Law/laws/sabbath (split from OSAS)

[WhiteWings]

It does prove one thing, the new Christians did keep Jewish customs.

Not sure WW how far you take that statement- so please regard this post in the context of the whole conversation thus far......

The fact that they gathered on the Sabbath for these meetings does not prove that all the early Christians kept Jewish "customs".

Both the Sabbath and Havdallah are Jewish customs. But I understand you just assume that purely accidently they gathered on days that accidently were "Jewish days"? Maybe Jesus never kept any of the feast either. He just purely accidently was there at that moment and just enjoyed the party.

Historical writings clearly show that the early Christians just worshipped on the Sabbath by Jews in the same synagogue at the same time, listening to the same teachings. Yeah, they had their arguments, but still were very many Jews. The early Christians were just Jews who believed Jesus was the long awaited Messiah. The "normal Jews" believed Jesus was not. It's no different than for example, some Christians believe the end-times happened around 70AD while others believe it has yet to come.

Anyway we had this chat before. There is simply no way to convince me all Jewishnes is replaced by Christanity the moment Jesus rose from the dead. If it was, then why is Revelelation on of the most Jewish orientated books of the whole Bible? I know there are a lot of verses that support the OT should be in the trash bin because it's obsolete. At least they seem to support so. But not if  'you' really look at the verses. They are crammed with references to Jewishness.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is an elephant....

[eaglesway]

WW, I hav absolutely no problem with Jewishness, or the celebration of it by Jews. I am not Jewish myself(other than imwardly by the Spirit a child of Abraham the father of faith), but I love all the rich history of the scripture and the heritage of the forefathers, the law and the prophets.

I hav simply said that there is no scriptural injunction for believers to keep the traditions or the feasts or the laws or the Sabbaths-  because they have been transcended in Christ. He is the sunshine that fulfills all that they foreshadowed, and the sun shines and the shadows fade.

2 Cor 3:7 But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. 10 For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses(transcends) it. 11 For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

12 Therefore having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech, 13 and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away. 14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. 15 But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; 16 but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.

The former glory is being surpassed in the glory of transformation into the image of the son of God- my Sabbath.

2 Cor 2:16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.

Heb 8:4 Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; 5 who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses [d]was warned by God when he was about to erect the [e]tabernacle; for, "See," He says, "that you make all things according to the pattern which was shown you on the mountain." 6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

[Seth]

As  Eaglesway  said, the scriptures indicate that the Christians met on Sabbath to preach to unconverted Jews, not to observe the Sabbath as a continual day of worship or rest for believers. As to the feast, of course Jesus was there, and so were his parents. What does that have to do with Christians observing them after the cross?

[sheila]

 I have personally kept some feasts myself......and  when I did..the gist of the celebration was

centered on the fulfillment through Christ.... really,I would rather the christians keep them instead

  of Easter..etc as a memorial of Christ fulfilling them.

   But I also realize we are under no commandment to do so..each one..being cnvinced.

     one thing that settles this for me is at the transfiguration...Peter asking if perhaps a house

  built for Moses,Elijah and Christ...and the reply.......".This is my son,hear ye Him"

.....remember....when God said......'I will make them jealous of a nation that is not a nation

and a people without knowledge "?  Most christians have no more than a surface knowledge

of these feasts and how Christ fulfilled them or the rich spiritual imagery of these things portraying

  Christ.......

   .

 

[eaglesway]

I think thats fine, and I agree that Easter and Christmas are really just pagan feasts merged with Christian religion. I think the feasts have plenty if typology and info in them and I even think it could be fun and interesting to keep them on occasion. I have been just re-iterating that there is no scriptural imperative for them under the new covenant - for Gentiles or for Jews. :o)

[Seth]

The thing that I don't see happening in the Early Church was peaceful ecumencism. I don't think the early church was attending festivals with unconverted Jews just to enjoy the day and get some meaning out of it for themselves. Not that I think there is anything wrong with doing so. But, if the Bible recorded the early church attending a festival (which they would do in a heartbeat), it would also record them getting tossed out on their rear ends for preaching Jesus. That was their agenda concerning the Sabbath and it would be their agenda concerning the festivals too. Oh, those annoying Christians and their Jesus.

