why is sunday instead of saturday the sabboth?

[Patrick_Murebil]

Hi Patrick,

Good to hear from you! You asked:

Sorry for not being clear – simply saying it is not inspired in the same way as the rest of the Bible, but obviously useful for perusing like other religious documents of that time.

God bless

Friedrich

Hi Friedrich,

But you do acknowledge that the books you call the “apocrapha” were contained in the LXX…correct?

It doesn’t matter to me whether you belive they are inspired or not. Thanks!

God bless all!!!

 

[Lilyflower]

Unfortunately; there is no “eighth day” on the calendar; and the resurrection of Jesus has nothing to do with the Biblical seventh-day Sabbath.

I disagree that MarysRoses posts are “theologically sound;” except to say they are sound Catholic theology.

Where in the Bible are we literally told to celebrate any day of the week, “in honor of the resurrection?” Where does it actually say we are to “transfer” the “seventh-day Sabbath principle” to any day of the week, "in honor of the resurrection?"

My emphasis

I have lost thread of this. Why does Scripture have to???

This is akin to saying that Scripture is a prescription for Christian living and if it is not in Scripture then it is not permitted!!

On second thoughts is this how some view the Scriptures???

So how did the Church manage before she canonised Scripture???

Do you accept the Scripture as it is canonised or do you accept teachings of those texts not canonised?

Blessings and peace

 

[Protestant101]

My emphasis

I have lost thread of this. Why does Scripture have to???

This is akin to saying that Scripture is a prescription for Christian living and if it is not in Scripture then it is not permitted!!

Wow! I find it hard to believe that Christians think like this about the Bible; but it is common within Roman Catholicism. Like it or not, your Church actually does have to depend upon the Bible too to defend her faith. With your dogma about Peter; for one eg., the only way you can “prove” it is to go the the Book of Mathew in the Bible, to “show” us poor unknowing Protestants where we are going “wrong.” You can’t use any other source for that doctrine!! All the other sources you could quote get it from that!

Another example: The Blessed Virgin Mary kept the Seventh-day Sabbath! Your own Catholic Bible says so. Mary never kept Sunday holy. Bring out your Bible now and I will be glad to show you this. Can anyone tell me how I could be wrong in doing what the Blessed Virgin Mary did? Is it possible??

I do what Mary did and you guys don’t. LOL! I 'm a better Catholic than you!!!

Luke 23:52-56. “And the women also, which came with Him from Galilee, followed after.” (Every Catholic will agree that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was at the cross). “They rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment.”

1. The Blessed Virgin Mary kept the Sabbath.
2. She kept the Ten Commandments.
3. She would have been a sinner if she had not.
4. “Sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 3:4.

The Bible must be above Tradition in all Churches; including the Catholic Church. When I think of “the falling away” mentioned in Scripture, I think of the following noteworthy facts of history - there are more, but these will make the point:

In the first period (lasting perhaps till about the fourth century) there were no books except the Bible,

from which lessons were read and Psalms were sung.” “The Catholic Encyclopedia,” Volume 11, page 296

“There was far more extensive and continuous use of Scripture in the public service of the early Church than there is among us.” Catholic Dictionary, page 509.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Wow! I find it hard to believe that Christians think like this about the Bible; but it is common within Roman Catholicism. Like it or not, your Church actually does have to depend upon the Bible too to defend her faith. With your dogma about Peter; for one eg., the only way you can “prove” it is to go the the Book of Mathew in the Bible, to “show” us poor unknowing Protestants where we are going “wrong.” You can’t use any other source for that doctrine!! All the other sources you could quote get it from that!

We depend on the Sacred Scripture and Tradition. It’s not either or. It’s both. Neither are superior. They are both equal.

Another example: The Blessed Virgin Mary kept the Seventh-day Sabbath! Your own Catholic Bible says so. Mary never kept Sunday holy. Bring out your Bible now and I will be glad to show you this. Can anyone tell me how I could be wrong in doing what the Blessed Virgin Mary did? Is it possible??

Mary lived her life as a devout Jew. In her days, she observed the Jewish observance for Sabbath worship.

This would change later on since after Christ’s resurrection and ascension into heaven, the Apostles and other Christians worship on the first day of the week which is Sunday.

Acts 20:7,

On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the morrow; and he prolonged his speech until midnight.

1 Corinthian 16; 2

[2] On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come.

Col 2:16-17:

**Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath.

[17] These are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.**

In Col 2:16-17, Paul teaches that the Sabbath was only a shadow of what was fulfilled in Christ, and says “let no one pass judgment any more over a Sabbath.”

Why do we worship on Sunday? Because Jesus Christ, rise from the dead on Sunday. Sunday is a memorial of his rising.

I do what Mary did and you guys don’t. LOL! I 'm a better Catholic than you!!!

Who are you to judge us? You have no authority over us.

 

[Protestant101]

We depend on the Sacred Scripture and Tradition. It’s not either or. It’s both. Neither are superior. They are both equal.

No. They are not equal. I have shown you above just one of many examples that prove you must ultimately go to Scripture to prove any so called Tradition.

Mary lived her life as a devout Jew. In her days, she observed the Jewish observance for Sabbath worship.

Again, no. Mary did not observe a “Jewish” Sabbath; the Bible nowhere calls it the Sabbath of the Jews, but it calls the seventhday sabbath the “Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” The Sabbath is not “Jewish.”

This would change later on since after Christ’s resurrection and ascension into heaven, the Apostles and other Christians worship on the first day of the week which is Sunday.

It only “changed” because of the Catholic Church, not because of anything in the Bible. The Apostles, and Mary worshipped on all the days of the week; for we should worship God EVERYDAY, but not one Apostle or Mary ever called the seventhday Sabbath “done away with” “changed” or any such thing. They all kept the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, as shown in the Bible.

Why do we worship on Sunday? Because Jesus Christ, rise from the dead on Sunday. Sunday is a memorial of his rising.

There is absolutely nothing in Scripture to command the change of the seventh day sabbath to the first day of the week just because of the resurrection.

Who are you to judge us? You have no authority over us.

“Judge righteous judgment…” John 7:24. In the words of Jesus; Christians have every right and every obligation to decide what is truth.

 

[guanophore]

"Mannyfit75:

We depend on the Sacred Scripture and Tradition. It’s not either or. It’s both. Neither are superior. They are both equal.

You incorrectly asserted that Catholics place Tradition above Scripture, and Mannyfit is correcting this misunderstanding of the Catholic position. Catholics consider them equal, because they both came from the same source.

No. They are not equal. I have shown you above just one of many examples that prove you must ultimately go to Scripture to prove any so called Tradition.

No, you have shown what your modern innovation has handed down to you, which constitutes “a different gospel” from the one we received from the Apostles.
"Mannyfit75:

Mary lived her life as a devout Jew. In her days, she observed the Jewish observance for Sabbath worship.

Again, no. Mary did not observe a “Jewish” Sabbath; the Bible nowhere calls it the Sabbath of the Jews, but it calls the seventhday sabbath the “Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” The Sabbath is not “Jewish.”

There are very specific instructions given to Moses, for the Jews, about the observance of the Sabbath. All the first Hebrew Christians were faithful keepers of these.
"Mannyfit75:

This would change later on since after Christ’s resurrection and ascension into heaven, the Apostles and other Christians worship on the first day of the week which is Sunday.

It only “changed” because of the Catholic Church, not because of anything in the Bible. The Apostles, and Mary worshipped on all the days of the week; for we should worship God EVERYDAY, but not one Apostle or Mary ever called the seventhday Sabbath “done away with” “changed” or any such thing. They all kept the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, as shown in the Bible.

This is mostly true, except the part about “not because of anything in the Bible”. The Scripture has, indeed, been a major source of standards for the observation of the Sabbath.
"Mannyfit75:

Why do we worship on Sunday? Because Jesus Christ, rise from the dead on Sunday. Sunday is a memorial of his rising.

There is absolutely nothing in Scripture to command the change of the seventh day sabbath to the first day of the week just because of the resurrection.

Well, we read it differently.

Mannyfit75:

Who are you to judge us? You have no authority over us.

“Judge righteous judgment…” John 7:24. In the words of Jesus; Christians have every right and every obligation to decide what is truth.

I agree. You have judged that you are a better Catholic than most Catholics, because you keep the Seventh Day Sabbath holy unto the Lord. In this area, I must agree. I think the vast majority of American Catholics routinely ignore or profane the Sabbath.

 

[Friedrich]

Dear Patrick

I followed your example and took a break too – not by the sea, but in the desert! I feel more relaxed now, and closer to God after spending time in nature.

Early one morning I sat outside my tent, waiting for the sun to rise. For worship I read Genesis 1. As the sun cleared the horizon and lit up the whole landscape, I caught a faint glipmse of what it must have been when God said: `Let there be light!’

Please give us the first instalment on your ideas re Genesis 1 & 2, and I will comment/reply with great pleasure.

God bless,

Friedrich

 

[Protestant101]

Dear Patrick

I followed your example and took a break too – not by the sea, but in the desert! I feel more relaxed now, and closer to God after spending time in nature.

Early one morning I sat outside my tent, waiting for the sun to rise. For worship I read Genesis 1. As the sun cleared the horizon and lit up the whole landscape, I caught a faint glipmse of what it must have been when God said: `Let there be light!’

Please give us the first instalment on your ideas re Genesis 1 & 2, and I will comment/reply with great pleasure.

God bless,

Friedrich

I would be interested in participating in this study on Genesis too. This is one of my favorite chapters in the Old Testament. It speaks to me very personally, as well as “doctrinally.” Can you let me know where the link is for this discussion when it gets started, please.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Wow! I find it hard to believe that Christians think like this about the Bible; but it is common within Roman Catholicism. Like it or not, your Church actually does have to depend upon the Bible too to defend her faith. With your dogma about Peter; for one eg., the only way you can “prove” it is to go the the Book of Mathew in the Bible, to “show” us poor unknowing Protestants where we are going “wrong.” You can’t use any other source for that doctrine!! All the other sources you could quote get it from that!

Another example: The Blessed Virgin Mary kept the Seventh-day Sabbath! Your own Catholic Bible says so. Mary never kept Sunday holy. Bring out your Bible now and I will be glad to show you this. Can anyone tell me how I could be wrong in doing what the Blessed Virgin Mary did? Is it possible??

I do what Mary did and you guys don’t. LOL! I 'm a better Catholic than you!!!

Luke 23:52-56. “And the women also, which came with Him from Galilee, followed after.” (Every Catholic will agree that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was at the cross). “They rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment.”

1. The Blessed Virgin Mary kept the Sabbath.
2. She kept the Ten Commandments.
3. She would have been a sinner if she had not.
4. “Sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 3:4.

The Bible must be above Tradition in all Churches; including the Catholic Church.

That would be hard, as it is part of Tradition (from Creation to Moses, and from the Resurrection to St. Paul’s first epistle two decades later, what were they following?), and out of Tradition it came.
The Catholic Church wrote and compiled the Bible. The Bible did not create the Church.
And why do you trust all those copies of the Bible? If you don’t trust the Church in interpreting it correctly, how can you trust them to copy it correctly?

When I think of “the falling away” mentioned in Scripture, I think of the following noteworthy facts of history - there are more, but these will make the point:

When I see this faling away mentioned, I think of how the ones making it explain the following noteworthy facts of the Gospel-there are more, but these will make the point.
Matthew 16:18
I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it
Matthew 28:18 All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.

Btw you still haven’t gotten yourself out of this corner you paint yourself in:

Btw, your sign "“Scripture Must Be Its Own Expositor, since It Is A Rule Of Itself…” contradicts Scripture Acts 8:31. LOL.

 

[Patrick_Murebil]

Dear Patrick

I followed your example and took a break too – not by the sea, but in the desert! I feel more relaxed now, and closer to God after spending time in nature.

Early one morning I sat outside my tent, waiting for the sun to rise. For worship I read Genesis 1. As the sun cleared the horizon and lit up the whole landscape, I caught a faint glipmse of what it must have been when God said: `Let there be light!’

Please give us the first instalment on your ideas re Genesis 1 & 2, and I will comment/reply with great pleasure.

God bless,

Friedrich

Welcome back Friedrich!! Now you have my thoughts drifting off to camping:thumbsup: Sounds like you had a nice break!!

Before we get started I’m wondering if we can continue on this thread or if we should start a new one. I’m in favor of staying on this thread for the simple reason that when I began to discuss the first two chapters of Genesis with Richard Kastner earlier back in this thread, it was leading to a look at the 7th day of creation. I thought that was pertinant to the OP question, since SDAs were commenting, and the creation story is core and fundamental to SDA thoughts on saturday as the sabbath. I thought we could start at the beginning, and then continue through the Bible as we dialog regarding the answer to the OP question.

So I’m not sure whether or not to stay here or begin a new thread…I’ll leave that up to the “judges” before we begin. And actually the OP question may have already been answered based on the following points of my understanding, which are, and anyone please feel free to correct me if I mis-state or mis-represent something.

The answer to the OP question is that saturday is the sabbath based on the following:

SDA view:

1. The 7th day sabbath/saturday, is a part of God’s Eternal Law (The 10 Commandments) which is…well…eternal, and was core to God’s government in Heaven before this world was even created, and in place for all eternity prior to the creation of this world for all of God’s created beings.
2. The 7th day sabbath/saturday was kept by Adam and Eve, and all of God’s followers from Creation, throughout the OT, and the NT.
3. The Lord’s Day, referred to in the Bible is not the first day of the week, but rather the 7th day sabbath/saturday.
4. The 7th day sabbath/saturday will be kept as part of God’s eternal law, after Jesus’ second coming and throughout all eternity in the future.

Catholic view:

1. The 7th day sabbath/saturday was instituted as part of the covenant God made with Moses and the Hebrews at Mt. Sinai.
2. The 7th day sabbath is saturday.
3. The first day/Sunday is the Lord’s Day referred to in the Bible and is celebrated in honor of Jesus’ resurrection.
4. Resting/worshipping on Sunday fulfills the moral requirement of the sabbath commandment in the 10 commandments.
5. It is God’s Rest(communion with God as intended for mankind at creation before sin entered the world) that we enter into as Christians, and God’s Rest is everyday.

So it seems to me that there is no disagreement about which day is the sabbath…from all that I’ve read, even the Catholics have said that in various threads on this forum,… and it is taught in the Catechism, that it is saturday. So sunday is not the sabbath instead of saturday.

The issue we are really looking at seems to be whether or not the 7th day sabbath/saturday is binding on Christians.

Which brings me back to my question as to whether or not the impending discussion should be carried on here on this thread or in a new thread?

So correct me if I’ve misrepresented any views above, and I am open to suggestions from the “judges”, OP, moderators, or anyone else as to whether or not we should begin a new thread.
Thanks in advance!
God bless all!!!

 

[Protestant101]

The answer to the OP question is that saturday is the sabbath based on the following:

So it seems to me that there is no disagreement about which day is the sabbath…from all that I’ve read, even the Catholics have said that in various threads on this forum,… and it is taught in the Catechism, that it is saturday. So sunday is not the sabbath instead of saturday.

The issue we are really looking at seems to be whether or not the 7th day sabbath/saturday is binding on Christians.

Which brings me back to my question as to whether or not the impending discussion should be carried on here on this thread or in a new thread?

So correct me if I’ve misrepresented any views above, and I am open to suggestions from the “judges”, OP, moderators, or anyone else as to whether or not we should begin a new thread.
Thanks in advance!
God bless all!!!

Howdy Patrick; I think that the points you have noted above as to our two respective views on the Sabbath are accurately stated, so far. The question you have asked;

“Is the 7th day Sabbath still binding on Christians?”

is really what it boils down to. Atleast it is one of the major points that it boils down to. I think there are 3 major points it boils down to.

To me; you could stay on topic here in the discussions of Genesis; it sounds as though it would fit good with the OPs original topic, as I am sure you would have an opinion on how the Genesis story impacts on weather or not the seventh day Sabbath is still binding?

 

[Friedrich]

Hi Patrick,

Thank you for your accurate summary of what SDA’s believe on the Sabbath. I couldn’t have stated it better!

Looking forward to your first instalment on Genesis 1.

Happy Sabbath,

Friedrich

 

[Patrick_Murebil]

Hi Patrick,

Thank you for your accurate summary of what SDA’s believe on the Sabbath. I couldn’t have stated it better!

Looking forward to your first instalment on Genesis 1.

Happy Sabbath,

Friedrich

Hi Friedrich,

I’m glad you and Protestant101 are satisfied with my summary of SDA beliefs above. Considering that I spent the best part of a quarter of a century teaching and defending those beliefs, I would hope that I would be able to do so with accuracy. I only hope and pray that in the next quarter of a century, I can become somewhat competant enough to teach and defend my beliefs, as taught by The Church, just as accurately. So much for an aging middle aged man to ingest, but I rest peacefully that I know what I need to know for now!!!

I’ve waited a while to see if anyone else had any objections to our continuing our discussion in this thread, and having heard none, I think we are safet to proceed without violating forum rules. But if at some point we get asked to “leave”, we can start another thread, until then…“on with the show”

I do ask that we limit our discussion at this point to the creation story, with the understanding that as we progress the rest of the Bible will be open for our study. I would just like us to go through the creation story (Genesis 1&2) in a slow paced detail of each day and verse, and share with each other what we learn from this story. It is easy for some to start listing verses from the rest of the Bible, and I’d prefer to look at the verses of this story. No need, at this point, to go off on studies of the first day, or plants, or, animals, or diet, in the rest of the Bible, but to look at these things in the context of the Creation Story. I hope that is ok with everyone! And of course this dialog is not exclusive to just you, Protestant101, and me. I would welcome everyone’s thoughts!

Soooo…without further ado and my endless ramblings…

Let’s begin at the beginning and share what we learn from Genesis 1:1,2 I use the New International Version pretty regularly, and I’ve included the texts from the King James version. All, please feel free to post the text from any other versions!

Geneis 1:[1] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (KJV)
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (NIV)

What I learn from this simple verse is that God existed first, before all that he created. Everything that exists came after God, and because He created it. The heavens, which would include everything beyond this earth. All the angels, all the galaxies, and all that exists, beyond our realm. The earth, our realm, was created by God, and not the other way around. The earth and the extensive universe are not God’s body or house (as believed by New Agers and various nature religions). This verse from the very beginning makes it clear that God was first, is all powerful, and not to be confused with that which He created. He, and He alone is God, and we are not. He is the Creator and not the creation.

Genesis 1:[2] And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (KJV)
Genesis 1:2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. (NIV)

In this verse we find that the earth was incomplete, because it is the earth that is without form and void. Why no mention of heaven, in this verse. Because heaven and all of the creation in that realm was complete. The angels and all created beings in existence in heaven were complete. But the earth was not. The heavenly realm was complete and working, but our realm the earth was not. The rest of Genesis 1 is God’s response to bring resolution to these states of incompleteness…formlessness, emptiness, darkness. And yet the power of God is present in the Spirit of God hovering and moving over the face of the waters. The beginning of the plan to complete the realm of the earth!

Please add your thoughts, comments, questions, to these two verses and what I’ve said. And then we can move on to the next verses where God begins to bring order out of chaos, and completeness to the earth.

God bless all!!

 

[Protestant101]

Hi Friedrich,

Geneis 1:[1] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (KJV)
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (NIV)

Genesis 1:[2] And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (KJV)
Genesis 1:2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. (NIV)

The rest of Genesis 1 is God’s response to bring resolution to these states of incompleteness…formlessness, emptiness, darkness.

Please add your thoughts, comments, questions, to these two verses and what I’ve said. And then we can move on to the next verses where God begins to bring order out of chaos, and completeness to the earth.

God bless all!!

One thing I have learned in studying the Bible is that we can sometimes learn quite a lot by simply asking a question. Jesus asked just over 300 questions in His ministry in trying to teach us His Word.

The question I have about these two verses, is not one I ask because I have no answer; it is one I believe will teach us a lot about God.

We commonly teach, (that is, both RCs and SDAs) how that “in the beginning” things were “perfect.” (“before the fall” is a common term we use in describing same). Why then, does the Bible say that God started the Earth “without form and void,” and with “great darkness?”

 

[Patrick_Murebil]

One thing I have learned in studying the Bible is that we can sometimes learn quite a lot by simply asking a question. Jesus asked just over 300 questions in His ministry in trying to teach us His Word.

The question I have about these two verses, is not one I ask because I have no answer; it is one I believe will teach us a lot about God.

We commonly teach, (that is, both RCs and SDAs) how that “in the beginning” things were “perfect.” (“before the fall” is a common term we use in describing same). Why then, does the Bible say that God started the Earth “without form and void,” and with “great darkness?”

Yes questions are a necessary part of learning, as well as the answers. Jesus did indeed ask a lot of questions in teaching people. He also answered a lot of questions (I’m not sure of the actual count).

So, please share your answer with us there rabbi!

God bless all!!!

 

[Lilyflower]

Yes questions are a necessary part of learning, as well as the answers. Jesus did indeed ask a lot of questions in teaching people. He also answered a lot of questions (I’m not sure of the actual count).

So, please share your answer with us there rabbi!

God bless all!!!

Asking questions is indeed an excellent way to teach. The learner has to think about the subject in order to answer the question which leads to much deeper processing which not only aids learning but increases understanding. It also aids long-term memory retention.

But I think the Lord also wanted His learners to not only understand but to think for themselves.

The Bible is suspect particularly in Genisis where it says 'God started with a man and from man came woman whereas we know for a fact that the primary agent is not man but woman so man had to come from woman and not the other way around.

Aware of the limitations of Scriptue, the Lord obviously wanted His learners to discover for themselves rather than rely on mis- information.

I am not casting aspersions about the Bible, I in fact use it the way Protestants use it ‘taking its many teachings as if they are addressed to me and try to live my life by it’. But I do not think that is the way it is intended. Much of it is not a ‘prescription of how to live’ but letters written to the early Church, which can be applied to many problems we face today.

However, I do struggle a bit with the Sabbath issue. For me, Saturday is and will always be the Sabbath but Sunday while not being the Sabbath, is the Lord’s Day and we do lots of things on Sunday’s traditional to the Sabbath observance.

That is one of the reasons I go to Mass on Saturday’s: ‘to keep holy the Sabbath day!’

Blessings and peace

 

[Protestant101]

Yes questions are a necessary part of learning, as well as the answers. Jesus did indeed ask a lot of questions in teaching people. He also answered a lot of questions (I’m not sure of the actual count).

So, please share your answer with us there rabbi!

God bless all!!!

LOL, I don’t have the right clothes for a “rabbi,” but you did use lowercase to spell it, so maybe that was not meaning a literal Rabbi?

To me, the Genesis verses we are discussing pose this serious question about “without form and void” for several reasons.

1/ Regardless of the nature of “without form and void,” it is recognized that God started with a “shell” if you will, and made something beautiful - perfect. This fact recognizes the Bible concept how that the plan of salvation was in existence since “before the foundation of the world.”

Take me for a personal example. I came off the streets and out of the world of drugs and violence. I was a mere shell of what God’s ideal for me would be; yet, God has found a way to take me as I am; “without form and void” and make me into something better. Am I “perfect?” LOL, I am sure that some of my Catholic friends, (and even Adventist friends) will be able to answer that question “efficiently;” but I would add that everytime something becomes apparent that does not belong in my heart, or in my life - the Creation story speaks anew to my heart a special endtime message: “Begin again with Me.”

I think God started out with a perfect “without form and void.” It wasn’t like anything we would see as in say “after the fall.” But it was a shell, and God used it as the foundation upon which to build His planet Earth, and so that we could later see and experience the truth:

Rom 1:20

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

 

[Friedrich]

Dear Lilyflower

Thank you for your lovely answer. As an old-fashioned Christian, however, I was perturbed by your view of Scripture; you said:

The Bible is suspect particularly in Genisis where it says 'God started with a man and from man came woman whereas we know for a fact that the primary agent is not man but woman so man had to come from woman and not the other way around.

Aware of the limitations of Scriptue, the Lord obviously wanted His learners to discover for themselves rather than rely on mis- information.

I am not casting aspersions about the Bible, I in fact use it the way Protestants use it ‘taking its many teachings as if they are addressed to me and try to live my life by it’. But I do not think that is the way it is intended. Much of it is not a ‘prescription of how to live’ but letters written to the early Church, which can be applied to many problems we face today.

If you really believe in the limitations of Scripture' and that the Bible had mis-information’, where does a view like that end? You can change/delete any section of Scripture that you don’t agree with, so in effect the Bible becomes just another book!

Have you considered that the problem could rather be with our mis-interpretation or abuse of Scripture?
You obviously feel strongly about man/woman. The Bible has a clear role for man – the protector, provider and priest in the home – and for woman – the loving glue that keeps the home together without relegating her to an inferior position. Man has messed these roles up, turning woman into a doormat. That is NOT God’s way, but Satan’s twisted version of what God intended for the loving relationship between two equal, but different people.

Just a thought,

God bless

Friedrich

 

[Lilyflower]

Dear Lilyflower

Thank you for your lovely answer. As an old-fashioned Christian, however, I was perturbed by your view of Scripture; you said:

If you really believe in the limitations of Scripture' and that the Bible had mis-information’, where does a view like that end? You can change/delete any section of Scripture that you don’t agree with, so in effect the Bible becomes just another book!

Have you considered that the problem could rather be with our mis-interpretation or abuse of Scripture?
You obviously feel strongly about man/woman. The Bible has a clear role for man – the protector, provider and priest in the home – and for woman – the loving glue that keeps the home together without relegating her to an inferior position. Man has messed these roles up, turning woman into a doormat. That is NOT God’s way, but Satan’s twisted version of what God intended for the loving relationship between two equal, but different people.

Just a thought,

God bless

Friedrich

I absolutely agree with everything you have said.

I think maybe I didn’t explain my thoughts very well.

Far be it for me to criticize Sacred Scripture and that was not what I meant. What I was trying to say is 'there are texts intended to be taken literally and texts which explain things to profound for human understanding so analogies are used.

I think the part of Genesis which describes Creation and the fall are rather like that. Something happened we know for sure else we would not be here but exactly what is too profound for our level of understanding. What we do know is that the primary biological state is famale from which come male not the other way around.

If for example a male loses the testosterone supply, he becomes more effeminate and develop breasts but if the female loses her female hormone she remains female. So it is testosterone which keeps the male state from female state. Therefore, by definition ‘as I see it’, male cannot be primary. But I may be wrong!

That does not detract one iota from the teachings of the Lord which I believe and accept 100% and indeed all of the New Testamant and most of the Old Testament.

In addition to reading, I think the Lord wanted us to ‘think and meditate’ rather than just take what is written without too much thought about it. Deeper thinking leads to deeper understanding which in my experience leads to greater conversion.

God bless you too

Blessings and peace

 

[RobHom]

Sorry, I may misunderstood you. I tried to read the article. It was too long. There was no need to read it all. The proof of something was being given. But my point is that we cannot invent the religion. And that is what was being done in that article. That is not fair.

If we are to accept what you have said above, two things are amply evident. 1. You are too lazy to take time to read, but not too lazy to make specious comments. 2. If you cannot “invent” religion, why do you belong to and profess a religion that was invented?

Further, as to issues of “fairness”, they are beyond your purview.

Moreover, it was too difficult (complicated) for me to follow. It was extra to bible so I did not give it much importance in the very important matter of the sabbath.

At least you are honest enough to admit that your faculties are less than required to meet the task. You should have stopped there and held your tongue. As one who does not hold the Bible to be the truth, you are not privileged to comment as to its veracity.