7th Day Sabbath not for New Testament believers

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

It was the impression I got from your response to me, by the way you worded it, that you had that opinion of my thought that I presented.

Well, that was not my intention. I simply did not understand the reasoning, it struck me as way out there. Apologies if my response came across the wrong way.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Well, that was not my intention. I simply did not understand the reasoning, it struck me as way out there. Apologies if my response came across the wrong way.

Thanks for the clarification. No need to apologize if that accusation was not your intention.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

lol. Paul, not me, said CREATION shows the things of God even to heathen gentiles. In fact PAUL said the things are clearly seen, including God's power and godhead. If you're right then Paul was wrong in saying these people have no excuse due to the light gleaned from creation, not the gospel. You totally glossed over Rom 1:20 after I referenced it.

Read it again.

Romans 1:18-21.. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; ..(19).. Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. ..(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: ..(21).. Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

How did they know the truth> From the gospel? No From creation. God revealed it to them by creation in this context.



He did not talk about obedient gentiles in chapter 2 from the church. They rejected what they knew of God from creation, not from the Gospel. After we read they knew truths of God, Paul explained how they knew in verse 20.



Brother, how you can misunderstand context that clearly shows he is speaking of gentiles who were heathen in chapter 1 is beyond me. Read some commentaries on the issue from people who can explain it better than me:

BARNES on Rom 1:18: The truth - The truth of God, in whatever way made known, and particularly, as the apostle goes on to say, what is made known by the light of nature. The truth pertaining to his perfections, his Law, etc. They hold it back. or restrain its influence.

Verse 19: Because - The apostle proceeds to show how it was that the pagan hindered the truth by their iniquity. This he does by showing that the truth might be known by the works of creation; and that nothing but their iniquity prevented it.

That which may be known of God - That which is “knowable” concerning God. The expression implies that there may be many things concerning God which cannot be known. But there are also many things which may be ascertained. Such are his existence, and many of his attributes, his power, and wisdom, and justice, etc. The object of the apostle was not to say that every thing pertaining to God could be known by them, or that they could have as clear a view of him as if they had possessed a revelation. We must interpret the expression according to the object which he had in view. That was to show that so much might be known of God as to prove that they had no excuse for their crimes; or that God would be just in punishing them for their deeds. For this, it was needful only that his existence and his justice, or his determination to punish sin, should be known; and this, the apostle affirms, was known among them, and had been from the creation of the world. This expression. therefore, is not to be pressed as implying that they knew all that could be known about God, or that they knew as much as they who had a revelation; but that they knew enough to prove that they had no excuse for their sins.

In them - “Among” them. So the preposition “in” is often used. It means that they had this knowledge; or it had been communicated to them. The great mass of the pagan world was indeed ignorant of the true God; but their leaders, or their philosophers, had this knowledge; see the note at Rom_1:21. But this was not true of the mass, or body of the people. Still it was true that this knowledge was in the possession of man, or was “among” the pagan world. and would have spread, had it not been for the love of sin.

God hath showed it to them - Compare Joh_1:9. He had endowed them with reason and conscience Rom_2:14-15; he had made them capable of seeing and investigating his works; he had spread before them the proofs of his wisdom, and goodness, and power, and had thus given them the means of learning his perfections and will.

Verse 20: or the invisible things of him - The expression “his invisible things” refers to those things which cannot be perceived by the senses. It does not imply that there are any things pertaining to the divine character which may be seen by the eye; but that there are things which may be known of him, though not discoverable by the eye. We judge of the objects around us by the senses, the sight, the touch, the ear, etc. Paul affirms, that though we cannot judge thus of God, yet there is a way by which we may come to the knowledge of him. What he means by the invisible things of God he specifies at the close of the verse, “his eternal power and Godhead.” The affirmation extends only to that; and the argument implies that that was enough to leave them without any excuse for their sins.

From the creation of the world - The word “creation” may either mean the “act” of creating, or more commonly it means “the thing created,” the world, the universe. In this sense it is commonly used in the New Testament; compare Mar_10:6; Mar_13:19; Mar_16:5; Rom_1:25; 2Co_5:17; Gal_6:15; Col_1:15, Col_1:23; Heb_4:13; Heb_9:11; 1Pe_2:13; 2Pe_3:4; Rev_3:14. The word “from” may mean “since,” or it may denote “by means of.” And the expression here may denote that, as an historical fact, God “has been” “known” since the act of creation; or it may denote that he is known “by means of” the material universe which he has formed. The latter is doubtless the true meaning. For,


It is not to state an historical fact, but to show that they had the means of knowing their duty within their reach, and were without excuse. Those means were in the wisdom, power, and glory of the universe, by which they were surrounded.

Are clearly seen - Are made manifest; or may be perceived. The word used here does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament.

Being understood - His perfections may be investigated, and comprehended by means of his works. They are the evidences submitted to our intellects, by which we may arrive at the true knowledge of God.

Things that are made - By his works; compare Heb_11:3. This means, not by the original “act” of creation, but by the continual operations of God in his Providence, by his doings, ποιήμασιν poiēmasin, by what he is continually producing and accomplishing in the displays of his power and goodness in the heavens and the earth. What they were capable of understanding, he immediately adds, and shows that he did not intend to affirm that everything could be known of God by his works; but so much as to free them from excuse for their sins.

His eternal power - Here are two things implied.

(1) That the universe contains an exhibition of his power, or a display of that attribute which we call “omnipotence;” and,

(2) That this power has existed from eternity, and of course implies an eternal existence in God.

It does not mean that this power has been exerted or put forth from eternity, for the very idea of creation supposes that it had not, but that there is proof, in the works of creation, of power which must have existed from eternity, or have belonged to an eternal being. The proof of this was clear, even to the pagan, with their imperfect views of creation and of astronomy; compare Psa_19:1-14. The majesty and grandeur of the heavens would strike their eye, and be full demonstration that they were the work of an infinitely great and glorious God.

And here is what he said about 2:15

Written in their hearts - The revealed Law of God was written on tables of stone, and then recorded in the books of the Old Testament. This law the Gentiles did not possess, but, to a certain extent, the same requirements were written on their hearts. Though not revealed to them as to the Jews, yet they had obtained the knowledge of them by the tight of nature. The word “hearts” here denotes the mind itself, as it does also frequently in the Sacred Scriptures; not the heart, as the seat of the affections. It does not mean that they loved or even approved of the Law, but that they had knowledge of it; and that that knowledge was deeply engraved on their minds.

You do not agree with me about a passage, and then speak like I am a moron and you cannot see how I can come up with that. Well, I just showed you a respectable scholar who claimed the same thing that I did. Is he a moron, too?

Brother...



EXACTLY! That is why the wicked are said in chapter 1 to have actually known of God THROUGH NATURE, and rejected it in their hearts to pursue sin, anyway. And after comparing the jews with the wicked gentile heathens, he then gives a hypothetical as if the tables were turned, which in some cases WAS THE CASE with heathen gentiles, who refused things like adultery because of their consciences and what they learned from nature of God.

ADAM CLARKE said the same thing.

For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, etc. - Nor does it follow that the Gentiles who have not had a Divine revelation, shall either perish, because they had it not; or their unrighteous conduct pass unpunished, because not having this revelation might be considered as an excuse for their sins.

Do by nature the things contained in the law - Do, without this Divine revelation, through that light which God imparts to every man, the things contained in the law - act according to justice, mercy, temperance and truth, the practice of which the revealed law so powerfully enjoins; these are a law unto themselves - they are not accountable to any other law, and are not to be judged by any dispensation different from that under which they live.

Rabbi Tanchum brings in the Supreme Being as saying: When I decreed any thing against the Gentiles, to whom I have not given laws and statutes, and they know what I have decreed; immediately they repent; but the Israelites do not so. Tanchum, fol. 43. 2.

The commentators generally believed in "the law of the (heathen) conscience". But Paul did not speak of heathens guided by their conscience, in chapter 2. He specifically says they are reckoned as though they are circumcised, because they do what the law says to do. He says this demonstrates the work of the law written in the heart. There is no law written in the heart that produces righteous living except the law of God written in the heart as part of the new covenant. This is "heart circumcision", something that never is and cannot be said of HEATHENS OUTSIDE OF CHRIST.

Chapter 1 is about the wrath of God revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness. The wrath of God is revealed from heaven BY THE WORD OF GOD not by heathen "conscience" nor by watching the weather or the stars. Israel was given the Word, failed to retain God in their knowledge, became idolaters and were given up to their sins. They were without excuse because creation itself confirms the existence, power, and infinite spiritual essence of God, testifying to the veracity of the Word which reveals God's wrath against sin.

If we are to apply Romans 1 to non Israelites, then it would be like this: the wrath was revealed in ages past (by precept to Adam and through the preaching of Noah and ultimately by the Flood itself). But mankind forgot God and sank into heathenism (again) and were given up to their sins.

In either case, ch 2 is not about heathen unbelievers being accounted as circumcised because they follow their consciences. It can only be about Christian gentiles, who though they are uncircumcised in flesh, are yet part of the new covenant.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The commentators generally believed in "the law of the (heathen) conscience". But Paul did not speak of heathens guided by their conscience, in chapter 2. He specifically says they are reckoned as though they are circumcised, because they do what the law says to do. He says this demonstrates the work of the law written in the heart. There is no law written in the heart that produces righteous living except the law of God written in the heart as part of the new covenant. This is "heart circumcision", something that never is and cannot be said of HEATHENS OUTSIDE OF CHRIST.

Chapter 1 is about the wrath of God revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness. The wrath of God is revealed from heaven BY THE WORD OF GOD not by heathen "conscience" nor by watching the weather or the stars. Israel was given the Word, failed to retain God in their knowledge, became idolaters and were given up to their sins. They were without excuse because creation itself confirms the existence, power, and infinite spiritual essence of God, testifying to the veracity of the Word which reveals God's wrath against sin.

If we are to apply Romans 1 to non Israelites, then it would be like this: the wrath was revealed in ages past (by precept to Adam and through the preaching of Noah and ultimately by the Flood itself). But mankind forgot God and sank into heathenism (again) and were given up to their sins.

In either case, ch 2 is not about heathen unbelievers being accounted as circumcised because they follow their consciences. It can only be about Christian gentiles, who though they are uncircumcised in flesh, are yet part of the new covenant.

However, I do not believe ch 1 is about hearhen nonIsraelites, "natural revelation", and "conscience". The people under discussion knew God but deliberately apostasized. God's power and deity were known to them because He made it known. They currently hold or suppress the truth in unrighteousness. Verse 32 says they know the judgment of God is capital punishment for a list of certain sins.

Putting it all together, these things really only can be said of Israel. The nations did not know God, He did not reveal Himself to the nations, He did not make His judgments and statutes known to them. The world by wisdom did not know God. Natural revelation does not lead heathens to know God. So ch 1 is about Israelites.

[mfblume]

But Paul did not speak of heathens guided by their conscience, in chapter 2. He specifically says they are reckoned as though they are circumcised, because they do what the law says to do.

Paul only meant that it's as though they were circumcised, having obeyed form their consciences and the light of nature certain things Law also commanded.

He says this demonstrates the work of the law written in the heart. There is no law written in the heart that produces righteous living except the law of God written in the heart as part of the new covenant. This is "heart circumcision", something that never is and cannot be said of HEATHENS OUTSIDE OF CHRIST.

Paul merely said that the light of God's truth came to these people through creation, and in that respect alone can they be compared ton Jews who had the written law that said many of the same things that heathen gentiles already knew.

He is not say that the writing on the heart was to the same degree as it is in 2 COr 3 or Jer 31. But in a sense they had somewhat of the law of God written in their hears, nevertheless.

Context of contrasting heathen gentiles from Jews under Law is consistent by this interpretation from chapter 1

Chapter 1 is about the wrath of God revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness. The wrath of God is revealed from heaven BY THE WORD OF GOD not by heathen "conscience"

That is a strawman.

I did not say wrath of God is revealed from the conscience, nor that Paul said it in Romans 1. Wrath of God in Paul's context simply means wrath is meted out in actual judgment, without an revelartion through a word being implied.

[quote]
nor by watching the weather or the stars. Israel was given the Word, failed to retain God in their knowledge, became idolaters and were given up to their sins.[]/quote]

No, this is not talking about Israelites. It's going back to the earliest of mankind, before Noah's day. It is simply saying that in the beginning generations of man, everyone knew there was one God. There were not false gods until a few generations passed when what Paul described in Rom 1 took place in their hearts. They refused to honour God as God and that led to idolatry in time.

They were without excuse because creation itself confirms the existence, power, and infinite spiritual essence of God, testifying to the veracity of the Word which reveals God's wrath against sin.

There is no mention of these gentiles having the word of God, but only the awareness of him through creation. It did not say that creation confirmed any word they had. t simply said they knew of God by creation, like a watchmaker is known to exist by the presence of a watch that cannot come about spontaneously.

If we are to apply Romans 1 to non Israelites, then it would be like this: the wrath was revealed in ages past (by precept to Adam and through the preaching of Noah and ultimately by the Flood itself). But mankind forgot God and sank into heathenism (again) and were given up to their sins.

There is not mention of a word related from man to man and then forgotten by the latter group. It simply means that Man could know there is a God and know many truths by sheer virtue of the creation around. It's assumption to insert the commanded word in there. And due to man's refusal to honour God as God, they began imaging creation to be deity, until it became the worship of things below man's own level of God's image and men worshipped serpents.

In either case, ch 2 is not about heathen unbelievers being accounted as circumcised because they follow their consciences. It can only be about Christian gentiles, who though they are uncircumcised in flesh, are yet part of the new covenant.

I distinctly and totally disagee, because you have to insert things in the text that are not there such as a commanded word given to people apart from sheer observance of creation that is mentioned.