If a Sabbath is forced, Will you keep Sunday holy?

[Blade]

Magenta I was so bless by some of posts Thats it.. it was wonderful, beautiful, uplifting.. all the good fruits huh

 

[Blik]

I support Sabbath commandment im talking about Christians who misinterept Col. 2:16 and use it as case to not keep Sabbath commandment they don't realize its talking about feast day Sabbath's which are no longer needed because of Christ's first coming. Pay attention don't mis quote me.

I misunderstood you. And I don't think Christ disagreed with the Father, so Christ wiped out what the Father told us. Matt. 5:18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

The Gnostics were powerful in the Colossian church, teaching that only the spiritual had meaning for Christ so they may not celebrate with a feast. Paul was telling them Gnostics (false prophets) were not speaking for Christ, the Colossians should listen only to Christ, and Christ was all for a celebration of His salvation. The Gnostics had no right to tell them they couldn't do that.

 

[posthuman]

Im sorry he was calling me blasphemy which is speaking profanely about God and i would never and heresy means teaching contrary to Gods word that's all I meant he shoudlnt be able to slander me senior or not.

well, i said that because i think i understand you to be calling everything in the law, apart from the decalogue, 'commandments of men' as though they were 'ordinances' given only by Moses, not by God.
all through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers & Deuteronomy though what's written is that the LORD told Moses what to say, and Moses related this to the people. what you're calling 'ceremonial' law etc. is still commandments directly from God.

for example --

And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying:
“Take Aaron and his sons with him, and the garments, the anointing oil, a bull as the sin offering, two rams, and a basket of unleavened bread; and gather all the congregation together at the door of the tabernacle of meeting.”​

So Moses did as the Lord commanded him. And the congregation was gathered together at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. And Moses said to the congregation,
“This is what the LORD commanded to be done.”
(Leviticus 8:1-5)
​

see, this 'ceremonial' consecration of Aaron as priest -- it's not a commandment of men. it's a commandment of God. this is what's written all throughout. so if you were to call these 'ordinances' coming from men, so that it's 'OK' that the Son of God has to die to free us from them, well that is IMO blasphemous, because you'd be reducing things commanded by God to merely human instructions.
i don't think you mean to do that -- that's why i was telling you, don't speak of it that way, i think you're wrong, i think that would be blaspheming.

maybe i'm using stronger words than i ought to have, and i'm sorry if that's the case -- but i see it a seriously flawed argument that the law can be separated into parts that stand & parts that don't, and i want to communicate the seriousness of it. in my view it's not merely human traditions that were nailed to the cross; it's "the law" -- and "the law" encompasses all the things given to Israel by God, largely through Moses, because after they heard His voice they begged not to hear it directly anymore.

 

[Ultimateprepper]

I misunderstood you. And I don't think Christ disagreed with the Father, so Christ wiped out what the Father told us. Matt. 5:18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

The Gnostics were powerful in the Colossian church, teaching that only the spiritual had meaning for Christ so they may not celebrate with a feast. Paul was telling them Gnostics (false prophets) were not speaking for Christ, the Colossians should listen only to Christ, and Christ was all for a celebration of His salvation. The Gnostics had no right to tell them they couldn't do that.

All is good.

 

[Ultimateprepper]

well, i said that because i think i understand you to be calling everything in the law, apart from the decalogue, 'commandments of men' as though they were 'ordinances' given only by Moses, not by God.
all through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers & Deuteronomy though what's written is that the LORD told Moses what to say, and Moses related this to the people. what you're calling 'ceremonial' law etc. is still commandments directly from God.

for example --

And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying:​

“Take Aaron and his sons with him, and the garments, the anointing oil, a bull as the sin offering, two rams, and a basket of unleavened bread; and gather all the congregation together at the door of the tabernacle of meeting.”​

So Moses did as the Lord commanded him. And the congregation was gathered together at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. And Moses said to the congregation, ​

“This is what the LORD commanded to be done.”​

(Leviticus 8:1-5)​

​

see, this 'ceremonial' consecration of Aaron as priest -- it's not a commandment of men. it's a commandment of God. this is what's written all throughout. so if you were to call these 'ordinances' coming from men, so that it's 'OK' that the Son of God has to die to free us from them, well that is IMO blasphemous, because you'd be reducing things commanded by God to merely human instructions.
i don't think you mean to do that -- that's why i was telling you, don't speak of it that way, i think you're wrong, i think that would be blaspheming.

maybe i'm using stronger words than i ought to have, and i'm sorry if that's the case -- but i see it a seriously flawed argument that the law can be separated into parts that stand & parts that don't, and i want to communicate the seriousness of it. in my view it's not merely human traditions that were nailed to the cross; it's "the law" -- and "the law" encompasses all the things given to Israel by God, largely through Moses, because after they heard His voice they begged not to hear it directly anymore.

well, i said that because i think i understand you to be calling everything in the law, apart from the decalogue, 'commandments of men' as though they were 'ordinances' given only by Moses, not by God.
all through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers & Deuteronomy though what's written is that the LORD told Moses what to say, and Moses related this to the people. what you're calling 'ceremonial' law etc. is still commandments directly from God.

for example --

And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying:​

“Take Aaron and his sons with him, and the garments, the anointing oil, a bull as the sin offering, two rams, and a basket of unleavened bread; and gather all the congregation together at the door of the tabernacle of meeting.”​

So Moses did as the Lord commanded him. And the congregation was gathered together at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. And Moses said to the congregation, ​

“This is what the LORD commanded to be done.”​

(Leviticus 8:1-5)​

​

see, this 'ceremonial' consecration of Aaron as priest -- it's not a commandment of men. it's a commandment of God. this is what's written all throughout. so if you were to call these 'ordinances' coming from men, so that it's 'OK' that the Son of God has to die to free us from them, well that is IMO blasphemous, because you'd be reducing things commanded by God to merely human instructions.
i don't think you mean to do that -- that's why i was telling you, don't speak of it that way, i think you're wrong, i think that would be blaspheming.

maybe i'm using stronger words than i ought to have, and i'm sorry if that's the case -- but i see it a seriously flawed argument that the law can be separated into parts that stand & parts that don't, and i want to communicate the seriousness of it. in my view it's not merely human traditions that were nailed to the cross; it's "the law" -- and "the law" encompasses all the things given to Israel by God, largely through Moses, because after they heard His voice they begged not to hear it directly anymore.

Sorry im confusing you read my first post on this I said the law of the spirit of life in Christ has freed me from the law of sin and death. And I also included feast day ceremonial laws which were in prepetation for first coming of Christ and mans ordinances I never called any of these the same because they are not. I said you aren't under law of sin and death which Christ's sacrifice freed me from also im not under ceremonial laws or mans ordinances which Again Christ fulfilled at his first coming with new covenant promise. I hope that clarifies my belief.

 

[Ultimateprepper]

Sorry im confusing you read my first post on this I said the law of the spirit of life in Christ has freed me from the law of sin and death. And I also included feast day ceremonial laws which were in prepetation for first coming of Christ and mans ordinances I never called any of these the same because they are not. I said you aren't under law of sin and death which Christ's sacrifice freed me from also im not under ceremonial laws or mans ordinances which Again Christ fulfilled at his first coming with new covenant promise. I hope that clarifies my belief.

well, i said that because i think i understand you to be calling everything in the law, apart from the decalogue, 'commandments of men' as though they were 'ordinances' given only by Moses, not by God.
all through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers & Deuteronomy though what's written is that the LORD told Moses what to say, and Moses related this to the people. what you're calling 'ceremonial' law etc. is still commandments directly from God.

for example --

And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying:​

“Take Aaron and his sons with him, and the garments, the anointing oil, a bull as the sin offering, two rams, and a basket of unleavened bread; and gather all the congregation together at the door of the tabernacle of meeting.”​

So Moses did as the Lord commanded him. And the congregation was gathered together at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. And Moses said to the congregation, ​

“This is what the LORD commanded to be done.”​

(Leviticus 8:1-5)​

​

see, this 'ceremonial' consecration of Aaron as priest -- it's not a commandment of men. it's a commandment of God. this is what's written all throughout. so if you were to call these 'ordinances' coming from men, so that it's 'OK' that the Son of God has to die to free us from them, well that is IMO blasphemous, because you'd be reducing things commanded by God to merely human instructions.
i don't think you mean to do that -- that's why i was telling you, don't speak of it that way, i think you're wrong, i think that would be blaspheming.

maybe i'm using stronger words than i ought to have, and i'm sorry if that's the case -- but i see it a seriously flawed argument that the law can be separated into parts that stand & parts that don't, and i want to communicate the seriousness of it. in my view it's not merely human traditions that were nailed to the cross; it's "the law" -- and "the law" encompasses all the things given to Israel by God, largely through Moses, because after they heard His voice they begged not to hear it directly anymore.

Gods ceremonial laws of sacrifice are fulfilled by Christ because he was the final offering for sin so we no longer need to make sacrifices for sin we can just call on the lord in the spirit and be forgiven I hope you see the truth in this.

 

[posthuman]

Gods ceremonial laws of sacrifice are fulfilled by Christ because he was the final offering for sin so we no longer need to make sacrifices for sin we can just call on the lord in the spirit and be forgiven I hope you see the truth in this.

of course -- but i don't see that the Bible ever makes a distinction between 'ceremonial/civil/moral' laws -- it always calls the law, "the law" -- the law of the covenant God made with Israel. the whole thing. when Jesus says 'not one jot or tittle will pass away..' He says this of "the law" -- which includes every bit of it.

in Romans 7 Paul says, we have died with Christ so that we can belong to a new husband, to Him. he says, having died, the law doesn't have any more jurisdiction over us. that's not just talking about ceremonial aspects or civil aspects of the things written in the law, but about all of it -- he doesn't use any language indicating that some of the law, we're under, even though we have died with respect to it. he says we're "not under law" but grace. grace doesn't only cover ceremonial transgression, but all sin, and you can't prosecute a dead man for theft any more than you can prosecute a dead man for mistakes in filing his paperwork.

in Christ God has set us free from all condemnation, if we walk in Him. God's righteousness doesn't change - righteousness is righteousness - so what is good in His sight is still what is good in His sight. but i don't live now trying not to commit adultery or covet 'because a commandment says i shouldn't' but because both of those things remain wrong whether there is a letter engraved in stone saying so or not. because doing those things is contrary to love, to the way that He loved us.

i'm sorry i wasn't more gentle in our previous conversation; i should be. i've been on this forum for several years now and as you might imagine, the same topics and arguments come up frequently. sometimes i read them and forget that it's not actually the same people i've discussed all this with over and over, but new people i haven't met before -- so i act like we've already been through all this 100 times but in reality we've not lol

essentially my position is this: we have died, and our lives are hid in Christ. being dead, not one jot or tittle of the law ((the whole law)) has to pass away in order for it not to have any more jurisdiction over us. the power of sin is the law -- but the law has no more power over us; sin has no more power over us to be our master or to condemn us.
this doesn't mean we should freely live our lives in contradiction to the righteousness described in the law, but it does mean that we're not under these commandments. what we are commanded, is to follow Him, walking in love, humbly, loving mercy and justice. the essential qualities of mercy and justice and goodness haven't changed, but the priesthood, the law, all these things have passed away, being replaced by a new and better covenant -- which is the unfolding of the promises to Abraham through faith, not the distillation of the covenant made with Israel under Moses.

 

[Ultimateprepper]

of course -- but i don't see that the Bible ever makes a distinction between 'ceremonial/civil/moral' laws -- it always calls the law, "the law" -- the law of the covenant God made with Israel. the whole thing. when Jesus says 'not one jot or tittle will pass away..' He says this of "the law" -- which includes every bit of it.

in Romans 7 Paul says, we have died with Christ so that we can belong to a new husband, to Him. he says, having died, the law doesn't have any more jurisdiction over us. that's not just talking about ceremonial aspects or civil aspects of the things written in the law, but about all of it -- he doesn't use any language indicating that some of the law, we're under, even though we have died with respect to it. he says we're "not under law" but grace. grace doesn't only cover ceremonial transgression, but all sin, and you can't prosecute a dead man for theft any more than you can prosecute a dead man for mistakes in filing his paperwork.

in Christ God has set us free from all condemnation, if we walk in Him. God's righteousness doesn't change - righteousness is righteousness - so what is good in His sight is still what is good in His sight. but i don't live now trying not to commit adultery or covet 'because a commandment says i shouldn't' but because both of those things remain wrong whether there is a letter engraved in stone saying so or not. because doing those things is contrary to love, to the way that He loved us.

