Day of worship

If you read the first post in the thread, it talks about Sunday. Other posts talk about Sunday as the NT Sabbath or keeping the Jewish.

So what are you trying to say? This seems pretty inflammatory. Is that what you mean?

I have not suggested not having a regular stated meeting times for the NT church. I have said that the NT does not specify a day, nor does it specify the activities of that day such as the OT did.

BTW, Psalm 2:3 does not talk about this issue. It is about a totally different issue--those who do not want to live under the authority of God and his king.

 

If you see the need for a day, and the NT admonitions for setting aside a day (that the whole church sets aside) then you are not a cavalier soul.

Psalm 2:3 eminently applies. As stated before, Paul was only speaking of a superstitious observance of a holy day (thinking that there was some difference in that day than in any other), but he does instruct us to set aside day for coming together, and for honoring that. I have found that most of those who kick against it are unwilling to "submit to one another" for the sake of the Gospel.

As we are instructed (if you do not want to use the word commanded) to set aside a day to come together, and to submit one to another in matters of the Gospel, then it is rebellion against God and His Messiah or Christ.

 

But herein is my question. Where does Paul instruct us to set aside a day? Heb 10:25 won't work becuase it only talks about coming together. It does not talk about a day. I fully believe in corporate gathering of the body for worship, edification, and fellowship. I believe when the church doors are open, people should be there, giving priority to the church over all else. I believe most Christians are not closely enough tied to their churches. They have too many ties and relationships outside of church.

I have a problem however, with those who say that the NT sets restrictions on a day such as the OT did, or one who says that Sunday is the NT Sabbath. Perhaps I misunderstand you or you misunderstand me.

Ps 2 is a royal Psalm for all the Davidic kings, culminating in Christ. It has nothing to do with whether or not we observe a day of the week. It has to do with the nations and kings of nations that would try to band together against God and Israel's king. I just can't see a legitimate application here from that passage.

[ July 09, 2002, 09:35 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

Subtract several hundred years and this would be the same argument the reformers heard from the RCC.

 

All laws of the Old Covenant are 'negated' except for those repeated in the New Covenant.

Where did Jesus say that?? Jesus said the oppposite: The he came to fulfill the Law, but not to abolish it. In addition, Jesus celebrated the Sabbath, that is, one day in seven to rest from work, go to the Synagogue, and celebrate worship God the Father.

If you negate the OT because the NT doesn't mention something, then you say the NT is greater than the OT, and that's just not so. If I remember correctly, when it says all scripture is inspired by God, it was referring originally to all the OT scriptures (though we understand it to refer to all scriptures, both old and new).

Additionally, the Ten Commandments are different from the other laws of the OT, because they are timeless. To say they were meant for only the Jewish people is way off the mark. While many of the cultural laws were specifically for the Jewish nation, the Ten Commandments were meant for ALL God's people. The Ten commandments are not just laws, they are God's commandments.

I have found that most of those who kick against it are unwilling to "submit to one another" for the sake of the Gospel. Aaron, you are too good When I grow up, I wanna be just like you.

[ July 08, 2002, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

Jesus did come to fulfill the Law and Paul says that Jesus is the end of the Law for righteousness to everyone that believes (Rom 10:4). He further says that we are no longer under the Law since we are now of faith (Gal 3). He further says that if you keep any of the Law, you have to keep all of it, ceremonial and civil, penalties and sanctions included (Gal 5).

We are not "negating" the OT. We are understanding the OT as the NT tells us to. The OT was teh Jewish law for the Jewish nation in the time of Moses, the judges, and the monarchy. It was their civil constitution. Since we are not of the nation of Israel, the Law does not apply to the church.

You have a very hard time substantiaing this from the text of Scripture. All you have to do is read the context in which they were given. It is undeniable that they were given to the OT Jews as a part of the Mosaic covenant (Exo 19). That is not to say that the principles in them are not timeless; most are. But we do not follow them because they are the 10 commandments. We follow them because we have been told to apart from teh Jewish law.

 

But we do not follow them because they are the 10 commandments. We follow them because we have been told to apart from teh Jewish law.

But the 10 Commandments ARE apart from the Jewish Law. There are many Jewish laws, but only Ten Commandments. Jesus says, if you love me, keep my commandments. He also said that, while man was not made for the sabbath, the sabbath was made for man. In that verse, he affirms that the honoring of the sabbath is valid, just not the way the high priests were honoring the sabbath.

If the Ten Commandments are only for the Jews, then we should back and judicial effort to ban the Ten Commandments from public places, because they, unlike the phrase "under God" in the pledge, espouse a Jewish establishment of religion. But since I believe the Ten Commandments are for ALL God's people, I don't believe they should be banned.

Saying the Ten Commandments are only for Jews is like saying Genesis is only the story of the creation of the first Jewish man and woman. Yet we don't believe this is the case. More to the point, God created human beings to need a day of rest. Knowing that, He commands us to rest one day in every seven. Not just for Him, but also for ourselves. If we consider our bodies temples of the Holy Spirit, then we should heed God's commands and keep his commandment. There is no better time management program that God's. Unless we think we're a different kind of human from the Jews, then God desires us to rest one day in seven just as much.

[ July 09, 2002, 02:54 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

Then why are the 10 commandments right smack at the beginning of the Mosaic covenant and right before the listing of the other laws? On what scriptural basis do you separate these two?

The precepts of the 10 commandments are found in other places in Scripture outside (both before and after the period of the law). We need to accept that.

It does not go unnoticed that you are not offering any Scripture in support of your view. I have shown the Scripture that refutes it.

Remember, I am not saying the 10 commandments are bad or that the precepts of the 10 commandments are not precepts for today. I am saying we keep them for reasons other than their position in the Jewish law. We keep them because the NT commands them, with the exception of the Sabbath day.

God didn't create a Jewish man and woman. the Jewish race did not exist until probably 5000 years or so after creation (c. 2200bc with the call of Abraham in Gen 12).

As for the one day of rest in seven, I am not arguing against that. I think it is a valid principle. However, that is a far different cry from keeping the Sabbath.

When you start insisting on Sabbath keeping, you must switch to fripm-satpm, and you must observe every other part of the Law (including the penalties and sanctions) for the Law exists as a whole (Gal 5).

 

Then why are the 10 commandments right smack at the beginning of the Mosaic covenant and right before the listing of the other laws? On what scriptural basis do you separate these two?
On the biblical basis that they were given directly to Moses in hardcopy in Exodus. While they also appear elsewhere inconjunction with Messianic law, the nature of their origin does not place them into the confines of Messianic law exclusively. These are commanements. In other words, God said we are do do them. They're not conditional, as the Messianic Laws are.

The precepts of the 10 commandments are found in other places in Scripture outside (both before and after the period of the law). We need to accept that.
Yes, that's true. The precepts of ALL Ten Commandments are found elsewhere, both in the OT and the NT. (I think people confuse how we observe the 4th commandment with whether or not we should)

It does not go unnoticed that you are not offering any Scripture in support of your view. I have shown the Scripture that refutes it. I have cited scripture, but was not complete with chapter and verse. Also, some of the scriptures I referred to were already posted by other people, so I saw no reason to post them again.

...I am not saying the 10 commandments are bad or that the precepts of the 10 commandments are not precepts for today. I am saying we keep them for reasons other than their position in the Jewish law. We keep them because the NT commands them, with the exception of the Sabbath day.
I agree with you here, except that I believe the NT says we should still keept it, but it talks about avenues of how we can keep the day holy, as opposed to whether or not we should. My position is simply we should keep the commandment on the sole basis that God told us to, without Messianic condition.

...Jewish race did not exist until probably 5000 years or so after creation (c. 2200bc with the call of Abraham in Gen 12). Assuming a young earth, I'd agree. Like I said, it's clear that Genesis was for all all people. Likewise, I contend that the two stone tablets given to Moses are for all God's people.

...[One day is seven to rest] is a far different cry from keeping the Sabbath.
According to the Commandment, we must keep it holy by resting: Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work... For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth...: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

When you start insisting on Sabbath keeping, you must switch to fripm-satpm, and you must observe every other part of the Law (including the penalties and sanctions) for the Law exists as a whole (Gal 5). You bring a good point. However, if, as I said, the 10 Commandments are unique from the remaining Messianic laws, then abandoning the Messianic laws would not include abandoning of the Ten Commandments. As far as which day to keep, if we are keeping the wrong day (which is a different topic to be sure), that's still no reason to not keep a sabbath day at all.

 

Pastor Larry said: "Then why are the 10 commandments right smack at the beginning of the Mosaic covenant and right before the listing of the other laws? On what scriptural basis do you separate these two?"

To which Johnv replied: "On the biblical basis that they were given directly to Moses in hardcopy in Exodus."

That's right Johnv. The Decalogue was written in stone by God. All the other is referred to as "the handwriting of ordinances," Colossians 2:14.

Besides, if the Ten Commandments were given only to the Jews, what was God's quarrel with Sodom and Gomorrah?

 

This is a riot. 2 verses after v.14 Paul specifically refers to the sabbath as among "food and drink, festivals, new moon," and that these are a "shadow of what is to come." So, are NT Christians to to be bound to dietary laws, celebrations of the festivals and new moon ceremonies? If not, and if the sabbath day still applies, then scripture is wrong to have included it among these other things.

As for the the finger of God writing the 'decalogue' in stone, obviously this requires the question: Do you do absolutely no work of any kind of the seventh day? And if the stone is so significant, then produce it... if it's not there, it is not preserved for us.

Besides, if the Ten Commandments were given only to the Jews, what was God's quarrel with Sodom and Gomorrah?

?? This makes less sense than most of the **** you post.

[ July 14, 2002, 12:52 AM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob Griffin ]

 

Sodom and Gomorrah predated the decalogue by about 700 years or so, give or take a few. There was no decalogue for them.

You guys are missing the most obvious things in the text. There is no way you can read Exodus 19 and 20 and get anything but what I have said. The 10 commandments as the decalogue were given to nobody but Israel. Many of the precepts have roots outside the Law (such as murder, lying, adultery, coveting, false worship, honoring parents, stealing, etc). That is why they are continuing. Not becuase of their status as the decalogue.

Read the text; it's right there.

 

I think Pastor Larry is just basically trying to say that Christians are not under the law but under grace yet we are still under instruction and guidance of the Holy Spirit to obey the same commandments that were given to Moses. They just are not refered to in the New Testament as the 10 Commandments.

These laws are moral laws that God did give so that is why they have carried forward to us. There are so many liberal Christians who say we don't have to obey any rules or regulations but it is obvious they cannot read because no where in the New Testament is this written. Yes Paul said that we are not under the law but he was talking about ceremonial law not moral law because in other scriptures he gives us commandments we are to follow.

Jesus said if we love him we will keep his commandments. John said the same thing.

Paul was not specific about keeping the 7th day sabbath yet when we read in the Book of Acts we find that Paul did keep the 7th day sabbath. So should we not follow his example? It seems very contradictory for Paul to say one thing and then do another does it not?

I think God wants his people to come together and this is why the Early Church came together so often. I think the modern church needs to follow the example of the New TEstament Church and Paul did say that we should not forsake the assembling of ourselves together as we see the day approach.

So many people want to find excuses and reasons not to come together instead of finding reasons to come together.

 

Cynic,

You apparently are not apt in dealing with the types and shadows contained in the Law.

 

What is the Sabbath?

The time of Sodom's debauchery is irrelevant. What is given in the Decalogue is a concise description of Natural Law. "Doth not even nature itself teach you...?" 1 Cor. 11:14. The Commandment concerning the Sabbath would be easy to explain away were it not for its place in the Decalogue. The justification for it does not refer any thing in God's dealings with Israel, but to the Beginning. To Creation. Before there was any sin.

And so the Sabbath existed not so much as Mosaic Law, but as Natural Law. In fact, there is no Commandment in the Decalogue that does not have its base ultimately in Creation. Why do we not worship idols? Because in the Beginning it was not so. Why do we Remember the Sabbath? Because in the Beginning it was so.

However, no one can say we celebrate Passover because in the Beginning it was so. Can anyone say they built a tabernacle, ordained a priesthood or offered the blood of animals because this was the way it was in the Beginning?

And so now it is clear what is meant by "written in stone," and "the handwriting of ordinances."

The New Testament does not have to spell it out for us, though it does by saying that we which have believed do enter into rest, Heb. 4:3.

(Lest any sottish lout suggest that we can do as we please--whether the Sabbath is observed one day or seven--I must refer to Hebrews 4:10, For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.)

Rabbinical tradition turned the Sabbath day into a kind of "magic" day, like Christmas. On this day, God came to earth, and they celebrated the Old Creation.

Today we have abandoned the superstitious view, which was really only a form of idolatry, for the Christian view that Christ is our Sabbath, and we testify of that by observing the First Day.

Our real problem with a day of rest is not theological. It is moral. We have too much liesure time on our hands and we've gotten soft like those of whom Amos spoke in 6:1-6. If we focused on "Six days shalt thou labor..." half as much as we focused on our ease, we would all be elated when that seventh day rolled around, and the question of an appropriate observance, like whether it was a whole day or not, would seldom be raised.

[ July 14, 2002, 01:35 AM: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

Aaron, this may shock you out of your little socks and sneakers, but Romans 14:5 and Colossians 2:16 still read the same way. Your reasoning is to be abandoned in favor of Paul's.

 

Little? Size 13, Bub!

I see Paul correcting a superstitious observance in the verses you cited, not the view which I have expressed. But I have already commented upon that.

 

No wonder you were shocked out of the little ones!