SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : THE SABBATH COMMANDMENT - My Personal Testimony

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 Next Page )
PosterThread
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
If you are not under one commandment, you are not under any commandment, much the same as breaking one is to break them all. Fair? As I understand such a position, you are saying that the disciple does not have any commandments to model after and that as Jesus' disciple, you are free by grace to live as you choose and re-present His kingdom as you please. I know in your heart that is not what you are trying to communicate, but that is what is being received by me.


Lahry
Let me assure you again that I am not scolding you. From the time that Jesus was manifested to Israel at Jordan, and publically acknowledged to be the Son of God, there is a change in his relationship with His past. From this time he never again 'submitted himself to Mary and Joseph' but was 'led by the Spirit'. John 8:29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.From this time onwards His life was marked by what Oswald Chambers called 'spontaneous moral action'; He was not living His life to a formula but in direct obedience to the leading of the Spirit. “And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.” (Matt. 3:17-4:1)This is the characteristic feature of 'sons'; Rom. 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. and distinguishes them from 'children' in Paul's letter to the Galatians.

In that letter he identifies the Israel-under-the-Law as the 'childhood' of the people. “Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:”
(Gal. 4:1-3) You will notice the tenses he is using, 'we were' ie the imperfect tense which could equally be translated 'we used to'.

In the earlier verses he has explained the position of Israel-under-the-Law “But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.”
(Gal. 3:23-26, NKJV) I have gone for the NKJV because it corrects the KJV in verse 26 altering the KJV's 'children' to 'sons'. Notice the switch too in personal pronouns; from verse 23 he used 'we' (Israel-under-the-Law) but in verse 26 switches to 'ye' (Gentiles). If you read these few verses you will see that Paul describes the childhood of Israel as a time when they were 'under a paidogogos' (a paidogogos was not a schoolmaster but was the slave who superintended the child and ensured that he behaved himself). The law, says Paul, was our paidogogos... but we are no longer under a paidogogos.

How do you understand this statement? It seems to me that if
law = paidogogos
and we are no longer under a paidogogos, it must be true that
we are no longer under a paidogogs = we are no longer under the law

I can't see any other way of interpreting this passage. How do you understand this?

The change from 'child' to 'son' takes place as the Father sends forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts (Gal 4:6). The Jews moves from child to son, and the Gentile moves from slave to son in this change. As 'sons' we are 'no longer under the law' but, as the proclaimed Son, are now 'Spirit-led'.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/7/22 4:30Profile
wildbranch
Member



Joined: 2005/7/20
Posts: 138


 Re:

Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.
The New American Standard Bible

1 John 3:4 - Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
The King James Version
.
The Greek word translated "lawlessness" in the NASB and "transgression of the law" in the KJV is one and the same word - anomia - and is shown from Strong's lexicon to be:

458 anomia
- iniquity 12, unrighteousness 1, transgress the law + 4160 1, transgression of the law 1; 15
1) the condition of without law
1a) because ignorant of it
1b) because of violating it
2) contempt and violation of law, iniquity, wickedness

This is precisely the same Greek word used in Matthew 7:23 where we hear Yeshua (Jesus) say, "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness (anomia)." In fact, most cases of the word "iniquity" in the KJV are the same Greek word.

Some show open contempt of the Law by brazenly teaching against it! Yes, the Law was a 'tutor', to teach us how to live and please our Father - now, being filled with the Spirit, we don't have to refer back to the law all the time, we walk having internalised the law and are free to run in it. Psalm 110.32: I will RUN in the way of thy commandments when thou enlargest my understanding! (RSV)


Psalm 119.44-45: I will keep thy law continually, for ever and ever; and I shall walk at LIBERTY , for I have sought thy precepts.

Now that I have my driver's license, I cannot say that I now reject the laws of the road that I had to learn from a book and through experience - now I embrace them automatically. They are not abolished, just because I have moved on and can drive without constantly thinking of the traffic rules as set out in the instruction manual.


We should not be "UNDER the law", as a slave would be under a master - no, on the contrary, we embrace and magnify the law with the power of the Holy Spirit within us, who writes onto our hearts the things that have been formerly commanded on stone, and then ENABLES us to joyfully obey with such freedom , loving to please our heavenly Father!

If this is a burdensome 'duty', we need to ask ourselves if we are truly filled with the Spirit.


Peace to all!

 2005/7/22 7:40Profile
wildbranch
Member



Joined: 2005/7/20
Posts: 138


 Re:

Hello again!

Lahry said: "I'm sick and tired, fed up to the max with anything that has to do with catholic liturgy and traditions of men. If it has been added in, it needs to be stripped off. If I am the only one who feels this way, then so be it. I've had my say."

You are not the only one Lahry! And the Sabbath issue is a good starting point.

The Roman Church hi-jacked the original church, introducing all sorts of error. Praise our merciful God that he is calling many out of that system.

NO SCRIPTURE concerning the first day of the week gives authority to replace the Sabbath of the Almighty God with Sunday observance.


