You are not logged in.
Notice this text often quoted by Sabbatarians to support the Sabbath observance continuance across Covenant lines.
This immediately raises the question of "Sabbath." It is obvious that nine of the Ten Commandments are reiterated in the New Covenant. Respected brethren have always differed on whether the "Sabbath" is still in force. I do not hope to solve this question here, but I will share the fruits of my study on this subject. The only passage in the New Testament I can see that might seem to teach the perpetual nature of the Sabbath-principle is Mark 2:27 - "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." The argument runs like this: the text does not say "the Sabbath was given to Israel," but to "man" in the generic sense. The context, however, seems to emphasize the purpose of the Sabbath, not its universal scope, or perpetual obligation. The Pharisees perverted the Sabbath and made it burdensome, rather than a blessed day of rest. Jesus corrects this perversion by stating the true purpose of the Sabbath: it was an institution for the good of man.
http://solochristo.com/theology/nct/crucial.htm
Last edited by bob_2 (01-21-10 11:31 am)
Offline
Had the Pharisees interpreted Jesus words to mean all mankind they would have been in a fit of rage. After all they were scholars and knew the scriptures. They knew that the covenant was given to them and them only. The Sabbath represented the remembrance of their journey out of slavery and was their constant reminder of the Creator God.
When Jesus was sacrificed for all mankind, He became the remembrance for the world. We need only to look to Him as our Creator and redeemer from the slavery of sin. He is our Rest and reminder. Special days, weeks, new moons celebrations, and all the other laws of the covenant that controlled the lives of the Israelites came to an abrupt end when God became the ultimate sacrifice for not just the Jew, but for every living soul that has ever tread this Earth. It took 40 years before God destroyed the temple and scattered the Jews to other lands, but when that happened the stones that contained the commandments became stone cold. Yes, there are some Jews and some Gentiles who cling to the old cold covenant. Some try to mix the old with the glorious new, but the scriptures are very plain and shine forth with the Good News of the simple plan of salvation. No buts, no strings attached, just the simple plan. Praise God for His grace that abounds. Bob
Offline
Bob Shields said: Had the Pharisees interpreted Jesus words to mean all mankind they would have been in a fit of rage.
At this point in the development of NC doctrine, none of the apostles understood that the Gentiles were going to be allowed access to the Gospel. This point would not be understood until later.
Moreover, the Pharisees became angry with Jesus because of his very different view of the Sabbath, as well as his insistence that God had shown him this new interpretation. This is why they plotted to kill him.
John 5:16 For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath.
John 5:17 But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”
John 5:18 For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
Anyone who wants to understand the NC Sabbath should study the Sabbath debates of Jesus and the Pharisees.
Bob said: After all they were scholars and knew the scriptures. They knew that the covenant was given to them and them only. The Sabbath represented the remembrance of their journey out of slavery and was their constant reminder of the Creator God.
They were very poor scholars and very wrong about most everything.
Matt. 15:14 “Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind.
God had planned all along to let the Gentiles into the Kingdom of God, and they were clueless.
As for the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders had overlooked a number of passages about the Sabbath that Jesus used very effectively to place a new spin on this doctrine. Proving that they were not very good Bible scholars.
Matt. 12:3 But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions,
Matt. 12:5 “Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are innocent?
Bob said: When Jesus was sacrificed for all mankind, He became the remembrance for the world. We need only to look to Him as our Creator and redeemer from the slavery of sin. He is our Rest and reminder.
If Jesus was going to change the weekly Sabbath into something about himself, why did he not come out and say it? Why debate how the Sabbath should be interpreted, if it was going to be done away with, or become morphed into some kind of spiritual feeling or experience?
It makes no sense because this is not what is taking place. Jesus is articulating the NC Sabbath in the Gospels. He is not changing it to Sunday or into an every day doctrine where he is our "rest."
Bob said: Special days, weeks, new moons celebrations, and all the other laws of the covenant that controlled the lives of the Israelites came to an abrupt end when God became the ultimate sacrifice for not just the Jew, but for every living soul that has ever tread this Earth.
First, since when is 40 years called "abrupt"? The Temple services went on for 2 more generations after the cross. This is not abrupt.
Second, if all Jewish law came to an end at the cross, why do we see the apostles referencing the Sabbath? They never said it went away. Not even Paul said such a thing. In fact, he told an entire town to meet him next Sabbath for a Gospel Sermon. Proving that Paul did not think, or act, as if the Sabbath had been abolished or changed into Sunday.
Acts 13:42 As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.
Acts 13:43 Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.
Acts 13:44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.
It is self-evident that the doctrine of the Sabbath did not "come to an abrupt end" after the cross. In fact, it did not end at all as many assume.
If the Sabbath had been abolished in Christian doctrine, then the account in Acts above could not have taken place. Paul would not be referencing the Sabbath as an active paradigm, if it were now a dead and false doctrine. He would not pretend there was going to be Sabbath next week if there was no such doctrine. This is but one example of many that could be cited.
Bob said: It took 40 years before God destroyed the temple and scattered the Jews to other lands, but when that happened the stones that contained the commandments became stone cold.
No one has ever found these stones. Nor does their temperature matter. The Moral law has never been removed from the J/C paradigm. Not by the apostles or the church fathers. Not by the RCC or the Reformers. It is myth.
So why do people assume such things? Bob, your position mirrors Marcion the Gnostic, not anyone who is Christian.
Bob said: Yes, there are some Jews and some Gentiles who cling to the old cold covenant.
Most all Christians think that their salvation depends on the kind of life they lead. The vast majority thinks that their behavior determines if they will be saved. This is how both the Sunday keepers view things, as well as the Sabbatarians. But they are both wrong. They are viewing things from an OC perspective.
Bob said: Some try to mix the old with the glorious new,
This is what the Judaizers did. They mixed the OC law with the NC Gospel. Their hybrid theology became the RCC. The Reformers came along and separated this awful amalgamation, and thus they elevated the Gospel above the law, without removing it. But after Luther, the Protestants soon lost site of the Gospel and the Judgment. Thus the last church era becomes the worst of all.
Bob said: but the scriptures are very plain and shine forth with the Good News of the simple plan of salvation. No buts, no strings attached, just the simple plan. Praise God for His grace that abounds.
The Scriptures are difficult and hard to understand. If that were not the case, everyone would be united on the same doctrines. Jesus teaches that without serious study and searching, no one will find the Gospel or understand law or prophecy correctly. These things are not intuitive or easy.
The Gospel is far more complex than you claim, and there are "strings" attached. For one, there is baptism. This is the gateway doctrine that replaces circumcision for the Church. There is also repentance, and all manner of behavioral expectations that come with the package.
So theology is not simple, nor is the Gospel easily comprehended. Many try to obtain Eternal life, but few are able to successfully embrace the Gospel.
Luke 13:23 And someone said to Him, “Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?” And He said to them,
Luke 13:24 “Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.
Does this help?
TN
Offline
Tom,
Second, if all Jewish law came to an end at the cross, why do we see the apostles referencing the Sabbath? They never said it went away. Not even Paul said such a thing. In fact, he told an entire town to meet him next Sabbath for a Gospel Sermon. Proving that Paul did not think, or act, as if the Sabbath had been abolished or changed into Sunday.
Paul still operated as a Jew. Not only did he keep the Sabbath but all the other feasts. In fact, the whole Christian group were celebrating Pentecost when the HS descended. Does that mean we need to celebrate Pentecost? The same goes for Jesus himself, of course, as He celebrated all the Jewish feasts (one of them mentioned in John 7). We ignore those feasts as well.
One could transfer Jesus' statement in Mt.11:28 as meaning that it is Jesus that gives us rest, although this statement is not related to the Sabbath as is Hebrews 4.
Offline
"If Jesus was going to change the weekly Sabbath into something about himself, why did he not come out and say it?"
He did say it:
" I am the way , the truth, and the life" John 14:6
Mat 11:28 "Come unto me, all [ye] that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."
Mat 11:29 "Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls."
Furthermore, the Sabbaths associated with the feasts and the weekly Sabbath were solemn occasions, joyful festive gatherings. Many people have an incorrect understanding of the term solemn as it applied to the bible terminology. The Jews still keep this hope up in their Sabbaths. If you were to Go to Israel and visit on Sabbath you would see the evidence of this in their dances and communion together. The Sabbath pointed to the rest we have in Jesus.
I hope this helps.
Cadge
Offline
Tom Said:
"Second, if all Jewish law came to an end at the cross, why do we see the apostles referencing the Sabbath? They never said it went away. Not even Paul said such a thing. In fact, he told an entire town to meet him next Sabbath for a Gospel Sermon. Proving that Paul did not think, or act, as if the Sabbath had been abolished or changed into Sunday.
Acts 13:42 As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.
Acts 13:43 Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.
Acts 13:44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.
It is self-evident that the doctrine of the Sabbath did not "come to an abrupt end" after the cross. In fact, it did not end at all as many assume.
If the Sabbath had been abolished in Christian doctrine, then the account in Acts above could not have taken place. Paul would not be referencing the Sabbath as an active paradigm, if it were now a dead and false doctrine. He would not pretend there was going to be Sabbath next week if there was no such doctrine. This is but one example of many that could be cited."
--------------------------
Cadge says:
"This is too funny", Paul was at the synagogue preaching to Jews. He went over the prophetic fullfillment of Jesus. The Gentiles came there because that was to whom and where Paul was preaching his "prophecy series" for at least two weeks.
When paul preached to the Gentiles, he made no reference to keeping the seventh day Sabbath. As a matter of fact he said that some keep one day some keep another, some keep every day alike. He said in Romans 14 that we are not to judge anyone on what they eat or day thay keep (but SDA's are famous for that).
Paul taught a principle in the unclean meat thing. He said that God had shown him that there is nothing unclean of itself. He said all was good if recieved with thanksgiving. He said eat whatever is sold in the shambles. He said when you are invited to a feast to eat whatever is put before you. He made clear that you don't eat what a person believes is unclean in front of them, not for your conscience sake, but for theirs, so as not to be a stumbling block to them from hearing the Gospel.
Now, we are not under the letter of the law. We are not to judge people on what they eat or drink or Sabbath days (rest days). However, even though we are free to rest (the sabbath was made for man) on whatever day we choose, wisdom tells us that if we are to be the Christian body that fulfills the prophecy of being the one that the Jews who accept the messiah are to be grafted into, then by the same principle that Paul gives about unclean meats, we should assemble on Saturday. But we are not under the Law. And it should also be the festive assembly as the Jews still keep if you want them to come. Satan has stolen the celebration out of our coming together and made it a more restrive and dour gathering. No wonder the childrens hearts aren't turned to the fathers and the fathers to the children.
"I hope this helps."
Cadge
Offline
OOPS!!
"Satan has stolen the celebration out of our coming together and made it a more restrive and dour gathering. No wonder the childrens hearts aren't turned to the fathers and the fathers to the children."
Should be "restrictive and dour gathering".
Keep glancing at you watches. Can't wait till it's over.
Offline
Poor Tom, he is so full of SDA koolaid that he cannot see the simple plan of salvation. Don't feel too bad Tom, I couldn't see it either when I was an Adventist and tied down to part of the OC law plus Ellen.
Yes Tom, your post did help. It showed how misinformed you really are.
NC Sabbath, what a laugh, as you say HA HA. Jesus didn't reform one iota of the Sabbath. He even stated that it wasn't His purpose to change any of the laws until all was accomplished. What does accomplished mean to you Tom?
You tell us that the NC didn't begin at Calvary. Just when did it begin Tom? When did the Old come to an abrupt end? Just because not all recognized the complete Gospel at Calvary doesn't mean that the Old didn't end there. Why do do you try so hard to make everyone else look like a fool? In doing so it only shows your own failings.
What is so hard about Jn 3:16?
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."
What is so hard about John 14:6?
"I am the way , the truth, and the life"
What is so hard about Mat 11:28
"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest."
What is so hard about accepting His rest? His rest is billions times better than Israel's Sabbath.
What is so hard about 2Cor 3:7-11 Is it a myth Tom? Are those stones still radiating and glorious? Jesus said they would be until Calvary. Did you miss the event? Was the Sabbath part of the words on those cold stones? Did you miss the part when Jesus gave us a new commandment that has been written on our hearts, you know, the law of love. It is time you learned that He didn't leave us in chaos until Tom Norris would come along and rescue mankind with his NC Sabbath, his thesis on tithing and his new teaching about the real pope Ellen.
"Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, 8will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!"
Do you think that the World needs Tom Norris to interpret scripture because it is too hard for the less educated little man to understand? Are we to put our trust in Tom Norris and ignore the special gift Jesus gave to each of us, the Holy Spirit?
Just where do you get your information that the Pharisees were "poor" scholars? I would argue that they knew the Torah like the backs of their hands. You pose a very poor argument.
What makes you think that Jesus was not teaching the Gentiles? Luke was a Gentile. Does it tell us in scripture that Jesus segregated the Jews from the Gentiles when he gave the Sermon on the Mount? Was there a stipulation on quotes like "come unto Me and I will give you rest"? Was that only for the Jews? Maybe, like you, the Jews thought they were the only ones He was talking to, but we see the whole picture. We know when He was referring to Jews only and when He was proclaiming His message to the whole World.
I pray this helps. Bob
Offline
Look, the Decalogue has been called the covenant in several texts, Deut 4:13;Deut 5:1-3; 2 Cor 3:7. Once you have crossed that hurdle, Hebrews 8:13 is right there, staring you in the face.
