Should we still observe the sabbath?

[good samaritan]

Genesis 1:13-19
13......And the evening and the morning were the third day.

Evening
‎ערב ⟺ עֶרֶב
Transliteration:
‛ereb
Pronunciation:
eh'-reb
Part of Speech:
Noun Masculine
Root Word (Etymology):
From עָרַב H6150
BDB Lexicon:
1. evening, night, sunset
a. evening, sunset
b. night

Morning

‎בּקר ⟺ בֹּקֶר
Transliteration:
bôqer
Pronunciation:
bo'-ker
Part of Speech:
Noun Masculine
Root Word (Etymology):
From בָּקַר H1239
BDB Lexicon:
1. morning, break of day
a. morning
1. of end of night
2. of coming of daylight
3. of coming of sunrise

How is there a sunset and a sunrise before the creation of the sun and moon?

14......And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15......And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16......And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17......And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18......And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19......And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

If the sunrise and the sunset is what determines a day, how where the first three days determined? I don’t have an answer for this myself, other than He’s God and I don’t know everything. Thoughts???

[Amanah]

When God separated light from darkness days were delineated.

Genesis 1:3-5
English Standard Version
3 And God said, (A)“Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

[good samaritan]

Possibly, day and night in Gods week isn’t the same as the day and night in our week. The sun and earth move systematically and at a frequency that gives us our time. Obviously God did not rely on that because He didn’t even create until day 4. The lexicon that defines evening and morning as sunset and sunrise is a lil bit confusing because you cannot have a sunset or sunrise without a sun.

2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

God’s time is not our time. The creation story is told by the books of the law of Moses. It does not appear that Adam was the writer of the book, nor would Adam been witness to the creation. He didn’t come to be until day 6, so evidently mankind was one of the last things made. It seems to me the creation story would have likely been orally translated.I personally am not convinced that the creation story is literal. It certainly establishes God as our creator, but the time and method of how that was done is still a mystery. Science dates something’s on earth as millions of years old. That isn’t consistent with the Bible’s teaching of 6,000 years of man’s day.

How do we reconcile this:

A) Science is wrong Bible is right

B) Science is right Bible is right but we misinterpret the time frame in Genesis.

I know this is off the wall, but since the Sabbath Law was established from creation story, I thought it may have some interest in the discussion.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Possibly, day and night in Gods week isn’t the same as the day and night in our week. The sun and earth move systematically and at a frequency that gives us our time. Obviously God did not rely on that because He didn’t even create until day 4. The lexicon that defines evening and morning as sunset and sunrise is a lil bit confusing because you cannot have a sunset or sunrise without a sun.

2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

God’s time is not our time. The creation story is told by the books of the law of Moses. It does not appear that Adam was the writer of the book, nor would Adam been witness to the creation. He didn’t come to be until day 6, so evidently mankind was one of the last things made. It seems to me the creation story would have likely been orally translated.I personally am not convinced that the creation story is literal. It certainly establishes God as our creator, but the time and method of how that was done is still a mystery. Science dates something’s on earth as millions of years old. That isn’t consistent with the Bible’s teaching of 6,000 years of man’s day.

How do we reconcile this:

A) Science is wrong Bible is right

B) Science is right Bible is right but we misinterpret the time frame in Genesis.

I know this is off the wall, but since the Sabbath Law was established from creation story, I thought it may have some interest in the discussion.

Science is knowledge gained by observations that prove or disprove a thesis. Atheistic evolutionism isn't science, it's a cosmology based on dogmas that are unobservable and unproven. There is zero discrepancy between actual science and the Bible. There are however major discrepancies between atheistic evolutionism and the Bible.

Once this is realised, then one is no longer trying to deal with supposed contradictions between science and the Bible. One then no longer tries to make the Bible fit the goofy ideas of godless antichrists, like thinking "The Creation account is not literal because the antichrists say it didn't happen that way."

[loran adkins]

Originally Posted by Esaias

There you go again with that "argumentum ad nauseum", just repeating your assertions without even attempting to prove them. Weird.

"Is there any NT scripture where anyone is commanded to abstain from bestiality or cross dressing?"

yada yada yada etc etc

There you go again quoting Old Testament when there has been many New Testament scripture that has been related that speaks that keeping of the Law of Moses and the literal ten commandments is not for those of the nations of the world.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by loran adkins

There you go again quoting Old Testament when there has been many New Testament scripture that has been related that speaks that keeping of the Law of Moses and the literal ten commandments is not for those of the nations of the world.

Wrong.

Romans 2:5-16 KJV
But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; [6] Who will render to every man according to his deeds: [7] To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: [8] But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, [9] Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; [10] But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: [11] For there is no respect of persons with God. [12] For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; [13] (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. [14] For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: [15] Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) [16] In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

[loran adkins]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Wrong.

Romans 2:5-16 KJV
But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; [6] Who will render to every man according to his deeds: [7] To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: [8] But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, [9] Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; [10] But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: [11] For there is no respect of persons with God. [12] For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; [13] (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. [14] For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: [15] Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another [16] In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

The law that is spoken of here is not the ten commandments per Sae. But that which is right before God. You keep referring to the ten commandments as being the law of God, but the ten commandments are summed up in Love the Lord God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself.

As has been said before, that which was handed down by Moses was both ceremonial and civil law. Those things that were a symbol of what Christ would fulfill were the ceremonial law. And then those things that dealt with our fellow man were civil. There is not one reason that you can put keeping the sabbath day as civil law as it has been shown to you a number of times that it has been fulfilled by Christ.

Although it is not a sin to keep the Sabbath day neither is it a sin to not keep it.
Rom 14:5.. One indeed esteems a day above another day; and another esteems every day alike. Let each one be fully assured in his own mind...
Rom 14:6.. He who regards the day regards it to the Lord; and he not regarding the day, does not regard it to the Lord. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, does not eat to the Lord, and gives God thanks...

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by loran adkins

The law that is spoken of here is not the ten commandments per Sae. But that which is right before God. You keep referring to the ten commandments as being the law of God, but the ten commandments are summed up in Love the Lord God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself.

As has been said before, that which was handed down by Moses was both ceremonial and civil law. Those things that were a symbol of what Christ would fulfill were the ceremonial law. And then those things that dealt with our fellow man were civil. There is not one reason that you can put keeping the sabbath day as civil law as it has been shown to you a number of times that it has been fulfilled by Christ.

Although it is not a sin to keep the Sabbath day neither is it a sin to not keep it.
Rom 14:5.. One indeed esteems a day above another day; and another esteems every day alike. Let each one be fully assured in his own mind...
Rom 14:6.. He who regards the day regards it to the Lord; and he not regarding the day, does not regard it to the Lord. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, does not eat to the Lord, and gives God thanks...

You didn't read the thread, obviously.

[loran adkins]

Originally Posted by Esaias

You didn't read the thread, obviously.

This thread is not the word of God, and neither is any man's interpretation. And that is what I see a lot on this site. You might be right about a lot of things, but you are not right on them all. And while it is nice to talk about our differences in the eyes of God it does not make that much difference. We are not the judge of who goes to heaven or not, especially not by our own interpretation of scripture. If two cannot agree on what scripture means than both are wrong because you are not letting the holy ghost lead you, you are letting your own flesh lead you and not the spirit of God.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by loran adkins

This thread is not the word of God, and neither is any man's interpretation. And that is what I see a lot on this site. You might be right about a lot of things, but you are not right on them all. And while it is nice to talk about our differences in the eyes of God it does not make that much difference. We are not the judge of who goes to heaven or not, especially not by our own interpretation of scripture. If two cannot agree on what scripture means than both are wrong because you are not letting the holy ghost lead you, you are letting your own flesh lead you and not the spirit of God.

My point was the thread already addressed your "points", but since you didn't read the thread you missed all that. We can't do your job for you, ya know?

Your statement about 2 people not agreeing therefore both are wrong is nonsense.

Who is led by the flesh? According to Paul it is the one who refuses to submit to THE LAW OF GOD.

Romans 8:5-8 KJV
For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. [6] For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. [7] Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. [8] So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.