Why we are not supposed to keep the Sabbath

[HIM]

Your zeal for the Lord is good to see. The discussion between you and me on presenting Sabbath observance was initiated by Bob's post #278 where he expressed frustration with the presentation. We don't have a disagreement about the meaning of Scripture. I do find it interesting that I can't find a place in the New Testament where Jesus (Revelation) or any of the apostles correct gentiles about when to keep the Sabbath. All types of sins are condemned, but the keeping of Sabbath doesn't seem to be there. Maybe I missed an example. That is not proof that not keeping Sabbath is not a sin, but it might color the presentation.

Jesus expects His followers to be keeping the Sabbath, not a sabbath at the time of the end right before His coming in the clouds to gather the saints in Matt 24.

Hebrews 4 states that we who have enter into the rest that is the Gospel also cease from our own works as God did from His.
The word "as" denotes a direct comparison..

So how and when did God cease from His own works?

The new Covenant is the Law in our hearts. We are a new creature. Now through Christ we do because of who we are in Him not because we have to, but because we want to through His Spirit.
We keep the commandments of God because of the faith of Jesus Christ. We are dead but live. But not us but Christ lives in us. And the life we now live, we live through the faith OF Jesus Christ. For he that has been baptized into Christ , has put on Christ. And it is He that works in us both to will and do His good pleasure.

So what if we are not keeping the commandments? Is the Law in our hearts? Are we a new creature in Christ Jesus?

 

[HIM]

When I asked why you answered: "no, the word holy is not in the Greek." Most all versions do not use the word holy. That doesn't seem to be a reason the verse could not mean Sabbath now does it?

Here is where the answer is.

Rom 14:1 Now receive the one who is weak in the faith, and do not have disputes over differing opinions.
Rom 14:2 One person believes in eating everything, but the weak person eats only vegetables.


Rom 14:1 And receive him who is weak in the faith—not to determinations of reasonings;
Rom 14:1 And receive the one who is weak in the faith, not to judgments of your thoughts.
Rom 14:1 Now receive the one who is weak in the faith, and do not have disputes over differing opinions.


Differing opinions, Reasonings, thoughts?


What is differing opinions?

In other words, Reasonings or thoughts of what?


Verse 2 answers this and sets the context

Rom 14:2 One person believes in eating everything, but the weak person eats only vegetables.

No where in Scripture is it commanded ever that we only eat vegetables, So opinions of what?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Your zeal for the Lord is good to see. The discussion between you and me on presenting Sabbath observance was initiated by Bob's post #278 where he expressed frustration with the presentation. We don't have a disagreement about the meaning of Scripture. I do find it interesting that I can't find a place in the New Testament where Jesus (Revelation) or any of the apostles correct gentiles about when to keep the Sabbath. All types of sins are condemned, but the keeping of Sabbath doesn't seem to be there. Maybe I missed an example. That is not proof that not keeping Sabbath is not a sin, but it might color the presentation.

There was never an argument in the NT about when the Sabbath was Sunday vs Saturday. God only named one day, the seventh day and called it His Sabbath Exo 20:10 and that did not change in the NT, it is still kept according to the commandment Luke 23:56

The only argument about the Sabbath was how to keep it. The Pharisees added many laws to God’s law including the Sabbath where it was no longer the delight it was meant to be by having communion with God our Creator Isa 58:13-14 on the day He set aside from Creation Exo 20:11, made for man Mark 2:27 to bless and join ourselves with Christ Isa 56:1-6 and to sanctify us Eze 20:12 as we can’t sanctify ourselves, we need God for everything.

Had the Sabbath changed there would have been an uproar in scripture, not. silence.

 

[Jerry N.]

Jesus expects His followers to be keeping the Sabbath, not a sabbath at the time of the end right before His coming in the clouds to gather the saints in Matt 24.

Hebrews 4 states that we who have enter into the rest that is the Gospel also cease from our own works as God did from His.
The word "as" denotes a direct comparison..

So how and when did God cease from His own works?

The new Covenant is the Law in our hearts. We are a new creature. Now through Christ we do because of who we are in Him not because we have to, but because we want to through His Spirit.
We keep the commandments of God because of the faith of Jesus Christ. We are dead but live. But not us but Christ lives in us. And the life we now live, we live through the faith OF Jesus Christ. For he that has been baptized into Christ , has put on Christ. And it is He that works in us both to will and do His good pleasure.

So what if we are not keeping the commandments? Is the Law in our hearts? Are we a new creature in Christ Jesus?

One could argue that neither Matt. 24 nor Hebrews 4 are directed to gentiles, but that is not important in this context.

You asked, “So what if we are not keeping the commandments? Is the Law in our hearts? Are we a new creature in Christ Jesus?” I haven’t got to the spiritual maturity that I don’t break a commandment from time to time. I accepted Christ as my savior many years ago, and I believe that the Holy Spirit has been acting in my life. Am I a new creature in Christ?

 

[HIM]

One could argue that neither Matt. 24 nor Hebrews 4 are directed to gentiles,

Then that one would be wrong.

but that is not important in this context.

Sure it is.

You asked, “So what if we are not keeping the commandments? Is the Law in our hearts? Are we a new creature in Christ Jesus?” I haven’t got to the spiritual maturity that I don’t break a commandment from time to time. I accepted Christ as my savior many years ago, and I believe that the Holy Spirit has been acting in my life. Am I a new creature in Christ?

I don't know.

What I do know is you are mistaken in the initial post we responded to and apparently your take on Matt 24 and Heb 4

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Your zeal for the Lord is good to see. The discussion between you and me on presenting Sabbath observance was initiated by Bob's post #278 where he expressed frustration with the presentation. We don't have a disagreement about the meaning of Scripture. I do find it interesting that I can't find a place in the New Testament where Jesus (Revelation) or any of the apostles correct gentiles about when to keep the Sabbath. All types of sins are condemned, but the keeping of Sabbath doesn't seem to be there. Maybe I missed an example. That is not proof that not keeping Sabbath is not a sin, but it might color the presentation.

Also forgot to add the Gentiles were keeping the Sabbath

Acts 13:42 [So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath.

Not asked for "day 1 preaching" nor did the apostles say- the Sabbath is now day 1 for Gentiles- which would be rebellion against God. Exo 20:8-11 Mat 2:27

Acts 13:44 On the next Sabbath almost the whole city came together to hear the word of God.

Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded both Jews and Greeks.

The whole Sunday vs Sabbath issue came after scripture in the third century started from sun worship with Constatine as predicted Dan 7:25

As we were warned

Acts 20:For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.

God's sheep hear His voice and follow Him

Exo 20:10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God.

Luke 4:16 So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. 17 And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah.

 

[trophy33]

Also forgot to add the Gentiles were keeping the Sabbath

Acts 13:42 [So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath.

1. There is no word "Gentiles" in the verse:
"As Paul and Barnabas were leaving the synagogue, they [the listeners] invited them to speak further about these things on the next Sabbath."

2. Coming together on the Sabbath day is not the keeping of the Sabbath. The rest from all work is keeping the Sabbath, biblically.

 

[HIM]

1. There is no word "Gentiles" in the verse:
"As Paul and Barnabas were leaving the synagogue, the people invited them to speak further about these things on the next Sabbath."

2. Coming together on the Sabbath day is not the keeping of the Sabbath. The rest from all work is keeping the Sabbath, biblically.

So are you here to argue textual variants then. Because the Byzantine text type most certainly does. Hence why the KJV and other translations do have Gentile in their translations.

 

[trophy33]

So are you here to argue textual variants then. Because the Byzantine text type most certainly does. Hence why the KJV and other translations do have Gentile in their translations.

This textual variant is not deemed to be good enough for today's usage. Thats why its not in any modern translation.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

So are you here to argue textual variants then. Because the Byzantine text type most certainly does. Hence why the KJV and other translations do have Gentile in their translations.

And knows the minds of why people are gathering on the Sabbath is not to be followers of Christ Luke 4:16 or obeying His commandments Exo 20:8-11 and ignore the reason why they said- to hear the Word of God an example of keeping the Sabbath day holy as the commandments states and as NT followers kept Luke 23:56. The Gentiles not asking for day one preaching, but Sabbath preaching, just as Jesus was as our example and kept the way Jesus said Lev 23:3 Exo 20:8-11

 

[HIM]

This textual variant is not deemed to be good enough for today's usage.

But it was good enough for how many years prior to the finding of the Alexandrian?

Thats why its not in any modern translation.

Says some paid scholars in a time where we are told the "professing Church" and the world will be at it's worse.

That is an issue.

It is as if to say we did not have the correct until.

 

[Leaf473]

The Israelites have been keeping the Sabbath for how long?

Who or what did they follow as they moved around?

Well, the Israelites lived mostly around the land of Israel. Picking which sunset in that area doesn't seem like it would be an issue, because the difference would only be a few minutes

But consider a tale of two cities

Silang, Cavite, Philippines, which is home to The Adventist University of the Philippines

And Berrien Springs, Michigan, which is where Andrews University is located

Both cities have a large number of Seventh-Day observers

Currently, those in Silang celebrate the Sabbath many hours before those in Berrien Springs

Is that based on something in the scriptures? Or on the human tradition of the international date line?

Suppose we put the date line in the middle of the Atlantic. Now those in Berrien Springs would celebrate a Sabbath before those in Silang

Yes, we can choose to follow what the descendants of the Israelites have decided. The rabbis say to follow the international date line. But isn't that essentially the traditions of the elders?

On this subject, many Seventh-Day observers end up appealing to the majority. But then it's strange when at other times the same people will say that the majority is often wrong

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 15:9 - New American Standard Bible 1995

‘BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.’”

www.biblegateway.com

 

[HIM]

Yes, we can choose to follow what the descendants of the Israelites have decided. The rabbis say to follow the international date line. But isn't that essentially the traditions of the elders?

Your reasoning.

Jesus did not correct them in regard to when they were keeping it.

WIth that in mind nothing has changed since then. They followed the rotation of the earth no matter where they were at.

 

[Leaf473]

But Not in respect to the commandments of God.

As was said, nowhere in scripture is it a law that we only eat vegies.

That's true, but it may have been a common Jewish practice at the time that Paul wrote Romans

Nor is it a founded in scripture that we are not to eat common animals.

What do you mean by "common animals"?

Are you leading up to the idea of a difference between koinos and akatharos?

I agree there could be a difference, but I also see that in Romans 14:20, Paul says that all things are clean (katharos)

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 14:20 - New American Standard Bible 1995

Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are clean, but they are evil for the man who eats and gives offense.

www.biblegateway.com

So with that, one would have to assume that the day mentioned is a holy day or the Sabbath

Well... Did you leave out a "not"? As your statement stands, I agree. The passage is talking about holy days, including the Seventh-Day Sabbath

It also looks to me like it's talking about all foods being "katharos", meaning everything people generally eat

 

[HIM]

What do you mean by "common animals"?

Are you leading up to the idea of a difference between koinos and akatharos?

I agree there could be a difference, but I also see that in Romans 14:20, Paul says that all things are clean (katharos)

The Common and unclean animals were seen in the vision of Peter's

He said he had never ate anything common or unclean. Then God said, what God has cleansed call not common.

Not only are two different animals being seen in the unfolding. But it is also worthy of a mention that God never addressed the animals that Peter seen which were unclean. He only mentions cleansing the unclean.

One should notice that in the seeing of all manner of four footed beasts and what not; not one animal was seen that Peter could eat. With that in mind, what made the clean animals not fit to eat in Peter's eyes?

Therein is the answer to your questions.

 

[trophy33]

But it was good enough for how many years prior to the finding of the Alexandrian?


Says some paid scholars in a time where we are told the "professing Church" and the world will be at it's worse.

That is an issue.

It is as if to say we did not have the correct until.

Nestle Aland is the authoritative text of the New Testament, for quite a while. If you have a personal problem with it and prefer a medieval textual version, then its your private, individual choice, but there is nothing to argue about, its already settled and accepted by the Bible translators and scholars.

 

[HIM]

So with that, one would have to assume that the day mentioned is a holy day or the Sabbath

Well... Did you leave out a "not"? As your statement stands, I agree. The passage is talking about holy days, including the Seventh-Day Sabbath

Did you miss the word assume?

Assuming is good?

Rather subjective reasoning when one assumes.

 

[HIM]

Nestle Aland is the authoritative text of the New Testament, for quite a while. If you have a personal problem with it and prefer a medieval textual version, then its your private, individual choice, but there is nothing to argue about, its already settled and accepted by the Bible translators and scholars.

Not all. And that doesn't answer the points given.

The main one being that you and they think we did not have God's word until these text were found.

 

[trophy33]

Not all. And that doesn't answer the points given.

The main one being that you and they think we did not have God's word until these text were found.

Again, there is nothing to argue about. It has already been settled. The medieval version is not found in the first manuscripts. Do not derail the thread to a totally different discussion about textual criticism. The authoritative text for the public usage and for the Bible translators is the NA.

 

[HIM]

Again, there is nothing to argue about. It has already been settled... its already settled and accepted by the Bible translators and scholars.

Not by all.