Why Sunday

[mfblume]

Again, this flatly proves sabbatarians' error. How could this be denied?

Originally Posted by mfblume

2 Cor 3 is very clearly showing that the law of Moses is the Ten Commandments.

2 Corinthians 3:3.. Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

Paul clearly said that the epistle of Christ is our lives that were written with God's words on fleshly tables of the HEART not STONE. The writing on tables of stone distinctly refers to the Ten Commandments.

Then we read:

2 Corinthians 3:6.. Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; [not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

We see a contrast between the letter that kills and the spirit that gives life. And the New Testament is of the Spirit that gives life!

With that in mind, we then read:

2 Corinthians 3:7.. But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

The letter that gives death is now referred to as the ministration of death, and it was written and engraved on stones, which is distinctly the ten commandments, It could not be plainer. And, furthermore, it describes the face of Moses when those ten commandments were presented by him to the people. His face was shining. When did his face shine other than when he was presenting the ten commandments and actually holding the tables of stone that were written and engraving with those commandments?

Exodus 34:29.. And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.



And the reason sabbatarians will make an effort to find a though that will change the simple reading to say that the ministration of death is something OTHER THAN THE ten commandments, is because they are in the mode of looking for a loophole. They are operating in eisegesis, and making the text say what they are looking for it to say, rather than allow it to teach the what to believe. I say that with no malice or mockery. And they do this becuase the next verse proves that the ministration of death is done away with. They cannot equate the ten commandments with the ministration of death, despite clear distinction that it is, due preceding verses, because the next verse shows that ministration passed away.

2 Corinthians 3:11.. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

Verse 7 said that the fading glory on Moses' face represented the fading glory of the Ten Commandments, written and engraven on stones, also called the letter and the ministration of death written on stoners.

Paul DID NOT say that the law of God was the written law apart from the ten commandments, and did not say that the written law's punishment of death is what made it the ministration of death. He said the TEN COMMANDMENTS were the ministration of death.

Also, sabbatarians at this point begin to argue apart from Paul's words here, and distract the issue into a debate on why commandments such as not committing adultery could cause death to people. They argue that we all know it is wrong to commit adultery and murder, two fo the ten commandments, so that if this was a ministration of death, EVEN THOUGH PAUL SAID IT WAS, that must mean it is okay to adulterate and murder people, WHICH IS NOT TRUE. The ministration of death was not described as that because the commandments themselves were wrong. It is described as that because Pau also taught that SIN IS IN OUR FLESH and disables us from perfectly keeping those commandments. And he actually used the word DEATH when describing that failure.

Romans 7:7-11.. What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. ..(8).. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. ..(9).. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. ..(10).. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. ..(11).. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

How could it be any plainer in saying that the LAW was the Ten Commandments in Paul's context in Romans 7?

Tithesmeister is correct!

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Brother Avery, with all due respect, nobody ever goes to other pages and reads paragraphs of literature. Please present those thoughts yourself in your own words right here. I've tried to get people to do that as well, and it never works. We're engaged here,... there's enough to read right here without adding paragraph from other websites or books.

With this book,which I have frequently reccommended, I am giving you exact pages on an easy-to-access PDF, with the url. (Only problem, Walker is not using the AV, the effect on this discussion looks to be quite minor.). Es suficiente.

If I felt I had much to add to the Walker pages, i would do the whole thing with extracts and additional sources, as I do on many other topics.

Personally, I believe anyone truly interested in the sabbath question will give at least a careful skim to The Law and the Sabbath, more than any other one book.

You especially, mfblume, as Allan Walker deals directly and forcefully with your variety-pack of arguments.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

With this book,which I have frequently reccommended, I am giving you exact pages on an easy-to-access PDF, with the url. (Only problem, Walker is not using the AV, the effect on this discussion looks to be quite minor.). Es suficiente.

If I felt I had much to add to the Walker pages, i would do the whole thing with extracts and additional sources, as I do on many other topics.

Personally, I believe anyone truly interested in the sabbath question will give at least a careful skim to The Law and the Sabbath, more than any other one book.

You especially, mfblume, as Allan Walker deals directly and forcefully with your variety-pack of arguments.

What I'm going to describe happens with any conversation like we're already doing even on this forum. But enough people can keep pushing a certain viewpoint with their arguments and make anybody agree with them eventually. Of course not all will. But reading a book that's fully intent on convincing a person of the Sabbath, is just something that doesn't fly very well. I know that's what we're all, each of us, trying to do with each of our views... is push them. But it's a lot easier to deal with when you put in your own words what he's saying. I've tried to get people to read books and they would never do it. So, I've kind of quit trying. Just some advice.


So again, I just like you to put it in your own words what he's saying.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by mfblume

What I'm going to describe happens with any conversation like we're already doing even on this forum. But enough people can keep pushing a certain viewpoint with their arguments and make anybody agree with them eventually. Of course not all will. But reading a book that's fully intent on convincing a person of the Sabbath, is just something that doesn't fly very well. I know that's what we're all, each of us, trying to do with each of our views... is push them. But it's a lot easier to deal with when you put in your own words what he's saying. I've tried to get people to read books and they would never do it. So, I've kind of quit trying. Just some advice.

Excellent examples. I would send people tons and tons of articles, books, and files on certain subjects. Only to find out that people aren't into research, let alone reading and studying out what you want them to find. People would rather be told the skinny answers to their fat questions. My wife and I's problem is that we read, we study, we research. We own a library of over 10,000 books on not only Christian subjects, but on every religion you could name. Material about these subjects written by their naysayers, and by they themselves. When we step back and examine all that is around us who call themselves Pentecostal, Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Jews, Rabbinical, Philosophical, Buddhists, Hindus, Republicans and Democrats. All contradict each other and give valid arguments on why. We believe that a tract filled with dogma will give an epiphany, turn on a light, open a door, and set the captive free. It will, because when the student is ready, the teacher WILL come. yet, when the student is non existent, or believes they are no longer learning, the teacher must back off, or else get a bloody nose.

But, even me stating all the above is going to be debated, scrutinized or totally ignored. The only one we are here for is the one who is ready, to read and eat what is being served. We don't have to worry about our critics or opposition because far be it from us to be teaching them. they have already attained the knowledge they see as truth. Be happy in the thought that Jesus knows His sheep, and they hear only His voice, not anyone's else. they only follow Him. So, if we are a voice and not an echo that voice will be recognized as either our's, or the Master's. taking a load of weight off our shoulders.

Originally Posted by mfblume

So again, I just like you to put it in your own words what he's saying.

Yes, indeed, I have been guilty of loading down people with tomes so large it just looks like homework. It is better when we are able to give a skinny answer. Yet, we do know how to fill pages of threads with miles of our own material.

[Amanah]

The ministration of death is the law written in stone, while the ministration of the Spirit is the law written on the heart. The moral commandments are not being done away with, but the ministration of the Spirit brings life rather than death.

It is not the commandments that are being done away with, but rather a change in ministration.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Amanah

The ministration of death is the law written in stone, while the ministration of the Spirit is the law written on the heart. The moral commandments are not being done away with, but the ministration of the Spirit brings life rather than death.

It is not the commandments that are being done away with, but rather a change in ministration.

Very good.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by mfblume

What I'm going to describe happens with any conversation like we're already doing even on this forum.

At the moment time is limited.
If you do not want to read the few pages I referenced, that is your right.

You put in long post after long post, and I no longer pay much attention to them, because they are based on repetitive misunderstandings on your part. And I do not feel to go around in circles.

If you referenced some writer of merit, and pointed to a few pages, I would have something more solid with which to work.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

At the moment time is limited.
If you do not want to read the few pages I referenced, that is your right.

You put in long post after long post, and I no longer pay much attention to them, because they are based on repetitive misunderstandings on your part. And I do not feel to go around in circles.

If you referenced some writer of merit, and pointed to a few pages, I would have something more solid with which to work.

Thank you for any references you have posted. Or will post in the future. This discussion is a very good one. Many who just read threads and never comment, will be greatful for your offering. Everyone posting are trying to understand each other’s position. At times it can be confusing and one may need to reread a post to be able to ask for clarification. Again thank you for posting in this thread.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Excellent examples. I would send people tons and tons of articles, books, and files on certain subjects. Only to find out that people aren't into research, let alone reading and studying out what you want them to find. People would rather be told the skinny answers to their fat questions. My wife and I's problem is that we read, we study, we research. We own a library of over 10,000 books on not only Christian subjects, but on every religion you could name. Material about these subjects written by their naysayers, and by they themselves. When we step back and examine all that is around us who call themselves Pentecostal, Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Jews, Rabbinical, Philosophical, Buddhists, Hindus, Republicans and Democrats. All contradict each other and give valid arguments on why. We believe that a tract filled with dogma will give an epiphany, turn on a light, open a door, and set the captive free. It will, because when the student is ready, the teacher WILL come. yet, when the student is non existent, or believes they are no longer learning, the teacher must back off, or else get a bloody nose.

But, even me stating all the above is going to be debated, scrutinized or totally ignored. The only one we are here for is the one who is ready, to read and eat what is being served. We don't have to worry about our critics or opposition because far be it from us to be teaching them. they have already attained the knowledge they see as truth. Be happy in the thought that Jesus knows His sheep, and they hear only His voice, not anyone's else. they only follow Him. So, if we are a voice and not an echo that voice will be recognized as either our's, or the Master's. taking a load of weight off our shoulders.



Yes, indeed, I have been guilty of loading down people with tomes so large it just looks like homework. It is better when we are able to give a skinny answer. Yet, we do know how to fill pages of threads with miles of our own material.

Amen!!!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

At the moment time is limited.
If you do not want to read the few pages I referenced, that is your right.

You put in long post after long post, and I no longer pay much attention to them, because they are based on repetitive misunderstandings on your part. And I do not feel to go around in circles.

If you referenced some writer of merit, and pointed to a few pages, I would have something more solid with which to work.

That's fine, but I think my posts are not understood correctly, so I rephrase my points. You seem to be the opposite of me where I would rather hear from you than a book.

So be it. Neither of us can please everyone.