Sabbath

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Hebrews teaches us that Jesus is a High Priest called after the order of Melchizedek i.e. 3:1; 4:14; 5:5,10. Then, the discussion of the significance of Melchizedek's priesthood occurs in chapter 7.

Note verse 12. An interesting conclusion is drawn. "For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law" (NKJV). The point? The Israelites were no longer under the law of Moses. God's law changed when Jesus became High Priest. He couldn't be a High Priest under the Levitical system -- He was from the wrong tribe (verses 12-14). Rather, He was declared to be a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. NOTE the emphasis on the word forever. It is emphasized in Hebrews 7:15-17. It is contrasting the Levitical priesthood, which ended, with the priesthood of Melchizedek, which will continue forever in Christ.

Now, please harmonize your understanding of Matthew 5:17-20 with this passage in Hebrews i.e. Heb. 7:12.

BustedFlat said:

God gave the law.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

BustedFlat said:

God says not one jot or one tittle of the law shall change until heaven and earth pass.

I see no wiggle room here. Jesus explains the law, as God laid it out.

Click to expand...

Not looking for any "wiggle room," just to consider what Jesus said. In the NKJV, Jesus said, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." (Matthew 5:17-18) Now, let contrast what Jesus said with what you are telling us He said - "God says not one jot or one tittle of the law shall change until heaven and earth pass." Uh oh. I see a problem. You haven't exactly captured what Jesus said. You have inserted the word "change" into the text. Jesus is discussing the fulfillment of the Law, not whether He is going to change the Law. However, since you brought it up, what does God's word say would happen to the old law after Jesus fulfilled it?

BustedFlat said:

One of His problems was 23 chapters (In the Mishnah, the commentaries on the law of Moses) on how to keep the Sabbath holy. God did not dictate 23 chapters, He said keep it holy.

Click to expand...

BustedFlat said:

Hebrews is discussing man's interpretation of that part of the law. God told us His interpretation in Psalms 110:

Psa 110:4The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Click to expand...

Actually, Hebrews is declaring that Jesus is the fulfillment of Psalm 110:4.

BustedFlat said:

FYI : I believe that Melchizedek is one of the appearances of Jesus in the old testament.

In Jesus

BustedFlat

Click to expand...

And, I believe that since Jesus is our High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, of necessity the law changed - "For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law" (Heb. 7:12 NKJV). Note the word "change." Here is where the word occurs and should be considered -- not in Matthew 5:18.

Hack said:

Commanded, Not Taken Away
Feast Days and Sabbaths ends its case against the Feasts by saying that Yahshua went up to Jerusalem in John 5:51 to keep a feast. It then says, “This is unquestionably one of the holy days that Paul spoke of as being abolished.” The question that immediately comes to mind is, why would our Savior implore us to follow in His footsteps and do what He did, which included keeping the annual Feasts (John 7:10, 14; 2:23, Mark 14:12) and then abolish those same Feasts as soon as He died? His command to keep the Passover in Luke 22:19 is unmistakable. How can we possibly follow this command if the Passover were done away at His death? Why do churches today still honor “Pentecost Sunday” if the Feasts are no longer in effect?
Why would Paul, whose ministry took place years after the death and resurrection of Yahshua, say, “I must by all means keep this Feast [Tabernacles] that comes to Jerusalem?” (Acts 18:21). Paul was obedient to Yahshua’s [and Yahweh’s] command by keeping the Passover in 1Corinthians 11:24-31, as well as other Feasts (Acts 20:6, 16; 27:9-even 30 years after the Savior’ resurrection). Paul said he was taught by the resurrected Savior Himself, Galatians 1:11-17. That being the case, why was he not told that the Feast days are no longer in effect? He said he declared all the counsel or teachings of Yahweh, Acts 20:27. Then why were the Feasts still part of his teachings if they were abolished by Yahshua’s death long before?
The fact is, not only were the Feast days not done away in the New Covenant, but also they will be kept in the coming millennial Kingdom. Read the revealing prophecies of future Feast observances in Zechariah 14:16-19; Isaiah 66:23; Ezekiel 44:24; 45:21-25; 46:3. The people of Yahweh as well as the whole earth will be observing all these days when Yahshua’s government is set up for a thousand years in Jerusalem. The question is, if they will be part of His government under His millennial reign, why would they be abolished for the True Worshiper today?

Click to expand...

The law of Moses was given in Exodus and continued until Jesus nailed it to the cross (Colossians 2:14). Jesus' law (i.e. testament or will) was established after His death (i.e. Hebrews 9:15-17).

Now, let's see where Jesus' life fit into the law of Moses versus the law of Christ ...

The law of Moses was given @ 1445 B.C. and continued until Jesus nailed it to His cross (Colossians 2:14) @ A.D. 29. Jesus was born @ 4 B.C. and died @ A.D. 29 (on the cross). After that, Jesus' law went into effect (Acts 2) and continues through today.

Therefore, Jesus was born, lived, and died while living under the law of Moses. After His death, His will went into effect. What you have yet to show us is whether or not keeping the Sabbath was a part of the law of Christ. True, it was definitely a requirement under the law of Moses, but that old covenant ended with Jesus death upon the cross. Now, under the new covenant (the law of Christ), we have better promises i.e. Hebrews 8:6-13.

Brother DRA:


The verse is quite simple,
Mat 5:18 :
"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. NKJV© 1982 Thomas Nelson
or:
I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. NIV© 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society
First is “till heaven and earth pass away”, then “till all is fulfilled” for emphases.


I am not going to debate this with you, there is no point. If I am wrong (and I don't think I am) then I lose nothing by asking the Holy Spirit to guide me in living my life as I see I have been commanded.
If I am right then I will see my rewards when His Kingdom is come.


In Jesus

BustedFlat said:

Brother DRA:


The verse is quite simple,
Mat 5:18 :
"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. NKJV© 1982 Thomas Nelson
or:
I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. NIV© 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society
First is “till heaven and earth pass away”, then “till all is fulfilled” for emphases.


I am not going to debate this with you, there is no point. If I am wrong (and I don't think I am) then I lose nothing by asking the Holy Spirit to guide me in living my life as I see I have been commanded.
If I am right then I will see my rewards when His Kingdom is come.


In Jesus

Click to expand...

I see where you are coming from. If I only wanted to accept an understanding from one passage (or text) of Scripture and close my mind to other relevant passages, I wouldn't want to debate the issue either.

As we have previously discussed, I firmly believe that Jesus teaches us that the understanding we derive from one passage of Scripture that disagrees with other relevant Scriptures is error and leads to sin. However, please don't take my word for it. Take the Lord's i.e. Matthew 4:5-7; Matthew 22:23-33. In the account in Matthew 4, it is a case of the devil's understanding of Psalm 91:11-12 versus Deuteronomy 6:16. In the account in Matthew 22, it is a case of the Sadducees understanding of Deuteronomy 25:5 versus Exodus 3:6. Likewise, it is your understanding of Matthew 5:18 versus Hebrews 7:12 that causes concern now.

Like you said, there's really no need to debate. You have your understanding of Matthew 5:18 and seem pretty content with it. However, I really think you should consider what God's word says in 2 Timothy 3:16a - "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God ..." (NKJV). Jesus seemed to use that approach. I suggest following His approach to Bible interpretation.

- DRA - said:

I see where you are coming from. If I only wanted to accept an understanding from one passage (or text) of Scripture and close my mind to other relevant passages, I wouldn't want to debate the issue either.

As we have previously discussed, I firmly believe that Jesus teaches us that the understanding we derive from one passage of Scripture that disagrees with other relevant Scriptures is error and leads to sin. However, please don't take my word of it. Take the Lord's i.e. Matthew 4:5-7; Matthew 22:23-33. In the account in Matthew 4, it is a case of the devil's understanding of Psalm 91:11-12 versus Deuteronomy 6:16. In the account in Matthew 22, it is a case of the Sadducees understanding of Deuteronomy 25:5 versus Exodus 3:6. Likewise, it is your understanding of Matthew 5:18 versus Hebrews 7:12 that causes concern now.

Like you said, there's really no need to debate. You have your understanding of Matthew 5:18 and seem pretty content with it. However, I really think you should consider what God's word says in 2 Timothy 3:16a - "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God ..." (NKJV). Jesus seemed to use that approach. I suggest following His approach to Bible interpretation.

Click to expand...

Your understanding of Matthew 5:18 is based on the assumption that the first covenant was fulfilled and all promises to the Jewish people were done.

