Text proves that Sabbath still exist and is still valid till Jesus come

Alright,.... let's give me the best text proof from the bible that proves Sabbath still exist and is still valid to be observe till Jesus come.

One person, one text please. And don't post what was already posted, no repetition.

May be some thing new may comes up, that is valuable in my personal ministry.

In His love

James, the following is a single passage, but it spans several verse numbers. The verse in bold is the clearest summary of the whole, but I am providing the entire passage for context.



This single passage refers to the Sabbath as being a "perpetual covenant," to be kept "for ever," "throughout your generations." It concludes by telling us that God wrote this commandment Himself, with His own finger, into tables of stone. Stone represents something enduring and unchanging.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

GC.
The text you give is not good enough to be presented to non SDA's people.

They may say that the Sabbath is designated ONLY for the Jews/Israel and for them alone forever.

Any better text?

In His love

James,

You said "One person, one text please." So I guess I've already given mine. However, you are right. Many people do indeed try to claim that the Sabbath was only for the Jews.

To answer this question, allow me to point out that God's people are all a part of "Israel." The term "Israel" encompasses all of God's people, and in fact, those who are not part of spiritual Israel will not be in the Kingdom.

In Revelation, John speaks of the last-day people who are to be sealed.


This passage is speaking of all of God's servants throughout the earth who receive the seal of God in their foreheads. Notice how they are all numbered among the tribes of Israel.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I don't know about this being the "best" one, but here's one:



This says to pray that your flight not be on the Sabbath, just before Christ comes again. If you're studying with people who believe in the Secret Rapture, they'll explain this away by saying this is speaking of the Jews during the 7 year period in between the Secret Rapture and Christs' visible Second Coming, but otherwise it should work well.

If it's OK to add another verse, this one is perfect to answer that objection:
Anyone who says they are not Abraham's seed also says that they are not Christ's. If that's the case, then God's commands have no meaning to them.

This text is one of my favorite and the strongest evidence in the New testament that Sabbath still exist and valid till Jesus come (again). it is hard to reject the idea.

Any other?

In His love

OK, this is a combine passage that gives meaning of the validity of the Sabbath, but the 1st one is literal Jews, abd the later one is for spiritual Jew. is there any hole in this presentation that can be rejected? I will study it further.

In His love

OK, this combination of passage is a better one. Never comes to my thinking. But will study further if there is any weakness in this presentation.

In His love

So far so good.... but I want to hear more....

Any more inputs of your favorite text (if possible no combine passages).

In His love

???

I think any text which says that the law is still valid, like for instance James 2:10-12, would prove that the Sabbath is still valid.

Hebrews 8 speaks of the law being written in the heart. This is quoting from Jer. 31. So that law mentioned in Hebrews 8 must be the same law mentioned in Jeremiah. This can only be the moral law, or 10 commandments, of which the Sabbath is a part. So that's a nice proof that the Sabbath is still in effect, since the law in written in our hearts and minds when we are converted.

The process of justification by faith is to bring the sinner into harmony with God. There are many passages which explain this. Since the law is a transcript of God's character, to bring one into harmony with God means to bring one into harmony with God's law. So it only remains to show that the law is a transcript of God's character.

One way of going about this is to compare what Scripture says about God and what Scripture says about the law (both our "truth" "righteousness" "eternal" etc.; Psalm 119 is a good reference for texts like this).

Another way of going about it is to show that righteousness is, by definition in Scripture, obedience to the moral law. Here are a couple of texts which show this:



To have the heart in the law is to know righteousness.





Putting these two texts together, we see that unrighteousness is transgression of the law, or, conversely, righteousness is obedience to the law. So "righteousness by faith" means "obedience to the law by faith." The law that we are to be obedient to is the moral law, or 10 commandments, as this is the law which is the standard of righteousness.

There is one text that proves we will always keep the Sabbath.
Isa. 66:22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD."

Harold

That would also prove that we are to always keep the new moon.

How about Mark 2:27 "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."

People say the Sabbath was given to the Jews in the wilderness. But that text says the Sabbath was created for mankind.

How about:
Therefore a Sabbath Rest Remains for the people of God. (Hebs. 4:9)

The Sabbath continues. The verb "remains" is "(apoleipetai) which literally means "has been left."
The Greek word translated "rest" in every other passage throughout Hebrews 3 and 4 is "katapausis." The word for "rest" in Hebrews 4:9 is (sabbatismos). The term (sabbatismos) is seen in the writings of Plutarch, Justin, Epiphanius, and others, and each time the term denotes the observance of the Sabbath. Therefore the text is saying, that Sabbath obsevance remains for the people of God.

Does the law still valid?

Christ is the end of the law

On the cross he ended the law of Moses.

A new law was given to Christianity, the law of love.

Why does we say, the Ten Commandments still continue and didn't end at the cross?

Torah consist of 613 mitzvoh, all has been nailed to the cross, is there any text saying that the Ten Commandments is an exception? Does the Jews realize that there are two laws in the Old Testament, same as SDA's view of the law?

In His love

People of nowadays says "from Sunday to Sunday or from Monday to Monday to indicate a period of time of a full week. It tells us a rotation of time, a period of 7 days.

In His love

This is a good one, even not so strong as Mat. 24:20, some one can reject it by saying, surely it is for man, because Jews were men, and not goats.

In His love

This one is not good enough, because the text doesn't say about a "day", more over Sabbath the 7th day, but about a rest, just "rest", that could mean of any other day as well.

In Hebrew 4:10 - KJV, For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.

TR , ο γαρ εισελθων εις την καταπαυσιν αυτου και αυτος κατεπαυσεν απο των εργων αυτου ωσπερ απο των ιδιων ο θεος
Translit, ho gar eiselthôn eis tên katapausin autou kai autos katepausen apo tôn ergôn autou hôsper apo tôn idiôn ho theos

Compare with The Orthodox Jewish Brit Chadasha (ORTHJBC)
"For whoever has entered into the menukhah of Hashem has also rested from his ma'asim, just as Hashem rested from his."

In Transit Interlinear does 'ωσπερ - hôsper' connected to the day Sabbath or to the rest of work? The 7th day is Sabbath, Saturday is Sabbath, but Sabbath is not Saturday alone.

In Hebrew 4:11 - it is not sabbatisnos but "katapausis" meaning a place of rest not a day of rest. Compare with Acts 7:49.

In His love

This argument is completely absurd, James. If the law had been abolished, the Sabbath certainly would have been abolished with it.

But Jesus didn't know anything about abolishing the law, for He said, "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them." According to the interpretation you are presenting, Christ would have said, "I have not come to abolish them, but to abolish them." Besides, if "fulfill" means to abolish, when Christ said, "For thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness," this means He abolished righteousness, since He fulfilled it. What could be more absurd?

Paul also didn't know that the commandments had been abolished at the cross, for he quoted several of them (Rom. 13:9, Gal. 5:14, Rom. 7:7, Eph. 6:2).

And the news that the law had been abolished hadn't yet reached James: "If you really fulfil the royal law, according to the scripture, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself,' you do well. But if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For he who said, 'Do not commit adultery,' said also, 'Do not kill.' If you do not commit adultery but do kill, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty" (James 2:8-12).

And alas, John also didn't know anything about the law having been abolished: "For sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4).

And by the way, the word "end" means also "objective", "goal."

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Romans 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

Romans 7:7 I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

So, the law defines sin.
The wages of sin is death, thus no one is saved by keeping the law because all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
Christ is the only source of salvation.
But what now? Now that we have grace?
Do we do away with the law and engage in sin?
No -- emphatically not.


The law is not an end in itself, it can't bring salvation.
The law shows people their need of salvation by grace, through faith. And the ceremonies shadowed forth Christ as fulfilling the righteousness, and bearing the curse of the broken law.

The law is not destroyed, nor the intention of the Lawgiver disappointed. The cross demonstrate to every member of the human family that the law of God is immutable, and that it can NOT be put aside or nullified to save any transgressor. If God could have changed one iota of His law, Jesus need not have come to our world to suffer and die; but He who was equal with the Father came and suffered the wages of sin, even the death of the cross, to give man another probation.

Christ did not come to release us from obedience to His law, and now we are free to sin. And what is sin? The definition given in God's word is, "Sin is the transgression of the law;" and the apostle Paul declares, "Where no law is, there is no transgression." The law is the great standard that will measure every man's character.


No, the law was not nailed to the cross --
Christ, who bore our sins, was nailed to the cross.

Read Colossians in context:

"When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature" (vs 13)

Without Christ we were dead -- with no hope, enslaved in sin, with no way out.

But God made you alive with Christ."

How does He do that? How does He give us life and deliver us from death?
Paul's next words tell us!
"He forgave us all our sins"

What was that again? How did He deliver us from death and bring us to life? By getting rid of the law that condemned us? NO! NO! He forgave us our sins, and how was this possible -- this forgiveness?

"He forgave us all our sins; having canceled the written record with it's legal demands which stood against us."

"Cheirographon" was used to show a "certificate of indebtedness". So we could read the verse to say: he canceled the written record of our debts.
What regulations or legal decree is held against sinners? The Bible tells us the wages of sin is death. That is the legal decree— you sin— you will die! That is the wage for sin.

How was it possible for God to forgive us our sins, canceling the record with it's legal decree against us? The verse continues, "He took it away by nailing it to the cross."

So what was nailed to the cross?
What was it that was against us, what was it that opposed us, what was it that stood in the way of life for us?

We must ask ourselves, did God bring forgiveness to mankind by destroying that which points out sin, or by taking upon Himself our sins and paying the penalty in our behalf? The Bible makes this clear enough.

In 1 Cor. 15:3 "Christ died for OUR SINS according to the scriptures."

Peter adds; "Christ in his own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness, by whose stripes we were healed." (1 Peter 2:24)




No, the law of love wasn't new.
God's law IS love -- it always was and always will be.

Deut. 6:5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
6:6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:

Deut. 11:13 Hearken diligently unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love the LORD your God, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul,

Lev. 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.






Scripture says of Christ:
he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,
The blood shed as the sacrifices were offered pointed to the sacrifice of the Lamb of God. All the typical offerings were fulfilled in Him.

Surely you don't want people free now to:
lie, steal, kill, be dishonest, coveteous, with no regard for faithfulness to God, one's marriage partner, or associates, would you?

To say it's "just love" now, puts one in the realm of "moral ethics" or -- whatever seems like "loving" thing to do at the moment, kind of thing.

But God's law of love has guidelines -- his commandments.



In Hebrews we see that the sacrificial/priestly rituals are "fadding away"

but one thing REMAINS

Therefore a Sabbath Rest Remains for the people of God. (Hebs. 4:9)

The Sabbath continues. The verb "remains" is "(apoleipetai) which literally means "has been left."
The Greek word translated "rest" in every other passage throughout Hebrews 3 and 4 is "katapausis." The word for "rest" in Hebrews 4:9 is (sabbatismos). The term (sabbatismos) is seen in the writings of Plutarch, Justin, Epiphanius, and others, and each time the term denotes the observance of the Sabbath. Therefore the text is saying, that Sabbath obsevance remains for the people of God.

Therefore a Sabbath Rest Remains for the people of God. (Hebs. 4:9)
The Sabbath continues. The verb "remains" is "(apoleipetai) which literally means "has been left."

The Greek word translated "rest" in every other passage throughout Hebrews 3 and 4 is "katapausis."

All those texts you referenced use "katapausis".


The word for "rest" in Hebrews 4:9 is (sabbatismos).

The term (sabbatismos) is seen in the writings of Plutarch, Justin, Epiphanius, and others, and each time the term denotes the observance of the Sabbath. Therefore the text is saying, that Sabbath obsevance (that is observing the Sabbath day) remains for the people of God.

The author of Hebrews is giving THE TRUE reason for keeping the Sabbath day, not doing away with it.

>Torah consist of 613 mitzvoh, all has been nailed to the cross,

Not exactly. Some of the 613 are explanations of what is meant in the Ten, for example the frst ten:

1. To know that G-d exists (Ex. 20:2; Deut. 5:6)
2. Not to entertain the idea that there is any god but the Eternal (Ex. 20:3)
3. Not to blaspheme (Ex. 22:27; in Christian texts, Ex. 22:28), the penalty for which is death (Lev. 24:16) (negative).
4. To hallow G-d's name (Lev. 22:32)
5. Not to profane G-d's name (Lev. 22:32)
6. To know that G-d is One, a complete Unity (Deut. 6:4)
7. To love G-d (Deut. 6:5)
8. To fear Him reverently (Deut. 6:13; 10:20)
9. Not to put the word of G-d to the test (Deut. 6:16) (negative).
10. To imitate His good and upright ways (Deut. 28:9)

from http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

By fulfilling the law, Christ death has ended the function of the Torah, which consist the Ten Commandments. Can we say that Torah has ended but the Decalogue no!

In His love

God is love. Love is the code of the heavenly kingdom.

Men was created in God's image and after his likeness, with love in his heart. There is only one law in Eden - love.

To Israel was given the Torah with the love code explained as the Decalogue. They must do and obey the Torah, including the Decalogue in it.

Christ renewed the position of the love code for Christian with his death, there is again only one law - the love code, which will go for eternity in heaven and the new world.

Whatever you did (not specifically the decalogue) that is based on "self" is against the love code, is sin.

For Christian, when they sin, they did something against the love code, not against the Decalogue. The only law that would judge people is the love code, because it is the code of heavenly kingdom.

Therefore, love is the fulfillment of the law (Romans 13:10). When you sin, you did not fulfill the love code rather than you break the Decalogue.

In His love

A "love code" without any definitions, isn't a code at all.
Love without limits is simply another lie of Satan. It presupposes that a person within him/herself is godlike and can render godly love without any guidelines from God.

The humanistic thinkers have taken over the concept of love from Christianity, but they only took it by word because they want to decide for themselves what love commands, what love is. They want freedom from God's law not freedom in God's law and therefore produce a love apart from law not a love according to God's law.

Who needs a definition? Is there any definition of love as the Decalogue in heaven, or in Eden when A&E were created? None at all.

Colossians 3:1,2.
1 If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God.
2 Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth.

As Christians, our mindsets are in heaven, our hearts is flowed with love, who need a definition.

There is only one word to describe the love code:

Matthew 7:12 - Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

In His love

Again it appears that you base "love" on human interpretation.
Whatever you want others to do to you is the criterion for "love"? That makes you the definer of "love"?

Yes, the text is in scripture, but it was never meant to replace God's law.

Without God's commandments a person makes their own mind and heart a "heaven center" and the source of knowledge as to what is "love"? Cause if one gets rid of God's commands, they aren't setting their mind on the things of God, but on our own imaginations of what one thinks God should be like.


Very shaky and dangerous ground.

No, my friend God is the definer of love -- and His Word and His law defines love.
Divine love is not defined by humans who think they have a "god center" within their minds that defines love according to what they think love is.

All one has to do is read some of the new age stuff and all their lofty ideas of love, unity and peace, and one should understand how Satan seeks to cause people to look to their own "higher self" for the true expression of love quite apart from God's law.

True Christianity is always distrustful of self realizing the "heart is deceitful" , and looks to God and seeks His will which is revealed in His Word and Commands.

Satan's insinuation to the angel's in heaven was exactly what is now being promoted (scary thought). "He began to insinuate doubts concerning the laws that governed heavenly beings, intimating that angels needed no such restraint, for their own wisdom was a sufficient guide. They were not beings that could bring dishonor to God; all their thoughts were holy, so why did they need a commander?"

Ez. 28:17 "Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness:...I will destroy thee, O covering cherub."


They fell because they believed they knew how to love and didn't need anyone ruling over them, defining love for them.

The same concept was Korah's downfall.
He and his followers rebelled against Moses and Aaron,
Lev. 16:3 And they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the LORD?

Yet, God didn't agree with Korah....

It's the same argument we hear today --
God is with us, we are holy, we don't need any commandments, or anyone telling us to keep God's commandments.

That is walking on DANGEROUS GROUND!

I'm curious as to your insistance that God's law shouldn't be kept anymore -- the idea that its done away with --
Which commandment do you want to break? Which commandment do you find "unloving" in your concept of what "heavenly love" is?

A note to all involved in this discussion:

Let's be patient with each other here.

James, in saying that Christ ended the law, that it was nailed to the cross, is not sharing anything unusual. To help those of you who do not live in an Asian country understand this, please allow me to point out that the only Bibles I am aware of in the Asian languages (with the exceptions of Burmese and possibly Tagalog, which were translated less recently), are translated from the corrupt Alexandrian line of Bibles. The Alexandrian text does indeed declare that the entire law of God was nailed to the cross and abolished.

In other words, unless James uses an English-language King James Bible, there is no other conclusion that he would be able to make than that the entire law was abolished at the cross.

James, I have sympathy for you. The Bible you read is mostly likely teaching error on this point. I know for a fact that the Chinese Bible, the Thai Bible, and the Korean Bible all have errors like this. I wish more missionaries would devote themselves to the work of translation, so that people like yourself could have the opportunity to read pure truth.

Dedication, here are the texts that I suspect James has been reading:



The modern Bibles all follow this same theology--that the law has been entirely abolished. Only when one looks to the older, less-corrupted translations, can the real truth be found in these verses.

James, as Dedication and I know from a study of the King James, which was translated from the Majority Text (called this because it represents over 90% of the ancient Bible manuscripts), the law was not abolished at the cross. The sacrifices were abolished. The sacrificial system, also sometimes referred to as the ceremonial system, this is what was abolished. The rules for the sacrifices were usually referred to as "ordinances" to help distinguish them from the law of the Ten Commandments. In the King James Version, this distinction is made clear.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Thanks for your advice brother. Indeed, that is exactly what Christians here in Indonesia think of the law, as what you have thought.

Therefore, a solid and biblical counter must be given, not just another idea.

In His love

What commandment do you think in my concept of "heavenly love" that is against the "love code?" You must answer it, not me, because I have no problem with God or my fellowmen.

In His love

No -- I've already explained several of those texts -- God's law was not nailed to the cross. Our SINS, which Christ bore as He was nailed to the cross, were nailed to the cross, not that which defines sin.

Why should I answer as to why you urge the idea that God's law is no longer in operation? It wasn't me that wrote that love needs no definition. It wasn't me that wrote that God's commandments are done away with along with the sacrificial and ceremonial laws?

The only conclusion I can see is that there is something in God's law that you want to out of your life? Why else would someone want to do away with God's commandments?

Actually I know what it is that makes the Christian world start talking about nailing God's commandments to cross -- it's the Sabbath.

Christians are all eager to post the ten commandments in public places and even have a national commandment day -- but start talking to them about the Sabbath and suddenly the commandments are said to be a Yoke that we need not wear anymore because they are nailed to the cross --

I find this to be very contradictory.

What did exist in Eden before sin? The love code and Sabbath.

What remains now after the cross for Christ believers? The love code and the Sabbath.

What would be there in the new world? The love code and the Sabbath.

I have no problem with the Sabbath.

In His love

I'm glad to see you understand the Sabbath is part of loving God with all our hearts.

But I still don't understand why you would present posts saying God's ten commandments are gone-- not needed?
Obviously each and every one of them sets standards to keep love on track.

1. If we love God with all our hearts, we won't place any other God's before Him.

2. If we love God with all our hearts, we won't use created objects upon which to lavish our worship.

3. If we love God with all our hearts and minds, we will reverance His name and seek to glorify His name in our speech and conduct.

4. If we love God with all our hearts and minds, we will look forward to the 7th day which is SPECIAL time when we can forget about all our daily work (which we are to do in the six days) and spend the time with Him.

5. If we truly love others, we will especially seek to honor and care for those who raised us. Honor our parents.

6. If we truly love others as God loves us, we will not hate them or kill them, either in actuality or in meanness or oppression. Wrath, strife, violence will not be part of our character

7. If we truly love our spouses our marriage commitment will be a decision of love that we will not tarnish with impurities and unfaithfulness.

8. If we really love others, we will never steal from them, but rather share our goods with them.

9. Love will not bear false witness against anyone. Love will not put others down to make self seem better.

10. Love does not covet other peoples goods or blessings but rejoices when others have good things.

So --
You see -- the commandments are God's love code.

The letter of the law (Decalogue) is for those who are unrighteous (1 Tim. 1:9-11), because for them, the law point out their sins. Thus, serving the law, is serving the ministry of death (2 Cor. 3:4-9), but, we are the sons of God, living faithfully in the path of the Spirit, is serving a new ministry, which is not of the letter, but of the spirit, the love code, a ministry of love.

whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, ...... inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.......... to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.... Whatever is not of faith is sin ..... these words are the boundaries of the love code, it is the boundaries of the ministry of love, which is a ministry of the Spirit, that gives life.

Insisting non SDA’s to keep the Decalogue will get a strong counter and almost impossible to convince them that the Decalogue is still valid. Then, OK, think like they think, we approach them in this way, with the love code. It works much better.

In His love

James, I appreciate your desire to figure out new ways to help people keep the Sabbath. Most people agree the other 9 commandments are still in effect.

The difference between "the letter of the law" and the "spirit of the law" is not in the law itself, but in the way a person responds to it.

We have all sinned, so yes, the law condemns us, only through the salvation offered by Christ may we escape the eternal death penalty and have life.
But, the scriptures ask, do we then void the law? No, God forbid!

People who keep the "letter of the law" follow the law in outward appearance.
People who keep the "spirit of the law" have the law "written on the fleshy tables of the heart" and keep it because the very principles have become part of their character.

But in all this the law is immutable. It stands in its full magnifications as the eternal standard of God's righteousness.

What is more important to be kept? The letter or the spirit of the law? Which is more glorious, the letter or the spirit of the law? Which stand for eternity, the letter or the spirit of the law?

The answer to all these questions is the spirit of the law. Therefore, you sin when you show favoritism, even it doesn't mentioned in the letter, but it's against the spirit.

So, why should we kept a law that is less glorious? Keep the most glorious one in your heart, and you will have peace with God.

In His love

James, the spirit of the law is inherent in the letter of the law. In other words, the letter of the law does not exclude the spirit of the law. We are the ones who separate the spirit of the law from the letter of the law when we try to obey the law in our own unaided strength. The problem is with us - not with the law. Nor does the law overlook certain aspects of life and living. It encompasses everything we think, say, and do. Nothing is left out. The law is holy, just, and good. It is a transcript of God's character.

Paul said that he had kept the law perfectly, so was the rich young man, which mean, man can keep the law perfectly but loveless. Meanwhile, another man who is led by the Spirit, did show what love is through his deeds to God and his neighbors.

My question is: Is this man keeping the law?

In His love

James, we addressed this in the other thread, but here I would like to discuss something else. Do you think God views people like Saul (pre-converted Paul) in terms of perfectly obeying the law? Since sin is the transgression of the law, it would mean they are sinless, guiltless in the sight of God. Do you think God considered Saul sinless, guiltless? If not, why not?

Saul of Tarsus is a perfect law keeper but loveless. The good Samaritan has shown his love to his neighbor although not keeping the law.

Who do you think of both is a law keeper?

In His love

James,

The one who loves most is the one who keeps God's commandments. See the verses below.

--------------------------------
And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. Exodus 20:6
And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments. Deuteronomy 5:10

Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations; Deuteronomy 7:9

Therefore thou shalt love the LORD thy God, and keep his charge, and his statutes, and his judgments, and his commandments, alway. Deuteronomy 11:1

If ye love me, keep my commandments. John 14:15

He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. John 14:21

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. John 15:10

By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. 1 John 5:2-3

And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. 2 John 1:6
--------------------------------

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

So, a Jew that has the law, did it perfectly, but in fact he is not a law keeper at all, for he is loveless.

On he other hand, here is this good Samaritan, an unbeliever and having no law, but did keep the law, for he has the love of God in his heart that could be seen from his deeds to his neighbors.

So, where are we, the Gentiles, Christ believers? Are we a law keeper like Saul or without law but indeed a law keeper like the good Samaritan?

In His love

Who says the Samaritan wasn't keeping the law? And who says that Saul was keeping the law? Paul later admits to being the "chief of sinners."

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

The parable itself answers your question. Using people who has the law against some one who hasn't the law, some one who is not a Jew.

In His love

So, James, you believe that having the law is the same as keeping it? Furthermore, you believe the Samaritans did not have the law?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Not really! The Jews in the parable have the law but didn't keep it.



Yes! If you think otherwise, can you prove it?

In His love

James,

The Samaritans were the people that remained of Israel (the "northern kingdom"). As such, if they did not know the law, or possess it, they had little excuse. They worshiped the same God which the Jews did, and would have worshiped in the same temple had the Jews permitted them. But in their hatred of their "wayward cousins," the Jews forbad the Samaritans from entering their synagogues on pain of death.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

James, do you think God viewed Saul as sinless, guiltless, and as one who perfectly obeyed the law?

Saul is a perfect law keeper, he admitted it himself, he though that he is righteous for his deeds is perfect according to the law. But his deeds without Christ is just filthy rags. God could not justify him, although he is perfect according to the letter of the law. He missed the spirit, his unbelieving.

Thus, I knew, keeping the law perfectly without Christ is useless, but keeping Christ in heart without law would not make you lost.

In His love.

James,

Do you have a reference for Paul/Saul keeping the law perfectly? Where does he claim this?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

James, do you agree with me when I say God did not view Saul as someone who kept the law perfectly? Do you agree with me when I say the letter of the law requires people to love God and mankind?

Philippians 3:6 - concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. (NKJV)

No, I don't agree at all!

James, thank you for answering my questions so enthusiastically. However, I am surprised you believe God viewed Saul's law keeping as perfect. I am even more surprised you believe the law does not require love to God and mankind.

Oops, sorry, I misread your questions. The 1st one I agree with you, what I meant is that I do not agree with the idea that God viewed Saul as a perfect law keeper. The 2nd question however, I don't agree with you because what is written is not to love God and mankind, to love is unwritten, it is the spirit of the law.

In His love

James, I'm glad you clarified your answers. You had me worried. So, since God did not view Saul as perfectly obeying the law, it stands to reason, then, that he came short of its requirements. In what way, though, did he come short of the law? If, as you say, he lacked love, then he came short of the law as it applies to love, right? Love, therefore, is an integral aspect of the law. To not love is to not obey the law. Jesus defined the law as love to God and love to mankind. No love means no obedience.

Exodus 20:6 And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

That's part of the second commandment.
And again in Dueteronomy

Duet. 5:10 And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.
5:11 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold [him] guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
5:12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.

To love is a written command all through the books of Moses.


Lev. 19:18 thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.

That's part of the Levitical law.

Now see what it says in Dueteronomy --

Duet: 6:5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
6:6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:


Duet, 7:9 Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he [is] God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments

Duet. 10:12 And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul,

10:19 Love ye therefore the stranger:

11:1 Therefore thou shalt love the LORD thy God, and keep his charge, and his statutes, and his judgments, and his commandments, alway.

11:13 hearken diligently unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love the LORD your God, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul,

11:22 For if ye shall diligently keep all these commandments which I command you, to do them, to love the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, and to cleave unto him;

19:9 thou shalt keep all these commandments to do them, which I command thee this day, to love the LORD thy God, and to walk ever in his ways;

30:16 In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments

All those texts are from the books of Moses.

It is definitely written that the command is to love....

Dedication, thank you for the thorough study. Nicely done.

Can a man love God and his neighbors? Only when he lived by the Spirit, otherwise even loving himself, he could not do, what he could do is killing himself. When God commanded Israel to love their neighbors, he meant saying that they should live by the Spirit. Because, love is a gift from God through the Spirit, it is not obtained through obedience. It is fruit of the Spirit. We all knew this.

When God gave Moses his Torah, the requirements is obey and live. If Saul from Tarsus could obey the law perfectly and blameless, then I believe that others may do the same. But was he blameless before God? Could he earn life through his obedience to the law? Although God said that he who obeyed the law shall live (Leviticus 18:5; Matthew 19:17), which Paul agreed (Rome 10:5, Galatians 3:11) but it seems that he could not get God justification to live from his obedience (Philippians 3:1-15).

W H Y ???

1. Because in Adam all must die, you can not atone for your self.
2. Because the law is holy, we are unholy.
3. Because the law is good, we are evil.
4. Because the law is perfect, we are defect.
5. Because God is love and we are selfish

Thus, only if you have the love of God, as a result of living by faith in Christ and walks after the Spirit, you may satisfy God heart and stand righteous before him. You are no longer selfish, no longer evil, no longer unholy. You are perfect, holy and love God and your neighbors. Your deeds now are in harmony with the commandments of God as MM and Dedication have quoted. But who need this? Keeping the law perfectly like Saul and the young rich men didn’t help them at all, but put away the law, you will not lost if you live by the Spirit, because what you did, which is right, which is love, which is in harmony with every law and commandments that God have ever given to men, is fruit of the Spirit.

The great example of this idea is in Rome 2:14-16.

In His love

Therefore, Christ was not stressing that we should keep the Decalogue, but what he stresses is that we should love each other.

In His love

But don’t worry my brothers, I’m not putting away the law, except those that has met the great sacrifice at the cross.

So, when Jesus indicates that Sabbath worship remains far after his ascension, we should believe it.
When Paul said that faith didn’t put away the law, we should believe it. When Paul said that the law is our tutor to bring us to Christ in order we may be justified by faith, and after justification, a life led by the Spirit should be shown as a result of genuine faith, which brought us no longer under the tutorial of a set of law, we should believe it.
When Paul said that the law is for those who are lawless and disobedient, for those who are ungodly and sinners, for those who are unholy and profane, etc, and not for those who are righteous, who are just, who are holy, then we should believe it.

So, when Paul said that we (who are just and righteous) are no longer under the law, he meant that we are no longer under it condemnation, therefore, no longer under it’s obligation, for only those who are condemned by the law are under it’s obligation to keep it, but those who are just and righteous are under a new obligation, which is to live by the Spirit.

Is this a better view rather than insisting non SDA’s to keep the Decalogue in our personal ministry preaching the bible? I think yes.

In His love

James, I'm happy to hear you are not doing away with the Ten Commandments. I am also happy to learn you believe the fruit of faith is love and obedience. And, yes, we experience this wonderful fruit as we behold Christ and Him crucified. We must not, however, focus on keeping the law. True, we must be aware of the law to keep it, but the only way we can successfully live in harmony with it is to focus all our energy and effort on knowing Jesus as our Friend and Savior. We must strive in Christ to resist temptation, but more than this, we must labor in Christ to manifest the fruits of the Spirit. Not sinning is not the goal. The goal is to be kind and loving like Jesus.

Hello brethren and friends

First, a little correction: Somebody put 'Duet' as reference to the 5th Moses' book, but duet is when two people join together to sing, for example. It should rather be 'Deut' (Deuteronomy). By the way, the word "deuteronomy" means repetition of the law.

Most of this discussion here is covered in detail in our discussions on the Ratzlaff neo-antinomian theology. So, I invite you to see our last post about it and see the indication to the entire discussion.

Thanks

Azenilto, thank you for the invitation to join you in study elsewhere. In turn, I would like to invite you to join our study here. Please refer to the opening post.

I prepared a study called "12 Reasons Why The Sabbath Is Not Limited to the Jewish People" and the first of them is based on the fact that in Gen. 2:2, 3 God sanctified {which means, separated for dedication to Him} the seventh-day when there was NO JEW in existence.

Any doubt that the seventh-day is equivalent to the Sabbath, just check Exo. 16:22, 23 where the same author of the Genesis creation record makes clear that the day following the sixth is the "holy Sabbath of the Lord".

Now, the objection raised by some is that there is no statement that Adam kept the Sabbath or God ordered him to do that. But that is based on the flawed "argument on silence".

With the same vigor we can ask: "Where is it written that Adam DID NOT keep the Sabbath?!"

Or, "Can you prove to me that Adam worked as a gardener in the Eden garden (Gen. 2:15) all seven days, just stopping at night for rest, without dedicating any day to the Lord?!"

Arguments on silence can't serve as proof or counterproof for nothing.

Feel free to post your study here.