Understanding the New Covenant

[Jimlarmore]

Here is a more complete quote from the Augsburg confession.


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Again, the authors of traditions do contrary to the command of God when they find matters of sin in foods, in days, and like things, and burden the Church with bondage of the law, as if there ought to be among Christians, in order to merit justification a service like the Levitical, the arrangement of which God had committed to the Apostles and bishops. For thus some of them write; and the Pontiffs in some measure seem to be misled by the example of the law of Moses. Hence are such burdens, as that they make it mortal sin, even without offense to others, to do manual labor on holy-days, a mortal sin to omit the Canonical Hours, that certain foods defile the conscience that fastings are works which appease God that sin in a reserved case cannot be forgiven but by the authority of him who reserved it; whereas the Canons themselves speak only of the reserving of the ecclesiastical penalty, and not of the reserving of the guilt. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Whence have the bishops the right to lay these traditions upon the Church for the ensnaring of consciences, when Peter, Acts 15, 10, forbids to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, and Paul says, 2 Cor. 13, 10, that the power given him was to edification not to destruction? Why, therefore, do they increase sins by these traditions? [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]But there are clear testimonies which prohibit the making of such traditions, as though they merited grace or were necessary to salvation. Paul says, Col. 2, 16-23: Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath-days.If ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances (touch not; taste not; handle not, which all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men! which things have indeed a show of wisdom. Also in Titus 1, 14 he openly forbids traditions: Not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men that turn from the truth. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]And Christ, Matt. 15, 14. 13, says of those who require traditions: Let them alone; they be blind leaders of the blind; and He rejects such services: Every plant which My heavenly Father hath not planted shall be plucked up. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If bishops have the right to burden churches with infinite traditions, and to ensnare consciences, why does Scripture so often prohibit to make, and to listen to, traditions? Why does it call them "doctrines of devils"? 1 Tim. 4, 1. Did the Holy Ghost in vain forewarn of these things? [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Since, therefore, ordinances instituted as things necessary, or with an opinion of meriting grace, are contrary to the Gospel, it follows that it is not lawful for any bishop to institute or exact such services. For it is necessary that the doctrine of Christian liberty be preserved in the churches, namely, that the bondage of the Law is not necessary to justification, as it is written in the Epistle to the Galatians, 5, 1: Be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. It is necessary that the chief article of the Gospel be preserved, to wit, that we obtain grace freely by faith in Christ, and not for certain observances or acts of worship devised by men. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]What, then, are we to think of the Sunday and like rites in the house of God? To this we answer that it is lawful for bishops or pastors to make ordinances that things be done orderly in the Church, not that thereby we should merit grace or make satisfaction for sins, or that consciences be bound to judge them necessary services, and to think that it is a sin to break them without offense to others. So Paul ordains, 1 Cor. 11, 5, that women should cover their heads in the congregation, 1 Cor. 14, 30, that interpreters be heard in order in the church, etc. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is proper that the churches should keep such ordinances for the sake of love and tranquillity, so far that one do not offend another, that all things be done in the churches in order, and without confusion, 1 Cor. 14, 40; comp. Phil. 2, 14; but so that consciences be not burdened to think that they are necessary to salvation, or to judge that they sin when they break them without offense to others; as no one will say that a woman sins who goes out in public with her head uncovered provided only that no offense be given. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Of this kind is the observance of the Lord's Day, Easter, Pentecost, and like holy-days and rites. For those who judge that by the authority of the Church the observance of the Lord's Day instead of the Sabbath-day was ordained as a thing necessary, do greatly err. Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath-day; for it teaches that, since the Gospel has been revealed, all the ceremonies of Moses can be omitted. And yet, because it was necessary to appoint a certain day, that the people might know when they ought to come together, it appears that the Church designated the Lord's Day for this purpose; and this day seems to have been chosen all the more for this additional reason, that men might have an example of Christian liberty, and might know that the keeping neither of the Sabbath nor of any other day is necessary. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]There are monstrous disputations concerning the changing of the law, the ceremonies of the new law, the changing of the Sabbath-day, which all have sprung from the false belief that there must needs be in the Church a service like to the Levitical, and that Christ had given commission to the Apostles and bishops to devise new ceremonies as necessary to salvation. These errors crept into the Church when the righteousness of faith was not taught clearly enough. Some dispute that the keeping of the Lord's Day is not indeed of divine right, but in a manner so. They prescribe concerning holy-days, how far it is lawful to work. What else are such disputations than snares of consciences? For although they endeavor to modify the traditions, yet the mitigation can never be perceived as long as the opinion remains that they are necessary, which must needs remain where the righteousness of faith and Christian liberty are not known. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Apostles commanded Acts 15, 20 to abstain from blood. Who does now observe it? And yet they that do it not sin not; for not even the Apostles themselves wanted to burden consciences with such bondage; but they forbade it for a time, to avoid offense. For in this decree we must perpetually consider what the aim of the Gospel is. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Scarcely any Canons are kept with exactness, and from day to day many go out of use even among those who are the most zealous advocates of traditions. Neither can due regard be paid to consciences unless this mitigation be observed, that we know that the Canons are kept without holding them to be necessary, and that no harm is done consciences, even though traditions go out of use.[/FONT]



I know I have seen more things specifically on the Sabbath issue, I will try to find them.
God bless! Ricker

Thanks Ricker,
I have read most of this but not all. I will get back with you later on this in more detail but the only real text that I saw while reading this is the standard many denominations use to throw out the Sabbath and that is Col 2: 14-16.

Just a quick note here on that set of texts and that is that Paul makes it clear we are not to judge anyone on what day they keep. That part is clear and I think that even applies to the 7th day Sabbath. However, the way the context is worded does not make it perfectly clear that the "holy days" nailed to the cross was the 7th day Sabbath. A close study reveals some very specific language that gives us a strong clue as to why it's not the Sabbath. Let's examine them:

Col 2:14-18

14

Blotting out the hand writing of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15

And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
16

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17

Which are a shadow of things to come: but the body is of Christ.

Clearly we see the distinction of the ceremonial laws made here. The ceremonial laws were written by the hand of Moses and placed on the side of the ark. They were said to be against the people and contained curses.

The ten commandments were written by the finger of God on stone and were placed inside the ark. They were never said to be against the people.

Also the word sabbath days when used in the Bible always referr to the ceremonial annual sabbaths. The 7th day Sabbath is nearly always said to be the Day of the Lord or God's holy Day.

Lastly, the Sabbath was never a shadow of things to come as the ceremonial annual sabbath days were. Also a day cannot be a ceremony. Obsevance of the day can include ceremonies but ceremonies are not necessary for it's proper observance. The Sabbath is about resting and communing with the Creator. That is the chief thing that God wanted when He created it at creation.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[ricker]

[

quote=Jimlarmore;44053562]Thanks Ricker,
I have read most of this but not all. I will get back with you later on this in more detail but the only real text that I saw while reading this is the standard many denominations use to throw out the Sabbath and that is Col 2: 14-16.

Just a quick note here on that set of texts and that is that Paul makes it clear we are not to judge anyone on what day they keep. That part is clear and I think that even applies to the 7th day Sabbath. However, the way the context is worded does not make it perfectly clear that the "holy days" nailed to the cross was the 7th day Sabbath. A close study reveals some very specific language that gives us a strong clue as to why it's not the Sabbath. Let's examine them:

Col 2:14-18

14

Blotting out the hand writing of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15

And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
16

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17

Which are a shadow of things to come: but the body is of Christ.

Clearly we see the distinction of the ceremonial laws made here. The ceremonial laws were written by the hand of Moses and placed on the side of the ark. They were said to be against the people and contained curses.

The ten commandments were written by the finger of God on stone and were placed inside the ark. They were never said to be against the people.

Also the word sabbath days when used in the Bible always referr to the ceremonial annual sabbaths. The 7th day Sabbath is nearly always said to be the Day of the Lord or God's holy Day.

Thank you for saying it's not perfectly clear, I agree. I can see this might not be a definitive anullment of the weekly Sabbath rule as some say. It could, however, be a clue. Paul did not take the opportunity to uphold the weekly Sabbath here like he could have. It seems there were questions about the validity of Jewish customs.

Lastly, the Sabbath was never a shadow of things to come as the ceremonial annual sabbath days were. Also a day cannot be a ceremony. Obsevance of the day can include ceremonies but ceremonies are not necessary for it's proper observance. The Sabbath is about resting and communing with the Creator. That is the chief thing that God wanted when He created it at creation.

A day can't be a ceremony, but the commanded rest on a day could be considered ceremonial, I think.
The shadow of things to come has been argued. We now have the fulfilled rest in Christ from our works.
The Sabbath commandment and the commentary surrounding it never specifically says the rest is for communing with God that I know of, but I guess that can be inferred.
Your brother in Christ, Ricker

 

[ricker]

I think it's time to draw any distinctions that may exist between the old and new covenants. This thread has gone on for over one hundred posts and I don't think that has been done. Out of courtesy to my brother Ricker I will allow him to begin with his ideas on this.
If it's ok with everyone can we kind of keep our discussions within the confines of a few important questions on this? I will start out with some and if anyone has more please add them.

1. What was the purpose of the Old Covenant?

I am no expert this subject, but I will give it a shot.
The old covenant was with Israel as God's chosen people to set them apart from the world, and we are also told this law was added to increase trespass to show the utter need of our Saviour.

2. What was the purpose of the New Covenant?

This is the fulfilled plan of salvation by grace through faith that we enter in as Christians.

3. What were the key components of the Old Covenant?

The law given to the Isralites was to guide them in the new land they were to be given. The ten commandments were a summation, if you will, of the laws and kept in the ark of the covenant. If the COI kept the laws and regulations given them by God, there were promises by God to them. (they didn't keep them).

4. What were the key components of the New Covenant?

The key components of the new covenant are the body and blood of Christ having been given for the forgiveness of sins. The Holy Spirit has been given to Christians now to guide us and the sign of this covenant is the Lord's supper.

5. What relationship did the sancturary have with the old covenant?

The sanctuary was a place for God to dwell among His chosen people, and a place for ceremonial shadows lookiong forward to Christs sacrifice.

6. What relationship did the sancturary have with the new covenant?

When the curtain was ripped from top to botom at Christ's death, it showed the temple's time had ceased to be relevent and the sacrificial system was over.

7. What places were the old Covenant written?

It was written on parchment, I presume, and stone and placed in the most holy place in the temple.

8. What places were the New Covenant written?

On our hearts by the ministration of the Holy Spirit.

9. What is the theme of the Old Covenant?

Do this and I will bless you as a nation.

10. What is the theme of the New Covenant?

Jesus has done this for you. Accept this free gift and follow Him.

This is ten questions. Some may come up with more but let's start to put all of this together. I know the majority of this discussion has been over the Sabbath so far and that is ok but we need to establish if the Sabbath was or is a part of the new covenant or not. So Brother Ricker, do your thing on this and I will do mine as well.

My answers here are thrown together kinda fast, and may not be thought out perfectly. Please take that into consideration. What are your answers? It is always easier to critique others than to put together origional clear, concise thoughts.
God bless! Ricker

 

[Jimlarmore]

[
Thank you for saying it's not perfectly clear, I agree. I can see this might not be a definitive anullment of the weekly Sabbath rule as some say. It could, however, be a clue. Paul did not take the opportunity to uphold the weekly Sabbath here like he could have. It seems there were questions about the validity of Jewish customs.

If I remember correctly from my studies of this Paul was addressing the problem of dealing with the ceremonial laws in general. The new Christians still wanted to observe some of these old ceremonial laws that were fulfilled at the cross. As I said before he spent a lot of scriptural ink on circumcision. Paul was a hebrew and a pharasee. The Sabbath would have been so engrained in his culture and life style that he may have not even felt the need to say anything on it. If the 7th day Sabbath of the Lord was actually to be done away with by divine inspiration he would have spent tons more time and ink on that than what he did on circumcision because as we have discussed the Sabbath is foundational to the nation of Israel and it's covenant to God.

A day can't be a ceremony, but the commanded rest on a day could be considered ceremonial, I think.

It could be but it doesn't have to be and that is the point I am trying to make here. To say it IS a ceremonial sign means it HAS to be ceremonial.

The shadow of things to come has been argued. We now have the fulfilled rest in Christ from our works.
The Sabbath commandment and the commentary surrounding it never specifically says the rest is for communing with God that I know of, but I guess that can be inferred.
Your brother in Christ, Ricker

I would tend to agree with you had the Sabbath commandment came alone or as a direct part of the ceremonial laws. The problem is it didn't. It came at Horeb when all of the rest of the moral commandments were given. They came to us in a package, they all stand together and are to be taken together. We can't pick and choose which ones we want to keep and which ones we don't. Also, I can't see how Christ's death which was for our sins fulfilled the sanctity and holiness of the day set aside at creation when there was no sin.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[ricker]

If I remember correctly from my studies of this Paul was addressing the problem of dealing with the ceremonial laws in general. The new Christians still wanted to observe some of these old ceremonial laws that were fulfilled at the cross. As I said before he spent a lot of scriptural ink on circumcision. Paul was a hebrew and a pharasee. The Sabbath would have been so engrained in his culture and life style that he may have not even felt the need to say anything on it. If the 7th day Sabbath of the Lord was actually to be done away with by divine inspiration he would have spent tons more time and ink on that than what he did on circumcision because as we have discussed the Sabbath is foundational to the nation of Israel and it's covenant to God.

The Sabbath certainly would be engrained in the Hebrew culture. So would the fact that circumcision was the entrance sign to keeping the whole law of the Jews.

On the other hand, I am not so sure the Sabbath tradition would have been so established at Corinth and other Gentile countries. We know, however, that there were Jewish synagogs at Corinth, at least.
Of course I realize making judgements of scripture by what is not said is dangerous.

It could be but it doesn't have to be and that is the point I am trying to make here. To say it IS a ceremonial sign means it HAS to be ceremonial.

Could a moral law be given as a sign to a certain nation? It still doesn't make sense to me. The Sabbath command is the only one of the ten that is called a sign.

I would tend to agree with you had the Sabbath commandment came alone or as a direct part of the ceremonial laws. The problem is it didn't. It came at Horeb when all of the rest of the moral commandments were given. They came to us in a package, they all stand together and are to be taken together. We can't pick and choose which ones we want to keep and which ones we don't. Also, I can't see how Christ's death which was for our sins fulfilled the sanctity and holiness of the day set aside at creation when there was no sin.

If one believes the ten commandments have to be all moral laws and can't include a ceremonial sign of the covenant with Israel, you are right.
You are right about the day being set aside and sanctified at creation.
God bless! Ricker

 

[Jimlarmore]

Ok, here goes. I am going to try to back each one of my answers up with scripture if possible so this may take awhile:

1. What was the purpose of the Old Covenant?

I think the Bible tells us that the Covenant was for the revealing of God's law's a statutes to His people, Ex31, & 34:28, Deut 4:13, Lev 26:15 . The covenant is actually an agreement between God and His people to obey His will. There was nothing really wrong with the first covenant other than the ceremonial laws that were fulfilled. The problem was with the people who couldn't keep it. This old covenant included both the ceremonial laws which were shadows of things to come ( Col 2:12, and Heb 10:1 ) and the ten commandments which was placed in the ark of the covenant right below the mercy seat of God's shikinah glory. The primary issue was though for salvation thru grace by faith ( Heb 9:19-22)

2. What was the purpose of the New Covenant?

The New and the Old has the same agenda and that is to reveal God's plan of salvation, laws and statutes. To emphasize the blood of Christ as the propitiation for all sinners. THat salvation is as it was in olden times by grace thru faith. The new covenant contains the laws of God that were to be written on the heart Jer 31:31-31, Heb 8:10, 10:16. The laws of God are the ten commandments.

3. What were the key components of the Old Covenant?

The key components of the Old Covenanat were the ten commandments and the sacrificial systems laws to be a shadow of things to come ( see above ) which is salvation by grace thru faith.

4. What were the key components of the New Covenant?

The blood of Christ shed for all mankind and God's laws as we spoke in Heb 8:10, 10:16, Jer 31:31-34.

5. What relationship did the sancturary have with the old covenant?

The sanctuary is a pattern of one that is in heaven, Ex 25:40, Heb 8:5 and represented the plan of salvation in miniature until the annointed one would come and fulfill it's shadowy ceremonies. As the priest moved thru the earthly sanctuary on earth so Christ moves thru the heavenly sanctuary in heaven. The Bible tells us that without the shedding of Blood there is no remission of sins, Heb 9:22 so the earthly sanctuary was a temporary way to forgive sins until the lamb of God came to be the sacrifice for all mankind John 1:29.

6. What relationship did the sancturary have with the new covenant?

Christ sits as our high priest in heaven right now, Heb 4:14. So the sanctuarial system continues in heaven with Christ's blood being offered once for all mankind. Christ is our mediator between us and the Father, 1 Tim 2:5, Heb 8:6. The earthly sanctuarial system is no longer in effect since at the cross the veil in the temple was rent from top to bottom , Matt 27:51, Mark 15:38, Luke 23:45.

7. What places were the old Covenant written?

The foundation of the old covenant the ten commandments were written on stone and placed inside the ark, Deut 10:2 and the book of the law that Moses wrote , or the hand writing of ordinances ( including the sacrificial system) he put on the side of the ark, Deut 31:26.

8. What places were the New Covenant written?

On the heart and mind Heb 8:10, Jere 31:31034

9. What is the theme of the Old Covenant?

The lamb of God that takes away the sin of man. The love of God for a fallen race.

10. What is the theme of the New Covenant?

The lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world, John 1:29.


God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[ricker]

Ok, here goes. I am going to try to back each one of my answers up with scripture if possible so this may take awhile:


I think the Bible tells us that the Covenant was for the revealing of God's law's a statutes to His people, Ex31, & 34:28, Deut 4:13, Lev 26:15 . The covenant is actually an agreement between God and His people to obey His will. There was nothing really wrong with the first covenant other than the ceremonial laws that were fulfilled. The problem was with the people who couldn't keep it. This old covenant included both the ceremonial laws which were shadows of things to come ( Col 2:12, and Heb 10:1 ) and the ten commandments which was placed in the ark of the covenant right below the mercy seat of God's shikinah glory. The primary issue was though for salvation thru grace by faith ( Heb 9:19-22)



The New and the Old has the same agenda and that is to reveal God's plan of salvation, laws and statutes. To emphasize the blood of Christ as the propitiation for all sinners. THat salvation is as it was in olden times by grace thru faith. The new covenant contains the laws of God that were to be written on the heart Jer 31:31-31, Heb 8:10, 10:16. The laws of God are the ten commandments.



The key components of the Old Covenanat were the ten commandments and the sacrificial systems laws to be a shadow of things to come ( see above ) which is salvation by grace thru faith.



The blood of Christ shed for all mankind and God's laws as we spoke in Heb 8:10, 10:16, Jer 31:31-34.



The sanctuary is a pattern of one that is in heaven, Ex 25:40, Heb 8:5 and represented the plan of salvation in miniature until the annointed one would come and fulfill it's shadowy ceremonies. As the priest moved thru the earthly sanctuary on earth so Christ moves thru the heavenly sanctuary in heaven. The Bible tells us that without the shedding of Blood there is no remission of sins, Heb 9:22 so the earthly sanctuary was a temporary way to forgive sins until the lamb of God came to be the sacrifice for all mankind John 1:29.



Christ sits as our high priest in heaven right now, Heb 4:14. So the sanctuarial system continues in heaven with Christ's blood being offered once for all mankind. Christ is our mediator between us and the Father, 1 Tim 2:5, Heb 8:6. The earthly sanctuarial system is no longer in effect since at the cross the veil in the temple was rent from top to bottom , Matt 27:51, Mark 15:38, Luke 23:45.



The foundation of the old covenant the ten commandments were written on stone and placed inside the ark, Deut 10:2 and the book of the law that Moses wrote , or the hand writing of ordinances ( including the sacrificial system) he put on the side of the ark, Deut 31:26.



On the heart and mind Heb 8:10, Jere 31:31034



The lamb of God that takes away the sin of man. The love of God for a fallen race.



The lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world, John 1:29.


God Bless
Jim Larmore

Just a quick observation. I like some of your answers better than mine. I'm a little unsure of the relationship of the ten commandments and the rest of the law with salvation by grace, however.
God bless! Ricker

 

[Jimlarmore]

The Sabbath certainly would be engrained in the Hebrew culture. So would the fact that circumcision was the entrance sign to keeping the whole law of the Jews.

On the other hand, I am not so sure the Sabbath tradition would have been so established at Corinth and other Gentile countries. We know, however, that there were Jewish synagogs at Corinth, at least.
Of course I realize making judgements of scripture by what is not said is dangerous.

Sometimes the absence of a point made is very telling considering the entire context of the whole anthology we call the Bible.

Could a moral law be given as a sign to a certain nation? It still doesn't make sense to me. The Sabbath command is the only one of the ten that is called a sign.

We've already discussed this but the uniqueness of Sabbath observance is the reason it was a "sign" between God and His people. Many of the pagan religions had moral laws similar or identical to the list in the decalog, However, the pagan's worshiped the sun on the first day of the week. Later it was this day that was adopted in lieu of the real Sabbath to placate the merger between Christianity and paganism.

If one believes the ten commandments have to be all moral laws and can't include a ceremonial sign of the covenant with Israel, you are right.
You are right about the day being set aside and sanctified at creation.
God bless! Ricker

I do believe they are all moral laws indeed. I don't think we can pick and choose which one of the ten we are to keep or ignore. The Sabbath is not a ceremonial sign of the old covenant. It is a sign between God and His people but it's not part of the ceremonial laws.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[ricker]

Sometimes the absence of a point made is very telling considering the entire context of the whole anthology we call the Bible.

Do you mean like the lack of any Sabbath commands or instructions thereof to the new Christian church?

We've already discussed this but the uniqueness of Sabbath observance is the reason it was a "sign" between God and His people. Many of the pagan religions had moral laws similar or identical to the list in the decalog, However, the pagan's worshiped the sun on the first day of the week. Later it was this day that was adopted in lieu of the real Sabbath to placate the merger between Christianity and paganism.

I guess I don't know much about the when and why of the origions of Christians worshipping on Sunday, but now days while going to church on Sunday is the norm, it is certainly not the only day used for weekly worship and I know no one in my church who "keeps" Sunday. Sorry, off topic.

I do believe they are all moral laws indeed. I don't think we can pick and choose which one of the ten we are to keep or ignore. The Sabbath is not a ceremonial sign of the old covenant. It is a sign between God and His people but it's not part of the ceremonial laws.

You almost make sense when you put it that way. Picking and choosing wouldn't be a good thing to do.
God bless! Ricker

 

[Jimlarmore]

Do you mean like the lack of any Sabbath commands or instructions thereof to the new Christian church?

You don't have any direct commands on any of the ten commandments per se'. They are all mentioned either directly or indirectly in the new testament but are not given as commands to the new Christian church. Even though there may not be a direct command to observe it we do see texts like in Hebrews 4 that clearly tell us that it is not only still in effect but that we should labor to enter the rest of God on that day. What I find amazing now is the tendancy to abandon the Sabbath when there is no direct command to do so in the Bible.

I guess I don't know much about the when and why of the origions of Christians worshipping on Sunday, but now days while going to church on Sunday is the norm, it is certainly not the only day used for weekly worship and I know no one in my church who "keeps" Sunday. Sorry, off topic.

No that's ok. I will not judge anyone for their discision to observe Sunday as their holy day. I just can't justify it in my mind to do it based on the Bible. I grew up going to church on Sunday and actually felt it was the holy day most of my formative years. It took a while for me to switch over to the 7th day but the Lord has blessed me beyond measure since I did. I can feel the Holy Spirit blessing me on that day more than any of the others.


God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[ricker]

You don't have any direct commands on any of the ten commandments per se'. They are all mentioned either directly or indirectly in the new testament but are not given as commands to the new Christian church. Even though there may not be a direct command to observe it we do see texts like in Hebrews 4 that clearly tell us that it is not only still in effect but that we should labor to enter the rest of God on that day. What I find amazing now is the tendancy to abandon the Sabbath when there is no direct command to do so in the Bible.

Could you show me where Hebrews clearly says we should labor to enter the rest of God on the Sabbath?
I'm not arguing, just want to get your imput.
Thanks, Ricker

 

[Jimlarmore]

Could you show me where Hebrews clearly says we should labor to enter the rest of God on the Sabbath?
I'm not arguing, just want to get your imput.
Thanks, Ricker

Let's look at the entire context as well as the texts that say this:

Hebrews 4:1-
1

Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.
2

For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
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.
9

There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
10

For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11

Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.



My commentary:
Verse one ( our context ) tells us that we should fear from receiving a promise of entering into "His rest" ( the rest of God ). That we may come short of it. So far we can't tell for sure what rest is specifically being spoken of here so we read on.

Verse's 2 thru 3 tell us that this rest comes to us from receiving the gospel ( of Jesus Christ ) but not all profited from it because they didn't have faith. IOW, the gospel has to be received by faith to work. The last part of verse 3 mentions that "the works" were finished from the foundation of the world. This to me is talking of the works of the plan of salvation that was decided on between the Father and the Son before the world was created.

Verses 4-6 specifically speaks of God's rest being on the 7th day Sabbath and that it was necessary for some to enter into this rest of God but some didn't because of unbelief or lack of faith.

Verses 7-11 we find that God limits a certain day and that we should not harden out hearts against that day and to listen to His voice to observe it.

Verse 8 tells us that if Jesus gave them rest would he not afterward have spoken of another day. This to me means there is no other day given but the Sabbath that symbolizes God's rest. Not that we can't enter into the rest of God from our works to save ourselves on other days but the Sabbath is symbolic of God's rest and sanctified as a holy time once a week.

Verse 9-11 tells us to labor to enter into God's rest from our works just as God entered into His rest on the first 7th day. These texts focus primarily on the works of man for salvation and not just physical work.

Conclusion:
Hebrews 4 has dualistic applications for observing/celebrating the 7th day and resting from our physical work and for entering God's rest spiritually from our works to save ourselves.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[freeindeed2]

Let's look at the entire context as well as the texts that say this:

Hebrews 4:1-
1

Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.
2

For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
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.
9

There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
10

For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11

Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.



My commentary:
Verse one ( our context ) tells us that we should fear from receiving a promise of entering into "His rest" ( the rest of God ). That we may come short of it. So far we can't tell for sure what rest is specifically being spoken of here so we read on.

Verse's 2 thru 3 tell us that this rest comes to us from receiving the gospel ( of Jesus Christ ) but not all profited from it because they didn't have faith. IOW, the gospel has to be received by faith to work. The last part of verse 3 mentions that "the works" were finished from the foundation of the world. This to me is talking of the works of the plan of salvation that was decided on between the Father and the Son before the world was created.

Verses 4-6 specifically speaks of God's rest being on the 7th day Sabbath and that it was necessary for some to enter into this rest of God but some didn't because of unbelief or lack of faith.

Verses 7-11 we find that God limits a certain day and that we should not harden out hearts against that day and to listen to His voice to observe it.

Verse 8 tells us that if Jesus gave them rest would he not afterward have spoken of another day. This to me means there is no other day given but the Sabbath that symbolizes God's rest. Not that we can't enter into the rest of God from our works to save ourselves on other days but the Sabbath is symbolic of God's rest and sanctified as a holy time once a week.

Verse 9-11 tells us to labor to enter into God's rest from our works just as God entered into His rest on the first 7th day. These texts focus primarily on the works of man for salvation and not just physical work.

Conclusion:
Hebrews 4 has dualistic applications for observing/celebrating the 7th day and resting from our physical work and for entering God's rest spiritually from our works to save ourselves.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

The passage says that day is 'today'. Today is Thursday.

Also you should consult the SDA Commentary. You'll find it will tell you that this passage is NOT a place to go to try and prove Sabbath observance being required of Christians in the New Covenant.

In CHRIST alone...

 

[Jimlarmore]

The passage says that day is 'today'. Today is Thursday.

Also you should consult the SDA Commentary. You'll find it will tell you that this passage is NOT a place to go to try and prove Sabbath observance being required of Christians in the New Covenant.

In CHRIST alone...

Thankyou for your advice but I will read and interpret the Bible as the Holy Spirit gives me the ability and disclosure of truth. Clearly, these verses speaks of the 7th day Sabbath here as being directly associated with the rest of God. Also, I think pastor Steven Bohr agrees on this truth as well.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[ricker]

Let's look at the entire context as well as the texts that say this:

Hebrews 4:1-
1

Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.
2

For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
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.
9

There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
10

For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11

Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

My commentary:
Verse one ( our context ) tells us that we should fear from receiving a promise of entering into "His rest" ( the rest of God ). That we may come short of it. So far we can't tell for sure what rest is specifically being spoken of here so we read on.

Verse's 2 thru 3 tell us that this rest comes to us from receiving the gospel ( of Jesus Christ ) but not all profited from it because they didn't have faith. IOW, the gospel has to be received by faith to work. The last part of verse 3 mentions that "the works" were finished from the foundation of the world. This to me is talking of the works of the plan of salvation that was decided on between the Father and the Son before the world was created.

Like it!

Verses 4-6 specifically speaks of God's rest being on the 7th day Sabbath and that it was necessary for some to enter into this rest of God but some didn't because of unbelief or lack of faith.

It says God rested on the seventh day. You added the word Sabbath.
I think these people who did not enter the rest because of unbelief is speaking of those who were not allowed into the promised land.

Verses 7-11 we find that God limits a certain day and that we should not harden out hearts against that day and to listen to His voice to observe it.

The verse The writer of Hebrews quoted (Psalms 95)is not speaking of the Sabbath, but the COI and the promised land.
6 Come, let us bow down in worship,
let us kneel before the LORD our Maker;

7 for he is our God
and we are the people of his pasture,
the flock under his care.
Today, if you hear his voice,
8 do not harden your hearts as you did at Meribah,
as you did that day at Massah in the desert,
9 where your fathers tested and tried me,
though they had seen what I did.
10 For forty years I was angry with that generation;
I said, "They are a people whose hearts go astray,
and they have not known my ways." 11 So I declared on oath in my anger,
"They shall never enter my rest."

Verse 8 tells us that if Jesus gave them rest would he not afterward have spoken of another day. This to me means there is no other day given but the Sabbath that symbolizes God's rest. Not that we can't enter into the rest of God from our works to save ourselves on other days but the Sabbath is symbolic of God's rest and sanctified as a holy time once a week.

Other translations say Joshua instead of Jesus and it makes a lot more sence that way. The rest spoken about is the rest the COI found in the promised land, not a recurring one. I'm not sure of what "another day" means, but can it mean the same day?

Verse 9-11 tells us to labor to enter into God's rest from our works just as God entered into His rest on the first 7th day. These texts focus primarily on the works of man for salvation and not just physical work.

Works of man and physical work? I don't understand what you mean.

Conclusion:
Hebrews 4 has dualistic applications for observing/celebrating the 7th day and resting from our physical work and for entering God's rest spiritually from our works to save ourselves.

Hebrews 4 speaks of God resting on the seventh day and compares it with the rest the COI found from their wandering in the promised land. It then says we are to enter into a Sabbath-rest from our works. It does not say we don't have to keep the Sabbath, but I can't see how it upholds the practice.
God bless! Ricker

 

[freeindeed2]

Thankyou for your advice but I will read and interpret the Bible as the Holy Spirit gives me the ability and disclosure of truth. Clearly, these verses speaks of the 7th day Sabbath here as being directly associated with the rest of God. Also, I think pastor Steven Bohr agrees on this truth as well.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

Are you saying you disagree with the SDA Commentary?

 

[ricker]

Thankyou for your advice but I will read and interpret the Bible as the Holy Spirit gives me the ability and disclosure of truth. Clearly, these verses speaks of the 7th day Sabbath here as being directly associated with the rest of God. Also, I think pastor Steven Bohr agrees on this truth as well.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

But I think pastor Ron Calvert would not. Oops, sorry, maybe the person you were talking to others know who Steven Bohr is.

 

[Jimlarmore]

It says God rested on the seventh day. You added the word Sabbath.
I think these people who did not enter the rest because of unbelief is speaking of those who were not allowed into the promised land.

The original language uses the word Sabbath or the same word in greek for Sabbath so I didn't think it was inappropriate.

The verse The writer of Hebrews quoted (Psalms 95)is not speaking of the Sabbath, but the COI and the promised land.
6 Come, let us bow down in worship,
let us kneel before the LORD our Maker;

7 for he is our God
and we are the people of his pasture,
the flock under his care.
Today, if you hear his voice,
8 do not harden your hearts as you did at Meribah,
as you did that day at Massah in the desert,
9 where your fathers tested and tried me,
though they had seen what I did.
10 For forty years I was angry with that generation;
I said, "They are a people whose hearts go astray,
and they have not known my ways." 11 So I declared on oath in my anger,
"They shall never enter my rest."

This is true it is not specifically speaking of the Sabbath right here per se' but the Sabbath is the thematic rest in context with this allusion in Psalms made by the author of Hebrews. You have to take the message the entire set of texts is giving you.

Other translations say Joshua instead of Jesus and it makes a lot more sence that way. The rest spoken about is the rest the COI found in the promised land, not a recurring one. I'm not sure of what "another day" means, but can it mean the same day?

The names of Joshua and Jesus are basically interchangeable in the Bible. Here the translators of the KJV saw fit to use the name of Jesus, However, I agree that if this is specifically addressing the event of the COI not entering the promised land then Joshua would be more appropriate.

Works of man and physical work? I don't understand what you mean.

Salvatory works by man is what I mean. Man can do nothing to save himself "works wise". Then however the Sabbath also gives man a chance to rest from his physical labors as well.

Hebrews 4 speaks of God resting on the seventh day and compares it with the rest the COI found from their wandering in the promised land. It then says we are to enter into a Sabbath-rest from our works. It does not say we don't have to keep the Sabbath, but I can't see how it upholds the practice.
God bless! Ricker

It places the importance of the Sabbath into view for new testament Christians. It gives us a dualistic application of rest from our labors or physical work and from our labors of spiritual work to save ourselves. By doing all of this it makes it very clear that the Sabbath was not done away with as some say it was. Sabbath rest is as important to new testament Christians now than it ever has been to any believer.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[Jimlarmore]

Are you saying you disagree with the SDA Commentary?

Is the SDA Commentary the inspired word of God?

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[Jimlarmore]

But I think pastor Ron Calvert would not. Oops, sorry, maybe the person you were talking to others know who Steven Bohr is.

Steven Bohr is a prominent SDA pastor who has a church in Fresno California. I see him a lot on 3abn and really like to listen to him preach. He almost always has a very in depth study of the Bible when he preaches and brings up things that are very deep. He made a comment not too long ago about Hebrews 4 and how it applied to the Sabbath for new covenant Christians. Basically, what I said earlier was almost a repeat of what he gave. He of course was much more eloquent in the way he presented it and he tied Heb 4 into other parts of the Bible as well.

God Bless
Jim Larmore