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.
The premise that the old covenant (Ten Commandments) was comprised only of moral laws that were eternal isn't supported in Scripture. Neither is a division between "moral" and "ceremonial" law found in the law mediated by Moses. Tall73 and I have both pointed out that the weekly sabbath was a component of law that required burnt offerings, and a priesthood that was authorized by the law to make those burnt offerings.There are problem in exporting an expression from one context to another, as the author may be using it with different meaning. As Paul qualified his expression with the term "shadow" and as the context was about keeping parts of the ritual law to be justified, and as Jesus said the moral law is eternal, its clear Paul did not intend his statement to be applied to the weekly Sabbath, as none of the 10 commandments are shadows but eternal moral laws. His readers would have understood what he meant.Tall73 said:The Old Testament parallels show that when the sabbaths were listed the weekly sabbath was included.
That conclusion alone calls for an end to the weekly sabbath.Its clear that the ceremonial sabbaths ended at the cross because they were shadows, requiring animal sacrifices.
Because you don't know the requirements for keeping the sabbath holy according to the law that ordained it, and don't know the origin of the sabbath, you simply contradict yourself as well as Scripture.The same cannot be said of the Sabbath because it originated before the fall when there were no animal sacrifices and was intended to last as long as the earth lasted.
I have offered a number of posts that suggest the sabbath was indeed a shadow of God's rest that originated in the Genesis account and has no end, and the reason you don't accept that is because you don't know the origin of the sabbath.
Repeating this falsified origin of the sabbath is the reason you write conclusions that are not consistent with Scripture.The weekly Sabbath began in Eden (Gen. 2:2-3).
You just contradicted what I wrote.I agree with you that the Sabbath has no end, it is an eternal type.
Why did you rely on a fabrication for your point?VictorC said:I have offered a number of posts that suggest the sabbath was indeed a shadow of God's rest that originated in the Genesis account and has no end, and the reason you don't accept that is because you don't know the origin of the sabbath.
Would you like to review Isaiah 56:4-6 , and tell us just what covenant the Gentiles were to take a hold of? This verse has no applicability after the tenure of that covenant came to an end.(the term "my sabbaths" is used for the weekly Sabbath - see Isa. 56:4-6)
Perhaps you should produce some evidence showing how the papacy reinstated the sabbath that Jesus took away (see Hebrews 10:8-9), which He did before the papacy existed.The Sabbath is moral in that we show our allegience to our Creator and Re-Creator. It is also a sign that God sanctifies us. We show our loyalty to God by keeping His laws. And we are a part of spiritual Israel. Isaiah 56:4-6 mentions righteous Gentiles keeping the Sabbath.
To break the Sabbath is to break all the commandments (acc. to James), and so is disloyalty to Jehovah. The question is, will we be loyal to the papacy and its Sabbath or God and His Sabbath?
Jesus said the moral law is eternal. . . ."
You just contradicted what I wrote.
Why did you rely on a fabrication for your point?
Not only can point backwards, but in this instance the sabbath points both backwards and forward. It points backward to God's rest that originated in the Genesis account, and points forward to the time we would enter that rest that remained a promise to be attained by those who already had the sabbath.You said the Sabbath was a shadow of God's rest which never ends.
Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant.
Do you believe then that a shadow can point backwards?
Repeating this falsified origin of the sabbath is the reason you write conclusions that are not consistent with Scripture.(I don't believe the Sabbath is a shadow as it began at Creation before the fall Gen. 2:2-3)
Perhaps it would be a good idea to quote that passage rather than citing it. Then you can demonstrate your contention that Jesus didn't fulfill the law concerning Himself. This doesn't support your claim that Jesus said the "moral" law was eternal.Matthew 5:17-19
God told Saul to wait for one week for the prophet to come but he got impatient and offered the sacrifice. Clearly when God commands something, even time, it is a moral principle.
If God tells you to do something on a specific day, and you choose to do it another day, there is a moral principle.
Lev. 19:3 links the 4th and 5th commandments:
"Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father, and keep my sabbaths: I am the LORD your God."
(the term "my sabbaths" is used for the weekly Sabbath - see Isa. 56:4-6)
Deut. 29:29 tells us to focus on what God has revealed rather than what He has not.
Jesus accomplished provision, purification for sins. We accept it in real time, which I stated from the outset. But then how is it you thought there was no timing specified?Hebrews speaks of what Jesus has accomplished, as well as what he is accomplishing by his continual intercession on the basis of what he accomplished on the cross (Heb. 7:25; 9:24).
James 2:10-11:The weekly Sabbath began in Eden (Gen. 2:2-3) and is part of the eternal moral law which cannot be divided (James 2:10-11).
This claim is exclusively yours alone.And we are a part of spiritual Israel.
When Sunday keeping began in the 2nd century, it was not seen as a replacement for the Sabbath. The Sabbath was not abandonded till about the 6th century because of anti semitism and an influx of pagan sun worshippers..
The NAS, Darby are most accuarate as it does not say "for sins" but "of sins", and the ancient manuscripts omit "our".
If Hebrews had wanted to say our sins were forgiven at the cross, he could have said "for our sins", but instead he says, "of sins".
This verse is then clarified by what follows, the once for all sacrifice, and the continual intercession (Heb. 7:25; 9:24).
The cross made provision for the forgiveness of sins which is applied by Christ as High Priest when a person confesses.
Otherwise there would be no need for confession of sin.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?