then you weren't in on the deal (covenant) either. No land? No covenant. Isn't that pretty simple?

3. If you are not an Israelite and you don't own land in Israel, and you're not a Levite (the Levites didn't get land) then the law did not apply to you.

In another thread, you said they were keeping the Ten Commandments before entering the promised land , which actually negates more of your argument. But you also have been claiming the Ten Commandments were only for Israel, and was tied to the land. Hence, your claim that unless you were an Israelite who owned land in Palestine (or were a Levite) the Ten Commandments didn't apply. Thus, all nations outside of Israel were not obligated to obey the Ten Commandments.

Now, if this is a misrepresentation of your belief, please accept my apologies and please clarify: who, if anyone, was obligated to obey the Ten Commandments outside of the land of Israel?

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Tithesmeister has claimed the Ten Commandments weren't valid outside of Palestine. Yet in Genesis we read of people being guilty of idolatry, murder, coveting, theft, adultery, etc.

I quoted (showed my work) where Moses said that the covenant was not with their fathers. Check the record. You are misrepresenting me. Look it up. I didn't say that. Moses said that. I merely quoted him. I want a response and an apology from you for saying I said something that I never said. They were NOT guilty of breaking the ten commandments of the Sinaitic covenant in Genesis. Because it didn't exist.

Originally Posted by Esaias

I do not say this to be rude or insulting.

It seems that you are saying it to be deceptive.

I don't remember you answering the question about eating pork. I know you talked about it.

Could you just humor me and answer the question?

Is eating pork a sin?

Yes

No

I really don't know what you believe about this. Why not just answer. It is not a trick question. Don't be ashamed of what you believe.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Why do a summation of my argument? What purpose would that serve? There is only one reason for you to do so. So that you can twist what I said. They can read my argument for themselves. They certainly don't need you to come along and explain something that you obviously don't understand.

Summarizing an opposing argument clarifies the points in contention, the points being made, etc. It also helps a person to clarify their own understanding of an opposing argument. Also, it helps clear away some of the unnecessary dross and side trails that often result in these types of discussions.

I agree, any reader can go back and read everyone's posts and see whatever they can see.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

This remark in bold is another misrepresentation. I do study the Old Testament. What you said is use the Old Testament only.

Here is your quote, lest I do to you what you have done to me.

"So, pull out the Old Testament, and using the Old Testament only, demonstrate whether or not the following doctrine is true:"

Copied and pasted. I only added the quotation marks.

I pointed out to you that we are a New Testament church.

You're welcome.

And, your objection to me asking for that was based on an idea that using the OT to verify a doctrine claimed as apostolic is wrong, when I already showed it is in fact what the Bereans were doing.

You are welcome, as well.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Esaias

In another thread, you said they were keeping the Ten Commandments before entering the promised land , which actually negates more of your argument. But you also have been claiming the Ten Commandments were only for Israel, and was tied to the land. Hence, your claim that unless you were an Israelite who owned land in Palestine (or were a Levite) the Ten Commandments didn't apply. Thus, all nations outside of Israel were not obligated to obey the Ten Commandments.

Now, if this is a misrepresentation of your belief, please accept my apologies and please clarify: who, if anyone, was obligated to obey the Ten Commandments outside of the land of Israel?

Well . . . Now you say that I believe ten commandments were valid outside of Palestine. Then you said I didn't believe such. Which is it?

That's an awful poor attempt at an apology, as apologies go. Probably the best I'll get though.

Esaias my belief on this is based on scripture. I have shown my work. You just won't accept scripture.

So while we're coming clean. Answer this question for me please.

Did Moses say that this covenant was not with our fathers, which is what I said, or did he not say it?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

That is a strawman. There is a law of the Spirit of Life which is distinct from the Law of Moses, and IT IS the law of Moses you are proposing we keep.

Please refresh your understanding of what a straw man fallacy is, and get back to me afterwards. Also, I assume you meant "...and IT IS NOT the law of Moses..." which is silly, God gave His law through Moses, the people didn't keep it, so He said He would make a new covenant with them and write His law in their hearts and cause them to obey His law, commandments, statutes, judgments, etc. You are proposing some new legislation as a replacement for God's law (commandments, statutes, etc).

Yet where is this new legislation found? Nowhere, that's where. The New Testament writings do not legislate new law as replacement for the commandments of God we read in the Scriptures. Rather, they repeatedly affirm God's law, as I keep showing and you keep rejecting.

AND YOU NEVER ANSWERED ME ABOUT THIS YET: SHOW ME ONE PERSON WHO KEPT ANY HOLY DAYS BEFORE MOSES. I ask and ask and you never respond to that. Meanwhile I am responding to all I can have time to do so.

Don't remember you asking that, actually. Can you show me one person who REFUSED TO KEEP SABBATH AFTER CHRIST? No, you cannot, without begging the question and interpreting didactic statements in your favor.

Israel wasn't even keeping Sabbath prior to Moses, apparent, hence the command to REMEMBER it.

Passover, Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement, and Tabernacles were not given prior to Sinai, to my knowledge, they were not known prior to that. Neither apparently was God's name JEHOVAH (Ex 6:3). Nor is there any indication people abstained from bestiality or cross dressing prior to Sinai. None of which proves people today should not follow the Sinaitic injunctions against bestiality or cross dressing.

And therefore (try to follow the logic here) just because there is no record of a person doing something prior to Sinai doesn't mean we don't have to do it either.

Meanwhile, I already showed you in this thread and the other previous thread how the early apostolic church was in fact keeping God's appointed feast days. Of course, you can't accept that, because it would overthrow your entire argument. Quite understandable.

The readers can decide what they understand God wants them to do, or not do.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

And you cannot put a holy law with a sinful man and expect man to obey it successfully. Romans 7. So, there is a law of the Spirit of life that overrides the law of sin and death. And the law of sin and death kicks in when one tries to keep the law of Moses in OLDNESS OF THE LETTER. Making self obey the law without any faith or seeking strength from the Spirit.

The power of God, the effect of the Holy Ghost, is to deliver the sinner from bondage to sin and disobedience (Romans 6-8). Sabbath breaking is sin, therefore one of the things the law of the Spirit does is end a person's Sabbath breaking, by faith in Jesus. I proved this already. I exegeted Romans 8 and showed point by point that Paul clearly taught the law breaker is the carnal, fleshly, natural one who minds the flesh, as opposed to the spiritual, spiritually minded Christian who actually obeys the law of God.

That law includes the Fourth Commandment.

It's amazing how far people will go not to give up their weekends!

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Well . . . Now you say that I believe ten commandments were valid outside of Palestine. Then you said I didn't believe such. Which is it?

I'm asking you to clarify. I notice you didn't.

That's an awful poor attempt at an apology, as apologies go. Probably the best I'll get though.

Did I misrepresent your belief about the Ten Commandments being obligatory outside Palestine? Just say "yes" and I will apologize. I actually already did, but if you want more, perhaps some flagellation or knee walking, just let me know.

Esaias my belief on this is based on scripture. I have shown my work. You just won't accept scripture.

No, I don't accept your interpretations of Scripture.

So while we're coming clean. Answer this question for me please.

Did Moses say that this covenant was not with our fathers, which is what I said, or did he not say it?

He did say that. And nowhere have I ever claimed the covenant was made with the fathers pre-Sinai. Nowhere have I denied what Moses declared.

BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT. You are still confounding (conflating, your choice) the covenant with the commandments. I've already shown (repeatedly) the necessary conclusions that result from your line of reasoning (the covenant was unique to Sinaitic Israelites, therefore the Fourth Commandment does not oblige me to anything - or ANY of the Ten Commandments, as you bluntly stated) but of course you won't acknowledge that.

Which is fine.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias View Post

Tithesmeister has claimed the Ten Commandments weren't valid outside of Palestine. Yet in Genesis we read of people being guilty of idolatry, murder, coveting, theft, adultery, etc.

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

I quoted (showed my work) where Moses said that the covenant was not with their fathers. Check the record. You are misrepresenting me. Look it up. I didn't say that. Moses said that. I merely quoted him. I want a response and an apology from you for saying I said something that I never said. They were NOT guilty of breaking the ten commandments of the Sinaitic covenant in Genesis. Because it didn't exist.

I sincerely apologize for saying you argued that the Ten Commandments weren't valid outside of Palestine. I clearly see now that instead, you said the Ten Commandments didn't exist before Moses (which of course means they weren't valid prior to Moses). Sorry, my bad.

Although, I will point out your words above are somewhat confusing. I talk about commandments, but you respond with talk about covenant, etc.

It seems that you are saying it to be deceptive.

Really? In that case why discuss anything with me? If, as you suspect, I am "deceptive". I've heard it said that ad hominem attacks against a person's character are usually a big indication the person using them has run out of reasoned argument and can't make a case, so they start insinuating the other side is bad and morally deficient.

I don't remember you answering the question about eating pork. I know you talked about it.

Could you just humor me and answer the question?

Is eating pork a sin?

Yes

No

I really don't know what you believe about this. Why not just answer. It is not a trick question. Don't be ashamed of what you believe.

Believe me, I'm not ashamed of what I believe, and most here who have been around these parts know what I think about the food laws. But, seeing as I'm deceptive, nothing I could possibly say can be trusted.

So no answer FOR YOU.