Should we still observe the sabbath?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

For those who uphold we are still under the Ten Commandments, are we supposed to keep only the Ten Commandments or do we keep the whole Torah? It could become a slippery slope into endless statutes.

God forbid we obey God in everything He tells us to do?

How can a Christian have a negative opinion about a commandment or instruction of God?

Which is better, for a child to seek the LEAST amount of obedience to his parents? Or for a child to be eager to learn and obey all of his parents' guidance?

So why do Christians think of God - whom they say is their Father - as some kind of unjust horrible tyrant? And that Jesus somehow came along to free us from the Father's terrible, onerous, despotic authoritarian control?

This is an artifact of trinitarian thinking, forgetting all those pesky commandments are CHRIST'S. As if Jehovah in the old testament is somebody different than Christ in the new. But He is the SAME yesterday, today, and forever. He is the incarnation in human nature of the very mind, will, character, and purpose of God.

[Esaias]

Psalm 19:1-14 KJV
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. [2] Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. [3] There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. [4] Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, [5] Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. [6] His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof. [7] The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. [8] The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. [9] The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether. [10] More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. [11] Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward. [12] Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. [13] Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins ; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression. [14] Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength, and my redeemer.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Commandment doesn’t have a present tense.

By context it does. It would be very simple to say "the former commandment", "the Mosaic commandment", etc."

[Esaias]

Paul explains the effect of the new covenant:

Romans 2:13-15 KJV
(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. [14] For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: [15] Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

The gentiles have not the law; they are not members of the Sinaitic Covenant and are heathens.

They do by nature; not by civil authorities.

The things contained in the law; they actually do the things commanded in the law.

Shew the work of the law written in their hearts; they demonstrate that God's law has been written in their hearts, they don't require a civil structure enforcing the law, they willfully and voluntarily submit to the law of God regardless of the surrounding culture, even though they be gentiles.

This is the new covenant in action:
Jeremiah 31:31-33 KJV
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: [32] Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord : [33] But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Paul points out that it is NOT a new set of laws, but God's one, holy, unified, original law that is written in the heart and demonstrated by obedience which is a hallmark of new covenant Christianity.

Romans 2:26-29 KJV
Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? [27] And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? [28] For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: [29] But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Paul here teaches that gentiles who obey the law of God are reckoned as if they were circumcised (covenanted). The spiritual circumcision of the heart results in a person obeying the law of God - the SAME law the Jew claims to follow.

There are no "two sets of laws", only one. It is either written in the heart, or just on paper.

Has the Father written His law into your heart and mind? Does your life show it by you "doing by nature the things contained in the law"?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

By context it does. It would be very simple to say "the former commandment", "the Mosaic commandment", etc."

Although I agree that Luke's phraseology recognizes and demonstrates a continued Christian Sabbatarianism, I however do not think nouns have tense. Only case, number, gender, and person.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias

God forbid we obey God in everything He tells us to do?

How can a Christian have a negative opinion about a commandment or instruction of God?

Which is better, for a child to seek the LEAST amount of obedience to his parents? Or for a child to be eager to learn and obey all of his parents' guidance?

So why do Christians think of God - whom they say is their Father - as some kind of unjust horrible tyrant? And that Jesus somehow came along to free us from the Father's terrible, onerous, despotic authoritarian control?

This is an artifact of trinitarian thinking, forgetting all those pesky commandments are CHRIST'S. As if Jehovah in the old testament is somebody different than Christ in the new. But He is the SAME yesterday, today, and forever. He is the incarnation in human nature of the very mind, will, character, and purpose of God.

I am not insinuating to disobey God. The laws of Moses cast a shadow of things to come and they also had relevance to the time period in which Israel lived in. Do you think we should still stone people who violate those laws, because that was what the law commanded to do for many of the violations.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Not true:

Genesis 26:4-5 (ESV),



Abraham kept God's "laws". And what are those laws of God that Abraham kept?

In a word: תּוֹרָה - torah

See: https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/26-5.htm

I am sorry, you are right here. I overlooked it when checking the Hebrew.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

I am not insinuating to disobey God.

What I am saying is your line of reasoning goes there, although you do not yet see it.

The laws of Moses cast a shadow of things to come and they also had relevance to the time period in which Israel lived in.

What "shadow" is cast by "Do not worship idols"? Is that also done away with now? God's laws are DIVINE, given by the Creator for man to follow. There is nothing unique to "that time period" that makes any of the Ten Commandments obsolete. Idolatry has always been wrong and always will be. Adultery, murder, coveting, profaning God's name, and yes ignoring the Creator's Sabbath, are, were, and remain wrong. The Bible doesn't become obsolete. We either live by it... Or not.

Do you think we should still stone people who violate those laws, because that was what the law commanded to do for many of the violations.

God commanded capital punishment for certain crimes. He knows best. Or do you think God's ideas are outdated and primitive?

I can't believe a Christian would find God's ideas abhorrent or inferior. Makes no sense to me.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

By context it does. It would be very simple to say "the former commandment", "the Mosaic commandment", etc."

No. It doesn’t. The commandment is the subject (noun). The verbs are past tense. The verbs describe the action taken in relation to the noun. The verbs all are past tense.

Anyway, what Esaias said about the noun not having tense. The Sabbath keeping in the NT? That is an issue that was certainly being observed by Jews. Not Gentiles. At least this is generally true according to scripture.

The tense of Commandment? Very weak.

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by Esaias

But this is contradictory. On the one hand, you say Jesus didn't overwrite the commandment, but essentially expanded it. It's now "thou shalt not commit murder, plus..."

I don't see how it's contradictory.

Originally Posted by Esaias

But when it comes to the Fourth Commandment, you are saying Jesus added to it/expanded it and therefore you don't have to actually do what is actually commanded. Do you see what I am pointing out? A double standard regarding the Commandments.

I truly don't see what you're trying to say. How is it contradictory? Maybe I'm not explaining it well enough?

Originally Posted by Esaias

If you applied to the 4th commandment the same reasoning you applied to the other, the conclusion should have been "keep the seventh day holy as the Sabbath PLUS these additional spiritual concepts."

You seem hung up on this idea of adding to the law, rather than the idea of it becoming a greater law. More restrictive in one sense, but also more freeing in another way.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Also, if God said "you shall not add" to His commandments, how then is Jesus not sinning by adding to His commandments?

I don't see what you mean. Expanding on the existing law is not the same as adding to it.

Originally Posted by Esaias

And finally, Jesus didn't actually add or expand anything. Not hating your neighbour was already commanded. Not lusting after someone else's woman was already commanded (Tenth Commandment). Jesus was explaining the proper application of the law of God and the proper attitude we should have towards it.

He also didn't say "You have heard remember the Sabbath, but I say unto you don't worry about that, just become a Christian and you can now work on the seventh day" or anything remotely similar.

You know, sometimes I wonder if you and Bro. Benincasa just troll to try and draw out an argument. I don't really know if you actually don't understand what I'm saying, or if you're just pretending to not understand so you can antagonize me about it. I don't know if I can explain it any clearer than I already stated it.