What day is the sabath what day does the bible say?

[helmut]

Those verses do not imply a connection.

They do not prove it. But they make such a connection more likely.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

They do not prove it. But they make such a collection more likely.

Collection? You mean connection? I don't think they make a connection more likely at all.

 

[helmut]

If there was a break in the weekly cycle,
there would be confusion at the end of month.

Confusion?

According to that theory, the first day of month (new moon day) was a Sabbath. So will be the 8th, 15th, 22th and 29th day.

At the evening of the 29th day you may see a new moon, which means the next day will be the first day of the new month, and so you will have a 2-day-feast: 29th of old moth, 1st of new month (both sabbaths).

If there is no moon visible on the 29th, the next day will be a sort of "leap day", either counted as the 30th day of the old month or without counting (inter-month day). And so there will be a 3-day feast: 29th of old month, inter-day, 1st of new month (Sabbath, special new moon day, Sabbath).

Why should there anyone confused about it? The only confusing that could arise would be the situation when in one region a new moon was sighted and only a 2-day feast celebrated, while in another region no-one saw a new moon on the evening of the 29th day, and they celebrated a 3-day-feast, with two different "calendars", and two different celebrating of Sabbath. This possibility is an argument against that theory, since there is no mention of such a situation.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I never said that Paul taught against the law. But he taught that the believer is dead for the law. Not the law has been made void, but the believer.

Upholding the law includes saying what the law tells about itself: It is a witness against men, no means of salvation.

If you think this is "teaching against the law" you are joining those who accused Paul of forsaking the law.

Would that be BECAUSE the believer KEEPS the Law? We are not "under the law" because since we keep it, we are not under its curse...because Yeshua got rid of the curse when we DO break it.

 

[helmut]

Collection? You mean connection? I don't think they make a connection more likely at all.

Sorry, yes, I meant connection. I will edit that posting.

 

[helmut]

In Leviticus 23:15-16, Shavuot happened on the day after the 7th Sabbath for a total of 50 days. However, if the Sabbath was reset to the first of every lunar month, then there would be partial weeks at the end of every month and the day after the 7th Sabbath would never total 50 days.

Well, since there are only one or two new months in 7 weeks, there will be many times when it will be literally 50 days.

I think this verse is a strong argument against the lunar Sabbath (thank you for showing it), but advocates of that theory may say the figure 50 is rounded. So it is no absolute proof, but it is a stronger argument than any argument for the lunar Sabbath.

 

[helmut]

Except you that claim the Sabbath can be on
the 28th then 3 days later another Sabbath.

There is a calculation error: If the first day is a Sabbath, the Sabbath 4 weeks later is the 29th, this is (in a lunar or lunisolar calendar) either the ultimate or the penultimate day of the month.

So the matter is not about 3 extra days, but one extra day within the new moon feast.

 

[helmut]

Would that be BECAUSE the believer KEEPS the Law? We are not "under the law" because since we keep it, we are not under its curse...because Yeshua got rid of the curse when we DO break it.

We keep the law of Christ (unless we sin, of course), which may include to live "without law", as Paul did for some times (1.Cor 9:21).

BTW: "Yeshua" (with an a at ther end) is a pronunciation which originated in Spanish Jews, who pronounced only 5 vowels as in Spanish (the Masoretes had 7 signs for 7 different vowels, possibly in accordance with ancient Greek?). Originally, the name was Yeshu`, with an Ayin (`) at the end. Ayin was a consonant and not a vowel, ask an oriental Jew or an Arab, if you want to learn more its pronunciation.

 

[helmut]

He tied it to creation.

And to the slavery in Egypt and the Exodus.

You are taking Deuteronomy IN PLACE OF Exodus. We need to hold onto both.

I think we have to hold both, and since my impression was that you neglect Deuteronomy, I emphasized on it.

Holding onto both means, that we recognize both statements: That the Sabbath is remembrance of God's rest on the seventh day of creation, and that it is re remembrance of the Exodus. And we should not forget that the Sabbath is the sign that makes a difference between Jews and Gentiles.

Both must be held up. Scripture cannot be broken. And since Deuteronomy does not nullify Exodus, you must still deal with the Exodus passage that God command this because of creation.

Yes, the seven days stem from creation, but this does not nullify that the law (the entire law) was given to Istrael and not to every people.

we all need to keep this command, just we all should not kill, or lie, or commit adultery.

These commands can be found in the NT, so we cannot dismiss them as just OT stuff. But what about not wearing mixed stuff, and all the other things that are not confirmed in the NT, including the Sabbath?

Neither is there a hint in the Bible that the command against graven images is given to people outside Israel.

Nonsense. It is clearly stated in Acts 15:20 that we should not use images (so the literal translation of the word eidolon). It is idolatry to kneel bore a graven image. Never read that verse?

 

[packermann]

Nonsense. It is clearly stated in Acts 15:20 that we should not use images (so the literal translation of the word eidolon). It is idolatry to kneel bore a graven image. Never read that verse?

I'll respond to the rest later, but I looked up the verse. Here it is:

Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.

So we should abstain from meat from blood. Did you eat a nice, juicy steak that is red inside? Isn't that redness from blood? So would anyone who eats red meat disobeying the Bible?

Also, this command came not from the Lord. It came from the apostles AND the elders (verse 22). So what was this? It was a Church Council. So since the Bible is quoting a Council as if it is infallible, this shows that Church Councils are infallibly led by the Holy Spirit.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Yes I know that but someone said it's not the christian sabath

Billions of "someones" (people worldwide) disagree with God.

So?

God is still right.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

We keep the law of Christ (unless we sin, of course), which may include to live "without law", as Paul did for some times (1.Cor 9:21).

BTW: "Yeshua" (with an a at ther end) is a pronunciation which originated in Spanish Jews, who pronounced only 5 vowels as in Spanish (the Masoretes had 7 signs for 7 different vowels, possibly in accordance with ancient Greek?). Originally, the name was Yeshu`, with an Ayin (`) at the end. Ayin was a consonant and not a vowel, ask an oriental Jew or an Arab, if you want to learn more its pronunciation.

Yeshua is Hebrew. Yeshu is the abbreviated form close to the Aramaic Isho. Arabs call Him Isa

 

[packermann]

These externals can drive people away from Christ. When a pagan idol is buried in a statue of a Saint, are the pagans converted by this act really come closer to Christ when they kneel before this statue?

In also have a problem when an "external" consists in an act explicitly forbidden in the Bible.

But how can you judge someone's internal heart by some external act? You say that "a pagan idol is buried in a statue of a Saint", but that is not what is in my heart. I could kneel before that statue, but that does not mean that in my heart I am worshipping the statue. If you should kneel at your bed in front of a Bible does that mean you are worshipping the Bible? I don't think so.

So you are judging me on externals without knowing what is going on in my heart.

Idolatry is a matter of the heart. It is placing something over God, such as money.

Jesus Christ is the image (eichon) of the invisible God. (Colosians 1:15). Before, in the Old Testament, God had no form. That is why no graven image can be made of Him. But now God has a form. His image is Jesus. And we can have statues and paintings of Jesus since he is the image of God.

If you want no image of Jesus, then lets ban all movies of Jesus. No more "King of Kings" or "Jesus of Nazareth". And lets not stop there. Lets teach that a mental image of Jesus is a sin (this is not as far-fetch as you think. Read the Protestant J.I. Packer's "Knowing God"). We should stop thinking that He is a tall man with dark hair and a beard. We should resist all images. And soon our Lord will not seem real at all. He will be an abstract concept. As for me, I want an actual visual of my Lord. It reminds me that He is real. So let me see Jesus in a statue, let me see Him in the movie "Jesus of Nazareth", and let me visualize Him standing over me in His black hair and beard while I pray. Let me have my physical and mental picture of Him. You do not have to. But if it helps me in my prayers who are you to judge me?

Also, where is it in the New Testament that kneeling before a statue is a sin? You have been arguing that unless it is in the New Testament it is only a restriction for the Jew. So where is it? So you have used the verse in Acts, but that verse also forbids you from eating a red, juicy steak (animals from blood). Are you prepared to give up steak?

 

[klutedavid]

But how can you judge someone's internal heart by some external act? You say that "a pagan idol is buried in a statue of a Saint", but that is not what is in my heart. I could kneel before that statue, but that does not mean that in my heart I am worshipping the statue. If you should kneel at your bed in front of a Bible does that mean you are worshipping the Bible? I don't think so.

So you are judging me on externals without knowing what is going on in my heart.

Idolatry is a matter of the heart. It is placing something over God, such as money.

Jesus Christ is the image (eichon) of the invisible God. (Colosians 1:15). Before, in the Old Testament, God had no form. That is why no graven image can be made of Him. But now God has a form. His image is Jesus. And we can have statues and paintings of Jesus since he is the image of God.

If you want no image of Jesus, then lets ban all movies of Jesus. No more "King of Kings" or "Jesus of Nazareth". And lets not stop there. Lets teach that a mental image of Jesus is a sin (this is not as far-fetch as you think. Read the Protestant J.I. Packer's "Knowing God"). We should stop thinking that He is a tall man with dark hair and a beard. We should resist all images. And soon our Lord will not seem real at all. He will be an abstract concept. As for me, I want an actual visual of my Lord. It reminds me that He is real. So let me see Jesus in a statue, let me see Him in the movie "Jesus of Nazareth", and let me visualize Him standing over me in His black hair and beard while I pray. Let me have my physical and mental picture of Him. You do not have to. But if it helps me in my prayers who are you to judge me?

Also, where is it in the New Testament that kneeling before a statue is a sin? You have been arguing that unless it is in the New Testament it is only a restriction for the Jew. So where is it? So you have used the verse in Acts, but that verse also forbids you from eating a red, juicy steak (animals from blood). Are you prepared to give up steak?

Not sure that I would agree with what you wrote.

For example you said.

Before, in the Old Testament, God had no form. That is why no graven image can be made of Him

But the Old Testament does, in fact, present a very detailed image of the creator.

Daniel 10:5-6
I lifted my eyes and looked, and behold, there was a certain man dressed in linen, whose waist was girded with a belt of pure gold of Uphaz. His body also was like beryl, his face had the appearance of lightning, his eyes were like flaming torches, his arms and feet like the gleam of polished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a tumult.

Anyone could paint, draw, mould, a picture of that man. i.e., the creator. Without too much effort. So I would strongly disagree with you.

 

[Soyeong]

Well, since there are only one or two new months in 7 weeks, there will be many times when it will be literally 50 days.

I think this verse is a strong argument against the lunar Sabbath (thank you for showing it), but advocates of that theory may say the figure 50 is rounded. So it is no absolute proof, but it is a stronger argument than any argument for the lunar Sabbath.

You're welcome. However, on a weekly Sabbath system, then it is not just many times that it will literally be 50 days, but rather it will always total exactly 50 days, while it will never total 50 days on a lunar Sabbath system.

 

[klutedavid]

You're welcome. However, on a weekly Sabbath system, then it is not just many times that it will literally be 50 days, but rather it will always total exactly 50 days, while it will never total 50 days on a lunar Sabbath system.

Are you sure about that?

 

[Soyeong]

Are you sure about that?

I wouldn't have said it otherwise.

 

[helmut]

So we should abstain from meat from blood. Did you eat a nice, juicy steak that is red inside? Isn't that redness from blood?

No, it is not. It is from myoglobin. See also the text previous to the linked passage for the difference to blood (hemoglobin)

Also, this command came not from the Lord. It came from the apostles AND the elders (verse 22).

You forgot the Holy Spirit (v.28).

So what was this? It was a Church Council. So since the Bible is quoting a Council as if it is infallible, this shows that Church Councils are infallibly led by the Holy Spirit.

Well, why do you say "Catholic Church"? It is the orthodox church that maintains leadership not by one person, but by all patriarchs. The Latin patriarch (aka Pope) has left this church, founded his own church (and installed "patriarchs", which should not confused with his colleagues, the real patriarchs).

The Coptic church (which separated out of quite different reasons) calls its patriarchs "pope", I suppose there is no difference in the Coptic language between these two terms.

If I would believe that a Church Council will be automatically led by the Holy Spirit as the assembly described in Acts 15, I would become Orthodox, not a Catholic schismatic.

 

[helmut]

Yeshua is Hebrew.

No, it is Ivrit, the language now spoken in Israel. The ancient Hebrew was without a, but with Ayin. In spoken Ivrit, there is no Ayin, the letter is either pronounced as an a or as an Aleph. Written Ivrit is like Hebrew (some differences for neologisms, loan words etc., but basically identical).

Yeshu is the abbreviated form close to the Aramaic Isho. Arabs call Him Isa

No, Yeshu (with neither a nor Ayin) is an distortion of the name used by Jews to curse the one who (in their perception) caused so many persecution of Jews.

Did you overlook the mark for Ayin? Well, instead of a sign similar to the small sign used in scientific transcription, I can use phonetic signs: Yeshuʕ If you can't see the "ʕ" you fonts lack phonetic symbols. But anyway: please notice the difference between Yeshu (a curse) and Yeshu` (the name of our Savior in ancient Aramaic).

"ʕisho" is a transcription from Greek iesou(s) (with itacism) into Aramaic, not the original name. You are right that this is the origin of Arabic "ʕisa". Note that both names begin with an Ayin, because the long "i" (or "ee" for English speekers ) in Middle and modern Greek is a vowel and has to be preceded by a consonant, either Ayin or Aleph.

 

[helmut]

I could kneel before that statue, but that does not mean that in my heart I am worshipping the statue. If you should kneel at your bed in front of a Bible does that mean you are worshipping the Bible? I don't think so.

As to the figure mantled as a saint, I did not speak about you, but there are examples of that e.g. in Latin America.

Why do you kneel before that statue? I never kneel in front of a Bible, it is rather that a Bible may be in front of me when I kneel, but that is a sort of coincidence, like kneeling at my bed.

Jesus Christ is the image (eichon) of the invisible God. (Colosians 1:15). Before, in the Old Testament, God had no form.

Well, he had a form,. as you can read in Isaiah 6. Or in other OT passages where it is said that men saw the LORD. And since no-one can see the Father, they must have seen Jesus.

If you want no image of Jesus

I'm no Jew who forbids every image. A resist images that are venerated. And well, this includes mental images. Mental images may be helpful, but (as C.S. Lewis wrote somewhere) we should not confuse them with the original.

Also, where is it in the New Testament that kneeling before a statue is a sin?

How do you understand the NT command that we should abstain from images? This is the literal translation in Acts 15:20, or other verses like 1.John 5:21. An image venerated by you is an idol for you.