Should we still observe the sabbath?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

If we are still under any of the Old Testament laws, why did Jesus come and die? In that case, Christ didn’t fulfill anything, but those laws are still in full effect. That doesn’t mean I find government from God by feely wheelies, it means that I have higher sense of the law of righteousness. Jesus expounds on it when he is teaching the sermon on the mount in Mathew 5. The law now now has more clarity for its purpose to us.

Explained already here, way back in the beginning:

Originally Posted by Esaias

2. 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).

This is something I've noticed: people raise a point, it gets answered, then after a while they circle back to that point AS IF it had never been addressed, AS IF it was just now brought up.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Explained already here, way back in the beginning:

[

This is something I've noticed: people raise a point, it gets answered, then after a while they circle back to that point AS IF it had never been addressed, AS IF it was just now brought up.

We are at like 100 posts and we have been off a while, sorry if I have forgotten. I am glad you reposted this. The context of the passage in James isn’t about keeping mosaic law, the context is about showing partiality to people of higher social status. You are correct we cannot have mixed moral character, but that has nothing to do with being under mosaic law. James used vs 9, because it was an already established fact (law is our schoolmaster) to illustrate his point, if we say I love my neighbor, but show partiality to the wealthy then we become a transgressor of the law that is written on our hearts.

What about the James 2:12?

James 2:12
So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Compare "the ole ball and chain" with this:

Jeremiah 6:16 KJV
Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.

I think the choice should be clear. Father knows best.

Is Jeremiah prophesying to Jews or Gentiles? This passage has no context in bringing NT Christian’s under the Mosaic law. I agree that Father knows best

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias View Post

2. 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).

This was not what my post #93 was addressing.

[good samaritan]

Galatians 4:21-31
21......Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

and shows that we are the sons of Abraham by the freewoman
22......For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23......But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
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.
25......For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26......But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27......For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28......Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29......But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30......Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31......So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

This is pretty clear to me, the law at mount sinai represented bondage, and those that are under bondage shall not be heir with those of the free woman.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Galatians 4:21-31
21......Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

and shows that we are the sons of Abraham by the freewoman
22......For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23......But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
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.
25......For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26......But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27......For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28......Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29......But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30......Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31......So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

This is pretty clear to me, the law at mount sinai represented bondage, and those that are under bondage shall not be heir with those of the free woman.

And, once again, if you interpret that passage to mean the commandments of God are not to be obeyed, then you have completely missed Paul's point, have created direct contradictions with Paul's other writings (not to mention the rest of the new testament authors), and are literally promoting lawlessness. You are literally saying those who obey God are going to be lost while those who disobey God "in the name of Jesus" are the ones who will inherit eternal life.

How that doesn't seem to bother you is also, literally, beyond my comprehension.

Meanwhile, Galatians was addressed here ---> http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...5&postcount=38
and here ---> http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...3&postcount=41

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Galatians 4:21-31
21......Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

and shows that we are the sons of Abraham by the freewoman
22......For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23......But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
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.
25......For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26......But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27......For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28......Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29......But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30......Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31......So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

This is pretty clear to me, the law at mount sinai represented bondage, and those that are under bondage shall not be heir with those of the free woman.

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.

[Esaias]

It was asked, "If we are still under any of the Old Testament laws, why did Jesus come and die?"

He died to save us from our sins. Sin is transgression of the law. He died so we could be free from our transgressions of God's law. NOT as some suppose by abolishing His commandments, but rather by forgiving us of our crimes and then MAKING US GOOD CITIZENS of His Kingdom through the regenerating power of His Spirit. His death and resurrection is meant to put LIFE into us, NEW LIFE, a Life of RIGHTEOUSNESS AND OBEDIENCE in place of the old death-life of sin and ungodliness and disobedience. We are saved by grace, and that grace of God leads to REPENTANCE which means to STOP SINNING AND START OBEYING GOD BY FAITH.

And yes that includes the Ten Commandments.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias

It was asked, "If we are still under any of the Old Testament laws, why did Jesus come and die?"

Notice the question:
If we are still under any of the Old Testament laws, why did Jesus come and die?

My gosh, if we are still obligated to honour our parents then why did Jesus come and die?
If we are still obligated to avoid adultery and murder and theft then why did Jesus come and die?
If we are still under the command not to worship idols then why did Jesus come and die?

Friends, Jesus didn't come and die so you could now worship idols, or steal, kill, commit adultery, or abandon your parents. Nor did He come and die so you could now forget about His Sabbath day, either.

[loran adkins]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Notice the question:
If we are still under any of the Old Testament laws, why did Jesus come and die?

My gosh, if we are still obligated to honour our parents then why did Jesus come and die?
If we are still obligated to avoid adultery and murder and theft then why did Jesus come and die?
If we are still under the command not to worship idols then why did Jesus come and die?

Friends, Jesus didn't come and die so you could now worship idols, or steal, kill, commit adultery, or abandon your parents. Nor did He come and die so you could now forget about His Sabbath day, either.

How we are to observe the Sabbath day is the question really.