Understanding the New Covenant

Jimlarmore · Feb 19, 2008

RND said:
Good points Jim.

Jim, don't you find it interesting and very telling that in the Gospels we NEVER see or are told of Jesus observing any of the ceremonial sabbaths and feast days and only observing the passover?

I think Jesus was purposely living the fulfillment of the prophecy about the sacrifice and oblation ceasing in the midst of the week.

Dan 9:27
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

It is very interesting. We know that His mother and Father fulfilled the ceremonial aspects of bringing Him to the temple after He was born and then again at about the age of 12 when He spoke to the learned doctors of Israel. Even though there is no mention of He Himself taking part in any of the ceremonies except for the passover ( the one feast that points to Him more than the others ) where He presented Himself in the court yard of the temple as the passover lamb and then died as our passover. I don't think we can assume from what we read in the Bible that His parents didn't include Him with their participation of the Jewish ceremonies.

At any rate it's significant that He never told any of those He forgave to go and sacrifice afterwards. He did tell the lepers to go and present themselves to the priest after He healed them in accordance with Jewish laws.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

Jimlarmore · Feb 19, 2008

ricker said:
I'm not offended, Jim. You have a considerate way of saying things.

On the flip side of what you say above, one could say some people try to rationalize the binding observance of the Sabbath in rejection of clear scripture.

Exodus 31:
This clearly states exactly who the Sabbath was for. The Bible nowhere states the Sabbath is a sign for the Christian church. The sign of the new covenant is the Lord's supper.

There is no doubt that it is indeed Israel who God gave the Sabbath to and it was a sign between them and Him. The question now who is Israel today? I think we have plowed this ground before and you know how I feel on this. The Bible is very clear that the Christian church is now Israel in God's eyes, what I call "Spiritual Israel".

Acts 15 clearly says the new Gentile Christians are not under the Jewish law.

Collossians 2 says this:

Romans 14 says:

Galations 4 says: This is speaking of the weekly, monthly and yearly celebrations.

Hebrews 4 tells us of the rest that remains for Christians:

Add this to the fact there is no command to observe the Sabbath under the new covenant or instructions to the new Gentile believers on its observance.

In each of these texts we can determine that it was either the ceremonial law that was spoken of or it was the fact that Paul was speaking against the law being able to save us. It never could brother. Salvation has always been by faith thru God's grace. To take what you imply to it's ultimate is to say it's now ok to lie, steal or comit adultery. We both know this is not true. The Sabbath commandment is just as binding as the other nine including those that guide our interaction with our fellow man.

I know you can try to rationalize these and more away, but please don't pretend the rationalization is only on the non-sabbitarian side. It seems to me these texts are much clearer in meaning than the ones you quote to try to maintain the Sabbaths significance.
God bless! Ricker

The texts in Hebrews 4 are very much telling us that the Sabbath rest that God entered into is very much still in effect. Those verses include resting from works of the flesh to save as well but the application of observing the Sabbath is undeniable. We can make a totally separate thread for just Hebrews 4 if you want to discuss this.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

RND · Feb 19, 2008

Jimlarmore said:
It is very interesting. We know that His mother and Father fulfilled the ceremonial aspects of bringing Him to the temple after He was born and then again at about the age of 12 when He spoke to the learned doctors of Israel. Even though there is no mention of He Himself taking part in any of the ceremonies except for the passover ( the one feast that points to Him more than the others ) where He presented Himself in the court yard of the temple as the passover lamb and then died as our passover. I don't think we can assume from what we read in the Bible that His parents didn't include Him with their participation of the Jewish ceremonies.

At any rate it's significant that He never told any of those He forgave to go and sacrifice afterwards. He did tell the lepers to go and present themselves to the priest after He healed them in accordance with Jewish laws.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

I agree with all your thoughts on this. Excellent points you made. Thanks.

ricker · Feb 19, 2008

Jimlarmore said:
Jimlarmore said:

There is no doubt that it is indeed Israel who God gave the Sabbath to and it was a sign between them and Him. The question now who is Israel today? I think we have plowed this ground before and you know how I feel on this. The Bible is very clear that the Christian church is now Israel in God's eyes, what I call "Spiritual Israel".

Click to expand...

And if you can come up with verses that say the sign given to the nation of Israel is still in effect for "spiritual Israel", we will have something to talk about.

In each of these texts we can determine that it was either the ceremonial law that was spoken of or it was the fact that Paul was speaking against the law being able to save us. It never could brother. Salvation has always been by faith thru God's grace. To take what you imply to it's ultimate is to say it's now ok to lie, steal or comit adultery. We both know this is not true. The Sabbath commandment is just as binding as the other nine including those that guide our interaction with our fellow man.

Click to expand...

I don't know, the verses seem plain to me. I told you you could try to rationalize them away.

The Sabbath was the ceremonial sign given to the nation of Israel in the center of the ten commandments. The new covenant does not change moral laws.

The texts in Hebrews 4 are very much telling us that the Sabbath rest that God entered into is very much still in effect. Those verses include resting from works of the flesh to save as well but the application of observing the Sabbath is undeniable. We can make a totally separate thread for just Hebrews 4 if you want to discuss this.
God Bless
Jim Larmore

Click to expand...

It is plain to see the rest God entered into was never a weekly one. Can you give me any indication from the Bible it was? I can give you some verses seeming to indicate it was not weekly.
God bless! Ricker

Jimlarmore · Feb 19, 2008

ricker said:
And if you can come up with verses that say the sign given to the nation of Israel is still in effect for "spiritual Israel", we will have something to talk about.

I don't know, the verses seem plain to me. I told you you could try to rationalize them away.

The Sabbath was the ceremonial sign given to the nation of Israel in the center of the ten commandments. The new covenant does not change moral laws.

Click to expand...

Your correct about that but it doesn't change or invalidate the Sabbath commandment either. There's absolutely nothing in any of these verses you gave that points out the Sabbath being done away with. The main thrust of these verses is that salvation is not obtained by the law. Like I said it never was. The texts in Heb 4 speaks directly about entering into God's rest. The original language in the Greek is very clear that it is "Sabbath" that is being spoken of with this rest. Rationalizing something is not bad as long as the rationalization lines up with the rest of the Bible. Rationalizing is bad when it is done to excuse or vindicate a wrong interpretation of what the Bible says or uses one text only that may not be saying what you think it says. In this case you can't tell me that any of these texts tells us that the Sabbath was done away with and except for the Hebrews text does not single out the 7th day Sabbath at all.

It is plain to see the rest God entered into was never a weekly one. Can you give me any indication from the Bible it was? I can give you some verses seeming to indicate it was not weekly.
God bless! Ricker

Click to expand...

Yes I can. In the context of the verses you gave Hebrews 4 makes it very clear that God entered into rest on the 7th day. This is specifying the creation week and the time when He sanctified the 7th day for all time for all mankind. Heb 4:3-8

3

For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
Psa 95:11
4

For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.
Gen 2:2
5

And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.
Psa 95:11
6

Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:
7

Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.
Psa 95:7,8
8

For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

I can go thru each one of these texts and make a case for the 7th day Sabbath as well as rest from works for salvation. This is a dualistic chapter providing key truths for both concepts/truths.

God bless
Jim Larmore

ricker · Feb 19, 2008

Jimlarmore said:
ricker said:

Your correct about that but it doesn't change or invalidate the Sabbath commandment either. There's absolutely nothing in any of these verses you gave that points out the Sabbath being done away with. The main thrust of these verses is that salvation is not obtained by the law. Like I said it never was. The texts in Heb 4 speaks directly about entering into God's rest. The original language in the Greek is very clear that it is "Sabbath" that is being spoken of with this rest. Rationalizing something is not bad as long as the rationalization lines up with the rest of the Bible. Rationalizing is bad when it is done to excuse or vindicate a wrong interpretation of what the Bible says or uses one text only that may not be saying what you think it says. In this case you can't tell me that any of these texts tells us that the Sabbath was done away with and except for the Hebrews text does not single out the 7th day Sabbath at all.

Yes I can. In the context of the verses you gave Hebrews 4 makes it very clear that God entered into rest on the 7th day. This is specifying the creation week and the time when He sanctified the 7th day for all time for all mankind. Heb 4:3-8

3

For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
Psa 95:11
4

For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.
Gen 2:2
5

And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.
Psa 95:11
6

Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:
7

Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.
Psa 95:7,8
8

For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

I can go thru each one of these texts and make a case for the 7th day Sabbath as well as rest from works for salvation. This is a dualistic chapter providing key truths for both concepts/truths.

God bless
Jim Larmore

Click to expand...

You say these verses I quoted don't do away with the Sabbath command. I would think the burden would be on Sabbitarians for proof of validity since the Sabbath law was given expressly to the nation of Israel as a sign and not commanded in the new testament. Moral laws are indeed mentioned in the new testament.

This passage says God rested from His works ont he seventh day. It does not say He rested on each seventh day thereafter. This passage speaks of the COI who were brought out of Egypt not being able to enter the promised land and hensforth "Gods rest" (not weekly) because of unbelief. (remember the spies in the story?). It also points to the rest "today". What does that mean to you?

This being said, I have a burden to visit an Adventist church again, and probably will in the next couple of weeks.
God bless! Ricker

Jimlarmore · Feb 19, 2008

ricker said:
You say these verses I quoted don't do away with the Sabbath command. I would think the burden would be on Sabbitarians for proof of validity since the Sabbath law was given expressly to the nation of Israel as a sign and not commanded in the new testament. Moral laws are indeed mentioned in the new testament.

I think in Hebrews it makes it very clear that in the new covenant God would write His laws on our hearts. God's laws include the Sabbath commandment. Anyway, this is a direct allusion to a set of verses in Jer 31 and old covenant book where the ten commandments were placed at the heart of it. When you say the Sabbatarians should have the burden of proof for the Sabbath it makes me smile in jest. Surely, the Bible is a "Jewish" book thematic of a "Jewish" messiah/savior written with the exception of two authors completely by all Sabbath keeping Jews.

The Sabbath is mentioned in the new testament over and over again and not once is it said to be fulfilled or done away with there. Christ Himself kept the Sabbath and never once said we need to abandon it and even said He was Lord of the Sabbath. No, my friend it is those who throw the Sabbath away that needs to have the burden of proof that it is no longer valid or in effect.

