The Thing Most Sabbath Keepers Do not Talk About.

Lets assume I am damned if I don't keep the Sabbath...

So this is getting real serious - hell awaits...

Right... what day is the Sabbath.

Quick research - the calendar has changed several times - which is the seventh day?

Do I go by the Georgian calendar, maybe the Hebrew Calendar, whoops we lost 10 days in 1752...

Then where am I on earth - If I get this wrong it's toast...

Worse if I am on the international space station trying to calculate the time zone.

I have a 1 in 7 chance of getting this right - talk about Russian roulette...

Does God really care about the day ???

Is 1 rest day in 7 near enough? (as long as it isn't Sunday) we know thats definitely wrong...

Wait the Romans had an 8 day week.

Maybe God only likes those with a degree in Maths and History...

Please pray for me...

HIM said:

No it is what is written. 3 questions were asked in verse 3, when shall these things be in regard to the destruction of the Temple. When shall be the sign of Jesus' coming and when shall be the end of the world. What follows is an answer to all three. The audience is any and all throughout the ages until He comes in His glory. How do we know?

Because Grammatically speaking the context is continuous from verse 1 to at least 31 when it speaks of Christ coming with His angels to gather the elect at the end of this world.

How do we know? By His use of words like and, but, then, when wherefore, and so forth. These words connect what is about to be said to what is already said. And they are in the Greek also. So that means up to Christ's coming in the clouds of glory with His angels he expects His followers to still be keeping the Sabbath.

Click to expand...

You are stuck in English grammar. Everything reads continuous because it is based on the original writings.The original writing did not contain chapter numbers or even verse numbers. It was written as a scroll. Chapter numbers and verse numbers were added later. lets look at the verses.

HIM said:

Matt 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to [him] for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
Matt 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Click to expand...

This must have shaken the disciples to the core. Enough to go to where Jesus was going to ask Him to explain.

HIM said:

Matt 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what [shall be] the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Click to expand...

Jesus is sitting on the mount of Olives looking directly at the temple and Jerusalem. This is Judea. And who lives in Judea? The Jews.

HIM said:

Matt 24:4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
Matt 24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
Matt 24:6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all [these things] must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
Matt 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
Matt 24:8 All these [are] the beginning of sorrows.
Matt 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
Matt 24:10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
Matt 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
Matt 24:12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
Matt 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
Matt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Click to expand...

These are future events. Your interpretation will vary based on your eschatology view.

HIM said:

Matt 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)

Click to expand...

‘There is an event here that will precipitate the Jews to flee. ”Who so readeth, let him understand” denotes how individual people will react to this reading.

HIM said:

Matt 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

Click to expand...

So when the events of verse 15 happen those in Judea, where Jerusalem and the temple are located, will flee to the mountains. Only those in Judea are running to the mountains. No one else is running to the mountains. It has to be only those in Judea because the temple is in Judea and that is where the abomination of desolation will happen or whatever other laws pertain to the lawful keeping of the sabbath.

HIM said:

Matt 24:17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
Matt 24:18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

Click to expand...

Huge sense of urgency here. Don’t stop to get anything, just run.

HIM said:

Matt 24:19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

Click to expand...

It takes time to finish feeding the baby so they can’t just run right away. That is why it is described as a “woe”.

HIM said:

Matt 24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

Click to expand...

“But pray” because if it happens during winter you could freeze or if it happens on a sabbath day then the law stipulates that you can’t travel more than a days walk away or even make a fire to keep warm if it’s winter.

HIM said:

Matt 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
Matt 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
Matt 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here [is] Christ, or there; believe [it] not.
Matt 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
Matt 24:25 Behold, I have told you before.
Matt 24:26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, [he is] in the secret chambers; believe [it] not.
Matt 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Matt 24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
Matt 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Matt 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Matt 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Click to expand...

The rest is the remainder of the prophesy which again you can interpret based on your eschatological view. These verses do not support your argument.

OK some satire there in my previous post, but really - if we gather to worship on one day or another does it really matter ?

Hentenza said:

You are stuck in English grammar. Everything reads continuous because it is based on the original writings.The original writing did not contain chapter numbers or even verse numbers. It was written as a scroll. Chapter numbers and verse numbers were added later. lets look at the verses.

Click to expand...

It reads the same in the Greek. You might not want to go down this road my friend. The Greek is what led me to share this.

HIM said:

It reads the same in the Greek. You might not want to go down this road my friend. The Greek is what led me to share this.

Click to expand...

And yet, your Greek did not prompt you to address my post. Every one has an interlinear these days.

Hentenza said:

And yet, your Greek did not prompt you to address my post. Every one has an interlinear these days.

Click to expand...

You might want to look at it then.

SabbathBlessings said:

Jesus was not silent on this. He said the apostles were guiltless Mat12:7 because it was and is not a sin to eat on the Sabbath.

Click to expand...

Jesus does say they are innocent (v7), but he does not comment on the act itself, but essentially calls them priests and gives them special authority that allows them to pick the heads of the grain. I'll let you draw your own conclusion if picking heads of grain is breaking the sabbath or not but that wasn't Christ's point nor was he defending the act "as-is" he instead was defending his authority. The Pharisees would not walk away, challenged that picking heads of grain are lawful, they would be challenged that Christ and his disciples have authority to do so.

SabbathBlessings said:

Jesus condemned the apostles for breaking the commandments from the same unit and holds on to their traditions of man over God's commandments Mat15:1-14 He said this is worshipping Him in vain. Jesus did not hold the Pharisees at a higher standard than He did for Himself and for His disciples and than tell us that our righteousness must exceed theirs if we are to see heaven Mat5:19-20 by breaking the least of these same commandments, this would make Jesus a hypocrite, which He is not. Its simply a misunderstanding of the Scriptures and not understanding the Sabbath. Jesus nor His disciples ever broke God's Sabbath, they broke the Pharisees sabbath, that was all about control and punishment when the Sabbath is and always will be a delight Isa58:13-14ceasing from all work and labors, spending time focusing on God on His holy day. That doesn't mean God never gave us clear direction on the Sabbath and that we can't do evil on it Mark3:4 like Jesus said by profaning it.Neh13:17 Isa56:2

Click to expand...

I get the call of Christ requires a standard higher than that which the Pharisees set. I know a different reference than what you quoted but I think still applies to Mat 15 which is Christ comments, "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God." (Mat 19:24), setting again a high standard. The discples' response was in the next verse, "Who then can be saved?" These passages discussed here all deconstruct the status quo idea of lawful living. Mat 15 and 19 both inject an idea of a standard too high to accomplish which is the point. Since it is not our righteousness that saves us but Christ's righteousness, which accomplishes that standard. Christ accomplishes a work, and just as with creation, when the work was complete it ushers in a rest called holy and we can partake of that rest and be called holy just as the 7th day is. But we cannot accomplish the work (which is the point)

The apostles do not break law and I'm not trying to show that in Mat 12, picking the heads of grain was breaking the law. I really don't know, and I'm indifferent to it either way. What I do know is that it has nothing to do with the passage. The point of whether it was breaking the law was a point of the Pharisees not Christ. Christ instead makes claim that he and his disciples have the authority to do so. To do what? to break law? no, because if you have the authority to do it, then you're not breaking it. Was it the "as-is" act breaking law? I don't know and to me it doesn't matter because authority over the Sabbath takes precedence on if it was lawful so it's a moot point. Does the owner break law when they enter the employees' only door, being not an employee themselves? of course not, they own the place and they implicitly have access to the entire place. Jesus draws on the same points regarding duties of priests and regarding himself as Lord of the Sabbath.

SabbathBlessings said:

It involves both. Exo20:8-11 Heb4,9,10,11 The commandments will always be like the way God gave them, Jesus came to magnify them Isa42:21 which means make larger, not smaller and the way He explained it, the heart is the issue, if the heart is changed all of God's commandments would be kept exactly how He said Mat5:18-30

Click to expand...

What is the product of the magnification of Circumcision? it is a deemphasis of the physical and a new revelation on the spiritual found in Christ. What is the magnification of the sacrifice? again a deemphasis of the physical and a new revelation on the spiritual found in Christ. Do you see the pattern here? Circumcision and sacrifices were religious rites not "moral acts" (outside of obedience of course) so their physical acts are made obsolete to make way for their deeper meanings. So this comes down to how we view the 4th commandment. Is it moral or ceremonial? I already know your answer and I'm not going to argue it, but like-wise you must see the logic where another sees it ceremonially and thus wants to drop the ceremonial aspects to make way for a magnified spiritual meaning found only in Christ.

Even the undisputed moral pillars like do not steal, lie, murder, etc... these themselves, if done alone and not magnified, only give us a one-dimensional cause-and-effect type of morality where anyone can see that it's a good idea not to steal, lie or murder and if you keep these, you live a better life. This is universal in the sense that even without Christ, the products tend to be the same, which is broadly more positive outcomes, and even the Sabbath can be understood this way. If you keep a cultural Sabbath as an atheist, you will probably still reap a positive outcome in your life because the routine of the sabbath is a healthy addition to any lifestyle. But Christ magnifies law so law does not only point to an innate positive impact even without Christ, but instead in a greater system to show not just inclusion of Christ but that he is the crux of all law and without him none of it stands. Sabbath is nothing without Christ, even with the positive impact it may have on our physical routines. So it is only with Christ it takes on a magnified meaning and if we remove the physical aspect, for example are unable to take rest because of physical distress, the magnification still holds. So I may be tortured or face extreme physical distress but still have rest even on the Sabbath this is because the magnification of law does not depend on the physical requirement of law to be magnified and it is indeed made bigger. This is the same with Sabbath with circumcision, the sacrifice, and all of law... all nothing without Christ and when we boil it down, the impactful meaning is not the physical product, although they may have a positive outcome, but only that which can be found through Christ, even whenthe physical is removed.

Carl Emerson said:

Do I go by the Georgian calendar, maybe the Hebrew Calendar, whoops we lost 10 days in 1752...

Click to expand...

although I do not know how history has played out and there may be some calibration issues with the point of the first Sabbath but with Western adjustments to the calendar, the days of the week remains unchanged. Sept 2nd 1752 was a Wednesday, then there is a 10 day skip and Sept 14th was a Thursday so the days of the week continued their natural progression. On Wednesday night Sept 2nd, people went to sleep and woke up as expected on a Thursday morning, went to work and did their lives even if the date was 10 days ahead. if we count sabbath to sabbath it would have still been 7 days regardless of the date changes or adding on months, days or removing etc... it's no different with February, every 4 years we get an extra day but this has no bearing on how the days of the week continue.

to me the 7 days week has issue with it's origins. Since when traced back it seems to be a Babylonian invention around the same time of the Babylonian exile, which challenges the creation account as being it's inception and suggests the Hebrews adopted the 7 day week rather than it's origins going back to creation. To me the greatest point in favour of the Babylonians is the question of why the number 7? there no biblical reason why 7 is the magic number and why it wasn't 6 or 9... or better yet 10. There is a lot of significance with the number 7 in the bible, but it is all rooted in creation, yet creation has no answer for us why 7, and without explanation, it would seem arbitrary and would imply there is still another origin story to explain 7.

The Babylonians have it, 7 is the known number of celestial bodies of the ancient world (before telescopes were invented). These are basically the planets we can see with the naked eye but also include the moon the sun (does not include the earth) they are the Sun, the Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. The days of the week were set at 7 to venerate these planets, each day for a separate planet which in English are still named this way today. (Sunday = Sun, Monday = Moon, Saturday = Saturday, etc...) Even the 7th day had a special veneration to not work but the Babylonians were motivated from fear and hiding themselves. This gives explaination for why the number 7, without the need to go deeper, where the creation account still asks why 7?
dd
This may be upsetting to many and they would outright reject it as it can be seen as challenging the authority of the scripture. But scripture is most certainly has a lot of woven metaphore, the entire law points to Christ for example. But it really depends on how we view these accounts of valuing literal details or spiritual truth and if the latter is more important, can the details take on shape to affirm the spiritual truth? I would say the 7 day system was adopted by the Hebrews and used as a tool to reveal a message far better. A system rooted in pagan motivation is uprooted to point to Christ, which is a biblically consistent theme and is a more noble goal. This is challenging for a lot to accept and requires a type of faith that does not need the inerrancy of the literal details but instead the inerrancy of truth. It also requires clear understanding of non-negotiables where we can say the creation account may have not been litteral God still is the one who created it. Or that this doesn't mean Christ wasn't a literal person or literally died and resurrected, etc. Drawing the line means a very critical version of faith to understand what details are non-negotiable and what may be negotiable. The question of why 7 is an example of critically challenging the text.

DamianWarS said:

Jesus does say they are innocent (v7), but he does not comment on the act itself,
but essentially calls them priests and gives them special authority that allows them to pick the heads of the grain. I'll let you draw your own conclusion if picking heads of grain is breaking the sabbath or not but that wasn't Christ's point nor was he defending the act "as-is" he instead was defending his authority. The Pharisees would not walk away, challenged that picking heads of grain are lawful, they would be challenged that Christ and his disciples have authority to do so.

Click to expand...

Him saying they were innocent is commenting on the act, that they were not guilty of the accusation of the Pharisees because its not a sin to eat on the Sabbath, never was. No need to draw our own conclusions Jesus made is quite clear. Why we are told Pro3:5-6

DamianWarS said:

I get the call of Christ requires a standard higher than that which the Pharisees set. I know a different reference than what you quoted but I think still applies to Mat 15 which is Christ comments, "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God." (Mat 19:24), setting again a high standard. The discples' response was in the next verse, "Who then can be saved?" These passages discussed here all deconstruct the status quo idea of lawful living. Mat 15 and 19 both inject an idea of a standard too high to accomplish which is the point. Since it is not our righteousness that saves us but Christ's righteousness, which accomplishes that standard. Christ accomplishes a work, and just as with creation, when the work was complete it ushers in a rest called holy and we can partake of that rest and be called holy just as the 7th day is. But we cannot accomplish the work (which is the point)

Click to expand...

I think you inserting the idea of keeping the Sabbath being too high of a standard to keep into these verses so therefore we do not have to keep, is a bad idea. The Sabbath can be kept, just like the other 9 if we love Jesus and cooperate with the Spirit. John14:15-18 The Sabbath wasn't mentioned in these verses, money was and Jesus said even rich people can be saved because....you missed the solution in the next verse and it wasn't Jesus lowering His standard or changing one of His commandment's



Mat 19: 24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

25 When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?”

26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

Money is not the issue, its the love of money that is, when we place it above God.

DamianWarS said:

The apostles do not break law and I'm not trying to show that in Mat 12, picking the heads of grain was breaking the law. I really don't know, and I'm indifferent to it either way. What I do know is that it has nothing to do with the passage. The point of whether it was breaking the law was a point of the Pharisees not Christ. Christ instead makes claim that he and his disciples have the authority to do so. To do what? to break law? no, because if you have the authority to do it, then you're not breaking it. Was it the "as-is" act breaking law? I don't know and to me it doesn't matter because authority over the Sabbath takes precedence on if it was lawful so it's a moot point. Does the owner break law when they enter the employees' only door, being not an employee themselves? of course not, they own the place and they implicitly have access to the entire place. Jesus draws on the same points regarding duties of priests and regarding himself as Lord of the Sabbath.


What is the product of the magnification of Circumcision? it is a deemphasis of the physical and a new revelation on the spiritual found in Christ. What is the magnification of the sacrifice? again a deemphasis of the physical and a new revelation on the spiritual found in Christ. Do you see the pattern here? Circumcision and sacrifices were religious rites not "moral acts" (outside of obedience of course) so their physical acts are made obsolete to make way for their deeper meanings. So this comes down to how we view the 4th commandment. Is it moral or ceremonial? I already know your answer and I'm not going to argue it, but like-wise you must see the logic where another sees it ceremonially and thus wants to drop the ceremonial aspects to make way for a magnified spiritual meaning found only in Christ.

Even the undisputed moral pillars like do not steal, lie, murder, etc... these themselves, if done alone and not magnified, only give us a one-dimensional cause-and-effect type of morality where anyone can see that it's a good idea not to steal, lie or murder and if you keep these, you live a better life. This is universal in the sense that even without Christ, the products tend to be the same, which is broadly more positive outcomes, and even the Sabbath can be understood this way. If you keep a cultural Sabbath as an atheist, you will probably still reap a positive outcome in your life because the routine of the sabbath is a healthy addition to any lifestyle. But Christ magnifies law so law does not only point to an innate positive impact even without Christ, but instead in a greater system to show not just inclusion of Christ but that he is the crux of all law and without him none of it stands. Sabbath is nothing without Christ, even with the positive impact it may have on our physical routines. So it is only with Christ it takes on a magnified meaning and if we remove the physical aspect, for example are unable to take rest because of physical distress, the magnification still holds. So I may be tortured or face extreme physical distress but still have rest even on the Sabbath this is because the magnification of law does not depend on the physical requirement of law to be magnified and it is indeed made bigger. This is the same with Sabbath with circumcision, the sacrifice, and all of law... all nothing without Christ and when we boil it down, the impactful meaning is not the physical product, although they may have a positive outcome, but only that which can be found through Christ, even whenthe physical is removed.

Click to expand...

Like I said previously I am not big on personal philosophies, I think if we stick with the Bible and what God said and Jesus did as our example and not deviate from that as we are told Isa8:20 we will be just fine.

Take care

HIM said:

You might want to look at it then.

Click to expand...

So make your case.

Carl Emerson said:

Lets assume I am damned if I don't keep the Sabbath...

So this is getting real serious - hell awaits...

Right... what day is the Sabbath.

Quick research - the calendar has changed several times - which is the seventh day?

Do I go by the Georgian calendar, maybe the Hebrew Calendar, whoops we lost 10 days in 1752...

Then where am I on earth - If I get this wrong it's toast...

Worse if I am on the international space station trying to calculate the time zone.

I have a 1 in 7 chance of getting this right - talk about Russian roulette...

Does God really care about the day ???

Is 1 rest day in 7 near enough? (as long as it isn't Sunday) we know thats definitely wrong...

Wait the Romans had an 8 day week.

Maybe God only likes those with a degree in Maths and History...

Please pray for me...

Click to expand...

Everyone seems to know when Sunday is and when Jesus rose. I do not believe this excuse is going to work.

Regardless what man had done to the calendar, it never changed the weekly cycle. Sunday will always be the first day, Saturday will always be the Sabbath. Why in almost every ancient language Saturday means Sabbath.