To whom and why God gave the Sabbaths?

[bugkiller]

John, like anyone mentioning scripture or God's commands meant Torah and the prophets.
The same ones we should be studying to show ourselves approved.

Abram was a father of Israel. So was Adam, Seth, Noah and so on. Straight line relationships.
God has always dealt with only one family group, and all covenants are with that bloodline.

I have an article for you to read. See if it answers your questions. And consider the answers
before trying to discount it.
http://www.askelm.com/essentials/ess009.htm

Do you wish to debate the errors in this article?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

God is the root or the life source, Jesus is the stem (the only connection to God), Israel
and later, us, are the branches. Why did some of the natural branches have to be cut
out for us to be grafted in? And when will they be regrafted?

Please read my previous post to this one too.

On what basis do you claim God (the Father) is the Root?

bugkiller

 

[tall73]

In some verses, not all. When the "new moon" comes and marks the beginning of the biblical month, is it a NEW moon or the same moon that was there last month that is renewing a repeating cycle? The covenant was called everlasting by God not by me. Therefore, the covenant IS in fact everlasting. If He makes a brand new one, He has trumped and/or dumped the one He said was forever? He isn't the author of confusion. If He calls it everlasting then it is... whether that stands in harmony with our current theology or not.

Since He called it everlasting, the context DEMANDS renew rather than brand new in this case.

Please post every instance that you feel refers to an everlasting covenant so I can address them. But in the meantime, please make some attempt to address what I posted to you from Hebrews. So far you have not addressed it at all, after saying you wanted to not avoid things.

Also, if you do not accept Hebrews as inspired please note that so I can take that into account.

You have not explained the language in Hebrews 8 of first...second. That would seem to be critical to explain as it directly contradicts your idea that it is the same. Nor have you explained the language quoted from Jeremiah by Hebrews: not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.

You have also not explained how a change of the nature of the priesthood, sacrifice, sanctuary, and the very promises in the covenant itself, from a covenant with promises on both sides, to a unilateral covenant can still be talking about the same covenant. Everything is better than the old. The old points to the various elements, as a shadow. The new is not just a renewal of the shadow. The new is the reality which the shadow pointed to. The reality is better. The Hotwheel is not the same as the actual car.

Heb 10:1 For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.
Heb 10:2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins?
Heb 10:3 But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.
Heb 10:4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Heb 10:5 Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, "Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me;
Heb 10:6 in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure.
Heb 10:7 Then I said, 'Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.'"
Heb 10:8 When he said above, "You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings" (these are offered according to the law),
Heb 10:9 then he added, "Behold, I have come to do your will." He does away with the first in order to establish the second.
Heb 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

 

[Ken Rank]

Please post every instance that you feel refers to an everlasting covenant so I can address them. But in the meantime, please make some attempt to address what I posted to you from Hebrews. So far you have not addressed it at all, after saying you wanted to not avoid things.

Also, if you do not accept Hebrews as inspired please note that so I can take that into account.

You have not explained the language in Hebrews 8 of first...second. That would seem to be critical to explain as it directly contradicts your idea that it is the same. Nor have you explained the language quoted from Jeremiah by Hebrews: not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.

You have also not explained how a change of the nature of the priesthood, sacrifice, sanctuary, and the very promises in the covenant itself, from a covenant with promises on both sides, to a unilateral covenant can still be talking about the same covenant. Everything is better than the old. The old points to the various elements, as a shadow. The new is not just a renewal of the shadow. The new is the reality which the shadow pointed to. The reality is better. The Hotwheel is not the same as the actual car.

Heb 10:1 For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.
Heb 10:2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins?
Heb 10:3 But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.
Heb 10:4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Heb 10:5 Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, "Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me;
Heb 10:6 in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure.
Heb 10:7 Then I said, 'Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.'"
Heb 10:8 When he said above, "You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings" (these are offered according to the law),
Heb 10:9 then he added, "Behold, I have come to do your will." He does away with the first in order to establish the second.
Heb 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

Will do, as long as you'll give it a fair read. I am not interested in some of the back and forth we see on forums like this. I will be fair and consider what you send if you will do the same. Otherwise, let's save each other the time, agreed?

