Dr. Michael Brown and the Sabbath Debate

[sparkman]

Nomos mean LAW plain and simple.
It doesn't mean a specific law, but the law can be determined by the context.

James is specific about which law because there's more then one law.

i know it is referring to the Ten Comandments because it quotes them.
Jas 2:11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.

He's quoting two items from the Mosaic Covenant. It just happens to be that the two items are from the Ten Commandments, which are an overview of the entire Mosaic Covenant.

I outlined my view of the structure of the Mosaic Covenant on this thread. It is based on my understanding of the book called "Treaty of the Great King" by Meredith Kline:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/117465-structure-old-covenant.html

In brief, though, my view of the Mosaic Covenant is that it is a false dichotomy to claim the Ten Commandments are separate, and still apply AS A WHOLE, and that the rest of the Mosaic Covenant does not. The Ten Commandments were in essence an overview of the entire Mosaic Covenant, and the Book of the Covenant is the detail behind it. I realize that there were additional elements introduced such as ceremonial and ritualistic aspects, but in essence, it is an overview of the Mosaic Covenant and to assert that the two are separate and one is applicable while the other is not is an error. All moral absolutes in the entire covenant are obviously spiritual and moral principles that the Christian would want to derive moral and spiritual direction from, but not because they are in the Mosaic Covenant and because it still applies (it does not) ..but because they are moral absolutes.

Read Acts 15, II Corinthians 3, Hebrews 8 and 9, Galatians 3 and 4, Ephesians 2:13-15, and Romans 7:1-6. The Mosaic Covenant, as a whole, is no longer in effect, and this includes Sabbath and festivals.

You're also not reading in context and seeing that he quotes a separate item from the Torah, which is a quote from Leviticus 19:18 "You shall love your neighbor as yourself". Start back at James 2:8 and go forward, and read in context.

Notice one item he does NOT mention as a commandment is the Sabbath.

Let me ask this...do you consider drunkenness or taking recreational drugs to be a sin? If so, where does it fall under the Ten Commandments if it's an all encompassing definition of sin? Also, if you are SDA, do you consider eating unclean meats to be sin, or smoking tobacco? Where do you see those items under the Ten Commandments?

That's the problem with making the assertion the Ten Commandments your standard. There's no slot that drunkenness falls under, and many other things you would consider sin, such as eating unclean meats. While trying to maintain a definition that sin is breaking the Ten Commandments, even you yourself don't think the Ten Commandments is the exhaustive definition of sin, as you would claim drunkenness (or even drinking alcohol for some SDAs) is a sin, smoking tobacco is a sin, or maybe even eating meat, ketchup, spices, pickles, chocolate, drinking coffee or colas, or eating vegetables with fruits in the same meal is a sin.

The Law (Mosaic Covenant) included moral elements so in that way it does define sin, but not every element within the Torah is a moral issue for the New Covenant believer. It is a basket, which holds a number of commandments, and part are moral in nature and part are ceremonial/ritualistic in nature.

I will ask a few other things:

1) If the intention of the Sabbath law is rest, then why can't rest occur on another day? Or, instead, are some being legalistic
about the manner of the rest, just like Christ told the Pharisees they were being?
2) If a slave in the NT church had a Gentile master who would not allow him to rest, was he living in sin for working on the
Sabbath? If so, why don't we find instruction in the Pauline epistles regarding this topic?
3) If the Sabbath is a moral issue, why did Christ never compare the Sabbath with a moral law, but compared it with
physical circumcision and the showbread, both of which are ceremonial or ritualistic in nature?
4) Why is Sabbath-breaking never listed as a sin in the sin lists of the Gentiles, and why are no instructions given in regards
to its observance?


I've asked some of these questions before and have received no adequate response yet.

I'll repeat this again: I have no issue with those Sabbath observers who don't accuse or judge non observers of being unsaved, spiritually inferior or in sin due to non-observance. In fact, I would attend a fellowship that observed the Sabbath and festivals if they were in my area and had good theology and a Christ-centered focus. I believe observance of the Sabbath and festivals have some teaching value, although the Gentiles bypassed spiritual kindergarten and went on to the higher grades, and nor am I convicted that non-observance is sin per Colossians 2:16-17.

 

[sparkman]

I agree with what you are saying here. I agree with your perspective as well. I am just now learning about a lot of this stuff and have just barely scraped the surface. I will tell you this, there are those I have met that will talk to you in the way you have mentioned. I only know because I have met them. I don't consider myself an authority in these things as I have much to learn. However, I would be interested in studying it with others. Hopefully you are greeted by someone that knows about this that is walking in love and abiding in the spirit like it happened with me. I may be able to talk to my wife about scheduling to meet to study the subject. It can be a lot of fun to learn together. Pray about it and let me know.

I can't conduct off site bible studies per the rules of the site but I can answer questions in reference to my perspective on this. I've seen you in the Bible study room. We can meet anytime and chat in a side room on the issue; I just can't plan scheduled meetings. It will just be an ad hoc discussion.

I would suggest watching the videos by Meno Kalisher on YouTube by Jerusalem Assembly. He knows what he's talking about. He is an observer of Sabbath and festivals but does not claim they are requirements. They have teaching value, and I would not claim otherwise. Galatians 3 is clear in this; that the Law was a schoolmaster to lead the Jews to Christ...however once the reality came, the shadow loses much of its value. It still has value, though, for reminder purposes.

Here's the link to Jerusalem Assembly:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbqxHKojvlUWBzFtUapcM5A/videos

The last video they posted was Purpose of the Law. I think he's going to do an overview on the Law in general. So far, everything he's said meshes with my understanding as I've developed it as an ex Sabbath observer. I would love to fellowship with his group, but they are in Jerusalem, so I'm not likely to be able to join them anytime soon He's a very animated speaker.

He has other videos about the festivals where he goes through their meaning...just look through his videos on YouTube.

 

[sparkman]

Hey sparkman,

I am curious with this question that you asked someone else.

Also, show me where any human observed the Sabbath prior to Exodus 16 when God gave it to Israel. And, if it was to be a sign to the Israelites, wouldn't that infer no one else was observing it?

There is an assumption here, namely that if there is no mention of anyone keeping the Sabbath before that point then no one did.

That is speculation is it not? Can you prove that no one ever did? The answer is a resounding no. I hope you get the point I am making. The question in reality offers no insight.

I am not picking at you just editing a thought pattern that leads to false measurements of truth. For example lets take that same question but a little edited. Show me where homosexuality was condemned before Leviticus? Now does the fact that there is no mention now prove that it was OK before Moses? no of course not.

But with the Sabbath we do have a clue, and By Sabbath I am referring to the 7th day Sabbath here.

Mar 2:27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

Jesus makes it clear that the Sabbath was made for man. That word man is mankind/humanity. And Jesus is referring to when it was made.

That the 7th day Sabbath is the one being refereed to is not in question as Context shows it to be. So we are not talking about feast Sabbaths here.

This leads us to Gen 2. Notice its not made for Jews but man. thus this is a heavy indication that Adam and Eve indeed did keep it. Or are we to assume that God excluded them from the title of mankind? No. It is a reasonable reaction to this evidence to see that the Sabbath was indeed kept before exodus 16. It may not be a flood of evidence but it does come into the equation.

As Far as being a sign to Israel, there is an assumption here also. It seems your assuming Sabbath has Israelite origin. But this is quickly dismissed when one examines Genesis 2. It pre-dates the Jewish nation and if that is in Question let the commandment given to Israel by God clear that up for you as it states the Commandment as a memorial of the Sabbath in Genesis 2. See Exodus 20 on the Sabbath.

Plus we have seen Jesus did not see it as only for Jews. Isaiah said it was for Gentiles also. The commandment itself includes the Stranger/Gentile.

My point is this, You have taken a verse such as this:

Eze 20:12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them.

Or one like it and assumed that this is the core or foundation or reason for the Sabbath. This is erroneous as the afore mentioned points show its origin and connection to be founded in creation.

This text does not change that reality it rather states that God is using that memorial as a sign that He sanctifies them. Its an additional use that one would expect for a number of reasons.

1, Gods Sabbath was made for man as a memorial of creation. It stands to reason that if God called a people to Himself then He would give it to them. This does not mean its meaning changes.

2, God was the one that sanctified them, Set them apart for Holy use, It stands to reason that God used the Sabbath which he set apart for holy use as a sign of this reality.

But this in no way does away with its original intention.

Hi gotime.

I think an assumption you're making is that Sabbath observance is a moral absolute, like those related to sexual immrality that you mentioned, and I don't have this conviction anymore as an ex Sabbath/festival observer.

The Sabbath is a ceremonial or ritualistic aspect of the law. I base my conviction on multiple points of reasoning.

Here are some of my reasons:

1. The Mosaic Covenant is not applicable anymore. Sabbath is part of the Mosaic Covenant. See Acts 15, II Corinthians 3, Galatians 3
and 4, Hebrews 8 and 9, Ephesians 2:13-15, and Romans 7:1-6. I see no logical reason for compartmentalizing the Ten
Commandments over the Book of the Covenant, and these verses provide support for my reasoning in making reference to the words
that were written on the tablets.
2. Colossians 2:16-17 mentions the weekly Sabbath as part of those things which are shadows of Christ who is the reality. The Sabbath
pointed to our spiritual rest in Christ (Matthew 11:28-30). It is mentioned in the context of other things which are inapplicable, therefore
the logical conclusion is that it is inapplicable.
3. The Sabbath is not a moral law. Christ compared it to other ceremonial and ritualistic aspects of the Law, such as circumcision and
the eating of the showbread (see Matt 12). He never mentioned it in the context of moral laws. In addition, he stated in John 5:1-18
that both he and his Father work continually (v. 17) in the context of the Sabbath. The Jews knew that he was making a reference to h
his deity, as they had the belief that God doesn't keep the Sabbath, and thus were enraged with him due to his claims concerning
this (v. 18).

Regarding Mark 2:28 and the creation account regarding the seventh day:

The assertion is being made that "man" must be generic rather than specific. My response is that the Israelites were men, so regardless of whether the Sabbath was created for the Israelites or mankind in general, your point is inconclusive. We only find the Sabbath being given to ancient Israel in Exodus 16. The Sabbath was "instituted" or "created" for Israel (and Israelites were men) at Exodus 16.

Christ's major point in these verses are something that, in my opinion, you should be concerned with. Pharisees were focused on the minute, like some Sabbath observers are focused on the exact day, rather than the practical need for rest. From my reading of what Christ said, he was focused more on the need for physical rest, rather than a test of loyalty to God, as many Sabbath observers claim that it continues to be.

By the way, I do not deny that the Sabbath has a benefit for rest purposes, if a person is able to rest (slaves in the NT church who were redeemed and had Gentile masters may have not been able to rest). The important issue is whether the Sabbath is a moral issue, and whether the command given to Israel applies to the New Covenant believer as a requirement, and those who are not observing it are being disobedient to God.

If your group was the same as mine, the claim is that those who are not keeping the specific 24 hour time period are in disobedience or rebellion against God, rather than another 24 hour time period. So, the focus, like the Pharisees, is not on a practical need for rest but on the issue of testing the person in relation to obedience.

I will also point out that the Genesis account only says God "ceased" on the seventh day of creation, and that he set apart that particular day, and there is no indication that one day out of every seventh was set apart for humans, until after Israel was given the Sabbath. The word Sabbath is not even mentioned until Exodus 16. So, your arguments are speculative..there is no proof.

God himself does not stop working on the Sabbath, by the way. And, even the Jews in Christ's day knew that God doesn't stop working on the Sabbath, like some Sabbath keepers claim.

In fact, read John 5:1-18. Christ IMPLICITLY stated that both he and his Father work on the Sabbath in verse 17. In verse 18, it records that they sought to kill him, because he was making himself equal with God.

The Jews knew that God doesn't rest on the Sabbath, and that by claiming that he works on the Sabbath in verse 17, just like God works, he was making an explicit claim to deity.

God, and Christ, hold the entire universe together. They don't take the day off on Saturday or any other day. So, Sabbath-keeping is not an essential aspect of God's character, which defines holiness. If you make this claim, you've got some real issues, as how do you explain Sabbath-keeping being an essential aspect of God's character, since he is not limited by time or space, and the Sabbath command necessarily involves time and location? How did God keep the Sabbath prior to creation? He is Creator, not the created.

There's an article on Mark 2 in this issue of Proclamation! if you want further details on Mark 2:28. Proclamation! is a magazine that is the ministry of Life Assurance Ministries, by Dale Ratzlaff, who is an ex SDA pastor. I don't agree with every point he makes but he is pretty much in line with my perspective.

Proclamation 2015 Fall


As I've mentioned in the past, Colossians 2:16-17 is significant in regards to the Sabbath issue, and SDAs have been unable to provide any reasonable explanation to exclude the weekly Sabbath from Paul's remarks in these Scriptures.

It is plain that the weekly Sabbath is included in these shadows. The progression, which has been exhibited in OT verses as well, is from weekly Sabbath, New Moons, and seasonal festivals, or the reverse order, namely, seasonal festivals, New Moons and weekly Sabbath.

In fact I shouldn't even be using the phrase weekly Sabbath, as there is no indication that sabbaton is used in any other context other than weekly Sabbath. sabbaton is translated "week" part of the time, for example, the first day of the week (Sunday) is mia ton sabbaton in Greek, literally, first of week.

So, the lack of an adequate explanation of Colossians 2:16-17 from the perspective of Sabbath observers continues to convict me it is no longer applicable. The alternative explanations of Sabbath observers on these verses are not compelling, although the SDAs have tried very hard to produce one.

The assumption by many Sabbath observers is that the Sabbath is a moral absolute. I do not agree with this; the Sabbath is not a moral absolute like the laws against committing adultery, etcetera. It is not something which defines God's character, which is the true standard of holiness.

I make this argument on four points:

1) Priests profaned the Sabbath, yet are blameless. See Matthew 12:5. They did very hard work on the Sabbath, making
multiple animal sacrifices, yet they were not guilty of sin. You would not find an example where God would say the same
regarding a moral law; where it was ok for one human to do something, but not ok for another human to do it.
2) Christ ONLY compared the Sabbath with ceremonial or ritualistic laws. For example, he compared the Sabbath with
physical circumcision (John 7:23) and related it to David eating the showbread (Matt 12:3-4).
3)The Sabbath was given to ancient Israel as their covenant sign under the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 31). To them, it was a sin to break it, just like it was a sin for them not to circumcise their child on the eighth day. We are not under the Mosaic Covenant...in fact, no one is per the Scriptures I gave..not even the Jews are now under the Mosaic Covenant.
4) God works on the Sabbath, as noted concerning John 5:1-18, so it is not immoral to work on the Sabbath, else God would be immoral, and we know that isn't true.

Regarding point #1, this is straightforward. Christ said that priests profane the Sabbath, or treat it as common, yet are blameless. So, the Sabbath command applied to the common Israelite, but did not apply to the priesthood. We would not find a moral law that is the same. For instance, it would not be permissible for me to commit adultery, and a sin for you to commit adultery. This isn't the nature of moral laws.

Regarding point #2, Christ only compared the Sabbath with ceremonial or ritualistic laws. This places the Sabbath in the same context. This reasoning is similar to the reasoning I employ with regards to Colossians 2:16-17. It is grouped in the context of other items that you plainly acknowledge are shadows and types.

I'll provide this link again that compares the Sabbath with physical circumcision to see how both laws were similarly viewed in relation to the language Scripture uses in regards to them:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/117464-sabbath-circumcision-comparison.html

Regarding point # 3, Exodus 31 relates the Sabbath to the unique sign Israel was given regarding their relationship to God in Exodus 31. The Sabbath was never given to Gentiles. Show me one NT reference to the binding requirement of the Sabbath upon Gentiles.

I've already established in previous conversations that Paul evangelized both Jews and Gentiles on the Sabbath in the synagogue. I also have stated that Jewish Christians continued to observe many elements of the Mosaic Covenant including physical circumcision (see Acts 21), as a matter of cultural affinity and not a matter of compulsion. So, the traditional "proofs" that Sabbath observers give in this regard are irrelevant.

We don't see a single church meeting which occurred on the Sabbath after the resurrection. Note that I am not saying none occurred, but I am stating that there are no recorded church meetings on the Sabbath; only synagogue meetings with unconverted Jews and Gentiles. However, we do find church meetings on the first day. Paul met with unconverted and converted Jews and Gentiles in the Synagogue, because that was where the Scriptures were housed. They listened to the reading of the Scriptures, and then discussed them on their own on the first day of the week, taking communion at the same time.

This situation continued until anti-Christian sentiments amongst the Jews made it impossible, and then the majority of Christians continued to meet on Sunday.

I am continuing this post with point #4 down below.

 

[sparkman]

yes I should have not said that last part, that was rude of me sorry to you ,
and to sparkmans for saying that, but this is no excuse for his hatred for his former church,
and blaming his troubles on them, and keeps draging it through the mud

No problem with the sleeping remark. I hate it that I do that. I am considering just praying while sitting down or something rather than kneeling with my head on the couch as I fall asleep on my knees too much. Part of it is due to the peace of being in God's presence, and part of it is due to praying when I'm too tired, and part of it is my health as I have poor sleep patterns in part due to sleep apnea.

I don't hate Herbert Armstrong or Worldwide Church of God, but I do find it unfortunate that he led so many astray into a suspicious, paranoid mindset that views them as the possessors of truth and everyone else as deceived.

I also don't blame them for issues in my life, either, other than I wish I could have went to seminary when I was saved, but being part of the Armstrongite group made that an impossibility. I wasted some years in backsliding, though, that had little or nothing to do with Armstrongism. I could have went to seminary during that period of time if I had my head on straight. So a lot of what I regret in my life is related to my own decisions, and not the fault of Worldwide Church of God or the church. In fact, church leadership is what led me out of this paranoid, suspicious mindset.

However, as a Reformed believer, I am convicted God is sovereign in my life, and I praise him for all experiences, past, present and future. Nothing is lost in God's economy. That's the difference between those who have a high view of God's sovereignty and those who do not. I know all things work to the good of those who are redeemed (Romans 8:28-30).

I think I appreciate God's grace more than I would have otherwise, having been in a group that did not understand God's grace very well, but there are other Protestant believers who are in a similar situation due to poor doctrine.

I'm sure Paul gained some benefit from his Judaism in that he was able to reason with fellow Jews effectively. God wastes no experience in the lives of those he chooses to redeem.

The redeemed are clay, and God is the potter. The redeemed have no right to complain about how God molds and shapes them.

Isaiah 45:9 “Woe to him who strives with him who formed him, a pot among earthen pots! Does the clay say to him who forms it, ‘What are you making?’ or ‘Your work has no handles’?

It's comical when you think about it.

 

[sparkman]

I agree with what you are saying here. I agree with your perspective as well. I am just now learning about a lot of this stuff and have just barely scraped the surface. I will tell you this, there are those I have met that will talk to you in the way you have mentioned. I only know because I have met them. I don't consider myself an authority in these things as I have much to learn. However, I would be interested in studying it with others. Hopefully you are greeted by someone that knows about this that is walking in love and abiding in the spirit like it happened with me. I may be able to talk to my wife about scheduling to meet to study the subject. It can be a lot of fun to learn together. Pray about it and let me know.

I'd also recommend Sabbath in Christ by Dale Ratzlaff on this topic.

He covers the covenants of the Bible very well, and the Sabbath in particular.

He is an ex SDA so he knows what he's talking about on law related issues.

 

[mailmandan]

new bible translations have totaly changed this verses true meaning.
orginal verse words were back in the 4th century before changed.

; but the body of Christ​

Totally changed the true meaning? Yeah right.

Colossians 2:17 (KJV) - Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

Colossians 2:17 (NKJV) - which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.

Colossians 2:17 - (ESV) - These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

Colossians 2:17 - (NAS) - things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.

Colossians 2:17 - (NIV) - These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

As Greek scholar A.T. Robertson points out - A shadow (skia). Old word, opposed to substance (swma, body). In Hebrews 10:1 skia is distinguished from eikwn (picture), but here from swma (body, substance). The swma (body) casts the skia (shadow) and so belongs to Christ (Cristou, genitive case).

this means follow what the rock did and said, not follow other mans tradations.

also there are 7 holydays or Sabbaths, not all pointed to the cross

I see that you like to twist the scriptures in order to make them suit your agenda. The Sabbath was the shadow, and Christ is the reality or substance that cast the shadow. ​

 

[sparkman]

Matt 11:28-30 [SUP]28 [/SUP]Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. [SUP]29 [/SUP]Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. [SUP]30 [/SUP]For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

It is not coincidence that Christ follows this up with multiple Sabbath accounts. He is the reality that was casting the shadow. The Sabbath is a physical rest, but Christ and our life in Him is the spiritual rest.

I am not saying Sabbath observance is without value, though. There can be a remembrance value in observing the Sabbath.

However, Christianity is centered upon, and depends upon, Christ's resurrection, so it is perfectly appropriate to meet on Sunday, the day of the resurrection.

I would point to Romans 14 in regards to one person esteeming one day above another. We have this liberality as Christians. Unfortunately, though, I find it is quite often the Sabbath observers who will argue that Christians DONT have this liberality, so they are the ones who sit in judgment of the rest of Christianity and declare them disobedient and in sin...some even claim not saved, as I did.

It's forced by their doctrine. Those individuals in this large subset think that non-observers are under the Mark of the Beast, or will be under the Mark of the Beast in the Great Tribulation. Therefore, their doctrinal teachings force this animosity.

Some Messianic Jews and other Sabbath/festival observrs are not in this situation, though. They view the Sabbath and festivals as worthwhile observances, but not requirements, and do not judge non-observers as disobedient, unsaved, or in sin. I'd belong to a congregation like this who had good doctrine in other areas..in fact it would be preferable for me.

 

[sparkman]

^^

Continuation of earlier post:

Regarding point #4, it relates to the common assertion that the Ten Commandments define God's character. If this is true, then why does God work on the Sabbath as per John 5:1-18? How did he observe the Sabbath prior to the creation of the earth and sun? Did his holiness change after the creation, in that he needed to observe a day? What point of time does he observe the Sabbath in, as he is omnipresent, and isn't tied down to a specific location on earth?

Some individuals claim that this account in John 5 is related to man-made oral traditions concerning the Sabbath..but Christ's rebuttal definitely says both he and the Father work continually, and are not bound by the Sabbath.

In addition, I will note that the Pharisees based their views of the Sabbath on Scripture. Note Jeremiah 17:20-22 which talks about bearing burdens on the Sabbath. Also note that Jesus told the man to pick up his bed and carry it away..a considerable burden...so he directly told the guy to break the Sabbath to demonstrate his authority over the Sabbath.

Note also that verse 18 says he broke the Sabbath..it doesn't say oral tradition about the Sabbath but it says he broke the Sabbath. I don't know what to make of this verse. I know the explanations some have given concerning the Halakh. One thing I know is that Jesus was sinless, and that it was a sin for a human under the Mosaic Covenant to break the Sabbath, but I believe the preceding verses state that he as God had authority even over the Sabbath so he could do whatever he wanted on the Sabbath. He also touched dead bodies and allowed a woman with an issuance of blood to touch him, both of which were violations of the Mosaic Covenant clean/unclean laws, so I don't think he was bound by ceremonial/ritualistic aspects of the Mosaic Covenant, although he observed them most of the time, if not all the time. Again, my mind is not made up on this point.

I believe that is why he said that he is Lord over the Sabbath. He wasn't subject to it (Matthew 12:1-8, Mark 2:23-28, Luke 6:1-5). He was God in the flesh. One thing I know for sure, though, is that God is not subject to the Sabbath, and Sabbath-keeping is not part of his eternal nature. God is not subject to the limitations of mankind, and he existed before the earth and sun was created, therefore to claim Sabbath observance is a part of his eternal nature, which is the definition of holiness, is foolish.

Christ is (and was) both God and man. He possesses two natures, which are in a hypostatic union. This is true whether he was on earth or in heaven now. As God, he never ceased working, period. The remark Christ made in John 5:17 indicates this. I am assuming I'm talking to Trinitarians who believe Christ was YHVH when I discuss this.

Some Torah observers will undoubtedly get very angry on these points, but I don't avoid them because Scripture does not. I know that Christ was sinless, regardless of anything. The issue is whether Mosaic Covenant ceremonial and ritualistic laws were binding upon Him, and I consider the Sabbath to be a ceremonial or ritualistic law based on the reasoning above. I will also note that the Pharisees had good reason to believe what they did about the Sabbath, and this belief didn't come from oral tradition like some claim, but are garnered from Scripture, specifically Jeremiah 17:20-22.

The assertion of a lot of Sabbath observers is that the Sabbath is a moral issue, and that God created the Sabbath as a test, and that this test still applies... the truly loyal ones will keep the Sabbath. It is true that God used the Sabbath to test ancient Israelites, but the presupposition is that New Covenant Christians are under the same test. Did God create the Sabbath for physical rest, or is he testing everyone's obedience with it? Are those who fail to keep the Saturday Sabbath in rebellion against God? Is the focus of these Sabbath keepers on the practical need for rest, or is it on testing the obedience of believers? If so, what do Christ's words mean? It seems to me as if this type of Sabbath observer is basically sitting in the same role as the Pharisees, claiming that you can only rest on a certain day and a certain time frame, or you are not under God's blessings.

By the way, the SDAs and the Armstrongites have to jump through some real hoops on these issues. Once the concept that the Sabbath was a requirement was applied to people in wide geographic areas, such as the extremes of the world (the North pole and the South pole), they had to deal with assigning arbitrary times for Sabbath observance, because days and nights last for multiple days or nights in some of these climates at different times of the year. Since Sabbath is observed sunset to sunset typically, it is impossible to implement in these areas if the Scriptural teaching is followed.

So, they had to create rules to define what times to observe the Sabbath, outside of Scriptural instructions (Ellen G. White, at one point, decided no SDAs could live in such areas btw).

What if I'm a guy on the space station? When do I observe the Sabbath? If you say that it is ok for him to arbitrarily observe the Sabbath at a given time, then what difference is there in that, and a non Sabbath observer who fellowships on Sunday? Is God only available to worship on certain days? Is God's presence in some days more than others?

My view of the Mosaic Covenant is that it applied to a specific group of people (Israelites) at a specific time (from the Exodus to Christ's sacrifice) in a specific location (the land of Canaan) in a specific climate (generally warm). Once the work of God expanded to be a universal work, including Gentiles, claiming that it still applies has many problems, not the least of which is that different climates and distances are an issue. For instance, one of the requirements under the Mosaic Covenant is that those who are underneath it needed to travel to Jerusalem 3 times a year for pilgrimage festivals. Are we claiming that a saved person living in North America needs to do this three times a year? Or, does God wink at disobedience to one element while requiring that other elements be observed? That's the view of Jews actually....they are hoping God ignores the parts of the Mosaic Covenant that they don't keep. Another example is that many of the Torah observers don't build a Sukkoth or booth out of palm fronds and occupy it for seven or 8 days..this observance made sense in the land of Palestine where it is warm and the materials were available but it doesn't translate so well to North America (note that the booths had to be constructed of certain materials and needed to be occupied during the Feast of Tabernacles). So, modern day Torah observers largely re-interpret the Law so it's demands aren't as much of a problem for them...which is basically the same thing they accuse the Roman Catholics of doing in regards to the Law (note that I am not a fan of Roman Catholic theology).

As a final remark, I have no issue with Sabbath observers who don't accuse others of being unsaved, spiritually inferior, or in sin due to non-observance. The principle of Romans 14 applies to differences of opinions regarding days or food. I would fellowship with a group that observed the Sabbath and festivals if they had a Christ-focus and weren't engaged in Judaizer behavior in accusing non-observers of being unsaved, spiritually inferior or in sin. However, I would not deceive myself into thinking I was observing the Mosaic Covenant like some of the Torah Observers are doing.

I repeat this constantly because some accuse me of being anti-Sabbath. I am not; I am against the accusers. Unfortunately because of their doctrinal position, many Sabbath observers are accusers in this regard, either by actual words or by thoughts. I know that I was as an Armstrongite.

 

[KohenMatt]

I get a bit confused about this subject. I have LOTS of questions.

Some very good questions here! Here are some answer from my perspective of the discussion....

If the commandment to keep the Sabbath holy is no longer true, then why did Jesus and the early Christians do so?

The command to keep the Sabbath is holy and is never rescinded in the Bible. Nor is it changed physically and/or spiritually. And as you mentioned, the fact that Jesus and the disciples is important.

If the laws are no longer to be followed, then why did Jesus emphasize keeping the commandments in his teachings?

Again, what you're implying is correct. Jesus kept the Law perfectly, and told all of His disciples to do so. He never told anyone to stop doing them.

If the laws are to be abolished, does one that follows this teaching find it acceptable to break the other commandments as well? I.e. commit murder, adultery, idolatry, etc... If not, then who determines which commandments are important and which are not?

God included all of the 10 commandments together in one section, which is a summary of the entire Law. The issue in God's eyes is not which sin is more grievous than the others. God doesn't rate the evilness of each command on a scale of 1 to 10. Man does that. Sin is disobeying God; plain and simple.

If keeping the Sabbath holy is not important, then why do Satanists believe that those that keep the Sabbath holy are protected and untouchable by their spells and curses? Why is it such an important agenda for Satanists to promote deception about when the Sabbath is and how to keep it holy?

I have no experience with Satanism, so I can't offer a thought on this one.

Why have I heard so many testimonies from people about how God began to bless them when they began keeping the Sabbath? If God doesn't care about the Sabbath anymore, then why would he bless them?

Good observation. For many who keep the Sabbath is a true and spirit-filled way, there is a tremendous blessing. Anytime you walk in obedience to any of God's commands, you're walking in a deeper fellowship with Him. When we disobey Him, we lose a degree of that fellowship. The Law and the Sabbath is another example of that.

I am yet another example of the blessing in 1st keeping the Sabbath, and in the 12 years since.

I understand that keeping the Sabbath is extremely inconvenient for most people living in the world these days, but are we not supposed to be separate from the world? Shouldn't we maybe trust that God knew what he was doing when he created and numbered the days? Were we not made in his image, and if so, then resting every seventh day like our father would seem appropriate if that was the day he created for it, no?

You're absolutely correct on all points here.

People that keep the Sabbath holy are constantly met with opposition from the world. Why does it seem so important that they be stopped from doing so?

It's a matter of extremes, which is the same for the anti-Sabbath crowd. Some of the anti-Sabbath crowd will accuse them of trying to earn salvation through the Sabbath, which is not true. Their opposition comes from that.

Similarly, there are many pro-Sabbath people that will accuse the non-keepers of sinning willfully and freely and thus losing their salvation, which is not true. People love to attack the extremest views as if they're held by the majority.

Just some things to think about. I don't actually expect anyone to have answers to support not sacrificing one day of the week for the Lord. I really don't even see it as a sacrifice if you love the Lord with all heart, mind, soul, and strength. Ah... bu there I go quoting the commandments again. I guess that is probably meaningless to anyone that believes we shouldn't obey the laws of God.

One of the common justifications for not keeping a physical Sabbath is that, "Jesus is my Sabbath rest. Every day is my Sabbath." While Jesus does represent our ultimate rest, God never changed the importance of His 7th day Sabbath.

Sometimes I get the impression that people think that God made a lot of big mistakes when he was first starting out and that Jesus came to fix them.

I don't think a lot of people view God as having made mistakes, but rather that what God did in the Law was never meant to be applicable to them in the 1st place.

The law that we are no longer under is the law of sin and death, and that freedom we have through faith in Jesus; NOT freedom to break the laws of God. Look in the scriptures, you will clearly see which law we are free from.

Bam.
You hit the nail on the head PERFECTLY on this one. This is an important distinction many people don't see. If you don't see this distinction, the whole understanding is confused.

How can you tell when a child loves his parents? The child trusts their judgment and obeys them. A rebellious child reasons as to why they should not have to do what was told of them. This is why Jesus said, "If anyone loves me, they will hear my commandments and do them."

Again, excellent points.

An analogy I use of why it's important to continue keeping the Sabbath after Jesus' death and resurrection is this:

When a parent gives a child an instruction, they expect the child to keep doing it until they tell them to stop, even if they don't mention it again. When I teach my children to wash their hands after they go to the bathroom, I expect them to keep doing it even when I stop giving them the instruction. And when my children turn 18, I expect them to keep washing, even though they're not under my instruction.

I view the Law and the Sabbath the same. God gave His people the instruction and He expects them to keep doing it unless He tells them to stop. Why doesn't God tell New Testament believers to observe the Sabbath? Because He already had told them in the past, and expected them to continue doing it until He told them to stop.

The burden of proof isn't on the Sabbath-keeper to explain why God didn't mention it again. The burden of proof is on the non-Sabbath keeping to explain when God told them to STOP keeping it.

Again, excellent questions!

 

[sparkman]

If individuals are claiming non-observers are unsaved, spiritually inferior, or in sin, then they are Judaizers.

I find that almost all Sabbath and festival observers ultimately engage in this behavior. That's why I can't be part of most of them. I know God doesn't want me to have anything to do with that.

It's built into their DNA. Notice their qualified language. They may extend the courtesy of claiming that their disobedience is out of ignorance, but ultimately they make the accusation.

Read the book of Galatians, Philippians 3 (notice that Paul calls them mongrels who followed him around like nasty curs, disturbing Gentile Christians with their assertions), Acts 15, and Colossians 2...you'll see a pattern of such accusations.

Especially focus on Galatians 4:20-31. It describes the allegory of Hagar and Sarai. Note specifically verse 29, and how the children of the Mosaic Covenant persecute those who are under the New Covenant.

By the way Torah observers are one of the worst for looking down on other Christians as ignorant. They, like the Armstrongites, claim a superior understanding of Scripture. Some in the chat room come in and make comments that openly display their contempt for others. I remember one Torah Observer who asked the chat room if they knew their Savior was Jewish.

I find the professed superiority of knowledge proclaimed by some of them with regards to the Scriptures to be amusing because often they reject the full deity of Jesus Christ, the Trinity, the inspiration of the Pauline epistles, and/or espouse extra-biblical sources of authority. In addition, they often believe in a Bible code-like view of the Hebrew pictograph alphabet, that proposes concealed information is available to them through converting the Hebrew OT into ancient Hebrew pictograph characters. This has been disproven by Christian linguists who focus on the original languages, and is largely the product of a self-taught linguist who is an engineer by trade (thanks HeRoseFromTheDead for informing me on this).

I'm willing to extend to Torah observers the liberality to observe these elements, but they are often not willing to extend the same courtesy to non-observers. This forum continually displays that. Even for my Sabbath observing friends, except for some Messianic Jews I've had interactions with, I'm suspicious of them on this issue. Ultimately they tend to show that they consider non-observers to be in sin, whether it's by ignorance or choice.

 

[sparkman]

I get a bit confused about this subject. I have LOTS of questions.

Some very good questions here! Here are some answer from my perspective of the discussion....



The command to keep the Sabbath is holy and is never rescinded in the Bible. Nor is it changed physically and/or spiritually. And as you mentioned, the fact that Jesus and the disciples is important.



Again, what you're implying is correct. Jesus kept the Law perfectly, and told all of His disciples to do so. He never told anyone to stop doing them.




God included all of the 10 commandments together in one section, which is a summary of the entire Law. The issue in God's eyes is not which sin is more grievous than the others. God doesn't rate the evilness of each command on a scale of 1 to 10. Man does that. Sin is disobeying God; plain and simple.



I have no experience with Satanism, so I can't offer a thought on this one.




Good observation. For many who keep the Sabbath is a true and spirit-filled way, there is a tremendous blessing. Anytime you walk in obedience to any of God's commands, you're walking in a deeper fellowship with Him. When we disobey Him, we lose a degree of that fellowship. The Law and the Sabbath is another example of that.

I am yet another example of the blessing in 1st keeping the Sabbath, and in the 12 years since.



You're absolutely correct on all points here.



It's a matter of extremes, which is the same for the anti-Sabbath crowd. Some of the anti-Sabbath crowd will accuse them of trying to earn salvation through the Sabbath, which is not true. Their opposition comes from that.

Similarly, there are many pro-Sabbath people that will accuse the non-keepers of sinning willfully and freely and thus losing their salvation, which is not true. People love to attack the extremest views as if they're held by the majority.



One of the common justifications for not keeping a physical Sabbath is that, "Jesus is my Sabbath rest. Every day is my Sabbath." While Jesus does represent our ultimate rest, God never changed the importance of His 7th day Sabbath.



I don't think a lot of people view God as having made mistakes, but rather that what God did in the Law was never meant to be applicable to them in the 1st place.



Bam.
You hit the nail on the head PERFECTLY on this one. This is an important distinction many people don't see. If you don't see this distinction, the whole understanding is confused.



Again, excellent points.

An analogy I use of why it's important to continue keeping the Sabbath after Jesus' death and resurrection is this:

When a parent gives a child an instruction, they expect the child to keep doing it until they tell them to stop, even if they don't mention it again. When I teach my children to wash their hands after they go to the bathroom, I expect them to keep doing it even when I stop giving them the instruction. And when my children turn 18, I expect them to keep washing, even though they're not under my instruction.

I view the Law and the Sabbath the same. God gave His people the instruction and He expects them to keep doing it unless He tells them to stop. Why doesn't God tell New Testament believers to observe the Sabbath? Because He already had told them in the past, and expected them to continue doing it until He told them to stop.

The burden of proof isn't on the Sabbath-keeper to explain why God didn't mention it again. The burden of proof is on the non-Sabbath keeping to explain when God told them to STOP keeping it.

Again, excellent questions!

Why are you commenting on the Ten Commandments in specific? Don't you believe all of the Mosaic Covenant applies, including physical circumcision?

If I remember right, you believe physical circumcision is something God expects male uncircumcised converts to be circumcised physically, which is plainly unbiblical. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[KohenMatt]

Why are you commenting on the Ten Commandments in specific? Don't you believe all of the Mosaic Covenant applies, including physical circumcision?

I commented on those specifically because he did. But yes, I do believe all of the Mosaic Covenant applies physically and/or spiritually.

If the laws are to be abolished, does one that follows this teaching find it acceptable to break the other commandments as well? I.e. commit murder, adultery, idolatry, etc... If not, then who determines which commandments are important and which are not?

If I remember right, you believe physical circumcision is something God expects male uncircumcised converts to be circumcised physically, which is plainly unbiblical. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I do believe that. And I believe it's not as un-Biblical as many people think.

 

[gotime]

Hi gotime.
​See my words in Bold, First thank you for taking the time to respond.
I think an assumption you're making is that Sabbath observance is a moral absolute, like those related to sexual immrality that you mentioned, and I don't have this conviction anymore as an ex Sabbath/festival observer.
Just to correct that Assumption, No I do not believe the Sabbath is a moral absolute. I think it is a memorial of creation. But that is not an assumption, the bible is most clear on that matter, it is not even up for debate.

The Sabbath is a ceremonial or ritualistic aspect of the law. I base my conviction on multiple points of reasoning.
No doubt about that, It is definitely a ceremony or ritual, The question is why? The bible says its a memorial of creation first and foremost.

Here are some of my reasons:

1. The Mosaic Covenant is not applicable anymore. Sabbath is part of the Mosaic Covenant. See Acts 15, II Corinthians 3, Galatians 3
and 4, Hebrews 8 and 9, Ephesians 2:13-15, and Romans 7:1-6. I see no logical reason for compartmentalizing the Ten
Commandments over the Book of the Covenant, and these verses provide support for my reasoning in making reference to the words
that were written on the tablet.
2. Colossians 2:16-17 mentions the weekly Sabbath as part of those things which are shadows of Christ who is the reality. The Sabbath
pointed to our spiritual rest in Christ (Matthew 11:28-30). It is mentioned in the context of other things which are inapplicable, therefore
the logical conclusion is that it is inapplicable.
3. The Sabbath is not a moral law. Christ compared it to other ceremonial and ritualistic aspects of the Law, such as circumcision and
the eating of the showbread (see Matt 12). He never mentioned it in the context of moral laws. In addition, he stated in John 5:1-18
that both he and his Father work continually (v. 17) in the context of the Sabbath. The Jews knew that he was making a reference to h
his deity, as they had the belief that God doesn't keep the Sabbath, and thus were enraged with him due to his claims concerning
this (v. 18).
While I am tempted to answer these assertions it would only serve to distract from the issue here. One must work from foundations. The problems with all your points above is they all neglect to acknowledge the purpose of the Sabbath foundation as given in Scripture. To do this is to argue from a distorted perspective, It bases your proposal on false assumptions. For example, You point out that it is not a moral law, however this actually has no baring on weather it should be kept or not. There are commands enjoyed in the new testament that are ceremony such as baptism and the Lords supper, none of which are moral but ritualistic. It simply does not speak to the issue and ignores the primary purpose of the 7th day Sabbath. All your points above do the same thing. not picking by the way, Just pointing out that you are failing to deal with the issue I have brought up.

Regarding Mark 2:28 and the creation account regarding the seventh day:

The assertion is being made that "man" must be generic rather than specific. My response is that the Israelites were men, so regardless of whether the Sabbath was created for the Israelites or mankind in general, your point is inconclusive. We only find the Sabbath being given to ancient Israel in Exodus 16. The Sabbath was "instituted" or "created" for Israel (and Israelites were men) at Exodus 16.

​I am sorry but while what you said there may make sense to your mind and others. It is based in no facts at all. The Sabbath was not made in exodus 16, it's importance was taught to them yes, But you have absolutely no evidence or at least have produced none as yet that shows that the Sabbath started in exodus 16. In fact the evidence in scripture is contrary to your assertion here. You have no grounds whatsoever to limit the Sabbath to Israel as the Scripture is clear, crystal clear where the 7th day Sabbath was instituted and made right in Gen 2. And if there was any doubt that this is the same Sabbath of Exodus 16 one only needs to go to chapter 20 where God makes it clear where the Sabbath comes from. You see I have bible facts to back my position. I am not making any of this up. Did God create the Sabbath on the 7th day of Creation? Gen 2 says a resounding yes not a guess not an assumption. Did The 7th day Sabbath given to Israel find its roots in the 7th day Of creation? again the answer is a resounding Yes as Gen 20 says so, again not a guess a bible fact.

Christ's major point in these verses are something that, in my opinion, you should be concerned with. Pharisees were focused on the minute, like some Sabbath observers are focused on the exact day, rather than the practical need for rest. From my reading of what Christ said, he was focused more on the need for physical rest, rather than a test of loyalty to God, as many Sabbath observers claim that it continues to be.

​This is your personal view on the issue it does not speak to a proper bible study to ascertain truth.

By the way, I do not deny that the Sabbath has a benefit for rest purposes, if a person is able to rest (slaves in the NT church who were redeemed and had Gentile masters may have not been able to rest). The important issue is whether the Sabbath is a moral issue, and whether the command given to Israel applies to the New Covenant believer as a requirement, and those who are not observing it are being disobedient to God.

If your group was the same as mine, the claim is that those who are not keeping the specific 24 hour time period are in disobedience or rebellion against God, rather than another 24 hour time period. So, the focus, like the Pharisees, is not on a practical need for rest but on the issue of testing the person in relation to obedience.

I will also point out that the Genesis account only says God "ceased" on the seventh day of creation, and that he set apart that particular day, and there is no indication that one day out of every seventh was set apart for humans, until after Israel was given the Sabbath. The word Sabbath is not even mentioned until Exodus 16. So, your arguments are speculative..there is no proof.
Yes there is proof as seen above , you seem to be ignoring the fact on this.

God himself does not stop working on the Sabbath, by the way. And, even the Jews in Christ's day knew that God doesn't stop working on the Sabbath, like some Sabbath keepers claim.

In fact, read John 5:1-18. Christ IMPLICITLY stated that both he and his Father work on the Sabbath in verse 17. In verse 18, it records that they sought to kill him, because he was making himself equal with God.

The Jews knew that God doesn't rest on the Sabbath, and that by claiming that he works on the Sabbath in verse 17, just like God works, he was making an explicit claim to deity.

God, and Christ, hold the entire universe together. They don't take the day off on Saturday or any other day. So, Sabbath-keeping is not an essential aspect of God's character, which defines holiness. If you make this claim, you've got some real issues, as how do you explain Sabbath-keeping being an essential aspect of God's character, since he is not limited by time or space, and the Sabbath command necessarily involves time and location? How did God keep the Sabbath prior to creation? He is Creator, not the created.
I never made this claim, Deal with the issues presented.

There's an article on Mark 2 in this issue of Proclamation! if you want further details on Mark 2:28. Proclamation! is a magazine that is the ministry of Life Assurance Ministries, by Dale Ratzlaff, who is an ex SDA pastor. I don't agree with every point he makes but he is pretty much in line with my perspective.

Proclamation 2015 Fall


As I've mentioned in the past, Colossians 2:16-17 is significant in regards to the Sabbath issue, and SDAs have been unable to provide any reasonable explanation to exclude the weekly Sabbath from Paul's remarks in these Scriptures.
This again is not dealing with the issue of the origin and purpose of the 7th day Sabbath. What you are doing here is ignoring the foundation and then coming in down the end of the evidence and applying your own views. The only way they will work is if your assumptions are right, But as I can see they are not as you do not acknowledge the foundation. We must build on proper biblical foundation. As yet you have given no facts to counter the foundation.

It is plain that the weekly Sabbath is included in these shadows. The progression, which has been exhibited in OT verses as well, is from weekly Sabbath, New Moons, and seasonal festivals, or the reverse order, namely, seasonal festivals, New Moons and weekly Sabbath.

In fact I shouldn't even be using the phrase weekly Sabbath, as there is no indication that sabbaton is used in any other context other than weekly Sabbath. sabbaton is translated "week" part of the time, for example, the first day of the week (Sunday) is mia ton sabbaton in Greek, literally, first of week.
The word sabbaton is basically what you have said here, but you need to do a better and more thorough study on the word. First as you have mentioned it is used in regards to other days also, But I find your translation somewhat lacking. In order to translate the text properly you have to know a few things. 1, The way the Jewish people measured their weeks. They really only had names for what we call Friday and Saturday. Friday was known as preparation day or the day before the Sabbath. Sunday was, day one after the Sabbath. You can find this by doing a study of bible and extra biblical references on their way of regarding the week.

2, once you understand that you need to realise that the new testament is in Greek and is using some greek language rules to explain a Hebrew understanding of the week.

Once you have done that you will find the "first of the week" is not an accurate translation. An accurate translation would be "The [day] one following or after the Sabbath. Jews measured everyday in regard to the Sabbath.

If you go and study the Old testament in regard to the Hebrew use of this word, which is the root of the Greek sabbaton. You will find that it is used not only in regard to the 7th day Sabbath but also the feast Sabbaths.

It is evident then that to make this word in Colossians fit the weekly Sabbath is an error of understanding language and culture. When one does a study on the origin and purpose of the weekly Sabbath as opposed to the enjoined Feast Sabbaths that came later. It is clear that there are other options. and when one studies the purpose and origin of the feast Sabbaths it becomes clear that these are in view in Colosisans.

So your concepts of the use of the word are not right and the bible proves that to be the case. and an understanding of language and culture. I can get more detailed on that issue if you would like for study purposes.
So, the lack of an adequate explanation of Colossians 2:16-17 from the perspective of Sabbath observers continues to convict me it is no longer applicable. The alternative explanations of Sabbath observers on these verses are not compelling, although the SDAs have tried very hard to produce one.

The assumption by many Sabbath observers is that the Sabbath is a moral absolute. I do not agree with this; the Sabbath is not a moral absolute like the laws against committing adultery, etcetera. It is not something which defines God's character, which is the true standard of holiness.

I make this argument on four points:

1) Priests profaned the Sabbath, yet are blameless. See Matthew 12:5. They did very hard work on the Sabbath, making
multiple animal sacrifices, yet they were not guilty of sin. You would not find an example where God would say the same
regarding a moral law; where it was ok for one human to do something, but not ok for another human to do it.
2) Christ ONLY compared the Sabbath with ceremonial or ritualistic laws. For example, he compared the Sabbath with
physical circumcision (John 7:23) and related it to David eating the showbread (Matt 12:3-4).
3)The Sabbath was given to ancient Israel as their covenant sign under the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 31). To them, it was a sin to break it, just like it was a sin for them not to circumcise their child on the eighth day. We are not under the Mosaic Covenant...in fact, no one is per the Scriptures I gave..not even the Jews are now under the Mosaic Covenant.
4) God works on the Sabbath, as noted concerning John 5:1-18, so it is not immoral to work on the Sabbath, else God would be immoral, and we know that isn't true.

Again I have made no such argument. While it could be stated that there is a moral reason to keep the Sabbath. One cannot say the Sabbath is moral in itself. at least as I can see. any way not relevant to my position.

Regarding point #1, this is straightforward. Christ said that priests profane the Sabbath, or treat it as common, yet are blameless. So, the Sabbath command applied to the common Israelite, but did not apply to the priesthood. We would not find a moral law that is the same. For instance, it would not be permissible for me to commit adultery, and a sin for you to commit adultery. This isn't the nature of moral laws.

That is a gross misuse of what Jesus is stating. If you read in Leviticus you will understand what Jesus was referring to. The priests could not sin moral on the Sabbath but they still had to do the work of the temple because forgiveness and freedom from sin was to be still offered on the Sabbath also. The works they did were salvational in nature commanded by God through Moses. Jesus taught this lesson in many ways, Like healing people on the Sabbath. Is it lawful to do good or evil he asked.

Regarding point #2, Christ only compared the Sabbath with ceremonial or ritualistic laws. This places the Sabbath in the same context. This reasoning is similar to the reasoning I employ with regards to Colossians 2:16-17. It is grouped in the context of other items that you plainly acknowledge are shadows and types.

As stated above ritualistic or not and I believe they are, speaks absolutely nothing to this issue.

I'll provide this link again that compares the Sabbath with physical circumcision to see how both laws were similarly viewed in relation to the language Scripture uses in regards to them:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/117464-sabbath-circumcision-comparison.html

Regarding point # 3, Exodus 31 relates the Sabbath to the unique sign Israel was given regarding their relationship to God in Exodus 31. The Sabbath was never given to Gentiles. Show me one NT reference to the binding requirement of the Sabbath upon Gentiles.

Again this assumption, As a bible student you should deal with what is said not hypothetical questions that distract form the issue. when you say to me show me a reference for the gentiles and the sabbath, you are arguing on silence. I have shown in my original post the danger of arguments form silence. Because silence tells us nothing to start with. and the question is steeped in assumption that the only reason silence could be is because its not important. This is simply bad reasoning and unusable in the argument.

As far as exodus 31 goes, you are assuming again while ignoring the original intent of the Sabbath. You say its a unique sign regarding their relationship with God. Well do you think God would give a sign regarding his relationship to those who don't follow him or have a relationship with him? no or course not. Does God using the Sabbath as a sign take away from its origin? no. You also ignore the fact that Gentiles lived in Israel and they were indeed connected to these things. But Isaiah is clear:

Isa 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; Isa 56:7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

I am sure your aware of this fact that the word Stranger is a name for Gentiles. The Sabbath was made by God in the beginning, it was enjoined to those who followed God even Gentiles. This actually serves to prove that the Sabbath is not something only for Jews but for anyone who would enter into relationship with God. In fact if you continue reading you will find that this also applies direct in relation to after Jesus death for our sins.

I've already established in previous conversations that Paul evangelized both Jews and Gentiles on the Sabbath in the synagogue. I also have stated that Jewish Christians continued to observe many elements of the Mosaic Covenant including physical circumcision (see Acts 21), as a matter of cultural affinity and not a matter of compulsion. So, the traditional "proofs" that Sabbath observers give in this regard are irrelevant.

We don't see a single church meeting which occurred on the Sabbath after the resurrection. Note that I am not saying none occurred, but I am stating that there are no recorded church meetings on the Sabbath; only synagogue meetings with unconverted Jews and Gentiles. However, we do find church meetings on the first day. Paul met with unconverted and converted Jews and Gentiles in the Synagogue, because that was where the Scriptures were housed. They listened to the reading of the Scriptures, and then discussed them on their own on the first day of the week, taking communion at the same time.

This situation continued until anti-Christian sentiments amongst the Jews made it impossible, and then the majority of Christians continued to meet on Sunday.

I am continuing this post with point #4 down below.

Anyway, that is enough for you to look at if you care to. But I will state the problem once more, you are not addressing the foundation of the Sabbath and thus misusing texts to qualify your position. I don't think you are deliberately doing this, I don't question your intention, in fact I think your intention is noble. But I question your tactics and you should also. Because very few of them are based in fact or proper systematic breakdown. If you get the foundation wrong you will have the bricks you build on it out of order.

 

[TMS]

I will ask a few other things:

1) If the intention of the Sabbath law is rest, then why can't rest occur on another day? Or, instead, are some being legalistic
about the manner of the rest, just like Christ told the Pharisees they were being?
2) If a slave in the NT church had a Gentile master who would not allow him to rest, was he living in sin for working on the
Sabbath? If so, why don't we find instruction in the Pauline epistles regarding this topic?
3) If the Sabbath is a moral issue, why did Christ never compare the Sabbath with a moral law, but compared it with
physical circumcision and the showbread, both of which are ceremonial or ritualistic in nature?
4) Why is Sabbath-breaking never listed as a sin in the sin lists of the Gentiles, and why are no instructions given in regards
to its observance?


I've asked some of these questions before and have received no adequate response yet.

.

Q1
1- Because God said the 7th day, not the 1st or the 2nd, and if we say i'm going to do it a different way we are being disobedient. "then why can't rest occur on another day?" you can rest on any day but if God said remember the 7th day and is specific we should listen.
When God said this tree is the tree of Life, Adam would have been stupid if he said all these trees are good for food so i don't need the tree of life anymore, God was specific.
We can worship God 24/7 and we can rest all the time if we want to but God set up an order for His creation, and that was to work 6 and rest on the seventh day. Satan will try to say rest on the first day and work the other six, it dosen't mater".

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? ("Has God said we can work on every day of the week? just forget about the sabbath" is what the devil might say today)
Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

If?, IF the command to keep the Sabbath Holy stands today, Than Satan has tricked most of the world into disobedience again.
If the command to keep the Sabbath Holy does not stands today, Than we can rest whenever we want and it makes no difference because it is not disobedience.

What was the intention of the Sabbath? Not just rest but a day set aside for holy use, also a sign.
Exo_31:13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.
Exo_20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Hallowed = kaw-dash'A primitive root; to be (causatively make, pronounce or observe as) clean (ceremonially or morally): - appoint, bid, consecrate, dedicate, defile, hallow, (be, keep) holy (-er, place), keep, prepare, proclaim, purify, sanctify (-ied one, self), X wholly.

"are some being legalistic about the manner of the rest, just like Christ told the Pharisees they were being?"
For starters The Pharisees were being hypocrites and placing large burdens on the law while not keeping it themselves. Obedience isn't legalism if it is done for the right reasons, (right motives).

Have i given an adequate response?

 

[TMS]

I will ask a few other things:

1) If the intention of the Sabbath law is rest, then why can't rest occur on another day? Or, instead, are some being legalistic
about the manner of the rest, just like Christ told the Pharisees they were being?
2) If a slave in the NT church had a Gentile master who would not allow him to rest, was he living in sin for working on the
Sabbath? If so, why don't we find instruction in the Pauline epistles regarding this topic?
3) If the Sabbath is a moral issue, why did Christ never compare the Sabbath with a moral law, but compared it with
physical circumcision and the showbread, both of which are ceremonial or ritualistic in nature?
4) Why is Sabbath-breaking never listed as a sin in the sin lists of the Gentiles, and why are no instructions given in regards
to its observance?


I've asked some of these questions before and have received no adequate response yet.

.

Q2
2) If a slave in the NT church had a Gentile master who would not allow him to rest, was he living in sin for working on the
Sabbath? If so, why don't we find instruction in the Pauline epistles regarding this topic?

Just because there isn't any instruction doesn't mean it is void or not applicable, that would be an assumption.
Silence isn't evidence that no one struggled with this issue.
Does Paul give instruction about what we should do when we are asked to kill by becoming a soldier in war?
The Commandments are plan and easy to understand. Why add to the very instructions God spoke with His own mouth.
"Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it Holy", What more could Paul add to that? I understand that it becomes technical when force is part of the equation but they had examples of what they should do.
Dan 3:16 Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we are not careful to answer thee in this matter.
Dan 3:17 If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king.
Dan 3:18 But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.
This subject isn't black and white, It is one between and God and the person that feels convicted about the Sabbath. And sometimes there isn't a black and white answer to solve every persons problem.

Is that an adequate response?

 

[TMS]

I'll think about the other two question when i have more time

 

[JesusLives]

Quote Sparkman:

I will ask a few other things:

1) If the intention of the Sabbath law is rest, then why can't rest occur on another day? Or, instead, are some being legalistic
about the manner of the rest, just like Christ told the Pharisees they were being?
2) If a slave in the NT church had a Gentile master who would not allow him to rest, was he living in sin for working on the
Sabbath? If so, why don't we find instruction in the Pauline epistles regarding this topic?
3) If the Sabbath is a moral issue, why did Christ never compare the Sabbath with a moral law, but compared it with
physical circumcision and the showbread, both of which are ceremonial or ritualistic in nature?
4) Why is Sabbath-breaking never listed as a sin in the sin lists of the Gentiles, and why are no instructions given in regards
to its observance?


I've asked some of these questions before and have received no adequate response yet.

..............................................................................................................................

Response JesusLives:

I know you have read the Bible verses before in

Genesis chapter 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it.

Ezekiel 20:12"Also I gave them My sabbaths to be a sign between Me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD who sanctifies them.

Sanctify means to set apart, make holy, consecrate - God did this at the end of His creation week and then repeated again in

Exodus 20:[SUP]11 [/SUP]For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

God blessed and hallowed the 7th day - God did this

Hallowed means honor as holy, make holy, consecrate

God did no such thing for the other 6 days of the week not even in the New Testament. God set apart this 7th day.

Mark 2:~27Then Jesus told them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

I guess my question to you would be on the last 3 questions. If God set up Holy set apart rest day at the end of creation and included the same 7th day holy set apart and blessed day as one of the commandments what value do the last three questions have?

 

[prove-all]

The whole God Family doctrine is a lying blasphemy that is similar to Satan's claim that he
would become like God. And, Armstrong was similarly blasphemous in making such a claim.

can you post Armstrongs claim, you keep repeating this slander over and over.
about them or there idea about becomming gods, and being so blasphemous claim.

please please show us what they say in there words, so we can see what they believe,
and confirm that it is not your twisted ideas and more false truths, or there delusion.

satan wanted to exalt his throne above Gods, so who here claims that?
no one I know have ever claimed they would be above God or equel to the father.
the bible says even Jesus can do nothing without the father, the father is above all.

God and the word, became the Father and Son , so now we can follow and become a Son.

I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman

Father, Son, Husband, Bride, marriage, birth, children; these are all terms that denote family.
And that family has everything to do with the Kingdom of God.

To say God is not a Family, to me is a blasphemy statement againest God.
To me God want us to be in his family, why else are we even here?

“Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb
is come, and his wife hath made herself ready” (Revelation 19:7).

marriage , Paul called it a great mystery (Ephesians 5:31-32).
“I speak concerning Christ and the church”

-Paul thought there was a family of God, do you believe him?

“For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
Of whom [the whole family in heaven and earth is named”] (Ephesians 3:14-15).

-you must not want to be in his family, seeing you do not believe in this family terms.

A happy family based on solid values with the father as the head and provider for
the family, and a submissive wife teaching obedient children, is a thing of the past,
the whole idea is ridiculed in this “modern” society, and it is its downfall.

The breakdown of the family unit the way God intended, has destroyed this country.
The entire family has been turned upside down (Isaiah 3:12).

so please show us what in [there words] is so wrong about family
and there idea of becomming like God, compared to the bible.

 

[prove-all]

But, I will NEVER be God and it's a blasphemous claim to state such a thing.
God by nature is uncreated, unique, and worthy of worship.

-this is an old subject, you have repeatedly said I would literally be God
like the father, and in the sense of having his omnipotence and omniscience.
you word things and talk bad about people, and put extra words in there mouths.

and for that matter where does Armstrong make this claim
of being omnipotence and omniscience as God the father?

if they doctrine is so wrong, please show us in there words what they say,
about being god. then all will know, even me what they say on this subject.

again the bible says even Jesus can do nothing without the father,
the father is above all. and Christ will be King of Kings over the earth,
and we can become kings and priests to the most high God on this earth.

or do you even believe that, you told me once we would [not] be kings and priests


-some bible verses about this subject

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:
and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,
and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth,
which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.


-


Psalms 82:6 (KJV)
I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

33The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy;
and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

John 10:34 (KJV)
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest;
because I said, I am the Son of God?


Romans 1:4 (KJV)
And declared to be [the Son of God] with power, according to the spirit of holiness,
[by the resurrection] from the dead: - first of many brothern


Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be:
but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.



-Jesus was not lying when he said ye are Gods, or was he ?
do you have problems with the bible verses posted above?


let me know now what beef you have with them verses please.
If not, in the future I would ask you not to slander my name again about this,
and make it seem like I believe something thats not in the bible.

 

[sparkman]

A problem I see here and I am referring to links in the original post, is this.

People assume that every time the word Sabbath is mentioned then the same things is being talked about. The problems with such thinking is, 1. its wrong. 2. If its wrong then the conclusions made because of this are also in error.

The fact that there is no distinction made between the Sabbath of creation and the feast Sabbaths is faulty at its core. The fact that when you talk to people they think that any text that talks about a day can be used in knowing if the Sabbath should be kept or not is laughable. and the fact that people think that any text that says the word Sabbath is referring to the same thing is also laughable. and only reveals a neglect of proper thought and study.

I am not sure what your point is, but Colossians 2:16-17 is definitely referring to the annual festivals when it mentions "festivals". These include the festivals of Leviticus 23.

The word Sabbath is sabbaton, and it is referring to the weekly Sabbath.

In the traditional SDA explanation, they deny that Sabbath refers to the weekly Sabbath, but it is impossible to make that assertion. In fact, if someone simply checks the use of the word sabbaton in the NT, it is also translated "week" in several cases. For example, "mia ton sabbaton" is the phrase referring to Sunday..literally, first of week.

And, again, the word order proceeds from seasonal, to monthly, to weekly...this order, and the reverse order, is observed in OT Scriptures.

Here's a video where Dale Ratzlaff explains this. Dale is an ex SDA pastor, and is a 4th generation SDA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Es9xJutiwo

The Scriptures listing this word order are presented by him in the video.