[eaglesway]

I agree.I think the Jews understood mid-rash in a way that we don't(discussing the scriptures). They probably allowed more varying views to be shared from the platform and discussed more thoroughly. Then when they figured out the implications of what you were espousing- they killed you  :laugh:

[Seth]

 :laughing7:

"I'm good with your beliefs....until I'm not"

[eaglesway]

I am perfectly willing to give you an opportunity to hang yourself  :punish:

[gregoryfl]

I have been reading these posts over the last several days and would like to share purely from a linguistic and grammatical view, another way to understand Colossians 2:16. I have been on both sides of understanding, and like most, parroted what I was told one way or the other. Although I know for sure that studying the languages for yourself does not in any way guarantee that you will be kept from error, I do believe it does offer a help toward correct understanding.

Colossians 2:16 is an example. Based on how most translate it, it reads basically this way:

Let no man therefore judge you in eating, or in drinking, or with respect to a feast day or a new moon or a Sabbath day,
(Col 2:16)

Let no one, then, be judging you in food or in drink or in the particulars of a festival, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,
(Col 2:16)

Reading these two literal translations objectively, you get the sense of there being 5 separate things making up a clause, of which no one is to judge:

1. Eating
2. Drinking
3. Feast Day
4. New Moon
5. Sabbath

The conjuction 'or' separates each of those entities, and there is a neutral tone to the text, meaning...do not let anyone judge you concerning anything having to do with these 5 things, one way or another.

Most would, of course, see this as proof that these believers were not keeping these days, and most likely eating and drinking whatever they wanted, and that Paul was encouraging them to continue on, not letting anyone judge them about this.

I would like to submit however, that grammatically and linguistically, the text actually is definitively stating the opposite. I will be seeking to demonstrate this from my Aramaic text first, although the Greek also can be used to show the same thing. My next post will be concerning this.

[Seth]

Hi Ronen,
I just want to point out that our discussion of Colossians 2 has also gone beyond just that verse, but also the following "for these things are having a shadow, but the body is of Christ."

So, whether anyone believes that the church was observing sabbaths or abstaining from certain foods etc, it's clear to me that those things are pointing to a present reality in Christ. If you have the body, then you have the Sabbath all the time.

I personally haven't seen proof directly in the text that the Early Church was observing sabbath days for their own edification, and especially not by necessity. I believe if it was a necessity, Paul would have a very clear teaching on it, not just a verse or two which could be debated on translation.

I think what was absolutely necessary for the church was presented to them in a very clear way on multiple occasions all through the scripture. If the Early Church is supposed to keep those things as a matter of doctrine and obedience, we wouldn't even need to debate it. It would be all over the scripture, like Paul's teaching about sin, and newness in Christ, and the carnal mind, and the cross, and how nobody is righteous of themselves etc etc.

If the Sabbath was an important subject, I think Paul would have plainly taught it "and don't forget to keep the Sabbath every week, guys. That's what God wants."

The very fact that we need to fuss with translations over a verse to try and determine something that some Christians believe is so utterly important to Christian life, yet was not clearly and demonstrably taught is dubious on the face of it, at least to me. Many times in discussions like this, Christians look at the text and will say "Paul was not saying..." But, where is the text that says that Paul IS saying we need to keep the Sabbaths, or holy days or abstain from meats? If it's so important, why are the verses about it so sparse and dependent on interpretation?

[FreeAtLast]

It does prove one thing, the new Christians did keep Jewish customs.

Not sure WW how far you take that statement- so please regard this post in the context of the whole conversation thus far......

The fact that they gathered on the Sabbath for these meetings does not prove that all the early Christians kept Jewish "customs".

Both the Sabbath and Havdallah are Jewish customs. But I understand you just assume that purely accidently they gathered on days that accidently were "Jewish days"? Maybe Jesus never kept any of the feast either. He just purely accidently was there at that moment and just enjoyed the party.

Historical writings clearly show that the early Christians just worshipped on the Sabbath by Jews in the same synagogue at the same time, listening to the same teachings. Yeah, they had their arguments, but still were very many Jews. The early Christians were just Jews who believed Jesus was the long awaited Messiah. The "normal Jews" believed Jesus was not. It's no different than for example, some Christians believe the end-times happened around 70AD while others believe it has yet to come.

Anyway we had this chat before. There is simply no way to convince me all Jewishnes is replaced by Christanity the moment Jesus rose from the dead. If it was, then why is Revelelation on of the most Jewish orientated books of the whole Bible? I know there are a lot of verses that support the OT should be in the trash bin because it's obsolete. At least they seem to support so. But not if  'you' really look at the verses. They are crammed with references to Jewishness.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is an elephant....

The Sabbath was there long before there were jewish people---Sabbath was a jewish custom--but long before the jews came about the Sabbath was there at the beginning.So it was hnot only for the jews when they came on the scene--but for all mankind  :HeartThrob: :HeartThrob: :HeartThrob:

[lastpost]

I hope not to side-track too much but I simply think that a follower of Christ is a follower of Christ, and the Christ-Spirit will lead that follower of Christ to follow Him, serve Him and worship Him in a spiritual manner, if they let Him, and there is no "set" observance in a ritualistic way.

If someone came to me today, 27th August, and asked me if I could find a spare half hour later because they had a strong desire to remember the Baby Jesus and His wondrous birth, and perhaps sing a few carols, and perhaps remember a few of the priceless treasures that the Jewel of Baby Jesus brought to humanity - then I think I would find that half hour and I might say, because it would be true, it would be my privilege, a privilege to draw closer to the humility of it all through remembrance, perhaps remembrance of a perfect living Being choosing to be born as a human out of an unending love for humanity, perhaps to try and enter into the utter sweetness of that humility where He gave up the privileges that were rightfully His and submitted Himself the laws of His own Creation, being dependent even for His physical life upon His mother's supply, perhaps remembering the difficulty and harshness of His life from the very beginning, right through to the end and His overcoming all temptations, even the temptation to use His power to alleviate His own suffering from man's point of view - and perhaps many more thoughts that could be remembered during a half hour.

And if that person came to me again in twenty years time and said, "You know what, I have a family now and I kept that little summer remembrance of Christ's birth going, and now we all stop what we're doing for half an hour every 27th of August and celebrate His birth, can you make it tonight?"

Well, I would say, absolutely I can make it, thank you for inviting me.

[Seth]

I hope not to side-track too much but I simply think that a follower of Christ is a follower of Christ, and the Christ-Spirit will lead that follower of Christ to follow Him, serve Him and worship Him in a spiritual manner, if they let Him, and there is no "set" observance in a ritualistic way.

I agree.

The question of physical circumcision and spiritual circumcision damages the argument that Sabbath must be kept the same way as it was under the Law. Paul spiritualized circumcision, and he also spiritualized the Sabbath (these things are having a shadow, but the body is of Christ). He showed Sabbath to be a metaphor of Christ, just like physical circumcision.

But the Sabbath keepers tell us to observe circumcision in the NEW way, but keep observing Sabbath in the OLD way. Don't be physically circumcised, because it "availeth nothing" but DO keep Sabbath as a literal day, because it availeth something? It doesn't follow.

ll those things are shadows. If circumcision is observed spiritually as in Romans 2, there is no reason that the Sabbath cannot also be observed spiritually, as in being in the body of Christ.

[FreeAtLast]

I hope not to side-track too much but I simply think that a follower of Christ is a follower of Christ, and the Christ-Spirit will lead that follower of Christ to follow Him, serve Him and worship Him in a spiritual manner, if they let Him, and there is no "set" observance in a ritualistic way.

I agree.

The question of physical circumcision and spiritual circumcision damages the argument that Sabbath must be kept the same way as it was under the Law. Paul spiritualized circumcision, and he also spiritualized the Sabbath (these things are having a shadow, but the body is of Christ). He showed Sabbath to be a metaphor of Christ, just like physical circumcision.

But the Sabbath keepers tell us to observe circumcision in the NEW way, but keep observing Sabbath in the OLD way. Don't be physically circumcised, because it "availeth nothing" but DO keep Sabbath as a literal day, because it availeth something? It doesn't follow.

ll those things are shadows. If circumcision is observed spiritually as in Romans 2, there is no reason that the Sabbath cannot also be observed spiritually, as in being in the body of Christ.

Sabbath was kept long before the law came through Moses---did they keep it the same way as under the law ?

[Seth]

Sabbath was was always a shadow of the body of Christ. Therefore it doesn't matter how anyone kept it before Christ came in his body to the Church.

[sheila]

God's rest day from His finished work[let us make man in our image] man in the incorruptible image

of Jesus Christ is the GREAT SABBATH where God and man rest.

   the Father has continued working until now,and so do I.

   is it lawful to heal or to kill on the Sabbath?

[Seth]

God's rest day from His finished work[let us make man in our image] man in the incorruptible image

of Jesus Christ is the GREAT SABBATH where God and man rest.

   the Father has continued working until now,and so do I.

   is it lawful to heal or to kill on the Sabbath?

:thumbsup:

It's a tough question to answer if one believes we must observe as the Jews did.

[FreeAtLast]

any thoughts on Hebrews 4 about  entering into his rest ??

its all surrounded by the Sabbath in Hebrews 4---even the warning given which was being spoken of from Ezekiel 20

How Israel rebelled against him in the wilderness,walking not in his statues,despised his judgements,and polluted his Sabbaths--

Hebrews 4 is a warning to NOT fall after the same example of unbelief as they did in Ezekiel

it is plainly speaking of the 7th day Sabbath there in Hebrews 4---there remains the rest unto the people of Yah

what remains was here long before or it could not be remaining at the present time---let us labor therefore to enter this rest(7th day Sabbath)unless we fall after the same unbelief as they did in Ezekiel  ???

read it in Ezekiel ---we have been warned by the writer of Hebrews   :HeartThrob: :HeartThrob: :HeartThrob:

[Seth]

since Jesus said come on to me and I shall give you rest, my thoughts on Hebrews 4 is that our that entering into his rest means entering into his body. By way of the Spirit. That is the only way we can enter into Christ. Therefore the Sabbath is in his body not a literal day. the literal day was only a shadow of everything I have just said.

[FreeAtLast]

since Jesus said come on to me and I shall give you rest, my thoughts on Hebrews 4 is that our that entering into his rest means entering into his body. By way of the Spirit. That is the only way we can enter into Christ. Therefore the Sabbath is in his body not a literal day. the literal day was only a shadow of everything I have just said.

question---did the jews of the old testament have this rest you talk about ??

[Seth]

Some of the prophets had the Spirit, but that does not mean they were converted by it.

John 7
37In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

So, the manifestation of the Spirit as a river of water by which man may come to Christ and drink and out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water, was not available until Christ was glorified. This is why the crucifixion was necessary. Otherwise it wasn't necessary for Christ to be resurrected to give these rivers of water to anyone else who wanted it.

None can receive the Holy Spirit unless they believe in Christ (Acts 2:38). But they murdered Christ instead because Christ said that they did not believe.

[sheila]

actually the 1000yr reign is JESUS CHRIST SABBATH REST DAY...that many do not enter into while

  in this life[they shall not enter my rest]just as many of the jews rejected Jesus and would not enter into Him..

   so He handed them over to satan for the destruction of their flesh...that the spirit may be saved

   on the day of the Lord.

[FreeAtLast]

Some of the prophets had the Spirit, but that does not mean they were converted by it.

John 7
37In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

So, the manifestation of the Spirit as a river of water by which man may come to Christ and drink and out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water, was not available until Christ was glorified. This is why the crucifixion was necessary. Otherwise it wasn't necessary for Christ to be resurrected to give these rivers of water to anyone else who wanted it.

None can receive the Holy Spirit unless they believe in Christ (Acts 2:38). But they murdered Christ instead because Christ said that they did not believe.

No Prophet in the old testament as I recall had the spirit indwelling--they only had the spirit come upon them to do the ministry they were given--not came to indwell.

Hebrews 4 talks of the 7th day Sabbath rest----the jews in Ezekiel didn't have the rest you are talking about because messiah had never come neither had the spirit been given to indwell people.

point is that the writer of Hebrews said that the rest that the jews of Ezekiel had still REMAINED unto that present time--and for them not to fall after the same example of their unbelief--the rest remained for the people of God in the new testament just  as it was in the old testament

basically don't pollute his Sabbaths,walk in his statues and commandments or fall after the same example of unbelief  :HeartThrob: :HeartThrob:

[FreeAtLast]

actually the 1000yr reign is JESUS CHRIST SABBATH REST DAY...that many do not enter into while

  in this life[they shall not enter my rest]just as many of the jews rejected Jesus and would not enter into Him..

   so He handed them over to satan for the destruction of their flesh...that the spirit may be saved

   on the day of the Lord.

nothing like a good ole fashion stoning by the high priest and his devils to help persuade someone   :HeartThrob: :HeartThrob: :HeartThrob: