The Sabbath and 10 Commandments

Richard Mulcahy said:

Hi all,

Do you agree with the following in below short video? And any other thoughts as to the contents of the video?

1 the Sabbath is no longer observed in NT

Click to expand...

Hi Richard Mulcahy,

This is not true.

First of all, the Gospels are part of the New Testament and Jesus kept the Sabbath (Luke 4:16), and Peter tells us that Jesus left us "an example, that you should follow in His steps" (1 Peter 2:21). John also affirms this premise when he writes, "Whoever claims to live in Him must walk as Jesus did" (1 John 2:6).

For those who may feel that Jesus keeping the Sabbath was only because He was a Jew and the Sabbath is only for Jews, Jesus says, "The Sabbath was made for human beings (444 anthropos), not human beings for the Sabbath."

Because Jesus never intended for His holy day of remembering Him as the Creator of the heavens and earth to come to an end, He never indicated such an idea to His closest followers. Thus, on the day Jesus died, we see that His disciples "rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment" (Luke 23:56).

Just as Peter and John indicated that Jesus left "an example, that you should follow in His steps," Paul's steps followed closely after his Master. In Acts 17:2-3 we see that Paul's custom was to go "into the synagogue ... on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures." Later in Acts 18 we read that on the Sabbath Paul "reasoned int he synagogue, trying to persuade Jews and Greeks (i.e. Gentiles)." In fact, in Acts 18 there is a record of 76 Sabbaths in which Paul is preaching to Jews and Gentiles.

Not only did Paul follow the example of Christ, but he says that you should follow his example (1 Corinthians 11:1).

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Soyeong said:

In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the law, so Jesus did not do that

Click to expand...

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a CHANGE also of THE LAW.

Heb 7:13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

Icyspark said:

Just as Peter and John indicated that Jesus left "an example, that you should follow in His steps," Paul's steps followed closely after his Master. In Acts 17:2-3 we see that Paul's custom was to go "into the synagogue ... on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures." Later in Acts 18 we read that on the Sabbath Paul "reasoned int he synagogue, trying to persuade Jews and Greeks (i.e. Gentiles)." In fact, in Acts 18 there is a record of 76 Sabbaths in which Paul is preaching to Jews and Gentiles.

Click to expand...

Paul was in the synagogue. Synagogues are where non Christian Jews assemble on the sabbath day - churches are where Christians assemble, not in a synagogue.

Paul went to the synagogues to preach to non Christian Jews, that Jesus is their Messiah.

It should be blatantly obvious that Paul had to preach to them about Jesus, on the day they were there - on the sabbath.

The fact that there were gentiles in the synagogue is irrelevant - they either had converted to Judaism, or were interested in it - as still happens today.

The following passage shows exactly why Paul went into a synagogue, and gives the sermon he delivered there.

Act 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

Act 13:15 And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.

Act 13:16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience.

Act 13:17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought he them out of it.

Act 13:18 And about the time of forty years suffered he their manners in the wilderness.

Act 13:19 And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Chanaan, he divided their land to them by lot.

Act 13:20 And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet.

Act 13:21 And afterward they desired a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years.

Act 13:22 And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.

Act 13:23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:

Act 13:24 When John had first preached before his coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.

Act 13:25 And as John fulfilled his course, he said, Whom think ye that I am? I am not he. But, behold, there cometh one after me, whose shoes of his feet I am not worthy to loose.

Act 13:26 Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent.

Act 13:27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him.

Act 13:28 And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.

Act 13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.

Act 13:30 But God raised him from the dead:

Act 13:31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

Act 13:32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,

Act 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

Act 13:34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David.

Act 13:35 Wherefore he saith also in another psalm, Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Act 13:36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:

Act 13:37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.

Act 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:

Act 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Act 13:40 Beware therefore, lest that come upon you, which is spoken of in the prophets;

Act 13:41 Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you.

Act 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

Act 13:43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.

Act 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

Act 13:45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.

Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

The next synagogue visit shows that Paul went there to evangelize the Jews, not to observe the sabbath day:

Act 14:1 Now at Iconium they entered together into the Jewish synagogue and spoke in such a way that a great number of both Jews and Greeks believed.

Act 14:2 But the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles and poisoned their minds against the brothers.

Act 14:3 So they remained for a long time, speaking boldly for the Lord, who bore witness to the word of his grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by their hands.

Act 14:4 But the people of the city were divided; some sided with the Jews and some with the apostles.

Icyspark said:

Just as Peter and John indicated that Jesus left "an example, that you should follow in His steps," Paul's steps followed closely after his Master. In Acts 17:2-3 we see that Paul's custom was to go "into the synagogue ... on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures." Later in Acts 18 we read that on the Sabbath Paul "reasoned int he synagogue, trying to persuade Jews and Greeks (i.e. Gentiles)." In fact, in Acts 18 there is a record of 76 Sabbaths in which Paul is preaching to Jews and Gentiles.

Click to expand...

Paul was in the synagogue. Synagogues are where non Christian Jews assemble on the sabbath day - churches are where Christians assemble, not in a synagogue.

Paul went to the synagogues to preach to non Christian Jews, that Jesus is their Messiah.

chad kincham said:

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a CHANGE also of THE LAW.

Heb 7:13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

Click to expand...

Do you think that according to Deuteronomy 4:2 that the author of Hebrews was sinning when they wrote Hebrews 7:12-14?

Soyeong said:

The same Father who gave the Law of Moses also sent Christ, so there is no difference between that and the Law of Christ

Click to expand...

Incorrect.

The law of Moses and the law of Christ are absolutely different.

Paul makes it clear that he was not under the law of Moses, but WAS under the law of Christ.

1Co 9:19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them.

1Co 9:20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though NOT being myself under THE LAW) that I might win those under the law.

1Co 9:21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but UNDER THE LAW OF CHRIST ) that I might win those outside the law.

1Co 9:22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. (ESV bible)

Soyeong said:

Do you think that according to Deuteronomy 4:2 that the author of Hebrews was sinning when they wrote Hebrews 7:12-14?

Click to expand...

Apparently you are unaware that there is a new covenant, and that the old one ended.

God divorced Israel in Jeremiah 3:8, which is what ended the old covenant.

You can see Jesus changing the law, here:

Mat 5:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth’ (The Law)
Mat 5:39 But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. (The changed law)

chad kincham said:

Incorrect.

The law of Moses and the law of Christ are absolutely different.

Paul makes it clear that he was not under the law of Moses, but WAS under the law of Christ.

1Co 9:19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them.

1Co 9:20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though NOT being myself under THE LAW) that I might win those under the law.

1Co 9:21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but UNDER THE LAW OF CHRIST ) that I might win those outside the law.

1Co 9:22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. (ESV bible)

Click to expand...

In those verses, Paul said in a parallel statement that he was not outside the Law of God, but under the Law of Christ, so he equated the Law of Moses with the Law of Christ. If the Kaw of Christ were different than the Law of Moses, then that would mean that Jesus was in disagreement with the Father, and I see no indication this. Christ did not teach anything that was not in accordance with the Law of Moses and it wouldn't make sense to think that the Law of Christ was something other than what Christ taught by word and by example.

chad kincham said:

Apparently you are unaware that there is a new covenant, and that the old one ended.

God divorced Israel in Jeremiah 3:8, which is what ended the old covenant.

You can see Jesus changing the law, here:

Mat 5:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth’ (The Law)
Mat 5:39 But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. (The changed law)

Click to expand...

God only divorced the Northern Kingdom. However, the way to act in accordance with God's nature is based on God's nature, not on any particular covenant, and God's nature is eternal, so the way to act in accordance with God's nature existed before the Mosaic Covenant was made, during it, and remains the same after it has become obsolete. For example, in it was sinful to commit adultery in Genesis 39:9 before the Mosaic Covenant was made, so none of God's covenants being made or becoming obsolete changes which actions are in accordance with or against His eternal nature.

In Galatians 4:4, Jesus was born under the law, so he was obliged to obey it, and he was sinless, so he never broke it, which includes Deuteronomy 4:2, so he never added to, subtracted from, or changed the law in disagreement with the Father. Everything that Jesus taught in Matthew 5 was in accordance with the OT, including Matthew 5:38-39, which is in accordance with Proverbs 20:22 and Proverbs 24:29, so this was not making a change, and to suggest that he was making a change is to suggest that he sinned in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 and therefore disqualified himself from being our Savior.

Richard Mulcahy said:

In fact all the 10 commandments are to be followed today.

Click to expand...

The reason the Decalogue (Ten Commands) are no longer in effect, but have ended, is found in 2 Corinthians chapter three, wherein we find that the Ten Commands are: the ministration of DEATH, the letter which KILLS, and the ministration of CONDEMNATION which is contrasted with the new covenant (testament) of the spirit, that gives life.


2Co 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

2Co 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written andengraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

2Co 3:8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?

2Co 3:9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

2Co 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.

2Co 3:11 For if that which is DONE AWAY was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.


The reason the Ten commands kills, brings death, and condemnation is due to the fact that the penalty under the law for breaking any of the Ten, was being put to death by stoning.


The penalty for homicide - being put to death:

Exo 21:12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.


The penalty for not honoring your mother and father: put to death by stoning:

Lev 20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall beupon him.


The penalty for adultery: put to death by stoning:

Lev 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another mans wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.


The penalty for breaking the sabbath by doing any work, such as picking up sticks for kindling: put to death by stoning:

Exo 31:14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is Holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth anywork therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.


If the Ten Commands are still in effect, the penalty for breaking them is still in effect, thus those who insist on keeping the ended covenant that contained the Ten Commands, are breaking the law themselves, by not stoning to death those who break the commands.

You can't have one without the other.

Imagine you were doing a ride along with a police officer, and you see that he ignores traffic law violations: speeding, running red lights, reckless driving, drunk driving, etc.


During the conversation you have with the officer, he says, "yes, I believe in the traffic laws. I keep those laws, myself - I just don't enforce them".

Sabbath day keepers, and Ten Commandment keepers are saying, those commands are still in effect and we keep them, but we don't enforce the law, as is required BY the law.


The ten commands ended when the old covenant ended, because the ten are called “the covenant on two tables of stone” in scripture - thus when the old covenant ended, the ten commands ended with it - including the fourth command.


Deu 9:11 And it came to pass at the end of forty days and forty nights, thatthe LORD gave me the two tables of stone, eventhe tables of the covenant.


Invariably some people will claim that the new covenant is simply the old covenant restated, but that argument won’t hold water.


Scripture says the new covenant is a BETTER covenant, founded on BETTER PROMISES - not the old one recycled.


Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a BETTER covenant, which was established upon better promises.


And says if the old one was faultless, there’d be no need for a new covenant.


Heb 8:7 For if that first covenanthad been faultless, then should no place have been sought

Soyeong said:

In those verses, Paul said in a parallel statement that he was not outside the Law of God, but under the Law of Christ, so he equated the Law of Moses with the Law of Christ

Click to expand...

Try reading it again. You have it backwards.

1Co 9:20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (THOUGH NOT BEING MYSELF UNDER THE LAW) that I might win those under the law.

1Co 9:21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but UNDER THE LAW OF CHRIST) that I might win those outside the law.

He clearly says he’s not under the law of Moses, but IS under the law of Christ.

chad kincham said:

Try reading it again. You have it backwards.

1Co 9:20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (THOUGH NOT BEING MYSELF UNDER THE LAW) that I might win those under the law.

1Co 9:21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but UNDER THE LAW OF CHRIST) that I might win those outside the law.

He clearly says he’s not under the law of Moses, but IS under the law of Christ.

Click to expand...

The Bible often uses parallel statements that are two ways of saying the same thing and Paul directly said that he was not outside the Law of God in parallel with being under the Law of Christ. So what else do you think not being outside the Law of God means? If your interpretation were correct, then it seems that you would have expected Paul to say in verse 21 that he was outside the Law of God, but he said the opposite. You are clearly the one who added "of Moses" to verse 20.

Soyeong said:

Do you think that according to Deuteronomy 4:2 that the author of Hebrews was sinning when they wrote Hebrews 7:12-14?

Click to expand...

Don’t look now, but there’s a new covenant and the old one has been replaced.

chad kincham said:

Don’t look now, but there’s a new covenant and the old one has been replaced.

Click to expand...

While we are under the New Covenant and not the Mosaic Covenant, we are nevertheless still under the same God with the same nature and therefore the same instructions for how to walk in the same ways and express the same character traits. For example, the way to act in accordance with God's righteousness is straightforwardly based on God's righteousness, not on any particular covenant, and God's righteousness is eternal, so any instructions that God has ever given for how to do what is righteous are eternally valid regardless of which covenant we are under, though as part of the New Covenant those who do not follow those instructions are not children of God (1 John 3:10). Likewise, sin was in the world before the Torah was given (Romans 5:13), so there were no actions that became righteous or sinful when the Torah was given, but rather the Torah revealed what has always been and will always be the way to do that. In Hebrews 8:10-13, the New Covenant still involves following the Torah, so while the Mosaic Covenant has become obsolete, God’s eternal law did not become obsolete along with it.

Richard Mulcahy said:

Hi all,

Do you agree with the following in below short video? And any other thoughts as to the contents of the video?

1 the Sabbath is no longer observed in NT
2 the 10 Commandments were only for the living people of Israel at the time

Also noteworthy, the speaker mentions that all the Commandments are still required to be adhered to currently as stated in NT books except for the Sabbath?

Click to expand...

We observe a Sabbath, on a "Seventh Day" (let's call it "Sunday").

Biltong65 said:

We observe a Sabbath, on a "Seventh Day" (let's call it "Sunday").

Click to expand...

The Israelites received a double portion of manna for the 7th day for 40 years in the wilderness, so they knew on which day God rested, they have been keeping it ever since, and the period of time that they have been keeping it holy corresponds to between Friday and Saturday at sundown. So they kept it together as a community and it was based on when God rested during creation week, not on what people decide to pick as their seventh day.

Soyeong said:

The Israelites received a double portion of manna for the 7th day for 40 years in the wilderness, so they knew on which day God rested, they have been keeping it ever since, and the period of time that they have been keeping it holy corresponds to between Friday and Saturday at sundown. So they kept it together as a community and it was based on when God rested during creation week, not on what people decide to pick as their seventh day.

Click to expand...

There was a LONG time between when God rested after the six days of Creation, and when the Jews started keeping a particular day as Sabbath (as related in our Bibles).

My last question is whether or not this is something which costs any of us our Salvation.

I think not.

Biltong65 said:

We observe a Sabbath, on a "Seventh Day" (let's call it "Sunday").

Click to expand...

Hi Biltong65,

This is like Adam and Eve saying to God, "We chose not to eat from one of the other trees in the Garden (let's call it "the tree of moral relativism").

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Biltong65 said:

There was a LONG time between when God rested after the six days of Creation, and when the Jews started keeping a particular day as Sabbath (as related in our Bibles).

My last question is whether or not this is something which costs any of us our Salvation.

I think not.

Click to expand...

God knew on which day he rested at it was the same day that He gave a double portion of manna for. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), so while we do not earn our salvation by obeying it, living in obedience to it is nevertheless what Jesus saving us from living in transgression of it looks like. In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the law, so refusing to having faith in God by refusing to obey His law is a serious issue in regard to our salvation from living in disobedience to His law. Whether someone thinking that God can't be trusted to guide them when it comes to keeping the Sabbath holy is sufficient to cost them their salvation is not my decision to make, but I pray that it is not sufficient.

Icyspark said:

Hi Biltong65,

This is like Adam and Eve saying to God, "We chose not to eat from one of the other trees in the Garden (let's call it "the tree of moral relativism").

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Click to expand...

So, the SDA (and its derivatives) see themselves as a small remnant, who will be saved (as an Elect) by God, based on this one distinctive, aside from other beliefs that are held as orthodox, among Christians?

Biltong65 said:

So, the SDA (and its derivatives) see themselves as a small remnant, who will be saved (as an Elect) by God, based on this one distinctive, aside from other beliefs that are held as orthodox, among Christians?

Click to expand...

Hi Biltong65,

I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion based on the logic in my previous post.

Followers of Christ know not to add or subtract from the word of God. They know that obedience to God reveals our love for Him (Deuteronomy 11:1; John 14:23-24; 1 John 2:5). If one chooses to sabbath/rest on a day the Lord did not command then are they not essentially denying their God (Matthew 10:33; Titus 1:16)? Is not the elevation of a day God did not ordain an example of moral relativism?

The venerated title was never stripped from the seventh day and the first day was never given any other title. What do you suppose "the first day" is in reference to?

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark