7th Day Sabbath not for New Testament believers

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Simple as that.

So, the days, months and years that follow in the next chapter are obviously Israelite old covenant holy days, months and years.

Isn't it more than a coincidence that Paul said law was as schoolmaster before Christ came, and he said the tutors and governors that represent law are no longer over a Jew after graduation day comes with Christ and the new covenant... where he also wrote about Israel thereby being under the bondage of the elements of the world.... AND THEN LISTS HOLY DAYS, MONTHS AND YEARS that christians should not keep, when Israel actually had Holy Months, days and years????

Some great coincidence if he's not referring to Law's feasts and sabbaths!

A quick response to the issue of the Galatian heretical calendar:

Galatians 4:3-7 speaks of bondage to the elements of the world, and deliverance from bondage by the coming of Christ so we can be adopted as sons and receive the Spirit. A common error takes the elements of the world to mean any kind of religious calendar whatsoever, bondage to mean observance of any religious calendar, and that Jesus came to deliver people from religious calendars.

This is of course sadly mistaken. Neither Paul nor any Bible writer spoke of God's appointed times (much less the whole of His law) as "elements of the world". In fact, Paul speaks the opposite way in the same epistle, where he says the law that was added because of transgressions was ordained by angels (Gal 3:19). So the law of God was certainly not of the world.

But what Paul is saying in these verses is easily seen when comparing them to what he says elsewhere. Namely, in Romans 7-8.

In Romans 7-8, the same parallel is found as in Galatians 4: bondage, Christ, deliverance, adoption, the Spirit. The exact same ingredients are to be found, in practically the same order.

The bondage in Romans is not a bondage of obedience to the law of God, but the bondage of sin (Romans 7:14-23). Christ is sent to effect deliverance and redemption from the bondage of sin (Romans 7:24-8:8). This makes the Spirit and our adoption available and effectual (Romans 8:9-17).

Galatians is talking about the same thing:

Bondage to worldly elements (Galatians 4:3). Christ sent to effect deliverance from bondage (Galatians 4:4-5). Adoption and Spirit available (Galatians 4:5-7). It is a perfect parallel.

Nowhere does Scripture speak of obeying God's law as "bondage", in fact Paul taught the exact opposite in Romans 7-8. In Romans 8:2, the law of the Spirit frees a person from the bondage of the law of sin and death. In Romans 8:4-6, Paul contrasts the flesh and the Spirit, the carnal (fleshly) mind and the spiritual mind, walking after the flesh and walking after the Spirit, etc. Then, in Romans 8:7, Paul identifies the fleshly mind as being enmity against God because it is not subject to the law of God.

The carnal, fleshly mind is not subject to the law of God, it does not obey the law of God, it is characterized by commandment breaking. But this lawless, disobedient carnal or fleshly mind is contrasted with the mind that follows the Spirit. So the contrast is between those who are " in the flesh", who mind the flesh, whose mind is catnal or fleshly, who break the commandments and do not obey God, are not subject to the law of God, who CAN'T be subject to God's law, on the one hand, with those who are in the Spirit, who mind spiritual things (God's law is spiritual - Romans 7:14, their mind is set on and subject to the law of God), in whom the righteousness of the law is actually fulfilled (that is, in whom the righteous acts commanded by God's law are actually performed), etc.

Romans 8:6 says to be fleshly minded is death (produces death, is in fact a condition of spiritual death), which per everywhere in Romans is the product of sin (transgression of God's law).

So the teaching of Paul in Romans, and in Galatians, is consistent. Carnality consists in lawbreaking, not being subject to God's law, being disobedient, in bondage to sin. Whether Jew or Gentile, all are in bondage because of sin (Romans 3:9, Galatians 3:22). Christ came to redeem and deliver His people, not from obedience to God, not from the commandments of God, but from sin, from disobedience, from transgression, from the "power of satan", from the dominion of "the prince of the power of the air", from the ELEMENTS OF THE KOSMOS or world order.

The result of this deliverance and redemption is not continued and now excused lawlessness and commandment breaking. On the contrary, it is genuine obedience! Romans 6:1-2 declares that those delivered from the bondage of sin are not to continue in sin, because they are dead to sin (not dead to God, or dead to righteousness).

The Galatians were a mostly gentile (Greek) church, and as such were previously devil worshipping pagans (Galatians 4:8). They were returning to their pagan roots, desiring to once again go into bondage (verse 9). This was being brought about by the influence of Jewish heretics. These were not just Jewish Christians who sought to obey God's commandments, but were actually workers of iniquity (LAWLESSNESS).

These Jewish heretics did NOT obey God's law, but were promoting gentile circumcision (Galatians 6:13), appealed to divine revelation from angels (cf. Gal 1:8), held doctrines and practices that led to worldly and sinful bondage (Gal 4:9, 5:1, 5:13, 5:16-25, compare with Colossians 2:23).

