Does Hebrews 3 and 4 do away with Sabbath?

[Laodicean]

Sabbath, as commanded in Exodus 20 is a "you shall not...". It is a restraining command.

Joe

Actually, it says, "Remember," Joe, not "you shall not."

 

[Joe67]

Actually, it says, "Remember," Joe, not "you shall not."

Laodicean,

Ex 20:8-10
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
KJV

Joe

 

[Laodicean]

Laodicean,

Ex 20:8-10
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
KJV

Joe

Ah, Joe, the filters again with which we approach the words.

For me, the Fourth starts, not with a command such as: "Thou shalt not keep the Sabbath day unholy," but wth a gentle request, "Remember." It's as if I were to say to you, Tomorrow is my birthday, remember. And tomorrow, you shall not do anything that is laborious or stressfull or taxing. Instead, come and enjoy yourself in my presence. Bring along your sons and your daughters, even your helpers in your house. Look, if you have any strangers come by, bring them along too. Let's celebrate!

Now, if I had said, "you shall do all manner of work in order to serve me and remember my birthday," I would consider that to be a terrible burden. But no, instead, "thou shalt" comes as a release from burden. A time to rest. A time to remember. Why would anyone object to such a happy day?

 

[ricker]

If God asks us to delight in the Sabbath, then any burdensomeness is a result of our not delighting in it. If we regard the Sabbath as a burden, that says something about how much delight we take in spending exclusive time with our God.
.

We are not to do anything that gives us pleasure on the sabbath, right? Sounds like a burden to me. A yoke, even.

 

[k4c]

We are not to do anything that gives us pleasure on the sabbath, right? Sounds like a burden to me. A yoke, even.

You're reading into it something that is not there. When it talks about no pleasure it's not referring to pleasure in general because it's pleasurable for me to keep the Sabbath and gather with my brothers and sisters. What it's saying is not to do our own pleasure. In other words, your church is planning a picnic fellowship but you decide to go golfing with buddies from work.

 

[ricker]

You're reading into it something that is not there. When it talks about no pleasure it's not referring to pleasure in general because it's pleasurable for me to keep the Sabbath and gather with my brothers and sisters. What it's saying is not to do our own pleasure. In other words, your church is planning a picnic fellowship but you decide to go golfing with buddies from work.

I think you're right. If I look at the NIV it makes more sense.

If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath
and from doing as you please on my holy day,
if you call the Sabbath a delight
and the LORD's holy day honorable,
and if you honor it by not going your own way
and not doing as you please or speaking idle words,
14 then you will find your joy in the LORD,
and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land
and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob."
The mouth of the LORD has spoken.

It does kinda sound like this was for the Israelites, but I digress.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

You're reading into it something that is not there. When it talks about no pleasure it's not referring to pleasure in general because it's pleasurable for me to keep the Sabbath and gather with my brothers and sisters. What it's saying is not to do our own pleasure. In other words, your church is planning a picnic fellowship but you decide to go golfing with buddies from work.

Actually, the passage says nothing about gathering with brothers and sisters.

BFA

 

[k4c]

Actually, the passage says nothing about gathering with brothers and sisters.

BFA

It doesn't have to because we already know the Sabbath is a time for the sacred assembly of brothers and sisters.

Leviticus 23:3 You will work for six days, but the seventh will be a day of complete rest, a day for the sacred assembly on which you do no work at all. Wherever you live, this is a Sabbath for Yahweh.

 

[k4c]

I think you're right. If I look at the NIV it makes more sense.

If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath
and from doing as you please on my holy day,
if you call the Sabbath a delight
and the LORD's holy day honorable,
and if you honor it by not going your own way
and not doing as you please or speaking idle words,
14 then you will find your joy in the LORD,
and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land
and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob."
The mouth of the LORD has spoken.

It does kinda sound like this was for the Israelites, but I digress.

Now don't get me wrong, it's not a sin to play golf on the Sabbath but it can be if it interfers with what God is doing through your local church family.

God blessed the seventh day and called it holy at creation. It's a time He set aside and protected by Law for His people to enjoy without being forced to work by unblieving bosses.

 

[ricker]

It doesn't have to because we already know the Sabbath is a time for the sacred assembly of brothers and sisters.

Leviticus 23:3 You will work for six days, but the seventh will be a day of complete rest, a day for the sacred assembly on which you do no work at all. Wherever you live, this is a Sabbath for Yahweh.

What Bible translation is that from?

 

[StormyOne]

It doesn't have to because we already know the Sabbath is a time for the sacred assembly of brothers and sisters.

Leviticus 23:3 You will work for six days, but the seventh will be a day of complete rest, a day for the sacred assembly on which you do no work at all. Wherever you live, this is a Sabbath for Yahweh.

yes, it sure is...

Exodus 31:

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

15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

So the people gather to put to death those who are defiling the sabbath?

 

[k4c]

What Bible translation is that from?

It's the New Jerusalem Bible. Most Bibles use the words, holy convocation, which means, a day for sacred assembly.

 

[k4c]

yes, it sure is...

Exodus 31:

So the people gather to put to death those who are defiling the sabbath?

I don't understand your statement, "Yes, it sure is..."

As far as being put to death for violating the Sabbath. Praise God we are no longer under the Old Covenant. Now we live by the words of Jesus. Jesus' words took away all the legalsitic and ritualistic keeping of the Sabbath.

 

[ricker]

It's the New Jerusalem Bible. Most Bibles use the words, holy convocation, which means, a day for sacred assembly.

Thanks. I didn't recognize it. That is a Catholic translation, not that it makes any difference.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

I don't understand your statement, "Yes, it sure is..."

As far as being put to death for violating the Sabbath. Praise God we are no longer under the Old Covenant. Now we live by the words of Jesus. Jesus' words took away all the legalsitic and ritualistic keeping of the Sabbath.

Let's keep in mind that the command to kill sabbath breakers was a God-given command. With this in view, I notice 2 things:

1. You seem to be advocating for a new form of sabbath keeping that is different from the sabbath God commanded the Israelites to observe.

2. It seems as though you feel comfortable referring to God-given old covenant commands as "legalistic and ritualistic."
​

Can you help me understand this?

BFA

 

[StormyOne]

I don't understand your statement, "Yes, it sure is..."

As far as being put to death for violating the Sabbath. Praise God we are no longer under the Old Covenant. Now we live by the words of Jesus. Jesus' words took away all the legalsitic and ritualistic keeping of the Sabbath.

perhaps you don't realize, all of that was a part of the old covenant which was done away with... I pointed out in a different thread that the ancient jews did NOT make a distinction between the "moral" law, the "ceremonial" law, and the statutes. To them it was all included... The sabbath school lesson last week pointed out that adventists make an artificial division...

It is convenient for us to classify Old Testament laws into various categories: (1) moral law, (2) ceremonial law, (3) civil law, (4) statutes and judgments, and (5) health laws.

This classification is in part artificial. In actuality, some of these categories are interrelated, and there is considerable overlap. The ancients did not see them as separate and distinct.

here is the link to the lesson:
Lesson 2

 

[k4c]

Let's keep in mind that the command to kill sabbath breakers was a God-given command. With this in view, I notice 2 things:

1. You seem to be advocating for a new form of sabbath keeping that is different from the sabbath God commanded the Israelites to observe.

2. It seems as though you feel comfortable referring to God-given old covenant commands as "legalistic and ritualistic."
​

Can you help me understand this?

BFA

It's the same Sabbath just without the Law of sin and death.

Ritualistc is when something is done without love or relationship.

Legalistic is when something is called sin when it's not sin.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

It's the same Sabbath just without the Law of sin and death.

When I read 2 Corinthians 3, I am persuaded that the law of sin and death includes the ten commandments. Therefore, I'm not sure how to distinguish between the sabbath and the law of sin and death.

Ritualistc is when something is done without love or relationship.

Is this how we should view those who observed the laws contained in the God-given old covenant?

Legalistic is when something is called sin when it's not sin.

I understand legalistic to mean "law keeping for the purpose of saving one's self through individual effort."

BFA

 

[k4c]

Byfaithalone1;When I read 2 Corinthians 3, I am persuaded that the law of sin and death includes the ten commandments. Therefore, I'm not sure how to distinguish between the sabbath and the law of sin and death.

The Law of sin and death is, you sin, you're put to death. Under the NC we are under grace. You sin, you're not put to death in order that we might obey God without the motive of fear.

Is this how we should view those who observed the laws contained in the God-given old covenant?

Those under the OC obeyed through fear of punishment, which is being put to death. Under the NC covenant God's grace covers us because His love has been set free through Christ. In this we can have no fear now as we look towards the judgement day.

1 John 4:17-18 By this, love is perfected with us, that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, so also are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.

I understand legalistic to mean "law keeping for the purpose of saving one's self through individual effort."

BFA

I believe keeping the Law for any other reason, other than love for God, is legalism. Legalism is the breeding ground for calling things sin that are not sin.

 

[VictorC]

Actually, it appears to be your contention that you should comply with something other than the Biblical sabbath. Just what it is you want everyone else to keep hasn't been defined for this audience.

1. You seem to be advocating for a new form of sabbath keeping that is different from the sabbath God commanded the Israelites to observe.

It would seem that we have made the same observation concerning those advocating the sabbath. What they have replaced it with still remains undefined.