Is it wrong that I keep Shabbat and do not "go to church" on Sunday?

Tone said:

So, you believe I have some punishment coming from the Father for enjoying Shabbat?


Is it wrong that I keep Shabbat and do not "go to church" on Sunday?

Click to expand...

Now you are putting words in my mouth. Is that what I said?

Tone said:

Can you show me anywhere in Scripture where those who delight in Torah and strive to walk in the blessings thereof, are punished?

Click to expand...

Galatians 5:2-4, 10
Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. …
10 I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion, whoever that may be, will have to pay the penalty.

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

Torah and Nevi'im

Click to expand...

Which one proves that Jesus was the Messiah? (scriptures)

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

As I have shown, it was called a "sect" WITHIN Judaism at one point. It was tolerated as long as the adherents were at least Ger Toshav. It became dangerous later...

"I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect.

Click to expand...

Later? What about when Christ was still alive?

John 9:22
His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jewish leaders, who already had decided that anyone who acknowledged that Jesus was the Messiah would be put out of the synagogue.

Tone said:

Now who's putting words in whose mouth?

Show me where I said anything about being justified by Torah observance?

Click to expand...

Those were the words of the Apostle Paul.
Best take it up with him. lol

Why did he accuse you of that?

Tone said:

Actually we are, but it is through Messiah's work (His righteousness), not our own.

They were trying to be justified by their observance of the Law.

Do you see the difference?

Click to expand...

So, there is no reason to keep the law?

Tone said:

They were trying to be justified by their observance of the Law.

Click to expand...

What was Paul's corrective teaching in that passage? (Gal.5) What did he want them to do instead?

Bonus question: What was the "yoke of slavery" being discussed here?

Galatians 5:1
It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.

Tone said:

You are getting those who delight in Torah and strive for the blessings mixed up with those "who are trying to be justified by the law"--It's two different conditions of the heart.

Click to expand...

Religious nostalgia, is that what you are talking about? Like stamp collecting?
What part of "new" don't you understand?

Hebrews 8:7, 13
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. ...
13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

Before... until... now...

Galatians 3:23-25
Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

Also a good example of the definition of "under" the law. (under a guardian)
"guardian" = prison guard
"held in custody" and "locked up" = imprisoned

Galatians 3:23-25
Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

Saint Steven said:

Also a good example of the definition of "under" the law. (under a guardian)
"guardian" = prison guard
"held in custody" and "locked up" = imprisoned

Galatians 3:23-25
Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

Click to expand...

"Under the LAW" was already defined by Paul this way in Romans 3

Rom
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

1 John 3:4 "for SIN IS transgression of the LAW"

The "School master" creates the reality - the context - that you are a lost sinner headed for the second-death lake-of-fire and in need of the Gospel solution.

When "Faith comes" - you are born again and no longer under the condemnation of the LAW of God. Rather under the NEW Covenant that Law is "written on the heart" Jer 31:31-33

This is the easy part of the topic.

Tone said: ↑
Can you show me anywhere in Scripture where those who delight in Torah and strive to walk in the blessings thereof, are punished?

Click to expand...

Answer: No text says that.

Saint Steven said:

Galatians 5:2-4, 10
Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. …
10 I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion, whoever that may be, will have to pay the penalty.

Click to expand...

Gal 5 is talking about those who "make stuff up" - there was no OT or NT command for gentiles to be circumcised. That was a "man-made-tradition" of some Christian Jews. Not even the non-Christian Jews were making that stuff up.

Again folks -- this is the "easy part" -- let's not get stuck on the easy part.

Saint Steven said:

Here again, the importance of definitions.

You ended your red highlight at the word "Law" (capital "L").
"... in accordance with the Law and... the Prophets". The Law and the Prophets.
The same phrase used by Christ in Matt.5:19. (the Law or the Prophets)
Meaning the Books of the Law and the Books of the Prophets.

Click to expand...

"Scripture" --

Luke 24
27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

Neither Christ nor Paul claim that Christ's mission was "to delete the scriptures"

Paul says he worships God as a follower of the Way. (admits)
He believes everything that is accordance with the Law and the Prophets.

Acts 17:2-3
As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead. “This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Messiah,” he said.

But in Acts 21 - Paul argues for MORE than that.

=====================

Saint Steven said:

I'll have to disagree in reference to his motives. I think he did it to appease the Jews. .

Click to expand...

James is very specific about the "point" of it all. He states explicitly it is to refute false accusations made against Paul. Those here who choose to join in making those false accusations against Paul - are then confronted by Paul's response , as he joins in "proving" that the accusation against him -- is false!

And what (according to James) was the false accusation?

text please.

Tone said:

Acts 6:8-14
"Stephen, full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. 9Then some of those who belonged to the synagogue of the Freedmen (as it was called), Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and others of those from Cilicia and Asia, stood up and argued with Stephen. 10But they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit* with which he spoke. 11Then they secretly instigated some men to say, ‘We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God.’ 12They stirred up the people as well as the elders and the scribes; then they suddenly confronted him, seized him, and brought him before the council.13They set up false witnesses who said, ‘This man never stops saying things against this holy place and the law; 14for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth* will destroy this place and will change the customs that Moses handed on to us.’"

Isn't it ironic that Paul is accused of the same thing to this day!?

He was there when they accused Stephen of these false charges...in case someone missed it...

Click to expand...

You said "Isn't it ironic that Paul is accused of the same thing to this day!?" -- bingo!!

Paul's false accusers... still accuse him

but notice in Acts 21 -- "exactly" what they accuse him of that James is getting everyone the "proof" they need to debunk the false accusation.

Acs 21: 20 And when they heard it they began glorifying God; and they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; 21 and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children

James says the false accusers of Paul are accusing him of the VERY thing his accusers still accuse him of to this very day.

22 What, then, is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. 23 Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; 24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law.

Saint Steven said:

I'll have to disagree in reference to his motives. I think he did it to appease the Jews. (his life was in danger) It would be hypocritical otherwise, concerning his teaching on the law. .

Click to expand...

Now what is being "proposed" here is that Paul was deceiving his accusers into THINKING that their true accusation against him was in fact -- false. His trickery was supposed to "pay off" by getting them to think he was not doing the very thing they were accusing him of doing --- and that people accuse him of doing to this very day.

The argument above is that if Paul did not deceive them (As you and I claim and as several others also freely admit ) - then he would be a hypocrit. -- oh what spin-doctoring, what tangled webs --

Now what is even more "odd" is that some folks are stuck making the "Paul was either hypocrite or a liar" accusations against Paul, the Bible scholars in the classic Sunday vs Bible-Sabbath debate ALSO freely admit that all TEN of the TEN Commandments apply to all mankind as they are part of the moral law of God, and for Christians are written on the heart under the NEW Covenant.

Some "details" are just soooooooo incredibly obvious that BOTH sides admit to them.