Col 2:16, 17 and Hebrews 4 are certainly talking about something other than giving a 24 hour period salvific power. So that is the danger of the SDA message. Jesus is the object of the Gospel. Christ's Law does not include the Sabbath. As I have pointed out in the NCT section
http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus … 8#POST2698
Mark 2:27 is not saying all mankind, since the Jews would really have wanted Him dead. He said it in a generic sense. He was lessening the standard the Pharisees created, and lightening the burden of the Sabbath, where most other OC Commandment were restated, with an enlargement of there meaning. Fulfill means to complete, the OT was never abolished but fulfilled. Like a museum piece, it still can inform and teach.
Offline
Another text which strengthens this position:
Luke 24:44He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."
Fulfilled means completed, not abolished. The OT is still valuable for instruction, but it is not the New Covenant, that didn't start until Christ's Death or some feel Pentecost when the "Comforter" was given as promised by Jesus.
Offline
Had the Pharisees interpreted Jesus words to mean all mankind they would have been in a fit of rage."
Absolutely! Even the Jews today will not allow a non-Jew to claim the rights and privileges of the Jew unless they first become circumcised. Which is the only reason the furor over circumcision between the new Jewish and Gentile Christians. The Jews were incensed that the pagan Gentiles could fellowship with them without their first being circumcised and only then, were they allowed to observe the Sabbath and other dietary laws restricted and given ONLY to Jews. It was their God who had covenanted with them only, and no other nation, and they resented another group claiming the same privileges.
The Sabbath commandment was never given ANYONE prior to Sinai. It was only the later writing of the Genesis story which added the 7th day rest, and even then, there was never a command given to man at that time--only that God, who had finished his creative work, was resting. Just as the gods rested in the Gilgamesh 7-day Creation.
The most distinctive external marks: circumcision, Sabbath, and dietary restrictions were given to the Jews in order to separate them from the idolatrous nations around them. THey were given to prevent sexual congress, regular daily activities, and ever eating together (A barrier removed according to Paul), a Middle Eastern custom not followed was a major ethical prohibition was refusing to eat with other people--as though they were "dogs" which the Jews often considered the pagans.
With all the emphasis on the seventh day, no one yet has shown that the Gentile Christians were ever instructed or commanded to observe it. Christianity was a new movement, not a seamless continuation of Judaism, something Adventists have attempted.
Yes, all the new Christians, both Jews and Gentiles, met at the synagogue on Sabbath because the synagogue was considered the "town hall" in the village, not necessarily a worship center like the temple, and people met there to discuss and do business, and because the first Christians (apostles) were Jews, they were the first leaders of the new Christians.
Jesus never preached to the Gentiles, nor did he ever abandon any of the Jewish teachings. He also, did not initiate Christianity. It was only begun after his resurrection and ascension by his followers, and the admission of pagans into the exclusive group was met with disdain because they did not first become circumcised. Peter and Paul both made it specifically plain: circumcision and observance of all the Jewish laws was not a requirement of the Gentiles.
Even in the first century, new believers were meeting on the first day of the week--not in replacement of the Sabbath--but in honor of the Resurrection. Had there been no resurrection, there would be no Christians today, while there would still be a Jewish Sabbath. Think about that. Or you a Jewish observer or a Christian celebrating the Resurrection? The former do not celebrate it and carefully observe the Sabbath as it is their covenant. Christians celebrate the Resurrection, which is their entire raison de etre.
Offline
Cadge said:
"Now, we are not under the letter of the law. We are not to judge people on what they eat or drink or Sabbath days (rest days). However, even though we are free to rest (the sabbath was made for man) on whatever day we choose, wisdom tells us that if we are to be the Christian body that fulfills the prophecy of being the one that the Jews who accept the messiah are to be grafted into, then by the same principle that Paul gives about unclean meats, we should assemble on Saturday. But we are not under the Law. And it should also be the festive assembly as the Jews still keep if you want them to come. Satan has stolen the celebration out of our coming together and made it a more restrive and dour gathering. No wonder the childrens hearts aren't turned to the fathers and the fathers to the children."
I don't completely understand the portion I highlighted in red Cadge. Does wisdom tell us we should be worshiping on Sabbath so that the Jews can make the transition to Christianity without changing days of worship? Where is this pronounced? The Sabbath was part of the Old Covenant. When they accept Jesus as Savior we should be teaching them to make a complete break with the old. Our minds should be on the Gospel not on diversions such as serving a day.
Offline
Hey, the Worldwide Church of God says this about the choice of worship day after their major change in thinking on the Sabbath and Festivals:
Should we hold our worship meetings on Sundays instead of Saturdays?
Jesus commanded us to go into all the world and make disciples. This is one of our core values. It is also a core value to meet (as much as reasonably possible) the worship needs of our people.
If a congregation wants to move its worship service to Sunday, that is fine. We have quite a few Sunday congregations, and many more considering the switch. Though a move to Sunday does not necessarily facilitate evangelism, in most cases it will not hurt it. Many in our culture find Sunday more convenient for meeting (especially for families with children involved in school and community programs on Saturday).
If days don't really matter, why would anyone want to switch?
The new covenant does not demand or forbid any particular day for corporate worship — there is no "holy time." One day is not inherently better than another. That means that, if no one in a particular church area wants to meet on Saturday, there is no reason for that church area to continue with Saturday meetings. We encourage congregations to realize that they have the option of continuing to meet on Saturdays for as long as they like, or the option of meeting on a different day. Some have chosen to meet on Sundays; some have not. We support both choices.
Since no one day is inherently better than another, the denomination does not require all congregations to meet on the same day. It is up to each local community of faith to decide on which day to meet for corporate worship. A number of factors may come up for consideration.
1) Since a primary purpose of the church is to fulfill the Great Commission, which day would be best for attracting new people in the community to worship services? Most Christian churches meet on Sunday in the U.••••• is the Christian norm, and therefore is most understandable to the "unchurched" people we would like to bring to Jesus and attract to church. On the other hand, many unchurched people do not have a preference.
2) In the U.S., many teens and children are involved in school and community projects, sports, etc. on Saturday, thus making it more difficult for these families to attend a Saturday meeting. Also, some of the adults work on Saturday. On the other hand, some may work on Sundays.
3) We want to serve the worship needs of our members, and a significant percentage of our members may be unable or unwilling to meet on Saturday or on Sunday. Some may have religious reasons for preferring Saturday, and some may have religious reasons for preferring Sunday.
4) Historical records from the first and second centuries show that gentiles in the early church met for corporate worship on Sunday, perhaps because they saw a "new creation" in the day of Christ's resurrection. This has been the most common explanation. The New Testament shows that the disciples met at least part of the time on "the first day of the week," i.e. Sunday, for worship. The only reason the WCG formed a tradition of meeting on Saturdays is that we had an incorrect understanding of the Bible, the relationship between the old and new covenants, and church history.
5) Meeting facilities may be easier to lease on one day or the other.
We allow congregations to change meeting times, locations and days according to local needs. We encourage each congregation to meet on the day that serves its needs and purpose best. It is our intent to provide, as much as is reasonably possible, for the worship needs of our people — whether that be congregations who want to meet on Saturday, Sunday or, in certain unusual situations, another day or evening of the week.
How can the change be done?
In WCG churches that have switched to Sunday meetings, the best transitions have been achieved by the pastor first educating the congregation 1) that Scripture permits corporate worship on any day of the week, 2) that Sunday has been the primary tradition of the Christian church, and 3) that in the specific community and culture, it has various advantages over Saturday as a day for corporate worship (including, possibly, evangelism). After ensuring that everyone had the information, the pastor then surveyed the congregation to determine their needs and desires for the day of worship services.
Everyone's reasonable needs (not necessarily desires) should be provided for. Some are unable to meet on one day or the other due to work; others due to conscience. If only a few feel they must either stay with Saturday or move to Sunday, perhaps a house church or other worship opportunity could be provided for the minority.
If the congregation has two roughly equal portions desiring different days, several approaches can be taken: 1) create two congregations (some have done this, but hall rental and other expenses must be taken into account), or 2) give it more time, more discussion and, later, another survey to see if desires have shifted one way or the other.
Basic principles to keep in mind
Can we remain together when members observe different sets of annual days? If Christ is in us, we can. This wars against our human nature, but with Christ it is possible — even imperative — to love people who have different opinions and practices on this topic. Let us point out some basic principles:
Paul says that worship days don't matter (Rom. 14:5). That applies equally to Saturday as to Sunday. Neither of these days is so important that it should cause animosity between members. If we have the "right" day of worship, but the wrong attitude, we gain nothing (1 Cor. 13:1-3).
In Christ, we are free to meet on any day of the week, any day of the year. But no matter when that is, we are to preach Christ, not the day. Our worship and our messages must focus on him, not on the day. We do not want anything in our messages to imply that people who observe one day are better or more obedient than those who observe another.
The focus is on Christ. We worship him, and we commemorate salvation in him. We want to lead people to Christ, not to a day of the week.
Old covenant days can be used to worship Christ, just as other days can be. The early church apparently worshiped at the temple on the Sabbath — with no complaint from Paul. He did not castigate the Jewish believers for any deficiencies in their understanding. Paul strongly objected to seeing the old covenant days as requirements for gentiles, but he seems to have no objection to them as options. Paul felt free to go into the temple, and free to preach on Sunday.
Since days do not matter, we offer worship services according to the needs and desires of our members. Our desire throughout is 1) that Christ is preached and 2) that no one judges others because of the days they observe.
Pastors should support and encourage those who wish to meet on either day, and will lead in such a way that Christ is honored, preached and taught. That means that pastors will not be teaching that the Sabbath is in any way required or expected, or that keeping it is an act of obedience to God, as we formerly believed and taught. Logistics and numbers may require some worship meetings, whether on Saturday or on Sunday, to be held in homes.
The trend within the Worldwide Church of God in the past few years has been that more members want to meet on Sunday. This trend may continue for a while, but I doubt that we will ever reach 100 percent. We intend to offer worship services on both days as long as members want them. It would be inconsistent to preach grace and freedom while forbidding worship on days that have origins that we don't like. Wherever and whenever we gather as God's people, we have an opportunity to preach and worship Christ!
Christ should be our focus. As we draw closer to him, as we become more like him in love, days on a calendar will decrease in significance. The days on the calendar are useful for worship, but they are not our primary goal. Our goal is not to force one day in, or to force another out — our goal is to lead people to Christ, and to let him live within us, to let his attitudes dominate us — attitudes of love, of respect for others, of humility, of being God-focused. Our sense of community, our devotion to fellowship within the church, must be based on these internal truths, not the external matter of considering one day better than another.
Suppose we could just sit down and start with Christ first, and his gospel. What are the most important things about Christ, and how do we celebrate those? Perhaps the most important thing about Christ is not days at all, but the manner in which we treat one another. How can we celebrate his love for us? How can we keep his greatest commandment, and his second-greatest commandment? How can we preach his message more effectively to the world that needs it? How can we be less concerned about ourselves and more about others?
Copyright 1998 Worldwide Church of God
http://www.wcg.org/lit/law/sabbath/sundayQ&A.htm
(Message edited by Bob_2 on March 06, 2009)
Offline
Bob, fulfilled means accomplished, completed, achieved, realized, satisfied, effectuated, finished.
The law was completed or finished. "It is Finished" was Jesus last words. The law is now good history for those in Christ. For those not in Christ it condemns and makes them realize we are, of ourselves, without hope.
Offline
I hail the Worldwide Church of God for taking the stand it has. Herbert Armstrong would have never allowed this to happen. The Sabbath was his best way to hold control over them. So it is with Adventists. As long as Sister White has control over SDAs they will never recognize scripture.
Offline
Bob Shields said:
"I don't completely understand the portion I highlighted in red Cadge. Does wisdom tell us we should be worshiping on Sabbath so that the Jews can make the transition to Christianity without changing days of worship? Where is this pronounced? The Sabbath was part of the Old Covenant. When they accept Jesus as Savior we should be teaching them to make a complete break with the old. Our minds should be on the Gospel not on diversions such as serving a day."
-------------------
I do not propose it to be as a legalistic holy day for obligatory worship like the Pope did with Sunday. I am saying that if we are to forsake not assembling, which I agree with, because we need to formulate evangelist plans and fellowship in a relaxed atmosphere while sharing things we experience in our weeks excursions or exchanging and encourageing each other on biblical principles, singing songs, and other involvements.
Our worship time is how we live our lives 24/7 as we counsel with Him in His word daily with the Holy Spirit. "I will bless the Lord at all times, His praise shall continually be in my mouth. My soul shall make her boast in the Lord, the humble shall hear threreof and be glad"= thoughts and actions all our waking hours. A continual connection where we stand as lights in the world. That's our worship.
When we assemble toghether it is to share our lives in closer unity and although we encourage each other in holiness, the day is not Holy. The Holy Spirit is Holy and those He dwells in are Holy because we are connected to Him.
So, the reason I say it is wise to assemble on Saturday is for the same reason you don't eat, what some consider unclean meat, in front of them. Their pride and predujice will cause them to not give you an ear. They are still stuck in legalism. We have a better chance of gaining their interest if it seems that we have something in common. In the angels message of Revelation 18 to "come out of her my people", would a Jew that would be "grafted in" be more inclined to "come out" to a an assemblage that you are having on a Saturday or a Sunday? Or do you think it would be better for assemblages on both weekend days as Bob2 showed us from the WWCG post? After all, were not after saving the saved, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. If there has to be a sacrifice of convienence for the Gospels sake, shouldn't that lot fall on the saved?
I could be wrong, been there before, no doubt will need more improvement, but this seems to be wise in my eyes.
Peace,
Cadge
Offline
I agree Cadge. While nowhere does the Bible say Christians need to worship on a particular day (Sabbath), neither does it say not to worship on Sabbath. It really doesn't matter. It's hard to do that, however, when the theology that brings people together on the Sabbath goes contrary to the NT Gospel and carries with it all kind of extra-biblical baggage.
Offline
Jews don't give brownie points to Christians who worship on their holy day. In fact they tell us that it was never meant to be Christians say of worship. It was exclusively for them.
Offline
Yes, Jews are rightfully insulted with those who say they keep the Sabbath. They protest by saying it is "their day" and given to no one else.
Why try to be half Jewish and half Christian and 100% of neither?
Offline
11: 17If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." 20Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.
The Jews are only lost if they do not believe in the Messiah, if the continue in their unbelief they will be as if broken branches from the vine lying on the ground.
Offline
Sirje Walkowiak said: Paul still operated as a Jew.
How could anyone "operate as a Jew" if the law no longer existed? The very fact that there were Jews means that the law did not evaporate as Bob is claiming. It did exist. This was my point. The Jews are living proof.
Moreover, what do you mean when you say that Paul, the great Gospel teacher to the Gentiles, "operated as a Jew"? Do you mean he went around tricking the Gentiles into thinking he was a Jew and not a Christian? Hardly. Paul was "operating" as a Christian, which is why the Jews were trying to kill him, and why the Judaizers in the church were also his enemy.
So no one thought that Paul was "operating" as a Jew. No. The Jews thought he was acting like a Gentile. This fact refutes your point.
Question: In Acts, was Paul just pretending to believe that there was a Sabbath coming next week? Was he just pandering to the silly Jews? Or was he certain that there was another Sabbath coming next week?
In other words, did Paul think that the Sabbath still existed after the cross?
Of course he did. He was not pretending to believe in something that did not exist. He knew that the Sabbath was still operative in the J/C paradigm, even if he had a different view of it than did the OC Jews. But it was still the same day, even if the doctrine was now being associated with the Gospel.
Sirje said: Not only did Jesus keep the Sabbath but all the other feasts. In fact, the whole Christian group was celebrating Pentecost when the HS descended.
Slow down. How do you know that Jesus "kept the Sabbath"? Who told you that Jesus "kept the Sabbath?"
Not the Jewish leaders in charge of the Sabbath. They said he was a Sabbath breaker. So this assumption that "Jesus kept the Sabbath" begs the question.
What version of the Sabbath was he keeping?
It was not the one that all the other Jews kept. The Gospel Story is clear on this point. Jesus promoted a different Sabbath from all of his contemporaries. (Hint: Find this Sabbath and you will have found the correct Sabbath for the Church.)
Note also that Paul did not keep the Sabbath, as approved by the Jews, either. How do we know this? Well, for starters, Paul was under numerous death threats from the Jews for his unorthodox theology. And the Judaizers, who were Sabbath zealots, were also his enemies. So Paul's Sabbath is very different from the norm. But it was still the Sabbath.
Acts 18:12 But while Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one accord rose up against Paul and brought him before the judgment seat,
Acts 18:13 saying, “This man persuades men to worship God contrary to the law.”
For example, we find Paul preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles and to the Jews on the Sabbath Day. This is not approved Sabbath behavior for any Jew. But Paul did not care. He used the Sabbath to do good, just as Jesus taught. Thus he acknowledged its existence, in public, even as he personally embraced it all his life.
Acts 16:13 And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to a riverside, where we were supposing that there would be a place of prayer; and we sat down and began speaking to the women who had assembled.
Acts 18:4 And he was reasoning in the synagogue every Sabbath and trying to persuade Jews and Greeks.
So we see Jesus and Paul acknowledging the Sabbath and doing good on that day. But their Gospel based Sabbath is very different from what the Jews promoted. It was obviously not Sunday, nor was it like the Old Covenant Sabbath.
As for Pentecost, the Eucharist is the New Covenant version of Pentecost. It is to be celebrated far more than the annual Pentecost.
Sirje said: Does that mean we need to celebrate Pentecost? And it is to be observed with real red wine, which alone symbolizes the blood of Christ.
Did Jesus or Paul teach that the church should celebrate Pentecost? Does the NT teach that the Gentiles are to become Jews and keep the Jewish festivals, including Pentecost? If they did, then this is what we need to do. But they did not. The Eucharist is the new Pentecost for the Church. And the Gentiles are not to try and become like OC Jews. OC Judaism is no longer the gateway into the Kingdom of God. But NC Judaism is, and this is called Christianity.
Gal. 2:11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
Gal. 2:12 For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.
Gal. 2:13 The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.
Gal. 2:14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?
Gal. 2:15 “We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles;
Gal. 2:16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.
Sirje said: The same goes for Jesus himself, of course, as He celebrated all the Jewish feasts (one of them mentioned in John 7). We ignore those feasts as well.
The New Covenant is far superior to the Old Covenant. Thus, many things have been abolished and removed. So it is fine to ignore what is no longer binding or necessary.
The Jewish apostles determine the doctrines of the Church. They have such authority. We do not. Thus, we must follow their Word in all doctrine. And their Word is not the Word of Moses, but a higher authority.
Sirje said: One could transfer Jesus' statement in Mt.11:28 as meaning that it is Jesus that gives us rest, although this statement is not related to the Sabbath as is Hebrews 4.
Those that study the Word in a serious manner know that such a "transfer" is hocus-pocus. Silly word games solve nothing and wastes a lot of time.
There is no way to pretend that Jesus did not address the doctrine of the Sabbath and reform it. The record is clear. Why all this denial about the existence of the Sabbath?
David Cadieux tried to say that Jesus claimed he is the Sabbath by declaring:
" I am the way , the truth, and the life" John 14:6
Mat 11:28 "Come unto me, all [ye] that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."
Mat 11:29 "Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls."
First, these verses do not say that Jesus is the Sabbath. He never said such an absurd and nonsensical thing.
Second: The church has always had a Sabbath, even though some of the Church Fathers articulated this "Every Day" Sabbath concept. But this spiritual Sabbath was not practical, nor was it embraced. Thus, the weekly Sabbath of the Jews becomes the model for the Christian Sabbath, which was on Sunday. The RCC admits that their Sunday Lord's day is a derivative of the Jewish Sabbath.
David said: Furthermore, the Sabbaths associated with the feasts and the weekly Sabbath were solemn occasions, joyful festive gatherings. The Jews still keep this hope up in their Sabbaths. If you were to Go to Israel and visit on Sabbath you would see the evidence of this in their dances and communion together. The Sabbath pointed to the rest we have in Jesus.
Wrong! The Jews had no idea that the Sabbath "pointed" to Jesus. So your attempt to revise history after the fact is pointless. The Creation Story is the historic context for the Sabbath, not the Messiah.
In addition, the Jews in Israel today, much less those in the 1st century had the Sabbath all wrong. This is what the Gospels clearly teach. Christ repudiated the Old Covenant Sabbath of the Jews, even as he articulated a very different version for the church. This is the point that all need to address.
Cadge says: "This is too funny", Paul was at the synagogue preaching to Jews. He went over the prophetic fulfillment of Jesus. The Gentiles came there because that was to whom and where Paul was preaching his "prophecy series" for at least two weeks.
While it is true that Paul was trolling the synagogues for the Gentile, God fearers, this is beside the point. The question is whether Paul believed that the Moral law and Sabbath existed after the cross. Or did he think they were now myth?
In other words, did Paul, the Christian, think that the 7th day was still the Sabbath? Yes or No?
The answer is yes. Paul never teaches that the Moral law or the Sabbath is myth, or that they have been abolished. He sees them as real and enduring. Which is why he uses the Sabbath to market the Gospel. He goes to the Synagogues, because this is where he will have the most initial success to preach the Gospel. In fact, he actually lived next door to the synagogue in Corinth, which no doubt caused a stir.
Acts 18:5 But when Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul began devoting himself completely to the word, solemnly testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ.
Acts 18:6 But when they resisted and blasphemed, he shook out his garments and said to them, “Your blood be on your own heads! I am clean. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.”
Acts 18:7 Then he left there and went to the house of a man named Titius Justus, a worshiper of God, whose house was next to the synagogue.
Acts 18:8 Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized.
Cadge said: When Paul preached to the Gentiles, he made no reference to keeping the seventh day Sabbath.
This is not true.
Paul did indeed "make a reference to the Sabbath" when he preached to the whole city. The scriptures contain the very proof that you deny.
In fact, Paul makes such a big reference to the Sabbath that he made a date with the whole town for them to hear the Gospel on the next Sabbath. Thus giving them a week to wait for the Sabbath and think about the Gospel. So the Sabbath is part of this story, even as the "people" begged to hear more on the next Sabbath.
Acts 13:42 As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.
Acts 13:43 Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.
Acts 13:44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.
So Paul was preaching the Gospel on the Sabbath and making plans to do it again, on purpose, in public, for all to see. The people were even "begging" for him to come back next Sabbath and preach to them. So the Sabbath is part of this story, and it is very wrong to try and pretend otherwise.
In fact, if you read the passage, Paul had also made specific reference to the Sabbath in his sermon. Thus Paul is not denying the Sabbath, or pretending that it is not associated with the Gospel or Judaism. It is part of the Gospel Story. It is not abolished or gone.
Acts 13:26 “Brethren, sons of Abraham’s family, and those among you who fear God, to us the message of this salvation has been sent.
Acts 13:27 “For those who live in Jerusalem, and their rulers, recognizing neither Him nor the utterances of the prophets which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning Him.
Acts 13:28 “And though they found no ground for putting Him to death, they asked Pilate that He be executed.
The Sabbath is alive and well in the NT. It is part of the Gospel Story.
Cadge said: As a matter of fact he said that some keep one day some keep another, some keep every day alike. He said in Romans 14 that we are not to judge anyone on what they eat or day they keep (but SDA's are famous for that).
Rom 14 is not anti-Sabbatarian. Nor does its context reflect a discussion about the law or the Sabbath. Besides, since when are Christians supposed to go around judging anyone?
You sound as if Paul would have been fine with Sunday or the Sabbath or no day at all. But there is no such chance. We know that he is not dismissing the Sabbath, because he is making preaching appointments on the Sabbath.
Rom 14 hardly proves that the Sabbath is gone.
Cadge said: Paul taught a principle in the unclean meat thing.
Before Paul was a Christian, Peter had a famous vision about clean and unclean foods. This vision helped him understand that there is no such thing in the NC. Thus, the Gentiles were allowed to join Spiritual Israel.
Cadge said: Now, we are not under the letter of the law. We are not to judge people on what they eat or drink or Sabbath days (rest days).
Heb. 10:30 For we know Him who said, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY.” And again, “THE LORD WILL JUDGEJUDGE HIS PEOPLE.”
Col. 2:16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—
Col. 2:17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.
Rom. 14:13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this—not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother’s way.
Cadge said: However, even though we are free to rest (the Sabbath was made for man) on whatever day we choose,
We are not free to do any such thing. The Sabbath is not an optional doctrine for the church. It can't be Sunday, or Friday. It can only be how Christ defined it in the Gospels. This is the Gospel Sabbath.
Cadge said: wisdom tells us that …we should assemble on Saturday. But we are not under the Law.
Forget wisdom. It is Jesus and the Apostles that we must follow. The teachings of Jesus instruct the church about the Sabbath.
Bob Shields said: Poor Tom, he is so full of SDA Kool-Aid that he cannot see the simple plan of salvation. Don't feel too bad Tom, I couldn't see it either when I was an Adventist and tied down to part of the OC law plus Ellen.
Bob, you misunderstand much if you think I am defending the Old Covenant Sabbath of the SDA's. That is not my position. However, your position that the law and the Sabbath do not exist in the NC are Gnostic positions that can be traced back to Marcion.
So your views are your own. You position on the law is not shared by either the RC's or the P's. You are standing outside the teachings of the church on a critical point of faith.
Bob said: NC Sabbath, what a laugh, as you say HA HA. Jesus didn't reform one iota of the Sabbath.
Then what were the Sabbath debates all about?
Bob said: He even stated that it wasn't His purpose to change any of the laws until all was accomplished. What does accomplished mean to you Tom?
Jesus didn't change the 7th day to the 1st, as many assume. So he did not change the Sabbath in that sense, nor did he do away with it. But he did teach a very different version of the Sabbath for the church to understand, which all have overlooked, including the SDA's.
Bob said: You tell us that the NC didn't begin at Calvary.
I don't think I ever said such a thing. Christ's blood ratified the NC.
Bob asked: When did the Old come to an abrupt end? Just because not all recognized the complete Gospel at Calvary doesn't mean that the Old didn't end there.
The date for the end of Old Covenant Judaism was 70 ad. When the Temple was destroyed and the Priesthood killed, this was the visible end of ritual Judaism and the Temple Cult.
Moreover, the OC, as a paradigm, and as a doctrinal concept, has never ended. Which is why anyone can fall under its spell and lose sight of the Gospel. This is what the Galatians did, and so too Peter and James. This is what most Christians still do today.
Gal. 4:21 Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen to the law?
Gal. 5:2 Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.
Gal. 5:3 And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.
Gal. 5:4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
So the law is still there, but our relationship to it has changed.
Bob asked: What is so hard about accepting His rest? His rest is billions times better than Israel's Sabbath.
First, few understand or accept the Gospel. So it is not easy to comprehend as you claim. It is very hard.
Second, all Christians must become spiritual Israelites. The Gentiles are grafted into Judaism, not the other way around. Thus the Christian Faith is Semitic. Which explains why there is a Sabbath for the church, just as there has always been one for the Jews. But it is a different version from the OC Sabbath. Very different.
Bob asked: What is so hard about 2Cor 3:7-11?
The difficulty is this: It is very hard to understand the Gospel. Few can grasp the correct relationship between the law and the Gospel. Even the leading apostles, Peter and James become totally fooled. So this material is not easy. The Gospel is hard to grasp.
2Cor. 3:14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.
2Cor. 3:15 But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart;
Today, the SDA's are like the Jews. They can't comprehend the Gospel. Thus they mimic the Judaizers and embrace the Old Covenant Sabbath, and tithe and food laws, proving that they have fallen from grace.
Bob said: Did you miss the part when Jesus gave us a new commandment that has been written on our hearts, you know, the law of love.
Neither the RCC nor the P's support this myth that the Moral law has become obsolete or abolished. While the SDA Community loves to waste their time arguing about phantom doctrines, what is the point?
Your position has no support from the Church. The Moral law is still part of church doctrine. Which means that the Sabbath is part of Christian theology, and will be so until the end of time. The fact the most think it is Sunday only proves how wrong the church is about the Gospel.
Bob asked: Just where do you get your information that the Pharisees were "poor" scholars? I would argue that they knew the Torah like the backs of their hands. You pose a very poor argument.
Jesus claimed, over and over, that the Pharisees did not understand theology or history correctly. In fact, his remark to Nicodemus proves that he was not impressed with their scholarship.
John 3:9 Nicodemus said to Him, “How can these things be?”
John 3:10 Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?
John 3:11 “Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.
I suggest that you get yourself a computerized Bible and study these points before you rush to make yourself look foolish. You will be surprised what you can learn by paying close attention to the NT.
Bob asked: What makes you think that Jesus was not teaching the Gentiles?
Jesus was sent to the Jews. Not to the Gentiles. While he knew that the Gentiles would be invited into the Kingdom of God, through the Gospel, he did not push that point. That would be for later.
Here is one quick example that proves Jesus was not "teaching the Gentiles." There are many more.
Matt. 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them: “Do not go in the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans;
Matt. 10:6 but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Matt. 10:7 “And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’
Matt. 10:8 “Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give.
Once again, all you had to do was look up the word Gentile, in a computerized Bible and scan the 99 times this word is used. The 6th hit contains Jesus instruction for his disciples to avoid teaching the Gentiles. There are many more passages that also prove the point.
So where do I get these ideas? FROM THE BIBLE. The same place that all must find doctrine.
Bob said: Luke was a Gentile. Does it tell us in scripture that Jesus segregated the Jews from the Gentiles when he gave the Sermon on the Mount?
Jesus was sent to the Jews. Peter and later Paul were sent to the Gentiles.
Matt. 15:24 But He answered and said, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”
Bob asked: Was there a stipulation on quotes like "come unto Me and I will give you rest"? Was that only for the Jews?
When Jesus said these words, no one knew, or had any idea, that the Gentiles were also included in the Gospel invitation. None of the Apostles imagined that any Gentile, without circumcision, could be saved through the Gospel.
If you did not know this, then you need to study this all out.
Bob said: Maybe, like you, the Jews thought they were the only ones He was talking to, but we see the whole picture.
The Jews did indeed think they were the only ones that Jesus was talking to. They were stunned to later discover that the Gentiles could also be saved through Christ. In fact, many rebelled against this idea, and thus the Judaizers gained strength in the church because they wanted the Gentiles to first become circumcised Jews before they could embrace the Gospel.
Bob Sands said: Look, the Decalogue has been called the covenant in several texts, Deut 4:13;Deut 5:1-3; 2 Cor 3:7. Once you have crossed that hurdle, Hebrews 8:13 is right there, staring you in the face.
Such amateur proof texting is not helpful.
Pay attention: There in no such position in the church that removes the Moral law. So you are advocating a position that neither the Reformers nor the RC's would support.
Bob said: Col 2:16, 17 and Hebrews 4 are certainly talking about something other than giving a 24 hour period salvific power.
The Sabbath is a well-known feature of Judaism. There are scores of texts that refer to the Sabbath. So your point is moot.
Bob said: So that is the danger of the SDA message. Jesus is the object of the Gospel. Christ's Law does not include the Sabbath.
The object of the Gospel is to save sinners and destroy the devil.
There is no use for anyone to try and deny that Jesus taught and defended the Gospel Sabbath. The record is there for all to see.
Bob said: Mark 2:27 is not saying all mankind, since the Jews would really have wanted Him dead. He said it in a generic sense. He was lessening the standard the Pharisees created, and lightening the burden of the Sabbath, where most other OC Commandment were restated, with an enlargement of there meaning.
How do you know that Mark did not mean all mankind? (You do know that all the Gospels were written after the cross?)
Have you looked up the Greek word for mankind? If so, what does it tell you about the meaning?
Elaine Nelson said: The Sabbath commandment was never given ANYONE prior to Sinai.
The Bible proves you wrong. The Sabbath not only existed, prior to the giving of the law on Mt Sinai, the Jews were given specific instruction about it. See for yourself. Note that the giving of the law had not yet occurred.
Ex. 16:16 “This is what the LORD has commanded, ‘Gather of it every man as much as he should eat; you shall take an omer apiece according to the number of persons each of you has in his tent.’”
Ex. 16:17 The sons of Israel did so, and some gathered much and some little.
Ex. 16:18 When they measured it with an omer, he who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had gathered little had no lack; every man gathered as much as he should eat.
Ex. 16:19 Moses said to them, “Let no man leave any of it until morning.”
Ex. 16:20 But they did not listen to Moses, and some left part of it until morning, and it bred worms and became foul; and Moses was angry with them.
Ex. 16:21 They gathered it morning by morning, every man as much as he should eat; but when the sun grew hot, it would melt.
Ex. 16:22 Now on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for each one. When all the leaders of the congregation came and told Moses,
Ex. 16:23 then he said to them, “This is what the LORD meant: Tomorrow is a sabbath observance, a holy sabbath to the LORD. Bake what you will bake and boil what you will boil, and all that is left over put aside to be kept until morning.”
Ex. 16:24 So they put it aside until morning, as Moses had ordered, and it did not become foul nor was there any worm in it.
Ex. 16:25 Moses said, “Eat it today, for today is a sabbath to the LORD; today you will not find it in the field.
Ex. 16:26 “Six days you shall gather it, but on the seventh day, the sabbath, there will be none.”
Ex. 16:27 It came about on the seventh day that some of the people went out to gather, but they found none.
Ex. 16:28 Then the LORD said to Moses, “How long do you refuse to keep My commandments and My instructions?
Ex. 16:29 “See, the LORD has given you the sabbath; therefore He gives you bread for two days on the sixth day. Remain every man in his place; let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.”
Ex. 16:30 So the people rested on the seventh day.
According to the Bible, Moses gave specific Sabbath instruction to the Jews, BEFORE they had reached Mt Sinai. So your position is proven wrong and you need to admit it.
Elaine said: The most distinctive external marks: circumcision, Sabbath, and dietary restrictions were given to the Jews in order to separate them from the idolatrous nations around them.
Correct. But so what?
Elaine said: With all the emphasis on the seventh day, no one yet has shown that the Gentile Christians were ever instructed or commanded to observe it.
The Church was not started by "Gentile Christians." It was 100% Jewish. Therefore, they all automatically embraced the Sabbath. This was all they knew, and this is what Jesus had also taught them. There was no Sunday anything, nor was there any attempt to remove the Sabbath and do away with the real Lord's Day. Rather, Jesus gave specific instruction about how the New Covenant Sabbath was to be observed.
Matt. 11:28 “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
Matt. 11:29 “Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS.
Matt. 11:30 “For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
Matt. 12:1 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath, and His disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat.
Matt. 12:2 But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath.”
Matt. 12:3 But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions,
Matt. 12:4 how he entered the house of God, and they ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for him to eat nor for those with him, but for the priests alone?
Matt. 12:5 “Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are innocent?
Matt. 12:6 “But I say to you that something greater than the temple is here.
Matt. 12:7 “But if you had known what this means, ‘I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT A SACRIFICE,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.
Matt. 12:8 “For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”
Jesus does not teach his apostles that the Sabbath was done away with in the NC, much less that it has become, or will become, Sunday.
Elaine said: Christianity was a new movement, not a seamless continuation of Judaism, something Adventists have attempted.
Wrong. Today, scholars know that the Christian Faith was not a separate movement from Judaism. Rather, it was a part of Judaism. In fact, the Romans considered the early Christians a Jewish sect. They were not viewed as separate whatsoever, because they were not separate, nor did they allow Gentiles into the Jewish Church for many years.
Why are you promoting such myths?
Elaine said: Yes, all the new Christians, both Jews and Gentiles, met at the synagogue on Sabbath because the synagogue was considered the "town hall" in the village, not necessarily a worship center like the temple, and people met there to discuss and do business, and because the first Christians (apostles) were Jews, they were the first leaders of the new Christians.
In the Gentile world where Paul preached, the Jewish synagogues were not located in the center of anything. But Paul knew that this is where the pro-Jewish Gentiles, the ones that did not want to be circumcised, also went on the Sabbath.
These Gentile "god fearers" would have joined Judaism, but for circumcision. This prevented many from becoming Jewish. Paul knew that his Gospel message did not contain circumcision, which meant that the Gentiles that had been drawn to Judaism, could now embrace the Gospel and enter into the Kingdom of God without any painful ritual.
Paul was a natural born salesman.
Elaine said: Jesus never preached to the Gentiles,
So what does this prove? Did he not send Peter and then Paul to the Gentiles in his name?
Elaine said: nor did he ever abandon any of the Jewish teachings.
If Jesus never revised or changed any Jewish doctrine, why did the religious leaders say otherwise? The Gospel Story does not support your position. You need to stop injecting your own personal bias into the record. The Jews killed Jesus because they claimed he was a Sabbath breaker and a blasphemer.
Who are you to try and change the story? And for what purpose?
Elaine said: He also, did not initiate Christianity. It was only begun after his resurrection and ascension by his followers…
Wrong. Where do you get this myth? And what is the purpose of it?
Matt. 16:18 “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
Jesus is the author of the Christian Faith. Jesus trained and organized many disciples, by name, to teach the Gospel to the Jews-- before the cross. They developed the church in the name of Jesus, as he instructed them.
Matt. 10:1 Jesus summoned His twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every kind of disease and every kind of sickness.
Matt. 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
Matt. 10:3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;
Matt. 10:4 Simon the Zealot, and Judas Iscariot, the one who betrayed Him.
Matt. 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them: “Do not go in the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans;
Matt. 10:6 but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Matt. 10:7 “And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’
Matt. 10:8 “Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give.
Matt. 10:9 “Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper for your money belts,
Matt. 10:10 or a bag for your journey, or even two coats, or sandals, or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his support.
Matt. 10:11 “And whatever city or village you enter, inquire who is worthy in it, and stay at his house until you leave that city.
Elaine said: Even in the first century, new believers were meeting on the first day of the week--not in replacement of the Sabbath--but in honor of the Resurrection.
There were no Jews pretending that Sunday was the Christian Sabbath. But there did come a time, after 70 ad, when the Gentile Christians wanted to separate themselves from the Jews. This is when Sunday came into the picture and slowly eclipsed the Sabbath. As the church fell under total Gentile control, Sunday became the new Sabbath.
Bob Sands said: If a congregation wants to move its worship service to Sunday, that is fine. We have quite a few Sunday congregations, and many more considering the switch.
Since when can any "congregation" do what it wants? The NT does not teach any such thing. Christian doctrine is not a potluck affair. But this is how the Laodicean church has viewed it.
This church wants to do x and this one y, and another one z, and on and on. Which is also why every church is found guilty in the LM. None of them understand the Gospel correctly, and all this chaos about the Sabbath just underscores this fact.
Bob said: If days don't really matter, why would anyone want to switch?
If days don't matter, why did Jesus waste his time debating about the meaning and observance of the Sabbath? And why did God, make such a big deal about the 7th day? Apparently, God is very concerned about the Sabbath, and so too was his Son Jesus.
Bob said: The new covenant does not demand or forbid any particular day for corporate worship — there is no "holy time."
The Gospel Story contains the Sabbath. It is part of a religious package that cannot be ignored. The Sabbath represented "Holy time" to the Jews and to Jesus and the apostles. This point has never been changed, much less to Sunday or Every Day.
Bob said: One day is not inherently better than another.
Wrong. The Bible is clear, and so too Judaism, that the 7th day is very special. Our Gentile views are irrelevant.
Bob said: That means that, if no one in a particular church area wants to meet on Saturday, there is no reason for that church area to continue with Saturday meetings. We encourage congregations to realize that they have the option of continuing to meet on Saturdays for as long as they like, or the option of meeting on a different day. Some have chosen to meet on Sundays; some have not. We support both choices.
The issue is not about "convenience," but about trying to understand the will of God and the Gospel teachings of Jesus. The church must deal with the Sabbath and get it correct. So far, no one has it right. Not the Sunday keepers, and not the OC SDA's.
Bob said: Since no one-day is inherently better than another, the denomination does not require all congregations to meet on the same day. It is up to each local community of faith to decide on which day to meet for corporate worship. A number of factors may come up for consideration.
Not only is your assumption wrong that all days are alike, so too is this idea that each local congregation can formulate its own doctrine. This is madness, a recipe for chaos and heresy. No wonder Laodicea is so wrong about so much?
Bob said: 1) Since a primary purpose of the church is to fulfill the Great Commission, which day would be best for attracting new people in the community to worship services?
First, the Gospel Story includes the Sabbath as being a very special day. To try and remove this doctrine, or replace it with another day, is to contaminate and ruin the Gospel. This is what has happened.
Second, we don't have to guess what day would be the "best day" for promoting and preaching the Gospel. All we have to do is see what day Paul chooses to market his Gospel to both Jews and Gentiles. And that day would be the SABBATH.
Acts 13:42 As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.
Acts 13:44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.
Bob said: The New Testament shows that the disciples met at least part of the time on "the first day of the week," i.e. Sunday, for worship. The only reason the WCG formed a tradition of meeting on Saturdays is that we had an incorrect understanding of the Bible, the relationship between the old and new covenants, and church history.
Ha! You are still very confused! You need to go back to the drawing board my friend!
Bob said: We allow congregations to change meeting times, locations and days according to local needs. We encourage each congregation to meet on the day that serves its needs and purpose best. It is our intent to provide, as much as is reasonably possible, for the worship needs of our people — whether that be congregations who want to meet on Saturday, Sunday or, in certain unusual situations, another day or evening of the week.
The issue is not about the convenience of meeting. The church is free to meet on any day, but it is not free to remove the Sabbath, or pretend that it is no longer anything special.
The issue is how are Christians to relate to the Gospel Sabbath?
Bob said: In WCG churches that have switched to Sunday meetings, the best transitions have been achieved by the pastor first educating the congregation 1) that Scripture permits corporate worship on any day of the week, 2) that Sunday has been the primary tradition of the Christian church, and 3) that in the specific community and culture, it has various advantages over Saturday as a day for corporate worship (including, possibly, evangelism).
How nice that you have found a loophole to do what you want? How wonderful that you have determined to follow RC tradition instead of the Word, and that "convenience" is more important than Gospel truth.
This confused Laodicean group is blind like all the others.
Bob said: After ensuring that everyone had the information, the pastor then surveyed the congregation to determine their needs and desires for the day of worship services.
Gospel doctrine is not based on popularity polls. But of course the Laodiceans are expert at making up their own rules. For which they are condemned!
Bob said: If the congregation has two roughly equal portions desiring different days, several approaches can be taken: 1) create two congregations (some have done this, but hall rental and other expenses must be taken into account), or 2) give it more time, more discussion and, later, another survey to see if desires have shifted one way or the other.
1Cor. 1:10 Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment.
1Cor. 1:11 For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there are quarrels among you.
Wow! Talk about disunity and doctrinal chaos? Do you think that Paul would approve of splitting a church in two, because of doctrine? Hardly. Such a view is madness and great rebellion against the Apostles.
1Cor. 11:18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it.
1Cor. 14:8 For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?
1Cor. 14:33 for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.
Bob said: Can we remain together when members observe different sets of annual days?
Jesus has the answer to this question. What does he think?
Matt. 12:25 And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, “Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand.
Bob said: If Christ is in us, we can. This wars against our human nature, but with Christ it is possible — even imperative — to love people who have different opinions and practices on this topic. Let us point out some basic principles:
Christ does not encourage either division or false doctrine. But a false Christ can accept many points of view.
Bob said: Paul says that worship days don't matter (Rom. 14:5).
Paul is not the head of the church, nor is he saying what you claim. Second, Jesus, who is the head, determines whether the Sabbath has a place in the NC, not Paul. His views are clear on this matter and it is time that the church takes the time to understand what Jesus is teaching about the Sabbath and what he is not.
Bob said: That applies equally to Saturday as to Sunday. Neither of these days is so important that it should cause animosity between members. If we have the "right" day of worship, but the wrong attitude, we gain nothing (1 Cor. 13:1-3).
There is only one Gospel and one Gospel Sabbath for the Church.
Moreover, Jesus teaches that there should be great division from those that follow the truth and those that do not.
Matt. 10:33 “But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven.
Matt. 10:34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
Matt. 10:35 “For I came to SET A MAN AGAINST HIS FATHER, AND A DAUGHTER AGAINST HER MOTHER, AND A DAUGHTER-IN-LAW AGAINST HER MOTHER-IN-LAW;
Matt. 10:36 and A MAN’S ENEMIES WILL BE THE MEMBERS OF HIS HOUSEHOLD.
Matt. 10:37 “He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.
Bob said: In Christ, we are free to meet on any day of the week, any day of the year. But no matter when that is, we are to preach Christ, not the day.
Those that embrace false doctrine cannot preach Christ fully or effectively. Which explains why there are so many absurd and impossible versions of the Gospel Story everywhere.
Bob said: Our worship and our messages must focus on him, not on the day. We do not want anything in our messages to imply that people who observe one day are better or more obedient than those who observe another.
To "focus on Jesus" while being confused about his teachings is a recipe for chaos. How can a divided church focus on anything?
Bob said: The focus is on Christ. We worship him, and we commemorate salvation in him. We want to lead people to Christ, not to a day of the week.
How can those that are divided and confused, understand Christ and the Gospel? Many worship a false Christ of their own making. Sad.
Bob said: Old covenant days can be used to worship Christ, just as other days can be.
Few understand the difference between the Old and New Covenants. This is the problem.
Bob said: The early church apparently worshiped at the temple on the Sabbath — with no complaint from Paul.
Jesus often went to the Temple, and so too did the apostles.
Bob said: He did not castigate the Jewish believers for any deficiencies in their understanding.
Wrong. Read Galatians. There Paul blasts Peter and James for their misunderstanding about the Old and New Covenants. He "castigated" and condemned them for all to see. See also Matt 23 where Jesus does the same thing to the Pharisees.
Bob said: Pastors should support and encourage those who wish to meet on either day, and will lead in such a way that Christ is honored, preached and taught.
Here is a perfect example why the Laodiceans are condemned and called blind and wretched. They do not take the Gospel Story seriously, nor do they want to find truth or unity. Religion is all about tradition, money, and convenience. Which explains why there are so many different doctrines everywhere.
Bob said: That means that pastors will not be teaching that the Sabbath is in any way required or expected, or that keeping it is an act of obedience to God, as we formerly believed and taught.
The fact that your church never had the correct view of the Gospel Sabbath is the real problem. You were in error before, and now you are still in error, except, now the church is more divided then ever. What you need to do is find the Gospel Sabbath. There is only one Gospel and one New Covenant version of the Sabbath.
So far no one has discovered it. Especially not the SDA's.
Bob said: Logistics and numbers may require some worship meetings, whether on Saturday or on Sunday, to be held in homes.
The early church met in homes. So here is some solid and correct doctrine. Good for you!
Bob said: The trend within the Worldwide Church of God in the past few years has been that more members want to meet on Sunday. This trend may continue for a while, but I doubt that we will ever reach 100 percent.
The trend in all churches today is division, confusion, and much false doctrine. Sad.
Bob said: We intend to offer worship services on both days as long as members want them. It would be inconsistent to preach grace and freedom while forbidding worship on days that have origins that we don't like. Wherever and whenever we gather as God's people, we have an opportunity to preach and worship Christ!
Why are you proud of your Gospel division and confusion? Rather, you should all hang your heads in shame.
Bob said: Christ should be our focus. As we draw closer to him, as we become more like him in love, days on a calendar will decrease in significance.
The fact that you had the wrong Sabbath before is no reason to embrace different error now. The object should be to understand the Gospel Sabbath. If there is one. And if there is none, then this truth must also become clear to all.
Bob said: The days on the calendar are useful for worship, but they are not our primary goal.
Who says the Sabbath is the primary goal of the Gospel?
Answer: the SDA's.
Here is where this false view of the Sabbath comes from for many today. But the SDA's were promoting the Old Covenant Sabbath, and so too was your group. Thus the blind were leading the blind and now they are both confused and divided.
Bob said: Our goal is not to force one day in, or to force another out — our goal is to lead people to Christ, …Our sense of community, our devotion to fellowship within the church, must be based on these internal truths, not the external matter of considering one day better than another.
There is only one Gospel and one Gospel Sabbath. Period. Today, both are hidden from the church.
Bob said: Suppose we could just sit down and start with Christ first, and his gospel. What are the most important things about Christ, and how do we celebrate those?
Jesus taught a very different Sabbath from what the Jews taught. In fact, his version of the NC Sabbath is dramatically different from what all churches teach today, including and especially the SDA's. Thus to embrace Christ, one must also understand and embrace his view of the Sabbath.
Bob said: Perhaps the most important thing about Christ is not days at all, but the manner in which we treat one another. How can we celebrate his love for us? How can we keep his greatest commandment, and his second-greatest commandment? How can we preach his message more effectively to the world that needs it? How can we be less concerned about ourselves and more about others?
How can a false Gospel and a false Sabbath be good for the church? How can a false Christ help anyone?
2Tim. 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,
2Tim. 4:4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.
Bob Shields said: The law was completed or finished. "It is Finished" was Jesus last words. The law is now good history for those in Christ. For those not in Christ it condemns and makes them realize we are, of ourselves, without hope.
If the law is "history," how can it condemn anyone today? How can it make anyone feel guilty or drive anyone to Christ for salvation from his or her sins? Without law, there is no sin. So your view that the law has taken a holiday is nonsense. It is still here to condemn all that are so foolish enough to think there is no law.
Bob Shields said: I hail the Worldwide Church of God for taking the stand it has. Herbert Armstrong would have never allowed this to happen. The Sabbath was his best way to hold control over them. So it is with Adventists.
The WCG has the wrong Gospel. They are very much like the SDA's, complete with division and doctrinal chaos. Pity.
David Cadieux said: I do not propose it to be as a legalistic holy day for obligatory worship like the Pope did with Sunday.
Neither do I. The Gospel Sabbath is far from legalistic.
Sirje Walkowiak said: I agree Cadge. While nowhere does the Bible say Christians need to worship on a particular day (Sabbath), neither does it say not to worship on Sabbath.
Christian doctrine comes from Jewish doctrine. Which means that the Sabbath was the day when Jesus, and his apostles "worshiped" in public. This is also why we see Paul doing the same thing. There is a Gospel Sabbath for the church, but so far, it has been a great secret. Even the SDA's have missed it!
Sirje said: when the theology that brings people together on the Sabbath goes contrary to the NT Gospel, it carries with it all kind of extra-biblical baggage.
Whenever the OC Sabbath is promoted in the church, the Gospel is lost. This is the problem. This is why it is so important to understand the NC Sabbath.
Bob Shields said: Jews don't give brownie points to Christians who worship on their holy day. In fact they tell us that it was never meant to be Christians day of worship. It was exclusively for them.
Who cares what the unbelieving Jews say?
Furthermore, all Christians must become spiritual Jews anyway. Which undercuts this anti-Semitic claim about Sunday being valid. There is no such possibility.
All Gentiles that seek to enter the Kingdom of the Jewish God, must become spiritual Jews, even claiming that Abraham is their spiritual father. They must enter into the Gospel Story, by faith, and embrace the Jewish Messiah, and follow the teachings of the Jewish apostles.
Gal. 3:7 Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham.
Gal. 6:16 And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.
In conclusion, there is an OC Sabbath for the Jews, and a NC Sabbath for the Church. At some point, the confused Laodiceans need to understand both the Gospel and the Gospel Sabbath.
I hope this helps,
Tom Norris, for the Gospel Sabbath
Offline
For an excellent treatise on Sabbath observance in early Christianity, Google "Sabbath and Sunday in Early Christianity, Part I: The First Century."
There are liberal quotations from Adventist theologians: C. Mervyn Maxwell, P;. Gerard Damsteegt and Kenneth Strand. They all agree that:
"The children of Noah....were given seven Laws only, the observance of the Sabbath not being among them." Quoting from the Midrash, they conclude: "A non-Jew who observes the Sabbath whilst he is uncircumcised incurs liability for the punishment of death. Why? Because non-Jews were not commanded concerning it...The Sabbath is a reunion between Israel and God; therefore any non-Jew who, being uncircumcised, thrusts himself between them incurs the penalty of death...The Gentiles have not been commanded to observe the Sabbath."
Again: Maxwell writes: "What do we mean by 'Sabbath keeping'?...A person must set aside the entire day as sacred from sundown to sundown, refraining from all secular work...If we demand evidence for this kind of true Sabbath-keeping...we have to say categorically that there is no evidence for any of it in the literature which has survived from the second and third centures...We have no documentary evidence of any who did so."
Maxwell again: "Another evidence of the early observance of Sunday is the fact that Christians frequently referred to it as the Lord's day during the second century...The most common Christian term for Sunday was 'Lord's Day.' The term 'Lord's Day' was in wide use by the end of the second century and may also have been in use near the beginning of it."
From the book by Maxwell and Damsteegt:
"It is unhistorical to say that the early fathers were 'silent' about the Sabbath. They were not silent about it, and what they they had to say was hostile to Sabbath keeping...A careful analysis of the four most noteworthy authors who dealt with the Sabbath in the second and early third centures, Barnabas, Justin, Irenaeus, and Tertullian, reveals a great unanimity of attitude toward the literal Sabbath. To a man, they opposed it. This is very significant, partly because Barnabas and Justin represented Christian attitudes as early as the 130s, and partly because these four writers encircled the Mediterranean basin: Barnabas in Alexandria, Justin first in Asia and then in Rome, Irenaeus first in Asia and then in Gaul, Tertullian for a while in Rome and then in Carthage.
Maxwell gives five areas of the teachings of the second-and third-century writers about the Sabbath:
1. Sabbath eschatology--The Sabbath foreshadows an age of sinlessness and peace beyond this present age.
2. Moral typology--Living a godly life every day fulfills the purpose of the Sabbath commandment.
3.The Sabbath is one of the Ten Commandments not binding on Christians.
4. The Sabbath is not a part of the natural law.
5. The patriarchs before Moses did not observe the Sabbath.
The supplanting of the old law with the new, of the literal Sabbath with the spiritual, was a very Christ-centered concept for these four writers.
C. Mervyn Maxwell and P. Gerard Damsteegt, eds., "Source Book for the History of Sabbath and Sunday."
Kenneth A. Strand, "The Sabbath and Sunday From the Second Through Fifth Centuries."
Offline
Just some more retorting of hot air from the one who thinks he is wise beyond words.
O wise one, tell us how Jesus changed the Sabbath. Remember he said: Matt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
Either Jesus lied or you can't understand "the smallest letter, not the least stroke of the pen, will by any means disappear from the law...
You keep telling us that Jesus changed the working parts of the Sabbath. The above plainly states that you are completely wrong. NC Sabbath, what a laugh.
An example of hot air is when I said the law came to an end at Calvary you had to counter with it not ending until AD 70. If we use your argument it hasn't fully ended at all. The problem is that you seem to justify anything just to get the last word and try to make the rest of us look foolish. I have been around that block a few times myself, so if you play that game I will certainly retort.
Tom said: If the law is "history," how can it condemn anyone today? How can it make anyone feel guilty or drive anyone to Christ for salvation from his or her sins? Without law, there is no sin. So your view that the law has taken a holiday is nonsense. It is still here to condemn all that are so foolish enough to think there is no law.
I see that you aren't interested in what I really said. If you were you wouldn't spiel off your hot air. Listen to what I really said: "The law was completed or finished. "It is Finished" was Jesus last words. The law is now good history for those in Christ. For those not in Christ it condemns and makes them realize we are, of ourselves, without hope."
Tom said: "Jesus was sent to the Jews. Not to the Gentiles. While he knew that the Gentiles would be invited into the Kingdom of God, through the Gospel, he did not push that point. That would be for later."
Luke 2:29"29"Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
you now dismiss your servant in peace.
30For my eyes have seen your salvation,
31which you have prepared in the sight of all people,
32a light for revelation to the Gentiles
and for glory to your people Israel."
33The child's father and mother marveled at what was said about him.
Jesus was sent, actually He came on his own accord, to all mankind. Yes, he mostly proclaimed in Jewish areas, but He never turned the Gentile away. He is the Master of all from the foundation of the Earth. Don't paint us some picture that isn't true Tom. His intent was for man to go into all the world and teach all nations the good news.
(Message edited by bob on March 08, 2009)
Offline
Tom,
I realize that's it's difficult for someone born and bred in western culture to understand a society that is totally based on a religion as is the Jewish culture, but try to follow this. Paul was a Jew CULTURALLY. He never stopped being a Jew culturally. Christ, for him, was the Jewish Messiah promised in the OT.
I believe this discussion came about because you refuted the idea that Christ is the Sabbath rest for the Christian and that Jesus changed the way the Christian Sabbath was to be kept. You have yet to give specifics as to what that change looks like. All that can be deducted from what you have said is that the Sabbath is a day in which we should DO GOOD, and perhaps WALK IN WHEAT FIELDS, as well as WORK since that's what Jesus did as he healed the sick - and, of course, PREACH. All of that can, and should be done every day. For a Christian there is no one day set aside for doing good.
Yes, Jesus changed the meaning of the Sabbath for the Jews among whom he walked and lived. He was continually making the point that mere religious posturing isn't what God wants from us, and that includes an outward observance of the Sabbath above meeting human need. That said, Jesus, as well as Paul, observed all the Jewish feasts and customs because they were both culturally Jews; and you can't separate cultural activity from the religious. So, therefore, we have Paul rushing to Jerusalem to observe Pentecost (Acts 20:16), and Jesus teaching at the synagogue on the Sabbath. In fact, Jesus did a number of things "ACCORDING CUSTOM"
* Jesus was presented at the temple - ACCORDING TO CUSTOM (Lk 1:9),
* Jesus was taken to Jerusalem for the Passover at the age of 12 - ACCORDING TO CUSTOM (Lk 2:27),
* Jesus read at the Synagogue on the Sabbath - ACCORDING TO CUSTOM (Lk 4:16)
So you see Tom, both Paul and Jesus did many things ACCORDING TO CUSTOM which were culturally natural for them to do. As a result, neither one forbade Jewish Christians from attending any of these events BECAUSE IT WAS THEIR CULTURAL CUSTOM to do them. But- when it came to Gentiles and the meaning of Christ in the rest of the world, neither Jesus nor Paul stipulates that they should keep any of these feasts, including the Sabbath.
Whoever wrote the book of Hebrews, is talking to the Jews as he shows them how Christ fulfilled all the OT figureheads and religious customs, stating that the weekly Sabbath is not what God was looking for, since there remains a Sabbath rest (in Christ) for His people.
Now, I don't think we should all rush out of church on Sabbath and find some other day to worship if we can get a blessing from a church service on Sabbath. For SDAs the Sabbath is as much a cultural thing as it was/is for the Jews; and a case could be made that the weekly Sabbath now represents the rest a Christian has in Christ - a rest from trying to be good enough. But that is ironic, because the halo placed around the Sabbath belies the rest offered by Christ.
I do hope that helps you, Tom.
Offline
Elaine Nelson said: For an excellent treatise on Sabbath observance in early Christianity, Goggle "Sabbath and Sunday in Early Christianity, Part I: The First Century."
Very nice post. Informative.
Elaine said: There are liberal quotations from Adventist theologians: C. Mervyn Maxwell, P;. Gerard Damsteegt and Kenneth Strand:
Damsteegt is not liberal. I am not sure about Strand.
Elaine posted: "The children of Noah....were given seven Laws only, the observance of the Sabbath not being among them." Quoting from the Midrash, they conclude: "A non-Jew who observes the Sabbath whilst he is uncircumcised incurs liability for the punishment of death. Why? Because non-Jews were not commanded concerning it...The Sabbath is a reunion between Israel and God; therefore any non-Jew who, being uncircumcised, thrusts himself between them incurs the penalty of death...The Gentiles have not been commanded to observe the Sabbath."
This is beside the point. There is no doubt that the Sabbath was given officially to the Jews. Or that it was part of the 10 Words spoken by the Almighty at Sinai. All agree on this point. Christians are not to follow Noah.
Again: Maxwell writes: "What do we mean by 'Sabbath keeping'?...A person must set aside the entire day as sacred from sundown to sundown, refraining from all secular work...If we demand evidence for this kind of true Sabbath-keeping...we have to say categorically that there is no evidence for any of it in the literature which has survived from the second and third centuries...We have no documentary evidence of any who did so."
It is comical that Maxwell thinks he knows the "true kind of Sabbath keeping." And guess what? To his twisted mind, it looks just like the Old Covenant, Pharisaical Sabbath keeping, - that Jesus condemned. The SDA's are looking at things from their own false perspective. They have assumed themselves to be expert about the Sabbath when that is not the case.
Why would anyone even look for Old Covenant Sabbath keeping, by the Gentiles? The Gentiles were not attracted to the radical Jewish Christians that promoted such legalistic Sabbath keeping, along with circumcision. A practice that the Gentiles abhorred.
No doubt some of this did take place in the apostolic church because this is what Galatians is all about. The Judaizers had infiltrated the church, and Paul fought back. He would not let the Gentiles, or the Jews, fall under the spell of the OC, even as the painful threat of circumcision worked to his benefit.
Paul's view would prevail, primarily because the Judaizers were about to be annihilated and destroyed. Only a few years after the death of Paul, in circa 67AD, the Romans destroyed Judaism and the Jerusalem Church. That was the end of Circumcision Party, as well as OC Judaism, which was the great obsession of the Judaizers.
Now the Gentiles would not be bothered by the Judaizers to become circumcised, practice food laws, or embrace the Sabbath like a Jew. The Jewish State and Temple was gone, the Priests had been slaughtered, even as the world was angry with the Jews for stirring up the wrath or Rome.
The Gentiles would now take full control of the church. There was no chance that they were going to adopt OC Sabbath keeping. They had Paul's Letters, even as the Judaizers had lost all of their influence.
So it is no wonder that these SDA scholars could not find what was never there. They don't know what to look for or where to look for it. They are confused because they do not understand the Gospel Story correctly. They are too busy trying to justify their own errors and myths.
The Gentiles never embraced the Sabbath like an OC Jew, nor were they ever supposed to make such an error. The NC Sabbath is very different from the OC Sabbath. And until this distinction is better understood, the Gospel Sabbath will continue to remain hidden from the Church.
Maxwell again: "Another evidence of the early observance of Sunday is the fact that Christians frequently referred to it as the Lord's day during the second century...The most common Christian term for Sunday was 'Lord's Day.' The term 'Lord's Day' was in wide use by the end of the second century and may also have been in use near the beginning of it."
This is true. But so what? It proves nothing, except that as the Gentiles took control of the church, they pushed out the Jewish Sabbath. They wanted to separate themselves from Judaism, and thus Sunday became the new Gentile Sabbath. This doctrine no doubt gained traction after the annihilation of the Jewish Temple in 70 AD. By the late 1st century it was prevalent for the Gentile church, even as it is to this very day.
No one will ever find a Christian Jew embracing the Sunday Lord's Day. None of the apostles would have embraced or supported such a Sabbath change, absent any specific instruction from Jesus. But there is no such instruction, because it never happened. Jesus re-interpreted the Sabbath for the church. This is the change that all must comprehend and embrace. Not Sunday, and not the OC Sabbath of the legalistic SDA's.
I repeat. Neither Jesus, Peter, nor Paul, endorsed or acknowledged a Sunday Lord's day. But they did record his Sabbath Reforms for all to see. Here is the NC Sabbath for the church. It is not Sunday, nor is it the OC Sabbath of the Jews or SDA's.
Moreover, Johns' reference to the Lord's Day in Revelation is exclusively Sabbatarian. Those that say otherwise are not being honest with the context or the history of the church, which was 100% Semitic.
From the book by Maxwell and Damsteegt:
"It is unhistorical to say that the early fathers were 'silent' about the Sabbath. They were not silent about it, and what they had to say was hostile to Sabbath keeping...A careful analysis of the four most noteworthy authors who dealt with the Sabbath in the second and early third centuries, Barnabas, Justin, Irenaeus, and Tertullian, reveals a great unanimity of attitude toward the literal Sabbath. To a man, they opposed it. This is very significant, partly because Barnabas and Justin represented Christian attitudes as early as the 130s, and partly because these four writers encircled the Mediterranean basin: Barnabas in Alexandria, Justin first in Asia and then in Rome, Irenaeus first in Asia and then in Gaul, Tertullian for a while in Rome and then in Carthage.
This is true. But it only proves that when the Gentiles gained control of the church, they replaced the Jewish Sabbath with the error of Sunday. Moreover, these same authors were not clear on the Gospel, any more than are the SDA's today. But how would an SDA scholar even know that? They too are in the dark about the law and the Gospel.
Elaine posted: Maxwell gives five areas of the teachings of the second-and third-century writers about the Sabbath:
Note the dates here. This is a time when the apostles were dead and gone. So what is taking place doctrinally cannot be viewed as anything other than history. If the writings of the apostles do not support any late developing doctrine, then it must be discarded.
So anything that is taught, is only credible to the extent it has apostolic support. Thus these 5 points are good history, but not necessarily apostolic teachings. All church doctrine must be grounded in the Word of the apostles. Period! NO exceptions.
1. Sabbath eschatology--The Sabbath foreshadows an age of sinlessness and peace beyond this present age.
Note that Gentiles were forced to acknowledge and deal with the Jewish Sabbath. It was impossible to avoid such a discussion. So they started spinning it this way and that, saying all manner of contradictory and impossible things about it.
Jesus did not teach this about the Sabbath, and neither did the Jews. So who cares what spin others have placed on the Sabbath downstream? History is not the same as credible doctrine.
2. Moral typology--Living a godly life every day fulfills the purpose of the Sabbath commandment.
This sounds like the Every Day Sabbath that was never implemented by the church. Moreover, Jesus did not teach that Santification was the meaning of the Sabbath.
3.The Sabbath is one of the Ten Commandments not binding on Christians.
Here the Gentiles try to remove the Sabbath from the Jewish Moral Law. Here they start double-talking and playing games, trying to see how they can write the Jews out of the Gospel Story.
So they come up with this absurd and impossible view that Sabbath Commandment is not like the other nine. They claim it is a ceremonial law like Circumcision, which means it can be dismissed as non-binding on the church.
Consequently, the church fathers correctly declared that the other nine are binding for duty, but not the Sabbath.
However, once the Jewish Sabbath was removed, it was replaced by the Sunday Lord's Day, which was not viewed as "ceremonial." It was treated just like all the other Commandments. Thus the Gentile doctrine of Sunday became binding on the (Gentile) church as the New Covenant Sabbath.
The Gentile Sabbath is the greatest theological fraud in the history of the Church. If the original Sabbath commandment was not binding on the church, how did its strange replacement become so? On whose authority?
To this day, the RCC declares that Sunday stands in the place of the Jewish Sabbath, even as it is traced to the Moral law as its origin. But it is a total and complete fraud. One that matches their false Gospel very well, even as it denies the authority of God and repudiates the teaching of his Son.
4. The Sabbath is not a part of the natural law.
This is what all the Gentiles said. So they replaced the Sabbath with Sunday, and then, guess what? It somehow became part of natural law and duty for the church. This is a scam.
This idea that only the 9 commandments represent natural law, and the Sabbath does not, is utter nonsense. Either all 10 are valid or none them are valid.
5. The patriarchs before Moses did not observe the Sabbath.
If this is true, it matters little. The church must follow the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. They have no business trying to follow anyone but them.
Jesus is the head of the church. What he says about the Sabbath is what counts most. His teaching trumps all others.
Elaine said: The supplanting of the old law with the new, of the literal Sabbath with the spiritual, was a very Christ-centered concept for these four writers.
First, note that there was only a 10% "supplanting of the Moral law by the Gentile church. They left the other 9 commandments alone, declaring that they represented the will of God and duty for the church. It was only the Sabbath Commandment that they revised and changed. Which once again proves that they have made a monumental error that can only be corrected by repentance, and the replacement of the 7th Day Sabbath back into its proper position of authority in the J/C paradigm.
This is what the SDA's were supposed to do, but then they embraced the OC Sabbath, instead of the NC version that Jesus taught in the Gospels. So there are errors all around the Sabbath, and it is time to clean up this confused Gentile mess.
Further, when the Jewish Sabbath is reinstated to its rightful place in the Decalogue, this will signal the end of Gentile control of church doctrine. The proclamation of the genuine Gospel, as well as the correct Sabbath will shake up the world and bring the Gospel full circle, back to its Semitic roots.
Who knew that the SDA's were really on to something so huge and important? Too bad that they have blown it.
Bob Shields asked: O wise one, tell us how Jesus changed the Sabbath.
You need to read the Sabbath debates in the NT for yourself. Jesus turned the OC doctrine of the Sabbath on its head. He dramatically changed the way it should be interpreted. Which is why the Jews accused him of embracing and teaching a very wrong Sabbath.
All one has to do is read the Sabbath debates between Jesus and the Jews to see how he "changed" the Sabbath. For example, the Jews said you can't work for people on the Sabbath, only for animals, but Jesus disagreed. In fact, Jesus made it clear that not only was it fine to work on the Sabbath, but that he and God both did so, on a regular basis.
So here, Jesus is clearly CHANGING how the Sabbath is to be viewed and observed. It was such a major change that the Jews could not comprehend it. And to this day, the church has also failed to understand the Gospel Sabbath as taught by Jesus.
I suggest that you read the Sabbath debates for yourself how different the Gospel Sabbath really is.
Bob said: Remember he said: Matt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
Jesus did not change the Sabbath to Sunday, thus he did not remove or destroy it. Rather, he explained how the Sabbath is to be viewed in the NC era. The fact that the Jews had it wrong to begin with, is also part of the problem.
Bob said: Either Jesus lied or you can't understand "the smallest letter, not the least stroke of the pen, will by any means disappear from the law...
The Gospel Sabbath represents the best and most mature reading of the Sabbath. So Jesus is not lying to you as he reforms the Sabbath, rather it is the SDA's that are lying. They think all must follow the OC Sabbath that Jesus repudiated. They are wrong.
Here is the source of your confusion. Jesus is not lying about the Sabbath, but the Gentile church has been doing this for centuries, and the SDA's have come along and made matters worse. At this point, no church has the correct Gospel or Gospel Sabbath. NONE! They are all lying about the Gospel and the Gospel Sabbath.
Bob said: You keep telling us that Jesus changed the working parts of the Sabbath. The above plainly states that you are completely wrong. NC Sabbath, what a laugh.
Why not read the passages of the Bible that speaks to the issue? Just read the Sabbath debates for yourself and see what Jesus is saying and what his opponents were saying. Then you will understand that this is no laughing matter. There is a Gospel Sabbath for the church, and there is nothing funny about the fact it has been hidden so long.
Bob said: An example of hot air is when I said the law came to an end at Calvary you had to counter with it not ending until AD 70. If we use your argument it hasn't fully ended at all.
The Moral law has never ended. This is what the apostles and the church fathers correctly concluded, and so too the RCC and the Protestants downstream. However, because the church fathers were anti-Semitic Gentiles, they decided that the Sabbath did come to an end at the cross, and thus it could be removed and replaced with a Sunday Sabbath. This was a great and blasphemous error.
The date for the end of cultic Judaism is 70 AD. Here is where lots of hot air from the destruction of Jerusalem was sent heavenward.
Bob said: The problem is that you seem to justify anything just to get the last word and try to make the rest of us look foolish. I have been around that block a few times myself, so if you play that game I will certainly retort.
Ha! Those that look foolish in these discussions, have only themselves to blame. Those that tell the truth and present the facts are not the problem.
Besides, unless you are a paid apologist, like Clifford Goldstein, or a church leader, you need not be so sensitive. Those fellows make a living from their knowledge of the Bible, and thus they should be very upset that someone could so publicly prove them wrong on so many points. But others should be thankful that someone is willing to take the time and speak the truth.
Furthermore, claiming the last word in a Gospel discussion is normative (for those paying attention). This is what Jesus taught and what his apostles followed. See for yourself:
Mark 6:11 “Any place that does not receive you or listen to you, as you go out from there, shake the dust off the soles of your feet for a testimony against them.”
Luke 10:8 “Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you;
Luke 10:9 and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’
Luke 10:10 “But whatever city you enter and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say,
Luke 10:11 ‘Even the dust of your city which clings to our feet we wipe off in protest against you; yet be sure of this, that the kingdom of God has come near.’
Luke 10:12 “I say to you, it will be more tolerable in that day for Sodom than for that city.
See how the Gospel preacher is taught by Jesus to always get in the last Word. Why? Because the Gospel is good news; it is to be proclaimed as fact, not debated by those who don't know what they are talking about. Thus the Gospel is not subject to the interpretation of others. Thus, those that proclaim it correctly are taught to also get in the last word, even if that word condemns those that refuse to believe. Paul always made sure he got the last word in, and so too do I. It is not an ego thing, but standard operating procedure for those that understand the NT.
Acts 13:50 But the Jews incited the devout women of prominence and the leading men of the city, and instigated a persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and drove them out of their district.
Acts 13:51 But they shook off the dust of their feet in protest against them and went to Iconium.
This teaching about getting in the last word was followed by Paul, even as Jesus manages to get in the last Word on the cross, before he dies. This pattern of behavior was also used by the first maryter, Stephen. See for yourself:
Acts 7:54 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the quick, and they began gnashing their teeth at him.
Acts 7:55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God;
Acts 7:56 and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Acts 7:57 But they cried out with a loud voice, and covered their ears and rushed at him with one impulse.
Acts 7:58 When they had driven him out of the city, they began stoning him; and the witnesses laid aside their robes at the feet of a young man named Saul.
Acts 7:59 They went on stoning Stephen as he called on the Lord and said, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!”
Acts 7:60 Then falling on his knees, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them!” Having said this, he fell asleep.
There are many other examples, but I trust you understand the point. Those that understand the Gospel, will always take the last word. They don't need any permission from others to do what they have been taught. Those that don't understand nor embrace the Gospel will never understand anything correctly.
Bob said: Listen to what I really said: "The law was completed or finished. "It is Finished" was Jesus last words. The law is now good history for those in Christ. For those not in Christ it condemns and makes them realize we are, of ourselves, without hope."
Who cares what you say? Not me. You are not an apostle, much less a biblical scholar or church historian. So your opinions are only that.
So what you are really saying is that the law is "finished" (whatever that means), for the Christian, but not for others? This might seem logical to you, but it is an impossible position that has no support from the history of the church.
While Jesus managed to say the last word, even on the cross, as he taught others to do, you have misunderstood his Words. He is not saying that the "law is finished." Rather, he is saying that the bloody sacrifice for the human race has been completed. He is saying that the NC is now ratified with his blood, and now the Church can become the new Israel of God, by faith.
The law has not been removed at the cross. It was established and preserved as the definer of sin, forever. This is why Jesus had to die on the cross. He died for sin, which needs the law to exist.
Rom. 3:31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law.
Jesus death on the cross, released us from our debts to the law. When he died on the cross, we too died with him, by faith, in order that our sins could be paid in full. But even so, the law remains in full force. We are only safe from it, to the extent we remain hidden in Christ, our Righteous substitute. More than that, we are to "serve" the law in a new and better way, proving that it has not gone anywhere.
Rom. 7:6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.
Rom. 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, “YOU SHALL NOT COVET.”
Rom. 7:12 So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.
Rom. 7:13 Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? May it never be! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful.
Rom. 8:3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,
Rom. 8:4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Rom. 13:8 Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.
Rom. 13:9 For this, “YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT MURDER, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT COVET,” and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.”
Rom. 13:10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
Bob said: Jesus was sent, actually He came on his own accord, to all mankind.
How do you know that Jesus "came of his own accord?" No doubt he was willing, but you have missed an important part of the Gospel Story. Jesus was an apostle from God. Few understand this point. He has been SENT from God and forever subordinated to God the father. So when he says he was sent by his father, we are not at liberty to claim that it did not happen like that.
Heb. 3:1 Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession;
Heb. 10:4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Heb. 10:5 Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says,
“SACRIFICE AND OFFERING YOU HAVE NOT DESIRED,
BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME;
Heb. 10:6 IN WHOLE BURNT OFFERINGS AND sacrifices FOR SIN YOU HAVE TAKEN NO PLEASURE.
Heb. 10:7 “THEN I SAID, ‘BEHOLD, I HAVE COME (IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF THE SCROLL OF ME) TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.’”
Likewise, when Jesus teaches the Gospel Sabbath, he makes it clear that he is doing the specific will of his Father in this regard. He even invokes the name of God to back up his very different views of the Sabbath.
John 5:16 For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath.
John 5:17 But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”
John 5:18 For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
John 5:19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.
John 5:20 “For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing;
John 5:22 “For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son,
John 5:23 so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.
To reject the Gospel Sabbath is to reject the Gospel as well as Christ and God the Father that sent Jesus here to earth. The Gospel Sabbath has come from the mind of God, and woe to those that refute it or try and pretend it has been changed to Sunday or done away with.
Moreover, those that claim, "Jesus is the Sabbath" are talking gibberish, because Jesus is not saying he is Lord of himself. When he declared himself to have doctrinal authority over the 7th day Sabbath, he was talking about the doctrine of the Jewish Sabbath of the 4th Commandment, (viewed as the 3rd for RC's). He is not claiming to be the Sabbath. This is an absurd position that has no basis in serious theological discussion.
Furthermore, as shown above, the Sabbath is ultimately tied to God the Father. He is the creator God of the Jews and Christians, while Jesus has been subordinated forever as a human being to God. Thus, at the end of time, we see Jesus bowing down before God. He is not greater than God, nor is he, or his doctrines, independent of God. So the Sabbath is not a person, nor is Jesus the highest authority for any Christian. God is the final authority for the Sabbath, and the one and only God of the universe.
Thus Jesus appeals to God the Father for the verification of his "working" Sabbath, even as he uses his own authority, as the Son of God, to define the Sabbath. And it is VERY DIFFERENT Sabbath from what the Jews and the SDA's assumed it to be.
But of course the Jews could never understand the Gospel Sabbath, because they never embraced the Gospel. That is the way this doctrine works. It is a litmus test to see who is paying attention to the teachings of Jesus and who is not. A false Gospel is reflected in a false Sabbath, even as the true Sabbath reflects the genuine Gospel.
Listen to Jesus castigate the Jews for rejecting the Gospel Sabbath. He took it personally and responded as follows:
John 5:36 “But the testimony which I have is greater than the testimony of John; for the works which the Father has given Me to accomplish—the very works that I do—testify about Me, that the Father has sent Me.
John 5:37 “And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form.
John 5:38 “You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent.
John 5:39 “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;
John 5:40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.
John 5:41 “I do not receive glory from men;
John 5:42 but I know you, that you do not have the love of God in yourselves.
John 5:43 “I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, you will receive him.
John 5:44 “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?
John 5:45 “Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope.
To reject the Gospel Sabbath, as interpreted by Christ, is to reject Christ. This is what the NT teaches in this passage. Moreover, this is how one can tell that every church in the land has a false Gospel. They have a false Sabbath. A false Sabbath equals a false Gospel.
Listen to Jesus tell the Jews, in the context of a debate about the Sabbath, that God favors mercy over law. And because they had misunderstood this critical point, they also rejected the Gospel Sabbath. Thus, the Sabbath confrontation between Jesus and the Jews was prefaced by the famous passage about "Come unto me, all who are weary, and I will give you rest." He was speaking about the Sabbath rest that he was about to demonstrate and debate. He was talking about the NC Sabbath that would accompany and represent the Israel of God, the church.
Matt. 11:26 “Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight.
Matt. 11:27 “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.
Matt. 11:28 “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
Matt. 11:29 “Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS.
Matt. 11:30 “For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
Matt. 12:1 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath, and His disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat.
Matt. 12:2 But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath.”
Matt. 12:3 But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions,
Matt. 12:4 how he entered the house of God, and they ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for him to eat nor for those with him, but for the priests alone?
Matt. 12:5 “Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are innocent?
Matt. 12:6 “But I say to you that something greater than the temple is here.
Matt. 12:7 “But if you had known what this means, ‘I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT A SACRIFICE,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.
Matt. 12:8 “For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”
Then the passage continues about the Sabbath debate between the Jesus and the Jews.
There is a NC Sabbath for the church. It can only be understood along with the Gospel. At some point, the Gospel, and the New Covenant Sabbath will become known to the world. This represents the final Advent Message of Rev 18.
Bob said: Yes, he mostly proclaimed in Jewish areas, but He never turned the Gentile away.
The Messiah was not sent to the Gentiles. They would not have understood much of anything he said anyway. He was sent to the Jews, because they were his people and they were supposed to be waiting for him with open arms. What a tragedy that they did not understand or accept him.
Bob said: Jesus is the Master of all from the foundation of the Earth.
You have confused Jesus, the Son of God, with God the Father. This is a common error, promoted by well meaning, but very confused Christians.
1Tim. 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
In fact, how many were taught to "pray to Jesus"? Millions. But there is no such doctrine. The Jews have always prayed to God, and never to Jesus. This can never change for the Christians, nor did it change.
2Tim. 1:2-3 To Timothy, my beloved son: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. I thank God, whom I serve with a clear conscience the way my forefathers did, as I constantly remember you in my prayers night and day,
It is a doctrinal error to pray to Jesus. Many were taught this myth. But Christians are to pray to God, in the name of Jesus. Jesus never told anyone to pray to him. In fact, he is very clear that we are to pray to God, -in the name of Jesus.
Luke 11:1 It happened that while Jesus was praying in a certain place, after He had finished, one of His disciples said to Him, “Lord, teach us to pray just as John also taught his disciples.”
Luke 11:2 And He said to them, “When you pray, say:
‘Father, hallowed be Your name.
Your kingdom come.
If ever there was a time when Jesus would instruct us to pray to him, this would be it. But he did no such thing. Which is why all the apostles are portrayed as praying to God the Father, never to Jesus. See for yourself.
2Cor. 13:7 Now we pray to God that you do no wrong;
2Th. 1:11 To this end also we pray for you always, that our God will count you worthy of your calling, and fulfill every desire for goodness and the work of faith with power,
Rom. 10:1 Brethren, my heart’s desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation.
John 14:13 “Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
Rom. 1:9-10 For God, whom I serve in my spirit in the preaching of the gospel of His Son, is my witness as to how unceasingly I make mention of you, always in my prayers making request, if perhaps now at last by the will of God I may succeed in coming to you.
Rom. 15:30-31 Now I urge you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God for me, that I may be rescued from those who are disobedient in Judea, and that my service for Jerusalem may prove acceptable to the saints;
Rom. 15:32-33 so that I may come to you in joy by the will of God and find refreshing rest in your company. Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.
Eph. 1:15 For this reason I too, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which exists among you and your love for all the saints,
Eph. 1:16 do not cease giving thanks for you, while making mention of you in my prayers;
Eph. 1:17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him.
Eph. 1:18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,
Th. 1:2-3 We give thanks to God always for all of you, making mention of you in our prayers; constantly bearing in mind your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ in the presence of our God and Father,
Matt. 7:11 “If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him!
Matt. 18:19 “Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven.
Jesus is not God the Father. He is not the supreme ruler of the universe, but the head of the church and the human race, trapped in time and space eternally. Few understand this critical point. See for yourself:
1Cor. 15:20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.
1Cor. 15:21 For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead.
1Cor. 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
1Cor. 15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming,
1Cor. 15:24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power.
1Cor. 15:25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.
1Cor. 15:26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.
1Cor. 15:27 For HE HAS PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET HIS FEET. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him.
1Cor. 15:28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.
Bob retorted: Don't paint us some picture that isn't true Tom. His intent was for man to go into all the world and teach all nations the good news.
Who is "us? And who is painting a false picture of the Gospel Story and church history? Not me. It is the Laodicean Church, meaning all denominations, both RC and Protestant that have ruined the Gospel Story by fraud. They are all teaching one false doctrine after another.
While the SDA's are one of the worst offenders, they are all BLIND and NAKED. Their "wretched" doctrines are so false that the church does not even know how to define the Sabbath or Pray to God correctly. They don't understand, nor do they embrace the Gospel. Which is why all Laodiceans stand condemned in the PAJ, unless they repent and embrace only what the Apostles endorse,
Sirje Walkowiak said: Tom, I realize that's it's difficult for someone born and bred in western culture to understand a society that is totally based on a religion as is the Jewish culture, but try to follow this. Paul was a Jew CULTURALLY. He never stopped being a Jew culturally. Christ, for him, was the Jewish Messiah promised in the OT.
Pay attention: Judaism is the basis for Christianity. In fact, the NC represents a more mature phase of Judaism, not a separate Gentile paradigm. Thus, the Christian Faith is Jewish, 100%. Not OC Jewish, but NC Jewish. All Christians are children of Abraham, members of the Israel of God.
Paul was a real Jew, by birth and culture, even as he went on to become a true Jew by Faith in the Gospel. That is what we must all do.
Sirje said: I believe this discussion came about because you refuted the idea that Christ is the Sabbath rest for the Christian and that Jesus changed the way the Christian Sabbath was to be kept.
Jesus is not the Sabbath any more than Paul represents Tuesday, or Peter Thursday. This is silly and absurd talk that has no basis in a serious discussion.
It is self-evident that Jesus interpreted the Sabbath very differently than did the Jewish leaders of his day. This evidence cannot be refuted.
Sirje said: You have yet to give specifics as to what that change looks like.
Wrong. I have explained many times the difference between Jesus view of the Sabbath and that of the Jews. In fact, here is a link from those that do not like the "specifics" that I have articulated. See for yourself:
http://www.seventh-dayadventism.com/ECvsTom6.htm
Sirje said: All that can be deducted from what you have said is that the Sabbath is a day in which we should DO GOOD, and perhaps WALK IN WHEAT FIELDS, as well as WORK since that's what Jesus did as he healed the sick - and, of course, PREACH. All of that can, and should be done every day. For a Christian there is no one day set aside for doing good.
You are not paying attention. Without going into the details here is the difference; The OC Sabbath is very restricted, it allows no work, the NCS says the opposite. It is wide open for all manner of "work." Here are two very different views of the 7th day Sabbath. No Work versus Work. Jesus surprised everyone and supported the working Sabbath. Surprise!
Sirje said: Yes, Jesus changed the meaning of the Sabbath for the Jews among whom he walked and lived.
Wrong. The Jews repudiated his Sabbath teaching, along with his claim that God was the real source behind this new and very different doctrine.
Furthermore, the Gentiles were never in the Sabbath debates, and thus they had no opinion or contribution to make. This was a debate between Jews only.
But Jesus failed to reform the Sabbath for the OC minded Jews. They never understood his Gospel or his Gospel Sabbath. Which is why the killed him as a false prophet, Sabbath breaker, and blasphemer. After the resurrection, the church would have to deal with the Sabbath.
Sirje said: He was continually making the point that mere religious posturing isn't what God wants from us, and that includes an outward observance of the Sabbath above meeting human need.
According to Jesus, the Jews had the wrong view of the Sabbath as well as of God. This is still the case today for the entire human race, Jew and Gentile.
Sirje said: That said, Jesus, as well as Paul, observed all the Jewish feasts and customs because they were both culturally Jews; and you can't separate cultural activity from the religious. So, therefore, we have Paul rushing to Jerusalem to observe Pentecost (Acts 20:16), and Jesus teaching at the synagogue on the Sabbath. In fact, Jesus did a number of things "ACCORDING CUSTOM."
Jesus made the Jews angry whenever he preached on Sabbath. So we need to understand why. He also purposefully ignores many of their traditions. Which means you are wrong to say, " you can't separate cultural activity from the religious." This is exactly what Jesus did many times.
Mark 7:1 The Pharisees and some of the scribes gathered around Him when they had come from Jerusalem,
Mark 7:2 and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed.
Mark 7:3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders;
Mark 7:4 and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots.)
Mark 7:5 The Pharisees and the scribes *asked Him, “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?”
Mark 7:6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS,
BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
Mark 7:7 ‘BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME,
TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.’
Mark 7:8 “Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
Mark 7:9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.
Judaism is the doctrinal and cultural context for the Gospel Story. This can never be changed or forgotten. Morover, the Christian Faith is 100% Jewish. So it takes some sharp study to understand the difference between the Old and New Covenants.
The church has never gotten this correct, which is why there is such confusion about the Gospel Sabbath, and so many other doctrines, like food laws and tithe, etc.
Sirje said: So you see Tom, both Paul and Jesus did many things ACCORDING TO CUSTOM, which were culturally natural for them to do. As a result, neither one forbade Jewish Christians from attending any of these events BECAUSE IT WAS THEIR CULTURAL CUSTOM to do them.
Wrong. It was the custom for all Jews to follow all types of rules and regulations. Jesus deliberately refused to do many of these, and so too the apostles. There was a change in doctrine between the OC and NC. This must be correctly understood or nothing will make sense.
In fact, it was the custom for all Jews to be circumcised, but Paul instructs the Christian Gentiles that they are not to do this, or they will lose their salvation. He also tells the Jews that they are not to promote this custom, which is no longer viable or credible. So much for customs.
Jesus taught NC Sabbath keeping for a reason. Not because the Sabbath was about to become obsolete, but because the church needed a Gospel Sabbath. He did not remove the Sabbath or change it to Sunday, but he did make it conform to the Gospel, and thus it represents not only our salvation and future rest, but also our freedom in Christ, and the present rest in the Gospel.
All things are lawful on the Sabbath for the NC priests that comprise the church. They can work, play, eat, drink, worship, and do almost anything, without fear of the Sabbath police or Sabbath breaking. This is what Jesus is teaching.
Sirje said: But- when it came to Gentiles and the meaning of Christ in the rest of the world, neither Jesus nor Paul stipulates that they should keep any of these feasts, including the Sabbath.
Jesus never taught that the Gospel Sabbath was optional or just for the Jews. Where did you get that? And neither did Paul think the Moral law was no longer the duty of the church.
1Cor. 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God.
Sirje said: Whoever wrote the book of Hebrews, is talking to the Jews as he shows them how Christ fulfilled all the OT figureheads and religious customs, stating that the weekly Sabbath is not what God was looking for, since there remains a Sabbath rest (in Christ) for His people.
The very fact that Hebrews references the Sabbath in a positive manner is not helpful for the anti-Sabbatarians. In fact, this text does not say what many assume, even as the Greek word used for Sabbath is rare and telling. Note this point about heb 4: 9:
Heb 4: 9
We should now briefly take up the issue of the Greek words for "rest" used in Hebrews 4:9-10. We quote here the verses in question and show the two Greek words being used:
There remains...a Sabbath-rest [sabbatismos] for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest [katapausin] also rests from his own work (4:9-10).
A Greek-English interlinear of the New Testament will show that the Greek word katapausin is used to denote "rest" throughout Hebrews 3:7-4:11. There is one exception, in 4:9, as shown above.
Here, sabbatismos is used, and it is translated "Sabbath-rest" in the New International Version. The word is formed from the verb sabbatizo, which means to "keep/observe/celebrate the Sabbath."
The only time in the Bible that sabbatismos is used is here in Hebrews 4:9. The word is not found in ancient Greek literature until well after the time when Hebrews was written.
Some decades later, sabbatismos is found in Plutarch... In his work, the word signifies weekly Sabbath observance. In later Christian documents, sabbatismos sometimes indicates the celebration or festivity associated with the Sabbath day.
http://www.wcg.org/lit/law/sabbath/hebrews4.9.htm
This passage in Hebrews is really saying that there is a Sabbath keeping for the church. And the author does not mean Sunday or the Old Covenant Sabbath of the Pharisees.
Here are some links for further study:
http://www.halalyah.com/sabbath_rest_in_hebrews
http://bible.cc/hebrews/4-9.htm
http://www.gnmagazine.org/booklets/SS/sabbath-rest .asp
http://hallel.info/hebrews-sabbath-rest/
http://www.wcg.org/lit/law/sabbath/hebrews4.9.htm
Sirje said: Now, I don't think we should all rush out of church on Sabbath and find some other day to worship if we can get a blessing from a church service on Sabbath.
If the Sabbath has been done away with, or if it has been changed to Sunday, then it is very wrong for anyone to embrace such false doctrine. So yes, if the Sabbath is wrong, then everyone should walk out of church on the Sabbath and stop being so foolish.
The same goes for Sunday. If that popular doctrine is a fraud, then everyone needs to know it and walk out in Protest. While false doctrine may seem to bring many "blessings" and riches to the Laodicean Church, it is all a delusion. False doctrine in the church brings the double curse of Paul as well as the wrath of God on all that follow Gospel myth.
Sirje said: For SDA's, the Sabbath is as much a cultural thing as it was/is for the Jews;
Correct. And guess what? They also got it wrong, just like the Jews. The SDA's have embraced the OC Sabbath, even as they have repudiated the Pauline Gospel, and embraced the legalistic errors of Peter and James. This is a horrible mistake. One that is destroying the Advent Movement.
The SDA's have the WRONG Sabbath and the WRONG Gospel. While they have managed to get the right day for the Sabbath, like the Jews, they have misunderstood the Gospel and the Gospel Sabbath. Just like the Jews that would rather kill Christ than try to understand what he was saying about God and the Gospel Sabbath. Pity.
There remains a Sabbath for the church. It is the Gospel Sabbath as taught by Jesus in the Gospels. It is very different from what the SDA's promote, as well as all others.
I hope this helps,
Tom Norris, for the New Covenant, Gospel Sabbath
Offline