the Sabbath

It was already answered John 16:8 The Holy Spirit is the One who convicts us of sin, if we have not harden our hearts from the Spirit calling us out of rebellion to Him Heb 3:7-8 as the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God nor indeed can be Romans 8:7-8 those living in flesh (sin) cannot please God.

Sadly, not everyone hears His voice once He convicts of sin and the Spirit has nothing to work with if our hearts are harden and has no choice to leave. People always talk about the unforgiveable sin and that is shutting ourselves off from hearing His voice, where sin no longer becomes something we try to overcome. God can forgive us of any sin except the sin against the Spirit Matthew 12:30-32 where we stop listening and live comfortably in our sins. Our salvation is from sin Mat 1:21

Conviction of sin is different than repentance. Conviction just makes one guilty. Repentance is granted through sorrow that assuages guilt. How do you understand 2 Corinthians 7:10?

I never said it was the same.

But that's how you answered my question. I'm asking the source. of repentance and you answer with a source of conviction. When I ask you about it, you refer me to your previous response.
All I am asking is who is the source of repentance. Can you answer that question?

I see the confusion now.

The same source who convicts us of sin brings us to repentance the Holy Spirit, but we have to cooperate. God will never force us to do anything, He provides the power, but we still have to do our part.

Do you believe that all who come to Jesus are drawn of the Father?

Yes

Is the Godly sorrow that works repentance...2 Corinthians 7:10...how the Father draws?

It's one way He draws when the Spirit convicts and we have a sorry heart and repent.

I think there are a misunderstanding in what it means for the Father to draw us to Him and I don't have time to go into great detail at the moment as I am short for time. I do not believe we have no part in our salvation, which does not mean we can save ourselves, only Jesus can save, but all of the promises are conditional. If they weren't and we did not have free will, then we would not have love because love is not something you can force, it has to come willingly.

John 6:37 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.

John 6:45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.

Everything comes from God. That doesn't mean we can't reject His calling or come to Him and fall later, Israel did and they were cut off. We too can make the same mistakes.

It's all the time I have for now. I'll try to check back later.

Take care.

I'm well aware of what you believe. That's why I went with this line of questioning. And I appreciate you taking the time to answer. I'm not trying to trick you, but I am trying to show you something I don't think you have considered.
Romans 3:10 and following gives a very blunt but accurate description of fallen man. In this estate, he is oblivious to his need of God and lives in opposition to God. And apart from God coming to man and quickening his spirit and leading him into repentance, the fallen man will remain destitute and separated from God.
Does this mean that an individual sits idly by as God works? Not at all. The individual is to respond to the actions of God. A good preacher always calls for a response from those listening. In fact, a good church meeting should be one continual call from the prayer of invocation to the benediction to each one present. But mankind is helpless unless God moves.

We really don't know each other so it would be hard for you to know everything I believe just as I don't know everything you believe other than what you state. Its best just to stick with what you believe, and I won't put words in your mouth and would appreciate the same. Take care.

My apologies. Grace and peace.

No worries and I appreciate it!

thats great
but to say the we don't need to obey God's command, is to say it is okay to to sin.

If i told everyone we can't obey the the law so continue to comit Adultery or continue to lie or take God's name in vain, that sounds like condoning sin. Because of grace and our unable flesh we are not given licence to continue to disobey.

I think we we Agree with Justification,,,we might be a bit different with sanctification.

Can we get back to the subject?

The Sabbath.

If you can see that he ten commandments were not the old covenant, because (1.) They were in existence, and were just as much binding on men before as after the exodus. (2.) They were never dedicated with blood. (3.) They were set forth by the Lord himself as antedating his covenant with Israel. Would that help. To know the 10 commandments are not the old covenant.

They were in existence, and were just as much binding on men before as after the exodus.

The book of Genesis, though so brief in its record of over 2300 years, nevertheless abounds with indications that the principles of the ten commandments were well understood and acted upon, even from the creation down. Why was Cain condemned for killing his brother, if the law against murder did not exist? “Where no law is, there is no transgression;” and, “sin is not imputed when there is no law.” By what standard was it shown that Noah and his house alone were righteous, while all the rest of mankind were only evil and that continually, if there was no law for a standard in such matters? To be righteous is to be living in conformity with a standard of righteousness, or right doing. “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” On what ground were the inhabitants of the wicked cities of the plain given over to the vengeance of eternal fire on account of their vileness, if there was no law against unchastity? There was a law. guiding the morals just as there is moral principles binding on us now? Is it an acknowledged principle now that a man cannot justly be punished who does not know, or has not had an opportunity to know, the law? So it was then, The law of God was in existence and understood before the flood and before the Exodus.

But some may be ready to suppose that even if the principles of the other commandments were known, surely the Sabbath was neither known nor regarded before the time of Moses. We answer that if it can be shown that any other commandment was known, tenfold more proof can be given that the Sabbath was known, and a commandment given for its observance. In proof of this it is only necessary to refer to the record of Gen 2.

Gen 2 records the origin of the Sabbatic institution in Eden. God rested on the seventh day. He then blessed the day; not the day past, but the seventh day for time to come. Then he sanctified it. Sanctify means to set apart to a sacred or religious use. This could not refer to past time, but to the seventh day for time to come. And it was to be used in this sacred or religious manner, not by the Lord; for he does not need it; but by man, for whom, says Christ, the Sabbath was made for man. Mark 2:27
How, then, we ask, could the Sabbath be thus sanctified for man’s use, or be set apart to be used in a holy or sacred manner by him? Only by telling man to use it in this manner. But just as soon as the Lord had told Adam to use the Sabbath in a sacred or religious manner, he had given him a command for its observance.
You may say but it does not say that.... But it does.
It was made by God (not for Himself) But for man to use.
It was made Holy and set apart for Holy use.

How can it not be that Adam was told to keep it holy.
The record in Genesis is therefore plain that a Sabbath commandment was given in Eden.
If it was given to Adam it was given to all his children and for all time.

They (The 10 commandments) were never dedicated with blood.

The old covenant given in Exodus is clearly distinguished from the Adamic, the Abrahamic, or any other covenant brought to view in the Bible.
We go back therefore to the history of Israel to the very first transaction we find taking place between God and the Israelites after they left Egypt, which answers to the definition of the word covenant. This must be the old covenant, unless some good reason can be shown why it is not.
we find only one, formal and mutual agreement between God and themselves, based upon mutual promises in the experience of that people. The record of it commences in Ex 19:3 “And Moses went up unto God, and the Lord called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say unto the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel: Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bear you on eagles’ wings, and brought you unto myself. Now, therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people; for all the earth is mine. And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.”
The briefest glance at this language shows it to be a formal proposition on the part of the Lord to the Israelites. Moses was the minister through whom the negotiation was carried on. Go down, said God to Moses, and make to the people this proposition: If you will obey my voice, and keep my covenant, I will secure you in the possession of certain special blessings above all people. With this instruction Moses went down to the people, and God waited for their answer.
verses 7,8. “And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the Lord commanded him. And all the people answered together and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the Lord.”
Such was the response of the people. They said, “We agree to the terms; we will enter into the arrangement.” We now have the two parties before us, and the mutual, voluntary action on the part of each. This is the first transaction of the kind recorded between God and that people. It answers most strictly to the meaning of the word covenant. Therefore we say that this has the primary claim to be considered the old covenant of which Jeremiah prophesied and Paul discoursed.

Just a side note.... Exo 19:5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

The covenant was being made and part of "the covenant" was to keep God's covenant. "My Covenant" .
The 10 commandments had not been given at this point. ... If God's covenant is the ten commandments then they existed before the old covenant was made and if it is not the ten commandments we can stop right here, and the arguement is final, (they are not part of the old covenant).

God was asking them to keep the ten commandments (His covenant), which i can show.... but not now. God was about to give these commandments to them in writting but they already existed because they accept to obey them before God has written them on stone.

When the people agreed to obey God’s voice, verses 5, 8, they had not heard his voice, and didn't know what conditions it might impose. The first time they agree...

But on the third day after this, the Lord came down in fearful majesty, and with a voice that shook the solid earth and declared the ten commandments. Here for the first time the people heard God’s voice which they were to obey. Then the Lord took Moses into a private interview with himself and gave him some instruction which the people were to follow in civil and religious matters, under this arrangement. This instruction is found in the latter part of Exodus 20, and 21, 22, and 23 the civil and ceremonial laws given to Israel.

In chapter 24 Moses appeared before the people a second time, and rehearsed in their hearing all the words which the Lord had communicated to him. And here the people, after having heard for themselves God’s voice, and being told all that he had said to Moses. Now they understood all the conditions; They agree the second time... Exodus 24:3:

It would seem that this was all-sufficient. But the Lord moved very carefully in the matter, so that the people might have no opportunity to plead in after years that they did not know what they were doing in entering into this covenant with him. So he caused Moses to write out in a book all the words He had told him, that all points might be again carefully considered, and then to read it all over to the people. Verse 7: “And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people.” Here they had opportunity for the third time to reconsider the matter and change their decision if they so desired. The 3rd time they agree.

Moses then took blood which had been offered for the purpose, verses 5, 6, and sprinkled it on the people and said, “Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words.” Verse 8. Here the covenant was closed up, sealed and ratified, by the shedding of blood.

Hebrews 9:17-20: “For a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no force at all while the testator liveth. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people, saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.”

Paul here plainly states that the first covenant was dedicated with blood, the words testament and covenant meaning the same thing, being from the same original word. And to what scene does Paul refer? To the very one recorded in Exodus 24:8,

Now to settle the fact, that this covenant was not the ten commandments, we have only to remark that neither Moses nor the people had a copy of the ten commandments of any kind in their hands at that time. This will appear from the further record of Exodus 24. In verse 12, we read, “And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there, and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law and commandments which I have written, that thou mayest teach them.” The idea that God had already caused Moses to write out a copy of these commandments, and that he had begun to teach them by having spoken them and read them in the ears of the people, verses 3 and 4, is utterly inconsistent with this statement, that God was about to put into his hands a law containing commandments that he had written, in order that Moses might teach them. But before Moses was called up to receive this law of ten commandments which God had written, the first covenant had been made, closed up, finished, and ratified by the shedding of blood.

The first covenant was dedicated with blood. But when that dedication took place, the ten commandments, in visible form, had not been put into the possession of the people; they had no copy of them; hence they were not dedicated with blood. Therefore, the ten commandments were not the old covenant.

The decalogue were dedicated with blood.

I asked ChatGPT the following question.

Were the ten commandments the basis of the old covenant at Mt Sinai?

ChatGPT replied.

Yes, the Decalogue, also known as the Ten Commandments, is considered a central part of the Old Covenant established between God and the Israelites at Mount Sinai. According to biblical tradition, the story is found in the Book of Exodus in the Bible. The Old Covenant, often referred to as the Mosaic Covenant, was established between God and the Israelites through their leader Moses.

The Decalogue consists of ten commandments that serve as moral and ethical guidelines for the Israelites. These commandments are presented in the books of Exodus (Exodus 20:1-17) and Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 5:6-21). The commandments cover various aspects of ethical behavior, worship, and interpersonal relationships.

The Old Covenant, however, encompasses more than just the Ten Commandments. It also includes additional laws, statutes, and regulations that were given to the Israelites through Moses, as outlined in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Together, these laws formed the foundation of the covenant between God and the Israelites during the period of the Old Testament.

Ridiculous for you to take Cameron saying he knows what you believe (being on the topic of this
thread: the Sabbath) and extrapolating it to mean you think he is talking about everything you believe.

People talk about the importance of context while ignoring it themselves.

Just like those who say, stick with Scripture, while they go about adding to it.

Equally ludicrous: claiming the 613 mitzvot are written on our hearts.

Was the Sabbath commandment given in Eden?

ChatGPT

According to the biblical narrative, the commandment to observe the Sabbath day as a day of rest was not explicitly given in the Garden of Eden. The first explicit mention of the Sabbath occurs in the context of the Israelites' journey in the wilderness after the exodus from Egypt.

In the Book of Exodus, after the Israelites had been freed from slavery in Egypt, God provided them with manna to eat during their time in the wilderness. It was during this period that the Sabbath commandment was introduced. In Exodus 16:23-30, God instructed the people to gather a double portion of manna on the sixth day and to rest on the seventh day, which would become the Sabbath.

Here's an excerpt from Exodus 16:23-29 (NIV): "He said to them, 'This is what the Lord commanded: Tomorrow is to be a day of sabbath rest, a holy sabbath to the Lord. So bake what you want to bake and boil what you want to boil. Save whatever is left and keep it until morning.'"

While the Sabbath commandment was not explicitly given in Eden, it became a significant part of the Israelite covenant and was later included in the Ten Commandments given at Mount Sinai (Exodus 20:8-11). The Sabbath commandment is a key element in the religious and cultural practices of Judaism and has influenced the observance of a day of rest in various Christian traditions as well.