The New Testament Sabbath Day

[Soyeong]

Curious to know what are the similarities of a law abolished and a law fullfilled?

The only similarity is that they are both ways of showing how to obey the law: one is about showing how to rightly obey the law in the way that it was intended (as Jesus then proceeded to expound upon) and the other in a wrong way that undermines how it was intended. Paul made a similar contrast where he said that our faith does not abolish the law, but rather it upholds them law (Romans 3:31). We can't uphold the law while thinking that it has been abolished, done away with, or that we shouldn't obey it. Rather, when we have faith that God knows how we should live, then we will obey His law, and in that way our faith upholds it. We are justified by faith apart from the law, but the law was never about how to become justified, but rather it is about how the justified are to live by faith, as it is written, the righteous shall live by faith (Habakkuk 2:4).

 

[DamianWarS]

The only similarity is that they are both ways of showing how to obey the law: one is about showing how to rightly obey the law in the way that it was intended (as Jesus then proceeded to expound upon) and the other in a wrong way that undermines how it was intended. Paul made a similar contrast where he said that our faith does not abolish the law, but rather it upholds them law (Romans 3:31). We can't uphold the law while thinking that it has been abolished, done away with, or that we shouldn't obey it. Rather, when we have faith that God knows how we should live, then we will obey His law, and in that way our faith upholds it. We are justified by faith apart from the law, but the law was never about how to become justified, but rather it is about how the justified are to live by faith, as it is written, the righteous shall live by faith (Habakkuk 2:4).

Hmm... it seems all you see is trees and can't find the forest. It's not difficult, if a contract is abolished or a contract is fulfilled the similarity between them both is the obligations of the contract are over. If abolished it is looked back on as wasted but if fulfilled it is looked back on with delight.

 

[pshun2404]

The covenant made at Horeb (which was made with Israel alone...not even with any of their fathers) was abolished in the sense that they failed and violated it continuously...and fulfilled in the sense that when Christ was here on earth He fulfilled it...in both cases (which are two aspects of the same thing) the obligations of the contract are null and void...that contract has been done away with and a new contract (based on what He has done via His death, burial, and resurrection) has been established....this contract can not be nullified because one cannot change that which has already been performed...this arrangement IS fulfilled. Now all who are placed IN HIM (the fulfillment), by the ones who procured it, reap the benefits (albeit even if undeservedly)...

 

[Soyeong]

Hmm... it seems all you see is trees and can't find the forest. It's not difficult, if a contract is abolished or a contract is fulfilled the similarity between them both is the obligations of the contract are over. If abolished it is looked back on as wasted but if fulfilled it is looked back on with delight.

God is righteous, so He always has righteous a conduct, and His law is righteous because it is a reflection of His character and it is His instructions for how to have such a conduct. So the way to have a righteous conduct existed from the beginning and exists independently of any covenant. The Old Covenant is a contract agreement to have a righteous conduct, but the way to have a righteous conduct was the same before the covenant and is the same after it. So saying that God's law has been brought to an end is like saying that God's righteousness has been brought to an end.

In any case, he didn't say that he came to fulfill the Old Covenant, but that he came to fulfill the law, which is a rabbinic technical term that is not used anywhere in other Jewish literature to mean to bring about the end of a contract. According Galatians 5:14, loving your neighbor fulfills the law, so everyone since Moses who has loved their neighbor has fulfilled the law, so it was not a unique act done by Jesus. Rather, love fulfills the law because that is what the essence of the law is or what the law is all about. Jesus summarized the law as being about how to love God and how to love your neighbor. He then went on to fulfill the law six times in Matthew 5 by teaching how to correctly understand the law and how love your neighbor, which would have been rather pointless if he was just about to bring the law to an end.

 

[Soyeong]

The covenant made at Horeb (which was made with Israel alone...not even with any of their fathers) was abolished in the sense that they failed and violated it continuously...and fulfilled in the sense that when Christ was here on earth He fulfilled it...in both cases (which are two aspects of the same thing) the obligations of the contract are null and void...that contract has been done away with and a new contract (based on what He has done via His death, burial, and resurrection) has been established....this contract can not be nullified because one cannot change that which has already been performed...this arrangement IS fulfilled. Now all who are placed IN HIM (the fulfillment), by the ones who procured it, reap the benefits (albeit even if undeservedly)...

God's holiness, righteousness, and goodness and the way to have a holy, righteous, and good conduct exists independently of any contract. We are told to have such a conduct (1 John 3:4-10, 1 Peter 1:14-16, Ephesians 2:10), which involves following God's instructions in the law for how to do that. The law could not make us holy, righteous, and good because our flesh prevented us from obeying it, so God did what the law could not do by causing us to be able to meet its righteous requirement. He did this by sending His Son to pay the penalty for our transgressions of the law and to set us free from transgression the law, and by sending His Spirit to lead us in obedience to the law (Ezekiel 36:26-27), so that we might meet its righteous requirement (Romans 8:2-4). The law is spiritual (Romans 7:14) and it is those who have a carnal mind who refuse to submit to God's law (Romans 8:7).

The problem with the Old Covenant was not with God's holy, righteous, and good law, but with the fact that people didn't obey it. Throughout the Old Testament God wanted His people to repent and return to obedience, so it doesn't not follow that God would solve this problem by giving up and lowering His righteous standard so that it would be no big deal if we didn't obey His commands. That doesn't sound like good news at all, but rather the good news is that God will make us into people who do what is holy, righteous, and good, like Christ. If you have faith in God that He will lead you into having a holy, righteous, and good conduct, then you will obey His instructions in the law for how to do that.

 

[ebedmelech]

Matthew 7:23 But I will reply, 'I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God's laws.'

Sin is defined as lawlessness, Jesus will tell those who practices disobedience to God's law to depart, no one who practices lawlessness has either seen or known him, those who practice lawlessness are of the devil, and the law says to keep the Sabbath, so why in the world do you continue to advocate practicing lawlessness?

You still miss the point. YOU have no righteousness apart from Christ. Romans 3: 21-28
21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction;
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;
25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed;
26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

 

[Soyeong]

You still miss the point. YOU have no righteousness apart from Christ. Romans 3: 21-28
21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction;
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;
25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed;
26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

I completely agree that there is no righteousness apart from Christ, but the law was never given as a means of providing righteousness apart from Christ in the first place, so saying that something doesn't have a certain purpose doesn't mean that it has no purpose. Moses could not have excused disobedience to God's law by saying that it didn't justify him and neither can we. The law is not instructions for how to become righteous, but rather it is instructions for how the righteous shall live by faith. Just a few verse later in Romans 3:31 Paul wanted to make it clean that he wasn't abolishing the law, but rather he said our faith upholds the law.

However, all of this dodging the issue that you quoted. The law says to keep the Sabbath, so if you say that we shouldn't obey God's law, then you are advocating lawlessness, and are putting yourself in the same category of people that Jesus was telling to depart from him. It honestly shouldn't be this difficult to convince followers of God that they should follow His commands and convince followers of Christ that they should follow his example of obedience.

 

[ebedmelech]

None of your above response counters what I said. It is just as ridiculous to say that Jesus obeyed the law so we don't have to as it is to say that Jesus refrained from committing murder, lying, stealing, etc., so we don't have to. No, he did that so we would have an example to follow and we are told to follow his example, to be his disciples, to imitate him, to be like him, and to walk as he walked, yet you somehow think that means we shouldn't follow his example obedience to God. "Fulfilling to law" is a rabbinic term that is found in Jewish literature, so they did not understand it or Jesus' words in the way that you have misinterpreted it.

Really? It definitely counters what you think! You miss the point. The facts are NO ONE except Christ obeyed God's Law perfectly! That perfect obedience is applied to every believer at salvation. This is what you don't understand! Grasp Romans 5:19-21:
19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.
20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more,
21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Furthermore Romans 6 makes it very clear that just because a believer has the righteousness of Christ DOES NOT give him license to sin. You have to take all that scripture says to understand...Romans 6:15:
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!

Even more 2 Corinthians 5:20-21 make the point:
20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

God has given us a precious gift in order to bless us, so why should we spurn it?

Where do I say one should? You don't spurn it when you understand Christ is your rest. This is what you miss and what you can't grasp because you want to misinterpret Hebrews 4. One enters Sabbath rest when they believe the gospel!

Again, Jesus was referencing Jeremiah 6:16-19, where walking in obedience to the law is what gives rest for our souls. The rest comes from ceasing from our activities to do the things of God, which are holy, righteous, and good.

You can't even understand Jeremiah 6:16-19. That passage is referring to God's appeal through Jeremiah for Judah to turn from their ways. They didn't and Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem! Has nothing to do with Matthew

They were seizing him because of false rumors that he taught against obeying the law, which he took steps to disprove, and denied doing in court.

Which they (the Jews) did throughout Acts because Paul didn't teach obeying the Law.

Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits[a] of the world, and not according to Christ.

Paul would never have described God's instructions using these terms and saying that they were not according to Christ would be pitting him against the Father. Rather, he goes into detail about what these elemental spirits are later in the chapter:

Colossians 2:20-23 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— 21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 22 (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? 23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

So this is what the people who were judging them were teaching. While it is true that Paul faced opposition from Judaizers, it is not true that Judaizers were the only source of opposition. The Colossians were being judging for disobeying human traditions, precepts, and teachings, not for disobeying God.



When Jesus quoted from Scriptures, he said "as it is written", but when he quoted from the religious leaders of the day, he said "you have heard it said". He was not going deeper than the law or teaching anything new, but rather he was teaching the law in the way it was meant to be understood and correcting how the religious leaders taught to understand and obey the law. The law is spiritual (Romans 7:14), so it is meant to teach us spiritual principles, such as not getting angry with our brothers or thinking lustfully about someone. When someone obeys those spiritual principles of the law, then that inherently also includes obeying the law as written against murder and adultery. So Jesus was fulfilling, as he just said he was going to do, by teaching how it should correctly be understood and obeyed.



Kind of like how a Firefighter is someone who is called to go out and fight fires, a righteous person is someone who is called to go out and practice righteousness (1 John 3:10, 2 Timothy 3:16-17). The righteousness of Jesus is what allows us to do practice righteousness by faith in accordance with God's instructions in His law and is why our faith upholds the law (Romans 3:31).

Soyeong...I'm going to leave you to yourself because you really need to work through the scriptures. I think you mean well but you simply have received some very wrong teaching.

 

[ebedmelech]

Before I leave this thread (which has gone full circle), I wish to post a link that really does show why Sabbath observance is no longer required and why. What's great about this article is it contrast the Old Covenant in light of the New Covenant which Christ instituted before He went to the cross.

Often times many who are Christians ignorantly say "the Sabbath was changed to Sunday after Christ". That too...is incorrect. The first day of the week was never called the Sabbath in the NT, it was called "the Lord's day" because on that day Jesus arose from the dead showing He had the power over sin and death. The early church met on that day honoring the resurrection of Christ, NOT the Sabbath.

Christ IS the Sabbath! Those who wish to find the truth of the Sabbath should carefully work through this article which I link and work through it carefully:

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Holidays/Shabbat/Sabbath_Rest/sabbath_rest.html

Praise be to the Lord Jesus!!! He is your rest!

 

[jacobs well]

Before I leave this thread (which has gone full circle), I wish to post a link that really does show why Sabbath observance is no longer required and why. What's great about this article is it contrast the Old Covenant in light of the New Covenant which Christ instituted before He went to the cross.

Often times many who are Christians ignorantly say "the Sabbath was changed to Sunday after Christ". That too...is incorrect. The first day of the week was never called the Sabbath in the NT, it was called "the Lord's day" because on that day Jesus arose from the dead showing He had the power over sin and death. The early church met on that day honoring the resurrection of Christ, NOT the Sabbath.

Christ IS the Sabbath! Those who wish to find the truth of the Sabbath should carefully work through this article which I link and work through it carefully:

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Holidays/Shabbat/Sabbath_Rest/sabbath_rest.html

Praise be to the Lord Jesus!!! He is your rest!

Apparently it takes time for some things to sink in.
One scripture commonly cited to justify Sunday worship is Rev 1:10, where John said " I was in the Spirit on the " Lord's Day " ...nowhere does the Bible define Lords's day as the first day of the week. If this was referring to a day of the week, we would have to conclude that John meant the seventh day , since Jesus said He was the Lord of the Sabbath.
This passage in context refers John's vision of the future period the Bible calls " the Day of the Lord ". a time many end time prophecies will be fulfilled. It is not referring to a day of the week.
Rev 1:10 is the only place the term " Lord's Day " is used in the Bible, which would hardly be the case if the Church had been observing Sundays for years, as some contend.
Jesus was not even resurrected on Sunday morning.
The key to understanding the timing of Christ's resurrection lies in understanding God's timetable for counting days and nights. The time between Christ's burial and resurrection would be the only sign that Jesus would give to prove He was the promised Messiah. Let's not cling to religious traditions that aren't supported by scripture.

 

[ebedmelech]

Apparently it takes time for some things to sink in.

In you're case...you're right.

One scripture commonly cited to justify Sunday worship is Rev 1:10, where John said " I was in the Spirit on the " Lord's Day " ...nowhere does the Bible define Lords's day as the first day of the week. If this was referring to a day of the week, we would have to conclude that John meant the seventh day , since Jesus said He was the Lord of the Sabbath.
This passage in context refers John's vision of the future period the Bible calls " the Day of the Lord ". a time many end time prophecies will be fulfilled. It is not referring to a day of the week.
Rev 1:10 is the only place the term " Lord's Day " is used in the Bible, which would hardly be the case if the Church had been observing Sundays for years, as some contend.
Jesus was not even resurrected on Sunday morning.
The key to understanding the timing of Christ's resurrection lies in understanding God's timetable for counting days and nights. The time between Christ's burial and resurrection would be the only sign that Jesus would give to prove He was the promised Messiah. Let's not cling to religious traditions that aren't supported by scripture.

Pretty wrong jacobs well...because you ignore passages that make the point. It starts with Jesus' resurrection:

Matthew 28:1
Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave.

Mark 16:2
2 Very early on the first day of the week, they *came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

Luke 24:1
But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared.

John 20:1
Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene *came early to the tomb, while it *was still dark, and *saw the stone already taken away from the tomb.

All from the gospels describing the day Christ was raised! You're trying hard...but you're just wrong to say the first day of the week is not Sunday doesn't help your case either because the apostle Paul in Romans 14:5-9 destroys that logic saying "the day" we regard to the Lord really doesn't matter!

Now...watch the pattern of assembly on the FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK:
John 20:19
19 So when it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and *said to them, “Peace be with you.”

Acts 20:7:
7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.

1 Corinthians 16:2
On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come.

To even try to surmise "the Lord's day" is not the day Jesus was raised stretches credulity. That day IS the Lord's day because it is the day Jesus showed HIs power over sin and death by the resurrection, which is the most MONUMENTAL DAY in history!

Meantime you've effectively run from every passage that totally destroys the idea the church should abide by the Sabbath on the 7th day. Even more, I don't need Revelation 1:10...because if the Lord's day was the Sabbath scripture would declare that...it doesn't!

Neither does the NT anywhere, after the 4 gospels declare or command believers to observe the Sabbath. That absence alone shows you're flat wrong. However you go on thinking observing the Sabbath gives you some standing with God. When you find a verse that tells the church to keep the Sabbath let me know. Otherwise all you can do is try to make scripture say what it doesn't!

 

[jacobs well]

In you're case...you're right.

Pretty wrong jacobs well...because you ignore passages that make the point. It starts with Jesus' resurrection:

Matthew 28:1
Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave.

Mark 16:2
2 Very early on the first day of the week, they *came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

Luke 24:1
But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared.

John 20:1
Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene *came early to the tomb, while it *was still dark, and *saw the stone already taken away from the tomb.

All from the gospels describing the day Christ was raised! You're trying hard...but you're just wrong to say the first day of the week is not Sunday doesn't help your case either because the apostle Paul in Romans 14:5-9 destroys that logic saying "the day" we regard to the Lord really doesn't matter!

Now...watch the pattern of assembly on the FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK:
John 20:19
19 So when it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and *said to them, “Peace be with you.”

Acts 20:7:
7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.

1 Corinthians 16:2
On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come.

To even try to surmise "the Lord's day" is not the day Jesus was raised stretches credulity. That day IS the Lord's day because it is the day Jesus showed HIs power over sin and death by the resurrection, which is the most MONUMENTAL DAY in history!

Meantime you've effectively run from every passage that totally destroys the idea the church should abide by the Sabbath on the 7th day. Even more, I don't need Revelation 1:10...because if the Lord's day was the Sabbath scripture would declare that...it doesn't!

Neither does the NT anywhere, after the 4 gospels declare or command believers to observe the Sabbath. That absence alone shows you're flat wrong. However you go on thinking observing the Sabbath gives you some standing with God. When you find a verse that tells the church to keep the Sabbath let me know. Otherwise all you can do is try to make scripture say what it doesn't!

I was hoping you would have left this thread as you said so we wouldn't have to go over the same fallacies.
The examples you provide like John 20:1 tells us it was still dark and Mary found the tomb empty. Jesus was already resurrected well before daybreak.
The same applies to any other reference regarding the actual resurrection- there were no witnesses to the time Jesus actually rose. And when they did show up Jesus was already gone.
The big problem with the Sunday morning theory you have does not conform to the promise Jesus made to us when He said He would be in the ground for exactly three days and three nights. And this promise or sign would be the only proof He would give us that He was the true Messiah- Matthew 12:39-40.

Your other three scripture references regarding the 1st day of the week have been put to rest pretty well long ago on this post and are generally the three most employed by critics.
i would rather accept evidence the " the Big Foot " fanatics provide for their arguments.

 

[ebedmelech]

I was hoping you would have left this thread as you said so we wouldn't have to go over the same fallacies.
The examples you provide like John 20:1 tells us it was still dark and Mary found the tomb empty. Jesus was already resurrected well before daybreak.
The same applies to any other reference regarding the actual resurrection- there were no witnesses to the time Jesus actually rose. And when they did show up Jesus was already gone.
The big problem with the Sunday morning theory you have does not conform to the promise Jesus made to us when He said He would be in the ground for exactly three days and three nights. And this promise or sign would be the only proof He would give us that He was the true Messiah- Matthew 12:39-40.

Your other three scripture references regarding the 1st day of the week have been put to rest pretty well long ago on this post and are generally the three most employed by critics.
i would rather accept evidence the " the Big Foot " fanatics provide for their arguments.

I am leaving the thread...along with your fallacious reasoning. Everyone knows no where does the scripture say "exactly 3 days and three nights"...you say that.

My link will help many see clean through your "sabbath keeping theory". Did you have a vision with a halo around the 7th day like Ellen G. White?

Also realize when a day started in Israel back then...you have a lot to learn. Go to Genesis 1 and hopefully learn something about a day.

Something else that totally defeats your reasoning jacobs well...:

Luke 23:54-56 shows how wrong you are! Jesus has died, and Joseph of Arimathea has received the body. He and the women with him:
54 It was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin.
55 Now the women who had come with Him out of Galilee followed, and saw the tomb and how His body was laid.
56 Then they returned and prepared spices and perfumes. And on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment.

SO THEY OBSERVED THE SABBATH COMPLETELY jacobs well...that's clear! So once again scripture refutes you.

Luke 24:1 makes it clear that it is now Sunday:
But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared.

According the Jewish days of the week, the first day is called Yom Rishon ...which simply means "first day"...we call it Sunday. Understanding for the Jew, a day starts at SUNSET...see if you can figure out why you're wrong.

Once again...go to Genesis 1 and see what a day consist of by seeing what it says after each day of creation, to declare that day over.

 

[jacobs well]

I am leaving the thread...along with your fallacious reasoning. Everyone knows no where does the scripture say "exactly 3 days and three nights"...you say that.

My link will help many see clean through your "sabbath keeping theory". Did you have a vision with a halo around the 7th day like Ellen G. White?

Also realize when a day started in Israel back then...you have a lot to learn. Go to Genesis 1 and hopefully learn something about a day.

Something else that totally defeats your reasoning jacobs well...:

Luke 23:54-56 shows how wrong you are! Jesus has died, and Joseph of Arimathea has received the body. He and the women with him:
54 It was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin.
55 Now the women who had come with Him out of Galilee followed, and saw the tomb and how His body was laid.
56 Then they returned and prepared spices and perfumes. And on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment.

SO THEY OBSERVED THE SABBATH COMPLETELY jacobs well...that's clear! So once again scripture refutes you.

Luke 24:1 makes it clear that it is now Monday:
But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared.

According the Jewish days of the week, the first day is called Yom Rishon ...which simply means "first day"...we call it Sunday. Understanding for the Jew, a day starts at SUNSET...see if you can figure out why you're wrong.

Once again...go to Genesis 1 and see what a day consist of by seeing what it says after each day of creation, to declare that day over.

Who else would be the authority on this subject other than Jesus:
Matt 12: 38-40 -" .....three days and three nights........"
The significance of Jesus's sign was the precise length of time he was in the ground dead, not His resurrection.

Do you think Jesus doesn't know the difference between a day and a night?
this would be the only sign to prove His Messiahship.
Read Jesus's own words as He clearly states there are 12 hours in a day and an equal time of darkness-John 11:9,10

 

[klutedavid]

Hello all.

In order to obey the ten commandments, one first needs to sign up to the Old
Covenant, below is the verbal agreement between God and the people of Israel.

Exodus 24
7 Then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the hearing of the people;
and they said, “All that the Lord has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient!”
8 So Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, and said, “Behold the
blood of the covenant, which the Lord has made with you in accordance with all
these words.”

Unless you have agreed to the terms and conditions of the Old Covenant, i.e., by
verbal consent, then you cannot be under this Old Covenant. Also it would need
to be sprinkled with blood, in order that you realize the gravity of this agreement
to the terms of the Old Covenant.

 

[ebedmelech]

Who else would be the authority on this subject other than Jesus:
Matt 12: 38-40 -" .....three days and three nights........"
The significance of Jesus's sign was the precise length of time he was in the ground dead, not His resurrection.

Do you think Jesus doesn't know the difference between a day and a night?
this would be the only sign to prove His Messiahship.
Read Jesus's own words as He clearly states there are 12 hours in a day and an equal time of darkness-John 11:9,10

The authority would be to read scripture and prove it was exactly three days and three nights. Start from the crucifixion and see it that's so. I 'm done with the Sabbath discussion, but let's see you prove that.

 

[klutedavid]

the promise Jesus made to us when He said He would be in the ground for exactly three days and three nights.

Hello Jacobs Well.

Apparently you are claiming that Jesus was dead for three days and three nights.
If this is true, then Jesus would have been raised up on the fourth day. The scripture
is very clear that Jesus rose on the third day and not on the fourth day.

Matthew 16:21
From that time Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem,
and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed,
and be raised up on the third day.

Matthew 17:23
and they will kill Him, and He will be raised on the third day.

Matthew 20:19
and will hand Him over to the Gentiles to mock and scourge and crucify Him,
and on the third day He will be raised up.

Matthew 26:61
and said, this man stated, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and to rebuild
it in three days.’

Matthew 27:40
and saying, “You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days."

Luke 9:22
saying, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders
and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and be raised up on the third day.”

Luke 13:32
And He said to them, “Go and tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and
perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I reach My goal.’

Luke 18:33
and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him; and the third day He will
rise again.

Luke 24:7
saying that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and
be crucified, and the third day rise again.

Luke 24:46
and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again
from the dead the third day.

John 2:19
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

John 2:20
The Jews then said, “It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise
it up in three days?”

Acts 10:40
God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He become visible.

1 Corinthians 15:4
and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.

 

[jacobs well]

The authority would be to read scripture and prove it was exactly three days and three nights. Start from the crucifixion and see it that's so. I 'm done with the Sabbath discussion, but let's see you prove that.

One clue for you is that there were 2 Sabbaths during the final week of Jesus life.
One an annual High Sabbath, and one the weekly Sabbath.
That's part of the puzzle that leads people astray.
Research it.

 

[jacobs well]

Hello Jacobs Well.

Apparently you are claiming that Jesus was dead for three days and three nights.
If this is true, then Jesus would have been raised up on the fourth day. The scripture
is very clear that Jesus rose on the third day and not on the fourth day.

Matthew 16:21
From that time Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem,
and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed,
and be raised up on the third day.

Matthew 17:23
and they will kill Him, and He will be raised on the third day.

Matthew 20:19
and will hand Him over to the Gentiles to mock and scourge and crucify Him,
and on the third day He will be raised up.

Matthew 26:61
and said, this man stated, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and to rebuild
it in three days.’

Matthew 27:40
and saying, “You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days."

Luke 9:22
saying, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders
and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and be raised up on the third day.”

Luke 13:32
And He said to them, “Go and tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and
perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I reach My goal.’

Luke 18:33
and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him; and the third day He will
rise again.

Luke 24:7
saying that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and
be crucified, and the third day rise again.

Luke 24:46
and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again
from the dead the third day.

John 2:19
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

John 2:20
The Jews then said, “It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise
it up in three days?”

Acts 10:40
God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He become visible.

1 Corinthians 15:4
and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.

I'm not claiming anything of my own. " The three days and three nights " come from the words of Jesus.
As mentioned earlier it was the exact length of time He would be dead in the ground or tomb that is the sign He was the Son of God-the Messiah.
Yet for all the stupendous greatness of the resurrection, there is not one scripture in the Bible which sets apart the day of the resurrection as a day to be appointed for worship.
but we are commanded to celebrate Christ's death- 1 Cor 11:26
The Good Friday afternoon to Easter Sunday sunrise timeline does not fit into Christ's proof He gave us.
There are numerous times Jesus says that He would " rise the THIRD DAY "
What is the bible definition of that third day?
Gen 1:3-5 ' God called the light day and the darkness night and the darkness and the light together were the first day"
the Hebrew word for day is " Yom "-it means a normal 24 hour day. starting at sunset with 12 hours of darkness and then 12 hours of light ending again at sunset.
' On the third day meant when the full period of three days and three nights had been completed.
Even now 1 day consists of 24 hours of day and night.
For the resurrection to be at sunrise, then based on real Bible time then the burial had to be at sunrise 72 hours earlier.
but Christ was not buried at sunrise but just before sunset on what was called "the preparation' -Luke 23:54
it was in pre-dawn darkness when Christs followers first approached the empty tomb, it was not at sunrise.
He had already risen-He was gone
Do the math.
Even if we call the last couple of hours on Friday a DAY. that's 1 day.
Friday evening (the darkness ) ....................................that's 1 night
All of Saturday (the light)............................................that's 1 day
all of Saturday evening (the darkness) ..........................that's 1 night
And then a few pre-dawn hours on Sunday.......................that's 1 day

Grand total of days and nights.....................................3 days and 2 nights.

Unless Jesus was precisely the length of time in the tomb He said He would be, we have no savior.
Jesus staked His very Messiahship on what He said would be the only sign He would give us.

Did He lie or have you been following a false gospel?

 

[ebedmelech]

One clue for you is that there were 2 Sabbaths during the final week of Jesus life.
One an annual High Sabbath, and one the weekly Sabbath.
That's part of the puzzle that leads people astray.
Research it.

There's no need to research anything as John 19:31 tells us:
31 Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

The parenthetical statement makes it clear jacobs well! It says that Sabbath was a "high day" do you even have a clue as to what that means?

It's you who must "do the research" because it does NOT mean there were two Sabbaths in the last week of Jesus life, as you push for. There was only one Sabbath because Jesus has died before the 2nd Sabbath. We know Jesus has died because Joseph of Arimathea get's the body of Jesus and puts it in the tomb with the women, and they rest on the Sabbath day. Knowing clearly that Jesus is dead and they observe the Sabbath after they put Him in the tomb, How are there two Sabbaths in the last week of Jesus life? There's only ONE. Luke 23:50-56, as I showed in my last post, makes it very clear Jesus is dead before the "high Sabbath". Where's the riddle?

Now...work through why it is a "high Sabbath". You *may* know why it's a high Sabbath...but there's no riddle, because Jesus is already in the grave when the Sabbath starts! There's no clue...the last week of Jesus life included one Sabbath day...He has died and is in the tomb when the "high Sabbath" starts!!!