Why have Christians forgotten the fourth Commandment? (Earth, exodus, bible)

[d.n.irvin]

Originally Posted by Popeyesays

It seems to me that IF the ten commandments were unalterable, then Jesus, Himself, would not have given an eleventh commandment.

13:33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you.
13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
13:35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
(King James Bible, John)

Regards,
Scott

I question, what Universal Laws of Mathematics teach that when we Simplify an equation we Subtract from it? Example: Quote:
-For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
The key phrase in this passage is "all the law"- if ALL of the Law[Ten Commandments] is fulfilled in one word LOVE- then nothing has been taken away from the Law -the fourth Commandment- Remember the Sabbath day to keep it Holy is included in " ALL the law"

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by d.n.irvin

I question, what Universal Laws of Mathematics teach that when we Simplify an equation we Subtract from it? Example: Quote:
-For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
The key phrase in this passage is "all the law"- if ALL of the Law[Ten Commandments] is fulfilled in one word LOVE- then nothing has been taken away from the Law -the fourth Commandment- Remember the Sabbath day to keep it Holy is included in " ALL the law"

That's a very fancy fandango, and this is not a personal interpretation?

Regards,
Scott

[d.n.irvin]

Originally Posted by 9-10ths_Penguin

Let's look at what the Bible says:

Exodus 31:14-15: Matthew 12:1:

Do you consider picking grain to be a form of work?

Because the Gospel clearly describes Jesus violating the letter of the Law regarding the Sabbath, even if He didn't violate its spirit.

In this thread, you have implied that not following an extremely legalistic interpretation of scripture is sinful.

Jesus being sinless is incompatible with your interpretation of scripture. Either Jesus sinned or you got things wrong.

Jesus is described as not following an extremely legalistic interpretation of scripture

I agree, though not likely in the way that you intended that statement.

I asked for evidence of a 7-day creation and a global flood.
Besides Bible evidence?-Too much for this post. But I' ll get to it. But know this: at the "end of the day" it all comes down to what you "believe" and "why you believe it". I choose to believe God's interpretations of Truth according to the Bible -vs Mans interpretations Truth -that's all

I'll take that as meaning "sorry, I don't have any real evidence."

That same passage says that "now we know in part and we prophesy in part"... but you seem to be claiming that you have certain knowledge and full prophecy.

Makes me wonder what you're trying to accomplish in this thread, then, if you aren't interested in convincing people.

You believe in whatever you want -Some people believe in Santa Claus - Just don't try to make me believe it -especially when it is in "Jesus' Name." As a concerned Christian - I don't want you to be fooled about the True Sababath-The Bible says "Satan deceiveth the whole world" and I believe the Bible -

[d.n.irvin]

Originally Posted by Popeyesays

That's a very fancy fandango, and this is not a personal interpretation?

Regards,
Scott

You know I don't know how you teach Reading and Comprehension? aside from reading and being able to comprehend what you read, but the Bible says "if any of you lack wisdom pray for it" and the ALL knowing Father God will give it to you .

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by d.n.irvin

You believe in whatever you want -Some people believe in Santa Claus - Just don't try to make me believe it -especially when it is in "Jesus' Name." As a concerned Christian - I don't want you to be fooled about the True Sababath-The Bible says "Satan deceiveth the whole world" and I believe the Bible -

I am not confused about the true sabbath.

"He came from Nazareth, no unknown place. He carried no sword in His hand, nor even a stick. He did not sit upon the Throne of David, He was a poor man. He reformed the Law of Moses, and broke the Sabbath Day. He did not conquer the East and the West, but was Himself subject to the Roman Law. He did not exalt the Jews, but taught equality and brotherhood, and rebuked the Scribes and Pharisees. He brought in no reign of peace, for during His lifetime injustice and cruelty reached such a height that even He Himself fell a victim to it, and died a shameful death upon the cross.
Thus the Jews thought and spoke, for they did not understand the Scriptures nor the glorious truths that were contained in them. The letter they knew by heart, but of the life-giving spirit they understood not a word. 56 "
(Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 55)

Regards,
Scott

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by d.n.irvin

and I don't have an interpretation of Scripture

Every reader of every written work, including Christians reading the Bible, unavoidably makes an interpretation. You as a reader bring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions to everything you read... including scripture.

Here's an example - 1 Thessalonians 5:2:

for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.

Without interpretation, this verse has no meaning. However, as an intelligent reader, you can interpret the literal meaning of words like "thief" and "night", as well as larger phrases like "thief in the night". Then, you can use your powers of interpretation to realize that this verse employs an analogy, and that the analogy deals with the stealthy nature of a thief in the night, and not, say, the fact that a thief takes property wrongfully, or the fact that he is committing the crime outside of normal working hours. It takes interpretation to first recognize the analogy, and then to apply it properly.

Thanks to proper interpretation, you can derive the meaning of the verse: that the day of the Lord will come in such a way that its approach may not be noticed.

Now... you could have interpreted the passage differently. You could have decided that it isn't the stealthy nature of a thief that's important to the analogy, but the fact that he takes property. You might then interpret the passage to mean that the day of the Lord will come in such a way that it will wrongfully deprive people of worldly posessions. The text itself allows either interpretation; its the knowledge that we bring to it that allows us to choose which one is correct.

Being intelligent readers, we have to select between interpretations and decide which one is more appropriate... which one was intended. Still. even when one particular interpretation is obvious, we do interpret.

For some reason you take offense to the term, but without interpretation, none of us can infer meaning from the written word.

[d.n.irvin]

Originally Posted by Popeyesays

I am not confused about the true sabbath.

"He came from Nazareth, no unknown place. He carried no sword in His hand, nor even a stick. He did not sit upon the Throne of David, He was a poor man. He reformed the Law of Moses, and broke the Sabbath Day. He did not conquer the East and the West, but was Himself subject to the Roman Law. He did not exalt the Jews, but taught equality and brotherhood, and rebuked the Scribes and Pharisees. He brought in no reign of peace, for during His lifetime injustice and cruelty reached such a height that even He Himself fell a victim to it, and died a shameful death upon the cross.
Thus the Jews thought and spoke, for they did not understand the Scriptures nor the glorious truths that were contained in them. The letter they knew by heart, but of the life-giving spirit they understood not a word. 56 "
(Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 55)

Regards,
Scott

Again When I hear people say that Christ broke the Sabbath I wonder whee they get that notion - It brings to mind Bible Prophecy of Revelation 13 thats says "Babylon has made all nations drunken with the wine of her fornication, that is, her false doctrines.

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by d.n.irvin

Again When I hear people say that Christ broke the Sabbath I wonder whee they get that notion - It brings to mind Bible Prophecy of Revelation 13 thats says "Babylon has made all nations drunken with the wine of her fornication, that is, her false doctrines.

Do the words non sequitur mean anything to you?

Regards,
Scott

[d.n.irvin]

Originally Posted by 9-10ths_Penguin

Every reader of every written work, including Christians reading the Bible, unavoidably makes an interpretation. You as a reader bring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions to everything you read... including scripture.

Here's an example - 1 Thessalonians 5:2:



Without interpretation, this verse has no meaning. However, as an intelligent reader, you can interpret the literal meaning of words like "thief" and "night", as well as larger phrases like "thief in the night". Then, you can use your powers of interpretation to realize that this verse employs an analogy, and that the analogy deals with the stealthy nature of a thief in the night, and not, say, the fact that a thief takes property wrongfully, or the fact that he is committing the crime outside of normal working hours. It takes interpretation to first recognize the analogy, and then to apply it properly.

Thanks to proper interpretation, you can derive the meaning of the verse: that the day of the Lord will come in such a way that its approach may not be noticed.

Now... you could have interpreted the passage differently. You could have decided that it isn't the stealthy nature of a thief that's important to the analogy, but the fact that he takes property. You might then interpret the passage to mean that the day of the Lord will come in such a way that it will wrongfully deprive people of worldly posessions. The text itself allows either interpretation; its the knowledge that we bring to it that allows us to choose which one is correct.

Being intelligent readers, we have to select between interpretations and decide which one is more appropriate... which one was intended. Still. even when one particular interpretation is obvious, we do interpret.

For some reason you take offense to the term, but without interpretation, none of us can infer meaning from the written word.

Pardon my tone, if I seem to be offended by the term "interpretation" I'm not. And I agree that the Bible is open to interpretation,HOWEVER I do take offense to persons claiming that I have a "personal interpretation" of Scripture. -Scripture is open to interpretation but not outside of the the scope of an in-depth study of all Scriptures related to a certain topic -- examined within there recorded context
Lets be Frank about do you really think Good Honest Catholic People and Good Honest Protestants of all denominations, of which Gods says has "sheep in many folds" -You Honestly think they know that the "old school Catholics" changed the Sabbath Day? and that the" Bible predicts they would do it? - I'm Not just some "trouble maker"
An underline rule of Christianity is to be your" brothers keeper" In my case -I'm simply sharing some of my personal "Bible" studies of what the Bible says -of its own interpretation "ALL THING CONSIDERED" "The Whole Bible" Not my "personal interpretation" I am convinced that the Bible is easy enough for any man to understand - And real Truth Can Withstand Investigation.

Sola Scriptura
So in the words of my favorite T.V Judge " That's what I'm about!"