[mfblume]

And since - according to you - we have progressed from the natural to the spiritual, and no longer keep the day, we no longer trust in God for natural things (crops, etc).

I never said we no longer trust God for natural things. I do all the time. Let's not take my words out of context. I said the trust in natural things in the example of a sabbath year foreshadowed a trust in spiritual things. Big difference.

By the way, you yourself make a big to-do about how spiritual means of or from the Spirit, and that physical things can indeed be spiritual. Yet, you cannot see that the "physical observance of a physical day" is very much spiritual. You are inconsistent.

No, I am not inconsistent. Spiritual things can be very physical. I maintain that. But there is nothing spiritual about a physical observance of a physical day, especially when the spiritual was contrasted from the natural case in referreding to the body and the shadow. YOu do agree that the shadow of something is a natural thing that points to a spiritual? Even you said that the sabbath is indeed a shadow of what we have now in CHrist's priesthood after admitting you previously erred in thinking it only pointed to something not yet come that is in our future. That's the correct route of thought. Do not abandon it now.

. . Just because some things are physical and spiritual does not mean everything that is spiritual is physical, which is the exact same error you made several days ago.

Spiritual things can be both physical and non-physical. Nothing that I stated says differently. But when we're reading about shaoow and body, the shadow remains the natural like the temple and like Jerusalem.

You have attempted to obscure that inconsistency by recently talking about a "natural" day instead of a "physical" day, but the inconsistency remains.

That which is natural is contrasted from that which is spiritual in the bible. A natural day is what nature causes to be a day. There is a spiritual day which is neither physical nor natural. A spiritual day has nothing to do with the earth’s rotation around the sun as the natural one is. And the rest that God entered is not restricted to one natural day.

Exodus 20:12 KJV
Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

Here is a commandment that promises a long life in the land. Is this spiritual? Or natural?

That’s quite natural. Long life naturally is involved. And this still holds true today!

The fact we can derive a principle from this about God, the church, and eternal life, does it mean we no longer need to physically honour our natural physical parents?

And here you go making the same repeated mistake of assuming that just because there something is a commandment in the Ten that it must remain forever. The commandment about honouring parents is something that does continue through our day. But you’re appealing to that idea by appealing to the commandment about honouring parents. So, if we honour parents always, including today, and that is natural, then we should keep the sabbath day on until today since that is also natural. Why do you insist that because something natural continues until today, then everything natural continues until today? Why do you continue to insist that belonging to the ten commandments means it must continue to today just because it is obvious some of the commandments continue to today? Even if one thing that is natural is meant to continue until today, LIKE FORBIDDENCE TO MURDER -- then eveyrthing natural in the commandments must continue to today just because they're in the commandments, and for no other reason?

Who is inconsistent? You do not travel to natural Jerusalem for your feasts that you keep, because there is a spiritual Jerusalem. You forget all about that when you discuss insistence on sabbath day despite their natural characteristic. You are inconsistent in keeping SOME of what is natural and not all others. In fact, naturally keeping the feasts on the very days the natural calendar shows you to, mixed together with refusal to go to natural Jerusalem on those feast days that required it in Leviticus, is way beyond inconsistency in the same breath and the same chapter in Leviticus as far as you are concerned today.

Or that there is no longer a very real promise of a lengthened life in the land attached to this commandment?

Sure there is! But that has nothing to do with the fact that sabbath was distinctly said to be a shadow. Where do we read no one should judge us in keeping the shadow of honouring parents as opposed to the body of what that points to? No where.

The Sabbath is spiritual. There is nothing natural about the significance of the seventh day,

Of course it is not spiritual. And it’s full of natural significance since it’s a seventh day of the week that honours the rest God made on the seventh day of old, natural creation that overlooks, or rather completely misses, the fact that even old creation is a shadow of the new creation in Christ. The only thing spiritual about it is that God is a Spirit and commanded it, but He also commanded temple attendance as well as Jerusalem attendance for feasts. And Paul may as well have used the terms natural and spiritual when he said the sabbath was a shadow but the body is of Christ! The natural was the shadow and the spiritual was the body. You are reaching and forcing in ways that are becoming more extreme and apparent.

it derives from the divine act of sanctification whereby God blessed and hallowed it.

Just like He blessed and hallowed the natural temple of Jerusalem as well as the natural City, Jerusalem, by calling it the HOLY CITY.

You fail to realize that God hallowed and blessed many physical and natural things under the Old Covenant, that were shadows of the greater and more blessed spiritual things in the new. So, is the natural Jerusalem and natural temple also spiritual? They have to be by your reasoning put forth here.

Types are in force til Jesus came. They were not as substantial as the body or antitype that they pointed toward.

Just like the Lord's Supper, footwashing, baptism, anointing with oil, laying on of hands, etc. They are SPIRITUAL because their significance is due to the spiritual significance God has given them.

All of these things you mentioned were commanded in the new testament, unlike sabbath days. Sabbaths were not commanded before Moses and the old covenant or after. These things you listed were not distinctly said to be shadows that no man should judge us in due to the body that we are meant to hold to instead like sabbaths. And you consistently overlok that single point of shadow/body.

One cannot talk about inconsistency when one refuses to travel to natural Jerusalem when keeping the same feasts that were required attendance there. This is severe mingling of something claimed to be spiritually fulfilled while at the same time vital aspects of the same mandate are claimed to not be spiritually fulfilled. The truth is that all the feasts are not to be kept literally as you keep them any more than we’re not meant to travel to natural Jerusalem for three of them.