The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum The Sabbath

In reply to:

---

Think about how the Old Testament is presented in Covenantal/Reformed theology. Would the original readers have understood it that way?

---

Absolutely! The fact that the Jews and particularly the Pharisees, the doctors of the Scriptures, charged the Lord Christ with breaking the Sabbath on more than one occasion, not to mention all that He taught concerning the Law (Moral), seems to indicate quite clearly that they fully understood the continuity of the covenant and its precepts.

Again, I will hopefully be posting some relevant and indepth articles concerning the Sabbath, re: it being a universal and perpetual MORAL law and its change from the Israelic Saturday to the Christian/Church Sunday, D.v. . . . stay tuned. Oh, I'm wondering if you have taken my recommendation and read through Dr. Francis Nigel Lee's treatise on: The Covenantal Sabbath, which I contend is irrefutable.

In His Grace,

In reply to:

---

[color:"blue"]How is it making Christ a liar?

---

Because Christ Himself said He came not to destroy the Law!

In reply to:

---

[color:"blue"]And where does the Bible say that there is a distinction between the ceremonial and moral laws?

---

Christ Himself makes the distinction by reaffirming Old Testament moral codes, while at the same time making, for example, the laws of kashruth unnecessary.

In reply to:

---

[color:"blue"]Calvinism has been defined in different ways (I want to make clear that I know what Calvin taught. If I state that a 4 pointer is a Calvinist, I know that he is not teaching exactly what Calvin taught. Calvinism is often a generic term for essentially believing fully in the sovereignty of God). I know some who say that if one even believes an Arminian is saved then you are not a Calvinist!

---

The most widely used and readily applicable definition of "Calvinist" is one who holds to the five points of the Canons of Dordt. Thus, a "four-point" Calvinist can hardly be called a Calvinist at all.

In reply to:

---

[color:"blue"]Most Dispensationalists hold to four of the five points of Calvinism.

---

How do you mean "most dispensationalists," then? Because I was raised in dispensationalist churches, and they are decidely not Calvinist, either in official church doctrine or in general belief.

In reply to:

---

[color:"blue"]The point they disagree upon, of course, is the limited atonement.

---

Which I argue makes them, by logical necessity, either universalists (Christ's atonement is effective for all) or Arminians (Christ's atonement is potentially effective for all, but effectiveness rests in man's decision to believe in Christ).