I will probably be out the rest of today. Will catch up soon. Blessings.

 

[tall73]

Will do, as long as you'll give it a fair read. I am not interested in some of the back and forth we see on forums like this. I will be fair and consider what you send if you will do the same. Otherwise, let's save each other the time, agreed?

I will probably be out the rest of today. Will catch up soon. Blessings.

Yes, I will read and consider your response.

 

[pat34lee]

No because of JN 1:17 and 15:10.

bugkiller

No what, and what do those have to do with it?

 

[pat34lee]

Do you wish to debate the errors in this article?

bugkiller

There are no errors, but we can discuss what you don't understand.

 

[pat34lee]

On what basis do you claim God (the Father) is the Root?

bugkiller

He is the source of all life. Too many Christians stop at Jesus, when he
came to bring us to the Father.

 

[bugkiller]

No what, and what do those have to do with it?

Have you even read them? I note you have no comment on them. I infer that they oppose your idea and you have not shown how they support your idea.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

There are no errors, but we can discuss what you don't understand.

You know very well what I oppose in that article from previous post of mine.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

He is the source of all life. Too many Christians stop at Jesus, when he
came to bring us to the Father.

Answer the question, please.

bugkiller

 

[ChristnMe]

The sabbath is not about taking a break for when in Genesis it says, 'God rested on the seven day' This is more referring to God having completed creation, He looked at it and was satisfied. God doesn't take vacations.

The law twisted what God ordained to be a day of observing God and His works. As when one go to Temple or church. Sabbath is not for man to rest but for God to be honored, revealed and celebrated. That is why Jesus said, man is not created for the Sabbath, but the Sabbath for man. Man is to control the Sabbath and not the other way around. The actual day of Sabbath by law is broken because Jesus clarified the purpose of it. To take time away from works and remember who gives the power to create wealth, prosperity etc. We can honor God everyday but God asks us to keep one special day for this honoring called the Sabbath. To give Him undivided attention.

Adam did not work to create his garden but was given it by God and told to tend to it on the sixth day. God then on the seventh day ordained it to be a time to marvel at God's creativity and power. At this time Adam has no concept of laboring requiring a physical rest. Man in himself does not have the power to create but is ordained to be a steward of God's will to create in the same manner God demonstrated, by speaking life. Before God could teach Adam how creation is done, they fell from grace and kicked out of the garden. Then by toil did they learn to survive and thus requiring rest as mankind defines today. It is why right after the tree of knowledge is placed in the garden satan comes, because he has no power to destroy what God did in the first six days. He need man to do it for him.

The story of creation is also a spiritual example of how we today must operate not by toiling but by Faith and stewardship enter into the rest (confidence) of God being the one who provides, protects and orders.

 

[pat34lee]

You know very well what I oppose in that article from previous post of mine.
bugkiller

Only the generalities. I outgrew that stage some years back.

 

[pat34lee]

Answer the question, please.
bugkiller

Answered already, though you may not like the answer.
I thought about attaching scripture, but God as our source
should be a given to any Christian.

 

[pat34lee]

You know very well what I oppose in that article from previous post of mine.
bugkiller

Time for mindreading, I guess.

Moses gave the law. To whom?
Israel.

Grace came through Jesus (Yeshua) to whom?
Israel. It didn't go to the gentiles until some years
after Yeshua's death. The first missions were to the
children of Israel in the surrounding countries.

Splitting God's law from Jesus' law is not a real thing,
because they are the same. Go forward a few chapters.

John 5:19, 5:30, 6:38, 8:16

This is the real problem with lawless theology. It teaches
a Jesus who is not God, and who brings another gospel
than that given by God, and another God from that in the
Torah.

 

[Ken Rank]

Please post every instance that you feel refers to an everlasting covenant so I can address them.

It starts with Adam... made perfect, tempted, he sinned and the result was death, decay, etc. So, God devised a plan to restore all things and this before there was even a sin (Revelation 13:8) and He began to implement it starting in Genesis 3:15. From there we see an interesting phenomena, He makes “my covenant” with a succession of people. Not, “a covenant” but “my covenant.” This begins with Noach in Genesis 6:18, and that repeated (or renewed) in Genesis 9:9. From there it goes to Abraham (Genesis 17:2 and Genesis 17:4) and then said to be headed to Isaac as an everlasting covenant (Genesis 17:9). There is no mention of Jacob directly in Genesis in connection with “my covenant” but the previous mentions said it would be passed down and then we have Psalm 105:8-10 which I will post here:

Psalm 105:8 He remembers His covenant forever, The word which He commanded, for a thousand generations, (9) The covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac, (10) And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To Israel as an everlasting covenant

So, 1000 generations (idiomatic... that would be 40,000 years at least... so an idiom for “everlasting”) followed by “my covenant” which was made with Abraham, and then passed to Isaac, and then confirmed with Jacob and then to his offspring, as “an everlasting covenant.”

Also, if you do not accept Hebrews as inspired please note that so I can take that into account.

I see Hebrews and the other 65 books as inspired.

You have not explained the language in Hebrews 8 of first...second.

At Sinai God gave the Torah. In it, He included a command that Israel was to keep the law on their own hearts, all the time (Deuteronomy 6:6-8). However, Israel was not able to keep the Law on their hearts all the time, and God knew, at the appointed time that HE WOULD write it there Himself. This is first hinted at in Deuteronomy 30:6, and we also see it in Ezekiel 11:19 and a few other places. GOD WOULD take the law from the stone and shift it to the heart. So... when we get to the new (or renewed) covenant, what is the sign?

Jeremiah 31:33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

The law will be written on the heart... that which was on stone is being moved to the heart. Same text, same Torah (Law) but moved from the stone to the heart as prophesied by Ezekiel.

Nor have you explained the language quoted from Jeremiah by Hebrews: not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.

What is different? The Law is being moved from stone to heart. It is not like it was when He made the covenant with Israel at Sinai where THEY HAD TO KEEP IT ON THEIR HEART (sorry for the caps, for emphasis only), now HE WRITES IT THERE PERMANENTLY. That is what is “better” in Hebrews. Instead of us trying to keep it on the heart, God writes it with His own finger inside us... MUCH better!

You have also not explained how a change of the nature of the priesthood, sacrifice, sanctuary, and the very promises in the covenant itself, from a covenant with promises on both sides, to a unilateral covenant can still be talking about the same covenant.

I don't know how much you have studied the priesthoods (plural) so allow me a quick explanation.

The Levitical priesthood is called “everlasting” (Numbers 25:13 but this appears in a few other places as well) which means it can't be done away with. The Melchizedekian priesthood is ALSO an everlasting priesthood (Hebrews 7:3) so we seemingly have an issue. Not really...

First... the Levitical priesthood is TO ISRAEL, whereas the Melchizedekian priesthood IS ISRAEL. We are NOT Levites, you and I (I don't think we are, anyway) but we ARE priests. So, Exodus 19:6 and 1 Peter 2:9 are speaking about us..God's Israel, being a priesthood. Melchizedekian though, not Levitical. At this time, there is no reason for Levitical priests. Ezekiel seems to hint at sacrifices in the Millennial Kingdom (we can discuss that in another thread) which would mean they would have a job to do. And, since God called that priesthood “everlasting” then that would make a level of sense. But what is this “changed thing in Hebrews 7:12? Well, the word for changed is metatithēmi and Thayer defines it as “ to transpose (two things, one of which is put in place of the other), transfer.” We have a transfer, but most Christians see this and “assume” that means one goes away.... it doesn't, it simply means the WEIGHT or FOCUS is taken from one and transferred to the other... but both can still exist which is good... seeing BOTH were called everlasting.

I will stop here now... I left you many verses to at least put your cursor over and consider. Thanks for hearing me out, I look forward to your reply.

Peace and blessings to you and yours.
Ken Rank

 

[bugkiller]

Time for mindreading, I guess.

Moses gave the law. To whom?
Israel.

Grace came through Jesus (Yeshua) to whom?
Israel. It didn't go to the gentiles until some years
after Yeshua's death. The first missions were to the
children of Israel in the surrounding countries.

Splitting God's law from Jesus' law is not a real thing,
because they are the same. Go forward a few chapters.

John 5:19, 5:30, 6:38, 8:16

This is the real problem with lawless theology. It teaches
a Jesus who is not God, and who brings another gospel
than that given by God, and another God from that in the
Torah.

A lawless theology? Really? Isn't that just another way to say promoting sin? Jesus is God the Son. Jesus is not God the Father. Thus in John 15:10 Jesus can not be presenting the law ALA 10 Cs. If Jn 1:17 is to be believed Jesus did not issue nor teach the law. Jesus is not a parrot. You seem to be saying that Jesus also issued the 10 Cs, if I read you correctly. As I said Jesus is not the Father.

I've absolutely no idea why it matters on the timing when the Gospel went to the gentiles.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

It starts with Adam... made perfect, tempted, he sinned and the result was death, decay, etc. So, God devised a plan to restore all things and this before there was even a sin (Revelation 13:8) and He began to implement it starting in Genesis 3:15. From there we see an interesting phenomena, He makes “my covenant” with a succession of people. Not, “a covenant” but “my covenant.” This begins with Noach in Genesis 6:18, and that repeated (or renewed) in Genesis 9:9. From there it goes to Abraham (Genesis 17:2 and Genesis 17:4) and then said to be headed to Isaac as an everlasting covenant (Genesis 17:9). There is no mention of Jacob directly in Genesis in connection with “my covenant” but the previous mentions said it would be passed down and then we have Psalm 105:8-10 which I will post here:

Psalm 105:8 He remembers His covenant forever, The word which He commanded, for a thousand generations, (9) The covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac, (10) And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To Israel as an everlasting covenant

So, 1000 generations (idiomatic... that would be 40,000 years at least... so an idiom for “everlasting”) followed by “my covenant” which was made with Abraham, and then passed to Isaac, and then confirmed with Jacob and then to his offspring, as “an everlasting covenant.”



I see Hebrews and the other 65 books as inspired.



At Sinai God gave the Torah. In it, He included a command that Israel was to keep the law on their own hearts, all the time (Deuteronomy 6:6-8). However, Israel was not able to keep the Law on their hearts all the time, and God knew, at the appointed time that HE WOULD write it there Himself. This is first hinted at in Deuteronomy 30:6, and we also see it in Ezekiel 11:19 and a few other places. GOD WOULD take the law from the stone and shift it to the heart. So... when we get to the new (or renewed) covenant, what is the sign?

Jeremiah 31:33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

The law will be written on the heart... that which was on stone is being moved to the heart. Same text, same Torah (Law) but moved from the stone to the heart as prophesied by Ezekiel.



What is different? The Law is being moved from stone to heart. It is not like it was when He made the covenant with Israel at Sinai where THEY HAD TO KEEP IT ON THEIR HEART (sorry for the caps, for emphasis only), now HE WRITES IT THERE PERMANENTLY. That is what is “better” in Hebrews. Instead of us trying to keep it on the heart, God writes it with His own finger inside us... MUCH better!



I don't know how much you have studied the priesthoods (plural) so allow me a quick explanation.

The Levitical priesthood is called “everlasting” (Numbers 25:13 but this appears in a few other places as well) which means it can't be done away with. The Melchizedekian priesthood is ALSO an everlasting priesthood (Hebrews 7:3) so we seemingly have an issue. Not really...

First... the Levitical priesthood is TO ISRAEL, whereas the Melchizedekian priesthood IS ISRAEL. We are NOT Levites, you and I (I don't think we are, anyway) but we ARE priests. So, Exodus 19:6 and 1 Peter 2:9 are speaking about us..God's Israel, being a priesthood. Melchizedekian though, not Levitical. At this time, there is no reason for Levitical priests. Ezekiel seems to hint at sacrifices in the Millennial Kingdom (we can discuss that in another thread) which would mean they would have a job to do. And, since God called that priesthood “everlasting” then that would make a level of sense. But what is this “changed thing in Hebrews 7:12? Well, the word for changed is metatithēmi and Thayer defines it as “ to transpose (two things, one of which is put in place of the other), transfer.” We have a transfer, but most Christians see this and “assume” that means one goes away.... it doesn't, it simply means the WEIGHT or FOCUS is taken from one and transferred to the other... but both can still exist which is good... seeing BOTH were called everlasting.

I will stop here now... I left you many verses to at least put your cursor over and consider. Thanks for hearing me out, I look forward to your reply.

Peace and blessings to you and yours.
Ken Rank

I've no idea how one can come to your conclusion about the self defining passage of Jer 31:31-33.

bugkiller

 

[Bob S]

No, me saying, "I will let this drop" does not mean I am the only one who gets a say. It means, "I am saying what I think and then I am letting it drop." Meaning... I will have said what I care to, if you want to say something about it, go ahead! Not sure why you had to go to a negative from me when we don't know each other. Why not assume I didn't mean it in an untoward way before assuming the worst?



I said, "If Yeshua is your rest, then why are you still decaying, dying, exposed to sin, tempted?" And that stands... we ARE SAVED from any final death but the fact remains that the wages of sin is death. Adam wasn't born with a clock ticking toward his demise... the clock began to tick when he sinned. When we are born, the clock starts to tick and we are not at rest yet because we ARE STILL exposed to sin, tempted, we decay, age, and die. We won't taste the final death but we ARE still paying the price for sin. Forgiven? Sure... we have the promise of eternal life... but we are still paying the price because we STILL DIE.

I agree and thanks for your explanation.

Sure, we all did.... but we are not perfected yet, not incorruptible, we WILL be changed when he returns. Until then... we are His, we are on a great journey, but by accepting Jesus (is there a verse that says to accept him or to confess he is Lord which means living according to His standards and not ours?) you still age, decay, and die.

Yep, in the mean time what a joy to know we are part of the group that knows our lives are not in vain.

Paul said that the Spirit was given as "a down payment" (2 Cor. 1:22 and 5:5) and while he comforts, teaches, guides us... etc.... the fact remains that the Spirit was given a a down payment toward much more to come. What you have and what you are is not all you will be. There is much before us. Shalom!

Wonderful news, claim the promises.

 

[tall73]

Thank you. I have read all the way through, but if it is OK with you would like to take the discussion one part at a time.

It starts with Adam... made perfect, tempted, he sinned and the result was death, decay, etc. So, God devised a plan to restore all things and this before there was even a sin (Revelation 13:8) and He began to implement it starting in Genesis 3:15. From there we see an interesting phenomena, He makes “my covenant” with a succession of people. Not, “a covenant” but “my covenant.” This begins with Noach in Genesis 6:18, and that repeated (or renewed) in Genesis 9:9.

Gen 9:8 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him,
Gen 9:9 "Behold, I establish my covenant with you and your offspring after you,
Gen 9:10 and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the livestock, and every beast of the earth with you, as many as came out of the ark; it is for every beast of the earth.
Gen 9:11 I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth."
Gen 9:12 And God said, "This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations:
Gen 9:13 I have set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth.

My take is that God speaks to Noah and says "my covenant with you and your offspring after you" and then describes a covenant completely different than that with Abraham. The "my covenant" is "with you". The you in this case is Noah. Abraham's covenant was not the same as Noah's. Not destroying the world with a flood is different than all generations being blessed through your offspring. So while you take "my covenant" as a technical phrase to speak of the same covenant, I would say "my covenant with you" indicates the person he is actually talking to. Now in some cases it is again the same being referred to. But it is made clear that is the case.

The covenant is the agreement. The covenant is comprised of the promises on both sides, and stipulations. Noah's covenant is again unilateral. But the promise made to God is not the same as that made to Abraham, and they are not the same covenant.