This passage says God rested from His works ont he seventh day. It does not say He rested on each seventh day thereafter. This passage speaks of the COI who were brought out of Egypt not being able to enter the promised land and hensforth "Gods rest" (not weekly) because of unbelief. (remember the spies in the story?). It also points to the rest "today". What does that mean to you?

There's two things that tells me that God intended for the 7th day Sabbath to be a perpetual sign between Him and His people.

1. He sanctified it which is defined as set aside for holy use. There is nothing in that concept that indicates a one time thing.

2. The weekly cycle is 7 days ending with the Sabbath. There is no other reason on earth for us to be on a 7 day cycle other than God ordained that for the 7th day Sabbath rest.

The third thing is the Bible actually says that the Sabbath is a perpetual sign for ever and ever between Him and His people.

This being said, I have a burden to visit an Adventist church again, and probably will in the next couple of weeks.
God bless! Ricker

Praise God, I hope you enjoy the visit. I wish we lived closer to each other I would love to get with you and discuss the Bible face to face.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

ricker · Feb 19, 2008

Jimlarmore said:
Jimlarmore said:

I think in Hebrews it makes it very clear that in the new covenant God would write His laws on our hearts. God's laws include the Sabbath commandment. Anyway, this is a direct allusion to a set of verses in Jer 31 and old covenant book where the ten commandments were placed at the heart of it. When you say the Sabbatarians should have the burden of proof for the Sabbath it makes me smile in jest. Surely, the Bible is a "Jewish" book thematic of a "Jewish" messiah/savior written with the exception of two authors completely by all Sabbath keeping Jews.

Click to expand...

Does it say the ten commandments are in the center of the new covenant?
Hebrews 7

18The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19(for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

Click to expand...

Hebrews 8

7For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another

Click to expand...

....

13By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

Click to expand...

The Sabbath is mentioned in the new testament over and over again and not once is it said to be fulfilled or done away with there. Christ Himself kept the Sabbath and never once said we need to abandon it and even said He was Lord of the Sabbath. No, my friend it is those who throw the Sabbath away that needs to have the burden of proof that it is no longer valid or in effect.

Click to expand...

Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, only mentions the Sabbath once in all his writings, and it is one of those verses you have to try to explain away.

There's two things that tells me that God intended for the 7th day Sabbath to be a perpetual sign between Him and His people.

1. He sanctified it which is defined as set aside for holy use. There is nothing in that concept that indicates a one time thing.

2. The weekly cycle is 7 days ending with the Sabbath. There is no other reason on earth for us to be on a 7 day cycle other than God ordained that for the 7th day Sabbath rest.

The third thing is the Bible actually says that the Sabbath is a perpetual sign for ever and ever between Him and His people.

Click to expand...

1.The Bible says God sanctified the day. It later says He gave a weekly Sabbath rest to the COI. The bible says at least 3 times that God rested on that seventh day. It never once says He rested every seventh day thereafter.
2. This is shaky ground to be confirming the validity of Sabbath keeping on Christ's church.
3. God's people were the nation of Israel. If we are spiritual israel or not, would the sign of the old be transfered to the new covenant? I thought Communion is the new sign.

Praise God, I hope you enjoy the visit. I wish we lived closer to each other I would love to get with you and discuss the Bible face to face.
God Bless
Jim Larmore

Click to expand...

I really don't know anyone at the "local" SDA church. My relatives all live far away. I appreciate your knowedge and tone of debate. My parents live in TN, but I guess that is still a long ways from you. Wouldn't it be interesting if the congregational president of a 600+ member Lutheran church as I am, was to switch to an Adventist church with 38 members? Don't hold your breath, but I never say never.
God bless! Ricker

Jimlarmore · Feb 20, 2008

ricker said:
Does it say the ten commandments are in the center of the new covenant?
Hebrews 7
Hebrews 8....

Some of the biggest problems with talking about the law in the new testament is that it very rarely specifies which law is being spoken of "directly". We can surmise which one it is sometimes by context like in Col 2:14. In that set of texts it's pretty clear that the word "ordinances" is referring to the ceremonial law that was nailed to the cross and the "sabbaths" are not the 7th day Sabbath which most of the time the Bible says is the "day of the Lord" or the Lord's day. At any rate in Heb 7:18 even if it is specifying the ten commandments per se' what it is really speaking of is the law's inability to save and we've already touched on that, it never could.

Now in Heb 8:7 we find a discussion of the covenants. Here we need to clarify something again. The covenant of God was not bad it was the people and their refusal to keep the first one that made the second one necessary. Heb 8:8-12 is the direct allusion to Jer 31 which is nearly a perfect re-copy. The laws spoken of here that would be written on the heart are "my laws" or the laws of God and specifically are the ten commandments by referral to Jeremiah 31. Anyway, it wasn't the old covenant that was bad it was the folks who couldn't keep it.

Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, only mentions the Sabbath once in all his writings, and it is one of those verses you have to try to explain away.

The issue of Sabbath observance was one of the main problems Jesus had during His ministry and the majority of the times that the Sabbath was mentioned in the new testament came as a result of that. He was accused of breaking the Sabbath several times which we know He never did but the fact that He never once said Sabbath observance was unecessary for man is significant. You'd think with all of the controversy He encountered with the Pharasee's over the Sabbath that He would have said something if it was to be ignored in the future. Instead He singles it out as a day to pray that you won't have to flee on when Jerusalem fell.

1.The Bible says God sanctified the day. It later says He gave a weekly Sabbath rest to the COI. The bible says at least 3 times that God rested on that seventh day. It never once says He rested every seventh day thereafter.

It never once said He kept on creating animals either. The establishment of the Sabbath and setting the 7 day weekly cycle was God's way of putting a period on the sentence of creation. The act of sanctifying it or setting it aside for holy use goes hand in hand with Christ's statment in Mark which tells us that the Sabbath was made for man. God does not need to Sabbath but He knew man would and when He rested He was our example.

2. This is shaky ground to be confirming the validity of Sabbath keeping on Christ's church.
3. God's people were the nation of Israel. If we are spiritual israel or not, would the sign of the old be transfered to the new covenant? I thought Communion is the new sign.

Communion is one of the signs of the new covenant very true, but nothing in the ten commandments of God was fulfilled at the cross. The ten commandments may have been at the heart of the old covenant but the covenant itself was what the people agreed to do with God and not the commandments themselves. God's laws are as eternal as He is.

I really don't know anyone at the "local" SDA church. My relatives all live far away. I appreciate your knowedge and tone of debate. My parents live in TN, but I guess that is still a long ways from you. Wouldn't it be interesting if the congregational president of a 600+ member Lutheran church as I am, was to switch to an Adventist church with 38 members? Don't hold your breath, but I never say never.
God bless! Ricker

In reality there has been several other pastors in the last year or so that has come over to our faith. I saw a couple of examples on 3abn where pastors who watched the first ten commandment weekend set aside in May brought their entire congregation over to at least observing the Sabbath. You see I don't see anything in a name that will save anyone. Being a sda for me is a matter of circumstance. This church just so happens to be the one that stays closer to the Bible than any other I have found so far. If I find one that stays even close I will go there. I've thought seriously about attending a messianic synogogue in Tulsa just to check it out. Anyway, I praise God for you brother. I think the Holy Spirit is working on your heart.

God Bless you,
Jim Larmore

ricker · Feb 20, 2008

Jimlarmore said:
Jimlarmore said:

Some of the biggest problems with talking about the law in the new testament is that it very rarely specifies which law is being spoken of "directly". We can surmise which one it is sometimes by context like in Col 2:14. In that set of texts it's pretty clear that the word "ordinances" is referring to the ceremonial law that was nailed to the cross and the "sabbaths" are not the 7th day Sabbath which most of the time the Bible says is the "day of the Lord" or the Lord's day. At any rate in Heb 7:18 even if it is specifying the ten commandments per se' what it is really speaking of is the law's inability to save and we've already touched on that, it never could.

Click to expand...

This verse says the former regulation is set aside. I guess we are back to whether we view the keeping of the Sabbath day as ceremonial or not.

Now in Heb 8:7 we find a discussion of the covenants. Here we need to clarify something again. The covenant of God was not bad it was the people and their refusal to keep the first one that made the second one necessary. Heb 8:8-12 is the direct allusion to Jer 31 which is nearly a perfect re-copy. The laws spoken of here that would be written on the heart are "my laws" or the laws of God and specifically are the ten commandments by referral to Jeremiah 31. Anyway, it wasn't the old covenant that was bad it was the folks who couldn't keep it.

Click to expand...

The writer of Hebrews is indeed quoting Jeremiah. Does that mean there can't be a change in the law?

The issue of Sabbath observance was one of the main problems Jesus had during His ministry and the majority of the times that the Sabbath was mentioned in the new testament came as a result of that. He was accused of breaking the Sabbath several times which we know He never did but the fact that He never once said Sabbath observance was unecessary for man is significant. You'd think with all of the controversy He encountered with the Pharasee's over the Sabbath that He would have said something if it was to be ignored in the future. Instead He singles it out as a day to pray that you won't have to flee on when Jerusalem fell.

Click to expand...

Again Jesus did not fortell the changes in any of the ceremonial laws, did He? Remember the Transfiguration where Jesus told His disciples not to speak of the law and prophets disappearing and such until after His ressurection.

It never once said He kept on creating animals either. The establishment of the Sabbath and setting the 7 day weekly cycle was God's way of putting a period on the sentence of creation. The act of sanctifying it or setting it aside for holy use goes hand in hand with Christ's statment in Mark which tells us that the Sabbath was made for man. God does not need to Sabbath but He knew man would and when He rested He was our example.

Click to expand...

We don't disagree on when the seventh day was sanctified, just when the weekly observance of it was instituted.

Communion is one of the signs of the new covenant very true, but nothing in the ten commandments of God was fulfilled at the cross. The ten commandments may have been at the heart of the old covenant but the covenant itself was what the people agreed to do with God and not the commandments themselves. God's laws are as eternal as He is.

Click to expand...

It seems like Sabbath observance was a covenant with the Israelites.

16 The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come as a lasting covenant.

Click to expand...

In reality there has been several other pastors in the last year or so that has come over to our faith. I saw a couple of examples on 3abn where pastors who watched the first ten commandment weekend set aside in May brought their entire congregation over to at least observing the Sabbath. You see I don't see anything in a name that will save anyone. Being a sda for me is a matter of circumstance. This church just so happens to be the one that stays closer to the Bible than any other I have found so far. If I find one that stays even close I will go there. I've thought seriously about attending a messianic synogogue in Tulsa just to check it out. Anyway, I praise God for you brother. I think the Holy Spirit is working on your heart.

God Bless you,
Jim Larmore

Click to expand...

I have always thought the Sabbath is as good a day as any to go to church. The required keeping it as a holy day is the thing that is questionable. As a Christian I know the Holy spirit is working in my heart.
God bless! Ricker

Jimlarmore · Feb 20, 2008

ricker said:
The verse says the former regulation is set aside. I guess we are back to whether we view the keeping of the Sabbath as ceremonial or not.

There may be a ceremonial aspect to Sabbath keeping for some especially when it comes in at sun set on Friday or goes out at sun set on Saturday. Personally, I don't view the observance of the Sabbath as ceremonial in the light of it being a part of the ceremonial laws. That is what this verse in Hebrews is speaking of, i.e. the ceremonial laws. Too much of the new testament speaks of the moral laws ( which are the ten commandments ) as being in effect for this to be saying they were set aside. What was set aside was the same hand writing of ordinances spoken of in Col 2:14.

The writer in Hebrews is indeed quoting Jeremiah. Does that mean there can't be a change in the law?

What it means to me is that the same law spoken of in Jeremiah has to be the same law spoken of in Hebrews. Otherwise it wouldn't make any sense. If the new covenant was to involve a "new law" one of these inspired writers would have certainly said so. However, instead one quotes the other with all of it's intendant similarity in theme and reality of same laws.

Again, remember Jesus did not fortell of the changes in the ceremonial laws , did He? Remember the transfiguration where Jesus told His disciples not to speak of the law and the prophets disappearing and such until after the resurrection?

Actually brother, what He said was to tell no one of the vision. He didn't mention anything about them disappearing. Where did you get that idea? As far as Christ not fortelling of the changes in the ceremonial laws again you are right however like I said we don't see Him participating in any sacrifice during His life which indicates He was living in the new covenant. He did however keep the Sabbath.

We don't disagree on when the Sabbath was sanctified. just when the weekly observance of it was instituted.

Well, then let's ask ourselves a question here. If the word sanctified means set aside for holy use , for man, and that was done at creation? Why would God even sanctify it then if He never intended for man to observe it until Mt. Sinai? You see it doesn't make any sense brother. It would be like God creating a certain food for man but not allowing Him to enjoy it for several thousand years. The Sabbath is holy time set aside for us and our creator to commune together. To rest our bodies and souls as He intended.

It seems like Sabbath observance was a covenant with the Israelites.

This truth is glorious in the fact that God promises blessings to His people , His peculiar people for observing His day, His holy day.

I have always thought the Sabbath is as good a day as any to go to church. The required keeping it as a holy day is the thing that is questionable. As a Christian I know the Holy spirit is working in my heart.
God bless! Ricker

That is why you and I are having this discourse right now brother. The Bible says for us to come and reason together with the Lord. Do you feel Him with us as we discuss all of this? I do.

God Bless you
Jim Larmore

ricker · Feb 24, 2008

Jimlarmore said:
There may be a ceremonial aspect to Sabbath keeping for some especially when it comes in at sun set on Friday or goes out at sun set on Saturday. Personally, I don't view the observance of the Sabbath as ceremonial in the light of it being a part of the ceremonial laws. That is what this verse in Hebrews is speaking of, i.e. the ceremonial laws. Too much of the new testament speaks of the moral laws ( which are the ten commandments ) as being in effect for this to be saying they were set aside. What was set aside was the same hand writing of ordinances spoken of in Col 2:14.

What it means to me is that the same law spoken of in Jeremiah has to be the same law spoken of in Hebrews. Otherwise it wouldn't make any sense. If the new covenant was to involve a "new law" one of these inspired writers would have certainly said so. However, instead one quotes the other with all of it's intendant similarity in theme and reality of same laws.

Actually brother, what He said was to tell no one of the vision. He didn't mention anything about them disappearing. Where did you get that idea? As far as Christ not fortelling of the changes in the ceremonial laws again you are right however like I said we don't see Him participating in any sacrifice during His life which indicates He was living in the new covenant. He did however keep the Sabbath.

Well, then let's ask ourselves a question here. If the word sanctified means set aside for holy use , for man, and that was done at creation? Why would God even sanctify it then if He never intended for man to observe it until Mt. Sinai? You see it doesn't make any sense brother. It would be like God creating a certain food for man but not allowing Him to enjoy it for several thousand years. The Sabbath is holy time set aside for us and our creator to commune together. To rest our bodies and souls as He intended.

This truth is glorious in the fact that God promises blessings to His people , His peculiar people for observing His day, His holy day.

That is why you and I are having this discourse right now brother. The Bible says for us to come and reason together with the Lord. Do you feel Him with us as we discuss all of this? I do.

God Bless you
Jim Larmore

I guess the whole crux of the matter to me is whether the Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel as their ceremonial sign or not. I know to you the fact that they are included in the ten makes you believe it is a moral command, but that is not enough reason for me. The ten were given as part of the covenant with the nation of Israel to begin with and it sure could conatain a ceremonial sign.

Exodus 31 says it is Israels sign. I don't know of any moral law that can be given as a sign. Could not bowing down to images, or not bearing false witness be given as a sign to a people? It seems unlikely to me. The very nature of the Sabbath command seems to me to be ceremonial.

The other thing I find compelling is the listing of the Sabbath among the other ceremonial laws in the books of Moses. I have heard Leviticus 23 is a "incluso" or something like that by people trying to explain away the relationship, but I don't know waht they are talking about and just read what the Bible says to me. It sure seems like it is including the weekly Sabbath with the rest.

Exodus 35 says:

1 Moses assembled the whole Israelite community and said to them, "These are the things the LORD has commanded you to do: 2 For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death. 3 Do not light a fire in any of your dwellings on the Sabbath day." Moses said to the whole Israelite community, "This is what the LORD has commanded: 5 From what you have, take an offering for the LORD. Everyone who is willing is to bring to the LORD an offering of gold, silver and .........

This seems to be including it in ceremonial laws.

Exodus 23 Seems to classify the weekly with the other Sabbaths.

10 "For six years you are to sow your fields and harvest the crops, 11 but during the seventh year let the land lie unplowed and unused. Then the poor among your people may get food from it, and the wild animals may eat what they leave. Do the same with your vineyard and your olive grove.
12 "Six days do your work, but on the seventh day do not work, so that your ox and your donkey may rest and the slave born in your household, and the alien as well, may be refreshed.

Sabbath observance just seems like a ceremonial thing to me, and sure seems like it is used as such in the Bible, given to the nation of Israel. Never do I see it given to "spiritual Israel" in the writings of the apostles to Christ's new church. In the Israelite nation if you were caught breaking the Sabbath, you were stoned to death. Sounds more like an obligation than a gift.
God bless! Ricker

Loveaboveall · Feb 24, 2008

ricker said:
I guess the whole crux of the matter to me is whether the Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel as their ceremonial sign or not. I know to you the fact that they are included in the ten makes you believe it is a moral command, but that is not enough reason for me. The ten were given as part of the covenant with the nation of Israel to begin with and it sure could conatain a ceremonial sign.

Exodus 31 says it is Israels sign. I don't know of any moral law that can be given as a sign. Could not bowing down to images, or not bearing false witness be given as a sign to a people? It seems unlikely to me. The very nature of the Sabbath command seems to me to be ceremonial.

The other thing I find compelling is the listing of the Sabbath among the other ceremonial laws in the books of Moses. I have heard Leviticus 23 is a "incluso" or something like that by people trying to explain away the relationship, but I don't know waht they are talking about and just read what the Bible says to me. It sure seems like it is including the weekly Sabbath with the rest.

Exodus 35 says:
This seems to be including it in ceremonial laws.

Exodus 23 Seems to classify the weekly with the other Sabbaths.

Sabbath observance just seems like a ceremonial thing to me, and sure seems like it is used as such in the Bible, given to the nation of Israel. Never do I see it given to "spiritual Israel" in the writings of the apostles to Christ's new church. In the Israelite nation if you were caught breaking the Sabbath, you were stoned to death. Sounds more like an obligation than a gift.
God bless! Ricker

Ricker,

Why not give God a chance to demonstrate to you definitively whether the Sabbath still has a special blessing attached to it and whether we should still be keeping it? Why not give God a full month, keeping every sabbath as a day to honor your creator, not thinking of yourself but of God and spending meaningful time with Him. Do this, and after a month let us know how you feel about the sabbath. I don't think you will be disappointed.

Jimlarmore · Feb 25, 2008

ricker said:
I guess the whole crux of the matter to me is whether the Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel as their ceremonial sign or not. I know to you the fact that they are included in the ten makes you believe it is a moral command, but that is not enough reason for me. The ten were given as part of the covenant with the nation of Israel to begin with and it sure could conatain a ceremonial sign.

I've already conceded the fact that the Sabbath has some ceremonial aspects to it. However, does that mean it's no longer a necessity as a new covenant Christian to observe it? I don't think so. The ceremonial laws that were given to the COI were a shadow of Christ's life and death on the cross. I believe we can see Christ in the Sabbath but nothing about the death of Christ fulfilled the necessity to rest from our work/s.

Exodus 31 says it is Israels sign. I don't know of any moral law that can be given as a sign. Could not bowing down to images, or not bearing false witness be given as a sign to a people? It seems unlikely to me. The very nature of the Sabbath command seems to me to be ceremonial.

The ten commandment law is given to us in basically two sections. The first four are commandments that deal with our relationship to our creator. The last six have to do with the way we deal with our fellow man. You can look at it as a horizontal apect and a verticle aspect to it in the way we relate to God and our fellow man.

The Sabbath stands near the center of the ten and is the last of the commandments that concern our obligation to God. It has to do with time and is uniquely different that way. All of the other commandments can be kept without the world noticing much about the observer but when we keep the Sabbath we stand apart from the majority of the world and that is how it's been since it was given. It's because of this uniqueness that the Sabbath commandment is a sign to the world and God at the same time that we are His people, His peculiar people.

The other thing I find compelling is the listing of the Sabbath among the other ceremonial laws in the books of Moses. I have heard Leviticus 23 is a "incluso" or something like that by people trying to explain away the relationship, but I don't know waht they are talking about and just read what the Bible says to me. It sure seems like it is including the weekly Sabbath with the rest.

The texts in Lev 23 is speaking of the ceremonial/yearly sabbaths and the Sabbath of the Lord ( the 7th day of the week ) as well. However, they are distinctly different and were not treated the same. One type of sabbath was yearly, the other came around ever 7 days and was always referred to in the Bible as God's holy day. Essentially, I think the Lord was trying to impress upon the minds of those thru Moses in these texts that He was setting aside holy time for convocations and ceremonies of the sanctuary. He included the 7th day Sabbath as a comparison if you will for them to know how to keep these feast days as well. The children of Israel has been in servatude for over 400 years and has lost most of the cultural practices that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had passed down to them. We see God asking Moses in Ex 16,
28

And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?
29

See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.

In this case the Children of Israel were not accustomed to observing God's holy day and even before He gave it to Moses on Sinai God called the Sabbath a command and a law. The point I'm trying to make is this. The tests are instructions for the COI and they already knew and understood the sanctity of the 7th day Sabbath and God was giving them a comparison to go by for the ceremonial ones. That does not mean the 7th was a ceremonial day too, not anymore than not murdering , comiting adultery or stealing was ceremonial.

Sabbath observance just seems like a ceremonial thing to me, and sure seems like it is used as such in the Bible, given to the nation of Israel.

Much of what we do even today in our worship is ceremonial. Even prayer can be ceremonial to many. However, just having a ceremonial aspect to it does not mean it's no longer in effect. That would be illogical and certainly not scriptural.

Never do I see it given to "spiritual Israel" in the writings of the apostles to Christ's new church. In the Israelite nation if you were caught breaking the Sabbath, you were stoned to death. Sounds more like an obligation than a gift.
God bless! Ricker

The reason in my mind that you don't see it given to "Spiritual Israel" is there was no need to. It had already been given to man kind at creation , practiced thru out the entire Bibe including the acts of the Messiah HImself. We see Paul preaching in the synogogue on the Sabbath and a week later to a whole town of Greeks on the Sabbath. There is nothing in the new covenant that tells us not to keep the Sabbath conversely the primary thrust of the entire Bible from Geneis to Revelation was to keep it.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

PROPHECYKID · Feb 25, 2008

I guess the whole crux of the matter to me is whether the Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel as their ceremonial sign or not. I know to you the fact that they are included in the ten makes you believe it is a moral command, but that is not enough reason for me. The ten were given as part of the covenant with the nation of Israel to begin with and it sure could conatain a ceremonial sign

.

I do not understand exactly what you mean by a ceremonial sign. But the Sabbath Law is distinct from the ceremonial laws. Remember that with the ceremonial system everything has to do with sacrifices. On the monthly sabbaths special sacrifices were offered. God's holy Sabbath was not related to the offering of Sacrifices in anyway. Plus God bleesed and sanctified the Sabbath at creation. The Sabbath was kept before the 10 commandments were given at Mt Sinai by Israel. When the ceremonial system in the old covenant was clearly described in Hebrews there is no mention of the Holy Sabbath there. Remember too that the Gentiles kept the Sabbath as well.

Exodus 31 says it is Israels sign. I don't know of any moral law that can be given as a sign. Could not bowing down to images, or not bearing false witness be given as a sign to a people? It seems unlikely to me. The very nature of the Sabbath command seems to me to be ceremonial.

What is ceremonial about the 4th commandment. If you read the 4th commandments it says nothing about sacrifices or anything like that. It just expresses paying homage to God.

The other thing I find compelling is the listing of the Sabbath among the other ceremonial laws in the books of Moses. I have heard Leviticus 23 is a "incluso" or something like that by people trying to explain away the relationship, but I don't know waht they are talking about and just read what the Bible says to me. It sure seems like it is including the weekly Sabbath with the rest.

I think someone explained this already and i agree with that person. We know that the 7th day Sabbath was not observed like the monthly sabbaths in terms of sacrifices and so on.

Sabbath observance just seems like a ceremonial thing to me, and sure seems like it is used as such in the Bible, given to the nation of Israel. Never do I see it given to "spiritual Israel" in the writings of the apostles to Christ's new church. In the Israelite nation if you were caught breaking the Sabbath, you were stoned to death. Sounds more like an obligation than a gift.

Stoned to death because of the Civil law of Moses. Adultery had the same penalty as well. These laws dealt with the civil governing of Israel. An eye for an eye was a civil law. Jesus changed that. Spiritual Israel includes both Jews and Gentiles. When the Gentiles in the early church converted they kept the Sabbath as well. It was when the Romans converted that they observed Sunday out of convenience.

Sophia7 · Feb 25, 2008

PROPHECYKID said:
I do not understand exactly what you mean by a ceremonial sign. But the Sabbath Law is distinct from the ceremonial laws. Remember that with the ceremonial system everything has to do with sacrifices. On the monthly sabbaths special sacrifices were offered. God's holy Sabbath was not related to the offering of Sacrifices in anyway.

Actually, there were special sacrifices offered on the Sabbath, in addition to the regular daily offerings:

Num 28:1 And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying,
Num 28:2 Command the children of Israel, and say unto them, My offering, and my bread for my sacrifices made by fire, for a sweet savor unto me, shall ye observe to offer unto me in their due season.
Num 28:3 And thou shalt say unto them, This is the offering made by fire which ye shall offer unto the LORD; two lambs of the first year without spot day by day, for a continual burnt offering.
Num 28:4 The one lamb shalt thou offer in the morning, and the other lamb shalt thou offer at even;
Num 28:5 And a tenth part of an ephah of flour for a meat offering, mingled with the fourth part of a hin of beaten oil.
Num 28:6 It is a continual burnt offering, which was ordained in mount Sinai for a sweet savor, a sacrifice made by fire unto the LORD.
Num 28:7 And the drink offering thereof shall be the fourth part of a hin for the one lamb: in the holy place shalt thou cause the strong wine to be poured unto the LORD for a drink offering.
Num 28:8 And the other lamb shalt thou offer at even: as the meat offering of the morning, and as the drink offering thereof, thou shalt offer it, a sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savor unto the LORD.

Num 28:9 And on the sabbath day two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth deals of flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and the drink offering thereof:
Num 28:10 This is the burnt offering of every sabbath, beside the continual burnt offering, and his drink offering.

Num 28:11 And in the beginnings of your months ye shall offer a burnt offering unto the LORD; two young bullocks, and one ram, seven lambs of the first year without spot;
Num 28:12 And three tenth deals of flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, for one bullock; and two tenth deals of flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, for one ram;
Num 28:13 And a several tenth deal of flour mingled with oil for a meat offering unto one lamb; for a burnt offering of a sweet savor, a sacrifice made by fire unto the LORD.
Num 28:14 And their drink offerings shall be half a hin of wine unto a bullock, and the third part of a hin unto a ram, and a fourth part of a hin unto a lamb: this is the burnt offering of every month throughout the months of the year.
Num 28:15 And one kid of the goats for a sin offering unto the LORD shall be offered, beside the continual burnt offering, and his drink offering. (KJV)

PROPHECYKID said:
We know that the 7th day Sabbath was not observed like the monthly sabbaths in terms of sacrifices and so on.

Yes, it was, according to Numbers 28.

Also, Jesus said that the priests in the temple profaned the Sabbath and yet were blameless:

Mat 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless
Mat 12:6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
Mat 12:7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. (KJV)

What do you think the priests were doing in the temple to profane the Sabbath?

Jimlarmore · Feb 25, 2008

Sophia7 said:
Actually, there were special sacrifices offered on the Sabbath, in addition to the regular daily offerings:
Num 28:9 And on the sabbath day two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth deals of flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and the drink offering thereof:
Num 28:10 This is the burnt offering of every sabbath, beside the continual burnt offering, and his drink offering.

Actually this does not prove that the Sabbath was ceremonial in nature or a part of the ceremonial laws per se'. Only that special sacrifices were made on that day. The Sabbath was set aside for holy use at creation before any sacrifices were made at all.

Yes, it was, according to Numbers 28.

Also, Jesus said that the priests in the temple profaned the Sabbath and yet were blameless:
Mat 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless
Mat 12:6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
Mat 12:7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. (KJV)
What do you think the priests were doing in the temple to profane the Sabbath?

I haven't been able to find it yet but I think there is a place in the Bible that says God works on the Sabbath as well. Our pastor's work harder on Sabbath than any other day. I think that is what this verse is referring to and that is the work of God on the Sabbath. There is certain work that has to be done on the Bible that is necessary work. Things like taking care of the sick etc. These folks are also held blameless before God even though they profane the Sabbath.

God bless
Jim Larmore

RND · Feb 25, 2008

Jimlarmore said:
Actually this does not prove that the Sabbath was ceremonial in nature or a part of the ceremonial laws per se'. Only that special sacrifices were made on that day. The Sabbath was set aside for holy use at creation before any sacrifices were made at all.

The first "pot luck" rules!

Jimlarmore said:
I haven't been able to find it yet but I think there is a place in the Bible that says God works on the Sabbath as well. Our pastor's work harder on Sabbath than any other day. I think that is what this verse is referring to and that is the work of God on the Sabbath. There is certain work that has to be done on the Bible that is necessary work. Things like taking care of the sick etc. These folks are also held blameless before God even though they profane the Sabbath.

Mat 12:11
And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift [it] out? 12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.

Mat 18:10 ¶
Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. 11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. 12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? 13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that [sheep], than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. 14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

God definately works on the Sabbath:

Luke 13:14
And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on the sabbath day, and said unto the people, There are six days in which men ought to work: in them therefore come and be healed, and not on the sabbath day.

Sophia7 · Feb 25, 2008

Jimlarmore said:
Actually this does not prove that the Sabbath was ceremonial in nature or a part of the ceremonial laws per se'. Only that special sacrifices were made on that day. The Sabbath was set aside for holy use at creation before any sacrifices were made at all.

PROPHECYKID said that there were no special sacrifices offered on the Sabbath. The passage that I quoted shows that there were. That was my point.

Jimlarmore · Feb 25, 2008

RND,
Good post above, thankyou . I think that is what Christ was referrring to in Mark is that the work of God even though it may be going against what is practiced on the Sabbath by the majority of folks is ok to do. His entire ministry was about doing His Father's business. A greater than Abraham was amoing the children of God at that time and they knew it not or refused to see it.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

Understanding the New Covenant

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Member

Senior Veteran

Veteran

Tall73's Wife

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Tall73's Wife

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency