Are professed Christians that worship our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday sinning?

ViaCrucis · Friday at 10:08 AM

Soyeong said:
The Israelites worshipped God on every day of the week, which included obeying His command to keep the 7th day holy, so the problem is not with someone worshiping on Sunday or on other days but with them doing that instead of obeying God's command to keep the 7th day holy. In Mark 7:6-9, Jesus criticized Pharisees as being hypocrites for setting aside the commands of God in order to establish their own traditions, so we should not elevate our traditions above the commands of God.

When you can show the Apostles teaching that Christians must observe the Sabbath this will become relevant.

The Torah says to observe--honor--the Sabbath. This is true.
The Torah also says that to touch a dead body brings ritual impurity, that a woman is made ritually impure during her menstrual cycle, and that men are made impure from "nighttime emissions"; also that the wearing of mixed fabrics is forbidden, that planting different crops in the same field is forbidden, and that eating certain kinds of foods is forbidden. The Torah also teaches that there should be a Tabernacle (this later became a permanent Temple in Jerusalem) where the high priest is to preside before the Mercy Seat to offer offerings of blood and incense.

As I've said on many occasions before, and I will continue to repeat as many times as I need to. Cherry-picking the Torah to find only the bits we want is meaningless and worthless and amounts to vain religiosity for the purpose of feeling self-righteous. This is not only offensive to the Gospel, it's offensive to the Law. This is not honoring God and His Torah, it is insulting His Torah and His Covenants; and it is insulting the Finished Work of Jesus Christ made at Mt. Calvary.

There is no such thing as "obedience" when that "obedience" is nothing more than self-promotion and vanity.

Soyeong · Friday at 11:08 AM

ViaCrucis said:
When you can show the Apostles teaching that Christians must observe the Sabbath this will become relevant.

Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the OT hundreds of times in order to support what they were saying, so it doesn't work to someone to think that they took the position that we should only follow what they said but not what they considered to be an authoritative source. For example, Jesus quoted three times from Deuteronomy in order to defeat the temptations of Satan, which included saying that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Deuteronomy 8:3), so he affirmed God as being an authoritative source and we have no need Jesus and the Apostles to specifically repeat everything that God has spoken in order to know that we should still live by what God has spoken. Moreover, that includes affirming what God spoke in Deuteronomy 5:12-15 in regard to keeping the Sabbath holy and everything that God spoke to Moses in Deuteronomy 5:31-33.

In Deuteronomy 12:32, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the Torah, and in Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him is if they speak against obeying the Torah. So if someone affirms that Jesus and the Apostles are servants of God and they interpret a verse as speaking against obeying the Torah, such as speaking against obeying what God spoke in Deuteronomy 14 in regard to refraining from eating unclean animals, then that should indicate to them that they must have misinterpreted that verse, but if someone thinks that their interpretation must be correct, then that should indicate to them that they were wrong to consider Jesus and the Apostles to be servants of God, but either way we should still obey the Torah.

It is by the Torah that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20) and the Apostles taught that we are not permitted to do what God has revealed to be sin (Romans 6:1-2), so we are. not permitted to transgress the Torah, which includes breaking the Sabbath.

Christ set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, which included keeping the Sabbath holy, and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22), that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6), and to be imitators of Paul as he is of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1).

In Colossians 2:16-23, they were keeping the Sabbath and God's other feasts in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow, they were being judged because they were doing that by pagans who were promoting human precepts and traditions, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone prevent them from obeying God.

In Acts 15:21, they had the expectation that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey the Torah by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues.

In 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be holy for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, which straightforwardly includes keeping God's Sabbaths holy (Leviticus 19:2-3).

In Hebrews 3:18-19, they did not enter into God's rest because of their unbelief/disobedience, and in Ezekiel 20:13, it specifically mentions that they greatly profaned God's Sabbaths, so someone should not think that they can enter into God's rest while having the same sort of disobedience that prevented the Israelites from doing that. In Hebrews 4:9-11, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, we should rest from our work as God rested from His work, and we should be careful to enter into that rest so that no one may fall away by the same sort of disobedience.

ViaCrucis said:
The Torah says to observe--honor--the Sabbath. This is true.
The Torah also says that to touch a dead body brings ritual impurity, that a woman is made ritually impure during her menstrual cycle, and that men are made impure from "nighttime emissions"; also that the wearing of mixed fabrics is forbidden, that planting different crops in the same field is forbidden, and that eating certain kinds of foods is forbidden. The Torah also teaches that there should be a Tabernacle (this later became a permanent Temple in Jerusalem) where the high priest is to preside before the Mercy Seat to offer offerings of blood and incense.

As I've said on many occasions before, and I will continue to repeat as many times as I need to. Cherry-picking the Torah to find only the bits we want is meaningless and worthless and amounts to vain religiosity for the purpose of feeling self-righteous. This is not only offensive to the Gospel, it's offensive to the Law. This is not honoring God and His Torah, it is insulting His Torah and His Covenants; and it is insulting the Finished Work of Jesus Christ made at Mt. Calvary.

There is no such thing as "obedience" when that "obedience" is nothing more than self-promotion and vanity.

While there are legitimate reasons for someone not obeying certain laws, such as with the fact that not not even Jesus obeyed the laws in regard to having a period or to giving birth, there are also illegitimate reasons, so I agree that we should not cherry-pick the Torah. However, the issue of whether followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Torah is independent of the issue of what I happen to be doing. Even if I were the biggest hypocrite in the word who actively trying to commit as sin as possible and who was the embodiment of self-righteousness, self-promoting, and vanity, then that would just mean that I would need to repent, not that it is false that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Torah. The reason why God gave the Torah was not in order to teach how to become self-righteous.

In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in what he accomplished through his ministry and through the cross is by repenting and becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20), which includes being zealous for keeping the Sabbath holy.