- DRA - said:

Not sure what else God has in mind for the Jews. In fact, I don't think that He has left any promises unfulfilled that He made to Israel.

Click to expand...

In order for that to be so Mathew 5:18 to has to mean something other than what it says. Your approach appears to be: this is what I believe, what does it say. <rather than this is what it says, what do I believe?>


So when the lord says “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished”.
“All being accomplished” ie: <end of>Revelation 22:21 is emphasis to the heaven and earth disappearing, not some legalistic clause that modifies the words ( is not Jesus talking against that very thing in this chapter?).


I use to believe as you did but the teachings of people like Bob Coy, Chuck Smith and Chuck Missler have lead me to reevaluate all of scripture in the Second Timothy approach. <Not taking the teachings of Man and adapting the Word to them, but allowing the Word speak to me in spite of the teachings of man.>
I strongly ask you to read Chuck Missler's essay on the 70 weeks of Daniel or better yet, get the audio or the whole lesson.
Also read Chuck Smiths comments on Matthew 5:17.
or listen to Bob Coy's teaching.


<and again I say, If my understanding is wrong on this point I lose nothing. So I will not argue it.>


In Jesus

Originally Posted by - DRA -

I see where you are coming from. If I only wanted to accept an understanding from one passage (or text) of Scripture and close my mind to other relevant passages, I wouldn't want to debate the issue either.

As we have previously discussed, I firmly believe that Jesus teaches us that the understanding we derive from one passage of Scripture that disagrees with other relevant Scriptures is error and leads to sin. However, please don't take my word of it. Take the Lord's i.e. Matthew 4:5-7; Matthew 22:23-33. In the account in Matthew 4, it is a case of the devil's understanding of Psalm 91:11-12 versus Deuteronomy 6:16. In the account in Matthew 22, it is a case of the Sadducees understanding of Deuteronomy 25:5 versus Exodus 3:6. Likewise, it is your understanding of Matthew 5:18 versus Hebrews 7:12 that causes concern now.

Like you said, there's really no need to debate. You have your understanding of Matthew 5:18 and seem pretty content with it. However, I really think you should consider what God's word says in 2 Timothy 3:16a - "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God ..." (NKJV). Jesus seemed to use that approach. I suggest following His approach to Bible interpretation.

BustedFlat said:

Your understanding of Matthew 5:18 is based on the assumption that the first covenant was fulfilled and all promises to the Jewish people were done.

In order for that to be so Mathew 5:18 to has to mean something other than what it says. Your approach appears to be: this is what I believe, what does it say. <rather than this is what it says, what do I believe?>

So when the lord says “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished”.
“All being accomplished” ie: <end of>Revelation 22:21 is emphasis to the heaven and earth disappearing, not some legalistic clause that modifies the words ( is not Jesus talking against that very thing in this chapter?).

Click to expand...

Nope, my understanding of Matthew 5:17-18 is based on what the Lord said - "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled (NKJV)." Clearly, Jesus is saying He would fulfill even the smallest detail of the law of Moses. The issue to be decided is if and when the law ended.

You are contending that the law did NOT end. Therefore, please harmonize this conclusion with Hebrews 7:12. The passage is not going away. If your understanding of Matthew 5:17-18 is correct, then the point made by the writer of Hebrews (which is God per 2 Tim. 3:16a) is void. I don't believe it is. I believe that Jesus is indeed a High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, which mean the priesthood changed, and since the law and the priesthood were coupled, of necessity the law also changed. That's the point Hebrews 7:12 is making.

As for Bible interpretation, anyone can go to a particular passage of Scripture and claim a particular understanding. Take Matthew 5:18. Previously, you tried to insert the word "change" into the passage to suggest Jesus was saying the law would not change. However, as pointed out, that is not what He said. He said He would fulfill all points of the law - to the smallest detail. Other passages show us what happened to the law. Jesus nailed it to His cross i.e. Col. 2:14. When the relevance of the law of Moses to Gentiles converts to Christ came up for discussion in Acts 15, the decision was that only a few basic moral aspects that predated the law were applicable to the Gentiles. Why? The law was fulfilled. It was replaced by a new covenant built upon better promises i.e. Hebrews 8:6-13.

However, if you beg to differ with the writer and author of Hebrews, then please don't let me stand in your way. You just go ahead and cling to your understanding of Matthew 5:18 and keep ignoring all the other relevant passages.

Food For Thought:
Matthew 22:41-46. The Pharisees understand that the Christ was to descend from David. However, they refused to acknowledge another aspect of the Christ i.e. Psalm 110:1 -- that He was David's Lord. Therefore, was their understanding of the Christ complete by only accepting the one aspect (that Jesus was a descendant of David), or should they have accepted both aspects (that Jesus was a descendant of David and David's Lord)? I think according to 2 Timothy 3:16a they should have accepted both aspects. Likewise, I think you should also accept Hebrews 7:12. However, the choice is yours ...

BustedFlat said:

I use to believe as you did but the teachings of people like Bob Coy, Chuck Smith and Chuck Missler have lead me to reevaluate all of scripture in the Second Timothy approach. <Not taking the teachings of Man and adapting the Word to them, but allowing the Word speak to me in spite of the teachings of man.>
I strongly ask you to read Chuck Missler's essay on the 70 weeks of Daniel or better yet, get the audio or the whole lesson.
Also read Chuck Smiths comments on Matthew 5:17.
or listen to Bob Coy's teaching.

<and again I say, If my understanding is wrong on this point I lose nothing. So I will not argue it.>

In Jesus

Click to expand...

Not to be offensive, but if these folks are the ones who have shown you the method of Bible interpretation you have been using, no thanks. Obviously, I don't think it follows the way Jesus teaches us that the truth should harmonize i.e. our understanding of one passage or text should agree with our understanding of other relevant passages or texts. The "I have an understanding of one passage" approach is exactly what I see the devil using in Matthew 4:5-7, the Sadducees in Matthew 22:23-33, and the Pharisees in Matthew 22:41-46. I believe Jesus plainly warns us about the danger of this approach to Scripture.

Hbr 7:11Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. 13 For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has officiated at the altar.
14 For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning *priesthood. 15 And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest 16 who has come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life.




Paul is talking here of the carnal law, the law as understood by man, not the law as laid down by God.


Romans 7:7
7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, "You shall not covet."* 8 But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all manner of evil desire. For apart from the law sin was dead. 9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me. 12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.
Law Cannot Save from Sin
13 Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. 16 If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. 17 But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.
21 I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. 22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God--through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.




Here Paul is talking as a Pharisee as to the difference in the law of the flesh (man) and the law of spirit (God). Same law, just different interpreters. One needed updating with the arrival of Christ, and it was not God's.


The law will end when all is fulfilled: Revelation 22
22And he showed me a *pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb. 2 In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3 And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him. 4 They shall see His face, and His name shall be on their foreheads. 5 There shall be no night there: They need no lamp nor light of the sun, for the Lord God gives them light. And they shall reign forever and ever.
<emphasis mine>


&#8220;It ain't over till The Father says well done,
Don't go shuttin' down 'til the trumpet sounds and the battle is won
don't go punchin' out 'til the final shout
and the Father says, 'Well done.'"

I'm right back to seeking an answer on this topic. As soon as I think I have it nailed down I find another question.

I guess at this point I am waiting on God for the answer and His answer will be the only one that settles this for me.

I know some people get bugged when others share teachings they find, I on the other hand enjoy it so in hopes that there are a few folks like myself I will post the teaching I studied most recently that has me seeking clarification from God.

The Seventh Day

by Chuck Missler
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2000/223

MaidforHim said:

I'm right back to seeking an answer on this topic. As soon as I think I have it nailed down I find another question.

I guess at this point I am waiting on God for the answer and His answer will be the only one that settles this for me.

I know some people get bugged when others share teachings they find, I on the other hand enjoy it so in hopes that there are a few folks like myself I will post the teaching I studied most recently that has me seeking clarification from God.

The Seventh Day

by Chuck Missler
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2000/223

Click to expand...

Sister In Christ:
After reading the Chuck Missler piece last night I found this teaching by Pastor Bob Coy of Calvary Chapel Ft. Lauderdale Fl. helped bring home the message to me to better understand what the Sabbath is and should be.
It is taught in the typical Bob Coy light hearted yet spirit filled style that I find leads God to speak to my heart.


In Jesus

Thank you so much BustedFlat! This teaching was awesome The whole thing was really good, but what hit me hardest was the language. Hebrew word for Sabbath = Intermission ..... not Saturday or Sunday. "My" seventh day is for a sabbath.... very cool. Thank you so much for shareing this. God bless you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I LOVE BOB COY God used him to bring us to Calvary Chapel.

MaidforHim said:

Thank you so much BustedFlat! This teaching was awesome The whole thing was really good, but what hit me hardest was the language. Hebrew word for Sabbath = Intermission ..... not Saturday or Sunday. "My" seventh day is for a sabbath.... very cool. Thank you so much for shareing this. God bless you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I LOVE BOB COY God used him to bring us to Calvary Chapel.

Click to expand...

Praise God!

God blessed me when you prompted me to dig deeper.

Thank you and God bless!

BustedFlat said:

Hbr 7:11Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. 13 For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has officiated at the altar.
14 For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning *priesthood. 15 And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest 16 who has come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life.

Paul is talking here of the carnal law, the law as understood by man, not the law as laid down by God.

Click to expand...

Good to see you acknowledge Hebrews 7:11-16.

However, I fail to see where this text is discussing the "carnal law, the law as understood by man, not the law as laid down by God." Which law specified that the High Priest should descend from Aaron (note the latter part of verse 11 and Exodus 28:41; 29:44; 30:30? Note also Heb. 7:14 -- "Of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning *priesthood." The law under consideration is the one spoken by Moses. So, which law did He give? Wasn't it the one "laid down by God?" Please explain.

BustedFlat said:

Romans 7:7
7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, "You shall not covet."* 8 But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all manner of evil desire. For apart from the law sin was dead. 9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me. 12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.
Law Cannot Save from Sin
13 Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. 16 If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. 17 But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.
21 I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. 22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God--through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.

Here Paul is talking as a Pharisee as to the difference in the law of the flesh (man) and the law of spirit (God). Same law, just different interpreters. One needed updating with the arrival of Christ, and it was not God's.

Click to expand...

This context actually starts back in Romans 6. In the first 11 verses, Paul describes the blessings enjoyed in baptism. Concisely stated, baptism is God's way for one to be united with Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection where they die to sins, are freed from them, and become alive to God. Romans 6:12-23 elaborates on being freed from the bondage of sin. Romans 7:1-6 elaborates on being freed from the law. It is likened to a marriage, where a spouse dies and leaves the other free to remarry. The point? The person baptized into Christ dies to the law and may remarry (see 7:4). What law were they delivered from? Note the latter part of 7:6 - "Not in oldness of the letter" is a reference to the law of Moses. Note verse 7. The law under consideration is the one that said, "You shall not covet" i.e. Exodus 20:17; Deuteronomy 5:21; 7:25.

Please be fair with the context of the discuss before making rash decisions.

BustedFlat said:

The law will end when all is fulfilled: Revelation 22
22And he showed me a *pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb. 2 In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3 And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him. 4 They shall see His face, and His name shall be on their foreheads. 5 There shall be no night there: They need no lamp nor light of the sun, for the Lord God gives them light. And they shall reign forever and ever.
<emphasis mine>


&#8220;It ain't over till The Father says well done,
Don't go shuttin' down 'til the trumpet sounds and the battle is won
don't go punchin' out 'til the final shout
and the Father says, 'Well done.'"

Newsboys Light's Out​

​

In Jesus​

Click to expand...

I trust that the Lord fulfilled the law like He said in Matthew 5:17-18. As for when the law ended, I believe that it ended when the "better promises" of the second covenant were offered i.e. "their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more" (see Hebrews 8:6-13). Do you believe the Lord forgives sins and remembers them no more under the gospel of Christ? Or, do you wait for better promises than those offered by the blood of Christ?

This is the exact point brothers and sisters:
"And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him." -- Revelation 22:3 -- I disagree with the conclusion that the law as understood in the commandments under the mercy seat below the shekinah will ever end. This spiritual law is an expression of God's being. "For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:" -- Hebrews 9:24

"Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;" -- Hebrews 2:14

"To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation." -- 2 Corinthians 5:19 -- see also 2 Corinthians 5:21 & 2 Corinthians 5:17

A logical rhetorical question: If God has a heartbeat, when?

We need to Remember, We cannot forget, God is dealing with issues angels desire to look into. We are a spectacle to His entire Universe. God is settling the issue of sin once for all eternity -- see 1 Corinthians 4:9 -- 1 Peter 1:12 -- Job 1:6 -- Job 2:1

"What do ye imagine against the LORD? he will make an utter end: affliction shall not rise up the second time." -- Nahum 1:9

"And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God." -- Revelation 21:3 -- see 2 Corinthians 6:16

There shall be no more curse, just blessings, for we shall see His Face, and know as we are known, before we call He will answer, and He will restore unto us a perfect tongue. Praise Jesus for those glorious days. Jesus comes. Period.

Hi (((CF Forums))) and other thread posters. i don't like the word I. But, so you know who i am. My name is Ken (imaken), I love our Lord Jesus. amen and PRAISE JESUS, period.

I am a non-denominational Sabbath keeper.
In fact, I love the Truth that is in Jesus. I love the truth of all things. That truth is Jesus. I rest in Him. This truth of all things, has a spiritual component and a physical component in my life.

This truth of all things, is a Golden Thread, which runs throughout MY understanding of the Gospel of Salvation. Praise the Lord! Jesus Comes. Period.

I was recently posting in another forum, on this subject of Sabbath. I have been reading in Christian Forums for a while. I have been watching this thread. The Lord has prevented me from posting, until now.

In my humble opinion, these misunderstandings about Sabbath, are fallacious (false) arguments, without a thorough understanding or consideration of the facts. Just because Jesus did not restate the command for Sabbath does not void it. Sabbath was often a point of contention, as it is now. Obviously this command has been attacked from both sides. Its principle and fact can be made burdensome, ignored, or changed. The truth of the matter, is its fact. I have heard some say Jesus is the Sabbath. ...balderdash... Jesus, is Jesus. I have heard some say Sabbath is the rest we have in Jesus. Better, but, that is not a literal true "day." I personally rest in Jesus everyday of my life. That is not a literal true "day" for me. My understanding of Sabbath, as an actual day of creation, is in the seventh day of the literal week.

A logical rhetorical question: If God has a heartbeat, when?

Another logical question, just because: If the physical world has time, when was the first second? -- When was the first week? "This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it." -- Psalm 118:24

Fact, in Truth, in Real Time. This world is not about us humans directly.
Fact, in Truth, in Real Time. God has many other creatures in His Universe. Of course we already know of millions of other creatures and creations on this earth. The Bible records there are other creatures of God, Living, in Heaven. Some people believe God may have more creatures in His Universe. I do. The unfallen worlds of God's Universe, are watching what is happening on Earth with rapt attention. Jesus spoke a parable about 99 who did not wander away. Other than angels, unfallen beings do not come here. Our planet is sick and quarantined, but that is best left for another thread discussion.

This world is about creation. This world is about God's use and maintenance of creation, for His Purpose, His Pleasure, and His Glory. This is the Beauty of His Grace, our beauty for ashes. This is why "That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." -- Ephesians 2:7 -- Ephesians 2:1-10

Fact, "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:" -- 1 Peter 3:18 -- for expanded study see 1 Peter 3:15-22

The commandment in question, the fourth commandment, starts: "Remember the Sabbath Day." Remembering something implies it is already known. So let us remember the sequence of events.
Remember, The first five days in the creation of this world were spent creating things in the physical realm. On the sixth day God created man, a creature of the physical (dust) and a creature of spirit (breath of life from God). Remember, then God "created" the Sabbath. The Sabbath was something entirely spiritual, something believed and kept.

Remember, God "created" the Sabbath. The Sabbath is not an institution, it is a creation of God. This was the only thing Adam and Eve were able to see created. God rested the seventh day because He was already counting for them. Adam and Eve had to trust Him, by faith, with counting to seven too. The Bible says, "The just shall live by faith." -- see Habakkuk 2:4 -- Romans 1:17 -- Galatians 3:11 -- Hebrews 10:38

Abraham knew of God's commands way before Moses came around. "Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." Was Abraham under the old covenant? or the new? First covenant? or the last? Were the promises made to Adam and Eve the first, the last, or the only, covenant, that has ever really spelled "salvation."
"And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." -- Galatians 3:29 -- Genesis 26:5 -- Genesis 18:19 -- Matthew 25:34 -- Ephesians 1:4 -- Hebrews 4:3 -- 1 Peter 1:20

Jesus said, "Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." -- John 17:24 -- see Matthew 13:35

My current personal theological question is this. Do the scenarios of Revelation 18:1-24 and Revelation 13:12-17, have to happen in one generation. God has given me some grace in this but, . . . well . . .

Please consider the following questions, given from a heart of loving concern.
Has God made any changes in the plan of Salvation? There is nothing which says the Melchisedec priesthood wasn't doing its thing all along, in action, in heaven, before, after, and during, Jesus life on Earth.
How many years before Abraham was the Sabbath created? Can it be counted? Or is there really just symbolic time on planet earth?
Are the ten commandments in the "law of God" part of the 'ceremonial mosaic law'? -- Remember what the experiment of the Mosaic covenanat was all about. The Israelites were '"baptized unto Moses" because they did not want to work with God directly. -- see 1 Corinthians10:1-5
How did God say he would "prove" the Israelites "whether they will walk in my law, or no." before the ten commandments were even given? -- hint see Exodus16:22-23.
What memorial of God are we supposed to remember "throughout all generations." see Psalm 135:13
How did the early Christians know when the "first day of the week" was?
What Sabbath are we supposed to recognize on the new earth? -- see Isaiah 66:23
What generally happens when a Sunday keeping Christian quits going to meetings? (hint; if they show up Thursday does it count?)
If a 'day' is a literal thing, how can one say all days are the same? Why number them at all?
Does Earth still rotate around the sun?
Does the universe rotate around God? -- When the sons of God presented themselves before the Lord, was there a time for that, or was it just a general, ethereal, sortof time and sortof place. -- see Job1:6 and Job2:1

Does the universe rotate around God? -- I will answer this one now.
Does the universe rotate around God? -- In most places, whether one knows it or not. There is no rotation in darkness, just formless void in that outer darkness.

If someone is unfamiliar with something, that does not make that particular position untrue, to them or anyone else. Fact is fact, whether one believes it or not. There can be an infinite number of falsehoods, but only one truth. God knows the truth. Jesus is the way the truth and the life, fact, whether one believes it or not.

The apostle John wrote: "He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil." -- 1 John 3:8
The apostle John wrote: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." -- 1 John 3:4
Apparently there was/is a law that makes the devil a sinner from the beginning.

I will say this again: There is a "golden thread" which runs throughout my understanding of the Gospel of Salvation. Others see parts of this golden thread also, which makes Jesus Christ our all sufficient savior.

If Adam and Eve had never fallen, which would already always be understood as the day of God's Rest. If Adam and Eve had stayed sinless, what day would be known as the Lord's day of Rest, for Him, and His image.

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." -- 1 Corinthians 2:14

"But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ." -- 1 Corinthians 2:9-16

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:" -- 2 Peter 1:19

I must point out the following scripture text, concerning a power in opposition to God, without comment. It is pertinent. "And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time." -- Daniel 7:25

I feel i must also point out the following:
In any seal of state three things must be present:
1. The name of the seal holder
2. The seal holder's title & authority
3. The seal holder's dominion

From the fourth commandment, Exodus 20:11 -- For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
1. Lord = Name
2. made = creator = title and authority
3. heaven & earth = dominion

Revelation 14:7 says, "Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters." -- Revelation 14:7

Also, "Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them." -- Ezekiel 20:12 -- If you look at this right, it says God gave them something He already had. Remember, when God tested the Israelites in the desert with the manna, they had been slaves. After forty years of regular manna timing, you can be sure the calender was on God's schedule.

And "And hallow my sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the LORD your God. -- Ezekiel 20:20

The Sabbath command and its spirit of worship, is the sign of God's creative power. Our own life and breath, in this real world, is our real physical sign of that communion. I live breathe and can think. The understanding in which one "Remembers" God's creative power is our spiritual sign of that relationship. I understand Jesus lived and died and rose again to bring me back into that communion with the Father. I understand Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
That is why Satan hates this sign of God's creative power so much. Just like Satan hates parenthood, fatherhood and motherhood, because those things remind him of God's creative power. Satan hates the Sabbath because it commemorates God's creative power. Jesus said "For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day." -- Matthew 12:8

God gives us an undeserved adoption and inheritance, and a spiritual "Melchisedec priesthood" of service to Him, by spiritual faith in the merits of Jesus the Christ, for eternity, and in eternity, with Him. No legal eagles or greasy grace allowed. The Bible says, "The just shall live by faith" every day of their lives. "But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." -- Galatians 3:11 -- see Habakkuk 2:4 -- Romans 1:17 -- Galatians 3:11 -- Hebrews 10:38

In Christ, ken
homepage reference kf1.org
Jesus comes. Period.

imaken said:

No legal eagles or greasy grace allowed. The Bible says, "The just shall live by faith" every day of their lives. "But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." -- Galatians 3:11 -- see Habakkuk 2:4 -- Romans 1:17 -- Galatians 3:11 -- Hebrews 10:38

Click to expand...

I agree with this part . I will live by faith and not by a law of the sabbath .

The idea that Constantine changed the sabbath is just another in the string of badly researched conspiracy theories which attempt to justify a modern revisionist position by using Constantine as a scape goat.

The fact is that the church met on sunday 200 years before constantine was even born. Also, the church didn't keep the sabbath 200 years before constantine was born.

This is recorded by Ignatius of Antioch as well as Justin Martyr. Ignatius was himself taught by John the apostle and he wrote around 100 AD. He recorded that the church did not keep the sabbath on saturday and that they worshipped on sunday as a celebration of the Lord's resurrection.

It is important to note that the early church did NOT view sunday as a replacement sabbath. Sunday was not a sabbath and didn't carry the restrictions of the sabbath of not working etc. Sunday was the day of celebration and communal worship in the church.

The christians did not keep the sabbath by not working. Ignatious says that many christians were in the habbit of honoring the sabbath by devoting that day to reading, studying, or thinking about scripture. However the church carried no restriction on working on the sabbath.

That is from a source who was alive during the time of the apostles.

- DRA - said:

I trust that the Lord fulfilled the law like He said in Matthew 5:17-18. As for when the law ended, I believe that it ended when the "better promises" of the second covenant were offered i.e. "their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more" (see Hebrews 8:6-13). Do you believe the Lord forgives sins and remembers them no more under the gospel of Christ? Or, do you wait for better promises than those offered by the blood of Christ?

Click to expand...

I too believe this, I am guilty of being a little overzealous in stating my position, I ask forgiveness brother.

I have a problem with the freedom without responsibility crowd, see the gay marriage thread for an example. I do not mean for my position to be interpreted as we are under the letter of the law, that would be blaspheme, but we very much live under the spirit of the law, I think that is what Christ's law is all about. I thank you brother, as iron sharpens iron, you keep me studying the word.


God Bless

Attemt to get back on thread

cavell said:

An examination of New Testament passages shows us four important points:
1) Whenever Christ appears in His resurrected form and the day is mentioned, it is always the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1, 9, 10; Mark 16:9; Luke 24:1, 13, 15; John 20:19, 26).

Click to expand...

Jhn 20:26And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: [then] came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace [be] unto you.


That would be Monday evening Bible study. The day is not named, but is mentioned.


The ascension appears to have happened on a Friday:


Act 1:3To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:


Sunday + 40 is a Friday, again the name is not stated but appears to be mentioned.

cavell said:

1. The only time the Sabbath is mentioned from Acts through Revelation it is for evangelistic purposes to the Jews and the setting is usually in a synagogue (Acts chapters 13–18). Paul wrote, "to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews" (1 Corinthians 9:20). Paul did not go to the synagogue to fellowship with and edify the saints, but to convict and save the lost.
2. Once Paul states "from now on I will go to the Gentiles" (Acts 18:6), the Sabbath is never again mentioned.
   And 4) instead of suggesting adherence to the Sabbath day, the remainder of the New Testament implies the opposite (including the one exception to point 3 above, found in Colossians 2:16).

Click to expand...

Rom 14:5One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Rom 14:6He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.


Does not mention by name but you can see he is talking about sabbath.


Col 2:16Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]:


Same idea as Romans 14:5-6, but the sabbath is named.




I would point out that the sabbath seems to be the basis of worship in the millennial Kingdom, and it seems to indicate shabbot:


Isa 66:22¶For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
Isa 66:23And it shall come to pass, [that] from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.




Eze 46:1¶Thus saith the Lord GOD; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened.