|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 7/31/2008 1:21:31 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1959
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
In neither of these cases are the words "last days" followed by "of the law" or anything like that. "The last days" could refer to the time since the Messiah and the things that are said to happen then need not happen immediately, but sometime before Yeshua's return.
It is true that they did not say "the last days of the law." But we know that those were the last days. Whatever meaning they have, I am in the appropriate time line. I said it was my "view."quote:
quote:
Well, if you think we are still obligated to keep the law, why don't you keep some of those things that aren't temple related?
How do you know I don't?
Whenever I address this issue, you guys tend to be evasive.
I have already spoken of the command to stone those who break the sabbath.
Do you have any bank CD's? That's loaning money at interest. (Ex. 25:37)
quote:
quote:
quote:
Bluethread said:
The fourth commandment is not tied to the Temple.
GrahamCraker said:Indeed it is not but it IS tied to the Law.
Bluethread saidI would beg to differ. I would say that the Tenple is tied to the Sabbath, since the Sabbath came first and existed before the Temple or even the Tabernacle for that matter.
Can you cite any command to observe the Saturday/Sabbath by refraining from work that did not come after the time of the Law? All of those commands occurred after the Law came into force.
quote:
quote:
GrahamCracker saidWe know that Jesus' followers kept the Law prior to Jesus' resurrection. We are told outright that they did. What I said was that people did so out of habit. I know that people who have life-long habits usually continue to do so until they have some reason to change them. Since we are never told that they actually stopped, the inference I gather from that is that they continued. As I said in #2867: "NT habit or custom is not the same thing as a command or an obligation."
Also, the Gentiles lived out of habit and Paul could be telling us to be gracious to them as they learn what Ha Torah says as they hear it every Sabbath. Just as habit is not a commandment, even more so, habit does not negate the validity of a commandment.
This is speculation on your part. There is nothing said that they would be later expected to keep the Sabbath. That is wishful thinking. Please cite any scripture which says that NT Gentiles would at some time be expected to keep the Sabbath. It simply isn't there. You are arguing from silence. Pretty much, you are making that up.
quote:
quote:
We are told that Paul in his missionary endeavors was in synagogue every sabbath, (Acts 13:42,44; 18:4). However, we are not told that he kept the Sabbath because he considered it obligatory to rest. I infer from that that he did it either from habit and/or because that was where he could reach Jews--since it says in Acts 15:21 that Jews worshiped every sabbath.
This is conjecture on your part and nowhere does Paul say he kept it out of any othert reason than to honor Adonai.
1) Fact: We are not told that Paul kept the sabbath out of obligation that he felt he was supposed to do so in order to please God. Repeat, we are not told that. So it is not speculation when I said we aren't told that.
2) Actually, we ARE TOLD that he kept the law for other reasons.
"To the Jews I became like a Jew to gain the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law) to gain those under the law....I do all things because of the gospel so that I can be a participant in it." (1 Cor. 9:20-23)
3) In Acts, which I cited previously, we are told that he argued for Christ in the synagogues. We are not told that he had any other reason. Please cite a scripture that says he did so because he felt he had an obligation to keep the Sabbath because he believed God wanted him to.
quote:
It is true that Paul stated that with regard to Timothy. However, nowhere does he make this statement regarding any other commandment including the Sabbath. Therefore, one example in complicated circumstances does not create an iron clad principle of interpretation.
True. But it does give us an example of Paul doing something with regard to the law for another reason. We can recognize that the works of the law were allowed even when they were otherwise not obligated. Paul states other places that circumcision is not obligated. He even rebuked the Galatians for keeping ciecumcision.
quote:
In conclusion, I again say, if Sabbath keepers can be forgiven for not giving up what you consider to be unnecessary, then it only seems reasonable that Gentiles be allowed to keep the appointed times in ignorance until they learn what Ha Torah says about such things.
The problem is not that you feel you must keep the Sabbath. The problem is that you feel the rest of us must keep it too. You cannot cite a single NT scripture where it says that we who want to please God must come to grips with this obligation of keeping the Sabbath. I believe God wants to release you from this dread obligation that people will be cursed if they don't keep the Sabbath. My opinion.
What your interpretation involves is eisegesis. That's where you import your own ideas into the text in order to interpret it from preconceived notions.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 7/31/2008 1:46:06 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog
quote:
ORIGINAL: manichunter
...I have esteemed this day as Holy since 1997. Hence, I am still a novice in practice and knowledge of its truth.
What do you expect to gain from this observance?
I am sure manichunter can speak for himself. However, these are standard arguments that you make and will be addressed soon in our discussion in the keeping the law thread. Therefore, I thought I would chime in here.
What I gain from this observance is a time of uninterupted communion with Adonai and His people. If we all choose our own day, we would tend to negllictr the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is. As Paul tells us, this assembling together is increasingly important as we see The Day approaching.
quote:
It's no mystery that unsaved, Christ-rejecting Jews observe the Sabbath to this day. Odeliya has first hand experience with the present day traditions of her people and will confirm this. The last people you would want to draw a conclusion from about whether or not the literal OT worship laws are still binding is the Christ-rejecting Jews themselves. Because they have rejected Christ, they are still essentially, and for all intents and purposes, still under the law.
The context of what Jesus is saying here is in regard to their vulnerabiltiy in being able to escape easily. To try and use this as Jesus's endorsement of the required continuance of the literal OT Sabbath is not reasonable.
You are the one who is adding the adjective "Christ-rejecting Jews " to the identification of those who were hearing Ha Torah taught every Shabbat. In fact it can be argued that the point of the Jerusalem council was that gentiles were not being allowed to observe Shabbat with the Jews and were kept from access to the Scriptures.
In context, if Shabbat is not to be generally observed, why would it be a burden to flee on Shabbat?
quote:
But do you really think Christ-rejecting Jews at this time are in true spiritual connection with God, deeply engrossed in their meditations and worship of God so as to be vulnerable to attack? They got spiritually interrupted almost 2000 years ago.
In context, Yeshua is not talking about "Christ-rejecting Jews". He is giving advise to His followers.
Regarding the Catholic rejection of Shabbat:
quote:
Apparently it was already a well established tradition. The Catholic Church simply made it a matter of Church law. I don't think it was a shot out of the dark that everyone woke up to suddenly one day.
Apparent to whom? It was a well establish tradition among the Romans, who observed the vernerable day of the sun, but it was not commonly observed by the followers of Yeshua until the Romans began to execute the Jews. At this point, many gentile believers wimped out and stopped gathering on Shabbat. This could very well be what was behind Pauls admonition that we forsack not the assembling of ourselves together.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: manichunter
Help me make sense of this Scripture in light of today's prominent teaching that believers should not observe and regard the Sabbath.
This is the key to understanding this question. Nobody is saying you are not to observe a literal OT Sabbath. You don't have to anymore. It's completely a personal/ denominational choice. You will not be put to death for not doing it. You will not be cursed for not doing it. God will not withold the fullness of His presence from you if you don't do it. Like circumcision, Sabbath keeping is a big nothing if you do it, it's a big nothing if you don't it. You are free from the requirement of the law to do it. The Catholics understood their freedom from the outward requirements of the law to be in communion with God. Communion (connection) with God is accomplished through the indwelling Holy Spirit now, of which the OT laws of worship were only an illustration for us to understand the future work of the Holy Spirit in salvation.
If this is true, then why were multitudes murdered in the Catholic purges for keeping Shabbat?
Yes, without salvation and a proper relationship with Adonai, the keeping of the commandments is nothing. However, there are benefits associated with keeping Shabbat, as I noted above.
quote:
The closest thing you'll find in scripture is the letter to the Galatians. Paul chastises them for their literal OT observances. Yes, they were doing it in the sense of securing and holding on to their salvation. But Paul makes no attempt to tell them to do it for the right reasons. He does more to steer them away from those observances, and does nothing to try to persuade them to continue doing them but with the right attitude. Instead, he directs them toward the fruit of the Spirit and love as the obedience that signifies the Spirit-filled life. That's the life we are to pursue as Sprit-filled Christians, not a life of OT worship law observance. Read it thoughtfully for yourself and see if I am wrong in this summation.
If anything, silence is considered consent not rejection. We also see in the book of the Acts of the Apostles that Paul's practice is to got to the synogogue on Shabbat and that others also did. Therefore, he does encourage proper observance by example. The fruit of the Spirit can be and, I submit, was derived by Paul from Ha Torah. We do not observe Shabbat out of a spirit of fear but of gratitude.
quote:
The bottom line...You are free from the requirements of the old law to establish and continue in a relationship with God. You do not have to do them anymore. But you are certainly free to do them if you want, as long as you don't think your relationship with God depends on it. In which case you will have erred in the same manner as the Galatians.
We never "had" to keep Shabbat for salvation, but it is a matter of presenting our bodies as a living sacrifice holy and acceptable to Adonai, which is only reasonable, given the circumstances.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 7/31/2008 2:36:03 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1959
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
Bluethread saidquote:
If anything, silence is considered consent not rejection. We also see in the book of the Acts of the Apostles that Paul's practice is to got to the synogogue on Shabbat and that others also did. Therefore, he does encourage proper observance by example. The fruit of the Spirit can be and, I submit, was derived by Paul from Ha Torah. We do not observe Shabbat out of a spirit of fear but of gratitude.
Scripture isn't silent on Paul's motivation for observing the law. See 1 Corinthians 9: 20-23.
It would be inconsistent to say that we are permitted to not observe the Sabbath and then to suggest that Paul was observing the Sabbath in order to encourage others to do so too.
Bluethread said:
quote:
In fact it can be argued that the point of the Jerusalem council was that gentiles were not being allowed to observe Shabbat with the Jews and were kept from access to the Scriptures.
In context, if Shabbat is not to be generally observed, why would it be a burden to flee on Shabbat?
That's an interesting spin. Of course, it is completely made up interpretation on your part.
Here is the root of the controversy:
"But some from the religous part of the Pharisee who had believed stood up and said 'It is necessary to circumcise the Gentiles and to order them to observe the law of Moses.' (Acts 15:5 NET Bible)
Further on down it says:
"For it seemed best to the Holy Spirit and to us not to place any greater burden on you than these necesary rules that you abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality. (Acts 15:28 NET Bible)" Bold emphasis mine.
Since they were certainly arguing about the obligation to keep the law, which would include Sabbath keeping, why did they not mention it?
< Message edited by GrahamCracker -- 7/31/2008 2:50:10 PM >
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 7/31/2008 6:24:50 PM
|
|
|
bjay0801
Posts: 142
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
Since they were certainly arguing about the obligation to keep the law, which would include Sabbath keeping, why did they not mention it?
THe letter does state that they would continue to hear the law of Moses read to them in the synogauge every sabbath. Going to the synogague during that time was automatic for devout men and women. So it was assumed that was what was going to be done. I have yet to read any accounts during the time of the apostles where believers went to "church" on Sunday, that's not to say that people did not ever meet up on any other days of the week, but since sabbath is a part of what God spoke to the people and there was no NT, . . . . .
_____________________________
O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 7/31/2008 8:25:24 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1959
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
THe letter does state that they would continue to hear the law of Moses read to them in the synagogues every sabbath. Going to the synagogue during that time was automatic for devout men and women. So it was assumed that was what was going to be done. I have yet to read any accounts during the time of the apostles where believers went to "church" on Sunday, that's not to say that people did not ever meet up on any other days of the week, but since sabbath is a part of what God spoke to the people and there was no NT, . . . . .
You're making an unwarranted assumption based upon what you apparently misinterpret in James' words. Actually, it was non-Christian Jews who were said to be meeting in the synagogues every Sabbath. James' point is that the Christian Gentiles should not offend the sensibilities of non-Christian Jews. Therefore, it does not follow that James planned for that to be done.
And, frankly, they probably met several days during the week as the book of Acts says elsewhere.
During the time the events of Acts were taking place, the transition to the New Covenant was taking place. There would certainly be no problem with people feeling they should worship on the Sabbath. What is issue here from my POV that NO DAY was given as obligatory from the perspective of the New Covenant.
So, as I keep repeating, for those of you who are not up to speed on this thread. The NT does not obligate us to worship on either Saturday nor Sunday nor does the NT obligate us to observe Saturday/Sabbath as a day to abstain from work. Without going into detail, I suggest you read Romans 14. It's pretty clear that no day is obligatory.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 7/31/2008 8:44:30 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1959
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
bj0801,
What you're assuming to logically follow from James' words is an interpretation that directly contradicts Paul's instructions to the Romans. While I agree that many Christians continued to observe the Sabbath because of their familiarity with the OT, Paul instructs that there is a change in the obligation to observe any day above another.
Certain people's habits are not going to change just because God changes it, so Paul instructs those who are flexible not to harshly judge those who do not change.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 7/31/2008 11:55:58 PM
|
|
|
SpongeBlog
Posts: 1046
Joined: 12/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
What I gain from this observance is a time of uninterupted communion with Adonai and His people. If we all choose our own day, we would tend to negllictr the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is. As Paul tells us, this assembling together is increasingly important as we see The Day approaching.
No Christian would argue the fact that we need to meet together, at the same time, and in order to worship Him. That it must be done on Saturday and be accompanied by a cessation of labors is the point of contention here. Those requirements had their purpose. And just like the third grade, that time of instruction has served it's purpose and we have now moved on to higher and more important revelation.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
...In context, if Shabbat is not to be generally observed, why would it be a burden to flee on Shabbat?
The context is clearly about preparation. It's not a discourse defending literal Sabbath keeping. What's so hard to understand about not being prepared to flee because you're still in the habit of essentially closing down your cities and resting on the day called the Sabbath?
You try to convince the Christ-rejecting nation of Jews that they don't have to observe a literal Sabbath anymore. They still believe the law should be kept to the letter (unlike all of us here). They'd want to stone you in accordance with that law for suggesting such a thing. Odeliya has already testified they will stone your car for driving on the Sabbath day. Why is it so shocking that the Jews would continue to revere the Sabbath, and that Jesus knew they would, and that it would hinder an escape from the city?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
But do you really think Christ-rejecting Jews at this time are in true spiritual connection with God, deeply engrossed in their meditations and worship of God so as to be vulnerable to attack? They got spiritually interrupted almost 2000 years ago.
In context, Yeshua is not talking about "Christ-rejecting Jews". He is giving advise to His followers.
Followers who live among Christ-rejecting Jews, who still observe a literal Sabbath. If you lived in a city that shut down every Sabbath even though you yourself are a believer, you'd have a hard time catching a bus out of town too.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Regarding the Catholic rejection of Shabbat:
quote:
Apparently it was already a well established tradition. The Catholic Church simply made it a matter of Church law. I don't think it was a shot out of the dark that everyone woke up to suddenly one day.
Apparent to whom? It was a well establish tradition among the Romans, who observed the vernerable day of the sun, but it was not commonly observed by the followers of Yeshua until the Romans began to execute the Jews. At this point, many gentile believers wimped out and stopped gathering on Shabbat. This could very well be what was behind Pauls admonition that we forsack not the assembling of ourselves together.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: manichunter
Help me make sense of this Scripture in light of today's prominent teaching that believers should not observe and regard the Sabbath.
This is the key to understanding this question. Nobody is saying you are not to observe a literal OT Sabbath. You don't have to anymore. It's completely a personal/ denominational choice. You will not be put to death for not doing it. You will not be cursed for not doing it. God will not withold the fullness of His presence from you if you don't do it. Like circumcision, Sabbath keeping is a big nothing if you do it, it's a big nothing if you don't it. You are free from the requirement of the law to do it. The Catholics understood their freedom from the outward requirements of the law to be in communion with God. Communion (connection) with God is accomplished through the indwelling Holy Spirit now, of which the OT laws of worship were only an illustration for us to understand the future work of the Holy Spirit in salvation.
If this is true, then why were multitudes murdered in the Catholic purges for keeping Shabbat?
(Assuming this is true. I'm not a Catholic history buff)...To uphold their law. What's so hard to understand about that?
And I'm saying nobody in this thread is saying you are not to keep a literal Sabbath. Nobody that I know of is defending the Catholic's misguided persecution of those who kept a Sabbath, which to them was considered anatheam (spelling?).
Are you sure the Roman persecution of Sabbath keeping had already started during the days of the Apostles? Is that why we see the suggestion that some were already meeting on Sunday's even while the NT was being written?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Yes, without salvation and a proper relationship with Adonai, the keeping of the commandments is nothing. However, there are benefits associated with keeping Shabbat, as I noted above.
But they aren't spiritual benefits. Unless one's conscience regards them as spiritual. In which case they are indeed bound to them. But God is not purposely rewarding people for observing a literal Sabbath anymore.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
The closest thing you'll find in scripture is the letter to the Galatians. Paul chastises them for their literal OT observances. Yes, they were doing it in the sense of securing and holding on to their salvation. But Paul makes no attempt to tell them to do it for the right reasons. He does more to steer them away from those observances, and does nothing to try to persuade them to continue doing them but with the right attitude. Instead, he directs them toward the fruit of the Spirit and love as the obedience that signifies the Spirit-filled life. That's the life we are to pursue as Sprit-filled Christians, not a life of OT worship law observance. Read it thoughtfully for yourself and see if I am wrong in this summation.
If anything, silence is considered consent not rejection. We also see in the book of the Acts of the Apostles that Paul's practice is to got to the synogogue on Shabbat and that others also did. Therefore, he does encourage proper observance by example.
You read too much into Paul's visits to the synagouge's during his travels. Where else would he find groups of Jews to speak to? Folks like to play the 'context' card until doing that doesn't help their arguemt. This is a perfect example. Paul is looking for Jews to talk to. Where would you have gone to find large gatherings of Jews during this time?
No one here believes that literal OT worship came to a screeching halt over night. Especially when you consider that it is Paul's revelation that revealed this knowledge to the world. His ministry is the latest of all the Apostles ministries.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
The fruit of the Spirit can be and, I submit, was derived by Paul from Ha Torah.
Which is precisely why Paul says walking in the Spirit upholds the law. The argument is not that we no longer have to obey anything found in Torah. The argument is we do have to obey the laws of external worship found in Torah.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
We do not observe Shabbat out of a spirit of fear but of gratitude.
Some have made it clear that they are afraid of the curses of Deut. and Leviticus for not following the literal OT laws of worship. If they truly believe that, then they must keep those laws for conscience sake until they have the knowledge that they have been set free from those requirements as New Covenant believers.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
The bottom line...You are free from the requirements of the old law to establish and continue in a relationship with God. You do not have to do them anymore. But you are certainly free to do them if you want, as long as you don't think your relationship with God depends on it. In which case you will have erred in the same manner as the Galatians.
We never "had" to keep Shabbat for salvation, but it is a matter of presenting our bodies as a living sacrifice holy and acceptable to Adonai, which is only reasonable, given the circumstances.
They were a matter of hard and fast law. You had to keep them as evidence of 'believing' God. At that time that is indeed how you showed yourself as being in covenant with, and believing God. Through the revelation of the Spirit in the New Covenant we now have knowledge of what God intended through those commands and are now free of the literal fulfillment of those commands.
This can be understood the same way the Apostles didn't have to avoid actual leaven once they learned that Jesus wasn't talking about actual leaven but rather the teaching of the Pharisees. If He had never revealed that to them there would have been no excuse for them to not do what He said to do and avoid actual leaven except to purposely disobey showing themselves to be in contempt and unbelief. But once they knew it wasn't about literal leaven, their 'disobedience' to the original command to avoid leaven would not be a sign of contempt and unbelief.
Literal OT worship law observance can be understood in this same way. Until you have the knowledge that they were only illustrations of higher principles, you are bound to the literal fulfillment of those things or else you will indeed be showing yourself to be nothing short of an unbelieving lawbreaker.
It's all about knowledge. OT folks didn't have the knowledge we have today as revealed by the Spirit that God had a higher intention in the OT worship laws that supersedes the literal fulfillment of those commands (like the example of the leaven). Lack of that knowledge required that those under the old covenant perform those things as commanded as a show of their faith.
< Message edited by SpongeBlog -- 8/1/2008 12:11:52 AM >
_____________________________
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men." (Romans 14:17,18)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 8/1/2008 10:56:13 AM
|
|
|
mcleod
Posts: 827
Joined: 4/4/2006
Status: offline
|
After your long,long thread Spongblog against blue thread. I am glad to see that you have edited at the end.
quote:
< Message edited by SpongeBlog -- 8/1/2008 12:11:52 AM >
I also notice that Graham Cracker found BJay0801 to have a written discussion with.
Just think on this when you die and you have been a follower of the one true God and you have put your life into his hands because you believe(faith) in him. You are about to enter a rest(sabbath). Please oh please think what you are to do everyday in order to have that happen. You need him to carry your load. For him to do the work for you so that the glory can and will be used for him and him only.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 8/1/2008 11:34:21 AM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1959
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
McLeod,
We are not "about to enter the Sabbath rest." We who have believed have already entered the Sabbath rest.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 8/1/2008 11:47:11 AM
|
|
|
mcleod
Posts: 827
Joined: 4/4/2006
Status: offline
|
By the way Larry you need to think that one over again. Because You think you have totally enter a resting place? If that would be the case then Paul would not have written to the Ephesians 6: 10-12 Where it is stated we war against evil everday of our lives. Again Paul in Romans talks about him having to go through a war in which he struggles to do what is right.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 8/1/2008 8:04:49 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1959
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mcleod
By the way Larry you need to think that one over again. Because You think you have totally enter a resting place? If that would be the case then Paul would not have written to the Ephesians 6: 10-12 Where it is stated we war against evil everday of our lives. Again Paul in Romans talks about him having to go through a war in which he struggles to do what is right.
McLeod
I thought it over, for about 2 seconds. As a matter of fact, I had just seen this scripture immediately prior to posting my comment.
"For we who have believed enter that rest..." (Hebrews 4:3, NASB)
It says specifically that those who have believed do enter His rest. I realize that a prolonged and detailed discussion on the context of this verse really is more out of the range of this discussion. It is certainly related but it would involve a rabbit trail. The issue involves a discussion of that verse in context and the actual purpose of Hebrews.
Among the interpretations of the "rest" in Hebrews, I am quite aware that some believe "the rest" is actually Heaven. But if you would carefully read Hebrews 3 and 4, no mention of heaven nor life after death is mentioned. The verse I summarized states my position in a nutshell.
Among a few of the interpretations:
1) Heaven (because that is apparently your position.)
2) A higher state of spirituality whereby we are never stressed out by our trials, etc.
3) Sinless sanctification.
4) Salvation itself whereby we have trusted Christ as our savior. This is my position and I can think of a number of reasons why you might reject it. I would be happy to discuss it at length with you, preferably via email or PM because I would rather not have any interference.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 8/2/2008 1:09:04 AM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker
quote:
quote:
. . .why don't you keep some of those things that aren't temple related?
How do you know I don't?
Whenever I address this issue, you guys tend to be evasive.
I am not "you guys".
quote:
I have already spoken of the command to stone those who break the sabbath.
I have said, I don't have he authority to do that. Ha Torah provides for due process.
quote:
Do you have any bank CD's? That's loaning money at interest. (Ex. 25:37)
Exodus 25:37 "Then make its seven lamps and set them up on it so that they light the space in front of it."
This doesn't have anything to do with loaning money.
You must mean; Lev. 25:35 "If one of your countrymen becomes poor and is unable to support himself among you, help him as you would an alien or a temporary resident, so he can continue to live among you. 36 Do not take interest of any kind from him, but fear your God, so that your countryman may continue to live among you. 37 You must not lend him money at interest or sell him food at a profit."
We see in context that this applies to those in the community who are poor. If it applied to everybody in all circumstances, then no one could make a living farming, or be in the food industry. Now,there are other verses about not charging interest without the poverty reference or the requirement not to charge for food. However, in all cases it is ones countrymen or those who sojourn among us. If one does not choose to accept the responsibilities of Ha Torah, one can not expect to benefit from its blessings. Also, contrary to the belief of some, I do not believe the USA is the land of Adonai's people. As much as is possible, those in my community maintain our own community standards, as I'm sure others do. That is one of the benefits of living in the USA, for now.
If you seriously wish to discuss how one can keep the commandments, I would be happy to do that in the proper forum. However, if you are just looking to find fault, I can make this easier for you. I do not keep all of the commandments without fault 24/7. That is why I trust in the grace of Adonai to forgive my trespasses, as I forgive those who trespass against me, while I implore Ruach Ha Chedosh(The Holy Spirit) to help me live in a way that pleases Him. I know of no credible follower of Yeshua(Jesus) who lives any other way.
Therefore, the proper question is not do I keep Shabbat properly, but can it be kept properly. To that I would answer, (Duet 30:11) "Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach."
quote:
Can you cite any command to observe the Saturday/Sabbath by refraining from work that did not come after the time of the Law? All of those commands occurred after the Law came into force.
Sorry, I was confused by the introduction of the Temple into the discussion. No, there is no record of a direct command to not work on Shabbat before it was written by the finger of Adonai on Sinai. However, there was not direct command to not commit adultry, steal, bear false witness or honor one's father or mother either. Do you believe Adonai found those acceptable before Sinai?
quote:
quote:
quote:
GrahamCracker saidWe know that Jesus' followers kept the Law prior to Jesus' resurrection. We are told outright that they did. What I said was that people did so out of habit. I know that people who have life-long habits usually continue to do so until they have some reason to change them. Since we are never told that they actually stopped, the inference I gather from that is that they continued. As I said in #2867: "NT habit or custom is not the same thing as a command or an obligation."
Also, the Gentiles lived out of habit and Paul could be telling us to be gracious to them as they learn what Ha Torah says as they hear it every Sabbath. Just as habit is not a commandment, even more so, habit does not negate the validity of a commandment.
This is speculation on your part. There is nothing said that they would be later expected to keep the Sabbath. That is wishful thinking. Please cite any scripture which says that NT Gentiles would at some time be expected to keep the Sabbath. It simply isn't there. You are arguing from silence. Pretty much, you are making that up.
We are told that Paul in his missionary endeavors was in synagogue every sabbath, (Acts 13:42,44; 18:4). However, we are not told that he kept the Sabbath because he considered it obligatory to rest. I infer from that that he did it either from habit and/or because that was where he could reach Jews--since it says in Acts 15:21 that Jews worshiped every sabbath.
This is conjecture on your part and nowhere does Paul say he kept it out of any other reason than to honor Adonai.
Yes this is all speculation and I was just responding to your inference that people kept Shabbat out of habit and not a true reverence for Adonai. My point is, we can not say emphatically why they continued to keep Shabbat from the examples, but we can say that they did.
quote:
1) Fact: We are not told that Paul kept the sabbath out of obligation that he felt he was supposed to do so in order to please God. Repeat, we are not told that. So it is not speculation when I said we aren't told that.
It also does not say that people did so out of habit. Repeat, we are not told that. So it is not speculation when I said we aren't told that. As you followed your statement with the qualification that "the inference I gather from that is that they continue.", so I said, "nowhere does Paul say he kept it out of any other reason than to honor Adonai." You infer ignorance, I infer righteous intent. Now let's look at your other reasons why Paul went to Synogogue.
quote:
2) Actually, we ARE TOLD that he kept the law for other reasons.
"To the Jews I became like a Jew to gain the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law) to gain those under the law....I do all things because of the gospel so that I can be a participant in it." (1 Cor. 9:20-23)
Shall we look at the entire passage?
1 Cor. 9:20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.
Where is it that Yeshua "did away" with Shabbat observance?
quote:
3) In Acts, which I cited previously, we are told that he argued for Christ in the synagogues. We are not told that he had any other reason. Please cite a scripture that says he did so because he felt he had an obligation to keep the Sabbath because he believed God wanted him to.
You are presuming the two are mutually exclusive. What would you expect a follower of Yeshua to do. Every disciple discussed his rabbi's views of Ha Torah in the Synogogue. In the Shema(Duet 6) and Lev. 19, this one of the examples set for keeping the two great commandments. So, in order to further Adonai's kingdom, he did as Adonai said, in the way Adonai said to do it, but we are not to infer that He believed this was a good idea for others?
quote:
quote:
It is true that Paul stated that with regard to Timothy. However, nowhere does he make this statement regarding any other commandment including the Sabbath. Therefore, one example in complicated circumstances does not create an iron clad principle of interpretation.
True. But it does give us an example of Paul doing something with regard to the law for another reason. We can recognize that the works of the law were allowed even when they were otherwise not obligated. Paul states other places that circumcision is not obligated. He even rebuked the Galatians for keeping ciecumcision.
Given your prior insistance that things be clearly stated, it is interesting how many inferences and generalizations you make. Don't put a yoke on my shoulders that you are not willing to bear. I don't necessarily have a problem with inference or generalization as such, but they are not the same as direct proof. As I said before, I am willing to discuss any of the commandments or Ha Torah as a whole, but it must be in the proper forum and in proper context.
quote:
quote:
In conclusion, I again say, if Sabbath keepers can be forgiven for not giving up what you consider to be unnecessary, then it only seems reasonable that Gentiles be allowed to keep the appointed times in ignorance until they learn what Ha Torah says about such things.
The problem is not that you feel you must keep the Sabbath. The problem is that you feel the rest of us must keep it too. You cannot cite a single NT scripture where it says that we who want to please God must come to grips with this obligation of keeping the Sabbath. I believe God wants to release you from this dread obligation that people will be cursed if they don't keep the Sabbath. My opinion.
I don't feel I must keep Shabbat. I feel I am privileged to be premitted to. Also, I never said anyone else "must keep it too". I am merely stating that there a certain blessings and curses associated with the keeping of Shabbat and if one wishes recieve those blessings and avoid those curses, one should keep Shabbat. If you believe I am wrong, please do not keep Shabbat, for what is not of faith is sin. Until I am presented with Scripture (new or old) that invalidates those blessings and curses, I will put my faith in the commandment of Adonai.
quote:
What your interpretation involves is eisegesis. That's where you import your own ideas into the text in order to interpret it from preconceived notions.
You mean like, dispensationalism and replacement theology?
< Message edited by Bluethread -- 8/2/2008 1:27:00 AM >
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 8/2/2008 3:57:05 AM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1149
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog
No Christian would argue the fact that we need to meet together, at the same time, and in order to worship Him. That it must be done on Saturday and be accompanied by a cessation of labors is the point of contention here. Those requirements had their purpose. And just like the third grade, that time of instruction has served it's purpose and we have now moved on to higher and more important revelation.
Enlighten me, briefly, what was the purpose of keeping Shabbat then that makes it unimportant today?
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
...In context, if Shabbat is not to be generally observed, why would it be a burden to flee on Shabbat?
The context is clearly about preparation. It's not a discourse defending literal Sabbath keeping. What's so hard to understand about not being prepared to flee because you're still in the habit of essentially closing down your cities and resting on the day called the Sabbath?
You try to convince the Christ-rejecting nation of Jews that they don't have to observe a literal Sabbath anymore. They still believe the law should be kept to the letter (unlike all of us here). They'd want to stone you in accordance with that law for suggesting such a thing. Odeliya has already testified they will stone your car for driving on the Sabbath day. Why is it so shocking that the Jews would continue to revere the Sabbath, and that Jesus knew they would, and that it would hinder an escape from the city?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
But do you really think Christ-rejecting Jews at this time are in true spiritual connection with God, deeply engrossed in their meditations and worship of God so as to be vulnerable to attack? They got spiritually interrupted almost 2000 years ago.
In context, Yeshua is not talking about "Christ-rejecting Jews". He is giving advise to His followers.
Followers who live among Christ-rejecting Jews, who still observe a literal Sabbath. If you lived in a city that shut down every Sabbath even though you yourself are a believer, you'd have a hard time catching a bus out of town too.
This whole equating Sabbath observance with "Christ-rejecting Jews" is so prejudizing the point, it's not worth following. I though it was not a sin to keep Shabbat?
quote:
quote:
If this is true, then why were multitudes murdered in the Catholic purges for keeping Shabbat?
(Assuming this is true. I'm not a Catholic history buff)...To uphold their law. What's so hard to understand about that?
And I'm saying nobody in this thread is saying you are not to keep a literal Sabbath. Nobody that I know of is defending the Catholic's misguided persecution of those who kept a Sabbath, which to them was considered anatheam (spelling?).
But you just used Catholic history as a justification of this point. If you meant nobody in this thread, why didn't you say so. Please, don't base appoint on an argument (Catholic canonization) and then denigh the argument(not a Catholic buff) and then try to give a justification for the argument again (to uphold their law) followed by a change of justification(no body in this thread). Would you like a little syrup with that waffle.
quote:
Are you sure the Roman persecution of Sabbath keeping had already started during the days of the Apostles? Is that why we see the suggestion that some were already meeting on Sunday's even while the NT was being written?
Let me do your homework here. Appart from the records of the women coming to the tomb, these are the only two references to the first day of the week in the Apistolic Writtings.
Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.
Here they happened to have a meal, maybe because Paul was in town and/or there was not sufficient time on Shabbat for Him to discuss everything. This does not mean that "sunday" gatherings were common.
1Co 16:2 On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made.
Here we see Paul telling them to set asside money on the first day of the week. Rather than being a proof of "sunday" worship, this could just as well be proof that they were keeping Shabbat, because dealing in money on Shabbat is considered work by many.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Yes, without salvation and a proper relationship with Adonai, the keeping of the commandments is nothing. However, there are benefits associated with keeping Shabbat, as I noted above.
But they aren't spiritual benefits. Unless one's conscience regards them as spiritual. In which case they are indeed bound to them. But God is not purposely rewarding people for observing a literal Sabbath anymore.
So, what is so bad about what you might consider nonspiritual benefits. Is Adonai not the authority over "natural" consequences. If I think I know how something works, that does not mean Adonai had no part in it. For example, the honoring of ones parents leading to the ability to take proper care of ones inheritance could be seen as a no brainer and therefore, we don't need to recognize that as a blessing from Adonai.
quote:
You read too much into Paul's visits to the synagogue's during his travels. Where else would he find groups of Jews to speak to? Folks like to play the 'context' card until doing that doesn't help their arguement. This is a perfect example. Paul is looking for Jews to talk to. Where would you have gone to find large gatherings of Jews during this time?
No one here believes that literal OT worship came to a screeching halt over night. Especially when you consider that it is Paul's revelation that revealed this knowledge to the world. His ministry is the latest of all the Apostles ministries.
Of course, he was looking for Jews to talk to. Why would he not. Ha Torah commands it. That is one of the blessings of the Shabbat convocation. Paul did what Adonai commanded, in the way Adonai commanded it be done and we persume Paul must have had some other reason for doing it? Also, if it was so clearly done away with, why wouldn't it come to a screeching halt? Especially, if it is a sign of the "Christ-rejecting Jews".
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
The fruit of the Spirit can be and, I submit, was derived by Paul from Ha Torah.
Which is precisely why Paul says walking in the Spirit upholds the law. The argument is not that we no longer have to obey anything found in Torah. The argument is we do have to obey the laws of external worship found in Torah.
Why would the Spirit of Adonai tell us to do something different from how Adonai told Moshe to do it? Also, who determined that keeping Shabbat is a law "of external worship". Believe me, I have seen more laws of external worship in evangelical churches than I have ever seen in studying Torah on Shabbat.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
We do not observe Shabbat out of a spirit of fear but of gratitude.
Some have made it clear that they are afraid of the curses of Deut. and Leviticus for not following the literal OT laws of worship. If they truly believe that, then they must keep those laws for conscience sake until they have the knowledge that they have been set free from those requirements as New Covenant believers.
If you say so. But I have not found that in my discussions. In fact, I have found many more examples of people "claiming" the blessings of Adonai while living in ways that are not prohibited in the Apistolic Writings, but still cause great harm to those around them. This is the nature of anequdotal evidence. But, let's stay on topic.
quote:
They were a matter of hard and fast law. You had to keep them as evidence of 'believing' God. At that time that is indeed how you showed yourself as being in covenant with, and believing God. Through the revelation of the Spirit in the New Covenant we now have knowledge of what God intended through those commands and are now free of the literal fulfillment of those commands.
This can be understood the same way the Apostles didn't have to avoid actual leaven once they learned that Jesus wasn't talking about actual leaven but rather the teaching of the Pharisees. If He had never revealed that to them there would have been no excuse for them to not do what He said to do and avoid actual leaven except to purposely disobey showing themselves to be in contempt and unbelief. But once they knew it wasn't about literal leaven, their 'disobedience' to the original command to avoid leaven would not be a sign of contempt and unbelief.
Literal OT worship law observance can be understood in this same way. Until you have the knowledge that they were only illustrations of higher principles, you are bound to the literal fulfillment of those things or else you will indeed be showing yourself to be nothing short of an unbelieving lawbreaker.
Good example. Let's look at it.
Matthew 16:5-12
"5 When they went across the lake, the disciples forgot to take bread. 6 "Be careful," Jesus said to them. "Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees." 7 They discussed this among themselves and said, "It is because we didn't bring any bread." 8 Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked, "You of little faith, why are you talking among yourselves about having no bread? 9 Do you still not understand? Don't you remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? 10 Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? 11 How is it you don't understand that I was not talking to you about bread? But be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees." 12 Then they understood that he was not telling them to guard against the yeast used in bread, but against the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees."
This has nothing to do with Pesach and the feast of unleavened bread. It appears you have made the same mistake as the disciples. You find fault with using context, yet you presume a negation of a commandment, ignoring Matthews clear explanation. He is talking about the teaching of the schools of the Pharisees and Sadducees and how it puffs them up. Which is exactly, what knowledge can do.
1 Cor. 8:1b"We know that we all possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. 2 The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know."
quote:
It's all about knowledge. OT folks didn't have the knowledge we have today as revealed by the Spirit that God had a higher intention in the OT worship laws that supersedes the literal fulfillment of those commands (like the example of the leaven). Lack of that knowledge required that those under the old covenant perform those things as commanded as a show of their faith.
This is a twist on the teaching of the Gnostics. Those who lived prior to Yeshua had to perform works as proof of their salvation, but "we who have the knowledge" don't have to do anything but believe, whatever that means. Salvation is, was and always shall be by grace through faith. This is the point of Hebrews 11. I have said this several times to you personally, but you have ignored that chapter every time.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Sabbath - One Stop Thread - 8/2/2008 9:59:01 AM
|
|
|
SpongeBlog
Posts: 1046
Joined: 12/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Enlighten me, briefly, what was the purpose of keeping Shabbat then that makes it unimportant today?
Part of your teaching is how OT procedures and requirements were understood as 'rehearsals' (I don't know if that includes the Sabbath or not, but follow me). Can you think of any greater fulfillment of the Sabbath requirements than what God accomplished in the giving of the Holy Spirit?
In accordance with the requirements of the law, eveyone who believes has entered into rest; a rest from sin that God has established. And everyone who believes has congregated with all His people in perfect meeting through the one common Spirit given to all. And He did it on the Day that was appointed from eternity past--the Day Christ was crudified. As a direct result of the work of Christ (not ours, like under the law) the requirements of the law were fulfilled for us when the way was opened for the giving of the Holy Spirit days later. Not much boasting on our part in having that great work done for us.
I'd rather focus on and rejoice in these truths. Evidence of having entered into that observance is a changed character, not what day of the week you go to Church on. And doesn't that make sense if the 'rest' you have entered into is a rest from the taskmaster of sin???? But what does going to Church on Saturday prove about that?
God has lifted the burden from us of having to fulfill the Sabbath requirements in our own strength and ability in order to secure fellowship with Him. That's what grace is all about.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
This whole equating Sabbath observance with "Christ-rejecting Jews" is so prejudizing the point, it's not worth following. I though it was not a sin to keep Shabbat?
If you rely on it for your relationship with God it is. And who epitomizes that better than the Christ-rejecting Jews? If anyone has 'prejudiced' the point it is the Jews themselves. Of all the people in the world, the Jews are the very ones we should expect to cling to the observances of their law.
I just don't get why it's so shocking to some that Jesus would make reference to the continuation of a literal Sabbath among the Jews right up to the end of time. Because they've rejected Christ, and by default are still under the old covenant, their Sabbath keeping cannot be an endorsement of a literal Sabbath requirement in the New Covenant. Makes perfect sense. My argument is as simple as that.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
But you just used Catholic history as a justification of this point. If you meant nobody in this thread, why didn't you say so. Please, don't base appoint on an argument (Catholic canonization) and then denigh the argument(not a Catholic buff) and then try to give a justification for the argument again (to uphold their law) followed by a change of justification(no body in this thread). Would you like a little syrup with that waffle.
Dude, take it up with the Catholics. And be fair and honest and examine their underlying beliefs before you beat them up. Compassion comes from understanding what motivates people. That doesn't mean you have to sign up for their doctrines. It means you can understand them without criticizing them and creating ungodly divisions.
The only point I want to defend in Catholic doctrine is they understood their freedom from the restrictions of the letter of the law. If you pull the discussion away from that single point, I will ignore it from here on out so I won't have to suffer under the twisting of my posts in the unfair way that you just did.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
Are you sure the Roman persecution of Sabbath keeping had already started during the days of the Apostles? Is that why we see the suggestion that some were already meeting on Sunday's even while the NT was being written?
Let me do your homework here. Appart from the records of the women coming to the tomb, these are the only two references to the first day of the week in the Apistolic Writtings.
Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.
Here they happened to have a meal, maybe because Paul was in town and/or there was not sufficient time on Shabbat for Him to discuss everything. This does not mean that "sunday" gatherings were common.
1Co 16:2 On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made.
Here we see Paul telling them to set asside money on the first day of the week. Rather than being a proof of "sunday" worship, this could just as well be proof that they were keeping Shabbat, because dealing in money on Shabbat is considered work by many.
I knew you'd miss it in my post. I called evidence of Sunday meetings a 'suggestion'. We can see the believers were meeting on Sunday's even during Apostolic times. We don't know anything about what that meant to them, or if they had already abandoned the Sabbath. The NT scriptures simply show us they did in fact meet on Sunday's. Period.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
So, what is so bad about what you might consider nonspiritual benefits. Is Adonai not the authority over "natural" consequences. If I think I know how something works, that does not mean Adonai had no part in it. For example, the honoring of ones parents leading to the ability to take proper care of ones inheritance could be seen as a no brainer and therefore, we don't need to recognize that as a blessing from Adonai.
Come on. Do you really want to defend the natural benefit of meeting and resting on a Saturday instead of Sunday?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
You read too much into Paul's visits to the synagogue's during his travels. Where else would he find groups of Jews to speak to? Folks like to play the 'context' card until doing that doesn't help their arguement. This is a perfect example. Paul is looking for Jews to talk to. Where would you have gone to find large gatherings of Jews during this time?
No one here believes that literal OT worship came to a screeching halt over night. Especially when you consider that it is Paul's revelation that revealed this knowledge to the world. His ministry is the latest of all the Apostles ministries.
Of course, he was looking for Jews to talk to. Why would he not. Ha Torah commands it. That is one of the blessings of the Shabbat convocation. Paul did what Adonai commanded, in the way Adonai commanded it be done and we persume Paul must have had some other reason for doing it? Also, if it was so clearly done away with, why wouldn't it come to a screeching halt?
Why are you not getting this. We have been telling you for months now...it was not so clearly and deliberately done away with over night. And since Paul plainly teaches those observances as optional, and according to one's conscience why should they come to a screeching halt??? Isn't your freedom to observe them proof of what I'm saying?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
...Especially, if it is a sign of the "Christ-rejecting Jews".
You are taking offense of something that you need not. I'm not suggesting for a minute that the Jews keep the law because they have rejected Christ, therefore, everyone who keeps the Sabbath is also a Christ-rejecter. Nonsense. Please don't bring it up again with me. It's not my argument.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
The fruit of the Spirit can be and, I submit, was derived by Paul from Ha Torah.
Which is precisely why Paul says walking in the Spirit upholds the law. The argument is not that we no longer have to obey anything found in Torah. The argument is we do have to obey the laws of external worship found in Torah.
Why would the Spirit of Adonai tell us to do something different from how Adonai told Moshe to do it?
I've been trying to show everybody this for months now. We understand 'why' things are different now in the undebatable examples we have in animal sa | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
