PDA

View Full Version : Which Of The Days Is The Seventh Day



vicky
Apr 24th 2008, 07:39 PM
Since God In Exodus Tells Us To Rest On The Seventh Day And None Of Us Even Rests On Any Day Which Of The Days Is The Seventh Day?

amazzin
Apr 24th 2008, 07:41 PM
Every Christian must set time aside to rest in the Lord. To specifically pray, to worship Him and to be in fellwoship with other believers in a non-working environment. That day doesn't have to be a Saturday or Sunday as long as you do it.

vicky
Apr 24th 2008, 07:52 PM
Every Christian must set time aside to rest in the Lord. To specifically pray, to worship Him and to be in fellwoship with otehr believers in a non-working environment. That day doesn't have to be a Saturday or Sunday as long as you do it.

BUT DONT YOU THINK THERE IS ACTUALLY A SPECIFIC DAY? I MEAN LETS TAKE A LOOK AT

JOHN19V31 NOW IT WAS THE DAY OF PREPARATION, AND THE NEXT DAY WAS TO BE A SPECIAL SABBATH.BECAUSE THE JEWS DID NOT WANT THE BODIES LEFT ON THE CROSSES DURING THE SABBATH, THEY ASKED PILATE TO HAVE THE LEGS BROKEN AND THE BODIES TAKEN DOWN.

NOW TELL ME WHEN WAS JESUS CHRIST CRUCIFIED? WAS IT FRIDAY? CAUSE IF IT WAS THEN WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

HisLeast
Apr 24th 2008, 08:14 PM
Jewish people have always considered Saturday the 7th and Sabbath day.

Thats about all I've been able to glean from the whole Sabbath topic. Is it for the Jews or everyone? Must it be Saturday? Just what is and isn't allowed? These are all questions that aren't immediately obvious to me (at least after reading BOTH testaments). Kinda one of those things I wish the good Lord would smite me with a bus, get it over with, so I can find out.

Rullion Green
Apr 24th 2008, 08:27 PM
It is Saturday, sunday is the first day of the week.

But as Christians under the new covenant, we are not obliged by the law of the old covenant to keep that day as we are to live for God every day but you can keep the sabbath ( saturday) by choice but are not under the cerimonial laws of Moses. As Christ fulfilled the Law, we have freedom from cerimonial laws, it is your choice what day of the week to go to church !!! :)

Most Messianic Jews prefer to go to Church on Saturday out of tradition, but are not legally bound as they once were under the Mosiac law, we have freedom in Christ.

Servant89
Apr 24th 2008, 11:24 PM
<<Which Of The Days Is The Seventh Day?>>

According to the OT law, it is Saturday, the 7th day. But we Christians are not under the OT law. Sabbath (Saturday) was a sign telling the world that Israel was under the OT covenant with God. Since we are not under that covenant, that sign goes away. Jesus spent his years of ministry WORKING on the day of rest (on Sabbath days). 75% of the times that the word "Sabbath" appears in the gospels is showing Jesus working on Saturdays. And the Jews sought out to kill him for that but Jesus answered them saying:

Jn 5:17 (http://webnet77.com/cgi-bin/bible/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=17) But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
18 (http://webnet77.com/cgi-bin/bible/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=18) Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

For Christians the Sabbath is now the first day of the week as prophecied in Lev 23 with the feast of Pentecost which was a feast (representing the first big harvest of the church) that had to be celebrated on Sunday morning and it had to be a Sabbath day (no work allowed in it). It had to be Sunday morning so that in everything Jesus has preeminence, even on the agenda for the week so that we serve God before we serve our boss, our family or our neighbors.

The ultimate sabbath day is described in Hebrews chapter 3 and chapter 4 which is the day when we get saved by believing.

Shalom

valleybldr
Apr 25th 2008, 01:45 AM
But as Christians under the new covenant, we are not obliged by the law of the old covenant to keep that day as we are to live for God every day but you can keep the sabbath ( saturday) by choice but are not under the cerimonial laws of Moses. As Christ fulfilled the Law, we have freedom from cerimonial laws, it is your choice what day of the week to go to church !!! :)


Nice theory but there are absolutely no scriptures to show that the practice of early believers worship changed from the Sabbath to Sunday. todd

valleybldr
Apr 25th 2008, 01:54 AM
<<Which Of The Days Is The Seventh Day?>>

According to the OT law, it is Saturday, the 7th day. But we Christians are not under the OT law. Sabbath (Saturday) was a sign telling the world that Israel was under the OT covenant with God. Since we are not under that covenant, that sign goes away. Jesus spent his years of ministry WORKING on the day of rest (on Sabbath days). 75% of the times that the word "Sabbath" appears in the gospels is showing Jesus working on Saturdays. And the Jews sought out to kill him for that but Jesus answered them saying:

Jn 5:17 (http://webnet77.com/cgi-bin/bible/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=17) But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
18 (http://webnet77.com/cgi-bin/bible/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=18) Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
He broke with Jewish tradition/rulings regarding the Sabbath. Had he "broken the Sabbath" he would not have been a sinless sacrifice. Plus, He would be breaking the rules He had authored, which makes no sense. todd

Rullion Green
Apr 25th 2008, 10:33 AM
Nice theory but there are absolutely no scriptures to show that the practice of early believers worship changed from the Sabbath to Sunday. todd

Hi Todd

you can see i never said that the day was changed ? i have no problem with someone going to church or worshipping on a saturday. I am saying we are not under the law of the old covinent and i can give you scriptures to that effect. Thats all i was saying :)

It's not a theory. The apostles had to deal with what to do with the gentiles and it was worked out that the gentile were not under cerimonial Mosiac law. have i got that wrong ?

I'm not disputing saturday is the sabbath according to scripture but i'm sayig Jesus is our sabbath and we have freedom in Him.

IPet2_9
Apr 25th 2008, 03:20 PM
Two reasons why the Saturday vs. Sunday thing is silly:

a) All the while, we are using the Julian calendar. That's like debating whether God is a Capricorn or a Sagittarius.

b) You can make Sunday the last day of the week very easily. Just call Monday the first day of the week. There. Sunday is Sabbath.

Rullion Green
Apr 25th 2008, 03:37 PM
Two reasons why the Saturday vs. Sunday thing is silly:

a) All the while, we are using the Julian calendar. That's like debating whether God is a Capricorn or a Sagittarius.

b) You can make Sunday the last day of the week very easily. Just call Monday the first day of the week. There. Sunday is Sabbath.

I agree with your comments about the topic but i seriously doubt you'll find anyone who will state that Monday is the first day of the week. But going by the Hebrew calender they have always took Saturday as the Sabbath.

vicky
Apr 25th 2008, 05:00 PM
Jewish people have always considered Saturday the 7th and Sabbath day.

Thats about all I've been able to glean from the whole Sabbath topic. Is it for the Jews or everyone? Must it be Saturday? Just what is and isn't allowed? These are all questions that aren't immediately obvious to me (at least after reading BOTH testaments). Kinda one of those things I wish the good Lord would smite me with a bus, get it over with, so I can find out.

in genesis after God had created everything, he rested on the seventh day and we all know that the Bible teaches us to remember the seventh day and keep it holy and its actullay one of the ten commandments! sabbath is for everyone.

IPet2_9
Apr 25th 2008, 05:03 PM
but i seriously doubt you'll find anyone who will state that Monday is the first day of the week

Eyewitnesses stated that the first day God started creating the universe was on a Monday. :rofl:

Rullion Green
Apr 25th 2008, 06:10 PM
Eyewitnesses stated that the first day God started creating the universe was on a Monday. :rofl:

I like your style !!! :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

thats good enough for me :rofl:

valleybldr
Apr 26th 2008, 02:23 AM
I'm not disputing saturday is the sabbath according to scripture but i'm sayig Jesus is our sabbath and we have freedom in Him. There is no record of apostolic believers using this "freedom" in ways you envision. It's Protestant theory over biblical evidence (or the lack of evidence showing nothing this major was tampered with). At least the Catholics are honest enough to say they made the change and feel they had the power/authority to do so. todd

Naphal
Apr 26th 2008, 02:51 AM
There is no record of apostolic believers using this "freedom" in ways you envision. It's Protestant theory over biblical evidence (or the lack of evidence showing nothing this major was tampered with). At least the Catholics are honest enough to say they made the change and feel they had the power/authority to do so. todd


Lets not charge Protestants with dishonesty. That's wrong and offensive.

If you want to esteem Saturdays over other days then do so but don't charge against anyone who doesn't as being dishonest or even in error because they aren't doing it like you.

Rom 14:1 Welcome all the Lord's followers, even those whose faith is weak. Don't criticize them for having beliefs that are different from yours.
Rom 14:2 Some think it is all right to eat anything, while those whose faith is weak will eat only vegetables.
Rom 14:3 But you should not criticize others for eating or for not eating. After all, God welcomes everyone.
Rom 14:4 What right do you have to criticize someone else's servants? Only their Lord can decide if they are doing right, and the Lord will make sure that they do right.
Rom 14:5 Some of the Lord's followers think one day is more important than another. Others think all days are the same. But each of you should make up your own mind .
Rom 14:6 Any followers who count one day more important than another day do it to honor their Lord. And any followers who eat meat give thanks to God, just like the ones who don't eat meat.
Rom 14:7 Whether we live or die, it must be for God, rather than for ourselves.
Rom 14:8 Whether we live or die, it must be for the Lord. Alive or dead, we still belong to the Lord.
Rom 14:9 This is because Christ died and rose to life, so that he would be the Lord of the dead and of the living.
Rom 14:10 Why do you criticize other followers of the Lord? Why do you look down on them? The day is coming when God will judge all of us.

