The Sabbath. Exploring Its Meaning, Purpose, and Practice with Love

[Mercy Shown]

Christ is the embodiment of God's word expressed through setting a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to it, so saying that he is our righteousness is the same as saying that us embodying God's word through following his example is our righteousness and the way to by faith completely submit to Christ and his righteousness for salvation. Us embodying God's word alone through following Christ's example is the salvation that is found in him alone.

I am unsure what your point is, but we do not embody God's word by following Christ's example. We follow Christ's example because we are imbued with His word through the saving power of God and the gift of His holy Spirit by which we are sealed.

For someone to have a character trait means that they are doer of that trait and it would be contradictory for someone to have a character trait apart from being a doer of that trait. For example, for someone to be courageous means that they are a doer of courageous works and it would be contradictory for someone to be courageous apart from being a doer of courageous works. For God to be righteous means that He is a doer of righteous works, it would be contradictory for God to be righteous if he were not, and the same is true for us. Likewise, to be made holy means to be made into a doer of holy works, of which keeping God's Sabbath and feast days holy are examples.

To be made Holy means to have longsuffering, patience, love, joy, peace, kindness, and goodness in ever-increasing streams flowing from hearts renewed by the Holy Spirit. And the greatest of these is love.

The only way to attain a character trait is through faith that we ought to be a doer of that character traits, so there is no amount of courageous works that someone is required to have done first in order to earn being courageous as the result, and the same is true of righteousness and holiness and every other character trait. The way to believe in God is by being a doer of His character traits. For example, by being a doer of good works in obedience to God's law we are testifying about God's goodness, which is why our good works bring glory to Him (Matthew 5:16) and by testifying about God's goodness, we are expressing the belief that God is good, or in other words we are believing in Him, and the same is true for God's other character traits.

You have the cart before the horse. We can not do these things to achieve holiness. We do these things from the holiness God makes in us if we submit to Him.

Jesus saves us from our sins (Matthew 1:21) and the Mosaic Law is how we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so while we do not extrinsically earn our salvation as the result of obeying it, being a doer of it through faith in Jesus is the way that he is saving us from not being a doer of it. For example, keeping God's feast days through faith in Jesus is intrinsically the way that he is saving us from not keeping them.

Jesus perfects us once and for all by his sacrifice on the cross. When He said, "it is finished!" It was.

 

[Soyeong]

I am unsure what your point is, but we do not embody God's word by following Christ's example. We follow Christ's example because we are imbued with His word through the saving power of God and the gift of His holy Spirit by which we are sealed.

You said:

"Until we by faith submit completely to Christ and His righteousness for our salvation, all else is moot. Our salvation if found alone in Christ: Christ plus nothing."

My point is that embodying God's word is the way to do that. Obeying God's word is not adding anything to Christ because Christ is God's word made flesh.

To be made Holy means to have longsuffering, patience, love, joy, peace, kindness, and goodness in ever-increasing streams flowing from hearts renewed by the Holy Spirit. And the greatest of these is love.

To say that God is holy means that God is a doer of holy works. You can use other words to describe what it means to do holy works but that doesn't change that. In 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be a doer of holy works for God is holy, which is a quote where God was giving instructions for how to do that, which includes keeping God's Sabbaths holy (Leviticus 19:2-3).

You have the cart before the horse. We can not do these things to achieve holiness. We do these things from the holiness God makes in us if we submit to Him.

I did not claim that we are required to do those thing in order to earn holiness as the result, but rather I said:

"The only way to attain a character trait is through faith that we ought to be a doer of that character traits, so there is no amount of courageous works that someone is required to have done first in order to earn being courageous as the result, and the same is true of righteousness and holiness and every other character trait."

God making us holy means that He is making us into a doer of holy works.

Jesus perfects us once and for all by his sacrifice on the cross. When He said, "it is finished!" It was.

In Titus 2:11-13, it describes our salvation as being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good, and to renounce doing what is ungodly, so we are not extrinsically required to have first done those works in order to earn our salvation as the result and we are not extrinsically required to do those works as the result of having first been saved, but rather God graciously teaching us to be doers of those works is the aspect of His gift of salvation that we are experiencing in the present. Moreover, in Titus 2:14, it says that Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for being a doer of good works in obedience to God's law in the way to believe in what he finished on the cross (Acts 21:20).

 

[RandyPNW]

The only way to abolish eternal laws for how to testify about God's eternal nature would be by first abolishing God.

To disagree with you I'd have to abolish God?? What makes you think temporal laws are eternal? Laws that governed elements that perish cannot be eternal.

Col 2.16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ...
20 Since you died with Christ to the elemental spiritual forces of this world, why, as though you still belonged to the world, do you submit to its rules: 21 “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? 22 These rules, which have to do with things that are all destined to perish with use, are based on merely human commands and teachings.

For example, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore laws for how to testify about His righteousness are also eternal (Psalms 119:160), and the only way that those eternal laws can be abolish is by first abolishing God's righteousness. In 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be holy for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, which includes keeping God's Sabbaths holy (Leviticus 19:2-3) and refraining from eating unclean animals (Leviticus 11:44-5), so by following those laws we are testify about God's eternal holiness, and the only way that eternal laws for how to be holy as God is holy can be abolished is by first abolishing God's eternal holiness.

You're advocating Legalism, a return to the Law of Moses. Paul spoke strongly against any need to return to the Law. So no, to recognize God's righteousness we do not have to uphold an outdated Law that only concerned perishable elements, which were a shadow of things are are eternal.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Christ began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of Christ, which includes repenting from breaking the Sabbath.

The Law was a guide to avoid sin, yes. But it was based on a temporary legal structure focused on temple, priesthood, and animal sacrifice, all of which were temporary things foreshadowing the spiritual reality of Christ. Christ is the eternal priest, the eternal sacrifice, and the eternal temple--not those that belonged to the Law that were only shadows.

Your Legalism is anti-Paul and anti-New Testament. So you must belong to some semi-Christian cult.

 

[Bro.T]

Most people also ignore the feast days, yes even most sabatarians. And almost all people totally ignore or justify judging others. It is a sad state of affairs.

Ok, but why do you think this has anything to do with salvation? The passage, Gal 6:1-6 is about not comparing oneself with others. Verse two specifically asks us to, "Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. If anyone thinks they are something when they are not, they deceive themselves." Verse 6 uses a different word translated as "Burden" in your Bible version. It is the Greek word portion from which we get our word "portion." Verse 6 instructs each person to do their portion of the church work.

Galatians is a book that completely refutes the doctrine of works righteousness.

Let's get some understanding on what Paul is saying here in (Gal. 3:1, 13, 16-17, 19, 24) (v.1) O FOOLISH Ga-la’-tians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? (v.13) Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, CURSED IS EVERYONE THAT HANGETH ON A TREE: What law is this talking about? Let the bible speak for itself.
(v.16) Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; but as of One, AND TO THY SEED, which is Christ. (v.17) And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

To sum up what going on here in Galatians, Paul is explaining that Christ came from Abraham seed, and remove the animal Sacrificial law. But in the days of Abraham that animal Sacrificial law never was on the table, and was not needed for Abraham to obey and faith in God. But Commandments was always on the table.

Now pay attention, the law that is being spoken of here came four hundred and thirty years after this covenant. But God’s holy commandments have been around forever even before man was created. Remember that Satan was kicked out of heaven because iniquity (sin) was found in him. And what is sin? The transgression of the law (commandments). Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. Now we have just read the biblical definition of sin, the transgression (breaking) of the law (commandments.) It doesn’t matter what you or I think sin is, it’s what God says sin is that counts. (1John 3:4)

(v.19) Wherefore then serveth the law? A question is being asked here. Then why should we serve this law? It was added because of transgression, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; the law that we are talking about here was added because of sin. But we now know that sin is the transgression of the law.

How do you add a law if sin is the transgression of the law? Because there are two sets of laws, you have God’s holy commandments which abided forever, and you had the animal sacrificial law which was added because of sin, but it was only good until the seed should come to whom the promise was made, and that seed was Jesus.

(v.24) Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. This animal sacrificial law was only a schoolmaster. (Paul breaks down more of this law in Hebrew 10th Chapter)

And this schoolmaster taught you that when you sinned in ignorance blood had to be shed (an animal sacrificed). But Christ being the ultimate sacrifice shed his precious blood once and for all, and by doing this putting an end to the animal sacrificial law.

Paul says in Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. So when you quoted all the places in the Bible that do away with this animal sacrificial law, not understanding that Paul talks about two sets of law. The Royal law (Ten Commandments) and the animal sacrificial law sometimes in the same verse you bring can bring destruction to yourself not knowing which law is which.

You are mistaken; Verse 7 was written to save people. Saved by grace. Only a saved saint will sow for the Spirit. All others sow to please the flesh, even those who pride themselves in their piety.

"Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus" (Revelation 14:12).

Whoever is weary and heavy laden, whoever has stumbled under the load that sin has put on them and felt the sting of judgment from their supposed fellow Christians. For those on the brink of giving up. Come onto Jesus and He will give you rest. Rest for your souls.

You are still speaking like one who needs to be restrained from doing what you want. That seems counter to the gospel. Sure, you quote verses, but they are selected by your filter and reinterpreted by a work bias.

Titus 3:5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,

It is impossible to be saved by Grace and be proud of it. But it is almost inevitable to think you are saved by your work and become proud of it.

Grace is nothing more than a free gift. And that free gift is our access back to the tree of life (Jesus) which Adam caused us to lose by disobeying God. Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (Romans 5: 12) But to maintain your grace you must keep the law. (1John 3:4) Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. Now we have just read the biblical definition of sin, the transgression (breaking) of the law (commandments.) It doesn’t matter what you or I think sin is, it’s what God says sin is that counts.

 

[Soyeong]

To disagree with you I'd have to abolish God?? What makes you think temporal laws are eternal?

I did not claim that you've have to abolish God in order to disagree with me, but that the only way to abolish laws for how to testify about God's eternal nature would be by first abolishing God. Sin is what is contrary to God's eternal nature, such as with righteousness being in accordance with God's nature while unrighteousness is sin, and sin is the transgression of God's law because it would given to divide between what is in accordance with or contrary to God's nature. This is why the Bible often uses the same terms to describe the nature of God as it does to describe the nature of God's law, such as with it being holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) or with justice, mercy, and faithfulness being weightier matters of the law (Matthew 23:23). So the fact that God's nature is eternal means that that the way to testify about God's nature is also eternal, again for example, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore all of His righteous laws are also eternal (Psalms 119:160), and if the way to testify about God's righteousness were temporary, then God's righteousness would also be temporary.

Laws that governed elements that perish cannot be eternal.

Col 2.16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ...
20 Since you died with Christ to the elemental spiritual forces of this world, why, as though you still belonged to the world, do you submit to its rules: 21 “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? 22 These rules, which have to do with things that are all destined to perish with use, are based on merely human commands and teachings.

Colossians 2:16-23 is speaking against those who are promoting human precepts and traditions, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, so you are incorrect to interpret these verses as speaking against those who are promoting obedience to God's law. Those promoting asceticism and severity to the body would not have been judging people for refraining from observing feasts, but rather they were pagans who were judging the Colossians because they were keeping God's feasts and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them for doing that and prevent them from obeying God.

You're advocating Legalism, a return to the Law of Moses. Paul spoke strongly against any need to return to the Law. So no, to recognize God's righteousness we do not have to uphold an outdated Law that only concerned perishable elements, which were a shadow of things are are eternal.

You're not countering my position, but rather you're just labeling it legalism. If God taught legalism by giving the gift of His law and Jesus taught legalism by spending his ministry graciously teaching us to obey it by word and by example, then we should all be advocating legalism, but that is not what I think legalism refers to. Paul was a servant of God, so he should not be interpreted as promoting rebellion against His commands, though if you think that that is what he was doing, then the bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so you should be quicker to disregard everything that Paul had said than to disregard anything that God has commanded.

Paul spoke about multiple categories of law other than the Law of God, such as the law of sin and works of the law, so it is important to correctly identify which law he was speaking against in order to avoid the mistake of making him out to be an enemy of God. In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contrasted the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death, and in Romans 8:3-7, he contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God. In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, and in Romans 3:31 and Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted saying that our faith upholds the Law of God with works of the law that are not of faith. Paul was a servant of God, so when he is correctly understood, he never spoke against anyone obeying anything that God has commanded. The Law of God is not only concerned with perishable elements, but rather it is spiritual (Romans 7:14).

The Law was a guide to avoid sin, yes. But it was based on a temporary legal structure focused on temple, priesthood, and animal sacrifice, all of which were temporary things foreshadowing the spiritual reality of Christ. Christ is the eternal priest, the eternal sacrifice, and the eternal temple--not those that belonged to the Law that were only shadows.

God's law contains important foreshows of what is to come, so it is important to continue to live in a way that testifies about the truth of what is to come by continuing to observe it rather than a way that denies the truth of what is to come. Christ is God's word made flesh, so obeying God's word is the way to testify about him and if God's word were temporary, then so that would meant that God's word made flesh is also temporary.

Your Legalism is anti-Paul and anti-New Testament. So you must belong to some semi-Christian cult.

I am neither anti-Paul or anti-NT, but rather I am against you interpreting parts of God's word as being against following each other. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and God's law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom, which Paul also taught based on God's law (Acts 14:21-22, 20:24-25, 28:13, Romans 15:4, 18-19).

 

[Mercy Shown]

Let's get some understanding on what Paul is saying here in (Gal. 3:1, 13, 16-17, 19, 24) (v.1) O FOOLISH Ga-la’-tians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? (v.13) Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, CURSED IS EVERYONE THAT HANGETH ON A TREE: What law is this talking about? Let the bible speak for itself.
(v.16) Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; but as of One, AND TO THY SEED, which is Christ. (v.17) And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

To sum up what going on here in Galatians, Paul is explaining that Christ came from Abraham seed, and remove the animal Sacrificial law. But in the days of Abraham that animal Sacrificial law never was on the table, and was not needed for Abraham to obey and faith in God. But Commandments was always on the table.

Your summary reflects your bias but not the facts in the text. Nowhere does Paul parse the law. He always refers to the law as including the Ten Commandments

Now pay attention, the law that is being spoken of here came four hundred and thirty years after this covenant. But God’s holy commandments have been around forever even before man was created. Remember that Satan was kicked out of heaven because iniquity (sin) was found in him. And what is sin? The transgression of the law (commandments). Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. Now we have just read the biblical definition of sin, the transgression (breaking) of the law (commandments.) It doesn’t matter what you or I think sin is, it’s what God says sin is that counts. (1John 3:4)

Breaking the law needs to be defined, for one may only think about something and break the law in his heart. Humans break the law all the time. Some know it, and some don't, but suffice it to say that no one obeys Christ's command to be as perfect as God. Nobody keeps the law perfectly. It doesn't matter what you think, and it doesn't matter what I think. It is what God says.

(v.19) Wherefore then serveth the law? A question is being asked here. Then why should we serve this law? It was added because of transgression, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; the law that we are talking about here was added because of sin. But we now know that sin is the transgression of the law.

How do you add a law if sin is the transgression of the law? Because there are two sets of laws, you have God’s holy commandments which abided forever, and you had the animal sacrificial law which was added because of sin, but it was only good until the seed should come to whom the promise was made, and that seed was Jesus.

This is a made-up fact to serve a specific bias, but it is not biblical. Paul only refers to one law, which includes the Ten Commandments. Example: Romans 8:13

(v.24) Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. This animal sacrificial law was only a schoolmaster. (Paul breaks down more of this law in Hebrew 10th Chapter)

And this schoolmaster taught you that when you sinned in ignorance blood had to be shed (an animal sacrificed). But Christ being the ultimate sacrifice shed his precious blood once and for all, and by doing this putting an end to the animal sacrificial law.

Paul says in Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. So when you quoted all the places in the Bible that do away with this animal sacrificial law, not understanding that Paul talks about two sets of law. The Royal law (Ten Commandments) and the animal sacrificial law sometimes in the same verse you bring can bring destruction to yourself not knowing which law is which.

Nowhere does Paul refer to two sets of laws. If Sabbath Keeping were so central to salvation, you would expect Pasul to have at least a couple of teachings on it. James refers to the Royal law, which states that you should love your neighbor as you love yourself. But nowhere is there a separation of law in Paul's writing.

"Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus" (Revelation 14:12).


Grace is nothing more than a free gift. And that free gift is our access back to the tree of life (Jesus) which Adam caused us to lose by disobeying God. Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (Romans 5: 12) But to maintain your grace you must keep the law. (1John 3:4) Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. Now we have just read the biblical definition of sin, the transgression (breaking) of the law (commandments.) It doesn’t matter what you or I think sin is, it’s what God says sin is that counts.

Yes, what God says, but not what Bro T. says God says. There is a wonderful freedom waiting for the heavy-laden that will transform them and their lives. A righteousness apart from the law that makes us right with the law as perfectly as Jesus Christ is to the law.

 

[RandyPNW]

Colossians 2:16-23 is speaking against those who are promoting human precepts and traditions, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, so you are incorrect to interpret these verses as speaking against those who are promoting obedience to God's law. Those promoting asceticism and severity to the body would not have been judging people for refraining from observing feasts, but rather they were pagans who were judging the Colossians because they were keeping God's feasts and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them for doing that and prevent them from obeying God.

I think Paul was viewing both practice of the Law of Moses and pagan practices as the same.

Col 2.16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.

These were the Law of Moses. And Paul dismissed them as now having been fulfilled in Christ. Continuing to follow them, after they had been fulfilled in Christ, would amount to the same thing as pagans who practice laws that are severe to the body, thinking that is producing righteous behavior. One can change the external body, but only God can change us internally.

Col 2.20 Since you died with Christ to the elemental spiritual forces of this world, why, as though you still belonged to the world, do you submit to its rules: 21 “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? 22 These rules, which have to do with things that are all destined to perish with use, are based on merely human commands and teachings. 23 Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.

So Paul connected these things. At the bottom of it all, he said we are not under the Law of Moses anymore and should accept no judgment from anybody in this regard. They were all fulfilled in Christ.

You're not countering my position, but rather you're just labeling it legalism.

I did counter your position, which determines that your position is Legalism. Promoting the Law of Moses when it has already been fulfilled in Christ is the very definition of Legalism.

17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

Paul spoke about multiple categories of law other than the Law of God, such as the law of sin and works of the law, so it is important to correctly identify which law he was speaking against in order to avoid the mistake of making him out to be an enemy of God.

Nobody thinks Paul was an enemy of God unless they are a false Christian. Christians normally understand that Paul referred to the Law of Moses as the Law that had been fulfilled by Christ.

In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contrasted the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death, and in Romans 8:3-7, he contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God.

You shouldn't confuse the Law of Moses with the laws of God with respect to creation and human morality. Those have been in effect since the creation of Man in God's image. The Law of Moses came much later and applied largely to the nation of Israel. And it was completely fulfilled at the cross of Christ.

The law of sin simply refers to the Sin Nature that Man obtained when Adam and Eve chose to accept the knowledge of sin. Now Man has a compulsion to rebel against God's word, though we can successfully resist this impulse.

God's word is with all men to enable them to resist sin if they accept it. We cannot exterminate sin until we are resurrected into new sinless bodies, but we are enabled to resist and overcome compulsions to rebel in overt ways.

God's law contains important foreshows of what is to come, so it is important to continue to live in a way that testifies about the truth of what is to come by continuing to observe it rather than a way that denies the truth of what is to come.

We do not observe the Law of Moses if we are Christians, period. The Law foreshadowed Christ. We are now in Christ--not in Moses' Law.

I am neither anti-Paul or anti-NT, but rather I am against you interpreting parts of God's word as being against following each other. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and God's law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom, which Paul also taught based on God's law (Acts 14:21-22, 20:24-25, 28:13, Romans 15:4, 18-19).

Your entire argument seems to be that people can't know what sin is without the Law of Moses. That is obviously untrue since Cain knew it was wrong to murder his brother before there even was a Law of Moses. The Law of God is in the human conscience innately. Your sense that mankind needs the Law of Moses to know right and wrong flies in the face of the human conscience.

The Law of Moses helped Israel understand God's plan to deal with sin redemptively. They needed someone to purify them from their sins. The temple showed their division as sinners from the holy God. The priesthood showed that all of them needed purification, including the priests.

But none of this could do anything more than temporarily keep them in relationship with God. It could not bring final redemption, or resurrection to Eternal Life.

So the Law of Moses was inadequate in itself. Christ had to come and complete the redemption that God indicated was necessary for Eternal Life.

To go back to the Law of Moses is turning all this on its head. Moral Law continues in the New Covenant just as it existed under the Old Covenant. But inasmuch as it was a different covenant the old laws no longer applied, but were replaced by the new laws created by our choice to live in Christ.

 

[bling]

That verse leaves room for two scenaros:

1.) The Colossians were not keeping God's feasts, they were being judged by Jews for not keeping them, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them for not keeping them.

2.) The Colossians were keeping God's feasts, they were being judged by pagans for keeping them, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them for keeping them.

In Colossians 2:16-23, Paul described the people who were judging the Colossians as promoting human precepts and teachings, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, which means that the second scenario is the case. Those who were promoting asceticism and severity to the body would not have been judging people for refraining from celebrating feasts. So it is ironic when people try to cite a verse where Paul was encouraging people not to let anyone prevent them from obeying God in order to try to justify their refusal to obey God.

First off: The “pagans” giving “judgement” of Christians celebrating Sabbaths would be of little or no significance. Pagans might be upset with them not worshipping the city gods, keep pagan feast and worshipping Christ.

Paul states his goal: “Col. 2:2 My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love…, that unity is not with the pagans.

These feasts and Sabbath days were… a shadow of the things that were to come. Who back before Christ came, kept the Sabbath day? Since “the reality, however, is found in Christ” so, Christ came and did away with the shadow (which includes a Sabbath day).

There was definitely a “disunity” in the early church between, well-educated Old Testament Jewish Christians and Gentiles who had no previous knowledge of God.

In Roman 14:1, the topic of the chapter is in regard to how to handle disputable matters of opinion in which God has given no command, not in regard to whether followers of God should follow God, so nothing in the chapter should be interpreted as speaking against following God. For example, in Romans 14:2-3, they were judging and resenting each other over whether or not someone chose to eat only vegetables even though God gave no command to do that. In Romans 14:4-6, Paul was not suggesting that we are free to break the Sabbath, or commit adultery, theft, murder, idolatry, rape, favoritism, kidnapping, or disobey any of God's other commands just as long as we are convinced in our own minds that it is ok to rebel against God, but rather that was only said in regard to things that are disputable matters of opinion in which God has given no command.

In Romans 14:5-6, it speaks about those who eat unto the Lord or who refrain from eating, so it is speaking about those who esteem certain days for fasting as a disputable matter of opinion. It had become a common practice in the first century to fast twice a week and people were judging and resenting each over whether or not someone chose to do that even though God gave no command to do that (Luke 18:12). The reason why we are to keep the Sabbath holy is not because man esteemed it as a matter of opinion, but because God blessed it, sanctified it, God sanctifies us, and because God commanded His people to keep it holy. Moreover, the 7th day is holy to God regardless of whether or not anyone keeps it holy and what is holy to God should not be profaned by man, so we would still be obligated to keep the 7th day holy even if God had never commanded anyone to do that.

Wow, Paul is specifically talking about: “one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike.” And “Whoever eats meat”. Paul is not discussing “adultery, theft, murder, idolatry, rape, favoritism, kidnapping, or disobey”. You are not “disobeying”, if you do not hold one day sacred over another day. All of Romans is dealing with the three big Jewish issues: Circumcision, not eating certain foods and the Sabbath days which was a huge problem among the Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome.

As Jesus said: “the Sabbath Day was a shadow of what we have with Jesus today” Col. 2:16.

While God commanded priests to rest on the Sabbath, He also commanded priests to make offerings on the Sabbath (Numbers 28:9-10), however, it was not the case that priests were forced to sin by disobeying one of the two commands no matter what they chose to do but that the lesser command was never intended to be understood as preventing the greater command from being obeyed. This is why Jesus said in Matthew 12:5-7 that priests who did their duties on the Sabbath were held innocent, why David and his men were held innocent, and why Jesus defended his disciples as being innocent. Likewise, this is why it is lawful to get an ox or a child out of a put on the Sabbath, why it is lawful to circumcise a baby on the 8th day if it happens on the Sabbath, and so forth.

We are the priests today.

Those are also Sabbaths, like a fractal pattern that is the same at different scales.


Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Torah by word and by example, so while Gentiles do not need to become Jews in order become a follower of Christ, Gentiles can't follow Christ by refusing to follow him. Those who are not Levites should not act as Levities.


Jesus aa there was a High Priest among the Levites, the Levities were priests among a nation of priests, like a fractal pattern. Priests had the role of putting God on display, of helping people navigate their atonement, of interceding on behalf of others, and of distributing resources to those who are in need, so while Levities did this in an official capacity, there is also an extent that this is something that we should al be doing as a nation.


Indeed.


Indeed.


God's commands are His instructions for how to worship him by testifying about His character. For example, by doing good works in obedience to God's commands we are testifying about God's goodness, which is why our good works bring glory to Him (Matthew 5:16).


We should always worship God by obeying His commands and part of the way to worship God is by obeying His command to keep the 7th day holy.


In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from God's law, so he did not expand it, though he did teach how to correctly obey it as it was originally intended.


The Sabbath rest is keeping the 7th day holy for priests and for Christians.


No. They were perhaps referring the the Messianic Era, which is the Millennial Reign, which is not currently happening.


Worship can be work. The commands have not been increased for Christians. A day that is holy is set apart and in order for a day to be set apart there needs to also be another day that it is set apart from, so to treat every day the same is to treat none of them as holy. If we did on every day what God wants us to do on the Sabbath, then we would do no work, but God also commanded us to work on the other six days.

We are to be in worship all the time and “worship” is not something we are compensated for so it is not “work” and if we are worshipping and not working, we are keeping the Sabbath rest.

Do you feel you Saturday is more “sacred” than other days or do believe the contrate every day is alike?

 

[Bro.T]

Your summary reflects your bias but not the facts in the text. Nowhere does Paul parse the law. He always refers to the law as including the Ten Commandments

Breaking the law needs to be defined, for one may only think about something and break the law in his heart. Humans break the law all the time. Some know it, and some don't, but suffice it to say that no one obeys Christ's command to be as perfect as God. Nobody keeps the law perfectly. It doesn't matter what you think, and it doesn't matter what I think. It is what God says.

This is a made-up fact to serve a specific bias, but it is not biblical. Paul only refers to one law, which includes the Ten Commandments. Example: Romans 8:13

Nowhere does Paul refer to two sets of laws. If Sabbath Keeping were so central to salvation, you would expect Pasul to have at least a couple of teachings on it. James refers to the Royal law, which states that you should love your neighbor as you love yourself. But nowhere is there a separation of law in Paul's writing.

Yes, what God says, but not what Bro T. says God says. There is a wonderful freedom waiting for the heavy-laden that will transform them and their lives. A righteousness apart from the law that makes us right with the law as perfectly as Jesus Christ is to the law.

It's alway good to read the Bible over and over again from Genesis to Revelation. It would be much better to understand what Paul and the apostles are talking about.

We will see there were two laws given to Moses, they were the commandments and the sacrificial law. Watch how they worked together. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do against any of them: (Leviticus 4:1-2) The law in the scriptures above is the commandments.

Notice something else very important in these two scriptures. It states, "if a soul shall sin through ignorance." Notice that the scripture did not says on purpose. Why? There is no sacrifice for a sin that is committed willfully. Let's find out what was to be done if a person committed a sin against the Lord unintentionally. Let's skip down to the 27th verse and take a look at the second law (which is the sacrificial law).

And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty; Or if his sin, which he hath sinned, come to his knowledge: then he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering. And the priest shall take of the blood thereof with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar. (Leviticus 4:27-30)

When the common people sinned through ignorance and it came to their knowledge, what did they have to do? They brought an offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for their sin which they had committed, then the priest would offer the animal to the Lord. Think about this for a moment. If an animal was killed for a person that committed sin, what will happen to us today if we a trespass against the Lord?

We will find that out later. Now we see how the sacrificial law was used when a person broke a commandment unintentionally.

Let's go into Paul's writings and take another look at both of these laws. We will go into the Book of Galatians chapter 3. This is one of the chapters that the majority of Christian preachers use to do away with the Lord's commandments. Now, let's read carefully!

Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. (Galatians 3:19)

Take heed to what Paul's says above, "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions." What is transgression? Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (I John 3:4) Transgression is braking of the commandments. What law was added because of the braking of the law? The sacrificial law! Paul is simply asking these Gentiles, "why perform the sacrificial law? It was added because of sin until the seed should come. Who is the seed?

Let's back up in this chapter and find out. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ. (Galatians 3:16) Who is the SEED? CHRIST! So, this law was added (which is the sacrificial law) until Christ came. What was the sacrificial law used for until Christ came? Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. (Galatians 3:24)

The sacrificial law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Before we continue, we must clear one thing up. Are we justified by faith alone? Let's see. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. (Romans 3:31) What law is established? Certainly not the sacrificial law, we have seen above that it was added because of transgression until the Seed came (which was Christ). The Royal law to be established forever which are the Ten Lords commandments!

 

[Mercy Shown]

It's alway good to read the Bible over and over again from Genesis to Revelation. It would be much better to understand what Paul and the apostles are talking about.

It is best to read the Bible with the illumination the Spirit of God gives. Many a Bible scholar has shipwrecked people's faith by their false understanding of scripture.

We will see there were two laws given to Moses, they were the commandments and the sacrificial law. Watch how they worked together. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do against any of them: (Leviticus 4:1-2) The law in the scriptures above is the commandments.

There was one law given to Moses on Sinai. It covered the Ten Commandments, the temple, and its services. Christ came and fulfilled the law and imputed His righteousness to us that we might have access to God. He perfected us forever by His one sacrifice, and once you understand the enormity of what God did for us while we were yet sinners, your only goal is to love and serve him as He guides you with His spirit,

Notice something else very important in these two scriptures. It states, "if a soul shall sin through ignorance." Notice that the scripture did not says on purpose. Why? There is no sacrifice for a sin that is committed willfully. Let's find out what was to be done if a person committed a sin against the Lord unintentionally. Let's skip down to the 27th verse and take a look at the second law (which is the sacrificial law).

Anyone who sins is doing it willfully unless they are having a psychotic break. The issue is whether we have turned from our sins. In other words, we hate sin even though it gets us occasionally. Do we run to our savior when we have sinned for forgiveness and pardon? The opposite is those who practice sin and are proud of it.

And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty; Or if his sin, which he hath sinned, come to his knowledge: then he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering. And the priest shall take of the blood thereof with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar. (Leviticus 4:27-30)

When the common people sinned through ignorance and it came to their knowledge, what did they have to do? They brought an offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for their sin which they had committed, then the priest would offer the animal to the Lord. Think about this for a moment. If an animal was killed for a person that committed sin, what will happen to us today if we a trespass against the Lord?

We will find that out later. Now we see how the sacrificial law was used when a person broke a commandment unintentionally.

Let's go into Paul's writings and take another look at both of these laws. We will go into the Book of Galatians chapter 3. This is one of the chapters that the majority of Christian preachers use to do away with the Lord's commandments. Now, let's read carefully!

Your premise is unproven. So, the point you are trying to make is unproven.

Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. (Galatians 3:19)

Take heed to what Paul's says above, "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions." What is transgression? Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (I John 3:4) Transgression is braking of the commandments. What law was added because of the braking of the law? The sacrificial law! Paul is simply asking these Gentiles, "why perform the sacrificial law? It was added because of sin until the seed should come. Who is the seed?

Let's back up in this chapter and find out. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ. (Galatians 3:16) Who is the SEED? CHRIST! So, this law was added (which is the sacrificial law) until Christ came. What was the sacrificial law used for until Christ came? Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. (Galatians 3:24)

The sacrificial law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Before we continue, we must clear one thing up. Are we justified by faith alone? Let's see. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. (Romans 3:31) What law is established? Certainly not the sacrificial law, we have seen above that it was added because of transgression until the Seed came (which was Christ). The Royal law to be established forever which are the Ten Lords commandments!

The entire law is our school master.

 

[Bro.T]

It is best to read the Bible with the illumination the Spirit of God gives. Many a Bible scholar has shipwrecked people's faith by their false understanding of scripture.

There was one law given to Moses on Sinai. It covered the Ten Commandments, the temple, and its services. Christ came and fulfilled the law and imputed His righteousness to us that we might have access to God. He perfected us forever by His one sacrifice, and once you understand the enormity of what God did for us while we were yet sinners, your only goal is to love and serve him as He guides you with His spirit,

Anyone who sins is doing it willfully unless they are having a psychotic break. The issue is whether we have turned from our sins. In other words, we hate sin even though it gets us occasionally. Do we run to our savior when we have sinned for forgiveness and pardon? The opposite is those who practice sin and are proud of it.

Your premise is unproven. So, the point you are trying to make is unproven.


The entire law is our school master.

Thank you for responding, it would of being a better fellowship had you use Scriptures and verses on your points."Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life." (Revelation 22:14).

peace in Jesus name

 

[BobRyan]

The issue is not whether you observe feast days and sabbaths. The issue is why. I Christ is your righteousness and has perfected you forever by His one sacrifice while making you holy then why do you observe sabbaths and feast days?

That is like saying "When Christ said - Love Me and keep My commandments in John 14 and Ex 20:6 -- did He really mean it"

In fact it is more like "Why insist that we not take God's name in vain if we have already accepted Christ as our righteousness"?

Matt 7 - Good trees produce good fruit according to Christ.

"This IS the LOVE of God that we keep HIS Commandments" 1 John 5:3-4

 

[BobRyan]

Do you observe these feast days to be saved?

did anyone ever do that "to be saved" as if God had said "salvation is by keeping ... or obeying..." rather than "by grace through faith"?

If we can't save ourselves by "not taking God's name in vain" then we can also not save ourselves by doing or not doing anything else in the way of obedience. But does that mean we should go around taking God's name in vain?

We all agree - "it does not mean any such thing"

 

[BobRyan]

Some verses to keep in mind:

Col. 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

Ro. 14: 5 One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. 6 Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.

Do you have a problem with me considering every day alike?

Jesus said: Matt. 12: 5 Or haven’t you read in the Law that the priests on Sabbath duty in the temple desecrate the Sabbath and yet are innocent?

Sabbath Worship


....can never get answers from those that believe in Saturday worship only the answers to my questions:

1. Is a Sabbath a Saturday or is Saturday a Sabbath with other days also Sabbaths

"the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD (YHWH)" Ex 20:10.

No matter how many annual Sabbath days in Lev 23 -- the weekly Sabbath of the TEN Commandments is not changed.

2. Are Christians today to be like the regular Jews of the Old Testament or are we to be like the priestly tribe of the Old Testament?

Rom 2 "He is not a Jew who is one outwardly - neither is circumcision external of the flesh"
Heb 8 (and Jer 31:31-34) the NEW Covenant writes the Law of God on the heart.

3. Are Christians today to be that nation of priests (Ex. 19:6, 1 Peter 2:9)

yes. See Rom 2 last 5 verses.

4. Did the Priests offer up even more sacrifices and were they doing more worshipping activities (some might describe as work) on the Sabbaths?

yes. Just as is the case with Christian pastors and evangelists today.

5. Is worship to God ever “work” by God’s definition?

True worship no matter which day of the week - is never "a work to earn salvation" Eph 2:8-10 no matter OT or NT.

6. We know van worship is offering up to God obedience to man’s commands, so could righteous worship be the offering up to God, obedience to God’s commands?

yes. Worship in the context of obedience is acceptable to God.
Worship - in rebellion is not as Samuel reminded Saul "To obey is better than to sacrifice"

7. If Christians are Priests, the temple of God, carrying the altar with them (cross), and constantly offering up themselves as a living sacrifice then: when are Christians not worshipping

Vacuuming the church in the middle of a church service is not an act of worship and all Christian pretty much get that point.
Choosing to paint a window frame instead of doing a Bible study with a friend is not an act of worship no matter how saintly the painter. Even painters need a time to stop, rest, have worship, devotions , be revived.

8. Did Christ expand the Old Testament commands to include our thoughts and lots more actions?

yes and the OT includes our thoughts "thou shall not covet" Ex 20.

9. For the Priests what is the Sabbath Rest and so what is the Sabbath Rest to be for Christians?

Christian pastors work to conduct worship services just as OT priests worked to conduct them.

But neither of them can pull weeds in their garden and claim that is an act "dedicated" to worship hence IS 58:13 we are told to avoid all secular activity on the Sabbath.

10. Some of the Jewish scholars prior to Christ seemed to have discussed (records are not perfect on this) that there was a coming “Age of Jubilee”

Which does not change\edit even one of the Ten Commandments.

Mark 7:7-13 Jewish scholars in Christ's day claimed to have edited/downsized the 5th commandment to make room for their man-made tradition of CORBAN -- Jesus said that God was not fooled by that trick. God was not at all confused by it according to Christ in Mark 7.

I think the priests did follow the Sabbath Rest since “worship” is not work and the priests were to worship

Just as pastors today "work" to provide a corporate worship service.

We can all easily see that point - but somehow I doubt that this satisfies what you are looking for.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

We are also told to be as perfect as God.

yes and to be perfect means also to do his will,

Blessings

 

[Mercy Shown]

did anyone ever do that "to be saved" as if God had said "salvation is by keeping ... or obeying..." rather than "by grace through faith"?

If we can't save ourselves by "not taking God's name in vain" then we can also not save ourselves by doing or not doing anything else in the way of obedience. But does that mean we should go around taking God's name in vain?

We all agree - "it does not mean any such thing"

This is headed in the right direction so to dig deeper I would ask, why not?

 

[BobRyan]

This is headed in the right direction so to dig deeper I would ask, why not?

well the reason not to take God's name in vain is
1. The Law is written on heart and mind under the New Covenant of Heb 8 and Jer 31:31-34
2. The new creation, new birth , leads to the spirit filled life of Rom 8 - one of obedience rather than rebellion against God
3. "This IS the LOVE of God that we KEEP his Commandments" 1 John 5:4

Love for God is expressed in the first four commandments
Love for our neighbor as ourself - is in the last 6 commandments.


The "good tree" of Matt 7 - produces "good fruit".

 

[Mercy Shown]

well the reason not to take God's name in vain is
1. The Law is written on heart and mind under the New Covenant of Heb 8 and Jer 31:31-34
2. The new creation, new birth , leads to the spirit filled life of Rom 8 - one of obedience rather than rebellion against God
3. "This IS the LOVE of God that we KEEP his Commandments" 1 John 5:4

Love for God is expressed in the first four commandments
Love for our neighbor as ourself - is in the last 6 commandments.


The "good tree" of Matt 7 - produces "good fruit".

Yes, this is what I have been looking for. Sabbath keeping is a blessing and a gift in this context, but it is not a high hill for a Christian to stand on and preach down to other Christians. Keeping a sabbath or any command does not make one righteous, but the righteous will keep God's law as best they can because they have been made righteous apart from the law. The door to the sheep gate is not the law; it is Christ, and the sheep pen is filled with rich, righteous, giving grass.

Knowing that Christ died for us while we were yet dirty sinners and then made us alive to show us His love should blow anyone away. Then, to have the Father hike up his robes and run down the driveway to meet us as sons and daughters when all we are doing is groveling in our guilt and planning to be servants is so unbelievable that until the Father throws his arms around us and kisses us, adopts us and makes us joint heirs with Christ, we are ignorant of His love. This is soul-changing and more powerful than threats, coercion, or manipulation. It vtrnasforms us as we meditate on it into humble children crying out "abba."

 

[BobRyan]

Yes, this is what I have been looking for. Sabbath keeping is a blessing and a gift in this context, but it is not a high hill for a Christian to stand on and preach down to other Christians.

Is "not taking God's name in vain", or "not bowing down before images" a high hill to stand on and preach down to other Christians -- in your POV?

Keeping a sabbath or any command does not make one righteous

True. The lost sinner cannot "earn their own salvation" by sufficiently refraining from taking God's name in vain.

What is interesting if the only discussion point were "do not take God's name in vain" then no one would even think to say "don't preach down to other Christians about that". Agreed???

, but the righteous will keep God's law as best they can

Indeed. Because under the New Covenant the Law is written on the heart.
And as Rom 3:31 says "what then? Do we make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! in fact we establish the Law"
Rev 14:12 "The saints KEEP the Law of God AND their faith in Jesus"

because they have been made righteous apart from the law. The door to the sheep gate is not the law; it is Christ,

agreed.

 

[Mercy Shown]

Is "not taking God's name in vain", or "not bowing down before images" a high hill to stand on and preach down to other Christians -- in your POV?

No, people take God's name in vain all the time without ever swearing or cussing. They call themselves Christians and then do not accept the power God offers them in grace. They deny the saving power of Christ and instead stand upon their claims of obedience. Too many "lawkeepers" stand in judgment of other Christians, many of whom may be closer to Christ than themselves.

Many would never bow to an image, bow to a day, bow to a church denomination, or bow to their righteousness.

True. The lost sinner cannot "earn their own salvation" by sufficiently refraining from taking God's name in vain.

What is interesting if the only discussion point were "do not take God's name in vain" then no one would even think to say "don't preach down to other Christians about that". Agreed???

No, if someone is taking God's name in vain, telling them to stop, that it is bad, or that they need to clean up their act will not address the sin from which their profanity flows.

Indeed. Because under the New Covenant the Law is written on the heart.
And as Rom 3:31 says "what then? Do we make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! in fact we establish the Law"
Rev 14:12 "The saints KEEP the Law of God AND their faith in Jesus"

agreed.