Historicity of the change of the Sabbath Commandment

[Travis93]

I agree with BobRyan, when Paul talked about observing times in Galatians 4:10 he could not have been talking about God's own sabbaths, and here is the proof.
Leviticus 19:3 Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father, and keep my sabbaths: I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 19:26 Ye shall not eat any thing with blood: neither shall ye use enchantment, nor observe times.

So unless we have a contradiction here, it seems like observing times is something different than observing the sabbath. Besides, if he was condemning people for keeping it, he's be condemning himself as he observed the sabbath many times (Acts 13:14, Acts 13:42-44, Acts 16:13, Acts 17:2, Acts 18:4, Acts 18:11) as well as the feasts (Acts 18:21, Acts 20:6, Acts 20:16, Acts 27:9).

 

[BobRyan]

I agree with BobRyan, when Paul talked about observing times in Galatians 4:10 he could not have been talking about God's own sabbaths, and here is the proof.
Leviticus 19:3 Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father, and keep my sabbaths: I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 19:26 Ye shall not eat any thing with blood: neither shall ye use enchantment, nor observe times.

So unless we have a contradiction here, it seems like observing times is something different than observing the sabbath. Besides, if he was condemning people for keeping it, he's be condemning himself as he observed the sabbath many times (Acts 13:14, Acts 13:42-44, Acts 16:13, Acts 17:2, Acts 18:4, Acts 18:11) as well as the feasts (Acts 18:21, Acts 20:6, Acts 20:16, Acts 27:9).

Good point.

Indeed and how could Paul in Romans 14 defend the right of those who wanted to keep one or all of the Lev 23 Holy Days only to condemn them as pagans for keeping the Bible Sabbath later?? There is no logic at all in bending the Bible in those directions.

 

[Travis93]

Good point.

Indeed and how could Paul in Romans 14 defend the right of those who wanted to keep one or all of the Lev 23 Holy Days only to condemn them as pagans for keeping the Bible Sabbath later?? There is no logic at all in bending the Bible in those directions.

He also flat out tells us to keep the Passover and feast of unleavened bread in 1 Corinthians 5:7-8 and exhorts us to imitate him as he imitates Jesus in 1 Corinthians 11:1.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Leviticus 19:26 Ye shall not eat any thing with blood: neither shall ye use enchantment, nor observe times.

So unless we have a contradiction here, it seems like observing times is something different than observing the sabbath.

It was too long ago for me to remember the details (I thought actually EVERYBODY would love the truth and would know it already years ago)
or to find a reference at hand,
but the Jews has a simple Hebraic understanding of this without any
twisting or contradicting any Scripture needed, by Grace in Yeshua HaMashiach.
It is most likely still 'findable', as God simply says seek and keep seeking and you shall find; and you shall know the truth(as He reveals it) and the truth will set you free(from sin , man's deceptions, and the devils doctrines/teachings and practices).

 

[Meowzltov]

Go to the 19Min:30Sec point at this video link for an enlightening 5 min segment stating that the RCC changed the Sabbath to week-day-1

Notice he answers that the Catholic Church changed the day of worship, not that the Catholic Church changed the Sabbath. He also states that Sunday is the "Day of the Lord," because Jesus rose from the dead. He correctly explains that the Jewish believers attended synagogue on Shabbat, and broke bread in Christian worship on Sunday -- which is what I just explained that I do as a Jewish Christian. He reminds us that the Church has been given authority to decide such matters.

All of this is stuff I've been telling you over and over and over. I'm glad you finally were able to agree.

 

[Bob S]

[QUOTE="Bob S, post: 69862950, member: 38283 ]Why do you "keep"* the Sabbath? Paul tells us the Sabbath was a shadow

only the annual feast day Sabbaths based in animal sacrifices pointing to the death of Christ.

Is that what Col 2: 16 says? Where did you get that information?

16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
If you are correct then Paul was a stutterer because he mentioned, according to you, feast days twice.

"The Sabbath was made for MANKIND" - Mark 2:27
"from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship" Is 66:23
"there REMAINS a Sabbath rest for the people of God" Hebrews 4 -- "remains" from the times of Ps 95. Still to this day

Then why didn't God explain that to the rest of the World? We have gone over Is 66 lots of times. I would think by now you would have given up using that verse as a reference. Jesus is our Sabbath(rest).

He didn't so you merely "quote you" to make up the lack of Bible fact to support your wild speculation.

Call what I write what you will.

God said "Remember the Sabbath day to KEEP it Holy..." Ex 20:8-11

Who did He say that to?
;

Romans 8:4-9 says only the lost are stuck in a spot where they "do not submit to the Law of God -- neither indeed CAN they be subjected to it"

It would seem like you have the 10 commandments as your guide. 2Cor 3:7-11 negates the 10 commandments as our guide and replaces it with the gift Jesus gave to each one of us, the Holy Spirit. Yep, read it for yourself and then read Rom 8 once more.

I pray this helps someone out there.

 

[Travis93]

Colossians 2:16-17 is about unbelievers judging believers for keeping those things. The feasts are not from the commandment of men, they are from God, he will be the one to judge people for not keeping them. Colossians 2:22 says it's the commandments and doctrines of men that you should be ignoring.

 

[BobRyan]

Romans 8:4-9 says only the lost are stuck in a spot where they "do not submit to the Law of God -- neither indeed CAN they be subjected to it"

Is that what Col 2: 16 says? Where did you get that information?

Which part of Romans 8 are you quoting?

This part -- ??
==========================

As for Col 2 -- condemning the traditions and doctrines of man - and upholding the Word of God --

Col 2 is opposed to making up a rule and judging others of being guilty of sin because they differ with you, even if that invented rule is related to a Bible command.

But Col 2 is not an attempt by Paul to delete the scriptures. Rather Paul condemns the idea of making stuff up that is not in scripture at all - where the only source/authority is "man".

Col 2:18 Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflatedwithout cause by his fleshly mind,
19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.


Col 2
20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. (KJV)

Col 2
20 If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as,
21 “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22 (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men?
23 These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.(NASB)[/QUOTE]

 

[Bob S]

Romans 8:4-9 says only the lost are stuck in a spot where they "do not submit to the Law of God -- neither indeed CAN they be subjected to it"



Which part of Romans 8 are you quoting?

This part -- ??
==========================

As for Col 2 -- condemning the traditions and doctrines of man - and upholding the Word of God --

Col 2 is opposed to making up a rule and judging others of being guilty of sin because they differ with you, even if that invented rule is related to a Bible command.

But Col 2 is not an attempt by Paul to delete the scriptures. Rather Paul condemns the idea of making stuff up that is not in scripture at all - where the only source/authority is "man".

Col 2:18 Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflatedwithout cause by his fleshly mind,
19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.


Col 2
20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. (KJV)

Col 2
20 If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as,
21 “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22 (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men?
23 These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.(NASB)

[/QUOTE]
Col 2 tells us that new moon, feasts and the weekly Sabbaths are shadows. I don't chase after shadows. If as you are trying to relate to us Paul didn't mean what we say it does then why are you not observing new moons and all the feast days?

Please do not try to tell us that Paul didn't mean the weekly Sabbath because he already wrote feast days which were also Sabbaths. Yep, he was referring to the real thing the weekly Sabbath which became a shadow. You worship a shadow, I worship Jesus.

 

[Travis93]

Col 2 tells us that new moon, feasts and the weekly Sabbaths are shadows. I don't chase after shadows. If as you are trying to relate to us Paul didn't mean what we say it does then why are you not observing new moons and all the feast days?

Please do not try to tell us that Paul didn't mean the weekly Sabbath because he already wrote feast days which were also Sabbaths. Yep, he was referring to the real thing the weekly Sabbath which became a shadow. You worship a shadow, I worship Jesus.[/QUOTE]

So will you refuse to go up to keep the feast of tabernacles once Jesus sets up his kingdom (Zechariah 14:16-19)? It says plagues and a lack of rain await those who won't. Unless you can say this event happened in the past (during the second temple period at that, since that's when Zechariah was written), it's still going to happen.

 

[BobRyan]

Col 2 tells us that new moon, feasts and the weekly Sabbaths are shadows.

No it does not. It says nothing about eating, or drinking, or the weekly Sabbath being abolished or being shadows.

