Should we still observe the sabbath?

[Esaias]

"Rest in Jesus is how we obey the Fourth Commandment because Jesus is our Sabbath. Therefore. we don't have to do what the Fourth Commandment LITERALLY SAYS TO DO."

Okay, then rest in Jesus is how we obey the Fifth Commandment because Jesus is our everlasting Father. Therefore we don't have to do what the Fifth Commandment LITERALLY SAYS TO DO.

The fact the antisabbatarian cannot see the absurdity of their position when faced point blank with the absolute proof their reasoning is erroneous and fatal to their own system of doctrine, is a strong indicator of willfulness. All the theological gymnastics are most likely just excuses to soothe the conscience from having to be honest. Nobody really just wants to flat out admit they could care less about God's holy Sabbath, they are gonna do whatever they want to do and hold on to their catholic traditions of men.

[good samaritan]

The Sabbath was an example of entering Gods rest. It isn’t about absolving the command, but rather fulfilling it. We now have a greater Fulfillment of keeping the sabbath.

Hebrews 4:10-11
10......For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11......Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

We now keep the Sabbath daily. We can live in the peace of knowing that we are justified by the grace of God and not by laboring to keep a law. Too many Christian’s are laboring to keep commands, when we should be laboring to continually abide in Him.

[Esaias]

Next I imagine we'll be hearing about how none of them are Sunday keepers even though they all do church on Sunday, other weekdays are optional and movable but God forbid the Sunday service gets moved, nosiree that's a FIXED UNALTERABLE OLD LANDMARK I tell ya!

"We don't keep Sunday, we just treat Sunday as the UNALTERABLE HOLY CHURCH DAY". lol

Who gave the world Sunday as church day? The EXACT SAME PEOPLE who came up with the trinity, infant baptism, Mary Queen of Heaven/Mother of God worship, priests, monks and nuns, clerical celibacy, purgatory, sprinkling and pouring, exorcisms, the Inquisition, transubstantiation, infallibility of the pope, councils, creeds, canons, and the murder of MILLIONS and the oppression of MILLIONS, all in the name of Jesus no less.

Sundaykeeping is part of pagan Mithraism, Sun and Baal worship, right along with the trinity and all the rest of the Babylonian heathenism going by the name of modern "Christianity". Baptising in the trinitarian formula is a sign of one's subservience to Rome, just as Sundaykeeping is.

2 Corinthians 6:14-18 KJV
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? [15] And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? [16] And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them ; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. [17] Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing ; and I will receive you, [18] And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

The Sabbath was an example of entering Gods rest. It isn’t about absolving the command, but rather fulfilling it. We now have a greater Fulfillment of keeping the sabbath.

Hebrews 4:10-11
10......For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11......Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

We now keep the Sabbath daily. We can live in the peace of knowing that we are justified by the grace of God and not by laboring to keep a law. Too many Christian’s are laboring to keep commands, when we should be laboring to continually abide in Him.

Cognitive dissonance has no limits.

I JUST addressed the supposed greater spiritual principle argument. I already SEVERAL TIMES refuted your erroneous and false teaching about what it means to fulfill something. And yet still you persist just repeating your claims, not proving anything, not refuting anything, just continuing headstrong in catholic traditions of men.

How sad.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Next I imagine we'll be hearing about how none of them are Sunday keepers even though they all do church on Sunday, other weekdays are optional and movable but God forbid the Sunday service gets moved, nosiree that's a FIXED UNALTERABLE OLD LANDMARK I tell ya!

"We don't keep Sunday, we just treat Sunday as the UNALTERABLE HOLY CHURCH DAY". lol

Who gave the world Sunday as church day? The EXACT SAME PEOPLE who came up with the trinity, infant baptism, Mary Queen of Heaven/Mother of God worship, priests, monks and nuns, clerical celibacy, purgatory, sprinkling and pouring, exorcisms, the Inquisition, transubstantiation, infallibility of the pope, councils, creeds, canons, and the murder of MILLIONS and the oppression of MILLIONS, all in the name of Jesus no less.

Sundaykeeping is part of pagan Mithraism, Sun and Baal worship, right along with the trinity and all the rest of the Babylonian heathenism going by the name of modern "Christianity". Baptising in the trinitarian formula is a sign of one's subservience to Rome, just as Sundaykeeping is.

2 Corinthians 6:14-18 KJV
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? [15] And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? [16] And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them ; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. [17] Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing ; and I will receive you, [18] And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

Let's be honest. Not all who have church on Sunday do so because they want to worship on a pagan sun worship day, or that the sabbath's been changed from one day to the next. If that is not understand, then the chat is lost. A day is not esteemed above another day to Paul. Sabbath keeping does NOT fit that premise.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

The Sabbath was an example of entering Gods rest. It isn’t about absolving the command, but rather fulfilling it. We now have a greater Fulfillment of keeping the sabbath.

Hebrews 4:10-11
10......For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11......Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

We now keep the Sabbath daily. We can live in the peace of knowing that we are justified by the grace of God and not by laboring to keep a law. Too many Christian’s are laboring to keep commands, when we should be laboring to continually abide in Him.

Right! Hebrews 4 in proper context leads to the conclusion.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

You conveniently failed to notice this has been addressed by me several times, including here: ---> http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...8&postcount=50

Here it is again:

Why the "greater spiritual principle" doesn't work.

It is asserted there is a greater spiritual principle behind the fourth commandment, and therefore we are not obligated to obey the fourth commandment as written. Instead, our obligation to the greater spiritual principle overrides any obligation to the actual commandment, and fulfilling the greater spiritual principle releases us from obligation to the actual commandment.

This is error.

First of all, it is a non sequitur. The existence of a greater spiritual principle does not obviate a literal commandment, simply as a direct result of the principle's existence.

Secondly, and more importantly, Jesus refuted this notion directly:

Mark 7:9-13 KJV
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. [10] For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: [11] But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. [12] And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; [13] Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Is God greater than one's parents? Yes. So dedicating your money to God is a greater act than dedicating your money to your parents? Yes, according to the Pharisees. Therefore, they said the greater spiritual principle of worshipping God overrides the literal commandment to provide for your parents.

But Jesus called this "rejecting the commandment of God to keep human tradition" and "making the word of God of no effect by your tradition."

So, to claim that a "greater spiritual principle" absolves you of any obligation to actually do what God actually commanded, is to reject God's commandment to keep a man made tradition and makes the word of God of no effect. Therefore, to claim a greater spiritual principle absolves you of any obligation to remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, is to reject God's commandment in favour of human tradition and makes the word of God of no effect. It is a hallmark of the leaven (doctrine) of the Pharisees, rejected by Christ, and about which we are warned by Him to beware of and reject.

...

Once again, notice the double mindedness of the antisabbatarian position: "We don't have to keep the Sabbath because reasons but really we actually do keep the Sabbath in our more advanced way."

Either the obligation is there, or it isn't. If you aren't obligated to keep Sabbath then why all the fuss about how "akshuwally" you do keep it (sort of)? And if you are obligated then why don't you just actually do what God said to do:

Exodus 20:8-11 KJV
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. [9] Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: [10] But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: [11] For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

That's taking the wrong direction from the notes presented earlier. Again, as I have repeated, the commandments included many things that were shadows. Shadows are the types of antitypes.

You do not go to Jerusalem to keep the feasts required to include pilgrimage there, but to the GREATER MORE SPIRITUAL Jerusalem, do you not?

For the same reason that you already use to not go to Jerusalem for some feasts, I don't keep seventh-day sabbath. Just apply the exact same principle for your greater Jerusalem to the sabbath issue, and you should understand our point, whether you agree or not. Imagine your argument I quoted being applied to the thought of you not going to natural Jerusalem for feast keeping. Does your argument hold up against refusal to go to Jerusalem? If not, then your argument does not hold up against my view of sabbath

While Jerusalem is spiritual now and not natural, do you still go to natural Jerusalem while also "going to" the spiritual Jerusalem? ...as you claim we should still keep natural sabbath day as well as the spiritual version that is greater?

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The fact the antisabbatarian cannot see the absurdity of their position when faced point blank with the absolute proof their reasoning is erroneous and fatal to their own system of doctrine, is a strong indicator of willfulness.

Did you ever consider that perhaps your own willfulness is preventing you from understanding the other side's point of view? You continually dismiss it, hand waving it away as "I don't want to keep commandments"; all while ignoring that everyone is saying it's not about not keeping commandments, but about those commandments being fulfilled in Christ.

Originally Posted by Esaias

they are gonna do whatever they want to do and hold on to their catholic traditions of men.

Wait, so catholics believe we don't need to have a specific day set aside for rest? When did that happen? Oh, never mind, you're using this as a springboard to complain about people having services on Sunday. Frankly, I couldn't care less if we gathered on Tuesday, or Friday, or yes, even Saturday.

Taking a day off to rest and relax is a sound principle that I think is worth keeping, but not as under the old law. The law of sabbath keeping was about finding rest, which we now find in Christ through the power of His Spirit and the new law written in our hearts. Just as we once were commanded not to commit murder, but we no longer need that law because we again have a new law written in our hearts. That law says we are to love God, and also to love our neighbors as ourselves, which would preclude us from committing murder, or disrespecting our parents, or stealing from others, or envying our neighbors, etc, etc, etc.

The new law doesn't overwrite or eliminate the old law, it supersedes it. By following the new law in our hearts, we will automatically keep the old laws by faith, rather than by our own power (which is impossible for any man, save for Jesus).

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Jito463

Did you ever consider that perhaps your own willfulness is preventing you from understanding the other side's point of view? You continually dismiss it, hand waving it away as "I don't want to keep commandments"; all while ignoring that everyone is saying it's not about not keeping commandments, but about those commandments being fulfilled in Christ.

Yes, y'all keep saying "those commandments have been fulfilled in Christ" but y'all also keep ignoring the fact that fulfillment does NOT mean "therefore we don't have to do what is commanded". I already showed that several times, both how and why, with examples, yet you guys just ignore that and keep repeating "fulfilled! fulfilled!" without dealing with the facts that are repeatedly pointed out to you.

So here it is AGAIN:

What does "fulfilled" mean when it comes to laws? You seem to think that when a law is "fulfilled" it is thereby abolished and done away with. Is this true? Let's see:

If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
(Jas 2:8)

If you fulfill this law, do you then become free from any obligation to that law? What does fulfill mean here? Does it not mean to obey, to perform, to execute, to carry out? So that if you perform the law "thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself", you have "fulfilled" that law? Then what? You can stop loving your neighbour? Or does "fulfill" not rather mean to perform and continue to perform? That is, you love your neighbour and continue to do so? Obviously the latter. Therefore, Jesus "fulfilling the law" does not mean the law is thereby abolished. It means instead that He performed it, and yea indeed He continued to perform it all the days of His life. He also said "think not that I am come to destroy the law". So whatever we think "fulfill" means, we are NOT ALLOWED to think it means "the law has been done away with or abolished or destroyed". And by the way, the "royal law according to the scripture" about loving your neighbour as yourself is Leviticus 19:18. Once again we see the new testament exhorting us to obey the law of God (this time straight out of Leviticus of all places).

Wait, so catholics believe we don't need to have a specific day set aside for rest? When did that happen? Oh, never mind, you're using this as a springboard to complain about people having services on Sunday. Frankly, I couldn't care less if we gathered on Tuesday, or Friday, or yes, even Saturday.

The Vatican instituted Sunday "sacredness". You continue their unscriptural practice. Just like those Protestants who continue to use the trinitarian formula even though quite a few of them will claim they don't care which formula one uses.

Taking a day off to rest and relax is a sound principle that I think is worth keeping, but not as under the old law. The law of sabbath keeping was about finding rest, which we now find in Christ through the power of His Spirit and the new law written in our hearts. Just as we once were commanded not to commit murder, but we no longer need that law because we again have a new law written in our hearts. That law says we are to love God, and also to love our neighbors as ourselves, which would preclude us from committing murder, or disrespecting our parents, or stealing from others, or envying our neighbors, etc, etc, etc.

The new law doesn't overwrite or eliminate the old law, it supersedes it. By following the new law in our hearts, we will automatically keep the old laws by faith, rather than by our own power (which is impossible for any man, save for Jesus).

Once again, these claims were already refuted and you guys refuse to address the points made and just keep reasserting your unproven claims. Argumentum ad nauseum, a fallacy, just reasserting a claim isn't proving the claim. I don't think you guys understand how point and counterpoint work.

So here it is again, already addressed:



Why the "greater spiritual principle" doesn't work.

It is asserted there is a greater spiritual principle behind the fourth commandment, and therefore we are not obligated to obey the fourth commandment as written. Instead, our obligation to the greater spiritual principle overrides any obligation to the actual commandment, and fulfilling the greater spiritual principle releases us from obligation to the actual commandment.

This is error.

First of all, it is a non sequitur. The existence of a greater spiritual principle does not obviate a literal commandment, simply as a direct result of the principle's existence.

Secondly, and more importantly, Jesus refuted this notion directly:

Mark 7:9-13 KJV
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. [10] For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: [11] But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. [12] And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; [13] Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Is God greater than one's parents? Yes. So dedicating your money to God is a greater act than dedicating your money to your parents? Yes, according to the Pharisees. Therefore, they said the greater spiritual principle of worshipping God overrides the literal commandment to provide for your parents.

But Jesus called this "rejecting the commandment of God to keep human tradition" and "making the word of God of no effect by your tradition."

So, to claim that a "greater spiritual principle" absolves you of any obligation to actually do what God actually commanded, is to reject God's commandment to keep a man made tradition and makes the word of God of no effect. Therefore, to claim a greater spiritual principle absolves you of any obligation to remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, is to reject God's commandment in favour of human tradition and makes the word of God of no effect. It is a hallmark of the leaven (doctrine) of the Pharisees, rejected by Christ, and about which we are warned by Him to beware of and reject.

[Esaias]

For the sake of the readers, I'd like to point out Paul is NOT talking about two laws, nor is he talking about any particular sets of commandments, but IS talking about TWO COVENANTS:

"24......Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. "

Were the laws of God incorporated as part of the covenant at Sinai? Yes.

Were they also incorporated as part of the New Covenant? YES:

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.

Hebrews 8:8-10 KJV
For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: [9] Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. [10] For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Does the power of grace in the new covenant through the Holy Ghost cause a person to actually DO the things commanded in the law? YES:

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

Romans 6:15-23 KJV
What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. [16] Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? [17] But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. [18] Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. [19] I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. [20] For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. [21] What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. [22] But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. [23] For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 8:1-9 KJV
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. [2] For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. [3] For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: [4] That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. [5] For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. [6] For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. [7] Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. [8] So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. [9] But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.