Any scriptural evidence that evangelized Gentiles are to keep the Sabbath?

helmut · Oct 9, 2020

BobRyan said:
First commandment WITH a promise "in what well known unit of LAW"??

Exodus.

BobRyan · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
Exodus.

Ex 20:12 is not the first promise in the book of Exodus.

want another shot at the question?

helmut · Oct 9, 2020

clefty said:
Right He does not but they DID...they in killing their husband to which they said “I DO” at Sinai...

How can you say that? Do you not know that it was the Romans (Pilate and his soldiers) who killed Him?

In Acts 2 and the following chapters, the Jews in Jerusalem are accused to be responsible for the death of Jesus. But this accusation is not brought against the Jews in Antioch by the Pisidia (Acts 13), nor against the Jews in Jerusalem about 20 or so years later (Acts 22). So before you bring the accusation of killing Jesus against a Jew, make sure he was personally present at Jerusalem in AD 30 (or whatever year the crucifixion happened).

And moreover - Jesus Himself has said that the Jews are not to blame:

John 10:17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.

No one took the life from Jesus - he gave it away out of His free will, obeying the father. And He prayed for forgiveness for those who crucified Him.

clefty said:
He will not marry two women...Blood Israel AND a Body of Christ...Or are you MAD*? Happily Paul was not Acts 26:25

*Mid Acts Dispensationalist

Dispensationalism has its merits, but what Darby & Co. said about the future, I disagree on almost every point. And one point of critic against them is: God has not two brides. Surprised?

helmut · Oct 9, 2020

BobRyan said:
Ex 20:12 is not the first promise in the book of Exodus.

want another shot at the question?

Where do you find a commandment with a promise before that verse?

helmut · Oct 9, 2020

eleos1954 said:
1 Peter 2:21
Berean Study Bible
For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in His footsteps:

Jesus who is God kept the 7th day Sabbath ...

No, Peter did not write such, on the contrary he wrote:

1.Pt 2:21 To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps: 22 “He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.” 23 When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats.

How dare you to add "Jesus who is God kept the 7th day Sabbath" to 1.Pt 2?

eleos1954 said:
John 6:38
For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

This is not about the Sabbath.

helmut · Oct 9, 2020

Yeshua HaDerekh said:
Yes they are. if you are correct, why then was there even any reason to finish the sentence with "torah taught every Shabbat"? I was not involved in your discussion in post 45.

Well, fact is there are differences between the noachide laws and the dogmae in Acts 15. Or are Noachides expected to refrain from eating blood?

The last sentence is a way to soothe those who were eager to teach them to obey the whole law.

Studyman · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
Not being a Jew, I'm not sure whether I should draw there any conclusion for me.

This is a fascinating reply. So you have been convinced that Jesus was not talking to you but only Jews in the New Testament? I have not heard this one yet.

So when HE said;

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Was He was only speaking to Jews here as well, and not to you?

Can you show me when Jesus actually says something for men of our time?

Matt. 24:4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I (Jesus) am Christ; and shall deceive many.

So then, this warning given by the Jesus of the Bible wasn't meant for our time? Only Jews in 67 AD?

This "future" is 67 AD. And it is said to Jews.

If Jesus Word's were only for Jews, then whose Word's will the Gentiles Seek?

Is. 66:19 And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles.

No, I hope you might reconsider your understanding regarding the Christ's Words.

Matt. 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

And again;

Matt. 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Are you teaching that these Word's are not for us? That HE is speaking only of the Jews who called Him Lord, Lord?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

Are these Sayings of the Christ of the Bible only for Jews?

My goodness, I hope you might reconsider.

helmut · Oct 9, 2020

Studyman said:
This is a fascinating reply. So you have been convinced that Jesus was not talking to you but only Jews in the New Testament? I have not heard this one yet.

It follows from the OT that the commandments were given to Israel, not other people. It follows from Ats 15 that there is a difference between Jewish and Gentile believers on the question of the Law.

This does by no means imply Jesus never said anything that matters for us Gentiles. You are using a straw man.

Studyman said:
Matt. 24:4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I (Jesus) am Christ; and shall deceive many.

Do you really want to say that calling Jesus the Christ is deception? I hope you made some error in wording and do not mean it that way.

The deception prophesied is: Some says "I am the Christ", whether he declares himself as the returned Jesus or whether he claims to be a Messiah without reference to Jesus. I can't see any link to the theme "are we Gentiles obliged to keep the whole law (including Sabbath and circumcision)?"

Yeshua HaDerekh · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
Well, fact is there are differences between the noachide laws and the dogmae in Acts 15. Or are Noachides expected to refrain from eating blood?

The last sentence is a way to soothe those who were eager to teach them to obey the whole law.

They are so similar that they are all but the same and were also Adamic laws. Blood? "But flesh with its life, which is its blood, you shall not eat" (Genesis 9:4). But yes, no bloodshed, murder. No, the last sentence was not to soothe. It was what Ger Toshav (resident alien) were asked to do initially. As they progressed they would accept more and more Torah and become Ger Tzedek, a full convert.

BobRyan · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
Where do you find a commandment with a promise before that verse?

There are many promises in Exodus before Ex 20:12

=======================Exodus 3:

The promise:
7 The Lord said, “I have surely seen the affliction of My people who are in Egypt, and have given heed to their cry because of their taskmasters, for I am aware of their sufferings. 8 So I have come down to deliver them from the power of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and spacious land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanite and the Hittite and the Amorite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite.

The command:
--The Mission of Moses
10 Therefore, come now, and I will send you to Pharaoh, so that you may bring My people, the sons of Israel, out of Egypt.

The promise:
"12 And He said, “Certainly I will be with you, and this shall be the sign to you that it is I who have sent you: when you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall worship God at this mountain.”

The command:
18 ...and you with the elders of Israel will come to the king of Egypt and you will say to him, ‘The Lord, the God of the Hebrews, has met with us. So now, please, let us go a three days’ journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the Lord our God.

the Promise:
20 So I will stretch out My hand and strike Egypt with all My miracles which I shall do in the midst of it; and after that he will let you go. 21 I will grant this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and it shall be that when you go, you will not go empty-handed. 22 But every woman shall ask of her neighbor and the woman who lives in her house, articles of silver and articles of gold, and clothing; and you will put them on your sons and daughters. Thus you will plunder the Egyptians.”

The command:
12 Now then go,

The promise:
and I, even I, will be with your mouth, and teach you what you are to say.”

BobRyan · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
Where do you find a commandment with a promise before that verse?

There are many promises in Exodus before Ex 20:12

=================================Exodus 4

The promise:

6 Say, therefore, to the sons of Israel, ‘I am the Lord, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from their bondage. I will also redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. 7 Then I will take you for My people, and I will be your God; and you shall know that I am the Lord your God, who brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. 8 I will bring you to the land which I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and I will give it to you for a possession; I am the Lord.’”

The Command:

10 Now the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 11 “Go, tell Pharaoh king of Egypt to let the sons of Israel go out of his land.” 12 But Moses spoke before the Lord, saying, “Behold, the sons of Israel have not listened to me; how then will Pharaoh listen to me, for I am unskilled in speech?” 13 Then the Lord spoke to Moses and to Aaron, and gave them a charge to the sons of Israel and to Pharaoh king of Egypt, to bring the sons of Israel out of the land of Egypt.

BobRyan · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
Where do you find a commandment with a promise before that verse?

There are many promises in Exodus before Ex 20:12

=================================Exodus 11

The command:
2 Speak now in the hearing of the people that each man ask from his neighbor and each woman from her neighbor for articles of silver and articles of gold.”

The blessing:
3 The Lord gave the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians. Furthermore, the man Moses himself was greatly esteemed in the land of Egypt, both in the sight of Pharaoh’s servants and in the sight of the people.

The promise:
4 Moses said, “Thus says the Lord, ‘About midnight I am going out into the midst of Egypt, 5 and all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of the Pharaoh who sits on his throne, even to the firstborn of the slave girl who is behind the millstones; all the firstborn of the cattle as well. 6 Moreover, there shall be a great cry in all the land of Egypt, such as there has not been before and such as shall never be again. 7 But against any of the sons of Israel a dog will not even bark, whether against man or beast, that you may understand how the Lord makes a distinction between Egypt and Israel.’ 8 All these your servants will come down to me and bow themselves before me, saying, ‘Go out, you and all the people who follow you,’ and after that I will go out.” And he went out from Pharaoh in hot anger

===================================== Ex 12

The Command:

Now the Lord said to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, 2 “This month shall be the beginning of months for you; it is to be the first month of the year to you. 3 Speak to all the congregation of Israel, saying, ‘On the tenth of this month they are each one to take a lamb for themselves, according to their fathers’ households, a lamb for each household. 4 Now if the household is too small for a lamb, then he and his neighbor nearest to his house are to take one according to the number of persons in them; according to what each man should eat, you are to divide the lamb. 5 Your lamb shall be an unblemished male a year old; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats. 6 You shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month, then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel is to kill it at twilight. 7 Moreover, they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and on the lintel of the houses in which they eat it. 8 They shall eat the flesh that same night, roasted with fire, and they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. 9 Do not eat any of it raw or boiled at all with water, but rather roasted with fire, both its head and its legs along with its entrails. 10 And you shall not leave any of it over until morning, but whatever is left of it until morning, you shall burn with fire. 11 Now you shall eat it in this manner: with your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste—it is the Lord’s Passover.

The promise:

12 For I will go through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments—I am the Lord. 13 The blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you live; and when I see the blood I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt.

Studyman · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
It follows from the OT that the commandments were given to Israel, not other people. It follows from Ats 15 that there is a difference between Jewish and Gentile believers on the question of the Law.

I know this religious philosophy is a popular one in the religions of the land we are born into.. But Acts 15 doesn't teach what you attribute to it.

Acts 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

This is after Peter declared to all men;

Acts 5:32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

So this is the point here. You have been convinced that there is a difference between Jew and Gentile believers, but Peter says just exactly the opposite as I just posted.

Also, the irony of this popular religious doctrine you are promoting is exposed in the end of the Chapter.

18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. (All Laws of God "many" preach are only for the Jews.)

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

So Peter and James is doing for the Gentiles "Exactly" what Jesus did for them in the Scripture you teach were not written for you.

Matt. 23:
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

This seems to confirm that there is no Jew or Gentile with the Christ. And that these Word's of the Christ are written to all men, not just the Jews as the popular religious philosophy of modern religions preach.

This does by no means imply Jesus never said anything that matters for us Gentiles. You are using a straw man.

I contend that every Word HE said was for all men. Who shall I rely on to discern which Word's of the Christ were only for the Jews as you say, and which ones were also for Gentiles? It's not a straw man at all, it is exactly what Jesus warned of.

Do you really want to say that calling Jesus the Christ is deception? I hope you made some error in wording and do not mean it that way.

What the Scriptures says is to take heed of religious men, who claim Jesus sent them, who preach the He is truly the Christ, will deceive many.

Does the Pope come in Christ's Name, and does he say Jesus is truly the Christ?

Does Benny Hinn come in Christ's Name, and preach that Jesus is truly the Christ? Does Ellen White come in Christ's Name, preaching that Jesus is truly the Christ?

Did Charles Russel come in Christ's Name, preaching that Jesus is truly the Christ?

Shouldn't we consider the warnings of the Christ regarding the religious philosophies of men who come in Christ's Name, teaching Jesus is truly the Christ?

The deception prophesied is: Some says "I am the Christ", whether he declares himself as the returned Jesus or whether he claims to be a Messiah without reference to Jesus.

I have heard this version before, but it doesn't make any sense. How does a man "come in Christ's Name", but at the same time claims to "be the Christ"?

What about all the other warnings which warn of the same exact thing?

2 Cor. 2:12 But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.

13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. (Not the Christ Himself)

14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Yes, men who come in Christ's Name, preaching, as do His Apostles, that Jesus is truly the Christ/Messiah.

This is why it's important to follow Paul's instructions, and reject all the "other religious voices" the Bible warns about over and over since Eve was convinced, by a voice that used "some" of God's Word, that God's Commandment made her blind.

I can't see any link to the theme "are we Gentiles obliged to keep the whole law (including Sabbath and circumcision)?"

Certainly not the Mainstream Preachers of Paul and Peter's time's version of Circumcision and the Sabbath. They had led God's People astray with their doctrines and commandments of men for centuries, as the Scriptures show us over and over.

Acts 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

The reality that you have been convinced by someone that God placed these burdens on men that caused them to fall is a perfect example of why Jesus warned us in Matt. 24.

Duet. 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

The Jews who were bewitching the Gentiles were not teaching the Law of Moses. They might have claimed it was, but the Holy scriptures are clear that they were not.

This is why Peter and James turned the Gentiles away from the philosophies of religious men, and sent them straight to Moses to hear what he is really saying, just as Jesus did for HIS Disciples in Matt. 23.

I point out these things in love of the brethren, in God's Love. I hope you might humble yourself enough to at least consider these scriptures.

clefty · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
Not being a Jew, I'm not sure whether I should draw there any conclusion for me.

conclude what is done from Moses seat?

believers in Him do...you know "follow Me"..."keep My commandments"..."live as He lived"..."love as I have loved you"..."and His commandments are NOT burdensome"

also knowing that at Sinai when He handed to ISRAEL (not just to the Jews one tribe of 12) the living oracles...already then there were those of us NOT of Jacob who received them...those of us the "strangers within thy gates" as specified in the Sabbath oracle the ONLY commandment which INCLUDED us...the irony...

as it was ONE LAW for native and foreigner alike...and in the NT too...even as Paul repeated since IN HIM there be no more Jew...but a citizen of Israel...grafted in to match the other branches NOT cut off for unbelief...

prolly why He instructed them to go into ALL nations to teach them to observe ALL He commanded them to do...kinda exactly like what Moses taught from his seat...native and foreigner THE SAME...

BECAUSE in the NT again WHOSOEVER believes...are going to continue to hear this SAME Moses in every synagogue in every city...on every Sabbath...as per what James concluded Acts 15:21 SPECIFICALLY about those NOT OF JACOB...

I mean we didn't have the codified NT yet... right? To hear THAT every Sabbath in the synagogues...so Moses it was...until Paul started his letters...and later the gospels...but then the divorce from all things Jewish began...and that enmity Jews had against Greeks also returned...you know dividing His people into two between those that still did vs those that claim they didn't need to...

This "future" is 67 AD. And it is said to Jews.

many project the scope further down the future...to END TIMES of trouble...

thus the Sabbath continued for His believers even after the DBR AND ASCENSION...

still does as per Heb 4:9 unless you are NOT His people...

You lost me? What does polytheistic (or in some variants pantheistic) Hinduism or Buddhism have to do with the teachings of Jesus and His apostles?

what is the Faith of Yahushua...notice it is NOT "have faith IN” but "here are they that...have the faith OF"...so again what faith does He have?

and then I gave some options...

Is "Yahushua" a misspelled Yehowshu` (or, omitting the Ayin at end and replacing it with an a, as in modern Ivrit, "Yeshua")?

well who knows for sure...I mean I ain't a Jew neither but I do know it is of Hebrew origin and NOT "Jesus"...

Otherwise I don't know at all what you are talking about

Is what I am talking about...

His name is like yours Helmut...not easy to translate or transliterate and significant to the origin of its people history culture...immediately recognizable as of one and not the other

clefty · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
They are called "words" in the Hebrew, and if you have a better term than "saying" to make clear they are not 10 token you can take from a dictionary ("word" in the literal sense), name it.

The Jews say the first word is "I am YHWH who brought you out of Egypt ...", hence the first word in Jewish counting is no commandment. I already linked to evidence about that. A list of 10 words, of which the first is no commandment, is no list of ten commandments, but of one non-commandment and 9 commandments. And there is no hard evidence which tradition is closer to how the God wants the list be subdivided, hence both traditions (one introductory word and 9 commandments, or 10 commandments) are of equal value. Is this distinction important at all?

lol...and here I thought just the Catholics clever in breaking up the 10th into two to absorb the second into the first and making the second about His Name...the Sabbath the 3rd and so on...

I thought when they omitted the 2nd in their public displays it was to avoid dealing with the image prohibition...you know, because when the Word became Incarnate it introduced a whole new economy of images or something....#2131 CCC Catechism of the Catholic Church - The first commandment

again you miss that ALL of this was a description to what it was like where "I AM"...to a lifestyle which we will be restored to when this detour of sin is over...to our FACTORY DEFAULT SETTING...made in His IMAGE not just to look like but to live MORE like He does...

LoveGodsWord · Oct 9, 2020

LoveGodsWord said: ↑ What makes you think I do not have scripture? God's ISRAEL according to the new covenant scriptures are no longer those in the flesh but in the Spirit and a Jew is not one outwardly but inwardly of the heart in the Spirit. God's ISRAEL are today all those who believe and follow God's Word. There are no more Jewish and Gentile believers in the flesh as all are one on Christ. Gentile believers are now grafted in. If we are not a part of Gods ISRAEL in the new covenant we have no part in God's new covenant promise....

EPHESIANS 2:11-13 [11], Why remember, that you being in TIME PAST Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;

[12], That AT THAT TIME [in the Past] YOU WERE WITHOUT CHRIST, BEING ALIENS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF ISRAEL, STRANGERS FROM THE COVENANT OF PROMISE, HAVING NO HOPE, AND WITHOUT GOD IN THE WORLD: [13], BUT NOW IN CHRIST JESUS, YOU WHO WERE FAR OFF ARE MADE NEAR BY THE BLOOD OF CHRIST.

GALATIANS 3:28-29 [28], THERE IS NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: FOR YOU ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS AND IF YOU BE CHRISTS, THEN YOU ARE ABRAHAM'S SEED FOR YOU ARE ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS [29], and IF YOU BE CHRISTS, THEN ARE YOU ABRAHAM'S SEED, AND HEIRS ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE.

God's true ISRAEL in the NEW COVENANT are not by name only but all those in Christ. Those of the FLESH (sinful human nature) are not Abrahams seed but those who BELIEVE and FOLLOW God in Christ are God's ISRAEL...

ROMANS 9:6-8 [6], FOR THEY ARE NOT ALL ISRAEL WHICH ARE OF ISRAEL,: [7], NEITHER, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, ARE THEY ALL CHILDREN: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called <Christ> [8], That is, THEY WHICH ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE FLESH, THESE ARE NOT THE CHILDREN OF GOD: BUT THE CHILDREN OF THE PROMISE <those who believe> ARE COUNTED FOR THE SEED.

God's ISRAEL are all those in CHRIST that have been given a NEW HEART according to the NEW COVENANT promise...

ROMANS 2:28-29 [28], FOR HE IS NOT A JEW WHICH IS ONE OUTWARDLY; NEITHER IS THAT CIRCUMCISION, WHICH IS OUTWARDS IN THE FLESH: [29], BUT HE IS A JEW WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY; and CIRCUMCISION IS OF THE HEART, IN THE SPIRIT, AND NOT IN THE LETTER; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

In the NEW COVENANT all those in Christ are are God's ISRAEL...

COLOSSIANS 3:11 [11], WHERE THERE IS NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: BUT CHRIST IS ALL IN ALL.

ROMANS 10:11-13 [11], For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. [12], FOR THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JEW OR GREEK: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. [13], FOR WHOSOEVER SHALL CALL UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED.

The New Covenant is for God's Israel...

EZEKIEL 36:26-27 [26], A NEW HEART WILL I GIVE YOU, AND A NEW SPIRIT WILL I PUT WITHIN YOU; AND I WILL TAKE AWAY THE STONY HEART OUT OF YOUR FLESH, AND GIVE YOU A HEART OF FLESH. [27], AND I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT WITHIN YOU, AND CAUSE YOU TO WALK IN MY STATUTES AND YOU SHALL KEEP MY JUDGEMENTS AND DO THEM.

and again...

JEREMIAH 31:33-34 [33], BUT THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL; After those days, says the LORD, I WILL PUT MY LAW IN THEIR INWARD PARTS,AND WRITE IT IN THEIR HEARTS; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. [34], And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, says the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Paul proclaims it here...

HEBREWS 8:10-12 [10], BUT THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL; After those days, says the LORD, I WILL PUT MY LAW IN THEIR INWARD PARTS, AND WRITE IT IN THEIR HEARTS; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: [11], And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. [12], For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

The NEW COVENANT is for GOD'S ISRAEL which represent those who BELIEVE and FOLLOW God’s WORD.

If you are not part of GOD'S ISRAEL then you are not a part of the NEW COVENANT (Hebrews 8:10-12).

............

CONCLUSION: God's ISRAEL is the name given by God to all those who BELIEVE and FOLLOW his WORD. GENTILES are now grafted in. If you are not a part of the God's ISRAEL then you have no part in the NEW COVENANT.

Your response here...

helmut said:
You overlooked the following:
Ro 11:28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable. The enemies of the Church (or God???), as far as the Gospel is concerned, are beloved one because will never revoke His covenant with Israel. Yes, The Church can be told "spiritual Israel", but this does not mean that the Israel according to the flesh has no future. The verse I cited above is in the context of the promise that Israel as a whole will be saved.

I noticed you deleted all the scriptures from my previous post that show who God's ISRAEL is under the new covenant. Was there any reason for this? I did not overlook anything dear friend that I could see. You were simply provided a detailed scripture exegesis on the origins of the name ISRAEL from the old covenant and who Gods ISRAEL represents today in the new covenant. Romans 11:28 does not delete all the scripture provided to you in the previous post and neither does it say that physical ISRAEL is God's true ISRAEL in the new covenant as the scripture teach that unbelieving physical ISRAEL are God's enemies *Romans 11:28 and have been cast away *Romans 11:15. When we read Romans 11:28 is simply says that they are still beloved by God even though they have been cast away and are now His enemies, because of the patriarchs who God made his covenant with (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). Those of physical ISRAEL who do not believe the Gospel in the new covenant according to Romans 11:28 are God's enemies and cast away, while Romans 11:13-27 says that those Jews and Gentile believers in the gospel are grafted in, while much of the other scriptures provided show there is now no more Jew or Gentile believer but all are one in Christ and a part God's true ISRAEL *Romans 9:6-8 of the new covenant and are descibed as all those who believe and follow God's Word *Ephesians 2:11-13; Galatians 3:28-29; Romans 9:6-8; Romans 2:28-29; Colossians 3:11; Romans 10:11-13. Reading all the scripture contexts in Romans 11:13-28 we read that unbelievers are cast out and enemies enemies of God, while believers are grafted in and God is able to graft back in those who have been cast out (Unbelieving physical ISRAEL who are still beloved for the patriarchs sake).

helmut said:
I've seen the trick o0f heaping many verses for the own case, but omitting the Scriptural evidence against it. I don't need more evidence that there is some truth in what you said (I hinted at that above), I showed you the key verse that proves your interpretation is wrong. Israel according to the flesh has the promise of being saved as a whole, what the precise meaning of "whole" is I am not sure (all Jews living when Christ returns?). But I am sure Scripture cannot be broken, as .God does not revoke the covenant with those who are "enemies for our sake".

Why do you say it is a trick to post scripture for everything I have shared with you here when you were the one asking for the scriptures you thought did not exist? Now when your provided scripture you do not believe them and claim it is a trick? They are Gods' Words not mine, so your argument is with God not me. Does this not worry you? It should because according to the scriptures, only God's Word is true and we should believe and follow them over the teachings and traditions of men that break the commandments of God *Romans 3:4; Acts of the Apostles 5:29; Matthew 15:3-9. You ask for scripture but when it is provided you say it is a trick because it disagrees with you.

May God bless you as you receive His Word.

LoveGodsWord · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
"Word" can also refer to a clause. Maybe this is more common in my mother tongue. The question is whether there are ten "sayings" or ten commandments.

I have added my previous post below because when you quote me you leave out the supporting scriptures, and Hebrew word meanings that were provided.

LoveGodsWord said: ↑ The Hebrew words used for ten commandments is עשׂרת הדברים׃ and translates as ten words in the English. This translation alone does not make any sense in the English as it is more than ten words for each law and more like ten sentences. The Hebrew translation of dabar to the ten words is because they are God's ten words. He spoke them and wrote them with his own finger *Exodus 20:1-17; Exodus 32:16. Fact of the matter is that these ten words (sentences) of God are all commandments ("Thou shalt not"; "You shall not") right? Hence the English translation to Ten commandments solves the problem of words and sentences and application.

The correct English translation therefore is ten commandments and this is why the majority of bible translation translate it that way. That does not mean the Ten words translation is not correct. It is correct but it is better understood in the English as to their implication of context as the "ten commandments" because the ten words (sentences) of God are ten commandments.

A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible
1697. דָבָר dâbâr, daw-bawr´; from 1696; a word; by impl. a matter (as spoken of) or thing; adv. a cause:—act, advice, affair, answer, × any such (thing), + because of, book, business, care, case, cause, certain rate, + chronicles, commandment, × commune (-ication), + concern [-ing], + confer, counsel, + dearth, decree, deed, × disease, due, duty, effect, + eloquent, errand, [evil favoured-] ness, + glory, + harm, hurt, + iniquity, + judgment, language, + lying, manner, matter, message, [no] thing, oracle, × ought, × parts, + pertaining, + please, portion, + power, promise, provision, purpose, question, rate, reason, report, request, × (as hast) said, sake, saying, sentence, + sign, + so, some [uncleanness], somewhat to say, + song, speech, × spoken, talk, task, + that, × there done, thing (concerning), thought, + thus, tidings, what [-soever], + wherewith, which, word, work.

The Lexham Bible Dictionary
TEN COMMANDMENTS (עֲשֶׂרֶת הַדְּבָרִים, asereth haddevarim). The commandments inscribed upon the two tablets of stone that God gave to Moses at Mount Sinai (Exod 20:1–17; Deut 5:6–21).

Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote on the tables the words of the covenant, the TEN COMMANDMENTS.

Deuteronomy 4:13 And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even TEN COMMANDMENTS; and he wrote them on two tables of stone.

Deuteronomy 10:4 And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the TEN COMMANDMENTS, which the LORD spoke to you in the mount out of the middle of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the LORD gave them to me.

Your response here...

helmut said:
OK.letsb look at the 10 words: Ten Commandments - Wikipedia As you can see. the first one starts with "I am, not "You shall", only the second one (according to the Jewish counting I referred to starts with "You shall have no other ...". Unlike the case at the end, where the division of "You shall not covet" into two cannot be maintained consistently in both version (Ex 20 and Deut 5), this difference is almost a matter of taste, with no evidence (pro/contra) from the texts itself.

Ok so the starting off God's spoken and written LAW in Exodus 20:1-17 does not say "thou shalt not" or "do not" in the first set of words. Yep I agree. How does that means that there are not 10 commandments in God's LAW? How exactly is this relevant to our conversation exactly? Are you claiming there is not 10 commandments in God's 10 commandments in Exodus 20:1-17? Sorry for all the questions here but this section of your post does not make much sense to me.

helmut said:
This is not "correct", but a translation which settles the question how the 10 words should be demarcated by a discretionary decision.

Well you have provided an opinion here unsupported by any evidence. You are free to believe as you wish. Your were provided in return scripture evidence and support as to why the English translation was made to ten commandments above which is related to the Hebrew making sense in English and commandments being related to subject matter and context. You are however free to believe as you wish but whatever way you wish to look at it the ten words or "sayings" in Exodus 20:1-17 are God's ten sayings that are "ten commandments" and one of those ten commandments is the 4th commandment Sabbath which in the new covenant we are told give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7. According to God's Word in the new covenant if we knowingly break any one of God's 10 commandments we stand guilty before God of sin *James 2:10-11; James 4:17. In times of ignorance when we do not know any better God does not hold us accountable to sin until he gives us a knowledge of the truth of His Word. At this point he calls us to believe and follow it *Acts of the Apostles 17:30-31. If we reject God's Word when he gives us a knowledge of the truth in order to continue in sin (breaking any one of God's 10 commandments) then we are held accountable for our sins because we count the blood of the covenant an unholy thing doing despite to the Spirit of God's grace *Hebrews 10:26-31.

May God bless you as you seek him through His Word.

clefty · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
How can you say that? Do you not know that it was the Romans (Pilate and his soldiers) who killed Him?

asked to do so by the Jews...certainly the ruling class ones...

In Acts 2 and the following chapters, the Jews in Jerusalem are accused to be responsible for the death of Jesus.

by the disciples and poor Stephen...

But this accusation is not brought against the Jews in Antioch by the Pisidia (Acts 13),

because those Jews did NOT...

nor against the Jews in Jerusalem about 20 or so years later (Acts 22).

well the issue there was that He rose...NOT how He was killed...they about tore the place up just on that issue...

So before you bring the accusation of killing Jesus against a Jew, make sure he was personally present at Jerusalem in AD 30 (or whatever year the crucifixion happened).

oh He was present...just as when He was when they said "I DO" but well didn't and adulterated and were put away...

And moreover - Jesus Himself has said that the Jews are not to blame:

John 10:17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.

No one took the life from Jesus - he gave it away out of His free will, obeying the father. And He prayed for forgiveness for those who crucified Him.

They took it upon themselves...

Dispensationalism has its merits,

yes yes...absolving you of keeping a day off...lol...

but now do you also

worship another god
make images and worship them
blaspheme His name
dishonor parents
kill
commit adultery
steal
lie
covet

those too were just for the Jews right? Not for the Body of Christ?

but what Darby & Co. said about the future, I disagree on almost every point.

phew...

And one point of critic against them is: God has not two brides. Surprised?

well...if you claim His bride is NOT keeping ALL He commanded us to do...then you have Him married to another...from another gospel another christ?

A bride who would "I DO" to a marriage contract dissimilar even contrary His prior? Against His Father's will?

So which woman is it?...the one that "here are they that keep the commandments of Yah and have the faith OF Yahushua" vs the other of "here are they that keep MOST of the commandments of Yah and have SOME of the faith OF Yahushua"

you seem to believe what Jews said of Stephen that he preached "Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered" Acts 6:13-14

but Luke was clear that was FALSE WITNESS as Stephen did NOT teach that because Yahushua did NOT DO that...in fact "think NOT that" but you do...believing Jewish fables despite Titus 1:14

He came to DEMONSTRATE the marriage contract He expected of His wife...she killed HIM...

but it was written out and taught and demonstrated by HIS LIFE and prior His signing it with His blood and sealing it with His death...NO CHANGES after the Testator is dead right? His last will and testament being christened to a room full of Jews...and demonstrated 40 days that is 5 weekends after His resurrection...NOTHING CHANGED...they even kept Pentecost...and the other festivals of Yah's calendar...

Peter demonstrated the dietary Laws of Leviticus still binding and Acts 15 still applied to those "strangers within the gates" as per Moses...

will you say "I DO" and join Israel His ONLY faithful bride...be grafted into the trunk and root...matching the branches that were NOT cut off for unbelief? Doing works He prepared from the beginning...living the life He created for us to live...before this detour of sin...?

BTW keeping His commandments is not burdensome...if you love Him...

eleos1954 · Oct 9, 2020

helmut said:
You didn't ponder whether this is of relevance in the New Covenant, and if yes, how this relevance looks like.

This seems to be an ad hoc argument without any scriptural base.
"For man" means that the Sabbath is no value in itself, but something given to man as a help. Therefore we should not follow blind rules, and according to Rom 14:5 this include we should not folllow rules that automatically make some days important for every believer.

This is not said in the verses you linked to. This argument is a blatant fake.

The Sabbath rest was made in the creation, but the command to keep the Sabbath was made known to the people of Israel (Neh 9:14) just prior to the 10 commandments (Ex 16:22-30). It is deception to use this revelation as an argument (your point 12) that the Sabbath was known before the Exodus.

This argument is a crafty diversion from the fast that the Sabbath is a sign between Israel and God (Ex 31:13).

Gen 2:1-3 does not mention a command, Gen 8:10 shows Noah not to rest, but to do several things every 7 days, Gen 29:27f is about a feast that lasted 7 days ...

A month is about 29.53059 days (or about 1447/49 days) in average, 29 or 30 days in a quite irregular sequence. If you celebrate the 29th and 30th (it there is a 30th day) as a "new moon feast", 7 days are just a quarter of the remaining 28 days, a quarter of a "net month", so to speak. So a 7-day period is a convenient period for reckoning time. That has nothing to do with a regularly 7-dayx period, since the first of seven days was always the 1st. 8th, 15th 23th (and 29th day as the start of the "rest of month", or new moon festival).

"Heart" implies importance, but the most imoportant commands (the true heart of the moral law) is defined by Jesus in a quite different manner, Mt 22:34-40). Calling the 10 commandments the heart of moral law is deviation from the teaching of Jesus.

The law was there as a witness against Israel (Deut 31:25-29). Does not look like an argument we should keep what the jews couldn't keep (Acts 15:10).

The "we" in this verse is the people of Israel. Am I a Jew? No, I am "Gentile believer" (Acts 15:23).

This was in the times of the Old Covenant. The first verse of the chapter speaks of the justice of God who will call all enemies to Jerusalem to eat the dead bodies there (V.9ff), but promises that the non-Jews (including castrates that could not be circumcised) could be saved from that.

The term you warn against s from Peter, who applied it to the law, which is not only "honorable", but even holy. And remember, it is Peter who was given the promise that his decisions will be in accordance to what has been bound or loosened in heaven. No one, no pope, no prophetess or whatsoever has the right to set himself into the seat of Peter and overturn what he said. And then ponder why the Sabbath is not mentioned in Acts 15 ...

... by doing works on Sabbaths, e.g. the work he mentioned in Jn 7:21 (namely the healing of the lame man in Jn 5.

Can we say we follow Jesus if we deny the right to do works on a Sabbath?

You mix two different terms, the term in Rev 1:10 is the traditional name for the Sunday, the day when (after the Sabbath had gone) the Christians assembled (which sometimes implied they trangressed the rules how far one was allowed to go on a Sabbath).

Interesting, how you twist that verse. "Lord of the Sabbath" was used as an explanation of a work Jesus did on a Sabbath. Unless you understand "love and protect" in the sense "allow to work for God" you argue contrary to what Jesus meant.

So if we can do good, we have no right to rest on a Sabbath.

No, it is not the day of Jesus' resurrection that is called Sabbath there,. It is the day when there is a Jewish service. You seem to be advocating about people who call the Sunday "Sabbath", this is not my position, so why you post such things to me?

The prayer meetings you mention are the substitute for a synagogue service. There was no such service in Philippi, for there was no synagogue in that pagan colony, there were not even 10 Jewish men who could conduct such a service, hence the substitute prayer meeting was the only place where Paul could practice his "Gospel is for Jews first" principle.

There certainly have been some dispute, for Paul warns about keeping the Sabbaths.

Because Paul observed the Torah to win the ones under the Torah, and lived without Thorah to win the ones without Torah (1.Co 9,19-23). The accusation that he taught apostasy from the Law of Mose (Acts 21:21) certainly included o teach not to keep the Sabbath.

No, the Sabbath is also mentioned without such article, as in Col 2:16-17. And can you show me the respect you discovered in that verse?

But what about the statement that no day can be made a rule to be observed by every believer? If you hold that day separate, it is ok, if you don't regard it special, it is ok. Everyone should do according his own conviction (Rom 14:5).

Well, Jesus cited a permission just to do that: My father is working, so do I. Is a permission by Jesus Himself nothing in your eyes?

Hm, there is no evidence the Sabbath was kept before the Exodus, hence you cannot just state it was kept before the fall.

And did you not notice that the verse you quoted also mentioned the New Moon feast. Do you keep it? If not, why is Is 66:23 no argument that one should keep New Moon feast (or Sabbath)?

If ther Sabbath was of the same rank than the command to not kill, why did Jesus never cite it as an command? There are several instance of Jesus citing commandments, sometimes from the decalogue, sometimes (especially when he showed the heart of the law) from other parts of the Law. Why did he never cite the 4th commandment?

An antichrist is one who denies Jesus is the son of God, or one who denies God became man in Jesus (denying euther the divine or the human nature of Christ), as we can reed in the verses where we find the term "antichrist". It is teaching of men to call another figure (the first beast in Rev 13) "antichrist", or even the antichrist.

God appointed many feasts, not just the Sabbath. And Daniel was an OT prophet who did not know about the time of the church (Eph 3:5). If you read that book carefully, you will see that he "jumps" from the second coming of Christ (in the time of the Roman empire) directly o Jesus ruling and judging the world.

So whatever this verse is about, it is immediately about a time before the first coming of Jesus (and only by parrallel about later times). Unless you have NT corroboration for this, do not apply Daniel to the end of times as revealed in the NT.

There is nothing wrong with the Law .... the Law stands.

Matthew 5

The Fulfillment of the Law

17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18 For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

19 So then, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever practices and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20For I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

There are MANY sabbaths and feasts contained within the laws and ordinances associated with the earthly sanctuary system (no longer needed because of Jesus) .... THE Sabbath of thy Lord thy God is the 7th day Sabbath He created in the beginning ... of which is in the 10 commandments ... and have NOT been done away with. By the blood of Jesus we (believers in Him) are not condemned by it .... but the law does stand.

I've made my points and you have made yours..... ;o)

From my previous post with scriptural references.

Any scriptural evidence that evangelized Gentiles are to keep the Sabbath?

I encourage people to study this out for themselves and may the Lord lead them in doing that. Amen.

helmut · Oct 10, 2020

Yeshua HaDerekh said:
They are so similar that they are all but the same and were also Adamic laws. Blood? "But flesh with its life, which is its blood, you shall not eat" (Genesis 9:4).

My question was on the rabbinic list of "Noachide laws", I know what is written in Genesis.

Yeshua HaDerekh said:
No, the last sentence was not to soothe. It was what Ger Toshav (resident alien) were asked to do initially. As they progressed they would accept more and more Torah and become Ger Tzedek, a full convert.

Paul, who was on that conference and even brought the letter to the churches in Galatia (Acts 16:4) does not show signs that this was the interpretation was the one adopted by the church.

We can dismiss Galatians, which most probably was written before that conference, but Romans and other letters do not support your view.

Any scriptural evidence that evangelized Gentiles are to keep the Sabbath?

Member

Junior Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it

Junior Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

God is Love

Member

Similar threads