Studyman · Friday at 1:10 PM

Soyeong said:
Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the OT hundreds of times in order to support what they were saying, so it doesn't work to someone to think that they took the position that we should only follow what they said but not what they considered to be an authoritative source. For example, Jesus quoted three times from Deuteronomy in order to defeat the temptations of Satan, which included saying that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Deuteronomy 8:3), so he affirmed God as being an authoritative source and we have no need Jesus and the Apostles to specifically repeat everything that God has spoken in order to know that we should still live by what God has spoken. Moreover, that includes affirming what God spoke in Deuteronomy 5:12-15 in regard to keeping the Sabbath holy and everything that God spoke to Moses in Deuteronomy 5:31-33.

In Deuteronomy 12:32, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the Torah, and in Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him is if they speak against obeying the Torah. So if someone affirms that Jesus and the Apostles are servants of God and they interpret a verse as speaking against obeying the Torah, such as speaking against obeying what God spoke in Deuteronomy 14 in regard to refraining from eating unclean animals, then that should indicate to them that they must have misinterpreted that verse, but if someone think that their interpretation must be correct, then that should indicate to them that they were wrong to consider Jesus and the Apostles to be servants of God, but either way we should still obey the Torah.

It is by the Torah that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20) and the Apostles taught that we are not permitted to do what God has revealed to be sin (Romans 6:1-2), so we are. not permitted to transgress the Torah, which includes breaking the Sabbath.

Christ set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, which included keeping the Sabbath holy, and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22), that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6), and to be imitators of Paul as he is of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1).

In Colossians 2:16-23, they were keeping the Sabbath and God's other feasts in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow, they were being judged because they were doing that by pagans who were promoting human precepts and traditions, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone prevent them from obeying God.

In Acts 15:21, they had the expectation that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey the Torah by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogues.

In 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be holy for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, which straightforwardly includes keeping God's Sabbaths holy (Leviticus 19:2-3).

In Hebrews 3:18-19, they did not enter into God's rest because of their unbelief/disobedience, and in Ezekiel 20:13, it specifically mentions that they greatly profaned God's Sabbaths, so someone should not think that they can enter into God's rest while having the same sort of disobedience that prevented the Israelites from doing that. In Hebrews 4:9-11, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, we should rest from our work as God rested from His work, and we should be careful to enter into that rest so that no one may fall away by the same sort of disobedience.

While there are legitimate reasons for someone not obeying certain laws, such as with the fact that not not even Jesus obeyed the laws in regard to having a period or to giving birth, there are also illegitimate reasons, so I agree that we should not cherry-pick the Torah. However, the issue of whether followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Torah is independent of the issue of what I happen to be doing. Even if I were the biggest hypocrite in the word who actively trying to commit as sin as possible and who was the embodiment of self-righteousness, self-promoting, and vanity, then that would just mean that I would need to repent, not that it is false that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Torah. The reason why God gave the Torah was not in order to teach how to become self-righteous.

In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in what he accomplished through his ministry and through the cross is by repenting and becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20), which includes being zealous for keeping the Sabbath holy.

For me, Paul explains that the Holy scriptures are trustworthy "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works". And Jesus instructed men, both as the Word of God that was God, and also the Word of God who became a mortal man, that man should live by Every Word of God.

There were religious men in Jerusalem "Who professed to know God", but who don't believe God, according to Scriptures, and it's easy for them to just judge much of God's Instruction in righteousness as unworthy of their honor and respect.

But Paul didn't do this, nor did he teach others to do this, in my view.

1 Cor. 9: 9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? 10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? "For our sakes", no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

Notice here how Paul doesn't just trash, disregard or judge even the least of God's Commandments as unworthy of honor and respect, simply because he didn't have any oxen or wasn't a farmer. He understood and taught others that God had these Words specifically written for "OUR" admonition, just as they were relevant for Paul and the Faithful believers in his generation.

In this way, men who present their bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is their reasonable service. are not conformed to this world: but are transformed by the renewing of their mind, "that they may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God".

Which is exactly what Paul did with God's Commandment " Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. He sought to know the meaning, and God revealed it to him as promised, what was that good, acceptable and perfect will of God that God intended him to find in the Commandment.

As Paul taught both Jew and Gentile;

Rom. 2: 7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing "seek for" glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

And I think he learned this from Jesus; "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and "his righteousness"; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Great post.

Hentenza · Friday at 3:14 PM

Soyeong said:
If the Law of Moses has not been nullified, then it is still a valid way to know God that those who want to know Him should still follow.

You are back to the straw man. The law of Moses has been fulfilled (completed) not nullified. The purpose left for the law is to show unbelievers that they need a savior. It is quite the leap of logic to argue that just because the law is active for a subgroup (unbelievers) that it would be active for another subgroup (believers).

Soyeong said:
In Matthew 4:15-23, Christ began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Law of Moses was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom/Grace, which Paul also taught based on the Law of Moses (Acts 14:21-22, 20:24-25, 28:23).

Christ early ministry was dedicated to make believers of the Jews. He wanted to reconcile the Jews to Him by preaching that the Messiah was Him so His efforts were to the Jews. (Matt. 10:5-6, 15:24, Acts 13:46).

The message that the kingdom of God is at hand was preached to Israel as it shows in Luke 4. The audience are the Jews in the synagogue not the gentiles outside. Once the Jews in the synagogue forcefully drove Him out did He mention going to other cities (Luke 4:43) but continue to preach in the synagogues of Judea (Luke 4:44).

Soyeong said:
Christ also set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Law of Moses and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22), that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6), and to be imitators of Paul as he is of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1). So both Christ and Paul taught to follow the Law of Moses by word and by example and being a Christian is about being a follower of what Christ taught, not about refusing to follow Him. Galatians and Romans should not be interpreted in a way that turns them against following what Christ and Paul taught.

The problem here is just your interpretation, if we take your interpretation then the scriptures are in tension. Paul explicitly teaches that we are no longer under the guardianship of the law. Paul clearly teaches that circumcision gains nothing. Paul clearly teaches that justification is impossible by the law.

Jesus plainly states that on the two love commandments hang the whole law and the prophets. (Matt. 22:40).

Christians with saving faith make the greatest effort to walk like Christ. All Christians are guided by the Spirit not by the letter of the law.

Soyeong said:
In Matthew 27:37, they nailed a handwritten ordinance to Christ's cross that announced the charge that was against him, which fits perfectly with the concept of the handwritten ordinance that listed the charges that were against us instead being nailed to Christ's cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, but has nothing to do with nailing any laws to the cross.

That’s not what scripture teaches. The inscription nailed to the cross has nothing to do with what Christ accomplished in the cross. The inscription was put there to belittle Christ. There is no longer circumcision by hand as the Mosaic law requires. There is no longer judgment for those who do not keep the festivals, not follow the food laws, or even keep the sabbath.

The result of Jesus sacrifice on the cross was justification to all who have faith in Him. The law is contrary to justification. The law is a curse to the Christian and the law is not of faith. These teachings are a direct teaching leaving very little wiggle room for misunderstanding. One would have to do mental gymnastics to explain away the plain teachings of these verses.

Soyeong said:
The reason that Christ went to the cross was not in order to cause us to be free to do what God revealed to be sin through the Mosaic Law, but just the opposite. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Jesus gave himself to free us from the Mosaic Law but in order to free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law (Acts 21:20).

And this is what isolating verses lead to,

“looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, eager for good deeds.”
‭‭Titus‬ ‭2‬:‭13‬-‭14‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Titus 2:13-14 (NASB2020) - looking for the blessed hope and th | YouVersion

looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people

bible.com

This is what justification means. Jesus sacrifice fulfills that law completely allowing Jesus to present His people blameless to God. All Christians are created to do good works that were prepared ahead of time (Eph. 2:10). All Christians do works but not the works of the law which does not justify.

Soyeong said:
I did address that in the post #543 that you did not address, so please address it.

Gladly. This is what you stated in post #543 with regards to the remaining purpose of the law.

“ Jesus saves us from our sin (Matthew 1:21), and it is by the Law of Moses that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so Jesus graciously teaching believers to be doers of the Law of Moses is intrinsically the way that he is giving us his gift of saving us from not being doers of it. The Law of Moses does not just show us why we need a Savior but is also the way that He is saving us.”

This is what Jesus did for the believer.

“For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1‬:‭13‬-‭14‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Colossians 1:13-14 (NASB2020) - For He rescued us from the domain o | YouVersion

For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

bible.com

Keep reading further in Rom. 3. Jesus Christ’s death on the Cross satisfied the demands of God’s Law that required that human sin be judged (Romans 3:26). In Him we have an advocate where if we confess our sin He will forgive our sins. (1 John 1:8-10).
The law does not do that.

So Jesus Christ’s death on the Cross establishes the Law by fulfilling the purpose of the Law in driving men to Jesus Christ as their Savior (Galatians 3:24). The Holy Spirit gives us the knowledge of sin and the way to repentance since the law is not able to. This is why there is no longer condemnation for those in Christ (Rom. 8:1).

Soyeong said:
The Gospel that called for us to repent from our disobedience to the Mosaic Law that Jesus taught in Matthew 4:15-23 is in accordance with him being sent as the promised seed to bless us by turning us from from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-36), which is the Gospel that was made known in advance to Abraham in accordance with the promise (Galatians 3:8), which he spread to those in Haran in accordance with the promise (Genesis 12:1-5).

Your argument relies on a connection between the verses that you posted but the problem is that the connection is not there. Look at Gal.3:8 with its immediate context.

“The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “All the nations will be blessed in you.” So then, those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer. For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all the things written in the book of the Law, to do them.” Now, that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, “the righteous one will live by faith.” However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, “The person who performs them will live by them.””
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3‬:‭8‬-‭12‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Galatians 3:8-12 (NASB2020) - The Scripture, foreseeing that God | YouVersion

The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU.” So then, those who are of faith are

bible.com

How can Abraham, who did not have the Mosaic law, be disobedient to such law and be preached the gospel ahead of time for him to repent from the Mosaic law. Here is a bit of circular logic.

Immediately after Gal. 3:8 Paul explains the curse of the law in relation to Abraham’s faith. Abraham was not saved by the works of the Mosaic law but by his faith in God. (Rom. 4:1-12).

Soyeong said:
The Hebrew word "yada" refers to intimate relationships/knowledge gained by experience such as with Genesis 4:1 where Adam knew (yada) Eve, she conceived, and gave birth to Cain. God's way is the way to know (yada) Him and Jesus by experiencing embodying His character traits, which is the narrow way to eternal life (John 17:3). For example, in Genesis 18:19, God knew (yada) Abraham that he would teach his children and those of his household to walk in His way by being doers of righteousness and justice that the Lord might bring to him all that He has promised.

Abraham was under the providential law which are the morals that all of us are born with. God is always involved with His creation. Abraham was not under the Mosaic law. So when God knew (yada) that Abraham was going to teach the righteousness of God He meant the providential law and the faith necessary to follow God. Every obedience comes from faith even in Abraham’s time.

Soyeong said:
In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israel might know (yada) Him, in 1 Kings 2:1-3, God taught how to walk in His way through the Law of Moses,

Yes. Moses was under the Mosaic law and asked God to show him how to walk in the law.

Soyeong said:
and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the goal of the Mosaic Law is to graciously teach us how to know God and Jesus, which is His gift of eternal life.

Matt. 7 is talking about false prophets so is unrelated to this discussion. This is a specific subset of bad people.

““Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭7‬:‭15‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Matthew 7:15 (NASB2020) - “Beware of the false prophets, who | YouVersion

“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

bible.com

Soyeong said:
In Genesis 26:4-5, God will multiply Abraham's children as the stars in the Heaven, to his children He will give all of these lands, and through his children all of the nations of the earth shall be blessed because he heard God's voice and guarded His charge, commandments, statutes, and laws. In Deuteronomy 30:16, if the children of Abraham will love God with all of their hearts by walking in His way in obedience to His commandments, statutes, and laws, then the will live and multiply and God will bless them in the land that they go to posses. So the promise was made to Abraham because he walked in God's way, he taught his children and those of his household to do that in accordance with spreading the Gospel of the Kingdom/Grace, and because they did that in obedience to the Mosaic Law. So both Abraham and Moses spread the Gospel of the Kingdom/Grace by teaching to walk in God's way.

They did not do it in obedience to the Mosaic law because Abraham was not given the Mosaic law.

“Now Moses summoned all Israel and said to them: “Listen, Israel, to the statutes and ordinances which I am speaking today for you to hear, so that you may learn them and be careful to do them. The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, all of us who are alive here today.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭5‬:‭1‬-‭3‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Deuteronomy 5:1-3 (NASB2020) - Now Moses summoned all Israel and s | YouVersion

Now Moses summoned all Israel and said to them: “ L isten, Israel, to the statutes and ordinances which I am speaking today for you to hear, so that you may learn them and be careful to do them. The L

bible.com

Soyeong said:
In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Mosaic Law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so the has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. In Genesis 6:8-9, Noah found grace in the eyes of God, he was a righteous man, and he walked with God, so God was gracious to Noah by teaching him to walk in His way and he was righteous because he obeyed through faith.

Noah did not have the Mosaic law either. So Noah is not pertinent to our discussion.

Carl Emerson · Friday at 6:48 PM

Soyeong said:
The command to keep the Sabbath holy does not prohibit meeting on other days of the week, and indeed they did have the meal together in the Temple on every day of the week (Acts 2:46). Part of keeping the Sabbath holy is distinguishing between when it begins and when it ends, so Jews have a longstanding tradition of meeting on the 1st day of the week for Havdalah on Saturday at sundown in order to mark the transition between the end of the Sabbath and the start of the work week. So Paul did not speak from morning until midnight, but rather he spoke from sundown until midnight, then left to travel on Sunday morning. So Acts 20:7 does not establish the purpose of the meeting was to honor the resurrection, and even if it was, it does not establish that they met on Sunday morning, and even if they had, it does not establish that this was the start of a new tradition, and even if it was, it does not establish that they hypocritically set aside any of God's commands in order to establish their tradition, and even if they had, then this would not establish that we should follow their example of sin.

My reference to Acts 20:7 was to counter the false claim that there is no reference to Sunday gatherings in Scripture.

The fact that communion was taken also affirms that the resurrection was being celebrated.

Hentenza · Friday at 6:55 PM

Soyeong said:
The command to keep the Sabbath holy does not prohibit meeting on other days of the week, and indeed they did have the meal together in the Temple on every day of the week (Acts 2:46). Part of keeping the Sabbath holy is distinguishing between when it begins and when it ends, so Jews have a longstanding tradition of meeting on the 1st day of the week for Havdalah on Saturday at sundown in order to mark the transition between the end of the Sabbath and the start of the work week. So Paul did not speak from morning until midnight, but rather he spoke from sundown until midnight, then left to travel on Sunday morning. So Acts 20:7 does not establish the purpose of the meeting was to honor the resurrection, and even if it was, it does not establish that they met on Sunday morning, and even if they had, it does not establish that this was the start of a new tradition, and even if it was, it does not establish that they hypocritically set aside any of God's commands in order to establish their tradition, and even if they had, then this would not establish that we should follow their example of sin.

The church works in the new covenant not in the old covenant. The problem that you have is showing evidence that the Christian is required to keep the seventh day sabbath in the new covenant. So I’ll leave to providing that evidence.

Freth · 2026-02-07T06:50:34-0600

Hentenza said:
The church works in the new covenant not in the old covenant. The problem that you have is showing evidence that the Christian is required to keep the seventh day sabbath in the new covenant. So I’ll leave to providing that evidence.

If God's law is written in the heart (Jeremiah 31:33, Hebrews 8:10, Hebrews 10:16), then it didn't go anywhere. This then would include the Sabbath, not negate it, which Jesus verified (Matthew 5:18-19).

Studyman · 2026-02-07T07:35:47-0600

Freth said:
If God's law is written in the heart (Jeremiah 31:33, Hebrews 8:10, Hebrews 10:16), then it didn't go anywhere. This then would include the Sabbath, not negate it, which Jesus verified (Matthew 5:18-19).

This is true. As the Jesus of the Bible also teaches, "But seek ye first: the kingdom of God, and "his righteousness"; and all these things shall be added unto you. If a man believes that God is, "and that he is a rewarder "of them" that diligently seek him", HE is faithful to write His Laws on his heart. The Bible says this is how men know if they know Him, or are just honoring Him with their lips, as it is also written "And hereby we do know that we know him, "if" we keep his commandments.

God doesn't force men to honor and respect Him and submit to His Instruction in Righteousness. Paul called it a "voluntary Humility" for those who "Yield Themselves" servants to obey Him. To choose the Way of God over the way of the religions of this world we were born into, even if it means taking a pay cut, or missing opening day of PGA tournament.

You are right to point out that in the entire Bible, there is no prophesy to abolish God's commandments. The only Law prophesied to change was the Priesthood Covenant God made with Levi, "After the Order of Aaron".

Good post Freth.

Hentenza · 2026-02-07T07:53:36-0600

Freth said:
If God's law is written in the heart (Jeremiah 31:33, Hebrews 8:10, Hebrews 10:16), then it didn't go anywhere.

You are ignoring scripture. The verses you quoted clearly state that this upcoming new covenant is with the house of Israel and the house of Judah not with the church. The new covenant for the church is a covenant of blood (Luke 22:20) based on Jesus sacrifice on the cross.

Freth said:
This then would include the Sabbath, not negate it, which Jesus verified (Matthew 5:18-19).

It doesn’t include the sabbath. Jesus is our Christian rest. The remaining purpose of the law is to bring unbelievers to Christ. To show unbelievers their need for a savior.

Hentenza · 2026-02-07T07:58:49-0600

Studyman said:
.

You are right to point out that in the entire Bible, there is no prophesy to abolish God's commandments.

The straw man continues. No one has argued that the commandments have been abolished. But then the legalist argument has to include fallacy and the murdering of hermeneutics. The old covenant passed away and the new covenant was ushered in by our Lord and savior. Amazing what an all powerful God can do.

Studyman said:
Good post Freth.

Not really.

Soyeong · 2026-02-07T19:40:14-0600

Carl Emerson said:
My reference to Acts 20:7 was to counter the false claim that there is no reference to Sunday gatherings in Scripture.

The fact that communion was taken also affirms that the resurrection was being celebrated.

The person you were responding to was speaking about observing the first day in honor the resurrection and while Acts 20:7 mentions meeting on the first day, it doesn't mention anything about communion or honoring the resurrection.

Hentenza · 2026-02-07T20:05:24-0600

Soyeong said:
The person you were responding to was speaking about observing the first day in honor the resurrection and while Acts 20:7 mentions meeting on the first day, it doesn't mention anything about communion or honoring the resurrection.

The Peshitta has it right when they translate breaking bread as the Eucharist which is the Lords supper.

20:7 ¶ AND on the first day in the week, when we were assembled to break the eucharist, Paulos discoursed with them, because the day following he was to depart; and he prolonged his discourse until the dividing of the night.

tall73 · 2026-02-07T20:09:49-0600

SabbathBlessings said:
All you are doing is quoting that there was sabbath(s) feast days in the OT and the Sabbath day, you have not proved that Paul is speaking of both.

No, what I was showing is that such listings of appointed times in the OT include both, such as Numbers 28,29 and Ezekiel 45,46, and both had sacrifices associated. There is an OT context to what Paul is stating.

SabbathBlessings said:
Paul very clearly is speaking of the sabbath(s) that were handwritten in ordinances. Col2:14

Incorrect. The term used is of a handrwitten bond of debt, and we see various translations that recognize that.

SabbathBlessings said:
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Yes, He took away our record of debt. That is what stood against us. The Day of Atonement, and the Passover, and such did not stand against us. They point to Jesus.

You cut off the sentence in the middle:

Colossians 2:13-14

13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. (NKJV)

The clause about the wiping out of our certificate of debt, that stood opposed to us, is describing His forgiveness of all our trespasses.

SabbathBlessings said:
Moses handwrote the ordinances so the context is proving your interpretation to be wrong.

You have misunderstood the handwritten certificate of debt, and obscured the actual context by cutting the thought in half. The sentence is about forgiving trespasses, removing our record of sin debt on the cross. The Day of Atonement, Passover, etc. were not opposed to us. They point to Jesus.

SabbathBlessings said:
2Chro 33:8 and I will not again remove the foot of Israel from the land which I have appointed for your fathers—only if they are careful to do all that I have commanded them, according to the whole law and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.”

Which included every thing except the Ten Commandments, which included the 4th commandment written by the finger of God, Exo31:18 not handwritten by Moses, that was placed besides the ark that was a witness against thee Deut31:24-26

By misunderstanding what the handwritten certificate of debt was you have also made an error here. You have read in the removal of the laws written by Moses.

They stood against them as witnesses when they broke them. However, you don't actually think all of them were removed. Laws against not showing favoritism, or opposing incest, or saying to love your neighbor as yourself, keeping your vows, etc. are not removed. They are referenced in the NT. So that was not what was canceled. What was removed was our record of sin.

SabbathBlessings said:
Your interpretation makes the Sabbath that God made for mankind Mark2:27 against mankind at Creation, so basically teaching God was against man right after He made man in His image at Creation before sin.

Of course that is not my interpretation. Because I don't think that the Sabbath or the Day of Atonement, or the Passover were against us. They point to Jesus.

But you have failed to apply your own logic. Explain how the Passover and the Day of Atonement and the New Moon were against us.

SabbathBlessings said:
Shadow laws are not sin, what God deems as doing righteousness, doing evil, the Bible very clearly and plainly tells us what shadow laws are Heb 10:1-10 which is in context to this entire passage. God never un-Blessed and un-Sanctified the seventh day Sabbath.

You haven't showed that he "un-blessed" the Day of Pentecost either. Paul was in a hurry to get back for it. Did you notice that in Acts?

Probably because God said it would be a statute forever for Israel in all their dwellings throughout their generations:

Leviticus 23:21

21 And you shall proclaim on the same day that it is a holy convocation to you. You shall do no customary work on it. It shall be a statute forever in all your dwellings throughout your generations. (NKJV)

Just as the Sabbath was for Israel:

Exodus 31:16-17

16 Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. 17 It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.’ ” (NKJV)

SabbathBlessings said:
Jesus claimed Lordship over it and said who He made it for. Not for Paul to come along 30 years later and countermand Him after Jesus ratified His covenant by His death.

Jesus was noting that they were hardly in a position to explain to Him the purpose of the Sabbath as He is the Son of Man who will judge all things and reign over the nations, and is Lord of the Sabbath.

The play on words emphasizes that title. But we see from the text which men the Sabbath was given to:

17 It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.’ ” (NKJV)

SabbathBlessings said:
This is a strawman and I never said such thing. I beleive Paul was a servant of God, not His corrector. Why I beleive what the Bible says people would do to his writings 2Peter3:16 something I beleive we should take serious as it is a serious warning

Now that we have clarified you accept that Peter agrees Paul was inspired, even if some misinterpret him, you can get back to explaining why your interpretation of Col 2. ignores half of the verse and misapplies the handwritten certificate of debt, and ignores the OT parallel passages showing this includes the weekly Sabbath.

SabbathBlessings said:
God did 4 things with the seventh day that He did not do with any other day.

1. God rested on the seventh day, Gen2:1-3 not because God needed rest but God always led the example for mankind.
2. He sanctified the Sabbath- set it apart for holy use Gen2:3
3. He blessed the Sabbath day Exo20:11 Gen2:3 that no man can reverse because man is not God Num20:19-20
4. He named the seventh day the Sabbath and made it interchangeable Exo20:11 it is the holy day of the LORD Isa58:13 in God's own words.

Not disputed, nor have I claimed the Sabbath is gone.

And It is awkward to have to keep pointing this out to you, but the various appointed times were all called holy.

Leviticus 23:1-2

1 And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘The feasts of the LORD, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, these are My feasts. (NKJV)

For example, pentecost wascalled holy, and a statute forever for Israel. But you say it was taken away, and somehow opposed to them. That is not accurate. Also, it was on a Sunday.

Leviticus 23:21

21 And you shall proclaim on the same day that it is a holy convocation to you. You shall do no customary work on it. It shall be a statute forever in all your dwellings throughout your generations. (NKJV)

SabbathBlessings said:
You are conflating a covenant which is an agreement with the law of God.

No, I am pointing out that the law of Israel was in the context of the covenant with Israel, and included elements particularly for Israel.

For instance, the commandment to honor father and mother included a promise to the nation that they would long dwell in the land He was giving to them, the promised land, if they obeyed it.

Exodus 20:12

12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the LORD your God is giving you. (NKJV)

Paul notes that the principle is still there to honor father and mother, but shows a new blessing to the church in Ephesus, which included gentiles ,that did not depend on their living in the promise land.

Ephesians 6:1-3

1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor your father and mother,” which is the first commandment with promise: 3 that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth. (NKJV)

He now applies it to living long on the earth outside of the context of the nation of Israel.

In the middle of the covenant document is the covenant with Israel of the Sabbath:

Exodus 31:17-18

17 It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.’ ”

18 And when He had made an end of speaking with him on Mount Sinai, He gave Moses two tablets of the Testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God. (NKJV)

He distinguishes between the laws that one will live if he does and the Sabbath which He also gave the Israelites as a sign:

Ezekiel 20:10-13

10 “Therefore I made them go out of the land of Egypt and brought them into the wilderness. 11 And I gave them My statutes and showed them My judgments, which, if a man does, he shall live by them.’ 12 Moreover I also gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between them and Me, that they might know that I am the LORD who sanctifies them. 13 Yet the house of Israel rebelled against Me in the wilderness; they did not walk in My statutes; they despised My judgments, which, if a man does, he shall live by them’; and they greatly defiled My Sabbaths. (NKJV)

And He relates the Sabbath to their leaving slavery in Egypt:

Deuteronomy 5:15

15 And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day. (NKJV)

The Sabbath was one of the holy appointed times with Israel, and included sacrifices:

Numbers 28:9-10

9 ‘And on the Sabbath day two lambs in their first year, without blemish, and two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour as a grain offering, mixed with oil, with its drink offering— 10 this is the burnt offering for every Sabbath, besides the regular burnt offering with its drink offering. (NKJV)

SabbathBlessings said:
God never made an agreement with an entire nation before Israel so of course it would be a different agreement, it doesn't mean God did not give His instruction for righteousness (right-doing) until Mt Sinai. We see plainly in Scripture that is not so.

It means that you are conflating a memorial, a sign with Israel, with the commands which if a man does them he will live by them.

The Sabbath was given to Israel in addition to those.

Ezekiel 20:10-13

10 “Therefore I made them go out of the land of Egypt and brought them into the wilderness. 11 And I gave them My statutes and showed them My judgments, which, if a man does, he shall live by them.’ 12 Moreover I also gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between them and Me, that they might know that I am the LORD who sanctifies them.

SabbathBlessings said:
Israel is just a name God gave and its never been only literal if so, God would have not called it His son. If it was literal it would mean Adam

Exo 4:22 Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says the LORD: "Israel is My son, My firstborn.
Hos 11:1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son.

God promises through our faith everything He promised through Abraham

Sons of Abraham, who was the father of those who had faith and were circumcised and those who had faith and were not circumcised.

The council did not require that Gentiles be circumcised and keep the whole law of Moses.

SabbathBlessings said:
Gal 3:26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Yes,

Romans 4:9-12

9 Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had while still uncircumcised. (NKJV)

We don't have to be circumcised and keep the whole law of Moses though. Abraham is the father of the uncircumcised who have faith.

tall73 · 2026-02-07T20:10:05-0600

SabbathBlessings said:
A New Moon can mean a new moon feast or can also mean just the new month.

A new moon in the context of the listing of appointed times with their sacrifices obviously referred to the new moon feast.

SabbathBlessings said:
Lets look at these more closely...

In Col 2:16 neomēnia (Key) it means †νουμηνία noumēnía, noo-may-nee'-ah; feminine of a compound of G3501 and G3376 (as noun by implication, of G2250); the festival of new moon:—new moon

In Col 2:16 Its connected to the feast day offerings.

In Isa 66:23 lets look at the meaning for that

חֹדֶשׁ chôdesh, kho'-desh; from H2318; the new moon; by implication, a month:—month(-ly), new moon.

Its connected to the month. No feast days.

That term is clearly associated with the feast. Note:

Psalms 81:3-4

3 Blow the trumpet at the time of the New Moon,

At the full moon, on our solemn feast day.

4 For this is a statute for Israel,

A law of the God of Jacob. (NKJV)

And here in a listing of appointed times:

Numbers 28:11-13

11 At the beginnings of your months you shall present a burnt offering to the LORD: two young bulls, one ram, and seven lambs in their first year, without blemish; 12 three-tenths of an ephah of fine flour as a grain offering, mixed with oil, for each bull; two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour as a grain offering, mixed with oil, for the one ram; 13 and one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour, mixed with oil, as a grain offering for each lamb, as a burnt offering of sweet aroma, an offering made by fire to the LORD. (NKJV)

And here in a rather close parallel of the listing in Col. 2

Ezekiel 45:17

17 It shall be the prince’s duty to furnish the burnt offerings, grain offerings, and drink offerings, at the feasts, the new moons, and the Sabbaths, all the appointed feasts of the house of Israel: he shall provide the sin offerings, grain offerings, burnt offerings, and peace offerings, to make atonement on behalf of the house of Israel. (ESV)

And of course it was associated with the Sabbath as a day to appear before God for worship:

2 Kings 4:22-23

22 Then she called to her husband and said, “Send me one of the servants and one of the donkeys, that I may quickly go to the man of God and come back again.” 23 And he said, “Why will you go to him today? It is neither new moon nor Sabbath.” She said, “All is well.” (ESV)

Isaiah 1:13

13 Bring no more vain offerings;

incense is an abomination to me.

New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations—

I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly. (ESV)

And just as the new moon was a convocation earlier in Isaiah, they are coming to assemble on the new moon later in Isaiah:

Isaiah 66:23

23 From new moon to new moon,

and from Sabbath to Sabbath,

all flesh shall come to worship before me,

declares the LORD. (ESV)

SabbathBlessings said:
I am not sure if you read my post but I acknowledged that they offered animal sacrifices after the fall on the Sabbath, But according to God, the weekly Sabbath started at Creation before sin so no sacrifices Exo20:11 no sacrifices in the 4th commandment, the Sabbath continued on in the New Covenant without animal sacrifices because those were the shadow laws according to Scripture that ended at the Cross Heb10:1-15, not one of God's finger-written commandments.

I read your post. The Sabbath is first mentioned in the context of Israel, in Ex 16, called a sign with Israel, a perpetual covenant with Israel, etc. God rested, stopped creation on the 7th day. That is not in dispute. He hallowed it and blessed it. But in what context? In giving it to Israel as a sign. And that statement was written by Moses in Genesis, after he had heard God's voice giving the Sabbath, and after the initial introduction of the Sabbath in Ex. 16. We know it was written afterwards because Genesis and Exodus form one narrative. And Exodus records the giving of the ten commandments.

Also, you didn't explain why they didn't know how to keep the Sabbath in Ex. 16, and he had to explain it, when it was the second month since leaving Egypt.

SabbathBlessings said:
These sacrifices were not atonement sacrifices nor does it say anything about them being about or on the Sabbath day.

You said they were not offering sacrifices. They were offering sacrifices. They still realized they pointed to Jesus, as the true Sacrifice, but the point was they were zealous for the whole law--not just the parts you like.

Paul was in a hurry to get back for Pentecost. It was a pilgrimage feast. You seem to be missing some of these elements.

SabbathBlessings said:
Circumcisions is not required for Gentiles in the OT or NT. In the OT Gentiles could partake in the temple services for the forgiveness of sins through circumcision, but Jesus did away with that wall of separation at the Cross and anyone can go to Him at anytime without an animal sacrifice, but we should present our bodies as a living sacrifice to God and live holy lives as He asked of His people.

Yes we may go to Him at any time at the throne of grace.

Yet, the Jewish believers were still observing the law, zealous for the law, per Acts 21.

SabbathBlessings said:
God will be the Judge of this for both of us, I do not beleive Paul would be so careless against one of God's written and spoken commandments, God's Testimony. Why Paul was so careful with the context around these verses.

SabbathBlessings said:
Why Paul himself didn't even do what you claim he taught in these verses.

Of course Paul did what he taught in these verses. He taught that the holy times pointed to Jesus. He was eager to get back for Pentecost. He observed the Sabbath. James acknowledged that he was not turning Jews away from Moses among the Gentiles.

But James also acknowledged that they did not require all this of the Gentiles. And the Colossians need not be judged on these points. The reality is in Christ.

Soyeong · 2026-02-07T20:15:17-0600

Hentenza said:
The Peshitta has it right when they translate breaking bread as the Eucharist which is the Lords supper.

20:7 ¶ AND on the first day in the week, when we were assembled to break the eucharist, Paulos discoursed with them, because the day following he was to depart; and he prolonged his discourse until the dividing of the night.

In Acts 2:46, they broke bread together in the Temple on every day, so it does not refer to the Eucharist.

Hentenza said:
The church works in the new covenant not in the old covenant. The problem that you have is showing evidence that the Christian is required to keep the seventh day sabbath in the new covenant. So I’ll leave to providing that evidence.

The New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).

Hentenza · 2026-02-07T20:28:21-0600

Soyeong said:
In Acts 2:46, they broke bread together in the Temple on every day, so it does not refer to the Eucharist.

One verse is unrelated to the other. The context determines the definition.

Soyeong said:
The New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27).

It does not.

““Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah,”
‭‭Jeremiah‬ ‭31‬:‭31‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Jeremiah 31:31 (NASB2020) - “Behold, days are coming,” declares | YouVersion

“Behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah

bible.com

““Therefore say to the house of Israel, ‘This is what the Lord God says: “It is not for your sake, house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you went.”
‭‭Ezekiel‬ ‭36‬:‭22‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Ezekiel 36:22 (NASB2020) - “Therefore say to the house of Isra | YouVersion

“Therefore say to the house of Israel, ‘This is what the Lord GOD says: “It is not for your sake, house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the natio

bible.com

The new covenant spoken to here is not with the church but with the house of Judah and Israel. Context and audience are important. The new covenant with the church is depicted in Luke 22:20. The church is not Israel or Judah.

tall73 · 2026-02-07T20:47:42-0600

Freth said:
If God's law is written in the heart (Jeremiah 31:33, Hebrews 8:10, Hebrews 10:16), then it didn't go anywhere. This then would include the Sabbath, not negate it, which Jesus verified (Matthew 5:18-19).

Yes, the law is written in the heart. We are to live it out by walking in the Spirit.

And yes, Israel continued to be zealous for the whole law, not just the Sabbath, but Pentecost etc. Paul was eager to be back for it. The text in Matthew 5 points out not just the commandments against adultery and murder, which are from the ten, but also commandments from other parts of the law.

However, Gentiles were not required to keep the whole law of Moses. They were still required to put to death the works of the flesh, and walk in the Spirit, against which there is no law (Gal. 5).

If we look at Romans 2 it shows what it mean for the law to be written on the heart, even in the cases where someone did not have the law.

Romans 2:12-16

12 For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. 14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. (ESV)

Some Gentiles, even without the law, were still at times showing that the work of the law was written on their hearts.

But does that mean all these people were naturally keeping Passover, or circumcision, etc. from the law? No, they were following the conscience God gave them. Nor were all those without the law naturally keeping the Sabbath. That was a sign made with Israel:

Exodus 31:16-17

16 Therefore the people of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, observing the Sabbath throughout their generations, as a covenant forever. 17 It is a sign forever between me and the people of Israel that in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.’” (ESV)

When Paul tells the Colossian church to let no one judge them regarding the various appointed times, he lists them in the same fashion as the OT, such as in Ezekiel 45. And we know that this included the weekly Sabbath as it is spelled out.

The Sabbath, like the other appointed times, had sacrifices. It was a sign not only of God's creation but His redemption from Egypt per Deut. 5. And it was a shadow, of which the reality is Christ.

Moreover, Paul states:

Romans 14:5-6

5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. (NKJV)

This is in line with the principle given in Col. 2 The Jewish believers, per Acts 21 were zealous for the law. They continued keeping all of it, while realizing it pointed to Jesus. They were observing the various holy days to the Lord.

The Gentiles were not required to be circumcised and keep the law of Moses.

Carl Emerson · 2026-02-08T02:42:30-0600

Soyeong said:
The person you were responding to was speaking about observing the first day in honor the resurrection and while Acts 20:7 mentions meeting on the first day, it doesn't mention anything about communion or honoring the resurrection.

Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight.

Communion is honouring the resurrection.

SabbathBlessings · 2026-02-08T06:05:44-0600

tall73 said:
No, what I was showing is that such listings of appointed times in the OT include both, such as Numbers 28,29 and Ezekiel 45,46, and both had sacrifices associated. There is an OT context to what Paul is stating.

Incorrect. The term used is of a handrwitten bond of debt, and we see various translations that recognize that.

Yes, He took away our record of debt. That is what stood against us. The Day of Atonement, and the Passover, and such did not stand against us. They point to Jesus.

You cut off the sentence in the middle:

Colossians 2:13-14
13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. (NKJV)

The clause about the wiping out of our certificate of debt, that stood opposed to us, is describing His forgiveness of all our trespasses.

You have misunderstood the handwritten certificate of debt, and obscured the actual context by cutting the thought in half. The sentence is about forgiving trespasses, removing our record of sin debt on the cross. The Day of Atonement, Passover, etc. were not opposed to us. They point to Jesus.

By misunderstanding what the handwritten certificate of debt was you have also made an error here. You have read in the removal of the laws written by Moses.

Col 2:14 KJV Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to His cross.

Col 2:14 NASB having canceled the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

Greek word for handwriting: χειρόγραφον (cheirographon)
Literally: “something written by hand

Ordinances
τοῖς δόγμασιν (tois dogmasin)
Meaning: “decrees,” “regulations,” “legal demands”

It is a legal document handwritten that condemns sinners why Paul used the word “against us” and “contrary to us”. The law does not condemn the righteous, it condemns the sinners.

God wrote the Ten Commandments with His finger, not hand

Exo 31:18 And when He had made an end of speaking with him on Mount Sinai, He gave Moses two tablets of the Testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God.

Moses handwrote the ordinances the law in which Paul speaks of

2 Chron 33:8 and I will not again remove the foot of Israel from the land which I have appointed for your fathers—only if they are careful to do all that I have commanded them, according to the whole law and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.”

Moses handwrote the ordinances 2Chron33:8 which included the sabbath(s) that are connected to feast days and animal sacrifices that Paul is referring to- God wrote the Sabbath of the LORD Exo20:10 the holy day of the LORD that was never a shadow, it started at Creation before sin Exo20:11 was never against mankind was made for mankind, no matter how much some choose not to accept the blessing God made for them Isa 56:2. Man, including Paul, cannot reverse the blessings of God, we can only forfeit ours. Scripture shows Paul never forfeited his or taught anyone to forfeit theirs. Why I believe Col2:16 is not about the Holy Day of the LORD but God will be the one to sort this out once He returns.

I never said the Passover, or the Day of Atonement was against man, you are adding things I never said, I said the feasts, besides the Sabbath of the LORD, were all shadow laws and pointed to Jesus because they required animal sacrifices and the Bible very clearly says animal sacrifices are the shadow laws Heb10:1-10 and yes animal sacrifices are against mankind because its a reminder of sins that they could never take away, why they were in the law of Moses besides the ark of the covenant of God, as a witness against Deut 31:24-26 the context Paul so carefully laid out.

When there is a conflict between what Jesus taught and what Paul is perceived to teach, my faith is in Jesus. In the OT profaning the Sabbath along with committing adultery, murder was a capital offense. Its why the Ten Commandments as a unit was under the mercy seat of God. Exo25:21 Exo31:18. Final atonement for sins has not happened, I do not believe God made a mistake on something He blessed and sanctified and set apart to spend holy time with His children. I do not believe Paul would ever countermand one of God's commandments and countermand Jesus. Mat5:19-30 Mat15:3-14 Mark7:7-13 if you don't believe God's commandments includes the 4th commandment that His faithful keep until the end of time Rev12:17 Rev14:12 Rev22:14 that we can forget the one commandment God said Remember that comes with the power of God's blessings and sanctification that can be your choice, its not mine. We will all have to be accountable for what we do and teach others.

All will get sorted out by God, who is our righteous Judge John12:48 James 2:11-12 Rev 11:18-19 which I believe will be soon.

Be well.

SabbathBlessings · 2026-02-08T06:55:19-0600

tall73 said:
Moreover, Paul states:

Romans 14:5-6
5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. (NKJV)

Rom 14:1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.

Paul is referring to things that are doubtful disputations.

Is the Testimony of God, the commandments of God written by God under the mercy seat of God, something blessed and sactified by God, ever a doubtful disputation? Its sad what people do with the writings of Paul.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Are professed Christians that worship our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday sinning?

Are professed Christians that worship our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday sinning?

Yes

No

Maybe

Confessional Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Well-Known Member

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

I will fear no evil for You are with me

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Well-Known Member

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Sophia7's husband

Sophia7's husband

Well-Known Member

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Sophia7's husband

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads