Saturday or Sunday Church?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What is the spirit of the seventh day of the week Sabbath commandment?
I'd like to jump in and say that in addition to what MMXX says in post #937, the spirit of the seventh day commandment is also seen in Matthew 6 where Jesus tells us to consider the birds who don't toil or gather into barns... We are not to be worried about tomorrow.

Those that are worried about the future usually worry every day. Start by giving yourself one day off without worry, then work your way up to every day.
 
Upvote 0

guevaraj

an oil seller in the story of the ten virgins
Supporter
Mar 31, 2019
2,060
143
53
Berrien Springs
Visit site
✟538,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Single
Brother, yes! Sunday doesn't occur in the scriptures but The first day of the week does. On the first day of the week, we gathered with the local believers to share in the Lord’s Supper. Bible Gateway passage: Acts 20 - New Living Translation
Brother, Acts, chapter 20, verse 7 does not say the first day of the week with the expression: "the first of the Sabbaths", but speaks from the point of view of the "seventh day" as the most significant "day" of rest in the week of creation, the day of the week we call Saturday.

On Saturday (not Sunday), we gathered with the local believers to share in the Lord’s Supper. Paul was preaching to them, and since he was leaving the next day, he kept talking until midnight. The upstairs room where we met was lighted with many flickering lamps. As Paul spoke on and on, a young man named Eutychus, sitting on the windowsill, became very drowsy. Finally, he fell sound asleep and dropped three stories to his death below. Paul went down, bent over him, and took him into his arms. “Don’t worry,” he said, “he’s alive!” Then they all went back upstairs, shared in the Lord’s Supper, and ate together. Paul continued talking to them until dawn, and then he left. Meanwhile, the young man was taken home alive and well, and everyone was greatly relieved. (Acts 20:7-12 NLT fixed)​

That's why in post #926, I wished you Happy first day of the week, even though the CF clock said Saturday at 4:11 PM. I know you calculate days of the week as starting at sunset in Jerusalem. And the Lord's Day occurs in the scriptures. It probably refers to the first day of the week imo. United in growing in the knowledge of God!
I calculate the "day" of rest we know as the Sabbath as starting at sunset in Jerusalem, but not the days of the week that begin and end in the morning throughout the world, as verified during 40 years in the desert with Manna near the Promised Land, and the days are not from evening-to-evening as Judaism assumed due to the Sabbath in Jerusalem falling before the seventh day of the week from morning-to-morning because it is remembered in the creation week time zone.

So God’s rest is there for people to enter, but those who first heard this good news failed to enter because they disobeyed God. So God set another time for entering his rest, and that time is today. God announced this through David much later in the words already quoted: “Today when you hear his voice, don’t harden your hearts.” Now if Joshua had succeeded in giving them this rest, God would not have spoken about another day of rest still to come. So there is a special rest still waiting for the people of God. For all who have entered into God’s rest have rested from their labors, just as God did after creating the world. So let us do our best to enter that rest. But if we disobey God, as the people of Israel did, we will fall. (Hebrews 4:6-11 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
About the law changing or being eternal,

Well, we already talked about eating only plants, then all animals, then some animals.

In addition, Hebrews 7
For when the priesthood changes, a change in the law must come, too.

So some people are going to look at the situation and say that the law is eternal, but the application changes. Another person will say the law is not eternal.

In practice, it will boil down to the same thing imo.
 
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
About heaven and earth passing away being an idiom,

I agree. But I think it's an idiom for a cataclysmic event, such as the cross and Resurrection.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Brother, Acts, chapter 20, verse 7 does not say the first day of the week with the expression: "the first of the Sabbaths", but speaks from the point of view of the "seventh day" as the most significant "day" of rest in the week of creation, the day of the week we call Saturday.

On Saturday (not Sunday), we gathered with the local believers to share in the Lord’s Supper. Paul was preaching to them, and since he was leaving the next day, he kept talking until midnight. The upstairs room where we met was lighted with many flickering lamps. As Paul spoke on and on, a young man named Eutychus, sitting on the windowsill, became very drowsy. Finally, he fell sound asleep and dropped three stories to his death below. Paul went down, bent over him, and took him into his arms. “Don’t worry,” he said, “he’s alive!” Then they all went back upstairs, shared in the Lord’s Supper, and ate together. Paul continued talking to them until dawn, and then he left. Meanwhile, the young man was taken home alive and well, and everyone was greatly relieved. (Acts 20:7-12 NLT fixed)​


I calculate the "day" of rest we know as the Sabbath as starting at sunset in Jerusalem, but not the days of the week that begin and end in the morning throughout the world, as verified during 40 years in the desert with Manna near the Promised Land, and the days are not from evening-to-evening as Judaism assumed due to the Sabbath in Jerusalem falling before the seventh day of the week from morning-to-morning because it is remembered in the creation week time zone.

So God’s rest is there for people to enter, but those who first heard this good news failed to enter because they disobeyed God. So God set another time for entering his rest, and that time is today. God announced this through David much later in the words already quoted: “Today when you hear his voice, don’t harden your hearts.” Now if Joshua had succeeded in giving them this rest, God would not have spoken about another day of rest still to come. So there is a special rest still waiting for the people of God. For all who have entered into God’s rest have rested from their labors, just as God did after creating the world. So let us do our best to enter that rest. But if we disobey God, as the people of Israel did, we will fall. (Hebrews 4:6-11 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge
Brother, I think we all agree that the phrase The first day of the week is something that occurs in the scriptures.

If the seventh day is calculated differently from the other days, then it's not really the seventh, imo. You could call it the Sabbath day, sure!

United in giving thanks to God for each day.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

guevaraj

an oil seller in the story of the ten virgins
Supporter
Mar 31, 2019
2,060
143
53
Berrien Springs
Visit site
✟538,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Single
Brother, I think we all agree that the phrase the first day of the week is something that occurs in the scriptures.
Brother, for those who think that the Bible gives value to the first day, it does not! Everywhere that the first day, which we call Sunday, is translated, it actually speaks from the point of view of the seventh day as being the most important "day" of rest.
If the seventh day is calculated differently from the other days, then it's not really the seventh, imo. You could call it the Sabbath day, sure! United in giving thanks to God for each day.
Correct, that's why the expression "the first of the Sabbaths" refers to the seventh day and not only the word Sabbath, without qualifying it to refer to the first occurrence, because the Sabbath is only the seventh day in the place of the creation week and in no other place. This is why Joshua was not able to enter the Sabbath for 40 years in the desert near the Promised Land, when God had them keep the wrong Sabbath as punishment by "oath" by having them keep the seventh day near the Promised Land with Manna, when the Sabbath in the Promised Land falls earlier than the seventh day in the Promised Land.

So God’s rest is there for people to enter, but those who first heard this good news failed to enter because they disobeyed God. So God set another time for entering his rest, and that time is today. God announced this through David much later in the words already quoted: “Today when you hear his voice, don’t harden your hearts.” Now if Joshua had succeeded in giving them this rest, God would not have spoken about another day of rest still to come. So there is a special rest still waiting for the people of God. For all who have entered into God’s rest have rested from their labors, just as God did after creating the world. So let us do our best to enter that rest. But if we disobey God, as the people of Israel did, we will fall. (Hebrews 4:6-11 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
About Paul saying As the law says at the end of 1 Corinthians 14,

What I'm saying is that Paul says As the law says. He doesn't say According to the traditions you received from us.

The reasonable conclusion is that he was using a loose interpretation of the law. Or, if he was using a rabbinical or apostolic tradition, that tradition was based on a loose interpretation of the law.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
About the four laws in Acts 15 being four categories,

If this is for beginners, how would they know what the 66 laws are?

What are the 66 laws?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
More about Acts 15

I think the specific thing under discussion is:
"It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.”

Which, and I mean this gently, sounds like what you are saying.

The apostles give a resounding No, imo.

What are the four laws, then? They are the minimum behaviors from the law of Moses that the gentiles would need to do to keep from totally offending the Jews in the church.

