Common Questions and Objections Regarding the Sabbath Refuted

netzarim said:

I would find your argument more persuasive if Peter said "We must obey God rather than the High Priest" or "We must obey God rather than the Judges or this Court". No, Peter only said "We must obey God rather than men.".

The illegitimate Sanhedrin consisted of only common "men" which had no jurisdiction over them.

Click to expand...

The law of Contempt never has made such irrelevant distinctions. Again, Paul raised jurisdictional defenses twice in Roman tribunals. NEVER in front of the Sanhedrin, which invariably treated the Apostles fairly: Once meting out a lesser punishment that what was called for, once granting an outright acquittal.

netzarim said:

I would find your argument more persuasive if Peter said "We must obey God rather than the High Priest" or "We must obey God rather than the Judges or this Court". No, Peter only said "We must obey God rather than men.".

The illegitimate Sanhedrin consisted of only common "men" which had no jurisdiction over them.

Click to expand...

The thing is, at times you said Acts is not inspired text, you used to also say 2 Peter is not, but if memory serves me, I think you did now include it "your" inspiration list, on another thread. Yet you argue out of Acts when it suits you, trying to validate your points, so why are your points valid, but when others use Acts, in the past, you invalidate Acts, as you seek to just use text that serves your argumernt, form an book that you say is not inspired?

netzarim said:

I would find your argument more persuasive if Peter said "We must obey God rather than the High Priest" or "We must obey God rather than the Judges or this Court". No, Peter only said "We must obey God rather than men.".

The illegitimate Sanhedrin consisted of only common "men" which had no jurisdiction over them.

Click to expand...

But who were the "men" there?

That is like saying whatever the guy on the large seat, in a courtroom, with the mallet, that the lawyers are subject to, is not known to be the judge.

Who else is the mallet wielding guy, with a black robe on, that gives a sentence to the guilty?

netzarim said:

Names and Titles are of great importance and significance according to my interpretation of Scripture.

Click to expand...

So is common sense, especially when the sanhedrin word was uses in Acts. But opppps, you do not think Acts is inspired text, yet you argue out of it...oh my.

I think the sabbath is great.

I'm now considering 2 day's of rest.

netzarim said:

I'm not disagreeing with you that they argued before the Sanhedrin. I am merely stating that they did that in obedience to Messiah's command, and that it wasn't done in recognition of the Sanhedrin's alleged jurisdiction

This supports my case that Paul was not amongst the Twelve Paul appealed to Caesar, his master in his jurisdiction, whereas the Apostles appealed to God, their Master, in their jurisdiction.

Click to expand...

Paul was smart, the jews were trying to kill him, he wanted a fair trial, acts shows that they plotted with festus to kill Paul.

Acts 25:2 And the chief priests and the principal men of the Jews laid out their case against Paul, and they urged him, 3 asking as a favor against Paul that he summon him to Jerusalem—because they were planning an ambush to kill him on the way.


Same earlier in 23.


12 When it was day, the Jews made a plot and bound themselves by an oath neither to eat nor drink till they had killed Paul. 13 There were more than forty who made this conspiracy. 14 They went to the chief priests and elders and said, “We have strictly bound ourselves by an oath to taste no food till we have killed Paul.

netzarim said:

Yes, the Romans might have recognized the Sanhedrin's jurisdiction, but I do not believe either God or Messiah did. The High Priest was no longer of the Aaronic or Zadokian line, but were puppets and viceregents of the Roman Empire. They were invalid High Priests in the eyes of God, and thus, their Sanhedrin under them were invalid in the eyes of God.

Where is it written that the Apostles called the members of the Sanhedrin "High Priest, judge, etc."? All I see in Acts 5:29 is Peter recognizing them only as "men" - equal to themselves.

Click to expand...

Again, men?..define who the "men" were?

netzarim said:

"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than men.'" Acts 5:22 RSV. This is clear enough to me that the apostles rejected the Sanhedrin's alleged jurisdiction

Paul is outside my jurisdiction

Click to expand...

of course, because if you read the context, it was God over those "men", that they listened too...

It could have been Obama, they had to listen to God, so your point is moot!

Frogster said:

Paul was smart, the jews were trying to kill him, he wanted a fair trial, acts shows that they plotted with festus to kill Paul.

Acts 25:2 And the chief priests and the principal men of the Jews laid out their case against Paul, and they urged him, 3 asking as a favor against Paul that he summon him to Jerusalem—because they were planning an ambush to kill him on the way.


Same earlier in 23.


12 When it was day, the Jews made a plot and bound themselves by an oath neither to eat nor drink till they had killed Paul. 13 There were more than forty who made this conspiracy. 14 They went to the chief priests and elders and said, “We have strictly bound ourselves by an oath to taste no food till we have killed Paul.

Click to expand...

I feel so vulnerable.

Frogster said:

It could have been Obama, they had to listen to God, so your point is moot!

Click to expand...

Nice usage of the word "moot".

netzarim said:

"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than men.'" Acts 5:22 RSV. This is clear enough to me that the apostles rejected the Sanhedrin's alleged jurisdiction

Paul is outside my jurisdiction

Click to expand...

Luke offers sooo much Paul support, the guy whose book you seem to selectively argue out of.

At least those on our side, say we argue from inspiration, but by your own words, you are arguing from a book, you think not to be inspired! You have said, "no one witnessed Paul", well a gospel writer did, and so did James and Peter, and others.

Look at the Luke support for the apostle Jesus chose..



Peter called Paul’s writings scripture in 2 Peter 3:16.


James called Paul his beloved brother who risked his life for the Lord in Acts 15. Peter also called Paul his beloved brother in 2 Peter 3.

When Luke says the Holy Spirit in Acts 13, sent out Paul, along with the prophets sending him, that does support Paul, largely.

When Luke says Paul was a chosen instrument, as spoken by the Lord in acts 9:15, repeated in Acts 26, that does indeed support Paul.

When Luke records Ananias a disciple going to Paul in Acts 9, that does witness Paul for sure.

Luke called Paul an apostle.


A Jewish prophet named Silas, started churches with Paul. There is a good one!

When the demons in acts 19, recognized the same Spirit in Paul, as Jesus, that does support Paul? Same as Acts 16, with the divination girl, the demons recognized a high ranking authority.


In other words, in the gospels, when demons cried out when they saw Jesus, it was out of fear, and they knew his authority. We have no problem thinking that pertaining to the Lord. So likewise, in Acts 19, they recognized Paul, as a high ranking authority a soldier, as they mentioned Paul, along side of the highest one, Jesus! In a strange way, it was a compliment, like here also...



Acts 16:16 As we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling. 17 She followed Paul and us, crying out, “These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation.”


Then, with authority..


Acts 16:18 And this she kept doing for many days. Paul, having become greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.


When the very respected Barnabas, the man of faith in Acts 4 and 11, went to get Paul, that is quite an endorsement.

When Luke records Jesus in acts 18, 22, 23, telling Paul to keep going, without any correction to his message, that does not witness Paul?

When an angel of God in acts 27 supports Paul, that is quite an amazing endorsement and confirmation.

When Bible knowing Aquila and Priscilla travel with Paul, that does not confirm Paul? Did they have correct Paul scripturally as they did Apollos? Nope.

When the council in acts 15 agreed with Paul, and his gospel, as per the recorded event seen in Galatians 2, that does prove Paul’s Gospel of grace for sure.

When Torah knowing Timothy travels with Paul, along with Luke himself, that does not support Paul?

Do the miracles recorded by Luke, Acts 19:11 etc, saying GOD did miracles through Paul, testify about Paul? Yes!


Luke records Peter and James saying not to burden the church with the yoke of law in Acts 15, same as how Paul referred to the law and it being a yoke. Good doctrinal testimony there, great confirmation from the other apostles.

The churches of Judea, praised God, because of Paul, Galatians 1:24,

When Luke says the Word of the Lord, was spread by Paul in Acts 19 and elsewhere, that is a powerful testimony, and quite an honor.

Acts 14:3 at Iconium, Luke says God was testifying to the grace Paul preached, that saved Jew and Greek. The Gospel of grace, that of Acts 20:24.

In Acts 19:6, Luke records that after Paul placed his hands on some disciples, they received the Holy Spirit, spoke in tongues, and prophesied. Good witness there too…

Acts 16, God sent an earthquake to free Paul, pretty good testimony there too. I wouldn’t mind God doing that for me. Seems like Paul’s mission was very important to the Lord, his chosen instrument had a very high calling.

In Acts 24, Paul confronted Felix about adultery, that took Holy Ghost guts, to say that to the one who had power over him, in that situation. Paul would also not succumb to the seeming bribe from Felix.

Acts 26, before King Agrippa, Paul tried to convert him, wow, more guts to do while in captivity, to those who had power over Paul, relative power though, God was in charge.


Imagine getting stoned in Lystra, and then go back there, Acts 14:21 Oh my!


And…not to mention, centuries later, Paul’s writings inspired by the Spirit, are still leading people to Christ.

And….they are so deep and rich, confirming the origin is the Spirit, by their richness and revelation, that one could spend a life time, just studying Romans, and see new things.

Paul, quite a guy, beaten, shipwrecked several times, stoned, cold, hungry, floating a day and night at sea, working to support himself, he was put in prison, beaten with rods, slandered, whipped by the synagogue leaders 5 times, having his back opened up, all for the love of his Lord.

pyramid33 said:

Nice usage of the word "moot".

Click to expand...

moot is moot!

pyramid33 said:

I feel so vulnerable.

Click to expand...

well...I got your back door!

If only you could relate all apostle's with as much praise as you give Paul.

pyramid33 said:

If only you could relate all apostle's with as much praise as you give Paul.

Click to expand...

Well heck, see Jesus, he chose Paul to do the chatting, what can i tell you? The chosen instrument of Acts 9:15.

Minister here>>>


Acts 20:24 But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God.


Acts 26:16 But rise and stand upon your feet, for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you as a servant and witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you, 17

Ahh. I'm just saying we can all get along and all thing's are good with God. God guide's and where a heart for God is guided, may it, by the grace of God, follow.

It is as Paul say's, if thy brother/sister stumble on a certain thing, avoid it for thy brother's/sister's sake to not interfere with the blessing of God. May God guide each of us as He intend's.

pyramid33 said:

Ahh. I'm just saying we can all get along and all thing's are good with God. God guide's and where a heart for God is guided, may it, by the grace of God, follow.

It is as Paul say's, if thy brother/sister stumble on a certain thing, avoid it for thy brother's/sister's sake to not interfere with the blessing of God. May God guide each of us as He intend's.

Click to expand...

Jesus was a stumbling stone, a rock of offense, to the law party.