Naphal
Apr 26th 2008, 02:54 AM
[quote=Nobunaga;1616467]I'm not disputing saturday is the sabbath according to scripture but i'm sayig Jesus is our sabbath and we have freedom in Him.[/quote


Amen to that!

valleybldr
Apr 26th 2008, 10:58 AM
Lets not charge Protestants with dishonesty. That's wrong and offensive.

If you want to esteem Saturdays over other days then do so but don't charge against anyone who doesn't as being dishonest or even in error because they aren't doing it like you.

Rom 14:1 Welcome all the Lord's followers, even those whose faith is weak. Don't criticize them for having beliefs that are different from yours.
Rom 14:2 Some think it is all right to eat anything, while those whose faith is weak will eat only vegetables.
Rom 14:3 But you should not criticize others for eating or for not eating. After all, God welcomes everyone.
Rom 14:4 What right do you have to criticize someone else's servants? Only their Lord can decide if they are doing right, and the Lord will make sure that they do right.
Rom 14:5 Some of the Lord's followers think one day is more important than another. Others think all days are the same. But each of you should make up your own mind .
Rom 14:6 Any followers who count one day more important than another day do it to honor their Lord. And any followers who eat meat give thanks to God, just like the ones who don't eat meat.
Rom 14:7 Whether we live or die, it must be for God, rather than for ourselves.
Rom 14:8 Whether we live or die, it must be for the Lord. Alive or dead, we still belong to the Lord.
Rom 14:9 This is because Christ died and rose to life, so that he would be the Lord of the dead and of the living.
Rom 14:10 Why do you criticize other followers of the Lord? Why do you look down on them? The day is coming when God will judge all of us. The passage in Romans is in reference to diet and fast days and has nothing to do with the Sabbath (unless you want it to). The transfer of worship was done by the organized church. By all means, keep whatever day you want and claim "freedom" whenever needed. Catholics don't find history offensive and Protestants should deal with the church authority issue rather then spinning unrelated Scrriptures in search of a pass. IMO, ignoring history and taking Scriptures out of context is offensive. todd

Rullion Green
Apr 26th 2008, 01:42 PM
There is no record of apostolic believers using this "freedom" in ways you envision. It's Protestant theory over biblical evidence (or the lack of evidence showing nothing this major was tampered with). At least the Catholics are honest enough to say they made the change and feel they had the power/authority to do so. todd

The Apostle Paul was all things to all men !!!

He was a hebrew of the Hebrews when he was with jews and could keep the Mosaic law if he had too, and when he was with the gentiles he could meet them on there own terms because he had the freedom in Christ.

i think he more than any other showed the freedom in Christ that was given. In order to get the gospel message to the world and give us the Good news :)

Naphal
Apr 26th 2008, 09:56 PM
The passage in Romans is in reference to diet and fast days and has nothing to do with the Sabbath (unless you want it to).

It isn't limited to fast days or the Sabbath or to any days. It just says we don't have to esteem the same day, which means to hold one day above others which is what people do with the Sabbath.




The transfer of worship was done by the organized church. By all means, keep whatever day you want and claim "freedom" whenever needed. Catholics don't find history offensive and Protestants should deal with the church authority issue rather then spinning unrelated Scrriptures in search of a pass.


"Why do you criticize other followers of the Lord? Why do you look down on them?"

They aren't unrelated, nor is anyone "spinning" anything or is a "pass" needed since there is nothing to be passed from. It's that type of attitude that is offensive in your posts. They are directly related and makes a Saturday no different than any other day if that's what one wants. It's completely up to each of us to decide now. That is part of being free from the law.





IMO, ignoring history and taking Scriptures out of context is offensive. todd



Again, you have a negative and accusatory attitude in your posts. I think it's wrong and you should pray about it and change. History isn't ignored nor are scriptures taken out of context. There is no spinning unrelated scriptures. It's all untrue.

I am going to quote Paul again because he deals with this exact attitude and issue:


Rom 14:1 Welcome all the Lord's followers, even those whose faith is weak. Don't criticize them for having beliefs that are different from yours.
Rom 14:2 Some think it is all right to eat anything, while those whose faith is weak will eat only vegetables.
Rom 14:3 But you should not criticize others for eating or for not eating. After all, God welcomes everyone.
Rom 14:4 What right do you have to criticize someone else's servants? Only their Lord can decide if they are doing right, and the Lord will make sure that they do right.
Rom 14:5 Some of the Lord's followers think one day is more important than another. Others think all days are the same. But each of you should make up your own mind .
Rom 14:6 Any followers who count one day more important than another day do it to honor their Lord. And any followers who eat meat give thanks to God, just like the ones who don't eat meat.
Rom 14:7 Whether we live or die, it must be for God, rather than for ourselves.
Rom 14:8 Whether we live or die, it must be for the Lord. Alive or dead, we still belong to the Lord.
Rom 14:9 This is because Christ died and rose to life, so that he would be the Lord of the dead and of the living.
Rom 14:10 Why do you criticize other followers of the Lord? Why do you look down on them? The day is coming when God will judge all of us.

Rullion Green
Apr 26th 2008, 10:09 PM
I detect a Seventh Day Adventist vibe here ? .. If so we are not to judge fellow believers as has been stated by Naphal or the Apostle Paul to be more precise lol, we have salvation in the Lord if we are trusting in Him alone for Salvation, and have the freedom to chose wich day to go to worship him for the salvation he has given us. God Bless

valleybldr
Apr 26th 2008, 10:36 PM
"Why do you criticize other followers of the Lord? Why do you look down on them?"
This is a discussion board. People are "free in Chrsit" to state their opinions without being accussed of "look[ing] down on [others]." Disagreement can be done without a critical spirit. They are not one and the same. Rom 14 might have application to the Sabbath but that's not the context of the passage. todd

valleybldr
Apr 26th 2008, 10:39 PM
I detect a Seventh Day Adventist vibe here ? .. If so we are not to judge fellow believers as has been stated by Naphal or the Apostle Paul to be more precise lol, we have salvation in the Lord if we are trusting in Him alone for Salvation, and have the freedom to chose wich day to go to worship him for the salvation he has given us. God Bless "Judging" deals with motive and condemnation. Disagreement/discourse can be done without either.

I don't know of any SDA's on the board but I'd guess their might be some.

todd

Literalist-Luke
Apr 26th 2008, 11:26 PM
Since God In Exodus Tells Us To Rest On The Seventh Day And None Of Us Even Rests On Any Day Which Of The Days Is The Seventh Day?God does not tell us to rest on the seventh day. He told Israel to rest on the seventh day. That has nothing to do with us.

Literalist-Luke
Apr 26th 2008, 11:27 PM
BUT DONT YOU THINK THERE IS ACTUALLY A SPECIFIC DAY? I MEAN LETS TAKE A LOOK AT

JOHN19V31 NOW IT WAS THE DAY OF PREPARATION, AND THE NEXT DAY WAS TO BE A SPECIAL SABBATH.BECAUSE THE JEWS DID NOT WANT THE BODIES LEFT ON THE CROSSES DURING THE SABBATH, THEY ASKED PILATE TO HAVE THE LEGS BROKEN AND THE BODIES TAKEN DOWN.

NOW TELL ME WHEN WAS JESUS CHRIST CRUCIFIED? WAS IT FRIDAY? CAUSE IF IT WAS THEN WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?First of all, it means you need to turn off your caps lock. ;) Secondly, it means that he was crucified on the day of the worst rush hour of the week. Other than that, for us Gentiles, it means nada.

Literalist-Luke
Apr 26th 2008, 11:31 PM
Acts 15:23-29 - "The apostles and elders, your brothers,
To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:
Greetings.
We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.
Farewell."

Would somebody please show me where, in there, it says that Gentiles are expected to keep the Sabbath????!!!

valleybldr
Apr 26th 2008, 11:47 PM
Would somebody please show me where, in there, it says that Gentiles are expected to keep the Sabbath????!!! And while your at it, please show me "in there" the part about refraining from murder too. thanks, todd

brakelite
Apr 27th 2008, 12:16 AM
The Apostle Paul was all things to all men !!!

He was a hebrew of the Hebrews when he was with jews and could keep the Mosaic law if he had too, and when he was with the gentiles he could meet them on there own terms because he had the freedom in Christ.

i think he more than any other showed the freedom in Christ that was given. In order to get the gospel message to the world and give us the Good news :)

Ac 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

Not the next day, which was sunday, but...

Ac 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

Here the gentiles are meeting Paul on God's terms, as we ought to do today.

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 12:33 AM
This is a discussion board. People are "free in Chrsit" to state their opinions without being accussed of "look[ing] down on [others]." Disagreement can be done without a critical spirit.

Yes it can be done but I felt that you haven't been doing it that way. Just consider what I said and what I quoted.




Rom 14 might have application to the Sabbath but that's not the context of the passage.


The context is what not to judge other Christians about. One is what day they esteem or not esteem which means non-sabbatarians cannot judge those that keep the Sabbath and Sabbatarians cannot judge those that do not. The other is judging what people eat or don't eat, another issue for Sabbatarians usually BTW.