i'm sorry i wasn't more gentle in our previous conversation; i should be. i've been on this forum for several years now and as you might imagine, the same topics and arguments come up frequently. sometimes i read them and forget that it's not actually the same people i've discussed all this with over and over, but new people i haven't met before -- so i act like we've already been through all this 100 times but in reality we've not lol

essentially my position is this: we have died, and our lives are hid in Christ. being dead, not one jot or tittle of the law ((the whole law)) has to pass away in order for it not to have any more jurisdiction over us. the power of sin is the law -- but the law has no more power over us; sin has no more power over us to be our master or to condemn us.
this doesn't mean we should freely live our lives in contradiction to the righteousness described in the law, but it does mean that we're not under these commandments. what we are commanded, is to follow Him, walking in love, humbly, loving mercy and justice. the essential qualities of mercy and justice and goodness haven't changed, but the priesthood, the law, all these things have passed away, being replaced by a new and better covenant -- which is the unfolding of the promises to Abraham through faith, not the distillation of the covenant made with Israel under Moses.

Psalms 1:2 But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. 3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. Jesus says if you love me keep my commandments.

 

[Ultimateprepper]

of course -- but i don't see that the Bible ever makes a distinction between 'ceremonial/civil/moral' laws -- it always calls the law, "the law" -- the law of the covenant God made with Israel. the whole thing. when Jesus says 'not one jot or tittle will pass away..' He says this of "the law" -- which includes every bit of it.

in Romans 7 Paul says, we have died with Christ so that we can belong to a new husband, to Him. he says, having died, the law doesn't have any more jurisdiction over us. that's not just talking about ceremonial aspects or civil aspects of the things written in the law, but about all of it -- he doesn't use any language indicating that some of the law, we're under, even though we have died with respect to it. he says we're "not under law" but grace. grace doesn't only cover ceremonial transgression, but all sin, and you can't prosecute a dead man for theft any more than you can prosecute a dead man for mistakes in filing his paperwork.

in Christ God has set us free from all condemnation, if we walk in Him. God's righteousness doesn't change - righteousness is righteousness - so what is good in His sight is still what is good in His sight. but i don't live now trying not to commit adultery or covet 'because a commandment says i shouldn't' but because both of those things remain wrong whether there is a letter engraved in stone saying so or not. because doing those things is contrary to love, to the way that He loved us.

i'm sorry i wasn't more gentle in our previous conversation; i should be. i've been on this forum for several years now and as you might imagine, the same topics and arguments come up frequently. sometimes i read them and forget that it's not actually the same people i've discussed all this with over and over, but new people i haven't met before -- so i act like we've already been through all this 100 times but in reality we've not lol

essentially my position is this: we have died, and our lives are hid in Christ. being dead, not one jot or tittle of the law ((the whole law)) has to pass away in order for it not to have any more jurisdiction over us. the power of sin is the law -- but the law has no more power over us; sin has no more power over us to be our master or to condemn us.
this doesn't mean we should freely live our lives in contradiction to the righteousness described in the law, but it does mean that we're not under these commandments. what we are commanded, is to follow Him, walking in love, humbly, loving mercy and justice. the essential qualities of mercy and justice and goodness haven't changed, but the priesthood, the law, all these things have passed away, being replaced by a new and better covenant -- which is the unfolding of the promises to Abraham through faith, not the distillation of the covenant made with Israel under Moses.

Rom. 7:22 For I delight in the law of god after the inward man: 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Adam was held responsible... and yes, we all have that choice to make

Amen, Adam suffered far worse than Eve, while they both suffered eternal death, and while Eve suffered from the pain of sin, Adam had the whole human race on his back, and the whole human race suffered for what he did,

adam was not fooled, he knew what he was doing

 

[eternally-gratefull]

she was judged for her own sin - even tho she was deceived.
Adam was judged for eating, too, and 'because he listened to her' - - I'm not seeing where God told him it was his fault Woman sinned.

In Adam all die, one could say Eve is part of All, that way through Christ, she too could live

 

[Ultimateprepper]

of course -- but i don't see that the Bible ever makes a distinction between 'ceremonial/civil/moral' laws -- it always calls the law, "the law" -- the law of the covenant God made with Israel. the whole thing. when Jesus says 'not one jot or tittle will pass away..' He says this of "the law" -- which includes every bit of it.

in Romans 7 Paul says, we have died with Christ so that we can belong to a new husband, to Him. he says, having died, the law doesn't have any more jurisdiction over us. that's not just talking about ceremonial aspects or civil aspects of the things written in the law, but about all of it -- he doesn't use any language indicating that some of the law, we're under, even though we have died with respect to it. he says we're "not under law" but grace. grace doesn't only cover ceremonial transgression, but all sin, and you can't prosecute a dead man for theft any more than you can prosecute a dead man for mistakes in filing his paperwork.

in Christ God has set us free from all condemnation, if we walk in Him. God's righteousness doesn't change - righteousness is righteousness - so what is good in His sight is still what is good in His sight. but i don't live now trying not to commit adultery or covet 'because a commandment says i shouldn't' but because both of those things remain wrong whether there is a letter engraved in stone saying so or not. because doing those things is contrary to love, to the way that He loved us.

i'm sorry i wasn't more gentle in our previous conversation; i should be. i've been on this forum for several years now and as you might imagine, the same topics and arguments come up frequently. sometimes i read them and forget that it's not actually the same people i've discussed all this with over and over, but new people i haven't met before -- so i act like we've already been through all this 100 times but in reality we've not lol

essentially my position is this: we have died, and our lives are hid in Christ. being dead, not one jot or tittle of the law ((the whole law)) has to pass away in order for it not to have any more jurisdiction over us. the power of sin is the law -- but the law has no more power over us; sin has no more power over us to be our master or to condemn us.
this doesn't mean we should freely live our lives in contradiction to the righteousness described in the law, but it does mean that we're not under these commandments. what we are commanded, is to follow Him, walking in love, humbly, loving mercy and justice. the essential qualities of mercy and justice and goodness haven't changed, but the priesthood, the law, all these things have passed away, being replaced by a new and better covenant -- which is the unfolding of the promises to Abraham through faith, not the distillation of the covenant made with Israel under Moses.

Rom. 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. That's gods words not mine.

 

[UCA4J]

Amen, Adam suffered far worse than Eve, while they both suffered eternal death, and while Eve suffered from the pain of sin, Adam had the whole human race on his back, and the whole human race suffered for what he did,

adam was not fooled, he knew what he was doing

so why didn't Adam ask the serpent to leave ?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Rom. 8:2 For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. That law and the ceremonial ordinances and mans tradition which was nailed to the cross is the only law you are no longer under. Mat. 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. Gods commandments are and will be till you die. And to those who don't understand Col. 2:16 this is not talking about the seventh day of week Sabbath commandment it is talking about feast day Sabbath's. Please read Lev. 23:24,27,32,37-38 this explains this in full. And gods commandments are not contrary to us they are to be a blessing not a curse which some believe. This is the enemy at work trying to twist the truth of Elyions word. Im not out to slander anyone or point finger in judgment I just want truth to be known.

Excuse me, the law was nailed, not just the law of ceremony

the law of sin and death are the stone tablets, ie ten commands, because whoever does not keep every word is cursed, the curse that Jesus took in our place (gal 3)

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Rom. 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. That's gods words not mine.

Yep we do

we establish through faith the law was pure. And as the schoolmaster it leads us to Christ

 

[eternally-gratefull]

so why didn't Adam ask the serpent to leave ?

i Will ask him that when I meet him

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Well, since both sinned, but only Adam held responsible, as in, through one man sin and death entered the world, it would seem so.

Heh, my thoughts exactly

Adam seems to be faulting both Eve and God. It is a prevalent problem.

Dunno why it auto edited weird like that...

Adam is showing his spiritual death at this time, as a spiritually dead person his focus is on self not Eve or God

 

[eternally-gratefull]

if that is really the case, then Adam is giving God an excuse that there are no good words to describe, instead of repenting, confessing his sin, and looking for mercy.

can i do that today and expect to receive salvation & eternal life? how then did Adam receive those things from God if he's essentially calling God a murderer?

Good question

Gods true mercy is unexplainable

 

[gb9]

the women, that you made for me, she gave me the fruit...

her fault, your fault, i was a victim....

 

[eternally-gratefull]

she gave him the apple to eat. he could have said no ....

Yep he could have, but what male would have said no to Eve? standing their naked and all her glory, a site probably no other male on earth will see

seriously Who would say no?

adam was perfect yes, but God gave him a mind that could freely chose,