Why we are not supposed to keep the Sabbath

[SabbathBlessings]

I think you're confused, but if you really insist, you can form your Aaronic priesthood and start sacrificing animals after you build your temple since you think you are a child of Moses instead of Abraham.

For me,.... GOD seated Jesus at the right of HIM, not moses, so Jesus is the one Who I'm going to listen to and obey,...



8 And though being a Son, He learned obedience from that which He suffered,

9 And being perfected, He became The Author of Eternal Salvation unto all those obeying Him,

That includes Paul too. For those who misunderstand him which we would not if we elevated God.

The Ten Commandments is owned by God, He claimed them as a unit of Ten Himself as His covenant Deut4:13 His Testimony Exo31:18 His commandments Exo20:6 His works Exo 32:16, contains His seal (name, territory, title) Exo20:11 the are inside His ark Exo40:20 Rev 11:19 they are not owned by Moses or Paul, they are God's. God's people keep God's Laws that only He can define, by faith and love Exo20:6 John14:15 Rev14:12 Rev22:14

 

[Studyman]

The context of what laws Christ is referring to is established in v17, saying "the law and the prophets," which is an all-inclusive term rather than one that isolates a subset. In this context (same verse), Christ says "I have not come to abolish them [the law and the prophets] but to fulfill them [the law and the prophets]" How we understand Christ having fulfilled a specific subset of laws, like circumcision or the sacrifice, should extend to the whole as is the context.

From the very beginning, according to the Holy Inspired Word of God, these are spiritual forces in this world whose sole purpose is to turn men away from obedience to the Word of God. This spirit, as the Scriptures clearly show, "Professes to know God" and it quotes "some" of God's Word in it's mission. God gave us an example of this in the beginning of the Bible with Eve, in His Love and Mercy, for our admonition.

The Holy Bible, that Apostle Paul said was inspired by the Great God of Abraham, was written for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works, and is full of examples of men who placed their trust, AKA "Faith" in this God and "His Word".

This same "Bible" is also full of examples of men who were turned aside from honoring this God with respect and obedience, by voices inspired by the "other spirit" in it's aforementioned mission. In my understanding, God has given us these examples to choose between, because HE, as His Son tells us, "for the Father seeketh such to worship him".

He could just make us worship Him, but there is something Holy and Precious to Him for a mortal being with reason and free will, to choose of our own free will, to trust Him in our short existence on earth. He has a great Gift to give, as Paul teaches, "To them who by patient continuance in well doing "seek for" glory and honour and immortality, This gift is immortality in a world with no pain, no sorrow, and no evil.

Jesus said that if we want to enter this "Life", we are to Keep the Commandments "of God". This is the Theme throughout the entire Bible.

This same God, who knows the end from the beginning, knew that this worlds religions would accuse Jesus of rejecting or abolishing God's Law, which is widely taught by the religions of this world God placed me in, and therefore placed in His Inspired Scripture, the Words of Jesus you have referenced.

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Of course all has not yet been fulfilled, because Jesus has not yet returned to raise the dead. And if HE doesn't return to Raise the Dead, then the Faith of Abel to Paul, including your faith and mine, is in vain.

The Circumcision God required through Moses, that is, "Circumcision of the Heart" is essential for salvation. To sacrifice the old self, and to "put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. is a requirement for Salvation, without which no man can enter the Kingdom of God.

So my friend, be careful that you don't listen to all the many "other voices" in this world, that "come in Christ's Name" that the Jesus of the bible warned us about. And consider that in the referenced Scriptures, "Destroy and Fulfil" are opposites in their meaning, not the same.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The early church did not change the day, Jesus did.

Where from the mouth of Jesus did He say He changed His holy day, in clear easy to understand plain Scripture just the way He gave it, written and spoken by Him, that comes with His blessings and sanctification. One verse where Jesus said, we no longer need to keep the Sabbath comamndment.. You didn't provide Scripture, just your own words and seem to be taking the liberty of speaking for Jesus.

Jesus in His words indicted clearly not a jot or tittle shall pass from His law Mat5:18. He said in His own words the Sabbath would continue after He ratified His covenant by His blood Mat24:20, why His apostles was keeping every Sabbath decades later Acts15:21 Acts 18:4 just as Jesus indicated , nothing can be added after Jesus died, it would make His sacrifice in vain as it was once and for all Heb10:10

The Sabbath continues coming before the Lord for worship in the New Heaven and New Earth for His saints, does not say any other day, thus saith the Lord Isa66:22-23

If you have a quote from Jesus that He changed His Sabbath comamndment, please share, otherwise I might consider the implications of claiming Jesus said this, when He clearly in His own words said the opposite.

 

[Studyman]

I think you're confused, but if you really insist, you can form your Aaronic priesthood and start sacrificing animals after you build your temple since you think you are a child of Moses instead of Abraham.

Why would I continue in the Law of the Priesthood "After the Order of Aaron", when the Law and Prophets Prophesied of the coming of a New Priest, "After the Order of Melchizedek"? In your religion, Jesus is this Prophesied Priest, Yes?

And didn't God tell Moses:

Deut. 18: 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. In your Bible, what did Jesus instruct in Matthew 23:1-3? And shouldn't a person OBEY JESUS?

The Jesus "of the Bible" said that those who do the "Works of Abraham" are the Children of Abraham. So according to this same God and Father of the Lord's Christ, whose Word's the Jesus "of the Bible" instructed me "Live By", what were those works? Here, let me show you God's Own Words, as HE tells you what the Works of Abraham were.

Gen. 26: 4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Didn't God also give Abraham's Children His Laws, His Statutes and His Commandments?

And if not, then please tell me whose Laws, Commandments and Statutes God gave?

For me,.... GOD seated Jesus at the right of HIM, not moses, so Jesus is the one Who I'm going to listen to and obey,...

8 And though being a Son, He learned obedience from that which He suffered,

9 And being perfected, He became The Author of Eternal Salvation unto all those obeying Him,

I appreciate your zeal, but I'm not sure what Jesus you are referring to. The Jesus "of the Bible" said:

Matt. 23: 1 Then spake "Jesus" to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 "All therefore" whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

But we no longer have to go to the Levite Priest or Scribe to hear Moses and do as he instructs, as the Jesus "of the Bible" commands us. We have the oracles of God in our own home now. "WE" sit in Moses Seat, and therefore we can read God's Words to us through Moses ourself.

Not sure what Jesus you are obeying here.

 

[ARBITER01]

Why would I continue in the Law of the Priesthood "After the Order of Aaron", when the Law and Prophets Prophesied of the coming of a New Priest, "After the Order of Melchizedek"? In your religion, Jesus is this Prophesied Priest, Yes?

And didn't God tell Moses:

Deut. 18: 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. In your Bible, what did Jesus instruct in Matthew 23:1-3? And shouldn't a person OBEY JESUS?

The Jesus "of the Bible" said that those who do the "Works of Abraham" are the Children of Abraham. So according to this same God and Father of the Lord's Christ, whose Word's the Jesus "of the Bible" instructed me "Live By", what were those works? Here, let me show you God's Own Words, as HE tells you what the Works of Abraham were.

Gen. 26: 4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Didn't God also give Abraham's Children His Laws, His Statutes and His Commandments?

And if not, then please tell me whose Laws, Commandments and Statutes God gave?






I appreciate your zeal, but I'm not sure what Jesus you are referring to. The Jesus "of the Bible" said:

Matt. 23: 1 Then spake "Jesus" to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 "All therefore" whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

But we no longer have to go to the Levite Priest or Scribe to hear Moses and do as he instructs, as the Jesus "of the Bible" commands us. We have the oracles of God in our own home now. "WE" sit in Moses Seat, and therefore we can read God's Words to us through Moses ourself.

Not sure what Jesus you are obeying here.

Sorry, you're gonna have to do better than that. This isn't about me.

As I said, if you're obeying Moses instead of Jesus, then Jesus is not Lord in your heart,.... no matter how much you try to spin it otherwise.

 

[rstrats]

I go to church on Sundays, on the Lord’s day.

As Freth touched on, what scripture do you have which refers to the first day of the week as the Lord's Day?

 

[Studyman]

This also applies to how we understand "whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments..." as it applies to the context of the law and the prophets, not a unique subset. So how we understand us not breaking circumcision or not breaking the sacrifice can be applied to the entire law rather than a segregated portion of it, which is never taught.

It seems you are either omitting, or have not read about the Prophesied Priest that was to come, who ushered in a prophesied New Priesthood Covenant for the remission of Sins. It is written that the Priesthood "works" for remission of sins under the Priesthood "After the Order of Aaron", which was temporary from it's conception and included various animal sacrifices and works of that Priesthood Law for remission of sins, was to pass away "after those days", replaced by the Priesthood "works" of a New Priesthood covenant, "After the Order of Melchizedek", in which the Priest offers His Own Blood, and sacrifices His Own Self, for the remission of sins. This is a pretty important part of the Gospel of Christ, I'm not sure why you don't speak of it.

In my understanding, Jesus is this New High Priest. Therefore, if a man continues in the sacrifices and ceremonies of the Old Priesthood, after this Prophesied High Priest has come, would that in itself not be "Transgressing God's Laws"? After all, Moses did say:

Diet. 18: 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

As to circumcision, this world's religions are obsessed with the loose skin on a man's penis. Personally I don't think God really cared about the foreskin of the penis, as much as the fleshy heart. And HE said as much if a man is interested in His Every Word. How was a person to even know if a man was circumcised or not in the OT? Did Holy men of God walk around flashing their privates? Actually, that was forbidden by God's Law. It was always about Circumcision of the heart, as Moses teaches. And it was always considered a token between God and man.

But the "other voice" mentioned in my last reply, has used it to justify disobedience to God for centuries. I am convinced God didn't give this statute of Circumcision, so that preachers, "who profess to know God" could use it to justify the abolition of the entire Law of God.

I could be wrong, but have not Scriptures support for this popular religious philosophy of this world.

By also using "the least" reference, Christ is also levelling our qualitative judgments of law and instead he says breaking any of them is the same as breaking all of them or the same as breaking unique subset that we deem as better or arbitrarily call moral over the rest. So whatever we remove from the equation, Christ is pulling it back in saying they are all treated qualitatively the same regardless of our superficial labels we may give them (sacrafical, ceremonial, moral, etc...). He is not dividing law, he is ensuring they are viewed as a whole, rejecting any idea we may have to separate them.

But remember, Gods Himself separated the Priesthood Law according to the "Order" in which it was established. And God has always separated Sacrificial Law, for the rest of His Laws.

1 Sam. 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness "is as iniquity and idolatry". Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

So I agree with you in part, that "WE" have no right or authority to Judge God's Law, one as greater than another. But "GOD" has the right to do so, and HE has, as is clearly evident in the Scripture above, and "many" more spoken by Him throughout the Bible.

The philosophy that a man can reject God's Laws, despise His Judgments, reject or pollute His Sabbaths, and then show up with the Blood of an innocent being, "as per the Law", and be justified is a falsehood. As Paul teaches, "No Flesh is justified by "works of the Law".

 

[ARBITER01]

I don't really want to prolong this too much, because I view all of those people promoting Moses and the Sinai covenant of the Jews to be false teachers on here (which is why I have some of them on ignore), but in scripture, there are plenty of areas confirming to us who we are to listen to and obey,....

2Pe 3:1 This is now, beloved, the second letter that I have written to you; and in both of them I stir up your sincere mind by reminding you;

2Pe 3:2 that you should remember the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and the commandment(s) of the Lord and Savior through your apostles:

When a supposed Christian has an inordinate amount of focus on the law of Moses instead of The Lord Jesus and what He taught His Apostles, then most likely they are only promoting a personal belief. They've been carried away by a strange doctrine.

If they can't see how the scriptures, in many areas, tell us that the old covenant was fulfilled and a new one in the blood of Jesus was started that replaced it, then most likely they only have their minds changed, not their hearts.

Jesus is not going to promote the old covenant that he died to replace.

 

[Studyman]

Christ does quote from 10 but in a diminutive way, "You have heard that it was said to those of old" then goes on telling us a better way. So he tells us an older way, then shows us a better way, that better way is uniquely from Christ saying "But I say..." this creates a contrast between the ways of the old (the law) with the ways of Christ, showing Christ's way is better. Better than what? Better than the law.

I know you are just furthering what this world's religions have taught you, and you genuinely believe what you just posted. And it is doubtful, as Jesus declares, that you will be persuaded of anything different.

Nevertheless, because of Love for the brethren, I would like to share with you and those reading along, the error in this popular religious philosophy of this world.

#1. To believe you, I would have to believe that the "Them of Old Time" He is speaking to in Matt. 5, is God, and the Prophet HE Sent, and that Jesus came to destroy their teaching, so that men would be discouraged to no longer "Live By" the Word's Jesus said to Live By. But when you actually read what Jesus is saying, He isn't correcting His Father and the Prophets, HE is exposing the teaching of the Pharisees. Jesus just said:

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. Remember, these preachers, as did their fathers, "omitted the weightier matters of the Law". They transgressed God's Commandments by their own religious traditions. Please look at the first "LAW" you are claiming God didn't teach, but Jesus did.

21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

So what does the Law of God say?

Lev. 19: 17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.

So Jesus is just repeating what the Law and Prophets, and HE Himself has taught about the "Jews Religion" from the beginning.

Like it was pointed out to you earlier, the devils mission is to turn men away from obedience to God. And to do that, it "Professes to know God", like the serpent in the garden, and it quotes "Some" of God's Word, like the serpent in the garden. And Jesus Himself called these Pharisees and scribes, "children of the devil". Malachi said of their fathers: "Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been "partial in the law".

In every verse where Jesus is exposing the "Them of old time", He shows what the Words of God the corrupt priests quoted, and followed up with the Words of God they omitted. I'll give you a couple more examples, in the in sincere hope you might consider.

31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Duet. 24: 1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found "some uncleanness in her": then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

Jer. 3: 8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

Matt. 19: 7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, "except it be for fornication", and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Again, the "them of old time" promoted divorce for any reason. But the LAW only gave ONE reason for divorce. This is clear as a bell, for those who are interested in what is actually written. Lets examine another.

33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

34 But I say unto you, "Swear not at all"; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

What does the LAW say?

Deut. 5: 21 When thou shalt vow a vow unto the LORD thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the LORD thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee. 22 But if thou shalt "forbear to vow", it shall be no sin in thee.

In every case Jesus is pointing out the "LAW" that the "them of Old Time" omitted.

38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Lev. 19: 18 Thou shalt "not avenge", nor "bear any grudge" against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

The teaching that Jesus, who had just said "except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.", but then went on to diminish His Father and the Prophets His Father sent, is really wicked and not true. You mean well, I don't think you are promoting such a falsehood on purpose. And we have all been deceived in our lives.

But I hope you will consider that the "Them of Old Time", in Matt. 5, right after Jesus said HE didn't come to destroy the Law and Prophets, is NOT His Father and the Prophets, but the Fathers of the Pharisees, who were, as it is written and told us by Jesus Himself, "omitted the weightier matters of the Law".

Remember, The Christ Jesus "IS" the LAW of God who came in the Flesh.

 

[Studyman]

Sorry, you're gonna have to do better than that. This isn't about me.

As I said, if you're obeying Moses instead of Jesus, then Jesus is not Lord in your heart,.... no matter how much you try to spin it otherwise.

The deceiver would have us believe that Moses created LAWs. That Jesus lied to us. And that we can not trust the Holy Scriptures "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

Jesus said to Take Heed we are not deceived by these "Many" who come in His Name. My sincere hope is that men turn away from the religions of this world who promote such foolishness, like Moses created the 10 Commandments, or the LAW "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD."

My hope is that they might be persuaded to believe the Word's Of God that HE gave to Jesus and His Prophets. But alas, the Jesus "of the Bible" said many will just not be persuaded.

Luke 16: And he said unto him, If they "hear not" Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

For me, I believe in the Words Jesus "of the Bible". And I truly wish everyone did.

 

[DamianWarS]

No because the next verse speaks of a law that not a jot or tittle can pass from.

We already know the law of Moses what was outside the ark was never meant to be permeant from Scripture, written on ink by man on scrolls

Jesus does not reference a subset of laws, he refererences the whole thhing as per the context established in v17. Because the 10 were in stone does not disqualify them as being a part of the whole law and no scripture tells us otherwise.

Jots and tittles are also features of Aramaic square script (what modern Hebrew uses). The 10 commandments was not written in this script, it was written in something that predates it called Paleo Hebrew or Phoenician (same script, variations of language). There was no jots or tittles in the 10 commandments because it was not written with a script that features dots and tittles.

The Aramaic square script is a form more adapted for hand written ink/paper (papyrus) medium, like a calligraphy style, over etched stone. Paleo Hebrew has simple straight lines making it more suitable over stone than Aramaic square script. When Christ speaks of jots and tittles, if we are to take that reference literally, he is not referencing the tablets at all (because the tablets didn't have these features), he is referencing the scrolls of the law (Torah) as well as the scrolls of the prophets (as he establishes in v17) that would be copied over generations to preserve the text over keeping extremely old versions along with updating the scripts. The litteral law of the day would be written using Aramaic square script and used dots and tittles. The tablets however would not.

But this is a moot point. Jesus is not isolating the 10, the reference is for the whole law.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Jesus does not reference a subset of laws, he refererences the whole thhing as per the context established in v17. Because the 10 were in stone does not disqualify them as being a part of the whole law and no scripture tells us otherwise.

Jots and tittles are also features of Aramaic square script (what modern Hebrew uses). The 10 commandments was not written in this script, it was written in something that predates it called Paleo Hebrew or Phoenician (same script, variations of language). There was no jots or tittles in the 10 commandments because it was not written with a script that features dots and tittles.

The Aramaic square script is a form more adapted for hand written ink/paper (papyrus) medium, like a calligraphy style, over etched stone. Paleo Hebrew has simple straight lines making it more suitable over stone than Aramaic square script. When Christ speaks of jots and tittles, if we are to take that reference literally, he is not referencing the tablets at all (because the tablets didn't have these features), he is referencing the scrolls of the law (Torah) as well as the scrolls of the prophets (as he establishes in v17) that would be copied over generations to preserve the text over keeping extremely old versions along with updating the scripts. The litteral law of the day would be written using Aramaic square script and used dots and tittles. The tablets however would not.

But this is a moot point. Jesus is not isolating the 10, the reference is for the whole law.

He quoted the Laws that not a jot or tittle can pass from verbatim that He already defined as a set Deut4:13. I prefer His words over opinions of man.

 

[Hentenza]

Where from the mouth of Jesus did He say He changed His holy day,

““Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter shall pass from the Law, until all is accomplished! Therefore, whoever nullifies one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. “For I say to you that unless your righteousness far surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭17‬-‭20‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Matthew 5:17-20 “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke o | New American Standard Bible - N

“Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke o

bible.com

You guys love to verse mine these verses but never actually address what Jesus is saying.

1. Jesus incorporates the moral commandments into His two love commandments. The 4th commandment is not a moral commandment despite what your sect believes. The Mosaic law plainly considers the practice as ceremonial.

2. Jesus uses this teaching here to address that errors that the scribes and Pharisees are making and warns others to not act like them. The audience here was primarily Jews with gentiles, who were not under the law, mixed in with the crowd.

3. The law convicts of sin but does not offer a means to repentance. The law remains to point the unbelieving sinners to a savior who then provides that means to repentance.

“And He *said to them, “Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and his companions became hungry; how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the consecrated bread, which is not lawful for anyone to eat except the priests, and he also gave it to those who were with him?” Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath.””
‭‭Mark‬ ‭2‬:‭25‬-‭28‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath.” | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

So the Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath.”

bible.com

Here the Pharisees were accusing Jesus of breaking the law by picking heads of grain during the sabbath. They were hungry. Jesus gives them the story of David who ate the consecrated bread meant for the priests because he was hungry. It’s not breaking the law to fulfill a practical need. So the sabbath was made for man who distorted that sabbath from a rest to a burden. Jesus becomes Lord of EVEN the sabbath because He is Lord of all. Man can’t keep the sabbath without perverting it as the sabbatists promote a moral sabbath. So Jesus gave us His rest.

If you make an argument against what I wrote then get creative and don’t waste my time with your tired arguments using the same verses that I have already addressed.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

““Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter shall pass from the Law, until all is accomplished! Therefore, whoever nullifies one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. “For I say to you that unless your righteousness far surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭17‬-‭20‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Matthew 5:17-20 “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke o | New American Standard Bible - N

“Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke o

bible.com

You guys love to verse mine these verses but never actually address what Jesus is saying.

1. Jesus incorporates the moral commandments into His two love commandments. The 4th commandment is not a moral commandment despite what your sect believes. The Mosaic law plainly considers the practice as ceremonial.

2. Jesus uses this teaching here to address that errors that the scribes and Pharisees are making and warns others to not act like them. The audience here was primarily Jews with gentiles, who were not under the law, mixed in with the crowd.

3. The law convicts of sin but does not offer a means to repentance. The law remains to point the unbelieving sinners to a savior who then provides that means to repentance.

“And He *said to them, “Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and his companions became hungry; how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the consecrated bread, which is not lawful for anyone to eat except the priests, and he also gave it to those who were with him?” Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath.””
‭‭Mark‬ ‭2‬:‭25‬-‭28‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath.” | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

So the Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath.”

bible.com

Here the Pharisees were accusing Jesus of breaking the law by picking heads of grain during the sabbath. They were hungry. Jesus gives them the story of David who ate the consecrated bread meant for the priests because he was hungry. It’s not breaking the law to fulfill a practical need. So the sabbath was made for man who distorted that sabbath from a rest to a burden. Jesus becomes Lord of EVEN the sabbath because He is Lord of all. Man can’t keep the sabbath without perverting it as the sabbatists promote a moral sabbath. So Jesus gave us His rest.

If you make an argument against what I wrote then get creative and don’t waste my time with your tired arguments using the same verses that I have already addressed.

This is a different argument than what I asked.

I asked very simply in Jesus own words where did He say we don't have to keep the Sabbath commandment? You claimed He changed the Sabbath. The summary of the Law, the two greatest commandments is not Jesus saying we can break the Sabbath commandment, they include the Sabbath according to God what Jesus who is God quoted Deut6:5.

So where is the verse where Jesus after His death told anyone, we do not need to keep the Sabbath commandment. He certainly did not tell His faithful followers who kept the Sabbath according to the comamndment after His death Luke23:56 so where is the verse where He told them or anyone to not keep the Sabbath commandment. Jesus wrote and spoke- Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Exo20:8-11, the Sabbath is My holy day Isa58:13 Where did He say just as clearly, we do not have to keep the Sabbath commandment. If you can't find it, because its not there, I would be careful adding words that our Lord and Savior did not say, but that's me I would never want to put myself in the place of Him and speak for Him on something He said the opposite. Eze20:12 Eze20:20 Mat24:20 Isa66:22-23.

 

[DamianWarS]

As to circumcision, this world's religions are obsessed with the loose skin on a man's penis. Personally I don't think God really cared about the foreskin of the penis, as much as the fleshy heart.

Tell that to Abraham who was told very clearly if not in the flesh then you have broken the covenant, tell hat to Moses who was almost killed for not doing it. Was not Jesus circumsized? Was not all of the disciples?

We can't spiritualize a subset of laws because we feel God doesn't care about their physical observance but then treat another subset differently. Jesus doesn't seem to make these distinctions, when he says the least of the commandments what commandments do you suppose he is referring to? Certainly not the 10 which would be regarded as the greatest. If we cannot apply the Christ's words to all of the law, the are we not guilty of making post-scriptual qualitative judgements calling some more worthy of our attention?

I speak to the issue I brought up but I'm not entirely certain where you stand on it, so these comments are direct to the issue but I'm not presupposing your own postion.

 

[Hentenza]

As Freth touched on, what scripture do you have which refers to the first day of the week as the Lord's Day?

1. The apostles gathered on the first day for services (Acts 20:7).

2. The tithes were always collected on the first day of the week. (1 Cor. 16:2).

3. The vast majority of Jesus apparitions for the 40 days after resurrection happened on a Sunday. (Multiple verses).

4. All testimony of the early church (first and second century) attest to a Sunday service.

Also, why would I want to worship Jesus on a day where He was still dead? The resurrection is the culmination of the gospel and the defeat of death and sin. Secondly, the 4th commandment was never a moral commandment but a ceremonial commandment which is why is not repeated into Jesus two love commandments.

 

[Hentenza]

This is a different argument than what I asked.

No. This is the argument that you asked. These are Jesus own words, are they not? You just don’t like it because it doesn’t match your legalistic arguments.

 

[DamianWarS]

He quoted the Laws that not a jot or tittle can pass from verbatim that He already defined as a set Deut4:13. I prefer His words over opinions of man.

He quotes from the 10 and he quotes outside the 10. Both are treated with the same logic and can be found next to each other in scripture in the same context (Ex 20, and Ex 21)

The text says the law and the prophets. The text says jots and tittles which are not characteristics of the script used in the physical tablets. The text says even the least of these... What do you suppose is the least? Certainly not the 10 which would be regarded as the greatest.

The context does not separate the 10 (which cannot be supported) but instead shows us a unified rule over law (very well supported). In the context of fulfilled what Christ does to x he also does to y. In the context of how we should value law how we value x is how we should value y. There is no segmented version of law.

Anyone can say I prefer his words over man (which by the way is accusatory and very insulting, please be better in your conduct) but without backing it up it is meaningly.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

No. This is the argument that you asked. These are Jesus own words, are they not? You just don’t like it because it doesn’t match your legalistic arguments.

They do not have Jesus saying we do not need to keep the Sabbath commandment and you know it otherwise you would simply produce the verse. God knows it too, who we can't hide anything from Ecc12:13-14

 

[SabbathBlessings]

He quotes from the 10 and he quotes outside the 10. Both are treated with the same logic and can be found next to each other in scripture in the same context (Ex 20, and Ex 21)

The text says the law and the prophets. The text says jots and tittles which are not characteristics of the script used in the physical tablets. The text says even the least of these... What do you suppose is the least? Certainly not the 10 which would be regarded as the greatest.

The context does not separate the 10 (which cannot be supported) but instead shows us a unified rule over law (very well supported). In the context of fulfilled what Christ does to x he also does to y. In the context of how we should value law how we value x is how we should value y. There is no segmented version of law.

Anyone can say I prefer his words over man (which by the way is accusatory and very insulting, please be better in your conduct) but without backing it up it is meaningly.

After quoting only from the Ten He said FUTHERMORE, which means in addition and than even related those to the Ten Commandments.