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 12:35 AM
Here the gentiles are meeting Paul on God's terms, as we ought to do today.

That's an unfair and incorrect assertion. Nothing related to doing anything on a Saturday is "on God's terms". It's purely man's choice on what day to do what.

brakelite
Apr 27th 2008, 12:47 AM
I detect a Seventh Day Adventist vibe here ? .. If so we are not to judge fellow believers as has been stated by Naphal or the Apostle Paul to be more precise lol, we have salvation in the Lord if we are trusting in Him alone for Salvation, and have the freedom to chose wich day to go to worship him for the salvation he has given us. God Bless

I agree with Valleybldr, no-one is judging here as we cannot read one another's hearts, and we are not discussing what may or may not be in your heart. But all Christians are called upon to call sin by it's rightful name, as all the prophets have done since Enoch. No-one would dare accuse any of them of judging; they, like Christ, were simply calling people to repentance.

Simply put, sin is transgression against the law. There is no scriptural evidence to suggest in any way that the 4th commandment has been removed from that law. Tradition, yes. Church councils, yes. Let me quote here several non-adventists:

Dr. Edward T. Hiscox,
author of the Baptist Manual:
“There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that
Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show
of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first
day of the week, with all its duties, privileges and sanctions. Earnestly
desiring information on this subject, which I studied for many years, I ask,
Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New
Testament, absolutely not. There is no Scriptural evidence of the change of
the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week.
I wish to say that this Sabbath question, in this aspect of it, is the gravest
and most perplexing question connected with Christian institutions which
at present claims attention from Christian people; and the only reason that
it is not a more disturbing element in Christian thought and in religious
discussions, is because the Christian world has settled down content on the
conviction that somehow a transference has taken place at the beginning of
Christian history. . . .
To me it seems unaccountable that Jesus, during three years’ intercourse
with his disciples, often conversing with them upon the Sabbath question,
discussing it in some of its various aspects, freeing it from its false glosses,
never alluded to any transference of the day; also, that during forty days of
his resurrection life, no such thing was intimated. Nor, so far as we know,
did the Spirit, which was given to bring to their remembrance all things
whatsoever that he had said unto them, deal with this question. Nor yet did
the inspired apostles, in preaching the gospel, founding churches,
counseling and instructing those founded, discuss or approach this subject.
Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early
Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers
and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of
paganism, and christened with the name of the sun-god, when adopted and
sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to
Protestantism.” From a speech given before the New York Ministers’
Conference, November 13, 1893.

Isaac Williams:
“Where are we told in Scripture that we are to keep the first day at all? We
are commanded to keep the seventh; but we are nowhere commanded to
keep the first day. . . . The reason why we keep the first day of the week
holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many
other things, not because of the Bible, but because the church, has
enjoined it.” Isaac Williams, Plain Sermons on the Catechism, volume I,
pp. 334-336.

“The day called Sabbath by both Jewish and Christian writers is not
Sunday, but the day previous–that is, Saturday. There is no indication
whatever that the apostles in any sense substituted the Christian Sunday [a
misnomer and oxymoron to be sure] for the Jewish Sabbath; no trace of any
such transference is to be found in history. And there is nothing in Holy
Scripture or in early Christian history to identify Sunday with the Sabbath,
or to make the fourth commandment a mere precept for the observance of
Sunday.” Vernon Staley, The Seasons, Fasts and Festivals of the Christian
Year, p. 54.

“The reason why we observe the first day instead of the seventh is based on
no positive command. One will search the Scriptures in vain for authority
for changing from the seventh day to the first.” Clovis G. Chappell, The
Rules for Living, p. 61.

“The Sabbath was founded on a specific divine command. We can plead no
such command for the obligation to observe Sunday.” R. W. Dale, The
Ten Commandmentes, p. 100.

“Jesus, after his resurrection, changed the Sabbath from the seventh to the
first day of the week; thus showing his authority as Lord even of the
Sabbath. Matt. xii, 8: not to abrogate or break it, but to preside over and
modify, or give new form to it, so as to have it commemorate his
resurrection, when he ceased from his redeeming work as God did from his
creation work. Heb. iv, 10.
When Jesus gave instructions for this change we are not told, but very
likely during the time when he spake to his apostles of the things pertaining
to is kingdom. Acts i, 3. This is probably one of the many unrecorded
things which Jesus did. John xx, 30; xxi, 25.”
Amos Binney and Daniel Steele, Theological Compend (New York: The Methodist Book Concern,
1902), p. 171. Does such a statement from an avowed Protestant really
merit a reply? Where is the Biblical proof for his statement?

And much of protestantism today makes the same presumption.

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 12:54 AM
I agree with Valleybldr, no-one is judging here as we cannot read one another's hearts, and we are not discussing what may or may not be in your heart. But all Christians are called upon to call sin by it's rightful name, as all the prophets have done since Enoch. No-one would dare accuse any of them of judging; they, like Christ, were simply calling people to repentance.

Simply put, sin is transgression against the law. There is no scriptural evidence to suggest in any way that the 4th commandment has been removed from that law.


So, are you charging non-Sabbath keepers with sin against the 4th commandment?


From context and past posts I think you are and that's a serious issue we would have to deal with and ask the mods to step in and handle. It is no small thing to charge Christians, especially most Christians, with such a serious sin.

brakelite
Apr 27th 2008, 01:07 AM
So, are you charging non-Sabbath keepers with sin against the 4th commandment?


From context and past posts I think you are and that's a serious issue we would have to deal with and ask the mods to step in and handle. It is no small thing to charge Christians, especially most Christians, with such a serious sin.

I am not charging anyone with sin, because I don't believe anyone is deliberately disobeying God. All Sunday keepers are, as far as I know, worshipping God on the day they believe to be right. It becomes a sin Naphal if you
a. Refuse to study the scriptures to find truth for yourself
b. On finding the truth refusing to obey it. Whatever that truth may be.

I am not accusing you of either of the above.

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 01:14 AM
I am not charging anyone with sin, because I don't believe anyone is deliberately disobeying God.

I am deliberately not keeping Saturdays as the Sabbath because I know that Christ is the Sabbath. I know that the 4th commandment is not part of the new covenant. Most of the Christians I have known, was raised with in the church, and all elders and deacons I've known believe the same way. I assume it is the same in most churches. This would make us deliberate sinners in your opinion, right?

If you as Christian have a right and duty to call sin what it is, and you believe intentional rejection of the Saturday Sabbath is a sin against God and his Law, then you should speak loudly and proudly against this.

brakelite
Apr 27th 2008, 01:51 AM
I am deliberately not keeping Saturdays as the Sabbath because I know that Christ is the Sabbath. I know that the 4th commandment is not part of the new covenant. Most of the Christians I have known, was raised with in the church, and all elders and deacons I've known believe the same way. I assume it is the same in most churches. This would make us deliberate sinners in your opinion, right?
Actually, no. Sin is either not doing something you know to be right, or doing something you know to be wrong.
What I am attempting to accomplish here in these forums is to promote and discuss what I believe to be doctrinal truth, as is most everyone else here. So long as you continue to sincerely believe that what you are practicing in your Christian walk is the right way, whilst you may be wrong, it becomes sin only when it becomes insincere or dishonest and hypocritical.

However, if it becomes known to me that you are deliberately and knowingly practicing something that the scriptures plainly teach is sin, shall I not rebuke that or am I to fear that I may be tossed from the forum?

If you as Christian have a right and duty to call sin what it is, and you believe intentional rejection of the Saturday Sabbath is a sin against God and his Law, then you should speak loudly and proudly against this.
I am not sure about the proudly part but yes, I believe that is every Christians duty, including yours, no matter what the offense.
As to the intentional rejection of the Sabbath, if you study the matter, and in your heart come to the conclusion that I am right regards my stand on the Sabbath, but for whatever reason whether pride or convenience or whatever you continue to disregard the Sabbath, then yes, it is sin.
And if I am to be thrown off these forums for taking such a non-compromising stance with regard the Law of God then so be it.

tgallison
Apr 27th 2008, 01:58 AM
I am deliberately not keeping Saturdays as the Sabbath because I know that Christ is the Sabbath. I know that the 4th commandment is not part of the new covenant. Most of the Christians I have known, was raised with in the church, and all elders and deacons I've known believe the same way. I assume it is the same in most churches. This would make us deliberate sinners in your opinion, right?

If you as Christian have a right and duty to call sin what it is, and you believe intentional rejection of the Saturday Sabbath is a sin against God and his Law, then you should speak loudly and proudly against this.

Naphal Greetings

I agree with you. Jesus is my atonement, and I have freedom in Christ. All things are lawful, but all things are not expedient.

terrell

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 02:03 AM
Actually, no. Sin is either not doing something you know to be right, or doing something you know to be wrong.

So sin is determined by what we believe not determined by God?




What I am attempting to accomplish here in these forums is to promote and discuss what I believe to be doctrinal truth, as is most everyone else here. So long as you continue to sincerely believe that what you are practicing in your Christian walk is the right way, whilst you may be wrong, it becomes sin only when it becomes insincere or dishonest and hypocritical.

That sounds ok to me but I see that you sometimes cross those lines and infer and imply that people believing differently than you are not only wrong, but sinning. To say they are possibly not sinning only due to their ignorance is not much better.

The truth is there is no sin related to not keeping the Sat. Sabbath but I know you disagree.



However, if it becomes known to me that you are deliberately and knowingly practicing something that the scriptures plainly teach is sin, shall I not rebuke that or am I to fear that I may be tossed from the forum?


You have to obey your own conscience.



I am not sure about the proudly part but yes, I believe that is every Christians duty, including yours, no matter what the offense.
As to the intentional rejection of the Sabbath, if you study the matter, and in your heart come to the conclusion that I am right regards my stand on the Sabbath, but for whatever reason whether pride or convenience or whatever you continue to disregard the Sabbath, then yes, it is sin.
And if I am to be thrown off these forums for taking such a non-compromising stance with regard the Law of God then so be it.


That's an interesting safety net you have there. It seems you won't call intentional rejection of the Sat. Sabbath a sin unless the rejecter also believes it's a sin which doesn't really make much sense. It sounds more like a careful dance of semantics IMO. Outside of this forum do you have stronger opinions that you don't feel you can express here?

valleybldr
Apr 27th 2008, 10:48 AM
The context is what not to judge other Christians about. One is what day they esteem or not esteem which means non-sabbatarians cannot judge those that keep the Sabbath and Sabbatarians cannot judge those that do not. The other is judging what people eat or don't eat, another issue for Sabbatarians usually BTW. You are comparing apples and oranges. Which day man decrees as a fast day and which days God deems "holy" are two ***very*** different things. I have no need to make them one and the same. todd

valleybldr
Apr 27th 2008, 10:52 AM
I am deliberately not keeping Saturdays as the Sabbath because I know that Christ is the Sabbath.

Yes and nuns deliberately don't get married because Christ is their husband. :B todd

ESTHER 4HIM
Apr 27th 2008, 06:21 PM
We are not under the law, but are we not still to keep the 10 commandments? It may be tradition for the churchs,elders,pastors,etc. to meet and worship on Sunday, but I have not yet found this to be scriptual..
The 10 commandments stand.That is our Christian foundation..If we are to ignore or change the Saturday sabbath,then shall we change the honoring of our parents, to honoring let's say, our pets?Or maybe,stealing if we really need something?Maybe have a relationship with my married brethren!
That would be sin? Then why justify Sunday keeping as freedom and tradition,yet all the other commandments are to be kept ?

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 07:02 PM
You are comparing apples and oranges. Which day man decrees as a fast day and which days God deems "holy" are two ***very*** different things. I have no need to make them one and the same. todd

No, God through Paul informs us that we can esteem any day we want or none. It is not limited to "fast days" as you keep claiming.

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 07:03 PM
Yes and nuns deliberately don't get married because Christ is their husband. :B todd

And that's their right if they choose it.

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 07:05 PM
We are not under the law, but are we not still to keep the 10 commandments? It may be tradition for the churchs,elders,pastors,etc. to meet and worship on Sunday, but I have not yet found this to be scriptual..
The 10 commandments stand.That is our Christian foundation..If we are to ignore or change the Saturday sabbath,then shall we change the honoring of our parents, to honoring let's say, our pets?Or maybe,stealing if we really need something?Maybe have a relationship with my married brethren!
That would be sin? Then why justify Sunday keeping as freedom and tradition,yet all the other commandments are to be kept ?


The 4th commandment was fulfilled in Christ and is no longer commanded. This is why we are told we can treat each day as equal if we choose to and no one else can judge us for it.

The Prodigal Son
Apr 27th 2008, 08:01 PM
I ask, Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament, absolutely not. There is no Scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week.


And there is nothing in Holy Scripture or in early Christian history to identify Sunday with the Sabbath...


One will search the Scriptures in vain for authority for changing from the seventh day to the first.


In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first [day] of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

The "first day of the week" is Strong's # 4521. Now, I don't read Hebrew or Greek, but if you click the link below you can see the Greek word for sabbath appears in the original text two times and is transalated (or mistranslated) as "first day of the week" in the second part of Mat 28:1.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/c.pl?book=Mat&chapter=28&verse=1&version=KJV#1

"In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first of the sabbath..."

Also, see Strong's #4521 mistranslation in Mar 16:2, Mar 16:9, Luk 24:1, Jhn 20:1, Jhn 20:19, Act 20:7, and 1Cr 16:2.

valleybldr
Apr 27th 2008, 08:34 PM
No, God through Paul informs us that we can esteem any day we want or none. It is not limited to "fast days" as you keep claiming. Not in regards to worship. There is *no* internal evidence that they ignored the days God ordained. Had this happened the stir would have been equal to the turmoil over circumcision and it would have gotten *plenty* of press. todd

valleybldr
Apr 27th 2008, 08:37 PM
And that's their right if they choose it.
My point was that Christ is the fulfillment of many things but that does not annul the physical. Do you obstain from bread have you had any purposely obstain from bread because He is the Bread of Life. Silly isn't it? todd

Servant89
Apr 27th 2008, 09:17 PM
<<There is no record of apostolic believers using this "freedom" in ways you envision. It's Protestant theory over biblical evidence (or the lack of evidence showing nothing this major was tampered with). >>

Yes there is ... Acts 18:6, Acts 20:7, 1Cor 16:2

This is like explaining the color purple to José Feliciano. If you are looking for a verse that says "Change the Sabbath to Sunday" there is none. It cannot be any. Because if there is such a command, there will be no progress, it will be like moving from a system of commands (under the law) to a different system of commands (another command to worship God on Sunday). The perfect offering is out of a willing heart, not forced by commands and that is why there is none to change it to Sunday.

The point is that we are not under the law. The Sabbath was a sign that announced humans were under that old covenant. We are under a new covenant (therefore it is not fit for us to keep that sign) we are under a better covenant that deals with grace not under the law.

Go ask the samaritan leper why was Jesus so pleased with him when he turned back from going to the priest (as mandated by Jesus) as soon as he got healed. Ask him also why was Jesus so disappointed at the nine that actually followed his command to the letter. It deals with reaping where he did not put any seed on the ground (any word or command). But you can not get this unless you are dead to the law. And you can not marry Christ unless you are dead to the law (Rom 7:4).

Who else would like to insist on putting God last (on the agenda for the week) with the excuse, it is commanded? Only those who care more for their own resumés on the law, than putting God first.

You that boast on the law, are not going in the wrong direction for lack of preaching, or lack of Bible verses. Your boasting is your undoing. That is why The Bible says that you have to surrender first, if you want to be able to see and understand this concept (2Cor 3:16).

Shalom

valleybldr
Apr 27th 2008, 09:27 PM
Shalom Who is 'boast[ing] in the law? Someone who does not murder? Commit adultery? How do you know someone is "boasting in the law?" I thought it was one who minimalizes the sacrifice of the Messiah while elevating works for merit. Who has done that here? Surrendering to the Lordship of our Messiah means doing things His way and not our own. No need to imply motive... if you had a case to make. todd

ESTHER 4HIM
Apr 27th 2008, 09:41 PM
The 4th commandment was fulfilled in Christ and is no longer commanded. This is why we are told we can treat each day as equal if we choose to and no one else can judge us for it.

And,where in scripture will I find that we are not bound by the 4th commandment?We can treat each day the same?Why does it not say, this includes the Sabbath?Also,why would Jesus fufill this commandment ,yet it is not plainly written?

The Prodigal Son
Apr 27th 2008, 09:52 PM
And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.


At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. But when the Pharisees saw [it], they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.

BTW, the man in Numbers was stoned to death.

losthorizon
Apr 27th 2008, 10:56 PM
And,where in scripture will I find that we are not bound by the 4th commandment?

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Colossians 2:16-17 (KJV)

ESTHER 4HIM
Apr 27th 2008, 11:14 PM
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Colossians 2:16-17 (KJV)
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT,I DO NOT BELIEVE THE ABOVE QUOTE MEANS THE SABBATH CAN BE ANY DAY ONE FEELS IS BEST! DO NOT JUDGE HOW EACH PERSON IS KEEPING IT OR NOT KEEPING IT.. NOT THAT THE SABBATH SHOULD BE REVOKED (OR CHANGED)!

losthorizon
Apr 27th 2008, 11:54 PM
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT,I DO NOT BELIEVE THE ABOVE QUOTE MEANS THE SABBATH CAN BE ANY DAY ONE FEELS IS BEST! DO NOT JUDGE HOW EACH PERSON IS KEEPING IT OR NOT KEEPING IT.. NOT THAT THE SABBATH SHOULD BE REVOKED (OR CHANGED)!
Are you yelling with those all caps? The Sabbath referred to in Col 2:16 is the weekly Sabbath that all Jews were to “keep holy”. It pertained only to the Old Covenant people and it was nailed to the cross and was never binding on Christians. Jesus cried out on the cross – “It is finished!” –ie- the Mosaic system with its priesthood, animal sacrifices, and holy days including the keeping of the seventh day was finished because of the once-for-all-time sacrifice of the Christ – those "old" requirements were no longer binding on God’s chosen people.

Those who force believers to keep that day as a requirement are teaching an egregious error and they should be rejected..."Let no man therefore judge you...in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days." This is not a hard concept to understand.

Naphal
Apr 27th 2008, 11:58 PM
Not in regards to worship. There is *no* internal evidence that they ignored the days God ordained.


Nice negative spin there. Something cannot be ignored if it doesn't exist anymore. The law was abolished, Christ was the end of the law. There is nothing left to ignore and when we see no one can judge another about the Sabbath and that no one has to esteem a certain day over another, and not a single command in the NT to keep a Saturday, the 4th commandment left out of the commandments needed to receive eternal life all nicely ads up to no requirement from God to keep it anymore and thus the majority received that message from the NT and it's writers and stopped keeping it, stopped obeying it's many rules, etc etc.

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 12:00 AM
My point was that Christ is the fulfillment of many things but that does not annul the physical. Do you obstain from bread have you had any purposely obstain from bread because He is the Bread of Life. Silly isn't it? todd

Yes that's silly. But rightly dividing all things is not silly...such as no more animal sacrifices and no more literal Saturdays of rest. There was a one time sacrifice and now any day can be a day of rest if we choose it. God leaves our physical rest entirely up to us in the new covenant.


Rom 14:1 Welcome all the Lord's followers, even those whose faith is weak. Don't criticize them for having beliefs that are different from yours.
Rom 14:2 Some think it is all right to eat anything, while those whose faith is weak will eat only vegetables.
Rom 14:3 But you should not criticize others for eating or for not eating. After all, God welcomes everyone.
Rom 14:4 What right do you have to criticize someone else's servants? Only their Lord can decide if they are doing right, and the Lord will make sure that they do right.
Rom 14:5 Some of the Lord's followers think one day is more important than another. Others think all days are the same. But each of you should make up your own mind .
Rom 14:6 Any followers who count one day more important than another day do it to honor their Lord. And any followers who eat meat give thanks to God, just like the ones who don't eat meat.
Rom 14:7 Whether we live or die, it must be for God, rather than for ourselves.
Rom 14:8 Whether we live or die, it must be for the Lord. Alive or dead, we still belong to the Lord.
Rom 14:9 This is because Christ died and rose to life, so that he would be the Lord of the dead and of the living.
Rom 14:10 Why do you criticize other followers of the Lord? Why do you look down on them? The day is coming when God will judge all of us.
Rom 14:11 In the Scriptures God says, "I swear by my very life that everyone will kneel down and praise my name!"
Rom 14:12 And so, each of us must give an account to God for what we do.
Rom 14:13 We must stop judging others. We must also make up our minds not to upset anyone's faith.
Rom 14:14 The Lord Jesus has made it clear to me that God considers all foods fit to eat. But if you think some foods are unfit to eat, then for you they are not fit.
Rom 14:15 If you are hurting others by the foods you eat, you are not guided by love. Don't let your appetite destroy someone Christ died for.
Rom 14:16 Don't let your right to eat bring shame to Christ.
Rom 14:17 God's kingdom isn't about eating and drinking. It is about pleasing God, about living in peace, and about true happiness. All this comes from the Holy Spirit.
Rom 14:18 If you serve Christ in this way, you will please God and be respected by people.
Rom 14:19 We should try to live at peace and help each other have a strong faith.

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 12:08 AM
And,where in scripture will I find that we are not bound by the 4th commandment?

The 4th commandment is one of many commandments of the law and we are set free from the law.




We can treat each day the same?Why does it not say, this includes the Sabbath?


Because he speaks of all days equally. A Christian may esteem a Saturday if they wish, another can esteem no days above another. It's ours to choose. To specify certain days by name is redundant.



Also,why would Jesus fufill this commandment ,yet it is not plainly written?

Jesus did whatever he had to on the Sabbath. Some of it was ok, some was not but he justified it by a higher moral calling to do so. In other works he had a good reason to break the commandment even though he was under the law at the time but we aren't so we don't even need a reason to work on a Saturday.

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 12:12 AM
Nice negative spin there. Something cannot be ignored if it doesn't exist anymore. The law was abolished, Christ was the end of the law. Christ did not "end" His own law. He is/was the end result of it. You can find passages where the Sabbath, Passover and Succot are being enjoyed in the Messianic Kingdom. todd

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 12:13 AM
Those who force believers to keep that day as a requirement are teaching an egregious error and they should be rejected..."Let no man therefore judge you...in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days." This is not a hard concept to understand.

It shouldn't be but it reminds me of the Jews and the veil over their eyes:


2 Corinthians 3:13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
2 Corinthians 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
2 Corinthians 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

Here the veil caused the Jews not see the "end of that which is abolished" being the law. And today we appear to have a smaller veil on one commandment of the law, the Sabbath. Some cannot see the "end" of that original Sabbath either. We should pray for the Jews and all who have veils concerning the law.

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 12:13 AM
Yes that's silly. But rightly dividing all things is not silly...such as no more animal sacrifices and no more literal Saturdays of rest. There was a one time sacrifice and now any day can be a day of rest if we choose it. God leaves our physical rest entirely up to us in the new covenant.


Rom 14:1 Welcome all the Lord's followers, even those whose faith is weak. Don't criticize them for having beliefs that are different from yours.
Rom 14:2 Some think it is all right to eat anything, while those whose faith is weak will eat only vegetables.
Rom 14:3 But you should not criticize others for eating or for not eating. After all, God welcomes everyone.
Rom 14:4 What right do you have to criticize someone else's servants? Only their Lord can decide if they are doing right, and the Lord will make sure that they do right.
Rom 14:5 Some of the Lord's followers think one day is more important than another. Others think all days are the same. But each of you should make up your own mind .
Rom 14:6 Any followers who count one day more important than another day do it to honor their Lord. And any followers who eat meat give thanks to God, just like the ones who don't eat meat.
Rom 14:7 Whether we live or die, it must be for God, rather than for ourselves.
Rom 14:8 Whether we live or die, it must be for the Lord. Alive or dead, we still belong to the Lord.
Rom 14:9 This is because Christ died and rose to life, so that he would be the Lord of the dead and of the living.
Rom 14:10 Why do you criticize other followers of the Lord? Why do you look down on them? The day is coming when God will judge all of us.
Rom 14:11 In the Scriptures God says, "I swear by my very life that everyone will kneel down and praise my name!"
Rom 14:12 And so, each of us must give an account to God for what we do.
Rom 14:13 We must stop judging others. We must also make up our minds not to upset anyone's faith.
Rom 14:14 The Lord Jesus has made it clear to me that God considers all foods fit to eat. But if you think some foods are unfit to eat, then for you they are not fit.
Rom 14:15 If you are hurting others by the foods you eat, you are not guided by love. Don't let your appetite destroy someone Christ died for.
Rom 14:16 Don't let your right to eat bring shame to Christ.
Rom 14:17 God's kingdom isn't about eating and drinking. It is about pleasing God, about living in peace, and about true happiness. All this comes from the Holy Spirit.
Rom 14:18 If you serve Christ in this way, you will please God and be respected by people.
Rom 14:19 We should try to live at peace and help each other have a strong faith. Again, this passage does not say what you contend it does. Read it carefully for it's context. todd

The Prodigal Son
Apr 28th 2008, 12:14 AM
In other works he had a good reason to break the commandment even though he was under the law at the time but we aren't so we don't even need a reason to work on a Saturday.

You may not have meant to type that exactly, but I'll go on record as stating that I don't believe Jesus broke the commandment.

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 12:16 AM
You may not have meant to type that exactly, but I'll go on record as stating that I don't believe Jesus broke the commandment. He was sinless and didn't "break" any of His commandments. todd

The Prodigal Son
Apr 28th 2008, 12:20 AM
He was sinless and didn't "break" any of His commandments. todd

Hey Todd,

Do you have a comment about Strong's #4521?

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1619138&postcount=44

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 12:29 AM
He was sinless and didn't "break" any of His commandments. todd


He did. His defense was to show how so many others broke it but remained blameless and if they could then he could, and he was even greater than them all.

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 12:36 AM
He did. His defense was to show how so many others broke it but remained blameless and if they could then he could, and he was even greater than them all. Sounds rather hypocritical. todd

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 12:39 AM
Hey Todd,

Do you have a comment about Strong's #4521?

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1619138&postcount=44 I don't know what you are looking for. Mentioning Sunday in a narrative does not annul the Sabbath. todd

The Prodigal Son
Apr 28th 2008, 12:43 AM
He did. His defense was to show how so many others broke it but remained blameless and if they could then he could, and he was even greater than them all.

Why do we rest on the sabbath?

The common understanding is that it is because God rested?


It [is] a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

Many people don't realize that the bible instructs us to rest on the sabbath because God did work.


And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and [that] the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.

The sabbath is a sign.


Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ.

The shadow or sign is teaching us that Christ did all of the work for our salvation. Anyone trusting in any work that they do is akin to the man picking up sticks on the sabbath [Num 15:32]. And he was judged.

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 12:46 AM
Why do we rest on the sabbath?

Because we are beat come Friday night!!! todd

The Prodigal Son
Apr 28th 2008, 12:46 AM
I don't know what you are looking for. Mentioning Sunday in a narrative does not annul the Sabbath. todd

Hello Todd,

I was looking for a comment on whether or not you thought the bible translators accurately translated Mat 28:1 with regards to Strong's #4521.

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1619138&postcount=44

ESTHER 4HIM
Apr 28th 2008, 12:53 AM
Are you yelling with those all caps? The Sabbath referred to in Col 2:16 is the weekly Sabbath that all Jews were to “keep holy”. It pertained only to the Old Covenant people and it was nailed to the cross and was never binding on Christians. Jesus cried out on the cross – “It is finished!” –ie- the Mosaic system with its priesthood, animal sacrifices, and holy days including the keeping of the seventh day was finished because of the once-for-all-time sacrifice of the Christ – those "old" requirements were no longer binding on God’s chosen people.

Those who force believers to keep that day as a requirement are teaching an egregious error and they should be rejected..."Let no man therefore judge you...in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days." This is not a hard concept to understand.

in all due respect(caps off),i believe all the above is interpretation. you have already quoted Colossians and i answered that,it was about judging a sabbath or a holy day.it says nothing about the weekly sabbath or they we may change or disregard it!I don't believe anyone should feel forced to keep a sabbath.just wonder why is is so important to meet on sundays instead of saturdays?why not obey all 10 commandments?what is so offensive (or defensive )about saturday, as a day of worship?

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 12:56 AM
Hello Todd,

I was looking for a comment on whether or not you thought the bible translators accurately translated Mat 28:1 with regards to Strong's #4521.

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1619138&postcount=44
Yes, I believe our Savior rose 72 hours after he had been placed in the grave (close of Shabbat/beginning of first day). The empty tomb was discovered on Sunday. todd

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 12:57 AM
what is so offensive (or defensive )about saturday, as a day of worship? "It's Jewish" todd

The Prodigal Son
Apr 28th 2008, 01:02 AM
Yes, I believe our Savior rose 72 hours after he had been placed in the grave (close of Shabbat/beginning of first day). The empty tomb was discovered on Sunday. todd

Is this the twilight zone?

(strange music playing)

Hello again Todd, :)

Did you click this link?

http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/c.pl?book=Mat&chapter=28&verse=1&version=KJV#1

Does anyone notice that Strong's #4521 is mistranslated as "day of the week" instead of "sabbath".

ESTHER 4HIM
Apr 28th 2008, 01:04 AM
"It's Jewish" todd


What!!????????:o

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 01:06 AM
Is this the twilight zone?

(strange music playing)

Hello again Todd, :)

Did you click this link?

http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/c.pl?book=Mat&chapter=28&verse=1&version=KJV#1

Does anyone notice that Strong's #4521 is mistranslated as "day of the week" instead of "sabbath". I have e-sword and yes I saw the point you are making. Without researching it again I have no problem with the Sunday rendering. What bearing does it have on the topic? todd

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 01:07 AM
What!!????????:o Well, Sunday worship isn't (Jewish...it has pagan origins) and it's all the rage. todd

The Prodigal Son
Apr 28th 2008, 01:13 AM
I have e-sword and yes I saw the point you are making. Without researching it again I have no problem with the Sunday rendering. What bearing does it have on the topic? todd

The point to be made is that the bible tells us in Mat 28:1

"In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first of the sabbath..."

The first of the sabbath is Sunday according to Mat 28:1 as well as Mar 16:2, Mar 16:9, Luk 24:1, Jhn 20:1, Jhn 20:19, Act 20:7, and 1Cr 16:2.

The bearing on this thread is the the OP's question:


Since God In Exodus Tells Us To Rest On The Seventh Day And None Of Us Even Rests On Any Day Which Of The Days Is The Seventh Day?

Answered with biblical references to the Sunday sabbath.

Good night all.

Paul

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 01:18 AM
The point to be made is that the bible tells us in Mat 28:1

"In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first of the sabbath..."

The first of the sabbath is Sunday according to Mat 28:1 as well as Mar 16:2, Mar 16:9, Luk 24:1, Jhn 20:1, Jhn 20:19, Act 20:7, and 1Cr 16:2.

The bearing on this thread is the the OP's question:



Answered with biblical references to the Sunday sabbath.

Good night all.

Paul

Got it. Couldn't disagree more. Have a great night. todd

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 01:20 AM
Sounds rather hypocritical. todd

It was hypocritical to hold him guilty when the Pharisees also broke the Sabbath but were blameless, and how David and other Priests broke the Sabbath and were blameless...why shouldn't Jesus be blameless also when he had the most important reason to break it than any of the others did! Plus he was more important than they, more than the temple itself!

Christs argument isn't that he isn't breaking the Sabbath but that it was a righteous thing to do which left him blameless and without sin like all his examples.

brakelite
Apr 28th 2008, 01:22 AM
Are you yelling with those all caps? The Sabbath referred to in Col 2:16 is the weekly Sabbath that all Jews were to “keep holy”. It pertained only to the Old Covenant people and it was nailed to the cross and was never binding on Christians. Jesus cried out on the cross – “It is finished!” –ie- the Mosaic system with its priesthood, animal sacrifices, and holy days including the keeping of the seventh day was finished because of the once-for-all-time sacrifice of the Christ – those "old" requirements were no longer binding on God’s chosen people.

Those who force believers to keep that day as a requirement are teaching an egregious error and they should be rejected..."Let no man therefore judge you...in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days." This is not a hard concept to understand.

Please explain to us all, in clear language with supporting and appropriate scriptures, how the 7th day weekly Sabbath instituted before the fall in commemoration of creation thus before the need of redemption, is in any way associated with the yearly sabbaths which were designed to give a pictorial foreshadowing of the gospel.

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 01:23 AM
It was hypocritical to hold him guilty when the Pharisees also broke the Sabbath but were blameless, and how David and other Priests broke the Sabbath and were blameless...why shouldn't Jesus be blameless also when he had the most important reason to break it than any of the others did! Plus he was more important than they, more than the temple itself!

Christs argument isn't that he isn't breaking the Sabbath but that it was a righteous thing to do which left him blameless and without sin like all his examples. The point is that the Sabbath is for the betterment of man and in extreme cases a need may supercede the letter. todd

losthorizon
Apr 28th 2008, 01:23 AM
in all due respect(caps off),i believe all the above is interpretation. you have already quoted Colossians and i answered that,it was about judging a sabbath or a holy day.it says nothing about the weekly sabbath or they we may change or disregard it!I don't believe anyone should feel forced to keep a sabbath.just wonder why is is so important to meet on sundays instead of saturdays?why not obey all 10 commandments?what is so offensive (or defensive )about saturday, as a day of worship?

You are free to “keep” any day you want – you are not free to bind “Sabbath keeping” on Christians as many Sabbatarians try to do – those folks are in error and should be rejected as representing Christ. The apostolic church met on the first day of the week as a special day to worship the risen Christ who arose from the grave on that same day – “the Lord’s day”. The Lord's day (Sunday) is not the Christian Sabbath. God should be worshipped every day. :)

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 01:32 AM
Why do we rest on the sabbath?

We don't.



The common understanding is that it is because God rested?

That's the first example of someone resting on the 7th day. It wasn't commanded to men to copy it until the law was given at Sinai. That has has been taken back and a new law given. All this is a history lesson in Judaism and Christianity.




Many people don't realize that the bible instructs us to rest on the sabbath because God did work.

God is only shown not working on the one 7th day. I don't believe God is ever shown resting again, and like you say, it is true God worked on the Sabbath which included his Son working.


The shadow or sign is teaching us that Christ did all of the work for our salvation. Anyone trusting in any work that they do is akin to the man picking up sticks on the sabbath [Num 15:32]. And he was judged.

Agreed.

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 01:34 AM
Please explain to us all, in clear language with supporting and appropriate scriptures, how the 7th day weekly Sabbath instituted before the fall in commemoration of creation thus before the need of redemption, is in any way associated with the yearly sabbaths which were designed to give a pictorial foreshadowing of the gospel.

The Sabbath was still a shadow of something to come, it was merely an older shadow than many of the other ceremonial shadows. The light of Christ was so bright it made that Sabbath shadow which began all the way to the week of creation!

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 01:35 AM
The point is that the Sabbath is for the betterment of man and in extreme cases a need may supercede the letter. todd


And what that Sabbath is now become also supercedes what it used to be and all the letters of it. You make it sound like the 4th commandment is the greatest of all the commandments.

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 01:35 AM
The apostolic church met on the first day of the week as a special day to worship the risen Christ who arose from the grave on that same day – “the Lord’s day”. The Lord's day (Sunday) is not the Christian Sabbath. God should be worshipped every day. :) Touching but do any biblical quotes make the same correlation? todd

brakelite
Apr 28th 2008, 01:40 AM
It was hypocritical to hold him guilty when the Pharisees also broke the Sabbath but were blameless, and how David and other Priests broke the Sabbath and were blameless...why shouldn't Jesus be blameless also when he had the most important reason to break it than any of the others did! Plus he was more important than they, more than the temple itself!

Christs argument isn't that he isn't breaking the Sabbath but that it was a righteous thing to do which left him blameless and without sin like all his examples.

You and most others debating for the abolition for the Sabbath would all agree that the "law" which was done away (whichever law that was) was done so at the cross. Not before, not after.
You have said many times, not just in this thread, that Jesus broke the Sabbath and thus using this as an excuse for your disposing of it all together. Before the "law" was done away.
Are you suggesting He sinned, and that it was a righteous thing to do? That an act of righteousness cancels out sin? Are you suggesting that Jesus was teaching a works based salvation?:o
Or shall I give you the benefit of the doubt and presume that is not what you meant at all, but that Jesus did not actually break the Sabbath,(because the "law" had not yet been done away) but simply displayed by His righteous actions the proper and correct way of observing the Sabbath thus rebuking the Pharisees for their legalism?

brakelite
Apr 28th 2008, 01:46 AM
The Sabbath was still a shadow of something to come, it was merely an older shadow than many of the other ceremonial shadows. The light of Christ was so bright it made that Sabbath shadow which began all the way to the week of creation!

I did ask for scripture support for such an understanding, perhaps a "thus saith the Lord" or something similar?

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 02:21 AM
Are you suggesting He sinned, and that it was a righteous thing to do?

All you had to do is read my post for your answer.


Originally Posted by Naphal http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=1619473#post1619473)
It was hypocritical to hold him guilty when the Pharisees also broke the Sabbath but were blameless, and how David and other Priests broke the Sabbath and were blameless...why shouldn't Jesus be blameless also when he had the most important reason to break it than any of the others did! Plus he was more important than they, more than the temple itself!

Christs argument isn't that he isn't breaking the Sabbath but that it was a righteous thing to do which left him blameless and without sin like all his examples.




That an act of righteousness cancels out sin?

That an act normally condemned by the old ceremonial law might not be condemned under special circumstances.



Are you suggesting that Jesus was teaching a works based salvation?:o

Not even suggesting it.



Or shall I give you the benefit of the doubt and presume that is not what you meant at all, but that Jesus did not actually break the Sabbath,(because the "law" had not yet been done away) but simply displayed by His righteous actions the proper and correct way of observing the Sabbath thus rebuking the Pharisees for their legalism?

Jesus broke the Sabbath. That is vastly clear from the context of the scriptures. Also that he, and all his examples remained blameless in their actions, that means it was not sinful to break it. This could happen because of the ceremonial aspect of that commandment. It wasnt a hard and fast rule as they say and it is even less so today.

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 02:24 AM
I did ask for scripture support for such an understanding, perhaps a "thus saith the Lord" or something similar?

There isn't a "thus saith the Lord" on any changes between the old cov. and the new cov. You just have to accept the volume of all the scriptures which are related.

Ephesians 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 09:58 AM
There isn't a "thus saith the Lord" on any changes between the old cov. and the new cov. You just have to accept the volume of all the scriptures which are related.

Ephesians 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; No, you pretty much have to rely on the (misrepresented) teachings of the Apostle Paul. The rest of Scripture is in perfect harmony and does not back your view. todd

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 10:18 AM
I did ask for scripture support for such an understanding, perhaps a "thus saith the Lord" or something similar?
The Sabbath is multi-faceted. It's future fulfillment points to the the Messianic Kingdom where all nations will have rest in the Messiah. Its observance is/was fundamental to Jewish life and early church practice. It will continue to be a joy and celebration to many up to, in and through our Lord's earthly Kingdom. As long as we have physical bodies we will need rest. Our (spiritual) Maker saw it so important that He set us an example. As long as we have spiritual yearnings we will need our Savior. These two blessings are not opposed to one another but in perfect harmony. todd

Studyin'2Show
Apr 28th 2008, 11:25 AM
No, you pretty much have to rely on the (misrepresented) teachings of the Apostle Paul. The rest of Scripture is in perfect harmony and does not back your view. toddSince this can be misunderstood and send the thread off on a tangent I thought I'd jump in here. ;) Some might think Todd is somehow knocking the teachings of Paul, but that would be a misunderstanding of the post. He believes, as do I, that many believers genuinely misinterpret Paul. Even Peter says that Paul is hard to understand. Yet his writings are usually read as if they are simple not taking into account context, other scripture, and his actions.

I always come back to the words of Messiah which tell us that the Sabbath was made FOR man. It is ours! It's for us to enjoy, not to be in conflict over. BTW, I don't see anyone here attempting to tell anyone else what they MUST do, as some may feel. There are just people who feel very differently about the interpretation of these things. As to the OP, I think there's not much debate on the fact that Friday evening to Saturday evening is the biblical seventh day. What one chooses to do with it seems to be the issue. :D

God Bless!

valleybldr
Apr 28th 2008, 01:21 PM
Since this can be misunderstood and send the thread off on a tangent I thought I'd jump in here. ;) Some might think Todd is somehow knocking the teachings of Paul, but that would be a misunderstanding of the post. He believes, as do I, that many believers genuinely misinterpret Paul. Even Peter says that Paul is hard to understand. Yet his writings are usually read as if they are simple not taking into account context, other scripture, and his actions.

I always come back to the words of Messiah which tell us that the Sabbath was made FOR man. It is ours! It's for us to enjoy, not to be in conflict over. BTW, I don't see anyone here attempting to tell anyone else what they MUST do, as some may feel. There are just people who feel very differently about the interpretation of these things. As to the OP, I think there's not much debate on the fact that Friday evening to Saturday evening is the biblical seventh day. What one chooses to do with it seems to be the issue. :D

God Bless! Yes, thanks. Rabbi Shaul's writings have been so distorted and yet God has a purpose in allowing this. Though I am strongly in disagreement with Mid-Acts dispensationalism, Act 28 dispensationalism etc. I do understand why they see Paul's teaching as radically out of sync with the rest of Scripture. They totally throw "the law" out and have no need to harmonize Paul with the Lord or His Apostles. In a way, their position along with the Catholics ("we have Papal authority to make the change") is a bit easier for me to respect. todd

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 11:34 PM
No, you pretty much have to rely on the (misrepresented) teachings of the Apostle Paul. The rest of Scripture is in perfect harmony and does not back your view. todd

It does back my view because my view comes directly from the scriptures. Nothing is misrepresented from Paul...its exactly because Paul is so clear that people have to alter or add to or limit what he says to excuse being under a certain part of the law when he says we are free from it, not just from some of it.

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 11:36 PM
The Sabbath is multi-faceted. It's future fulfillment points to the the Messianic Kingdom where all nations will have rest in the Messiah.

The sad thing is that you don't realize this has already occurred...

Naphal
Apr 28th 2008, 11:39 PM
Yes, thanks. Rabbi Shaul's writings have been so distorted and yet God has a purpose in allowing this.


Matthew 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.

valleybldr
Apr 29th 2008, 12:08 AM
The sad thing is that you don't realize this has already occurred...
Context, context. I was speaking of the vantage point of the Messianic Kingdom. Your snipe is inaccurate and unappreciated. todd

valleybldr
Apr 29th 2008, 12:12 AM
Matthew 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.Wonder what spiritual point He was making or was he just issuing another one of the commands we need to follow? The "Jewish leader Saul" is that better? todd

valleybldr
Apr 29th 2008, 12:14 AM
Nothing is misrepresented from Paul...its exactly because Paul is so clear that people have to alter or add to or limit what he says to excuse being under a certain part of the law when he says we are free from it, not just from some of it. That's not what Peter said. I side with Peter on this one. Why do you want to be "free" from something that was given to protect you? I'm "free".... bang bang you're dead. todd

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 12:17 AM
Context, context. I was speaking of the vantage point of the Messianic Kingdom. Your snipe is inaccurate and unappreciated. todd

It's still occurred in context of what's been fulfilled and what hasn't been...

What you believe is fulfilled at that time has already been fulfilled.

Studyin'2Show
Apr 29th 2008, 12:18 AM
It does back my view because my view comes directly from the scriptures. Nothing is misrepresented from Paul...its exactly because Paul is so clear that people have to alter or add to or limit what he says to excuse being under a certain part of the law when he says we are free from it, not just from some of it.Peter seems to contradict that Paul is clear, saying that Paul is hard to understand. :hmm:

Matthew 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.Which being translated is teacher. Do you not call anyone a teacher? It also says not to call anyone father. I still called my dad father before he passed away. I believe there is more to His words than the words teacher and father being off limits. You do still use the words teacher and father, right?

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 12:18 AM
Wonder what spiritual point He was making or was he just issuing another one of the commands we need to follow? The "Jewish leader Saul" is that better? todd

His name is Paul and he shouldn't be called Rabbi was my point.

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 12:21 AM
Peter seems to contradict that Paul is clear, saying that Paul is hard to understand. :hmm:

He doesn't say that. He says Paul is hard to understand to the "unlearned and unstable" who also have trouble understanding other scriptures. Paul is not hard for others to understand...



Which being translated is teacher. Do you not call anyone a teacher? It also says not to call anyone father. I still called my dad father before he passed away. I believe there is more to His words than the words teacher and father being off limits. You do still use the words teacher and father, right?

I do not call anyone other than my Father, Father. And I call no one Rabbi, as Christ instructs.

brakelite
Apr 29th 2008, 12:34 AM
He doesn't say that. He says Paul is hard to understand to the "unlearned and unstable" who also have trouble understanding other scriptures. Paul is not hard for others to understand...
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Peter must be hard to understand also. He clearly says that Paul is hard to understand. He adds that because of that, some wrest the scriptures out of context. He calls them that do so unlearned and unstable.




I do not call anyone other than my Father, Father. And I call no one Rabbi, as Christ instructs.
Fair enough. Others here though have been accused of being legalists because they choose to do as Christ instructs.:hmm:

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 12:40 AM
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Peter must be hard to understand also. He clearly says that Paul is hard to understand.

No, he says he is hard to certain people.


Fair enough. Others here though have been accused of being legalists because they choose to do as Christ instructs.:hmm:

No one has been called a legalist for doing that. It's for doing that which was abolished that the legalist title applies.

Studyin'2Show
Apr 29th 2008, 12:43 AM
He doesn't say that. He says Paul is hard to understand to the "unlearned and unstable" who also have trouble understanding other scriptures. Paul is not hard for others to understand...

I do not call anyone other than my Father, Father. And I call no one Rabbi, as Christ instructs.I think you may want to take a look at that scripture again. BTW, wouldn't the whole Bible be hard to understand for the unlearned and unstable? You keep saying rabbi, but the word translated into our language is teacher. Do you have any teachers that you call such? My only point is that the scripture goes much deeper, when read in context, than making certain words off limits. ;)

God Bless!

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 12:49 AM
I think you may want to take a look at that scripture again. BTW, wouldn't the whole Bible be hard to understand for the unlearned and unstable?

He includes other scriptures so yes, the whole bible essentially.





You keep saying rabbi, but the word translated into our language is teacher.


Matthew 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.

Paul would not want us to call him Rabbi so why would anyone do that?

Studyin'2Show
Apr 29th 2008, 01:15 AM
He includes other scriptures so yes, the whole bible essentially.

Matthew 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.

Paul would not want us to call him Rabbi so why would anyone do that?2 Peter 3:14-16
14 Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

In context, Naphal. Paul is hard to understand. The untaught and unstable twist what is already difficult, AS THEY DO with other scripture. Even commentators that readily agree with your position would concede that Paul is difficult to understand.

I think we'll have to ask Paul his opinion when we get there! :D

God Bless!

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 01:18 AM
In context, Naphal. Paul is hard to understand. The untaught and unstable twist what is already difficult, AS THEY DO with other scripture. Even commentators that readily agree with your position would concede that Paul is difficult to understand.

I think we'll have to ask Paul his opinion when we get there! :D



lol, as if he would be easy to understand?

Naw, Paul isn't hard to understand to all or even most and not certainly to Peter! In context it's speaking of those that are unstable...they can't understand Paul or any other of the deeper things of scripture.

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 01:20 AM
In context, Naphal. Paul is hard to understand.

Ok. Do you have trouble understanding what Paul speaks about?

Studyin'2Show
Apr 29th 2008, 01:25 AM
Ok. Do you have trouble understanding what Paul speaks about?I read it in context, considering other scripture, including his own epistles, as well as his actions. That's different than just reading a few verses on their own without considering other scripture, his own epistles, and his actions.

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 01:27 AM
I read it in context, considering other scripture, including his own epistles, as well as his actions. That's different than just reading a few verses on their own without considering other scripture, his own epistles, and his actions.

That's a long way to spell "no" lol

The unlearned and unstable can't understand even when they do all of that.

valleybldr
Apr 29th 2008, 08:50 AM
The unlearned and unstable can't understand even when they do all of that.
Some questions for the "learned" among us.

What one main teaching (contrary to the rest of Scripture BTW) is said to be taught by the Apostle Paul? Specifically, what was Peter talking about? What choice in life does the bible repeatedly state leads to one's "destruction?" What do God's people study in order to be "learned?" What path leads to "stability?"

todd

Studyin'2Show
Apr 29th 2008, 12:42 PM
That's a long way to spell "no" lol

The unlearned and unstable can't understand even when they do all of that.I disagree. Even the simpleminded can understand. For Paul, however, you need to be able to dissect lawyer-speak. ;)

walking4him
Apr 29th 2008, 01:56 PM
Ok I'm confused about some thing; Why does everyone call Sunday the beginnging of the week if it's part of the weekend? Modern calendars are not the standard.

Studyin'2Show
Apr 29th 2008, 04:35 PM
Ok I'm confused about some thing; Why does everyone call Sunday the beginnging of the week if it's part of the weekend? Modern calendars are not the standard.Because that is what the Bible calls it. The concept of the 'weekend' is actually a rather new one. ;)

God Bless!

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 10:53 PM
I disagree. Even the simpleminded can understand. For Paul, however, you need to be able to dissect lawyer-speak. ;)

I've never heard of lawyers with the reputation for simplistic, unlearned language before. Normally lawyers have a rep. for using difficult and rarely used technical legal jargon...

It wasn't the words he used or how he wrote but the subjects he dealt with that was hard for the unstable and unlearned to grasp. It's no different with the parables Christ spoke.

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 10:54 PM
Ok I'm confused about some thing; Why does everyone call Sunday the beginnging of the week if it's part of the weekend? Modern calendars are not the standard.

Since the standard 5 day work week, Saturday and Sunday was the end of the week with Sunday as the last day of the week, Monday is the first day of the week. It was different in biblical times.

Studyin'2Show
Apr 29th 2008, 10:59 PM
I've never heard of lawyers with the reputation for simplistic, unlearned language before. Normally lawyers have a rep. for using difficult and rarely used technical legal jargon...

It wasn't the words he used or how he wrote but the subjects he dealt with that was hard for the unstable and unlearned to grasp. It's no different with the parables Christ spoke.That's the point, Naphal. Paul spoke like a lawyer. Again, most traditionalists would agree that Paul's writings are extremely heady. Not many would call his writings simple, like the parable which are much simpler to understand for us because Yeshua usually explained Himself. We don't really get that with Paul. None of this changes, however, which day is the seventh. The Sabbath will always be the Sabbath. What one chooses to do with, well, that is the real question. ;)

God Bless!

Naphal
Apr 29th 2008, 11:19 PM
That's the point, Naphal. Paul spoke like a lawyer.


Naw, he wasnt a lawyer and didn't speak as one.

2 Corinthians 11:6 But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have been throughly made manifest among you in all things.

The word Rude doesn't mean "mean", it means to be unskilled or uneducated. Paul was speaking about his ability to converse in greek. He was fluent in Hebrew because that was his native language.

2399
2399 idiotes {id-ee-o'-tace}
from 2398; TDNT - 3:215,348; n m
AV - unlearned 3, ignorant 1, rude 1; 5
1) a private person as opposed to a magistrate, ruler, king
2) a common soldier, as opposed to a military officer
3) a writer of prose as opposed to a poet
4) in the NT, an unlearned, illiterate, man as opposed to the
learned and educated: one who is unskilled in any art

NT:2399
idiotes (id-ee-o'-tace); from NT:2398; a private person, i.e. (by implication) an ignoramus (compare "idiot"):

KJV - ignorant, rude, unlearned.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)


Again, what was hard about what Paul speaks about isn't the exact wording used but the actual subject discussed. In context of the subject at hand, it's about the return of Christ.




Again, most traditionalists would agree that Paul's writings are extremely heady. Not many would call his writings simple,

Except Paul himself?




None of this changes, however, which day is the seventh. The Sabbath will always be the Sabbath.


I don't really agree but it doesn't matter really.

Studyin'2Show
Apr 30th 2008, 01:15 AM
Naphal, untrained in SPEECH does not mean that he was not a LAW-yer (one trained in the Law). It means that he was not a good public speaker; he was not charismatic. It was not his eloquence of speech that got attention. You know the type that could read the menu at Burger King and make it sound amazing. That was the point Paul was making. Anyway, within the verses you quote he says that he IS knowledgeable. How could he be ignorant and knowledgeable if he was speaking of the same thing? So, yes, he was 'rude' of speech. Now, give him a pen and paper and he was very knowledgeable and would go to town! :lol:

You don't agree that the seventh day is Saturday? :hmm:

Naphal
Apr 30th 2008, 01:18 AM
Naphal, untrained in SPEECH does not mean that he was not a LAW-yer (one trained in the Law). It means that he was not a good public speaker; he was not charismatic. It was not his eloquence of speech that got attention. You know the type that could read the menu at Burger King and make it sound amazing. That was the point Paul was making. Anyway, within the verses you quote he says that he IS knowledgeable. How could he be ignorant and knowledgeable if he was speaking of the same thing? So, yes, he was 'rude' of speech. Now, give him a pen and paper and he was very knowledgeable and would go to town! :lol:

Speech doesn't have to be limited to verbal speech. Paul is addressing his "rude" speech in letter form. He wasn't as good in Greek as he was in hebrew.


You don't agree that the seventh day is Saturday? :hmm:

The 7th day of the biblical week was/is Saturday. The Sabbath is no longer Saturday, or any other day of the week.

Studyin'2Show
Apr 30th 2008, 02:32 AM
Whatever, Naphal. I believe you're taking the verse completely out of context but all it takes is simply reading the epistles to know that Paul was not 'rude' of the Law. So, read it whichever way you'd like and call whatever you want the Sabbath. This really should be about sharing ideas and not so much about a verbal competition. It's bedtime for me. 5am comes way too fast. :D

God Bless!

Naphal
Apr 30th 2008, 02:39 AM
Whatever, Naphal. I believe you're taking the verse completely out of context but all it takes is simply reading the epistles to know that Paul was not 'rude' of the Law.

He wasn't "rude" of the law but how he expressed himself! That's the whole point of his saying he is rude in speech but not in knowledge!




So, read it whichever way you'd like and call whatever you want the Sabbath. This really should be about sharing ideas and not so much about a verbal competition.

It was always just a sharing of ideas for me...

I was hoping you'd enjoy the part of his "speech" being more unlearned than his knowledge was. I always found that interesting.



It's bedtime for me. 5am comes way too fast. :D


I rarely have to be up so early but I actually have to be up at 4:30 tomorrow, and that's west coast time! I am glad that isn't daily although I guess that would be easier than the occasional early early rising.