• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Any scriptural evidence that evangelized Gentiles are to keep the Sabbath?

Status
Not open for further replies.

eleos1954

God is Love
Site Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
11,016
6,439
Utah
✟852,417.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Neither did keeping the Sabbath.


In know. And there is ample evidence that the sabbath likewise is a sign for then messianic rest.


At which point does Jeremiah specify that "his" law ist restricted to the 10 commandments? You have referred to a passage which shows that "his" Law included sacrifices!

It is double standard to say that the ceremonial law (like sacrifices) has to be spiritualised, and a law that is (according to Jeremiah, Jesus and other parts of Scripture) not more important (maybe even less) should be kept literally.

It's rather late in Germany, I'm going to sleep and read more postings tomorrow.

John 9:16 Some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath.”

AGAIN .... they were in error of what THEY were ACCUSING him of. Jesus did NOT violate the Sabbath.

In know. And there is ample evidence that the sabbath likewise is a sign for then messianic rest.


messianic rest

ie ... relating to the Messiah

1 Peter 2:21
Berean Study Bible
For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in His footsteps:

Jesus who is God kept the 7th day Sabbath ...

John 6:38
For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
 
Upvote 0

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
13,114
4,640
Eretz
✟376,204.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Well, they are not the Noachite law. See Post #45. The Noachide laws are somewhat similar, especially if one adds the interpretation given later, e.g. the "blood" referring to murder instead of food. But the ways the Noachide and the Apostolic (Acts 15) commands are reached at are quite different.

The whole logic of the narrative (e.g. the arguments given by Peter) speak against an interpretation that the Torah should (later) be taught to them. The list is about the minimum believing Goyim should keep so that believing Jews can safely live with them.

BTW: It would be informative for me to learn how the term "Ger Toshav" relates to what I wrote in Post #45.

Yes they are. if you are correct, why then was there even any reason to finish the sentence with "torah taught every Shabbat"? I was not involved in your discussion in post 45.
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Jesus answers it in Mark 7:6-13

"Word of God" = "Moses Said" = "Commandment of God"
This is no answer to what I said. I know the OT is the word of God, and never said anything to the contrary.

Every word of God has a purpose, I remember when I found a point that made Mt 1:17 important to refute a sort of heresy.

The question at issue here is whether the Sabbath has meaning in the New Covenant. It surely has a command to employers to give the employees rest from their work, and there is no question it has a spiritual meaning. But what I pointed to is that it does not have a meaning as a literal command to us believers.

The term "Law of Mose" is quite Biblical (Lk 2:22; 24:44; Jn 1:17; Act 13:38; 15:5; 28:23; 1Co 9:9; Heb 10:28; cf. Mt 19:8; Jn 7:19; 8:5 etc.), so it is legitimate to ask whether "commandment" refers to the commandments of Mose or the commandments of Jesus (Jn 13:34; 14:15.21; 15:10.12; 1.Jn 2:3.4; cf. 2.Pt 3:2 etc.).

So Mk 7 gives no answer to thr question I posted.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,342
11,897
Georgia
✟1,091,965.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The crucial question is: Is this about the commandments of Mose, or about the commandments of Jesus?

Jesus answers it in Mark 7:6-13

"Word of God" = "Moses Said" = "Commandment of God"

This is no answer to what I said. I know the OT is the word of God, and never said anything to the contrary.

Is your issue that the commandments of Jesus are not in that same category as "the Word of God" or the "Commandment of God"??

The question at issue here is whether the Sabbath has meaning in the New Covenant.

The New Covenant states specifically that it has the "Law of God" known to Jeremiah and his readers "written on heart and mind" Jer 31:31-34 and it is "unchanged" in the NT Heb 8:6-12.

It just does not get any easier than that.

But what I pointed to is that it does not have a meaning as a literal command to us believers.

That is a good example of a statement not found in scripture at all OT or NT.

What we do find is that for all eternity after the cross "All mankind" will come before God "from Sabbath to Sabbath to bow down" Is 66:23 in the New Earth.

I prefer the Bible.

The term "Law of Mose" is quite Biblical

No doubt - which is why Jesus in Mark 7 slam hammers the traditions of man with the Word of God showing us that tradition is crushed at the foot of "Commandment of God" = "Moses said" = "Word of God"

so it is legitimate to ask whether "commandment" refers to the commandments of Mose or the commandments of Jesus

As Paul points out in Eph 6:1-2 it certainly refers to that unit of Law where the 5th commandment "is the first commandment with a promise" -- that unit of TEN most certainly "included" in the term. Paul reminds us of this again in Romans 7 - as does Christ in Matt 19:17 saying "Keep THE Commandments" and is then asked "which ones?" and at that point Jesus quotes from "the TEN".

I prefer the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
He created the day .... blessed it and sanctified it (made it HOLY) ... set it apart ... just as we are being sanctified (being made Holy) set apart .... so the day He created is set apart ... set apart from what?
You didn't ponder whether this is of relevance in the New Covenant, and if yes, how this relevance looks like.

4. It was made before the fall; hence it is not a type; for types were not introduced till after the fall.
This seems to be an ad hoc argument without any scriptural base.
5. Jesus says it was made for man (Mark 2:27), that is, for the race, as the word man is here unlimited; hence, for the Gentile as well as for the Jew.
"For man" means that the Sabbath is no value in itself, but something given to man as a help. Therefore we should not follow blind rules, and according to Rom 14:5 this include we should not folllow rules that automatically make some days important for every believer.

7. It was given to Adam, the head of the human race. (Mark 2:27; Genesis 2:1-3.)
This is not said in the verses you linked to. This argument is a blatant fake.

9. It is' not a Jewish institution, for it was made 2,300 years before ever there was a Jew.
The Sabbath rest was made in the creation, but the command to keep the Sabbath was made known to the people of Israel (Neh 9:14) just prior to the 10 commandments (Ex 16:22-30). It is deception to use this revelation as an argument (your point 12) that the Sabbath was known before the Exodus.
10. The Bible never calls it the Jewish Sabbath, but always "the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Men should be cautious how they stigmatize God's holy rest day.
This argument is a crafty diversion from the fast that the Sabbath is a sign between Israel and God (Ex 31:13).

11. Evident reference is made to the Sabbath and the seven-day week all, through the patriarchal age. (Genesis 2:l-3; 8:10,12; 29:27,28.etc.)
Gen 2:1-3 does not mention a command, Gen 8:10 shows Noah not to rest, but to do several things every 7 days, Gen 29:27f is about a feast that lasted 7 days ...

A month is about 29.53059 days (or about 1447/49 days) in average, 29 or 30 days in a quite irregular sequence. If you celebrate the 29th and 30th (it there is a 30th day) as a "new moon feast", 7 days are just a quarter of the remaining 28 days, a quarter of a "net month", so to speak. So a 7-day period is a convenient period for reckoning time. That has nothing to do with a regularly 7-dayx period, since the first of seven days was always the 1st. 8th, 15th 23th (and 29th day as the start of the "rest of month", or new moon festival).
13. Then God placed it in the heart of His moral law. (Exodus 20:1-17.)
"Heart" implies importance, but the most imoportant commands (the true heart of the moral law) is defined by Jesus in a quite different manner, Mt 22:34-40). Calling the 10 commandments the heart of moral law is deviation from the teaching of Jesus.

17. It was sacredly preserved in the ark in the holy of holies. (Deuteronomy 10:1-5.)
The law was there as a witness against Israel (Deut 31:25-29). Does not look like an argument we should keep what the jews couldn't keep (Acts 15:10).

20. It is the sign of the true God, by which we are to know Him from false gods. (Ezekiel 20:20.)
The "we" in this verse is the people of Israel. Am I a Jew? No, I am "Gentile believer" (Acts 15:23).

God has pronounced a special blessing on all the Gentiles who will keep it. (Isaiah 56:6,7.)
This was in the times of the Old Covenant. The first verse of the chapter speaks of the justice of God who will call all enemies to Jerusalem to eat the dead bodies there (V.9ff), but promises that the non-Jews (including castrates that could not be circumcised) could be saved from that.

The Lord requires us to call it "honourable". (Isaiah 58:13.) Beware, ye who take delight in calling it the. “old Jewish Sabbath,” “a yoke of bondage,” etc.
The term you warn against s from Peter, who applied it to the law, which is not only "honorable", but even holy. And remember, it is Peter who was given the promise that his decisions will be in accordance to what has been bound or loosened in heaven. No one, no pope, no prophetess or whatsoever has the right to set himself into the seat of Peter and overturn what he said. And then ponder why the Sabbath is not mentioned in Acts 15 ...

30. When the Son of God came, He kept the seventh day all His life
... by doing works on Sabbaths, e.g. the work he mentioned in Jn 7:21 (namely the healing of the lame man in Jn 5.

Can we say we follow Jesus if we deny the right to do works on a Sabbath?

31. The seventh day is the Lord's Day. (See Revelation 1:10; Mark 2:28; Isaiah 58:13;Exodus 20:10.)
You mix two different terms, the term in Rev 1:10 is the traditional name for the Sunday, the day when (after the Sabbath had gone) the Christians assembled (which sometimes implied they trangressed the rules how far one was allowed to go on a Sabbath).

32. Jesus was/is Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:28), that is, to love and protect it, as the husband is the lord of the wife, to love and cherish her (1 Peter 3:6.)
Interesting, how you twist that verse. "Lord of the Sabbath" was used as an explanation of a work Jesus did on a Sabbath. Unless you understand "love and protect" in the sense "allow to work for God" you argue contrary to what Jesus meant.

35. He taught His disciples that they should do nothing upon the Sabbath day but what was “lawful” (Matthew 12:12.) ... (ie it is lawful to do good.
So if we can do good, we have no right to rest on a Sabbath.

38. Thirty years after Christ's resurrection, the Holy Spirit' expressly calls it "the Sabbath day,"(Acts 13:14.)
No, it is not the day of Jesus' resurrection that is called Sabbath there,. It is the day when there is a Jewish service. You seem to be advocating about people who call the Sunday "Sabbath", this is not my position, so why you post such things to me?

43. It was customary to hold prayer meetings upon that day. (Acts 16:13.)
The prayer meetings you mention are the substitute for a synagogue service. There was no such service in Philippi, for there was no synagogue in that pagan colony, there were not even 10 Jewish men who could conduct such a service, hence the substitute prayer meeting was the only place where Paul could practice his "Gospel is for Jews first" principle.
47. There was never any dispute between the Christians and the Jews about the Sabbath day. This is proof that the Christians still observed the same day that the Jews did.
There certainly have been some dispute, for Paul warns about keeping the Sabbaths.

48. In all their accusations against Paul, they never charged him with disregarding the Sabbath day. Why did they not, if he did not keep it?
Because Paul observed the Torah to win the ones under the Torah, and lived without Thorah to win the ones without Torah (1.Co 9,19-23). The accusation that he taught apostasy from the Law of Mose (Acts 21:21) certainly included o teach not to keep the Sabbath.
50. The Sabbath is mentioned in the New Testament fifty-nine times, and always with respect, bearing the same title it had in the Old Testament, “the Sabbath day.”
No, the Sabbath is also mentioned without such article, as in Col 2:16-17. And can you show me the respect you discovered in that verse?

51. Not a word is said anywhere in the New Testament about the Sabbath's being abolished, done away, changed, or anything of the kind.
But what about the statement that no day can be made a rule to be observed by every believer? If you hold that day separate, it is ok, if you don't regard it special, it is ok. Everyone should do according his own conviction (Rom 14:5).

52. God has never given permission to any man to work upon it. Reader, by what authority do you use - the seventh day for common labor?
Well, Jesus cited a permission just to do that: My father is working, so do I. Is a permission by Jesus Himself nothing in your eyes?

55. As the Sabbath was kept in Eden before the fall, so it will be observed eternally in the new earth after the restitution. (Isaiah 66:22, 23.)
Hm, there is no evidence the Sabbath was kept before the Exodus, hence you cannot just state it was kept before the fall.

And did you not notice that the verse you quoted also mentioned the New Moon feast. Do you keep it? If not, why is Is 66:23 no argument that one should keep New Moon feast (or Sabbath)?

56. The seventh-day Sabbath was an important part of the law of God, as it came from His own mouth, and was written by His own finger upon stone at Sinai. (See Exodus 20.) When Jesus began His work, He expressly declared that He had not come to destroy the law. “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets.” Matthew 5:17
If ther Sabbath was of the same rank than the command to not kill, why did Jesus never cite it as an command? There are several instance of Jesus citing commandments, sometimes from the decalogue, sometimes (especially when he showed the heart of the law) from other parts of the Law. Why did he never cite the 4th commandment?

Ponder this as well .... regarding the antichrist ...
An antichrist is one who denies Jesus is the son of God, or one who denies God became man in Jesus (denying euther the divine or the human nature of Christ), as we can reed in the verses where we find the term "antichrist". It is teaching of men to call another figure (the first beast in Rev 13) "antichrist", or even the antichrist.

English Standard Version
He shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and shall think (can't actually do it) to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time.
God appointed many feasts, not just the Sabbath. And Daniel was an OT prophet who did not know about the time of the church (Eph 3:5). If you read that book carefully, you will see that he "jumps" from the second coming of Christ (in the time of the Roman empire) directly o Jesus ruling and judging the world.

So whatever this verse is about, it is immediately about a time before the first coming of Jesus (and only by parrallel about later times). Unless you have NT corroboration for this, do not apply Daniel to the end of times as revealed in the NT.
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Jeremian 21:33
It does not mention the 10 words, but rather speaks of the commandments of God in general.

and ... how we are to love God is in the 1 thru 4 of the 10 commandments

and ... how we are to love our neighbor is in 5-10 of the 10 commandments.
This is your interpretation. I do not question these two sentences, but they are no proof that Jer 23 is about the 10 words.

And it is a fact what Jesus called the heart of the law (or the highest commandment).
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,342
11,897
Georgia
✟1,091,965.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The New Covenant states specifically that it has the "Law of God" known to Jeremiah and his readers "written on heart and mind" Jer 31:31-34 and it is "unchanged" in the NT Heb 8:6-12.

It just does not get any easier than that.

You didn't ponder whether this is of relevance in the New Covenant, and if yes, how this relevance looks like. .

What we do find is that for all eternity after the cross "All mankind" will come before God "from Sabbath to Sabbath to bow down" Is 66:23 in the New Earth.

I prefer the Bible.

You are of course - free to differ
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,342
11,897
Georgia
✟1,091,965.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
It does not mention the 10 words, but rather speaks of the commandments of God in general.

Jer 31:31-34 "I will write My LAW on their heart and mind"

Exegesis - all Bible scholars know that the reference to the LAW of God in Jer 31 - in context for Jeremiah and his readers -- most certainly included the TEN commandments, written on stone, ( "He spoke these words and added NO more" Deut 5) and kept inside the ark.

That is irrefutable. Nothing in the Jer 31 text says "Not the Law of God that we all know was given at Sinai"
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
In Mark 7:6-13 Christ refers to them as "commandments"
In Matt 19 as "Commandments"
In Eph 6 and Romans 7 Paul also refers to them as commandments
The word "commandment" does not automatically mean "10 [or 9] commandments".
  • You showed no passage where all the 10 words are referred to.
  • Jesus did not confine the word "commandment" to the 10 words, he uses this word also for the command to write a document if a man divorces his wife (Mk 10:5).
  • In Mt 22:34-36 Jesus speaks about the heart of the law, the highets commandment, he cites two of being both highest, and none of them is in the 10 words.
  • No one doubts that the word in Ex 20:3-17 are commandments, the question is rather whether they are nine commandments (and together with Ex 20:2 19 words) or ten commandments (with Ex 20:2 being the preamble). This cannot be decided by showing that V.2-17 are commandments.
The division of the TEN is how it is in both the Hebrew and Protestant versions. Did you know that?
According to the Jewish counting, the second word is "You shall not have other Gods beside me", and the first word is no commandment. See first columns in the table here.

Deut 10:4 4 He wrote on the tablets, like the former writing, the Ten Commandments which the Lord had spoken to you on the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly; and the Lord gave them to me.
The word "commandment" in your version is an interpretation, the Hebrew has "10 words". But in one poit I have to apologize: Unlike in Exodus, where the term is used several chapter later, in the verse you quoted there is a direct link to the word in Det 5:6-21.
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
56
Chattanooga
✟24,118.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

@helmut

Pardon the intrusion as you seem busy enough...

but I am curious as to what you make of His affirming what is taught from Moses’ seat Matt 23:2-3

and that like winters He also expects Sabbaths to continue into the future Matt 24:20

oh and of course “here are they” keeping most of Yah’s Law? with the faith OF Yahushua being what? Buddhism Islam Hinduism Catholic Protestant ...Jewish?
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
56
Chattanooga
✟24,118.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The word "commandment" in your version is an interpretation,

You seem to know that the 10 are words or sayings

descriptions...of Him His character His Way

Young’s translations has a more closely accurate version to the Biblical Hebrew with

“thou dost not”

so where I AM...ALL these standards are in place...

and will be STILL when His people are restored to the image they were created in...His...to live as we did before this detour of sin...He provides us NOW and here the SAME “that where I AM ye may be also”
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
What makes you think I do not have scripture? God's ISRAEL according to the new covenant scriptures are no longer those in the flesh but in the Spirit and a Jew is not one outwardly but inwardly of the heart in the Spirit.

............

CONCLUSION: God's ISRAEL is the name given by God to all those who BELIEVE and FOLLOW his WORD. GENTILES are now grafted in. If you are not a part of the God's ISRAEL then you have no part in the NEW COVENANT.
You overlooked the following:
Ro 11:28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

The enemies of the Church (or God???), as far as the Gospel is concerned, are beloved one because will never revoke His covenant with Israel.

Yes, The Church can be told "spiritual Israel", but this does not mean that the Israel according to the flesh has no future. The verse I cited above is in the context of the promise that Israel as a whole will be saved.

Need more scripture????
I've seen the trick o0f heaping many verses for the own case, but omitting the Scriptural evidence against it. I don't need more evidence that there is some truth in what you said (I hinted at that above), I showed you the key verse that proves your interpretation is wrong. Israel according to the flesh has the promise of being saved as a whole, what the precise meaning of "whole" is I am not sure (all Jews living when Christ returns?). But I am sure Scripture cannot be broken, as .God does not revoke the covenant with those who are "enemies for our sake".
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The Hebrew words used for ten commandments is עשׂרת הדברים׃ and translates as ten words in the English.
This translation alone does not make any sense in the English as it is more than ten words for each law and more like ten sentences.
"Word" can also refer to a clause. Maybe this is more common in my mother tongue. The question is whether there are ten "sayings" or ten commandments.

Fact of the matter is that these ten words (sentences) of God are all commandments ("Thou shalt not"; "You shall not") right?
OK.letsb look at the 10 words: Ten Commandments - Wikipedia

As you can see. the first one starts with "I am, not "You shall", only the second one (according to the Jewish counting I referred to starts with "You shall have no other ...". Unlike the case at the end, where the division of "You shall not covet" into two cannot be maintained consistently in both version (Ex 20 and Deut 5), this difference is almost a matter of taste, with no evidence (pro/contra) from the texts itself.

The correct English translation therefore is ten commandments
This is not "correct", but a translation which settles the question how the 10 words should be demarcated by a discretionary decision.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
53,342
11,897
Georgia
✟1,091,965.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
In Mark 7:6-13 Christ refers to them as "commandments"
In Matt 19 as "Commandments"
In Eph 6 and Romans 7 Paul also refers to them as commandments

There is more than enough data to justify the translation in the OT as "Ten Commandments"
.

The word "commandment" does not automatically mean "10 [or 9] commandments".
  • You showed no passage where all the 10 words are referred to. .
Eph 6:1-2
Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 Honor your father and mother (which is the first commandment with a promise), 3 so that it may be well with you, and that you may live long on the earth.

First commandment WITH a promise "in what well known unit of LAW"??

You claim that the readers had a great many choices where the 5th commandment is "the first commandment with a promise" in some "other" well defined well-known unit of Law -- and it is not the TEN.

The burden of proof is on your assumption at that point.

As it is - there is no ambiguity at all in that text - and you have yet to propose such a well accepted unit of law known to Paul and his readers.

Notice that in Romans 7 Paul also claims that that unit of law include "do not covet".

And in Rom 13 he shows that it includes even more of the TEN.

So what unit of law is it - that they would all have had which ordered the commands such that the 5th commandment is the first commandment with a promise -- ? Answer: the TEN.
 
Upvote 0

clefty

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2020
512
109
56
Chattanooga
✟24,118.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
God does not revoke the covenant with those who are "enemies for our sake".

Right He does not but they DID...they in killing their husband to which they said “I DO” at Sinai...

thus they separated what Yah had joined and are free to remarry...

resurrected the Bridegroom seeks again a faithful wife to Him His Ways...the SAME Living Oracles He gave at Sinai to His former wife

He will not marry two women...Blood Israel AND a Body of Christ...Or are you MAD*? Happily Paul was not Acts 26:25

*Mid Acts Dispensationalist
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Is your issue that the commandments of Jesus are not in that same category as "the Word of God" or the "Commandment of God"??
What do you mean with "category"? The Bible makes the distinction between the commandments of the OT and the commandments of Jesus. Does this put them in different categories?

But a distinction made in the Bibel should not be ignored.

That is a good example of a statement not found in scripture at all OT or NT.

What we do find is that for all eternity after the cross "All mankind" will come before God "from Sabbath to Sabbath to bow down" Is 66:23 in the New Earth.
You omitted "from new moon to new moon". Do you celebrate the New Moon? If that verse is no proof that New Moon should be celebrated in all eternity, how can you say it is proof that Sabbaths should be kept?

And this is about the new heaven and earth, when there will be no sun, and no moon (Rev 21:22). So what tells us the mentioning of New Moon (which was celebrated when the crescent of the new moon was detected) in a prophecy about a time when there is no moon (and hence no crescent to be detected)? It says: Sabbath and New Moon are a means to denote time and maybe have some figurative spiritual meaning.

I prefer the Bible.
I prefer the whole Bible, not some verses which don't say what they seem to say if you ignore other parts of Scripture.

As Paul points out in Eph 6:1-2 it certainly refers to that unit of Law where the 5th commandment "is the first commandment with a promise" -- that unit of TEN most certainly "included" in the term.
AFAIK know there is no commandment before the 10 words with a promise, so this holds whether 10 (or 9) is included or not.

Paul reminds us of this again in Romans 7 - as does Christ in Matt 19:17 saying "Keep THE Commandments" and is then asked "which ones?" and at that point Jesus quotes from "the TEN".
But he never quotes the 4th commandment. If you prefer the Bible you should at least notice that.

And if one asks "which commandments", it matters whether you are circumcised or not, as Paul makes clear in Gal 5:3. So an answer to a Jew is not automatically binding to a persomn that is not circumcised.

Again,. I prefer the whole Bible.
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
You are of course - free to differ
I differ when I see that you don't take the whole Bible.

I'm willing to be corrected by passages in the Bible that I did not take into accont, but only when there are not passages I took into account and the dialog partner did not, which are crucial to the argumentation.
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Jer 31:31-34 "I will write My LAW on their heart and mind"

Exegesis - all Bible scholars know that the reference to the LAW of God in Jer 31 - in context for Jeremiah and his readers -- most certainly included the TEN commandments, written on stone, ( "He spoke these words and added NO more" Deut 5) and kept inside the ark.

That is irrefutable. Nothing in the Jer 31 text says "Not the Law of God that we all know was given at Sinai"
OK, now we have changed the theme. It began with a discussion about the 4th commandment, and I spoke against the view that it is the "heart" of the law (and not the commandments Jesus showed us to be highest). Jes 31:31-34 does not support this view.

It was never my intention to say that the Decalogue was not included in the commandments Jer 31 refers to. This list includes the keeping of Sabbath, being circumcised, offering sacrifices etc., in short: The whole Torah. But to use this passage that we should sacrifice animals, get circumcised, or need to keep the Sabbath is contrary to the NT.
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
but I am curious as to what you make of His affirming what is taught from Moses’ seat Matt 23:2-3
Not being a Jew, I'm not sure whether I should draw there any conclusion for me.

and that like winters He also expects Sabbaths to continue into the future Matt 24:20
This "future" is 67 AD. And it is said to Jews.

oh and of course “here are they” keeping most of Yah’s Law? with the faith OF Yahushua being what? Buddhism Islam Hinduism Catholic Protestant ...Jewish?
You lost me? What does polytheistic (or in some variants pantheistic) Hinduism or Buddhism have to do with the teachings of Jesus and His apostles?

Is "Yahushua" a misspelled Yehowshu` (or, omitting the Ayin at end and replacing it with an a, as in modern Ivrit, "Yeshua")? Otherwise I don't know at all what you are talking about.
 
Upvote 0

Helmut-WK

Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,050
420
Berlin
✟92,781.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
You seem to know that the 10 are words or sayings
They are called "words" in the Hebrew, and if you have a better term than "saying" to make clear they are not 10 token you can take from a dictionary ("word" in the literal sense), name it.

The Jews say the first word is "I am YHWH who brought you out of Egypt ...", hence the first word in Jewish counting is no commandment. I already linked to evidence about that. A list of 10 words, of which the first is no commandment, is no list of ten commandments, but of one non-commandment and 9 commandments. And there is no hard evidence which tradition is closer to how the God wants the list be subdivided, hence both traditions (one introductory word and 9 commandments, or 10 commandments) are of equal value. Is this distinction important at all?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.