Sabbath
- Thread starter geaux4it
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Christ literally is God.
He said, give to anyone who asks of you, without demanding it back. iirc there is no 'unless it happens to be sabbath' clause in that saying..
Wouldnt you agree that when Christ says 'My commandments' the primary meaning is the things He Himself commanded?
Like going two miles when someone compels you ((forces you)) to go one? No 'unless it's sabbath, then don't go at all' clause there, either. You know that is referring to a Roman soldier forcing you to carry his gear, right? And they didn't care about Jewish sabbaths?
It is as I said: the man Jesus said 'My Father is always working, and I am working' on one occasion when He was being attacked for doing the things He did on a sabbath. His apostle commands us that whatever we do, we should do as to God, not to human masters. So if your boss wants you to come and take care of paperwork on a saturday, the Bible says you must treat that as though you are doing paperwork for God, not your employer.
That being the case aren't you guilty of disobedience to the commands of Christ if you refuse? Wouldn't you be completely misunderstanding the meaning and righteousness of sabbath if you use it as an excuse not to give what is asked of you? Wouldn't you be blaspheming the spirit of the law?
I am essentially asking this:
Did Jesus ever refuse to do anything because it was sabbath?
He said, give to anyone who asks of you, without demanding it back. iirc there is no 'unless it happens to be sabbath' clause in that saying..
Wouldnt you agree that when Christ says 'My commandments' the primary meaning is the things He Himself commanded?
Like going two miles when someone compels you ((forces you)) to go one? No 'unless it's sabbath, then don't go at all' clause there, either. You know that is referring to a Roman soldier forcing you to carry his gear, right? And they didn't care about Jewish sabbaths?
It is as I said: the man Jesus said 'My Father is always working, and I am working' on one occasion when He was being attacked for doing the things He did on a sabbath. His apostle commands us that whatever we do, we should do as to God, not to human masters. So if your boss wants you to come and take care of paperwork on a saturday, the Bible says you must treat that as though you are doing paperwork for God, not your employer.
That being the case aren't you guilty of disobedience to the commands of Christ if you refuse? Wouldn't you be completely misunderstanding the meaning and righteousness of sabbath if you use it as an excuse not to give what is asked of you? Wouldn't you be blaspheming the spirit of the law?
I am essentially asking this:
Did Jesus ever refuse to do anything because it was sabbath?
-
1
- Show all
The context in Romans 14 is FASTING. People were being judged based on what days they fasted and what foods they did or didn't eat during those times.... They were being judged based off of mans law, not God's law. Other than the day of atonement, Gods law does not require that we fast on specific days. This verse is not saying anything about not having to keep the Sabbath.
"Christ literally is God".... Sure, but words mean things. What does that mean? Certain men were called "god" in the bible too. Again, "god" just means "authority" (boss, ruler... one in charge). So sure, the Messiah is "God" (authority).... but he is not The Most High God, The Father is.
Yes he is speaking of what he commanded... But what he commanded comes from The Father. That is how he is "the word made flesh"... a physical representation of what the Father says.
What the Messiah did on the Sabbath was healing/feeding people (god's work).... Yet he kicked people out of the temple for buying and selling (man's work). How does it make sense to put something you are getting paid for and is not a need for true health and wellness in the category of God's work?
Yes he is speaking of what he commanded... But what he commanded comes from The Father. That is how he is "the word made flesh"... a physical representation of what the Father says.
What the Messiah did on the Sabbath was healing/feeding people (god's work).... Yet he kicked people out of the temple for buying and selling (man's work). How does it make sense to put something you are getting paid for and is not a need for true health and wellness in the category of God's work?
I disagree, but I can see why one might interpret it that way.
Some points to consider with Romans 14:
1) Is "meat" and food literal or a metaphor for "spiritual meat"?
2) If food is literal, is the entirety of Romans 14 about food, or is food an example?
In either case, the sentiment isn't to discard the Sabbath, but that if someone chooses to interpret everyday as part of the Lord's Sabbath, let him make up his own mind. A day in the eyes of the Lord is like a thousand years. The day of salvation is now.
Some points to consider with Romans 14:
1) Is "meat" and food literal or a metaphor for "spiritual meat"?
2) If food is literal, is the entirety of Romans 14 about food, or is food an example?
In either case, the sentiment isn't to discard the Sabbath, but that if someone chooses to interpret everyday as part of the Lord's Sabbath, let him make up his own mind. A day in the eyes of the Lord is like a thousand years. The day of salvation is now.
Paul's writings are hard to understand compared to other scriptures, which is why his letters were singled out here:
2 Peter 3:16-17
16 He speaks about this subject in all his letters. Some things in them are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, leading to their own destruction, as they do the rest of the Scriptures.17 And so, dear friends, since you already know these things, continuously be on your guard not to be carried away by the deception of lawless people. Otherwise, you may fall from your secure position.
2 Peter 3:16-17
16 He speaks about this subject in all his letters. Some things in them are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, leading to their own destruction, as they do the rest of the Scriptures.17 And so, dear friends, since you already know these things, continuously be on your guard not to be carried away by the deception of lawless people. Otherwise, you may fall from your secure position.
"Hard to understand" is an indication of symbolism such as metaphor.
It's easy to accuse another person of distorting the word, it is more difficult to constructively discuss the meaning of the word. What is the truth in this case? You are claiming that Romans 14 is literally about food and only literal food. I respect that this is your interpretation but do not find it compelling. Why should we assume Romans 14 is necessarily only about literal food?
Even without Romans 14, from your perspective, how does one keep the Sabbath? And where in scripture is your perspective founded from?
It's easy to accuse another person of distorting the word, it is more difficult to constructively discuss the meaning of the word. What is the truth in this case? You are claiming that Romans 14 is literally about food and only literal food. I respect that this is your interpretation but do not find it compelling. Why should we assume Romans 14 is necessarily only about literal food?
Even without Romans 14, from your perspective, how does one keep the Sabbath? And where in scripture is your perspective founded from?
Your correct, it does does not PROVE it... however it is one of the many passages that I've posted so far that nobody has had an explanation for. Whether it be context or translation, I've pointed out things that modern mainstream Christianity is missing in these common Paul verses that are used to support an abolished law (and that is only one author).... But people have not been able to do that for the passages I've cited from Mathew, Luke, John, James, Peter... and even Paul himself.
So even "IF" I did interpret the writings of Paul the same way as other people that I have been chatting with on here, Why would I side with Paul by himself if I don't have an explanation for the scriptures written by the other 5 or more authors that appear to contradict those interpretations of Paul???
So even "IF" I did interpret the writings of Paul the same way as other people that I have been chatting with on here, Why would I side with Paul by himself if I don't have an explanation for the scriptures written by the other 5 or more authors that appear to contradict those interpretations of Paul???
i have an explanation. Gentile believers are not under Moses.
gee haven't you met a dispensationalist, in 127 pages? and i'm not even a dispensationalist.
i have an explanation. "the law" means "the law" -- in Romans 7 Paul gives an example of "the law" that we are not under, that we died to in order to belong to another. guess what that example is? one of the 10 commandments. "the law" clearly includes the decalogue: any other explanation is truly perverting the scripture by the mouth of Paul.
so
what about going 2 miles when compelled to go 1?
what about considering everything your hand finds to do, to be as though done for service to God, not men?
what about God never stopping working, and Jesus never stopping working either: while perfectly fulfilling the law?
do God's work and work as though to God, whatever your work is
some of my argument, you have wholly skirted addressing: not without reason
you still gonna call it sin to give to whoever asks you on a sabbath?
you gonna say 'this is corban' in order to excuse neglecting your neighbor?
gee haven't you met a dispensationalist, in 127 pages? and i'm not even a dispensationalist.
i have an explanation. "the law" means "the law" -- in Romans 7 Paul gives an example of "the law" that we are not under, that we died to in order to belong to another. guess what that example is? one of the 10 commandments. "the law" clearly includes the decalogue: any other explanation is truly perverting the scripture by the mouth of Paul.
so
what about going 2 miles when compelled to go 1?
what about considering everything your hand finds to do, to be as though done for service to God, not men?
what about God never stopping working, and Jesus never stopping working either: while perfectly fulfilling the law?
do God's work and work as though to God, whatever your work is
some of my argument, you have wholly skirted addressing: not without reason
you still gonna call it sin to give to whoever asks you on a sabbath?
you gonna say 'this is corban' in order to excuse neglecting your neighbor?
-
1
- Show all
I don't think there is a scripture that calls this "fasting", but refraining from certain "activities" I guess is one way to look at it. The word "holy" means set apart, or designated for a specific purpose. There would be nothing "holy" about the Sabbath if we treat it like any other day.
Why would someone do it? Out of love, honor, respect and trust in The Father that He knows better for us than we know for ourselves. A common theme that I find in law (instructions from God) is that to me they seem to be centered around the thriving and surviving of mankind: The first "law" was "be fruitful and multiply", homosexuality counteracts that law, killing counteracts that law. We have dietary laws for our heath, A day of rest for our well being, etc. When we abolish Gods laws, we end up on a slippery slope towards chaos and self destruction. Gods law is Pro life, pro nature and pro love.
Why would someone do it? Out of love, honor, respect and trust in The Father that He knows better for us than we know for ourselves. A common theme that I find in law (instructions from God) is that to me they seem to be centered around the thriving and surviving of mankind: The first "law" was "be fruitful and multiply", homosexuality counteracts that law, killing counteracts that law. We have dietary laws for our heath, A day of rest for our well being, etc. When we abolish Gods laws, we end up on a slippery slope towards chaos and self destruction. Gods law is Pro life, pro nature and pro love.
That is not an explanation of the words in the verse itself... that is you again pointing back at Paul to something you believe contradicts the verse.
Yes, WHAT is being asked of you makes all the difference. Is what's being done for personal gain? Out of selfishness? Is it for money? For pride? What about the person that is asking for help... How are you helping them? With material things? Are we disobeying the Father to do it?
These type questions make up the spiritual component of the law. The physical is what we do, the spiritual is why we do it.
I don't know if you haven't been paying attention, or are purposely ignoring what I've been saying.... But I have not once said "I do not like Paul". That is a dishonest misrepresentation of me. What I've consistently stated is that for the most part, it has been the misrepresentations of Paul that I disagree with... not Paul himself. If you can twist my words and misrepresent me that easily, why then wouldn't I believe that you couldn't do the same with Paul's writings....
The only subject in Paul's writings (that I can currently think of) where I haven't spent enough time on to draw a conclusion about, is the subject of Abrahams righteousness through faith alone. "IF" after further research I come to the conclusion that that is what he meant and there is no translation or context issue.... Then yes, that would be a direct contradiction to James and other authors:
James 2:19-26
19 You believe that there is one God. That’s fine! Even the demons believe that and tremble with fear. 20 Do you want proof, you foolish person, that faith without actions is worthless? 21 Our ancestor Abraham was justified by his actions when he offered his son Isaac on the altar, wasn’t he? 22 You see that his faith worked together with what he did, and by his actions his faith was made complete. 23 And so the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” And so he was called God’s friend. 24 You observe that a person is justified through actions and not through faith alone. 25 Likewise, Rahab the prostitute was justified through actions when she welcomed the messengers and sent them away on a different road, wasn’t she? 26 For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without actions is also dead.
The only subject in Paul's writings (that I can currently think of) where I haven't spent enough time on to draw a conclusion about, is the subject of Abrahams righteousness through faith alone. "IF" after further research I come to the conclusion that that is what he meant and there is no translation or context issue.... Then yes, that would be a direct contradiction to James and other authors:
James 2:19-26
19 You believe that there is one God. That’s fine! Even the demons believe that and tremble with fear. 20 Do you want proof, you foolish person, that faith without actions is worthless? 21 Our ancestor Abraham was justified by his actions when he offered his son Isaac on the altar, wasn’t he? 22 You see that his faith worked together with what he did, and by his actions his faith was made complete. 23 And so the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” And so he was called God’s friend. 24 You observe that a person is justified through actions and not through faith alone. 25 Likewise, Rahab the prostitute was justified through actions when she welcomed the messengers and sent them away on a different road, wasn’t she? 26 For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without actions is also dead.
Everyone on here that has only posted Paul's writings and has yet to show how any of the verses that I've posted from any of the other authors I cited are mistranslated, misrepresented or anything else that would lead to an incorrect interpretation of them. Rather than point out error in interpretation, they revert back to a another Paul verse that they believe counteracts it....
If you are not finding the error in the interpretation with the verse itself, then all you are doing is pointing out contradiction... and people have to then decide which author to believe.
If you are not finding the error in the interpretation with the verse itself, then all you are doing is pointing out contradiction... and people have to then decide which author to believe.