Are they the only restrictions on behaviors for Christians? No. But I think the apostles expect that the spirit will lead the gentiles and conform them to the image of Christ.

There are, of course, occasional guidelines given by people like Paul. But I don't think he's intending to give an additional set of commandments.

It's like the situation with inappropriate contentography today. It's not mentioned in the Bible. But most Christians have a sense that something is wrong with it, and work to avoid it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ICONO'CLAST

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2005
1,902
781
new york
✟93,319.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The anyonymous author of Hebrews found different ways of describing the superiority of the Lord Jesus Christ. One of them, which forms the underlying motif of chapters 3 and 4, is that Jesus Christ gives the rest that neither Moses nor Joshua could provide. Under Moses, the people of God were disobedient and failed to enter into God’s rest (Heb. 3:18). Psalm 95:11 (quoted in Hebrews 4:3) implies that Joshua could not have given the people “real rest” since “through David” God speaks about the rest he will give on another day (Heb. 4:7). This in turn implies that “There remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (Heb. 4:9).

In speaking of this rest (Heb. 3:18; 4:1, 3-6, 8) the author consistently used the same word for “rest” (katapausis). Suddenly, in speaking about the “rest” that remains for the people of God, he uses a different word (sabbatismos, used only here in the NT) meaning specifically a Sabbath rest. In the context of his teaching, this refers fundamentally to the “Sabbath rest” which is found in Christ (“Come . . . I will give you rest,” Matt. 11:28-30). Thus we are to “strive to enter that rest” (Heb. 4:11).

Since Augustine, Christians have recognized that the Bible describes human experience in a fourfold scheme: in creation, fall, redemption, and glory. We are familiar with echoes of this in the Westminster Confession of Faith (chapter 9) and in Thomas Boston’s great book Human Nature in its Fourfold State. It is no surprise then that the Sabbath, which was made for man, is experienced by him in four ways.

In creation, man was made as God's image—intended “naturally” as God’s child to reflect his Father. Since his Father worked creatively for six days and rested on the seventh, Adam, like a son, was to copy Him. Together, on the seventh day, they were to walk in the garden. That day was a time to listen to all the Father had to show and tell about the wonders of His creating work.

Thus the Sabbath Day was meant to be “Father’s Day” every week. It was “made” for Adam. It also had a hint of the future in it. The Father had finished His work, but Adam had not.

But Adam fell. He ruined everything, including the Sabbath. Instead of walking with God, he hid from God (Gen. 3:8). It was the Sabbath, Father’s Day, but God had to look for him!

This new context helps us to understand the significance of the fourth commandment. It was given to fallen man—that is why it contains a “you shall not.” He was not to work, but to rest. Externally, that meant ceasing from his ordinary tasks in order to meet with God. Internally, it involved ceasing from all self-sufficiency in order to rest in God’s grace.

Considering this, what difference did the coming of Jesus make to the Sabbath day? In Christ crucified and risen, we find eternal rest (Matt. 11:28-30), and we are restored to communion with God (Matt. 11:25-30). The lost treasures of the Sabbath are restored. We rest in Christ from our labor of self-sufficiency, and we have access to the Father (Eph. 2:18). As we meet with Him, He shows us Himself, His ways, His world, His purposes, His glory. And whatever was temporary about the Mosaic Sabbath must be left behind as the reality of the intimate communion of the Adamic Sabbath is again experienced in our worship of the risen Savior on the first day of the week— the Lord’s Day.

But we have not yet reached the goal. We still struggle to rest from our labors; we still must “strive to enter that rest” (Heb. 4:11). Consequently the weekly nature of the Sabbath continues as a reminder that we are not yet home with the Father. And since this rest is ours only through union with Christ in His death and resurrection, our struggles to refuse the old life and enjoy the new continue.

But one may ask: “How does this impact my Sundays as a Christian?” This view of the Sabbath should help us regulate our weeks. Sunday is “Father’s Day,” and we have an appointment to meet Him. The child who asks “How short can the meeting be?” has a dysfunctional relationship problem—not an intellectual, theological problem—something is amiss in his fellowship with God.

This view of the Sabbath helps us deal with the question “Is it ok to do . . . on Sunday?—because I don’t have any time to do it in the rest of the week?” If this is our question, the problem is not how we use Sunday, it is how we are misusing the rest of the week.

This view of the Lord’s Day helps us see the day as a foretaste of heaven. And it teaches us that if the worship, fellowship, ministry, and outreach of our churches do not give expression to that then something is seriously amiss.

Hebrews teaches us that eternal glory is a Sabbath rest. Every day, all day, will be “Father’s Day!’ Thus if here and now we learn the pleasures of a God-given weekly rhythm, it will no longer seem strange to us that the eternal glory can be described as a prolonged Sabbath!



Yours for a Donation of Any Amount

For a limited time, we will send you Sinclair Ferguson's Lessons from the Upper Room book, DVD series, and accompanying digital study guide for your gift of any amount.

GET THESE RESOURCES



Originally published in Tabletalk, our daily Bible study magazine.

LEARN MORE
https://gift.ligonier.org/2317/less...tm_medium=marketing+block&utm_source=ligonier
 
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Brother, for those who think that the Bible gives value to the first day, it does not! Everywhere that the first day, which we call Sunday, is translated, it actually speaks from the point of view of the seventh day as being the most important "day" of rest.

Correct, that's why the expression "the first of the Sabbaths" refers to the seventh day and not only the word Sabbath, without qualifying it to refer to the first occurrence, because the Sabbath is only the seventh day in the place of the creation week and in no other place. This is why Joshua was not able to enter the Sabbath for 40 years in the desert near the Promised Land, when God had them keep the wrong Sabbath as punishment by "oath" by having them keep the seventh day near the Promised Land with Manna, when the Sabbath in the Promised Land falls earlier than the seventh day in the Promised Land.

So God’s rest is there for people to enter, but those who first heard this good news failed to enter because they disobeyed God. So God set another time for entering his rest, and that time is today. God announced this through David much later in the words already quoted: “Today when you hear his voice, don’t harden your hearts.” Now if Joshua had succeeded in giving them this rest, God would not have spoken about another day of rest still to come. So there is a special rest still waiting for the people of God. For all who have entered into God’s rest have rested from their labors, just as God did after creating the world. So let us do our best to enter that rest. But if we disobey God, as the people of Israel did, we will fall. (Hebrews 4:6-11 NLT)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge
Brother, if the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week at the place of creation, then it seems reasonable to me to wish you happy first day of the week at the place of creation.

United in rejoicing in the Lord!
 
Upvote 0

guevaraj

an oil seller in the story of the ten virgins
Supporter
Mar 31, 2019
2,060
143
53
Berrien Springs
Visit site
✟538,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Single
Brother, if the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week at the place of creation, then it seems reasonable to me to wish you happy first day of the week at the place of creation. United in rejoicing in the Lord!
Brother, you bring a good point! Since the Bible does not have an alternative expression for the first day as it does for the seventh day with the expression: "the first of the Sabbaths", that also shows that the seventh day is special in the word of God and the first is not special in the word of God. The best example of the use of this alternative expression for the seventh day is in the following passage, because it verifies what I found in Genesis, that the days of the week are from morning-to-morning and that the Sabbath in Jerusalem is before the seventh day.

long after the Sabbath (evening), as it dawns beyond Saturday (morning), came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, to see the tomb. (Mathew 28:1, my own translation)​

361381_ff7aae7ab7169d40699276fc6f90eac7.png


United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge
 
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
About some examples where we probably disagree in the application of the law,

There are some laws about not eating unclean animals. I think the application isn't about what goes in our mouths, but what comes out of our hearts.

A different example is Leviticus 13
“The leper in whom the plague is shall wear torn clothes, and the hair of his head shall hang loose. He shall cover his upper lip, and shall cry, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’

I don't think people with a particular skin condition should have to dress that way or walk around that way today. But we do want to realize that sin is to be avoided, and that God judges sin.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
About quoting from the Didache,

Do you consider it authoritative? Scripture?

What are you using for your Canon of scripture?
 
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Brother, you bring a good point! Since the Bible does not have an alternative expression for the first day as it does for the seventh day with the expression: "the first of the Sabbaths", that also shows that the seventh day is special in the word of God and the first is not special in the word of God. The best example of the use of this alternative expression for the seventh day is in the following passage, because it verifies what I found in Genesis, that the days of the week are from morning-to-morning and that the Sabbath in Jerusalem is before the seventh day.

long after the Sabbath (evening), as it dawns beyond Saturday (morning), came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, to see the tomb. (Mathew 28:1, my own translation)​

361381_ff7aae7ab7169d40699276fc6f90eac7.png


United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge
Brother, it's possible that The Lord's day is an alternative expression for the first day of the week.

United in seeking God!
 
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
About traveling for festivals and laws regarding Temple practice,

The temple was still standing for the first 40 years after the resurrection.

So the people that Paul is writing to in Romans, Corinthians, Galatians... they would all be under those laws, if I understand you correctly.
 
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
One other thought about traveling to Jerusalem for feasts and sacrifices,

Is the idea that you don't have to do it if it's too difficult? But what about the passage from Deuteronomy that I believe you've quoted that says the law is not too difficult for you?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,124
2,188
54
Northeast
✟177,893.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, the Bible directly says that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), so that is not a matter of perception. For example, it is eternally against God's righteousness to commit murder and the circumstances under which killing someone counts are murder will never change, but whether it is right to kill someone is circumstantial. We are held innocent if in the middle of the night we strike a thief who broke in and they die and that will never change to becoming guilty if we do that. Likewise, if it were to ever change so that it became in accordance with God's righteousness to commit murder, then God's righteousness would not be eternal. We can be confident regardless of which covenant someone is under, if any, and no matter how many covenants God makes or that become obsolete that it will always be sinful to commit murder.



Jesus said that not the least part would disappear until heaven and earth disappear and that all is accomplished, which are either both referring to end times (Revelation 21:1) or are idioms for saying that it is never going to happen. Instructions for how to act in accordance with God's righteousness can't be abolished through first abolishing God's eternal righteousness.



Why?

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.



66 laws is still a much easier starting point than 613 laws. Do you think that 66 laws is too many for mature Gentiles believers to be able to keep?




In Acts 15:19, the point was to not make things too difficult for new believers who are turning to God, so that at least raises the question of whether it was intended to be an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether there is room for new believers to mature in their faith and learn more about how to love God and walk in His way by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues (Acts 15:21). Furthermore, there is evidence in places like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:19-21 where Gentiles were expected to obey more than just the four things listed in Acts 15:20.



Indeed, we should not practice those things as a lifestyle, though the point still remains that there are more than the four things listed in Acts 15:20 that Gentiles are required to refrain from doing or else they will not inherit the Kingdom.



Please give some examples where you justify your disagreement about how to apply it today.



Didache 6:2 For if you are able to bear all the yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able, what you are able that do.

In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it forms the basis for the oral Torah. The verses that I cited for Paul instructing people to follow the traditions that they instructed refer to Jewish traditionary law, or in other words oral Torah. People should follow the Torah in the way that the elders of their community teach. The pilgrim festivals are also connected with the temple, and laws in regard to temple practice apply only when there is a temple in which to practice them.




Please explain why interpretations of Paul where he was teaching against obeying what God has commanded should be preferred over interpretations of Paul where he was teaching in accordance with what God has commanded. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying what He has commanded. Two people can have different interpretations about how to correctly obey what God has commanded while still being in complete agreement that followers of God should follow what God has commanded, so those are two separate issues that should not be blurred.
About Romans 14 and interpretations,

If Paul is using a loose interpretation of Torah, then he's not teaching against it if he says it's okay to treat all days alike.

I don't know of anyone who really says we should disobey God. It's all a matter of which commandments, and how they are applied today imo.
____________
I believe this concludes post 896. I'm enjoying this discussion, I hope you are too!
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.