Sabbath and bible feasts

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

I don’t think the law is ridiculous. The law was to lead us to Christ. The law never made any person righteous, but on the contrary made us sinners.

The law doesn't make anyone a sinner. Does the law prohibiting theft make you a thief? Of course not, your own thieving makes you a thief.

Personally I believe that all this getting back to OT law is a departure from the grace of Jesus Christ and brings us back into Condemnation.

That's because you are under conviction and are looking for a way out. The only way out though is REPENTANCE.

I believe that the Spirit leads us into righteous living and we read the scriptures as a whole to get application.

Except those Scriptures that interfere with your traditions, amen?

The NT has letters explicitly to the churches that contain the apostles doctrine and that is what we must continue in.

Yes, like these:

2 Timothy 3:15-17 KJV
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. [16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: [17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

1 John 3:4-10 KJV
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. [5] And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. [6] Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. [7] Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. [8] He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. [9] Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. [10] In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Romans 6:1-2 KJV
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? [2] God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

Romans 6:14-18 KJV
For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. [15] 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.


Romans 8:1-7 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.

Matthew 19:16-17 KJV
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? [17] And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Matthew 4:4 KJV
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Revelation 12:17 KJV
And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

It is funny that you have been adamant about tithing being a false teaching, but sabbath observance is for us today. How do you distinguish which laws are applicable and which are not, without being inconsistent?

Every Word of God is applicable and relevant to us within its own context and the larger context of the entirety of Scripture. It is YOU that are wholly inconsistent because you cherry pick what you think is applicable and which is not based solely on your traditions and personal preferences. For example, you believe the Second Commandment applies, but not the Fourth. You believe Deut 22:5 applies, but not Deut 22:8. You like Lev 19:17-18, but not Lev 19:19. You like Lev 19:26, but not Lev 19:27. And so on and so forth.

Tithing isn't a false doctrine. Rather the idea that everyone needs to pay the pastor (or the 501c3 corporation calling itself a "church") 10% of their gross wages from whatever source derived in cash, check, or credit card, usually with a corresponding tax deduction from the government, IS a false doctrine, because it is CONTRARY TO THE LAW OF GOD.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Tithing isn't a false doctrine. Rather the idea that everyone needs to pay the pastor (or the 501c3 corporation calling itself a "church") 10% of their gross wages from whatever source derived in cash, check, or credit card, usually with a corresponding tax deduction from the government, IS a false doctrine, because it is CONTRARY TO THE LAW OF GOD.

And here we can see the difference between the antinomian and the theonomist. The antinomian may be against the false doctrine calling itself "tithing", but on what basis? Solely personal preference and feels. Meanwhile, another antinomian loves the modern "tithe" teaching. How to determine which is correct? Both antinomians have nothing to go on except personal opinion and perhaps tradition.

But the theonomist simply points to Thus Saith The Lord, book chapter and verse, and the issue is settled. God is God, He gets to be the decider of the issue. Whereas for the antinomian, Man is God and decides the issue. And thus, for the antinomian, the issue never actually gets decided, with any Divine Authority.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The law doesn't make anyone a sinner. Does the law prohibiting theft make you a thief? Of course not, your own thieving makes you a thief.

Herein lies the crux of the matter.

James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

We are violators of the law and no matter how hard you try you will never live up to that standard. The flesh is weak and although we are to be filled with the Holy Ghost, we still are flesh.

That's because you are under conviction and are looking for a way out. The only way out though is REPENTANCE.

Yes, I am often under conviction and I do often repent. Funny thing is it has never been over Saturday vs Sunday worship. I am usually convicted over things that I have said or maybe I didn't say something when I knew I should. I sometimes get angry and overreact or sometimes I may be selfish about something. These are some examples of the things I feel conviction about.

Except those Scriptures that interfere with your traditions, amen?

No, not really. Just not a part of the Jews religion.

Yes, like these:

2 Timothy 3:15-17 KJV
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. [16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: [17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Yes, the law is given for those things. The foundation of the laws given at Sinai is still relevant, but the application has changed entirely. We are not Jews under Moses law.

Acts 3:22
For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.

I am a follower of Jesus and not Moses.

1 John 3:4-10 KJV
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. [5] And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. [6] Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. [7] Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. [8] He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. [9] Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. [10] In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

This doesn't not mean literal observance of the Old Testament Covenant.

Romans 7:6
But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

Romans 6:1-2 KJV
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? [2] God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

Sin exist without the law of Moses.

Romans 6:14-18 KJV
For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. [15] 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.

Yet not one NT reference to committing sin for Sabbath observance mentioned by the apostles, but the pharisseses frequently used that accusation against Christ. Ironic?

The apostles did teach this:

Romans 14:13
Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

Romans 8:1-7 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.

Thank God we are made free!!! No more shackles, no more chains, no more bondage, I am free.

Matthew 19:16-17 KJV
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? [17] And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

What lack I yet. As a Jew it was necessary to keep the law of Moses, but Jesus law went beyond, go and sell all and give to the poor.

Matthew 4:4 KJV
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Yes, but the implications of this go farther than just the written word.

Revelation 12:17 KJV
And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

This was not speaking about People following the law of Moses. This is the church, who have the testimony of Jesus Christ and are following Christs teaching.

Every Word of God is applicable and relevant to us within its own context and the larger context of the entirety of Scripture. It is YOU that are wholly inconsistent because you cherry pick what you think is applicable and which is not based solely on your traditions and personal preferences. For example, you believe the Second Commandment applies, but not the Fourth. You believe Deut 22:5 applies, but not Deut 22:8. You like Lev 19:17-18, but not Lev 19:19. You like Lev 19:26, but not Lev 19:27. And so on and so forth.

I think all those scriptures are relevant and for instruction. As I have said in another post, I dont think we are in sin, for example: not putting a railing around the roof of our houses. We don't have to live our lives in fear, hoping that we have the exact application down of obeying laws and ordinances. What if I don't have the right time of evening when Sabbath begins? All I see for your interpretation is stumbling blocks.

Tithing isn't a false doctrine. Rather the idea that everyone needs to pay the pastor (or the 501c3 corporation calling itself a "church") 10% of their gross wages from whatever source derived in cash, check, or credit card, usually with a corresponding tax deduction from the government, IS a false doctrine, because it is CONTRARY TO THE LAW OF GOD.

This is true.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Yet not one NT reference to committing sin for Sabbath observance mentioned by the apostles, but the pharisseses frequently used that accusation against Christ. Ironic?

Are you still hiding behind this old canard? Guess what? There is not one NT reference to committing the sins of cross-dressing or bestiality. Well, how about that? Does that mean such things are now permissible? According to your "logic", YES.

The Pharisees accused Christ's disciples of breaking the Sabbath, and the accusation was FALSE.

You know, at some point, you really just have to realise that all these supposed objections to obeying God are really just empty excuses that don't even make any sense.

"I don't follow Moses, I follow Christ"? Actually, NO:

And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
(Luk 16:31)

[diakonos]

Would driving 2 hours to a church on Saturday be considered work?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by diakonos

Would driving 2 hours to a church on Saturday be considered work?

Well that's quite a drive! Pray about it.

Just make sure you don't have to buy gas during the journey.

[mfblume]

My newest book entitled, The Expiration of Sabbaths, Feast Days, & Holy Times.

https://www.amazon.com/Days-Months-Y...YZ/ref=sr_1_13


The controversy of the place that Law and Old Covenant legalities hold in the New Covenant has never exhausted itself since the days of the Apostles. Those who keep the Law as well as though who feel it is expired, without granting license to sin, are both sincere and want to please God Almighty in every way in which they can. This volume takes a deeply contextual approach without the stains of the traditions of men to properly understand the overall issue. Arguments for keeping feast days and Sabbaths are addressed and answered with great detail. Heavy emphasis is put on the context of Galatians chapters 3 through 4 to show that the elements of the world in Chapter 4 are indeed the schoolmastery of Law from Chapter 3 under which Israel was bound until the Lord Jesus Christ would come into the world with the New Covenant. Indeed, Law genders to bondage.

Blessings!

[Amanah]

Acts 20:7 is mistranslated in the kjv as
And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight

Ἐν δὲ τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων συνηγμένων ἡμῶν κλάσαι ἄρτον ὁ Παῦλος διελέγετο αὐτοῖς μέλλων ἐξιέναι τῇ ἐπαύριον· καὶ παρέτεινεν τὸν λόγον μέχρι μεσονύκτιον.

Translated from the Greek, it actually reads:

"On the first Sabbath, when we had gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and prolonged his speech until midnight."

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/14f2udDvBG/

**

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Acts 20:7 is mistranslated in the kjv as
And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight

Ἐν δὲ τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων συνηγμένων ἡμῶν κλάσαι ἄρτον ὁ Παῦλος διελέγετο αὐτοῖς μέλλων ἐξιέναι τῇ ἐπαύριον· καὶ παρέτεινεν τὸν λόγον μέχρι μεσονύκτιον.

Translated from the Greek, it actually reads:

"On the first Sabbath, when we had gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and prolonged his speech until midnight."

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/14f2udDvBG/

**

I don't think it's a mistranslation. The term sabbaton was used for "week" since a week is a cycle from one sabbath to another. The question would be "what is this FIRST sabbath"? Without the context of a particular Feast or some other particular enumerated time period, it wouldn't make sense to say "on the first sabbath". However, it would make perfect sense to mean "on the first of the week" (that is, at the beginning of the sabbath-cycle).

Otherwise, we get people claiming Jesus did NOT rise upon the first day of the week, but upon the "first sabbath", which is erroneous.

In addition, it was common practice to have a fellowship meal at the close of the Sabbath, it would begin on the Sabbath in the evening and then continue into the early night, acting as a sort of bridge between the last day of the week and the first day of the week. Jews still practice a similar custom called "havdala" as a means of separating the Sabbath from the next day, and this is related to the origin of "vespers" in Orthodox Christian practice.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I don't think it's a mistranslation. The term sabbaton was used for "week" since a week is a cycle from one sabbath to another. The question would be "what is this FIRST sabbath"? Without the context of a particular Feast or some other particular enumerated time period, it wouldn't make sense to say "on the first sabbath". However, it would make perfect sense to mean "on the first of the week" (that is, at the beginning of the sabbath-cycle).

Otherwise, we get people claiming Jesus did NOT rise upon the first day of the week, but upon the "first sabbath", which is erroneous.

In addition, it was common practice to have a fellowship meal at the close of the Sabbath, it would begin on the Sabbath in the evening and then continue into the early night, acting as a sort of bridge between the last day of the week and the first day of the week. Jews still practice a similar custom called "havdala" as a means of separating the Sabbath from the next day, and this is related to the origin of "vespers" in Orthodox Christian practice.

In some manuscripts sabbaton is plural.