From the Anglican/Episcopal Church: "The Catholics changed it"
"We have made the change from the seventh day to the first day, from Saturday to Sunday, on the authority of the one holy Catholic Church" Bishop Seymour- "Why We Keep Sunday"
:-(

 2005/7/22 7:55Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

wildbranch
1Cor. 9:21 to them that are without law, as without law, not being without law to God, but under law to Christ, that I might gain them that are without law. (ASV) In the final analysis no man is 'without law' of one kind or another, but our question has to do with 'the law' ie the Sinai Law/Covenant.

I am not pleading for antinomianism nor for license but simply wanting to draw attention to the fact that the New Covenant is not concerned with 'keeping the law' but with 'fulfilling it'. The righteous requirement of the law is now 'fulfilled' by those who walk in the Spirit. “[There is] then now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and of death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh, [u]in order that the righteous requirement of the law should be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to flesh but according to Spirit.[/u]”
(Rom. 8:1-4, DRBY)


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/7/22 8:01Profile









 Re: Hi Ron

Hi Ron,
Thank you for your post. Of course I agree that christians should be led by the Spirit. I have often preached that Jesus was obedient in all things. However, He was not obedient in the traditions of men.

May I humbly ask you, was the obedience of Jesus within the framework or boundry of moral law?

Here is a simplistic example. Let's say that we are on a 100 acre farm that is fenced. The fence is not there to hold us prisoner as much as it is to keep us from getting harmed by the peril that lies beyond it. The rebellious nature of man would eat away at the will and intellect to explore beyond the fence. The spirit led saint would be content to stay inside the fence realizing through maturity that there is an abundant life within the fence an that the best things are stored in the barn and farmhouse.
Farmers don't usually build their homes and barns near the perimeter of their land, but somewhere in the middle. What would a farmer think of his son or daughter who refused to eat and sleep in the farm house but instead spent most of their time out by the fence, as close to it as possible?

In many lives, christianity has eroded to a lifestyle of attempting to avoid "wrongdoing". The bible teaches that within the believer there is a continual war between carnality and spirituality. However, the carnal nature, already dead before God, should not rule and have dominion over any believer. So we do not concern ourselves with the law because our lifestyle is not lived out near the limit of law. Our lifestyle is supposed to be in fellowship with the Father through the Son by the Holy Spirit. Spending time with Him puts His desire in our heart for His will and good pleasure.

Surely God was not tired when He completed creation. But He set aside the 7th day for a purpose, not for His benefit but for our own. It was intended for a blessing, not a bondage or obligation. Not only does it provide for physical rest from our labors, but it also sets a side a time to be with Him.

If you were working when you met your spouse like I was, you could hardly wait for a day off so you could spend more time with them. I remember foolishly speeding just to get home from work so that I would hopefully add just a few more minutes of time to be with her. Should this not be the kind of lifestyle and love a christian has for the One Who chose to save us out of a merciful heart of love? He gives us 6 days a week, can He not have the 7th day?

Ron, nobody hates religion more than I do. I grew up in it's jaws. I never want to go back, nor would it ever enter my mind to suggest to anyone that they should either. Our life is not to be lived beyond the limits of God's law. To preach or teach that is not preaching religion. It is what God expects and how His Spirit leads us as He takes up residence within us. If this is not so, then we are pitifully confused and misled.
I'm saying it's time to get away from confusion. It's time to understand that there is a difference between justification and sanctification. It's time to get back to biblical living. It's time to abandon all that has been added by the traditions of men and their religion for the last 1900 years. It's time to honor God and live as His ambassadors, not our own. It's time to spend time with God and let Him tell us what to do and say. I believe that within the framework of such a lifestyle, we will find the Holy Spirit admonishing us to remember the Sabbath day and keep it Holy.

Amen and amen,

Lahry

 2005/7/22 8:23
Eli_Barnabas
Member



Joined: 2005/2/16
Posts: 621
Cache Valley, Utah

 Re:

Amen, thank you Lahry.

-Eli


_________________
Eli Brayley

 2005/7/22 8:37Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:

May I humbly ask you, was the obedience of Jesus within the framework or boundry of moral law?

Are we talking about moral law or the Sinaitic law? There is an interesting encounter between Paul and the Athenians is which he tells them that God has regarded their idol worship as ignorance (not sin) and has overlooked it. (Acts 17:30) and yet he plainly warns them of an appointed day in which the 'world' will be judged in righteousness by Christ. The Athenians were without the Sinaitic Law and God did not hold them responsible for it, but they were not without moral law and God most certainly would hold them responsible for that. Needless to say, God would not have held them responsible for not keeping Israel's Sabbaths either.


Quote:
It's time to spend time with God and let Him tell us what to do and say. I believe that within the framework of such a lifestyle, we will find the Holy Spirit admonishing us to remember the Sabbath day and keep it Holy.

Do you not think that those who have a different view would not say that we seek God to do His will. Of course you wouldn't. This is a question of interpretation.

I am strongly in favour of the preaching of sanctification but not as an exercise in the keeping of Sinaitic law. Your illustration is interesting. It some ways it is what the Jews did. They created a second barrier of their own laws so that people would not even get as far as breaking God's laws. It only had the effect of obscuring the revealed law. Neither am I against the change in the change of rhythm which a weekly Sabbath brought. I am against the idea that it is necessary and that keeping it somehow is more 'sanctified'.

Quote:
It is what God expects and how His Spirit leads us as He takes up residence within us. If this is not so, then we are pitifully confused and misled.

What does this mean? Does it mean that only those who keep a weekly Sabbath are rightly hearing the voice of God? Am I pitifully confused and misled because I don't keep such a Sabbath?


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/7/22 14:00Profile
dann
Member



Joined: 2005/2/16
Posts: 239
Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada

 Re:

Just a quick (and I hope respectable) question to Lahry:

If the sabbath were part of God's "moral law" (allowing the presumption that such a thing exists) why didn't God instruct anyone to keep the sabbath holy until Moses?

I ask because curiously (perhaps significantly is a better word) murder is the only sin mentioned in every book of the torah. It was a rule for all mankind, given to all descendants of Adam, and given immediately, as it were, in the second generation of mankind. It predates Abraham, Moses, and certainly the laws given to Moses. The "sabbath rest" however, isn't binding upon man until Sinai - and even at that time it is only binding upon the Jews.

It seems reasonable to me, that while one could make a somewhat convincing case ( assuming that there is such a thing as "God's moral law") to include murder in "God's moral law" - but I see no grounds to include a Sabbath rest into that moral standard.

I am curious (and open of course) to learn how you come up with a moral law, and after having come up with it, how you include the sabbath rest in it? I feel that either I am missing something, or that we are operating under different presumptions.

Thanks,

Dan
/\/
\/\


_________________
Daniel van de Laar

 2005/7/22 14:47Profile
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

Just a thought, but I keep seeing this line of thought running through here that seems to be thinking people are advocating an anti-nomianism of some sort. I've yet to see anybody even remotely advocate some sort of once-saved-always-saved, or Christians are without law type of view. So, I don't know why some are speaking as if people are.

I see nobody here advocating living a loose life style in disregard for God's holy law. I would safely say everybody here believes firmly we must keep God's commandments, and that grace does not give us a license to sin.

The issue at hand that we seem to be tap dancing around and only occasionally flirting with ultimately comes down to this: Does the New Covenant require Sabbath keeping? The question is not of moral law. The question is regarding the New Covenant.

Once we understand that, we must understand the New Covenant does not require Sabbath keeping. Now, I'm not advocating that the New Covenant is somehow deleting any of the Old Testament commandments in suggesting such. Rather, what I am saying is that the New Covenant fulfills the Old Covenant established through Moses. Not only does it fulfill it, but it supercedes it, for it is a greater more glorious covenant.

Think of the New Covenant in relation to the Old like this. In the night sky there are stars which you can see. But when the sun comes up, you can no longer see the stars. Now, the stars are not done away with when the sun rises. However, the sun's rays when it shines are so much brigther and glorious than the stars that are still in the sky, you no longer see them. In fact, you can no longer observe them.

So it is with the Sabbath. The Sabbath is one of the stars in the night sky. But when the sun rises, you can not OBSERVE it because of the brigthness of the sun.


_________________
Jimmy H

 2005/7/22 16:01Profile









 Re: King Jimmy

..if only we lived under the Son, you would have a great analogy.
For those who asked, I suppose I'm referring to the major 10 Commandments given on Siani. But the Sabbath was not instituted there.
For the one commenter who said that Murder is only sin mentioned in all the books of the Torah, I beg to differ with you. What about Adam and Eve's Sin? What about the rebellion of Cain in offering sacrafice his own way? Who told them or commanded them to offer a sacrafice anyway? Where is that written before Moses time.
The Old Covenant was made long before Moses time. It was given to Abraham. So that don't hold water either.

King Jimmy, you said....

Quote:
I see nobody here advocating living a loose life style in disregard for God's holy law. I would safely say everybody here believes firmly we must keep God's commandments, and that grace does not give us a license to sin.



You can't have it both ways, beloved. If you are not going to live "loose", then what criteria will you judge living conservative? Where is the standard? Do you attempt to drive with a blind fold on?
I regret that I have done such a poor job of expressing what I'd like to say. I think we have all said what we would hope be revelation and light, but I don't see any progress. To continue on does not appear to be fruitful. I'm sorry I jumped in this thing in the first place. It's just that I've been wrestling with it for some time. Not just this one issue, but this whole "business" we somehow call church. If the clock is not turned back to biblical christianity, I'm afraid that millions of people will show up at hell's door wondering how on earth did they get there. That is very frightening.
Just one more thing. Anyone here celebrate Christmas and Easter?

In Him,

Lahry

 2005/7/22 20:01





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy