Do you think Easter is Christian?

o2bwise said:

Hi Strong In Him,

The distraction is that we spend time bickering about who has the correct day

Romans 14:5
5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind.

I actually believe the above verse applies even though I also believe God sanctified and set aside the 7th day and did not deviate from this at a later time.

Oftentimes, I have been in the company of Sunday keeping brethren and it was my conviction that they esteemed the 1st day sufficient that to bring up the whole "It's the 7th day, brother!" subject matter is a thorn and better left unsaid.

Click to expand...

Thanks. But my comment wasn't about the Sabbath, but about the day on which we celebrate Easter.

o2bwise said:

Hi nomadictheist,

We know there was a collection on the first day and we know that some Christians referred to Sunday as the Lord's day.

With respect to "pseudoscholars with an agenda to push," I have no problem being considered a pseudoscholar. As far as having an agenda to push, well, I switched from Sunday to the 7th day and I don't think I was pushing an agenda.

Click to expand...

However, you are clearly pushing this agenda here; you obviously consider Sabbatarianism the preferred option and have no qualms about promoting this view.

The 7th day was set aside even before Adam and Eve sinned.

God's intent for the 7th day was that it actually commemorated events that took place on every day other than the 7th - days 1-6 (creation time). The first day lacks this characteristic in that what it commemorates took place on that very day - here a characteristic 100% contrary to what God did with the day He set aside.

In fact, some see the same model where the age of earth's travail in sin is seen to be 6 millennial periods at the tail of which man is once again remade in the image of God and a testimony is given. Then follows a Sabbath (read: 7th) millennium of rest.

Jesus said He did not come to change the law even by a jot or a tittle.

Then you have Romans 7 where the law that exposes sin is the one Paul quotes from when he refers to "You shall not covet" - this law then being the OT Ten Commandments.

Were I to be a believer in the 1st day, what I would love to see is an explicit declaration that the 7th day is laid aside, is unsanctified, its holiness abrogated, and the first day exalted with the qualification that God sanctified it and made it holy.

Click to expand...

Thus, you miss the point as to what the Seventh Day actually refers to.

roamer_1 said:

This will be my last post tonight, as the sun is setting here, and Shabbat begins.

I keep shabbat precisely as it says to - I try to have coldcuts and such ready, to keep from cooking, and I create no fire - though I may warm things up on the fire that is set before the Shabbat. Chili is a favorite Shabbat meal, and cold tacos are good to take along if I go for a walk...

If I want to go fishing or something, I get there before friday night and spend the night over.

I get my morning chores done, and keep them to a minimum (but certainly the animals are fed and watered), and that's normally the only thing I use the pickup for (being to distant to otherwise do efficiently.

I will do no business on that day, and emergency work that must be done is given for free.

I may run down to the SDA and worship with them... Or go to the Bible study at the Calvary church...

Might walk down to my Mom's and spend time there.. Might walk up on the mountain to the bench that overlooks my house - It is a beautiful place for reflection. Might stay home and study the Word... Might walk up to the mill pond...

But it is all about being a blessed time, not a Pharisaical burden - And it IS a blessed time, just as YHWH promises. It is my favorite time of the week... Completely stress free. No work, no phone, very little TV (if any), and LOTS of time to spend with the Father.

Shabbat Shalom.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you are not obeying what God told Moses with regards to the Sabbath, if you seem so adament about keeping the Sabbath according to the OT.

"See! For the Lord has given you the Sabbath; therefore He gives you on the sixth day bread for two days. Let every man remain in his place; let no man go out of his place on the seventh day." (Exodus 16:29); "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it." (Exodus 20:10); "You shall keep the Sabbath, therefore, for it is holy to you. Everyone who profanes it shall surely be put to death; for whoever does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from among his people." (Exodus 31:14)

Do you believe in the Holy Bible or do you have another set of sabbath laws that's not found in the Scriptures?

Der Alter said:

Acts of the Apostles 23:6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
​

This was when Roman soldiers rescued Paul from a Jewish lynch mob before he appealed to Caesar and was taken to Rome, not before he became a Christian.

Click to expand...

Please read carefully, Paul was converted in Acts 9.

Please read in context of Acts 23 and not just use verse 6 to justify what you want to think of Paul as still speaking as a Pharisee and not a Christian when He was before the council made up of the Sadducees and Pharisees being tried for preaching Christ Jesus. That's because in verse 6, he did say, "Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!", knowing that the Saudacees didn't believe in the resurrection. He knew of the difference belief the Saudacees and the Pharisees had between them.

Paul basically used the belief of the Pharisees against the Sadducees to create a dissension between the two groups, "And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection—and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both. Then there arose a loud outcry. And the scribes of the Pharisees’ party arose and protested, saying, “We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God." (Acts 23:7-9)

And it worked! He got himself freed from the council made up of the Pharisees and Sadducees, for in verse 10, we read, "Now when there arose a great dissension, the commander, fearing lest Paul might be pulled to pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him by force from among them, and bring him into the barracks."

Note that it was the Jerusalem council (the Sanhedrins) that was accusing Paul for preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ and that it was the Jews who ordered the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ by using the Roman laws against the blessed Savior. The same thing was happening in the book of Acts.

Rather than you focusing on the person Paul, focus on the main subject of the Holy Bible. And that is the person we know as the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords - Jesus Christ.

Der Alter said:

Wrong! Nothing you said here changes anything. In Acts of the Apostles 21:22-24, which I quoted, Paul had just returned to Jerusalem from Antioch where he, Peter, James and other church leaders determined that gentile Christians were only required to observe 4 specific things; avoid things offered to idols, blood, things strangled and fornication, which is repeated in vs. 25. Immediately before this Paul agreed to take a Nazarite vow to show the Jewish leaders he still respected Torah. That Paul chose to show respect for Torah, while with Jews, did not make him a slave to it.
In Acts of the Apostles 24:18 Paul was talking about what happened in Acts 21:20-24 not before he was a Christian.

Click to expand...

<Staff Edit> You demonstrate that you're someone who do not read the Scriptures or anything in context before you decide on sharing your opinion. As for Acts 24:18 and Acts 21:20-24, Paul was already a Christian as he was converted in Acts 9. From that point, Paul was a changed man. He was no more functioning as a Pharisee though he knew how they functioned. He was speaking of his life experience as a Pharisee and what he knew about the laws and their belief. That does not mean he was still a Pharisee and operating as one.

Mind you, I am not advocating that anyone should disregard the laws of God, for by it we know that we have sinned against God and that we must repent toward God for our sins. But as a Christian, those laws have no more hold on me with regards to my salvation through my faith in Jesus Christ. That is, the laws cannot send me to hell anymore as I believe that my glorius Savior Jesus Christ died for my sins. Does that mean I can continue to sin at will? God forbid! But does that mean I do not sin anymore in the flesh? Impossible! This is where God will discipline me for my sins and that's because I am His child and He loves me.

Chris Tan said:

Thank you, I stand corrected.

Click to expand...

Excellent! many here would not admit as much.

[roamer_1:] Close... So close. So isn't part of repentance to 'go and sin no more'? How do you know what sin is without Torah?
For instance, if your church says homosexuality is just fine, but Torah says it is an abomination, You can judge those teachers by the Torah, and know they aren't speaking the truth.

Precisely, that was the purpose of the Ten Commandments, to make sin known. It couldn't justify the sinner. The law was not given to justify man, rather it condemned the man.

Click to expand...

Yes. But that is not it's sole purpose, as it is meant to be kept. And it is not the ten - there is no division in the law. Nothing added to, nothing taken from... it is necessarily the whole law.

And yet they cannot see nor belief (even professing so called Christians). Ever wondered why? They were written on stone tablets when Moses received it from God, just like their hearts. The work of regeneration never happened to a great multitudes of Jews when they came out of Egypt. That's why all the law did was condemned them that they have sinned against God.

Click to expand...

Bravo!

Hence only through regeneration (born of the Spirit) that the sinner becomes truly aware of their sin and by the faith given to them by the Spirit, they will indeed repent sincerely to God. "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them." (Ezekiel 36:26,27)

Click to expand...

Notice: If one is regenerated, and has a heart of flesh the Spirit will cause one to walk in His 'statutes and keep his judgements'... That sounds like keeping Torah to me (not that Torah is no more)...

So when Christ told Mary, "go and sin no more", does it imply that she never sinned again? Are you then saying that the sinner can live a life of sinless perfection after repentance to God?

Click to expand...

Of course not. Everyone messes up - but that can't be license to sin. When Yeshua said 'go and sin no more', he meant what he said - One must try to be obedient.

Are you implying that you are to keep the Torah outside of faith in Jesus Christ? Sounds like you are preaching legalism.

Click to expand...

No, I am preaching obedience.

Did you not read, "For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes." (Romans 10:3,4)

Click to expand...

Check out that word 'end'...

That is, in the sight of God through justification by faith in Christ, the Christian is deemed to have kept all the laws.

I would rather you preach Christ crucified than pushing the law to be your justification before God.

Click to expand...

I am not justified by keeping Torah, and no one ever has been, Again, that is not what it is for. I keep Torah because my Master did. I try to walk in His footsteps. That is obedience... That is discipleship. How do you know you love the Father? When you are walking in his commandments.

I am no longer bound to Torah by it's curses because One stands sinless to take my place. But neither does that give me license. I must try not to sin. And since sin is transgression of the law... the rest of that equation is easy to figure.

Chris Tan said:

Sounds like you are not obeying what God told Moses with regards to the Sabbath, if you seem so adament about keeping the Sabbath according to the OT.

Click to expand...

In what way? Your cherry picked verses don't prove what you think it does... You need to see the whole thing.

roamer_1 said:

In what way? Your cherry picked verses don't prove what you think it does... You need to see the whole thing.

Click to expand...

"Cherry pick verses"?

Excuse me? You were the one that seems adamant that one must keep the Sabbath, isn't it? I was simply showing you what God taught Moses to teach the children of Israel with the regards of keeping the Sabbath. How is that "cherry picking"? OIt came out of Exodus, just after Moses received the law from God. As they say, it was "hot off the press".

Now, unless you can show me God changed His instructions with regards to keeping the Sabbath as what was given to Moses, you are teaching a convoluted way that one should "keep the Sabbath".

So, make up your mind what you are trying to say with regards to "keeping the Sabbath".

<Staff Edit>

I was referring to your understanding of what happened in Acts 24:18 and Acts 21:20-24 and your persistence that the apostle Paul was speaking as one who was yet converted to a Christian. And that he was still a Pharisee when he spoke those things written in Acts 24:18 and Acts 21:20-24. Like Scriptures showed, Paul was converted way back in Acts 9 and there was no way in Acts 24:18 and Acts 21:20-24, he was speaking as a Pharisee and not a Christian.
Was Christ loving to everyone when He was doing His ministry? Did He treat everyone He came across as His brother? You only have to read the four Gospels and you will come to a conclusion that not everyone He encountered and spoke to was His brother. I am not be judgmental but Christ did tell us "you will know them by their fruits". I am just listening to what my Savior has taught me and being careful.

I do not know you from Adam and all we know of each other is what is written in these blogs. Which does not carry very much weight as far as calling one another brother in Christ. If I challenge you just like you challenge me, let us be open and not condescend to call each other brothers in Christ until we know each other better from the doctrines we confess to. For if we both are born of the same Spirit of Christ, in God's time, we will know if we are one in Christ. If not, let's us not call each other brother in Christ just yet.

Chris Tan said:

I was referring to your understanding of what happened in Acts 24:18 and Acts 21:20-24 and your persistence that the apostle Paul was speaking as one who was yet converted to a Christian.

Click to expand...

You weren't, because those posts were not mine.


<Staff Edit>

Chris Tan said:

Was Christ loving to everyone when He was doing His ministry? Did He treat everyone He came across as His brother?

Click to expand...

Jesus is, and was, truth, spoke the truth and taught the things of God. If someone had a hard time understanding, he explained. it's quite true that he told Pharisees et al that they were hard hearted when they opposed him - he knew their hearts and what they were saying and objecting to. And he called them out on bad behaviour too. <Staff Edit>

Chris Tan said:

I do not know you from Adam

Click to expand...

Clue - Adam was male, I am female.

Chris Tan said:

Which does not carry very much weight as far as calling one another brother in Christ. If I challenge you just like you challenge me, let us be open and not condescend to call each other brothers in Christ until we know each other better from the doctrines we confess to. For if we both are born of the same Spirit of Christ, in God's time, we will know if we are one in Christ. If not, let's us not call each other brother in Christ just yet.

Click to expand...

If you wish.
But as this forum is for Christians only, I was assuming that those who post here are Christians. I know people understand that word differently - someone may say they are a Christian and have not been born again. But if God is the Father of you both; if you would both say that you have assurance from the Spirit that you are saved and children of God - then that other forummer is your brother - or sister, I shouldn't assume - in Christ, whether you would call them that or not.

Der Alter said:

We certainly appreciate this unsupported personal opinion.

Click to expand...

Mine is the unsupported position? YHWH"S Holy Days are ordained. Absolutely Biblical. Christmas and Easter are unfounded.

At least four errors here. I wonder why all four gospels agree that Jesus was crucified and placed in the tomb on παρασκευή/paraskeue, which does mean "preparation," but was the name of the 6th day of the week. Mark identifies it as the day before the Sabbath. John identifies it as the paraskeue of the Passover.

Click to expand...

'Preparation Day' precedes the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The lambs are slaughtered on that day, mid afternoon.
It is the Preparation Day for the High Sabbath day that is referred to, as can be ascertained by calculating from Palm Sunday - The day the perfect lamb was brought into the city. Four days later (including Sunday)... Wednesday... Was necessarily the 'Preparation Day' for the Feast of Unleavened Bread... The Passover Meal was necessarily eaten that evening (Wed. night). So Passover cannot have been Friday. It is an impossibility.

Nonsense! There is no credible, verifiable, historical evidence that any pagan deity was born on December 25 or that anything of significance to any pagan religion occurred on that day.

Click to expand...

Go find a sun stone. With your own eyes, observe the winter solstice. On the day of the solstice, the sun touches the apex of the stone. For three days, the sun remains in that position, with the change imperceptible to the eye. This is the 'death of the sun'. The sun is 'reborn' the fourth day, and the sun has begun to move back according to the stone...

This is the basis for every dying/reborn sun god. With that understanding, research the pagan gods, and you'll see.

Wgw said:

So your view is that immediately after the Apostles reposed, the Church plunged inextricably into apostasy?

Click to expand...

No, I believe it carried on for some time - Beyond the fall of the Temple... Maybe as far as the early 2nd century (when the Jews set up a creed in the synagogues meant to expose Christians). Unfortunately, there is a near dearth of extant text from that time - But what came out the other end, by 350 or so, was Rabbinic Judaism on the one side, and what we call Christianity on the other... Neither true to it's root.

I follow the practice of the early Christians. I also consider the Scripture which testifies to the correctness of their decision in this matter to be God's word and my guide. I don't really mind if other people worship on Saturday, however.

Some of them care a lot that I don't agree with the tiny percentage of Christians who see things their way, but I don't really mind that they worship on Saturday if they think that's right.

That's all there is to this IMO.

nomadictheist said:

And this is why trying to hold a sound, logical debate on matters like this is futile. Because anyone who disagrees with the ancient writings just says "oh, it was changed" or "I don't put much stock in scholars," or both. Well, if that's your attitude, you'll have to excuse me for not putting much stock in your opinion.

Click to expand...

And here is the crux of the problem. From the position of the ancient way:

Messiah cannot have added or taken from Torah, without committing sin. To establish a new form of worship is certainly adding to Torah. If he committed sin, he is not Messiah.

And Paul, as a disciple of his Master, cannot have added to his words, or he is gathering disciples to himself rather than to his Master.

Yet by the time we have a reliable record (somewhere in the 350AD range), what has emerged is something wholly divorced as a sect of Judaism, hostile to YHWH's Sabbath and Holy Days, and persecuting Christians who refused to give them up. It's holy days are all 'dressed up' remodeled pagan holidays, it's laws are it's own (granting some modified appearance toward YHWH's Law) and it goes off, careening through centuries, converting men by the power of secular law and war - force and coercion.

It is so very remarkably removed, that finding it questionable should go without saying.

It is the WORD That YHWH said he would protect. I can find no divine authority in the fathers, so why should one be offended that I mistrust them?

o2bwise said:

Romans 14:5
5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind.

Click to expand...

That is speaking about fasting, not Holy Days.

Chris Tan said:

Now, unless you can show me God changed His instructions with regards to keeping the Sabbath as what was given to Moses, you are teaching a convoluted way that one should "keep the Sabbath".

Click to expand...

One could, I suppose, point to the 'changes' wrought by the tabernacle, and later the Temple, but I don't see much in changes, more of a further revelation.

Yeshua is my example when I find something questionable in how people interpret YHWH. Yeshua certainly did not stay in his house. There are travel restrictions (not more than a 'Sabbath day's journey') which he adhered to, but he went to synagogue on the Sabbath, and went out among the people... Even healing on the Sabbath... And the Pharisees who criticized him were out and about too.

So the 'remain in your place' that you interpret severely, I see as 'Don't bother going out looking for manna, because it ain't gonna be there'...

Even as your severe interpretation of 'no work' includes not milking the cow that day, or feeding and watering the animals - All that shows me is an ignorance of what must certainly happen every day in an agrarian lifestyle - Something YHWH no doubt understood to be true.

Shabbat is meant to be a day of rest, and a blessing - Not more burdensome than the weekday.

Chris Tan said:

Please read carefully, Paul was converted in Acts 9.

Please read in context of Acts 23 and not just use verse 6 to justify what you want to think of Paul as still speaking as a Pharisee and not a Christian when He was before the council made up of the Sadducees and Pharisees being tried for preaching Christ Jesus. That's because in verse 6, he did say, "Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!", knowing that the Saudacees didn't believe in the resurrection. He knew of the difference belief the Saudacees and the Pharisees had between them.

Click to expand...

I have read Acts 23:6 very carefully many times. Paul did not say he "knew of the difference belief the Sadducees and the Pharisees had between them." Paul was a educated man had he wanted to say what you claim that is what he would have said. But, in fact, Paul said "I am a Pharisee."


While Paul had been saved earlier, apparently he still had some connection with the Pharisees.

Paul basically used the belief of the Pharisees against the Sadducees to create a dissension between the two groups, "And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection—and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both. Then there arose a loud outcry. And the scribes of the Pharisees’ party arose and protested, saying, “We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God." (Acts 23:7-9)

And it worked! He got himself freed from the council made up of the Pharisees and Sadducees, for in verse 10, we read, "Now when there arose a great dissension, the commander, fearing lest Paul might be pulled to pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him by force from among them, and bring him into the barracks."

Note that it was the Jerusalem council (the Sanhedrins) that was accusing Paul for preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ and that it was the Jews who ordered the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ by using the Roman laws against the blessed Savior. The same thing was happening in the book of Acts.

Rather than you focusing on the person Paul, focus on the main subject of the Holy Bible. And that is the person we know as the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords - Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

See above.

roamer_1 said:

Mine is the unsupported position? YHWH"S Holy Days are ordained. Absolutely Biblical. Christmas and Easter are unfounded.

Click to expand...

That is not what I said was unsupported.

'Preparation Day' precedes the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The lambs are slaughtered on that day, mid afternoon.
It is the Preparation Day for the High Sabbath day that is referred to, as can be ascertained by calculating from Palm Sunday - The day the perfect lamb was brought into the city. Four days later (including Sunday)... Wednesday... Was necessarily the 'Preparation Day' for the Feast of Unleavened Bread... The Passover Meal was necessarily eaten that evening (Wed. night). So Passover cannot have been Friday. It is an impossibility.

Click to expand...

Unless the Feast of Unleavened Bread [ULB] falls on the weekly Sabbath there is no "preparation day" for it. Neither the 1st nor 7th day of ULB are ever called a Sabbath anywhere in the OT. They are designated as a "Holy Convocation" which differs from a Sabbath because the preparation and cooking of food is specifically permitted on the 1st and 7th day of ULB.

There was only one Sabbath in passion week, the weekly Sabbath. There was only one Paraskeue/preparation during passion week the day before the weekly Sabbath and Passover because it fell on the Sabbath that made the Sabbath a High day.

Go find a sun stone. With your own eyes, observe the winter solstice. On the day of the solstice, the sun touches the apex of the stone. For three days, the sun remains in that position, with the change imperceptible to the eye. This is the 'death of the sun'. The sun is 'reborn' the fourth day, and the sun has begun to move back according to the stone...
This is the basis for every dying/reborn sun god. With that understanding, research the pagan gods, and you'll see.

Click to expand...

I am aware of the solstices. The winter solstice occurs about 4 days before December 25. If you can, please provide credible, verifiable historical evidence that some pagan deity was born on December 25 or something else significant occurred on that day. Copy/pastes from anonymous websites is not evidence.

Der Alter said:

Unless the Feast of Unleavened Bread [ULB] falls on the weekly Sabbath there is no "preparation day" for it. Neither the 1st nor 7th day of ULB are ever called a Sabbath anywhere in the OT. They are designated as a "Holy Convocation" which differs from a Sabbath because the preparation and cooking of food is specifically permitted on the 1st and 7th day of ULB.

Click to expand...

The preparation day is when all the leaven is purged from the house. All yeast, sourdough starter, and leavened bread, is taken outside and burned. The house is thoroughly cleaned. The Father of the house inspects the finished product with the kids, even to the point of taking a candle inside cupboards and into corners any dust is picked up into a feather and taken outside... It's a big deal, and well known. And each house prepares all the components of the seder meal on that day.

To say there is no preparation day for the passover is just plain wrong.

Der Alter said:

I am aware of the solstices. The winter solstice occurs about 4 days before December 25. If you can, please provide credible, verifiable historical evidence that some pagan deity was born on December 25 or something else significant occurred on that day. Copy/pastes from anonymous websites is not evidence.

Click to expand...

Help yourself. Study any/every dying/reborn sun god, as I said.