So...
we still eat.
we still drink.
we still observe the weekly Sabbath as even ALL MANKIND will do for all eternity in the New Earth - Isaiah 66:23

But it does declare that the ceremonial Sabbaths - feasts - were shadows pointing forward to the sacrifice of Christ.

And by simply noting the details gloss over in Col 2 - we see Col 2 -- condemning the traditions and doctrines of man - and upholding the Word of God --

Col 2 is opposed to making up a rule and judging others of being guilty of sin because they differ with you, even if that invented rule is related to a Bible command.

But Col 2 is not an attempt by Paul to delete the scriptures. Rather Paul condemns the idea of making stuff up that is not in scripture at all - where the only source/authority is "man".

Col 2:18 Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflatedwithout cause by his fleshly mind,
19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.


Col 2
20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. (KJV)

Col 2
20 If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as,
21 “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22 (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men?
23 These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.(NASB)

 

[bugkiller]

Col 2 tells us that new moon, feasts and the weekly Sabbaths are shadows. I don't chase after shadows. If as you are trying to relate to us Paul didn't mean what we say it does then why are you not observing new moons and all the feast days?

Please do not try to tell us that Paul didn't mean the weekly Sabbath because he already wrote feast days which were also Sabbaths. Yep, he was referring to the real thing the weekly Sabbath which became a shadow. You worship a shadow, I worship Jesus.

Maybe he claims those jots and tittles of the law have passed away. But how can that be when according to him it can't until heaven and earth are gone.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Col 2 tells us that new moon, feasts and the weekly Sabbaths are shadows. I don't chase after shadows. If as you are trying to relate to us Paul didn't mean what we say it does then why are you not observing new moons and all the feast days?

Please do not try to tell us that Paul didn't mean the weekly Sabbath because he already wrote feast days which were also Sabbaths. Yep, he was referring to the real thing the weekly Sabbath which became a shadow. You worship a shadow, I worship Jesus.

So will you refuse to go up to keep the feast of tabernacles once Jesus sets up his kingdom (Zechariah 14:16-19)? It says plagues and a lack of rain await those who won't. Unless you can say this event happened in the past (during the second temple period at that, since that's when Zechariah was written), it's still going to happen.

That will be very interesting to see a plague on only one apartment out of say 6 in the same building. (Yeah I live in the west or I's say one in a hundred) It will be interesting to see a plague like no rain on a small or selected parcel(s) of dirt in a section of land. I don't think you understand what your selected verses say.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

No it does not. It says nothing about eating, or drinking, or the weekly Sabbath being abolished or being shadows.

So...
we still eat.
we still drink.
we still observe the weekly Sabbath as even ALL MANKIND will do for all eternity in the New Earth - Isaiah 66:23

But it does declare that the ceremonial Sabbaths - feasts - were shadows pointing forward to the sacrifice of Christ.

And by simply noting the details gloss over in Col 2 - we see Col 2 -- condemning the traditions and doctrines of man - and upholding the Word of God --

Col 2 is opposed to making up a rule and judging others of being guilty of sin because they differ with you, even if that invented rule is related to a Bible command.

But Col 2 is not an attempt by Paul to delete the scriptures. Rather Paul condemns the idea of making stuff up that is not in scripture at all - where the only source/authority is "man".

Col 2:18 Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflatedwithout cause by his fleshly mind,
19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.


Col 2
20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. (KJV)

Col 2
20 If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as,
21 “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22 (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men?
23 These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.(NASB)

You're at least entertaining. But I gotta admit you're getting very boring with your reruns.

bugkiller

 

[BobRyan]

You're at least entertaining. But I gotta admit you're getting very boring with your reruns.
bugkiller

In the presidential politics we have certain "antics" -- fluff non-substantive statements - that get bandied around... like that. My argument is that our 5 year olds should not do it.

 

[bbbbbbb]

In the presidential politics we have certain "antics" -- fluff non-substantive statements - that get bandied around... like that. My argument is that our 5 year olds should not do it.

Do what?

 

[BobRyan]

I agree with BobRyan, when Paul talked about observing times in Galatians 4:10 he could not have been talking about God's own sabbaths, and here is the proof.
Leviticus 19:3 Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father, and keep my sabbaths: I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 19:26 Ye shall not eat any thing with blood: neither shall ye use enchantment, nor observe times.

So unless we have a contradiction here, it seems like observing times is something different than observing the sabbath. Besides, if he was condemning people for keeping it, he's be condemning himself as he observed the sabbath many times (Acts 13:14, Acts 13:42-44, Acts 16:13, Acts 17:2, Acts 18:4, Acts 18:11) as well as the feasts (Acts 18:21, Acts 20:6, Acts 20:16, Acts 27:9).

This is true - Gal 4 deals with pagan holy days - and Paul condemns keeping even one of them.

By contrast in Romans 14 and the Bible approved holy days -- Paul condemns anyone who complains about those who keep them.

=====================

This thread is about the historic efforts made to bend/edit/point the Sabbath Commandment to "week day 1"

 

[Bob S]

Romans 8:4-9 says only the lost are stuck in a spot where they "do not submit to the Law of God -- neither indeed CAN they be subjected to it"



Which part of Romans 8 are you quoting?

This part -- ??
==========================

As for Col 2 -- condemning the traditions and doctrines of man - and upholding the Word of God --

Col 2 is opposed to making up a rule and judging others of being guilty of sin because they differ with you, even if that invented rule is related to a Bible command.

But Col 2 is not an attempt by Paul to delete the scriptures. Rather Paul condemns the idea of making stuff up that is not in scripture at all - where the only source/authority is "man".

Col 2:18 Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflatedwithout cause by his fleshly mind,
19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.


Col 2
20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. (KJV)

Col 2
20 If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as,
21 “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22 (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men?
23 These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.(NASB)

[/QUOTE]
Hi Bob,lets come and reason together. Bickering has not proved to each other our reason to be here.

Lets say you make up a covenant between the two of us. This covenant is even engraved in stone so as to last forever. I continuously brake it, because I cannot live up to the requirements of the covenant, until you get to the point that you can no longer tolerate my unworthiness and negate the covenant between us. I failed the intent of the covenants purpose. Does the covenant that was to last forever still have any value as far as being in force? It was between you and me. Even though it was written in stone it has no value to anyone else. It, with all its rules and regulations, has become history. We might use parts of it to write yet another and the old one would be a good place to start We can write a new covenant with better promises rules and rest assured the new one will be satisfactory with both of us. The laws of our first covenant has now become shadows and the reality is in the new one we make. So it is with the old and new covenant that God has given, the old with its rules and regulations is now a shadow of the new covenant in Christ.

 

[BobRyan]

Hi Bob,lets come and reason together. Bickering has not proved to each other our reason to be here.

Lets say you make up a covenant between the two of us. This covenant is even engraved in stone so as to last forever. I continuously brake it, because I cannot live up to the requirements of the covenant, until you get to the point that you can no longer tolerate my unworthiness

Let's say you and the previous owner make an agreement about the house that you live in. And you break that agreement by trashing the house -- then the previous owner says he will make a new agreement with you and that house will once again be deeded over to you and you will keep it in good condition.

Same house -- different agreement.

Same binding authority of the state that you live in to enforce the agreement.

Jeremiah said it would be the LAW of God known to Jeremiah and his readers - that would be written on the heart and mind.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Hi Bob,lets come and reason together. Bickering has not proved to each other our reason to be here.

Lets say you make up a covenant between the two of us. This covenant is even engraved in stone so as to last forever. I continuously brake it, because I cannot live up to the requirements of the covenant, until you get to the point that you can no longer tolerate my unworthiness and negate the covenant between us. I failed the intent of the covenants purpose. Does the covenant that was to last forever still have any value as far as being in force? It was between you and me. Even though it was written in stone it has no value to anyone else. It, with all its rules and regulations, has become history. We might use parts of it to write yet another and the old one would be a good place to start We can write a new covenant with better promises rules and rest assured the new one will be satisfactory with both of us. The laws of our first covenant has now become shadows and the reality is in the new one we make. So it is with the old and new covenant that God has given, the old with its rules and regulations is now a shadow of the new covenant in Christ.[/QUOTE]

Now let's say I, as an unbiased bystander, did not enter into your covenant, but Bob goes ahead and breaks it and then you turn around and rewrite it and then turn to me and tell me that I am obigated to keep Bob's covenant. I don't think so, do you?