Why the weekly Sabbath (Saturday) is the Lord's Day, in the Bible

[Leaf473]

Not when they are correct. And that is not subject to opinion.

I believe it's okay to question a correct interpretation. Jesus correctly interpreted the law, saying that loving God with everything and loving your neighbor as yourself would lead to eternal life.

A lawyer asks him a follow-up question, which leads to the story of the Good Samaritan.

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 10:29-30 - New American Standard Bible

But wanting to justify himself, he said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” The Good Samaritan - Jesus replied and said, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he encountered robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[trophy33]

God’s holy mountain doesn’t change from one book to another. All I see is you using your words to argue with scripture. Too far apart, take care.

I wonder why you still did not realize that the need to add to Scriptures or to take single verses out of their context and to stick them together to create your own context is a sign your theology is not a good one.

 

[HIM]

The holy mountain is heaven and that is not the past…. The apostles kept every Sabbath Acts 18:4, and said what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God 1 Cor 7:19 so your argument appears not to be with me.

I hope you are not serious with this one.

Not only was the Apostle Paul keeping the Sabbath but also the Greeks according to the text. And he persuaded them. Did he persuade them not to continue keeping the Sabbath? No mention of that is there.

 

[HIM]

I believe it's okay to question a correct interpretation. Jesus correctly interpreted the law, saying that loving God with everything and loving your neighbor as yourself would lead to eternal life.

A lawyer asks him a follow-up question, which leads to the story of the Good Samaritan.

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 10:29-30 - New American Standard Bible

But wanting to justify himself, he said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” The Good Samaritan - Jesus replied and said, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he encountered robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead.

www.biblegateway.com

I don't care what you or I believe

 

[HIM]

I wonder why you still did not realize that the need to add to Scriptures or to take single verses out of their context and to stick them together to create your own context is a sign your theology is not a good one.

I wonder if you realize your posts never really address the points shared with anything objective.

 

[Leaf473]

I don't care what you or I believe

Then peace be with you

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Corinthians 1:3 - New American Standard Bible

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[trophy33]

Not only was the Apostle Paul keeping the Sabbath but also the Greeks according to the text. And he persuaded them. Did he persuade them not to continue keeping the Sabbath? No mention of that is there.

There is nothing in the text saying that Paul was keeping the Sabbath.

Those Greeks were proselytes to Judaism (thats why they assembled in synagogues) or they were Greek speaking Jews.

 

[Clare73]

Hi
Hi @SabbathBlessings, @Clare73 this considering the "rest" in Hebrews 4:10. This question is for you both. When someone "ceased from his/her work" is that mean temporarily or permanent rest? For instance, the creation account, God work 6 days then "rest" on the 7th day. So God rest (ceased from his work on 7th day) a temporary or permanent rest?

Heb 4:3 states, ". . .and yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world."

 

[HIM]

Heb 4:3 states, ". . .and yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world."

Which indicates that the rest which is the gospel was available since then. Since that is the context of verse 1 and 2 and the beginning of this verse that you quote. As verse 4 states God rested from all His works. And that would include the work for the rest that we now enter into through Christ Jesus which is the Gospel as verse 2 states. What is even more interesting is that verse five says in this again. In this again what? He speaks of the seventh day if we shall enter into His rest which is the gospel according to context. There remains therefore a sabbath keeping to the people of God. For we who enter into His rest which is the Gospel ALSO cease from our own work as God did from His.

 

[HIM]

There is nothing in the text saying that Paul was keeping the Sabbath.

Those Greeks were proselytes to Judaism (thats why they assembled in synagogues) or they were Greek speaking Jews.

The Greeks were in the synagogue on the Sabbath. What is it they were doing prior to being persuaded? If Paul did not keep the Sabbath then, there must be an account in 18 that says so. But what we have is that he every Sabbath was in the synagogue.

 

[expos4ever]

Someone posted this, although I added the bolding:

Rom 3:19 - all mankind condemned under the Law - the whole world -- every mouth - held as guilty before God and under the death sentence as defined by God's law. So all need the gospel.

This will be one of three posts addressing the claim that all mankind are condemned under the law

First, let's look at Romans 3:19:

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are [k]under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God;

Paul refers to "those who are under the law". Must "those under the law", by necessity refer to all humanity? Of course not, it is entirely plausible, just based on the phrase "those under the law" that only a subset of humanity is under the law. In fact, when you actually think about it, if Paul really believed that everyone were indeed under the law, would he use the wording "those under the law"?

Likley not.

Does the following sentence make sense?: "Those bachelors who are unmarried". No it does not - the word "those", by its very nature, picks out a subset of something. And obviously it is not only a subset of bachelors who are unmarried, it is all bachelors.

Or this sentence "those humans who have, at one point, had a mother"? Again, this does not make any sense.

On the other hand, all the following sentences do make sense, precisely because "those", by its very function as a word, always picks out a subset:

Those men over 65

Those people with red hair

Those people who earn more than $100,000 yearly.

So how could Paul be referring to all humanity when he uses the phrase "those under the law"?

I will anticipate an objection: sometimes we use the word "those" in a way that does not pick out a subset. As in when someone sarcastically says "those with a brain will know that you do not wear socks with sandals". You would have to believe that Paul is using this mode of speech to believe that he believes all humanity is under the law. I will let readers judge how likely that is.

But let's be clear: I have just proven that the phrase "those under the law" could, repeat could, denote a subset of all humanity.

But this entire argument is not even needed because I will now proceed to do the following:

- In my next post, I will show that verses 1-18 of Romans 3 already establishes that Paul is comparing and contrasting Jews and Gentiles, thereby setting up the possibility that "those under the law" refers to only one of these two groups, the Jews (again, I would have thought it was common knowledge that scripture teaches the Law is for Jews only).

- In the post after that will be the coup de grace - an irrefutable argument that Paul cannot possibly believe that Gentiles are under the Law. Again, I would have thought that it was widely known that the law of Moses only applied to Jews. But, apparently not everyone knowledges this obvious Biblical fact.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

The Sabbath was not eliminated by the Catholic Church, but has been fulfilled by the passion and death of Our Lord. Do we look to a day to save us? No, we no nothing among you except Christ and Him crucified. We have a Savior and it is not a matter of time or special days. Even Paul says some hold one day above another, another man sees everyday alike. We should not fight over days but turn our eyes to the Lord, He is Risen

I enjoyed reading this following sermon



From a sermon by Saint Maximus of Turin, bishop


Christ is the day


Christ is risen! He has burst open the gates of hell and let the dead go free; he has renewed the earth through the members of his Church now born again in baptism, and has made it blossom afresh with men brought back to life. His Holy Spirit has unlocked the doors of heaven, which stand wide open to receive those who rise up from the earth. Because of Christ’s resurrection the thief ascends to paradise, the bodies of the blessed enter the holy city, and the dead are restored to the company of the living. There is an upward movement in the whole of creation, each element raising itself to something higher. We see hell restoring its victims to the upper regions, earth sending its buried dead to heaven, and heaven presenting the new arrivals to the Lord. In one and the same movement, our Saviour’s passion raises men from the depths, lifts them up from the earth, and sets them in the heights.


Christ is risen. His rising brings life to the dead, forgiveness to sinners, and glory to the saints. And so David the prophet summons all creation to join in celebrating the Easter festival: Rejoice and be glad, he cries, on this day which the Lord has made.


The light of Christ is an endless day that knows no night. Christ is this day, says the Apostle; such is the meaning of his words: Night is almost over; day is at hand. He tells us that night is almost over, not that it is about to fall. By this we are meant to understand that the coming of Christ’s light puts Satan’s darkness to flight, leaving no place for any shadow of sin. His everlasting radiance dispels the dark clouds of the past and checks the hidden growth of vice. The Son is that day to whom the day, which is the Father, communicates the mystery of his divinity. He is the day who says through the mouth of Solomon: I have caused an unfailing light to rise in heaven. And as in heaven no night can follow day, so no sin can overshadow the justice of Christ. The celestial day is perpetually bright and shining with brilliant light; clouds can never darken its skies. In the same way, the light of Christ is eternally glowing with luminous radiance and can never be extinguished by the darkness of sin. This is why John the evangelist says: The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has never been able to overpower it.


And so, my brothers, each of us ought surely to rejoice on this holy day. Let no one, conscious of his sinfulness, withdraw from our common celebration, nor let anyone be kept away from our public prayer by the burden of his guilt. Sinner he may indeed be, but he must not despair of pardon on this day which is so highly privileged; for if a thief could receive the grace of paradise, how could a Christian be refused forgiveness?

 

[trophy33]

The Greeks were in the synagogue on the Sabbath. What is it they were doing prior to being persuaded? If Paul did not keep the Sabbath then, there must be an account in 18 that says so. But what we have is that he every Sabbath was in the synagogue.

He was in the synagogue to preach the gospel to people who assembled there. Not to keep the Sabbath.

If you want to preach to [Jewish] people, you will logically go to where they are.

And even if he were there because he personally kept the Sabbath (which is just a speculation, its not said in the text), its still not a command to the rest of us to keep the Sabbath, it would be just his personal habit. Paul himself said in his letters that Christians are not required to keep any day as special and that Jews are released from serving in the old way of the written code (Romans 7:6).

 

[expos4ever]

Post 2 in series showing that Romans 3:19 is not saying all humanity is under the Law.

Look at the first 2 verses of the chapter:

Then what [a]advantage does the Jew have? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Great in every respect. First, that they were entrusted with the actual words of God....

Clearly, we know, just a verses before verse 19, that Paul is thinking about Jews as a category - a subset of all humanity.

And verse 3 through 8 continue to focus on the Jews. Even if it were not otherwise obvious that these verses are about the Jews, we know that this is the case from verse 9 where Paul shifts his focus to Gentiles.

What then? [h]Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin;

The logic is here is clear:

1. Paul starts by charging the Jews with being sinners.
2.He then explicitly drags the Gentile into the picture, charging them with being sinners as well.

Now, then: I should not need to have to explain this but I will: just because Paul has identified all humanity as sinners worthy of condemnation, this does not forces us to conclude they are all condemned by the Law! In fact, we know from Romans 2 that this is not the case:

For all who have sinned [j]without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned [l]under the Law will be judged [m]by the Law;

Clearly there are two categories in Paul's mind - Gentiles who will be condemned apart from the Law and Jews who will condemned by it. This fact needs to inform how we interpret Romans 3:19 - those under the Law are, yes, Jews.

But, we do not even need this argument. As I will now show from Romans 3:28-29, short of a translation error, it is not even possible that Paul believes that Gentiles are under the Law.

 

[Clare73]

Heb 4:3 states, ". . .and yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world."
Which indicates that the rest which is the gospel was available since then.

However, would that be in accordance with the NT, which does not present the gospel as being since the creation of the world, which creation was finished before the fall, and which fall was the reason for the gospel?

"Finished since the creation" would indicate God's own rest; i.e., "my rest" (Heb 3:11, Heb 3:18, Heb 4:3, Heb 4:5), is full-time since creation. . .as our NT salvation rest in Christ, from our own works to save and in his finished work which saves, is full-time.

Since that is the context of verse 1 and 2 and the beginning of this verse that you quote. As verse 4 states God rested from all His works. And that would include the work for the rest that we now enter into through Christ Jesus

In context, would that not refer to the work of creation only?

which is the Gospel as verse 2 states.

The gospel was preached to them in the sacrificial system, though not as clearly as in the NT.
The context here is unbelief (Heb 3:12).

It might be helpful to review posts #91, #92 for the complete context of Heb 3:7-4:13.

What is even more interesting is that verse five days in this again. In this again what?

In this (Ge 2:2), again in (Ps 95:11), it is stated that God's work has been finished (his rest is full-time) since the creation of the world.

He speaks of the seventh day if we shall enter into His rest which is the gospel according to context.

Actually, he is demonstrating that "spoken about the seventh day" in Ge 2:2 (Heb 4:4) refers to God's rest (Heb 4:5), the issue here.

There remains therefore a sabbath keeping to the people of God.

Which is the NT full-time Sabbath keeping (rest) in Jesus Christ, from our own works to save, and in his completed work which saves.

For we who enter into His rest which is the Gospel ALSO cease from our own work as God did from His.

We cease from our own work (to save, and rest in Jesus' completed work which saves).

 

[HIM]

He was in the synagogue to preach the gospel to people who assembled there. Not to keep the Sabbath.

If you want to preach to [Jewish] people, you will logically go to where they are.

And even if he were there because he personally kept the Sabbath (which is just a speculation, its not said in the text), its still not a command to the rest of us to keep the Sabbath, it would be just his personal habit. Paul himself said in his letters that Christians are not required to keep any day as special and that Jews are released from serving in the old way of the written code (Romans 7:6).

What does chapter six say. It says how can we who are baptized into Christ Jesus sin.. For we are no longer servants of sin but of righteousness. So if we are not sinning then there is no need for a law. For the law if the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set us free from the law of sin and death, that the righteousness of the law be fulfilled in us who walk after the spirit and not after the flesh

 

[expos4ever]

Third and last post in a series showing that Romans 3:19 is not saying that all humanity is condemned by the Law. Yes, all humanity is condemned, but not all by the Law.

Here is Romans 3:28:29:

28 [x]For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from works [y]of the Law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also,

This should be the end of the argument - no person who believes Gentiles are subject to the Law would ever write these words.

But, of course, there will be denials.

So consider this very abstract, general statement:

We maintain that a person's justification has nothing to do with engaging in behaviour X; or is justification only for group A? Is not justification also available to group B as well? Yes, justification is available to both groups A and B.

It is an undeniable fact of logic that this block of text, as unit, logically forces us to conclude that only group A is able to engage in behaviour X.

End of discussion - how can anyone deny this? If it were the case that group B could engage in behaviour X, then justification would indeed be available to them and there would be no need to even raise the connection between justification and engaging in behaviour X in the first place!

To show how absurd it is to argue that Paul believes that Gentiles are under the Law given verses 28 and 29, consider these statements where we know that one group is not subject to a particular law:

For we maintain that a person is in the position of being justified apart from obeying the law against banking one's own sperm. Or does the Law apply to men only? Does it not apply to women too, yet to women too.

The second and third sentences makes no sense - no person with a lick of reasoning power would ever write the second and third sentences for the painfully obvious reason that only men can bank their own sperm.

Those who deny the obvious truth about what Romans 3:28-29 says obviously are stuck. So watch what they do - they will try all sorts of things - evasion, distraction, diversion.

But they will never, repeat never be able to actually engage this argument because, let's face it, it is irrefutable.

Unless, of course, there is a translation error. Or one believes that Paul's writing are not inerrant.

 

[trophy33]

What does chapter six say. It says how can we who are baptized into Christ Jesus sin.. For we are no longer servants of sin but of righteousness. So if we are not sinning then there is no need for a law. For the law if the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set us free from the law of sin and death, that the righteousness of the law be fulfilled in us who walk after the spirit and not after the flesh

We are talking about Acts, chapter 18, to remind you - Paul visiting synagogues on Sabbath.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

The interesting facts of the Bible that are plain was that God chose to rise from the dead on the first day of the week. The Gospel states, Now when the Sabbath was over, on the first day of the week…..

On the final Sabbath, the Church had only one member. It was not Peter, he had denied Christ. It wasn’t the Apostles, they all scattered and ran. It wasn’t the women that went to the tomb. They were going to anoint Jesus because they thought he was still dead. No, the only member of the Church on that dark Sabbath was our Lord’s mother. The one whose heart was pierced as Simeon had foretold. The mother of Our Lord, the mother of the Church and the mother of all Christians. She alone knew the mystery of God, that her son would suffer and die to be raised to everlasting life. When Jesus was raised and before He ascended to the Father, he chastised the Apostles for their unbelief. The Church is not made up of unbelievers but of believers.
It was not until 10 days after His ascension that the Holy Spirit was sent and descended on the Apostles. Pentecost is on the first day of the week. That was the first time the Gospel was preached to the world, and everyone heard the Apostles in their own language. The Church was established that day.
Ok let’s review, on the Sabbath, no one was at Church except Mary. The resurrection and the Descent of the Holy Spirit both occur on the first Day of the week? Seems kind of special and sanctified to me, as it does to the Catholic Church and most Christian believers. We celebrate the Lord who is our creator, not a day which is a creation.

Saturday is a special day in the Catholic Church. It is where we remember Our Lady and her sorrow over her crucified son. The whole world had abandoned him, though he is the creator and savior of us all. That would cause sadness in any mother, but Our Lady had a deeper sorrow

 

[Leaf473]

@HIM, something may have gone wrong with the quoting system in your post #214.