The Galatian heresy and the Colossian heresy are in fact either the same, or very nearly, the same. An heretical form of Judaism, proselytizing gentiles, demanding gentile circumcision, involved in angel worship or at least angel devotion, certain ascetic practices, yet utterly powerless to produce genuine holiness, rife with sin and lawlessness, with an emphasis of pagan astrological elements and philosophy.

In other words, incipient Jewish Gnosticism.

Galatians 4:10 describes the heretical observance of days, months, times, and years. While the unlearned claim this is referring to God's appointments (moedim), the phrase is never used either by the Bible, or by non Christian Jewish sources, to describe the Biblical Feasts days, Sabbaths, new moons, etc. In fact, the Law explicitly forbids the "observance of times" (Lev 19:26, Deut 18:10, Deut 18:14, etc).

The Galatian calendar is not the Divine calendar given by God, but is "of the world", associated with paganism, produces bondage, and is SINFUL (forbidden by God). What was happening in Galatia was the introduction of certain mystical ideas, a religious calendar syncretized from pagan and Jewish occultic astrology, antinomian in its actual essential character (just like Pharisaism, see Matt 15:6, Mark 7:13), producing the works of the flesh including witchcrafts, and is identified by Paul as a "bewitchment".

If any comparison is to be made, the Galatian heresy is more akin to the pseudoGnostic sun worship currently infecting Christendom, with its Day of the Sun, Christmas (birthday of the Sun god, Baal), Easter (spring equinoctial Sunday holy day based on fertility rites), unbiblical ascetic practices (no beards on men, sleeve lengths of Divine authority, celibate priesthood, forty day Lenten fasts, etc etc), antinomianism based on manmade traditions (God's law abolished, spiritualized Sabbath breaking, uncovered women in church, cathartic emotional releases substituted for actual repentance, etc), introduction of pagan philosophies and beliefs (immortal soul belief, women preachers, angels procreating with women producing demigods, going to heaven instead of resurrection, etc), and being characterized by actual carnality and sin (adultery, divorce and remarriages rampant, homosexuality, fornication, thefts, embezzlements, scandal after scandal, schisms and heresies, implacable divisions, denominationalism, etc etc etc).

[Esaias]

Galatians 5:3 is important in identifying the type of Jewish Gnostic heresy infiltrating the Galatian church. Paul in that verse testifies to them all that if anyone submits to proselyte circumcision, they are a debtor to do the whole law. This reminder is repeated in Galatians 3:10).

Now, if the heretics were simply trying to promote keeping God's laws, commandments, statutes, etc, then this is entirely the wrong thing to say. Any genuine legalist would simply give a hearty "Amen!" to Paul's testimony.

The truth, though, is these Judaizing heretics were actually antinomians. See Galatians 6:13. They promoted circumcision, and a Jew-centric religious authority, but did not in fact follow the whole law. Paul was pointing out to the Galatians that converting to Judaism obligates one to ALL the law, not just those parts favored by the heretics.

Jewish sectarianism was rife in the first century, with sects varying from extreme legalism to extreme antinomianism, and numerous shades in between, all under the banner of "Judaism". Jewish Gnostic sects are known historically to have combined ascetic practices with abandonment of or even wholesale repudiation of various chunks of the divine law. The Pharisees likewise, though often considered (erroneously) to be strict legalists, were actually known for countless loopholes and legal methods of justifying law breaking. Jesus several times rebuked the Pharisees for making the commandments of God of no effect through their religious traditions. Those religious traditions were often ascetic (tithes required way beyond what Moses said, Sabbath rules that were nowhere stated in the Scripture, size requirements for phylacteries and tassel-lengths, etc) yet overall the religion was an unending scheme of actual commandment breaking.

Pharisaism also included syncretistic pagan astrological and philosophical elements, as did Essene Judaism. The modern iteration of this is hasidism, kabbalah, Chabad, Frankism, Sabbateanism, etc etc.

Paul wasn't debating against people who just believed in obeying God's commandments, but rather Jewish proselytizers involved in asceticism, astrology, pagan philosophy, and practical antinomianism.

[Esaias]

More light on the Galatian/Colossian (and Roman!) heresy

Paul constantly preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In doing so, he was constantly arguing against various heresies and errors. But the largest, most wide spread, and persistent, and potentially dangerous, heresy, in his day at least, was against justification by "the works of the law". Paul did often have to preach and teach against libertinism, licentiousness, blatant lawlessness, and Epicurean style antinomism. But that is a common tendency everywhere at all times (humans innately want to indulge their desires and be fully autonomous, or self-directed, rather than submit to any law or disciplined code of ethics). However, the heresy of "justification by the works of the law" was a bigger threat to early apostolic Christianity than simple hedonism.

So what is meant by "the works of the law"? Modern antinomians (those who are either against, or who seek a substitute or replacement for (anti-) the law (nomos) of God) claim that the works of the law are the specific things commanded by the law of God directing human activity. The works of the law are the things contained in the commandments, statutes, judgments, ordinances, and laws given by God in the Bible (especially as codified in the Pentateuch). The theory goes that Jews wanted to obey the commandments of God, as a means of getting God to declare them righteous or "justified", whereas Paul and the New Testament teach one is declared righteous by simply believing in Jesus. Further, the antinomians acknowledge that some of the law of God is required or obligatory, but some of the law is not. Whenever they encounter a difference of opinion as to which parts belong to which category (obligatory, vs non obligatory), they will accuse the other of being "of the works of the law". Some go so far as to apply "works of the law" to ANY and ALL actions, and thus pontificate that "Lordship Salvation is heresy" or that "thinking baptism is necessary is works-based heretical legalism."

But is this correct? Was Paul talking about the commandments of God, saying not only should nobody seek righteousness by obeying God, but nobody should even try obeying God? Or at least, nobody should desire to keep any commandments our particular group doesn't accept as valid and obligatory? This may come as a shock to some, but in my most recent research these last few days, I have discovered that such is not at all what Paul was saying.

The term "works of the law" in Greek is ergou nomou (ergon nomos), and appears in the Authorised Version as either "works" or "deeds" "of the law". Here are all the places this term appears:

Romans 3:20
Romans 3:28
Romans 9:32
Galatians 2:16
Galatians 3:2
Galatians 3:5
Galatians 3:10

THAT'S IT. These are all occurrences of ergon nomos as a term or phrase in the Bible.

What is interesting, is the term appears in NO RABBINICAL JEWISH LITERATURE of the period. It appears to be a wholly Pauline invention.

But, Paul uses the term expecting his hearers, including Jews and Pharisees, to understand what he referred to. If he was simply referring to the actions commanded by the law of God, we would expect to see the term used as such in wider contemporary Jewish literature. But that is not the case. AND YET, Paul does not give a detailed explanation of what he is referring to, as if he expected folks to understand what he meant.

What is fascinating, is the term "works of the law" DOES occur in ESSENE literature. In fact, Qumran manuscript 4QMMT is titled, in Hebrew, "Some Pertinent Works of the Law".

Here is a link to the document in English translation: http://www.jacksonsnyder.com/arc/Translations/4qmmt.htm

I HIGHLY recommend the readers visit the link and read the document. What will become apparent is that "works of the law" is an Essene phrase referring to specific Essene halachot, or regulations (laws), claimed to be authoritative interpretations and applications of the law of God (whether the written law or some oral tradition of the elders). More importantly, the "works of the law" have to do with separation, cleanness, purity, and righteousness before God. To be pure, clean, righteous before God, a Jew must adhere to the "works of the law", that is, the sectarian interpretation and application of rules of separation from pollution, especially gentile pollution.

The gentiles were being told by Paul's opponents that faith in Jesus, baptism, and the Holy Ghost were not sufficient to become righteous in God's eyes as a member of His Covenant. They must be circumcised (become Jews) and follow sectarian "standards of holiness" (a talmud) legislated by the sectarians. This sectarian talmud or halachah was man made and went beyond the actual law of God, but was taught as "the law of Jehovah".

The Pharisees had the same problem, teaching as doctrine the commandments of men (that is, teaching man made rules as the law of God).

The fact the Galatian heretics were also going back to pagan astrologies is a strong confirmation the heretics were an Essene or Essene-like sect of Jewish Christians attempting to infiltrate the church and promote an Essene style holiness talmud to gentile believers. Galatians 2:12 touches on the idea of separation from Gentiles, a key Essene holiness standard (prevalent, though to a slightly lesser degree, among Pharisees as well). Romans, which also dealt extensively with "works of the law", addresses issues of sectarian religious days and vegetarianism (which were common among some Essene groups and other Jewish groups living outside of Judea, fearful of "gentile contamination").

So, putting it all together, it becomes clearer what Paul was arguing against: an Essene or Essene-like sectarian Jewish heretical movement within the early church, proselytizing gentile Christians into accepting the sectarian halachah ("law") as the only guarantee of salvation and membership in God's community, which was also propagating Jewish Gnostic mystical occultism, complete with unhealthy fascination with and veneration of angelic beings, a substitute religious calendar of non-Divine origin, ascetic religious practices concerning what may and may not be touched, handled, used, etc, other ascetic practices, a purity spiraling into schismatism and separation, substitution of obedience to man made law and traditions for actual obedience to the actual teachings of God's Word, all of which made Christ, conversion, the Holy Spirit, and living by faith superfluous and unnecessary.

[Esaias]

Here is a copy of an article from Biblical Archeological Review I found on another website, concerning 4QMMT, by Martin Begg:
http://www.sabbathreformation.com/ar...118800746.html

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

No

So you are full of baloney as far as not wanting a brother to stumble.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Here is a copy of an article from Biblical Archeological Review I found on another website, concerning 4QMMT, by Martin Begg:
http://www.sabbathreformation.com/ar...118800746.html

Correction, Martin Abegg.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

So you are full of baloney as far as not wanting a brother to stumble.

Actually . . .

No.

Tithing is not the same as observing a holy day. Observing a holy day is not the same as tithing. So, it is NOT baloney, it is scripture. Scripture is not baloney.

I'm going to really gear this down, in the hopes that you may be able to keep up.

Rom.14
[1] Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
[2] For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
[3] Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
[4] Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
[5] One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
[6] He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks . . .

If you'll notice the part I have emphasized above, you may perceive that it is entirely within the context that I used it. One man may regard one day as unto the Lord, while another regardeth it not, also unto the Lord. That is precisely what I intended when I said that Esaias didn't bother me at all with his Sabbath keeping. Esaias wants to keep the Sabbath. He keeps the Sabbath unto the Lord. I do not keep the law of the Sabbath, I keep it not as unto the Lord. Do you comprehend this?

Later, in verse thirteen Paul says this . . .

[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.

So, do you get it? I wouldn't want to cause Esaias to stumble by being overly aggressive with him regarding his doctrine of keeping the law of the Sabbath.

Read the above until it sinks in. It is not baloney. It is scripture.

Now let's move on to the tithing question. The doctrine that most preachers teach on tithing is a bundle of lies. I know that you realize this because we've covered that before. So how is tithing different?

Because lying will send you to hell! That makes lying about tithing a heaven or hell issue. So if I fail to point out to preachers that they are lying about tithing, I allow them to jeopardize their salvation by teaching a lie. Do you see the difference? Once again, it is not baloney, it is the word of God.

Now read this . . .

Rev.21
[8] But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

So, you see? It is NOT baloney after all. It is the word of God, used in the proper context, to teach a doctrine that the Word fully supports. Feel free to do likewise!

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

mfblume, can you state in a short paragraph your position on the decalogue as a whole and the creation 7th-day sabbath word within the decalogue. Thanks.

============

Please keep it simple. e.g. abrogated, spiritualized, transferred, dispensational. Try not to go far afield. Any relevance for today?

Be sure to comment on the 10 as a group, and the sabbath individually.

===========

Thanks!

rebump

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

rebump

Been away from the forum a few days. I see there are several posts to answer. Will answer them all.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

mfblume, can you state in a short paragraph your position on the decalogue as a whole and the creation 7th-day sabbath word within the decalogue. Thanks.

============
Please keep it simple. e.g. abrogated, spiritualized, transferred, dispensational. Try not to go far afield. Any relevance for today?
Be sure to comment on the 10 as a group, and the sabbath individually.
===========

Thanks!

The Ten Commandments are the representation of all the law of God proposed to mankind. They correctly showed man what was required of man in order to be righteous. They were not wrong nor error. Paul showed us insight about the commandments and indicated they were the ministration of death seeing as breaking the law decreed one was sinful and worthy of death, and man was unable to keep them. Had man not had sin, man could keep them.

All of them are relevant for today, however the shadow aspect Paul spoke about in the fourth cannot be ignored. It is unique. It’s ritualistic, seeing as it is memorial of God resting the 7th day after creation. And now there is a new creation, so we rest in a greater Sabbath, and thereby have no need for the shadow as far as righteousness is concerned.

Paul showed us, also, that the manner of flesh using its natural energy to keep those commandments has been superseded by a greater means of service to God. Oldness of the letter is self making self obey the law with one’s own goodness and energy, whereas the newness of the Spirit is calling on God in faith to empower us to do righteousness. I said that to indicate that reading a list of rules and making ourselves obey them is the oldness of the letter. Not to say those actions are wrong, but it is walking after the flesh to make ourselves obey rules and commandments. The Spirit will cause us to commit the same activities, or lack thereof, if we are led by the Spirit, which is what it means to have those laws written in our hearts. So, they’re all in effect today, but we’re not left to make ourselves obey them, but rather allow the Spirit to lead us and we will find that when the Spirit leads us we will do the things the commandments said to do, and not do the things the commandments said not to do.

Again, however, the fourth commandment was stated by the New Testament to be a shadow of the day of rest in Christ’s new creation, rendering the older shadow fulfilled and expired as to its purpose..