• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Common Questions and Objections Regarding the Sabbath Refuted

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
probably because they are all here spamming us with the mark of the beast is keeping sunday or some nonsense like that

One thing the Early Church Fathers were unanimous about: Condemning Sabbath Keeping as part of the Satanic heresies of "Judaizing," "Galatians," and "Ebionite." All three heresies insisted on Sabbath Keeping for Christians. And the Early Church Fathers never relented in condemning such trash as heresy.

Sabbath Keeping has always been condemned as anti-Christian trash. Here's Ignatius of Antioch, schooled by the Apostles Peter and John, in his Epistle to the Magnesiums in 107 AD:

"Be not deceived with strange doctrines, nor with old fables, which are unprofitable. For if we still live according to the Jewish Law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace....If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and By His death."

That is the typical reaction of the Church Fathers who were trained directly by the Apostles. The Apostles and the first generation Christian leadership would strongly endorse the following:

"Seventh Day Adventists deny the resurrection by observing the Sabbath. We come to church on Sunday, the Lord's Day, to worship Him who "died for our sins, and rose again for our justification." We worship a living Savior, and with thanksgiving, can sing:
"He lives, He lives, Christ Jesus lives today!"
If I worship Christ on Saturday I deny that His work is finished, that He is a resurrected, living Savior."
http://www.abaptistvoice.com/English/Articles/Miscelanous/WhyIAmABaptist.htm

Keeping the Sabbath = Denying the Resurrection. And acknowledging you have not received Grace. That has been the unanimous opinion of Christianity for 2,000 years. I am just mystified why a Christian website would ever allow destructive and anti-Christian Sabbath Keeping trash to be posted here, when it has been so strongly condemned as an anti-Christian heresy for 2,000 years.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
F

from scratch

Guest
One thing the Early Church Fathers were unanimous about: Condemning Sabbath Keeping as part of the Satanic heresies of "Judaizing," "Galatians," and "Ebionite." All three heresies insisted on Sabbath Keeping for Christians. And the Early Church Fathers never relented in condemning such trash as heresy.

Sabbath Keeping has always been condemned as anti-Christian trash. Here's Ignatius of Antioch, schooled by the Apostles Peter and John, in his Epistle to the Magnesiums in 107 AD:

"Be not deceived with strange doctrines, nor with old fables, which are unprofitable. For if we still live according to the Jewish Law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace....If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and By His death."

That is the typical reaction of the Church Fathers who were trained directly by the Apostles. The Apostles and the first generation Christian leadership would strongly endorse the following:

"Seventh Day Adventists deny the resurrection by observing the Sabbath. We come to church on Sunday, the Lord's Day, to worship Him who "died for our sins, and rose again for our justification." We worship a living Savior, and with thanksgiving, can sing:
"He lives, He lives, Christ Jesus lives today!"
If I worship Christ on Saturday I deny that His work is finished, that He is a resurrected, living Savior."
Why I Am A Baptist And Not A Seventh Day Adventist

Keeping the Sabbath = Denying the Resurrection. And acknowledging you have not received Grace. That has been the unanimous opinion of Christianity for 2,000 years. I am just mystified why a Christian website would ever allow destructive and anti-Christian Sabbath Keeping trash to be posted here, when it has been so strongly condemned as an anti-Christian heresy for 2,000 years.
That is one of my favorite hymns. Could sing it every week. Its rarely sung any more. But at least its still in the published hymnals.
 
Upvote 0

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
That is one of my favorite hymns. Could sing it every week. Its rarely sung any more. But at least its still in the published hymnals.

I wonder if my parents would disown me if they knew how often I had quoted a Baptist. I wonder what progmonk thinks of me quoting a Baptist. In SDA Parlance, Baptists are down near the bottom of the list of evil-doers Adventists hate the most:

1) Catholic Church: 9-headed baby-blood-slurping AntiChrist and his Coven of wicked dark angels. BAD BAD BAD;

2). Methodists: Summarily kicked Ellen White out into the street, right in the middle of a meeting, where she was holding forth on how the failed 1844 Prophecies were actually RIGHT all along, after all! Pretty spooky, there, Ellen. Methodists had the "truth" presented to them, but firmly rejected it, and expelled Ellen like a bad tooth. That's Bad. Not Catholic Bad. But still bad.

3). Lutherans, Episcopalians and Presbyterians: Followed the Millerites around, openly mocking them, throwing rocks at them and blowing tubas that woke up the "Ascencionists" from a deep sleep, who thought the Tubas were the Heavenly Ram's Horn. Snickering at the white-robed dingbats on top of the mountain. Bad. Not Methodist Bad, but bad enough.

4). Baptists: The Congregation that whelped William Miller, but then rejected the local boy made good. Never supported Miller during his false-prophesying frenzy, but never openly mocked him like Lutherans, Episcopalians and Presbyterians either. And welcomed him back in with open arms after he repented from his time-setting sins, and after he rejected the "Sabbath Message" and the "Investigative Judgment" hoaxes. Bad. Not Lutheran, Episcopalian and Presbyterian Bad. Baptists may actually be saved, if they can be convinced to keep the Sabbath. And if progmonk will work hard to convince the Church to interpret the BCF to require Sabbath Keeping.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
How does "keeping the Sabbath" equal "denying the resurrection"?

Check out my double post on "The War against the Ten Commandments." ALL of the Church Fathers argued that Sabbath Keeping is contrary to the Resurrection. Sabbath Keeping celebrates the dead-in-the-grave Jesus Christ, NOT the Resurrected one. That Sabbath that Christ spent in the Grave was the last legitimate Sabbath.
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
Check out my double post on "The War against the Ten Commandments." ALL of the Church Fathers argued that Sabbath Keeping is contrary to the Resurrection. Sabbath Keeping celebrates the dead-in-the-grave Jesus Christ, NOT the Resurrected one. That Sabbath that Christ spent in the Grave was the last legitimate Sabbath.
Perhaps all of your Church Fathers might argue that :)

To me, keeping the Sabbath is a moedim recital which points to and looks forward to our eternal Sabbath.
 
Upvote 0

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Perhaps all of your Church Fathers might argue that :)

They are the Church Fathers of Christianity as it exists today. Clearly not the Fathers of Messianic Judaism, which is where you are coming from.

To me, keeping the Sabbath is a moedim recital which points to and looks forward to our eternal Sabbath.

Christians have "eternal Sabbath" in Christ. EVERYDAY is a "Sabbath" for Christians.

Unfortunately, for Gentiles that do not wish to go through the entire process to Judaism, the Mosaic Law is unavailable. The Sabbath has NEVER been available to be kept by a Gentile. The Mosaic law and history are crystal clear. Acts 15 only restates what has always been the Rabbinical view of the Mosaic Law.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
They are the Church Fathers of Christianity as it exists today. Clearly not the Fathers of Messianic Judaism, which is where you are coming from.
Exactly.

Christians have "eternal Sabbath" in Christ. EVERYDAY is a "Sabbath" for Christians.
What is your "everyday Sabbath" a rest from?

Unfortunately, for Gentiles that do not wish to go through the entire process to Judaism, the Mosaic Law is unavailable. The Sabbath has NEVER been available to be kept by a Gentile. The Mosaic law and history are crystal clear. Acts 15 only restates what has always been the Rabbinical view of the Mosaic Law.
I disagree. YHVH's Law has always welcomed faithful Gentiles: "One Torah-law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you." - Ex 12:49 cf Lev 24:22, Num 15:15,16, Num 15:29. Gentiles left Egypt with Israel, Gentiles sojourned with Israel by Mount Sinai when the commandments were received, and Gentiles entered into the land with Israel. We believe that Messiah (in Mt 28:18-20) was simply repeating this open invitation to Gentiles that has always existed.
 
Upvote 0

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I disagree. YHVH's Law has always welcomed faithful Gentiles: "One Torah-law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you." - Ex 12:49 cf Lev 24:22, Num 15:15,16, Num 15:29. Gentiles left Egypt with Israel, Gentiles sojourned with Israel by Mount Sinai when the commandments were received, and Gentiles entered into the land with Israel. We believe that Messiah (in Mt 28:18-20) was simply repeating this open invitation to Gentiles that has always existed.

They were "welcome" to follow the Mosaic Law, as long as they went through the full conversion process. Every quote that Jesus gave about the Law was in the context of assuming that everyone hearing him was a Jew. He NEVER advocated that Gentiles convert to Judaism, or follow the Mosaic Law. NEVER.

The Mosaic Law is indivisible. Your conversion begins the moment you end up alone in the room with the grinning Rabbi holding the dull circumcision knife.

That is PRECISELY what Acts 15 was avoiding for the Gentile Christian converts
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
They were "welcome" to follow the Mosaic Law, as long as they went through the full conversion process. The Mosaic Law is indivisible. Your conversion begins the moment you end up in the room with the grinning Rabbi holding the dull circumcision knife.
This "process" you describe is part of Orthodox-Conservative Judaism, and not generally part of Messianic Judaism.

That is PRECISELY what Acts 15 was avoiding for the Gentile Christian converts
I disagree, on the basis of Acts 15:21. No initial burden was to be given to Gentile converts except for abstaining from foods offered to idols, from fornication, from strangled meat-foods, and from ingesting blood. After that, the Gentile converts were expected to learn what else the Law required when they attended synagogue (Ac 15:21).

If, on the other hand, this list of four requirements were to be the only requirements for Gentile converts, then we should celebrate that we can worship other gods, be false witnesses, dishonor our parents, etc.?

(I wonder how many Gentile converts today follow Acts 15:20?)
 
Upvote 0

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I disagree, on the basis of Acts 15:21. No initial burden was to be given to Gentile converts except for abstaining from foods offered to idols, from fornication, from strangled meat-foods, and from ingesting blood. After that, the Gentile converts were expected to learn what else the Law required when they attended synagogue (Ac 15:21).

(I wonder how many Gentile converts today follow Acts 15:20?)

It is clear that Acts 15:21 was referring to the Mosaic Law as it then existed. There is NOTHING in that verse that indicated the Apostles were seeking to change the Mosaic Law, to reverse its longstanding ban on Gentiles attempting to follow it. It is clear that the Pharisees, by arguing that the Gentiles should be circumcised, felt Gentile Christian converts should undergo the conversion process to Judaism. The Apostles would have none of it.

This "process" you describe is part of Orthodox-Conservative Judaism, and not generally part of Messianic Judaism.

There is NOTHING in the Old or New Testament that indicates the Apostles thought they had that as an option. You have the luxury of saying what "process" you will be under, since we do not live in a theocracy. The Apostles were living under Mosaic Law strictly enforced by the Sanhedrin. They did not have the options that you and do in our pluralistic society.

If, on the other hand, this list of four requirements were to be the only requirements for Gentile converts, then we should celebrate that we can worship other gods, be false witnesses, dishonor our parents, etc.?

Whether or not it was spelled out by the Decree from the Council of Jerusalem, the Noahides required the setting up of "Courts of Justice." The Sanhedrin vigorously enforced many different laws. It is probably not true that they would not enforce the Noahide prohibition against "other gods," given the vigor with which they persecuted the Christians. False Witnessing was a law that is clearly part of the Noahide, and enforced by the Sanhedrin against Gentile offenders. Whether or not the Apostles spelled out all of the Noahides in the Jerusalem Decree is irrelevant to whether the Sanhedrin enforced the rest of them. The Sanhedrin did not need the Apostle's prior approval to prosecute Gentiles within their jurisdiction. The issue was whether the Gentiles would adopt the Mosaic Laws and convert to Judaism as part of their conversion to Christianity. The Apostles decision is an unequivocal "NO"

The letter was written to the Gentiles in Antioch, who were under Roman Law. I do not know if it enforced the Commandments you state. Clearly, the Decree does NOT require the Gentiles to obey the Ten Commandments. Judaism NEVER required Gentiles to keep the Ten Commandments. Judaism has NEVER taught that the Ten Commandments have universal applicability. The Jerusalem Decree would have spelled out the Ten Commandments, if it meant to do so. The idea that Gentile Christian converts in Antioch would be forced to obey the Ten Commandments is just absurd.

There is NOTHING in the rest of the New Testament that indicates the Decree was temporary, tentative or "initial." Moreover, the statements of the second-generation Church Fathers indicate that it was NOT just an "initial" ruling. In fact, the Church fathers condemned ANY attempt to add more of the Jewish Law to the burden of Gentile Christians. That is clear, unequivocal and unanimous. I can assure you from my close study of St. Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp and Justin Martyr that ANY attempt to "update" the Decree with more Jewish ordinances would have been strongly and harshly denounced and resisted. There is zero chance the Church Fathers would have allowed an "update."

By the way, as a housekeeping rule, maybe we could agree on waiting for a certain amount of time before responding to each other's posts. The last time we had this kind of enjoyable exchange, I was guilty of editing my posts and you would respond to the incomplete post. I do not want it to appear that you are overlooking something that I edited in AFTER you posted.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
It is clear that Acts 15:21 was referring to the Mosaic Law as it existed. There is NOTHING in that verse that indicated the Apostles were going to try to get a change in Mosaic Law to reverse the ban on Gentiles following it. It is clear that the Pharisees by arguing that the Gentiles should be circumcised, that they should be converted to Judaism. The Apostles would have none of it. There is NOTHING in the Old or New Testament that indicated that the Apostles had that as an option, or even thought they should. You have the luxury of saying what "process" you will be under. The Apostles were living under Mosaic Law enforced by the Sanhedrin. They did not have the options that you do.
I suggest that the Apostles recognized that they no longer lived under the illegitimate Sanhedrin (with a clouded priestly lineage), but under the governance of Messiah instead. The Apostolic group were the new Sanhedrin under Messiah. They no longer answered to the illegitimate Sanhedrin which rejected Messiah.

The issue was whether the Gentiles would follow the Mosaic Laws as part of their conversion to Christianity. The Apostles decision is an unequivocal "NO"
I believe that their decision was an unequivocal "YES, but start here first". ;)

By the way, as a housekeeping rule, maybe we could agree on waiting for a certain amount of time before responding to each other's posts. The last time we had this kind of enjoyable exchange, I was guilty of editing my posts and you would respond to the incomplete post. I do not want it to appear that you are overlooking something that I edited in AFTER you posted.
No problem. :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Here are the writings of four of the most prominent First and Second Century Christian leaders. You will find a COMPLETE absence of any mention whatsoever that the Decree of Jerusalem should be upgraded or expanded. To the contrary, if these Martyrs said ANYTHING, it was to denounce all forms of Judaism, however minor, that were constantly creeping in to Christianity. And Seventh Day Adventism's leading Sabbath Scholar Dr. Samuele Bacchiochi has demonstrated that the abandonment of the Jewish Sabbath by Christianity (including by Jewish Christians) was complete no later than AD 140.

Ignatius of Antioch

Justin Martyr

St. Polycarp of Smyrna

First Clement: Clement of Rome

There is just nothing in history that I can find that indicates any effort whatsoever that someone in Christianity wanted to add more rules to, or update or expand the Decree from the Council of Jerusalem. To the contrary, even Jewish Christians had abandoned Sabbath Keeping and the Food Laws no later than AD 140.

Acts 15 has the full letter that actually went out to the Gentile Christians at Antioch. There is NO reference to the Mosaic Law being added later. There was NO reference to watch for updates. There was NO prediction for a Jerusalem Council 2.0. There is NOTHING in the rest of the Bible that indicated a Jerusalem Council 2.0, or any effort whatsoever expended that would indicate even the faintest of desires to have one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
F

from scratch

Guest
Exactly.

What is your "everyday Sabbath" a rest from?

I disagree. YHVH's Law has always welcomed faithful Gentiles: "One Torah-law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you." - Ex 12:49 cf Lev 24:22, Num 15:15,16, Num 15:29. Gentiles left Egypt with Israel, Gentiles sojourned with Israel by Mount Sinai when the commandments were received, and Gentiles entered into the land with Israel. We believe that Messiah (in Mt 28:18-20) was simply repeating this open invitation to Gentiles that has always existed.
Are you really suggesting the Sabbath is merely a rest from physical labor and the Sabbath you long for is nothing more than an extended 7th day sabbath? What then was Jesus offering them in Mat 11:28-30?
 
Upvote 0
F

from scratch

Guest
This "process" you describe is part of Orthodox-Conservative Judaism, and not generally part of Messianic Judaism.

I disagree, on the basis of Acts 15:21. No initial burden was to be given to Gentile converts except for abstaining from foods offered to idols, from fornication, from strangled meat-foods, and from ingesting blood. After that, the Gentile converts were expected to learn what else the Law required when they attended synagogue (Ac 15:21).

If, on the other hand, this list of four requirements were to be the only requirements for Gentile converts, then we should celebrate that we can worship other gods, be false witnesses, dishonor our parents, etc.?

(I wonder how many Gentile converts today follow Acts 15:20?)
Gentile converts to what? Are you talking about the organized church in general or are you really talking about real born-again Christians?
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
Here are the writings of four of the most prominent First and Second Century Christian leaders. You will find a COMPLETE absence of any mention whatsoever that the Decree of Jerusalem should be upgraded or expanded. To the contrary, if these Martyrs said ANYTHING, it was to denounce all forms of Judaism, however minor, that were constantly creeping in to Christianity. And Seventh Day Adventism's leading Sabbath Scholar Dr. Samuele Bacchiochi has demonstrated that the abandonment of the Jewish Sabbath by Christianity (including by Jewish Christians) was complete no later than AD 140.

Ignatius of Antioch Justin Martyr St. Polycarp of Smyrna First Clement: Clement of Rome
Correct, those are your Christian leaders, not Messianic ones. ;) Their opinions are irrelevant to my Messianic faith.

There is just nothing in history that I can find that indicates any effort whatsoever that someone in Christianity wanted to add more rules to, or update or expand the Decree from the Council of Jerusalem. To the contrary, even Jewish Christians had abandoned Sabbath Keeping and the Food Laws no later than AD 140.
The opinions and positions of the 2nd century believers are also irrelevant and not authoritative.

Acts 15 has the full letter that actually went out to the Gentile Christians at Antioch. There is NO reference to the Mosaic Law being added later. There was NO reference to watch for updates. There was NO prediction for a Jerusalem Council 2.0. There is NOTHING in the rest of the Bible that indicated a Jerusalem Council 2.0, or any effort whatsoever expended that would indicate even the faintest of desires to have one.
I don't dispute this :)
 
Upvote 0

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I am SO excited! I finally found an up-to-date translation of the "Laws of Kings and Wars." It is at http://halakhah.com/rst/kingsandwars.pdf.

I invite you to peruse this masterpiece of Torah Mishnah (the Oral Torah given to Moses) to get a flavor of how the Apostles, particularly St. Paul would have comprehensively viewed the Mosaic Law in debating and finalizing the Decree from the Council of Jerusalem. No doubt, the following would have had an immense and controlling impact on the Decree from the Council of Jerusalem. There is no chance that the Apostles would been able to change ANY of this on behalf of their Gentile Christian converts, nor is there any evidence that I can find that any of the Early Church Fathers ever tried such a thing. Based on the following, there is no chance that the Early Church Fathers would have ever attempted to add more Mosaic Laws to the existing Decree from the Council of Jerusalem. The following would have controlled every action of either a Gentile or a Jewish convert in the Second Temple period.


"8.1 Moses our Teacher did not bequeath the Torah and the Commandments to anyone but to Israel, as it says, “the Heritage of the Congregation of Jacob” (Deut. 33:4), and to anyone from the other nations who wishes to convert, as it says, “as you, as a convert” (Numbers 15:15). However, no one who does not want to convert is forced to accept the Torah and the Commandments."

"8.13 Moses our Teacher was commanded by the Almighty to compel the world to accept the Commandments of the Sons of Noah ("the Noahide" laws). Anyone who fails to accept them is executed. Anyone who does accept them upon himself is called a Convert Who May Reside Anywhere. He must accept them in front of three wise and learned Jews. However, anyone who agrees to be circumcised and twelve months have elapsed and he was not as yet circumcised is no different than any other member of the nations of the world."

"8.14 Anyone who accepts upon himself and carefully observes the Seven Commandments is of the Righteous of the Nations of the World and has a portion in the World to Come. This is as long as he accepts and performs them because (he truly believes that) it was the Holy One, Blessed Be He, Who commanded them in the Torah, and that is was through Moses our Teacher we were informed that the Sons of Noah had already been commanded to observe them. But if he observes them because he convinced himself logically, then he is not considered a Resident Convert and is not of the Righteous of the Nations of the World, but merely one of their wise."

"9.1 Adam, the first man, was commanded with six commandments: 1) idolatry, 2) “blessing” (euphemistically) the Name (of G-d), 3) murder, 4) illicit sexual relations, 5) thievery and, 6) establishing a system of justice."

"9.2 Even though all of these have been received as a Tradition from Moses our Teacher and we can understand the rationale for them, nevertheless, from (verses in) the Torah (we learn that) it was these that they were commanded. A seventh commandment forbidding the eating of a limb torn from a live animal was added for Noah, as it says, “Even flesh, life is in the blood, do not eat of it” (Genesis 9:4)."

"9.3 These commandments were universally applicable - until Abraham. With Abraham, circumcision was also commanded and he prayed Shacharis (the Morning Prayer). Isaac separated out a tithe and added another prayer in the afternoon and, with Jacob, the prohibition against eating the sciatic nerve was
added, as was the Maariv (Evening) Prayer. In Egypt, Amram was commanded with other precepts and, with Moses our Teacher, the Torah was completed."

"10.4 We ignore the request of a non-Jew who had converted and was circumcised and immersed, and now wishes to turn away from G-d and change his status to Resident Convert as he was before. Rather, he is to conduct himself like any other Jew, or he will be executed. A child can annul his conversion when he grows up if he had been immersed by the Court when he was a minor. He may only become a Resident Convert. However, if he didn’t annul his conversion at that time, he cannot do so later, and he becomes a Righteous Convert."

"10.11 A non-Jew who busied himself with Torah is liable with his life. He must involve himself in their Seven Commandments only. Similarly, a non-Jew who “rested” as one would on Sabbath, even on a weekday, is liable with the death penalty. There is no reason to mention (that he is culpable) if he invented his own holiday."

"10.12 The principle here is that we do not permit them to make a new religion and create new commandments for themselves based on their own reasoning. They may only become Righteous Converts and accept upon themselves all the Commandments, or they must observe their own (Seven) Laws only, and not add or detract from them. If a non-Jew busied himself with Torah or made Sabbath or made up something new, we give him lashes and punish him and tell him that he is liable with the death penalty for doing this. But he is not executed."

This would have been the State of the Art in the Mishnah Torah at the time of the Second Temple and at the time the Decree was issued from the Council of Jerusalem. The Mishnah Torah excerpts that I have provided simply preclude the addition of any more terms and rules to Decree. There is no chance that Gentile Christian converts ever kept the Sabbath, followed the Mosaic food laws, or any other part of the Mosaic Law in First Century Christianity. The language of this ancient Mishnah Torah, that was given to Moses simultaneously with the written Torah, are a complete and direct repudiation of any inference that the Sabbath was a creation ordinance. Look especially at the laws governing Adam, later amended for Noah. .
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LarryP2

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2014
1,237
88
✟1,841.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
The Pharisaical/Rabbinical Oral Torah is invalid in the eyes of most Messianics. To us, it is the product of a heretical sect/offshoot of the true faith.

We do not believe that Moses was given an Oral Torah on Mount Sinai (see Josh 1:8, "written therein")

Be that as it may, there is no doubt that Paul was taught this by Gamaliel and had to have had it in the uppermost of his mind during the debates at the council of Jerusalem. Both Paul and Gamaliel were Pharisees who indeed were bound by the Mishnah Torah. There is no way around it. There is simply no way in light of this that Paul or any of the other Early Church Leaders would have EVER institute a Sabbath requirement on Gentile Christians. That would have simply been impossible.

The Decree of the Council of Jerusalem flatly refused to institute Sabbath Keeping or any other Mosaic Law ordinance on the Gentile Christian converts. In light of these excerpts from the Mishnah Torah, any argument contrariwise is just not rational. Paul and the other Apostles, the Gentile Christians and the Early Church Fathers did not have the luxury of declaring themselves to be Messianic Jews and ignoring the Mishnah Torah.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0