For SDA's on Sunday worship

Eric said --

The Jews already knew that God created the World in 6 days and rested the Seventh. They knew the truths of the Bible. What was "news" to them was that Jesus was the Messiah and that he came and died for our sins and rose again. "That" stumbling stone is what was tripping up the Jews.

The Gentiles were accepting it - the Jews were rejecting it. So "now" are you going to ask them to meet "tomorrow" on Sunday once things start getting ugly? In fact - the only "distinctive" you have for them is all the Messiah and Jesus-rose-again etc message that many today say is the "Sunday message". Since that is your FIRST message - How do you keep ignoring "Sunday after Sunday" and keep coming back "Sabbath after Sabbath" when ONLY the Gentiles are picking up on this -- and you started on day 1 with all they needed to know to come back "Sunday after Sunday".

In fact - they are teaching "Sabbath after Sabbath" - to people that are now fully aware - of the Sunday message. They continue to skip the logical Sunday service...

And the reason is...??

Any takers?

In Christ,

Bob

 

The laws of God - the scriptures - remain in effect. We would need very specific instruction from God - before doing anything to "abolish" the Word of God.

Romans 14 can not be used as a argument for abolishing something. It is only an argument for showing toleration of practice among what is already shown in God's Word to be optional.

For example - in Acts 15 they are reminded of the on-going Levitical law against eathing meat with blood in eat. "Eating all things" in Romans 14 is not a "license" to ignore the statement of Acts 15.

In the same way - we "know" about the "end" of the sacrificial - annual Sabbaths (predictive Laws - predicting events in the Gospel - in the life of the Messiah) by the clear fact of Hebrews 8-10 where we are told that God is setting the first aside to establish the second.

The earthly priests and the laws that govern their ministry - are set aside - and the heavenly priesthood of Christ begins.

It does not abolish the OT - it does away with the annual feast days - for which you need a Jewish Priest - to minister.

However even then - as we see in Acts 16 and 21 - Paul called the Jews to continue to obey them. And as we see in the OT - it was never a "requirement" for Gentiles to be circumcised or to participate in the Annual Feast days.

In Christ,

Bob

 

It is ridiculous to insist that Saturday is THE day to worship GOD. We are to worship GOD EVERYDAY. Now to set aside a day other than Saturday is of NO consequence because Christ has FULFILLED the LAW. As SAVED BORN-AGAIN "CHRISTIANS", we are lead by the Holy Spirit who resides within us. We are bondservants to CHRIST and not the LAW... You have been saved from the LAW and you are not saved by it. It is IMPOSSIBLE to keep the LAW.
I believe Sunday worship symbolizes our new freedom founded in CHRIST as does the eating of EVERYTHING once labeled UNCLEAN.

 

So are you saying it was "ridiculous" for God to make it a Holy Day in Gen 2:3?

Or are you saying it was "ridiculous" for God to set it as the Sabbath commandment in His Own Ten commandments in Exodus 20?

Or are you saying it was "ridiculous" for God to affirm it as a day of worship and holy convocation in Lev 23?

Or are you saying that it "will be ridiculous" to see God fulfill His word in Isaiah 66 and command that "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall All mankind Come before Me to Worship"?

Which of these actions are you calling "ridiculous"?

Just curious.

The Levitical law? The Law of God? The Law of scripture? Indeed you are right -- He fulfilled the Law commanding us to Love God with all of our heart. Even so - He fufilled the Law commanding us not to take God's name in vain. He also "fulfilled" the law commanding us to love our Neighbor as ourselves as well as the law telling us to Honor the Creator's 7th-day memorial of Creation. He even "fulfilled" the law commanding us not to murder, steal, commit adultery etc etc.

All of these - He perfectly fulfilled - just as you say.

Equally true - and as John says in 1John 2:4-6 the one who "Says he knows Christ" and does not "Walk as Jesus walked - is a liar and the truth is not in him". So instead of being called to "ignore Christ" - the Word of God calls us to observe His example.

Are you "recommending rebellion" ? Or are you simply saying that the Gospel leaves us "enslaved to rebellion" contrary to Romans 6?

In Christ,

Bob

 

As I said before, I am not defending Sunday. Yes, there would come a rift between the Church and the syngogues, as Jesus warned, but still, the apostles preached in the synagogues for a while at least, on the Sabbath service (and their being put out is not covered at this point, but even if it was, the might continue the pattern, but stillm, this is not "KEEPing" it). So once again, unless one is pushing Sunday, why would we look for them to ask Paul to move their meetings to Sunday? (It was post-Apostolic period when Christians got the idea to move it to Sunday, to "symbolize our freedom").

Once again, I didn't say "abolished", I spoke of being changed in application, just like murder, oaths and adultery.
Since you understand how the annual feasts were shadows of Christ, Colossians 2:16,17 incudes the Sabbath, along with the "feast days" as shadows, and that's all I was saying, not that they were just "abolished" like they lost all their meaning altogether.

Of course it is not ridiculous for God to say those things, but then was it ridiculous for Him to institute the sacrifices? No, but it would be ridiculous for someone to say they were still mandated for everyone today. Once again, Christ magnified the Law, and God does not want our attention and worship just one day, but every day. The law was the tutor to lead to Christ, so yes He said things back then that have a totally different application today.

 

If God said of the new earth "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall all mankind come before me to offer animal sacrifices" - as says in Isaiah 66 of the new Earth "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall all mankind come before Me to worship" --- then "yes" we would have to ask ourselves if we have really judged rightly in saying that God is no longer interested in the practice.

Notice that God gave mankind the Holy Day in Gen 2:3 - before sin. It has nothing to do with "predicting" the coming of the Messiah to save Adam from a sin he had not committed.

Christ said that the "Sabbath was made for mankind - not mankind for the Sabbath" - the idea that He "removed that blessing from mankind" after the cross - is foreign to scripture.

In Christ,

Bob

 

In Leve 23 there are a list of "predictive" shadow Sabbaths that all point forward to the act of Christ in dying for our sins.

But the 7th-day weekly Sabbath is a "memorial" of God Creative act - from the very beginning. It does not "predict" anything to Adam or to anyone who follows God's command to honor His 7th-day weekly holy day given to mankind as a memorial of creation.

Thus - Col 2 limits itself to the "shadow Sabbaths" and further limits itself to correcting "abuses" of judging others - that Christ declares to be "abuses" even in the pre-cross era in Matt 7.

Correcting the abuse of a system done by others - is not the same as abolishing the system itself. So EVEN if you stick with the subject of the "Shadow Sabbaths" given in Lev 23 as annual holy days of rest - you can not use Col 2 to defend abolishing them. It only speaks to removing abuses of the Jews surrounding them.

IN Christ,

Bob

 

That is not "giving man the holy day" at that time (the Garden of Eden) Nowhere is it mentioned as being commanded then. But man did fall, and naturally turned to false gods, and needed a reminder of who the true God who created the universe was. Like the rest of the Law, "added because of sin" (Gal.3:19), this would be replaced by the Spirit's working in our lives, which came along after Christ's death. Genesis was Moses account of the significance God was giving to the Sabbath. But nowhere was it ever said to be a universal or eternal command.

Sabbatarians often claim that the sabbath is for man to show his love for God. They also say elsewhere that man was made to love God. Put this together, man was made for the Sabbath.
But if it's truly for man, then god can give a new form of worship that serves the same purpose.

This is the whole point. Since when are we to be focused on this old creation? It is fallen and passing away. The same God who created it initially will create a whole new world, where sin will never be allowed to spring up, and THIS is what we are to look forward to now. Not by keeping a memorial to the past creation, but in looking to Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who will bring us to the new world. So in this, the weekly sabbath is shown to be just as much a shadow of Christ as the annual days. It points to or predicts the new creative act God did, and through Christ will share with us.

 

hmm....it`s pretty hot around here

how about some study in history ?

http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/1_ch09.htm

it`s about "worship in apostolic age"......just for a reference.

Gby,

-ken-

 

#1. God said that "He sanctified it" in Genesis 2:3 making it a Holy day.

#2. God said that "He rested -- therefore He sanctified, blessed and made it holy" speaking of that Genesis week in summary.

#3. God did not "write a command to Cain not to murder" but mankind was still obligated by that law and it was still a "sin" for Cain to murder.

#4. Christ said "The Sabbath was MADE for mankind and not mankind MADE for the Sabbath" speaking of the making of both. There is no hiding the fact that the 7th-day memorial of creation week was given in Gen 2:3 on the 7th day of creation week. In fact - that is the only thing that marks that 7th day of creation week. Hence our 7-day week.

#5. There is no place in scripture saying that the Holy Spirit is given in place of the Creator's 7th-day memorial of creation - made "for mankind" as a holy day in Gen 2:3.

In John 3 Christ states that the -pre-cross Jewish bible teacher "must already know" that it is "already a fact" that one must be "born of the spirit" to enter the kindgom of heaven. The Holy Spirit was not "optional" to the Gospel or salvation. The list of saints given in Heb 11 - are those born again by the Holy Spirit.

Christ's statement in Mark 2:27 about the making fo the Sabbath being "for mankind" and also referencing the "making" of mankind, along with God's statement in Gen 2:3 that the 7th day memorial of creation was "made holy" at that time, and God's own "summary" of the creation event in Exodus 20:8-11 telling us that His act of "resting is what made it holy". Shows the origin, date and scope of the first occurence of the Holy Seventh day given by the creator "made for mankind" as a memorial of creation.

The Isaiah 66 statement about the New Heavens and New Earth - shows the "eternal" scope of the Creator's memorial of creation -

Then - as you point out - possibly our Creator was "having a bad idea" when He "made the 7th day of creation week - a holy day" in Gen 2:3.

After all why should it be a "blessing for mankind" to obey God? Why should showing love for God and love for our neighbor in anyway "bless mankind"? Perhaps you do have a point there.

No question that God Himself can choose to explicitly "sanctify, bless and make holy" any other day He chooses. But He has not.

Whether that day could "also serve as a memorial of creation of mankind" as we find in Gen 2:3 and Exodus 20:8-11 by virtue of the fact that the Creator chose to add it to creation week, to rest on that day and to set an example for mankind - remains to be seen.

Since the Creator gave mankind the 7-day week - not a 6-day week.

Since Christ said it was "made FOR mankind" in Mark 2.

Since the Creator said it was "A holy day" in Gen 2:3

Since the Creator's own summary of the Creation week "event" shows it to have been made holy by virtue of the "rest that God gave" then at that time.

Since God Himself declares that for all eternity in the New Heavens and New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall All mankind come before Me to Worship".

Christ said before the Cross - to the pre-cross Jews "If you Love ME Keep My commandments" (John 14). Christ is God - God's commandments are in fact -- His. He did not introduce the idea that "Keeping His commandments was NOT to love Christ" as your position requires.

That God was giving mankind the 7th-day memorial of His creative act in Gen 2:3 - as a prediction of the destruction of the world and making of a new World (something that has not yet happened) - does not appear to fit.

Particularly when we observe that EVEN in the New Earth "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall All mankind come before Me to worship".

In any case - we differ on this point - I just wanted to explore some of the reasons for the differences.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Still, that is viewd in retrospect from the Mosaic period. Really, every day is holy, or is God's presence not in any other day, as Armstrong says? He sanctified many things that were apart of the Law that are not still in effecxt (the Temple, etc). Blessed and sanctified do not equal "commanded all men to oberve it for all times".

That's apart of the universal laws, which were always commanded to all men, and are written in man's conscience. The Sabbath never had that status, but was always for Israel's identity.

Once again, this says nothing about a universal eternal command to refrain from work that day every week.

In the Calvinist debate, didn't you agree with most of the other non-Calvinists that the Spirit was not given before Christ? (Since that was the Calvinists' only way to have salvation in the Old Testament if the new birth precedes belief.) The Spirit was given to the prophets for inspiration, but there was no regeneration. Else, that dispensation would have been sufficient. Christ was telling Nicodemus the way it should be, but the whole point was that things weren't working they way they should. That's why Christ came in the first place.

Continuing with the last point, this was conditional on the Israelites fulfilling their purpose of "declar[ing] My glory among the Gentiles"(v.19). In other words, there would have been no Christ dying, no new dispensation, so the whole Law would have been still in effect. Notice, the new moons (v.23) and the offerings(v.20) are mentioned as well! Even if one takes the theory that the Law will be reinstituted, (and why would sacrifices ever be reinstituted, for eternity, yet, after Christ's work is finished?) still, we do not keep those other two points of the Law, so we cannot use this to say that the Sabbath is "eternal" either.

Not a bad idea, just a temporary
"blessing" that is fulfilled by Christ.

Once again, not arguing for another day. But the advocates for Sunday use similar arguments as you: indirect implication and "everybody must have known", as in the quote from the link s.phoenix posted above:

"The day was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week, not on the ground of a particular command, but by the free spirit of the gospel and by the power of certain great facts which he at the foundation of the Christian church. It was on that day that Christ rose from the dead; that he appeared to Mary, the disciples of Emmaus, and the assembled apostles; that he poured out his Spirit and founded the church;690 and that he revealed to his beloved disciple the mysteries of the future. Hence, the first day was already in the apostolic age honorably designated as "the Lord’s Day." On that day Paul met with the disciples at Troas and preached till midnight. On that day he ordered the Galatian and Corinthian Christians to make, no doubt in connection with divine service, their weekly contributions to charitable objects according to their ability. It appears, therefore, from the New Testament itself, that Sunday was observed as a day of worship, and in special commemoration of the Resurrection, whereby the work of redemption was finished.691

The universal and uncontradicted Sunday observance in the second century can only be explained by the fact that it had its roots in apostolic practice. Such observance is the more to be appreciated as it had no support in civil legislation before the age of Constantine, and must have been connected with many inconveniences, considering the lowly social condition of the majority of Christians and their dependence upon their heathen masters and employers. Sunday thus became, by an easy and natural transformation, the Christian Sabbath or weekly day of rest, at once answering the typical import of the Jewish Sabbath, and itself forming in turn a type of the eternal rest of the people of God in the heavenly Canaan.692 In the gospel dispensation the Sabbath is not a degradation, but an elevation, of the week days to a higher plane, looking to the consecration of all time and all work. It is not a legal ceremonial bondage, but rather a precious gift of grace, a privilege, a holy rest in God in the midst of the unrest of the world, a day of spiritual refreshing in communion with God and in the fellowship of the saints, a foretaste and pledge of the never-ending Sabbath in heaven."

In light of this:

As the quote says, (And I forgot to mention), the Sabbath was also a shadow of the milennial rest. As you know, the original creation week was a type of the ages of mankind, so the sabbath prefigured the Milennium.

 

Bob said quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#5. There is no place in scripture saying that the Holy Spirit is given in place of the Creator's 7th-day memorial of creation - made "for mankind" as a holy day in Gen 2:3.

In John 3 Christ states that the -pre-cross Jewish bible teacher "must already know" that it is "already a fact" that one must be "born of the spirit" to enter the kindgom of heaven. The Holy Spirit was not "optional" to the Gospel or salvation. The list of saints given in Heb 11 - are those born again by the Holy Spirit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No. My understanding is that the Holy Spirit - New Birth etc are the "One Gospel" and that there has only been "one" in all of time. That this had to start immediately at the fall of Adam - else there could be no Heb 11 list - since the only thing "other than" the Holy Spirit - is the total depravity of man.

Obviously people received full forgiveness of sins (As even Christ said before the Cross "your sins ARE forgiven") and we have Enoch and Elijah taken to heaven - fully forgiven "really forgiven" pre-cross.

The fact that the blood of Christ had not yet been shed - did not stop God from applying the benefits of His blood, causing the totally-depraved to be "born-again" and even translating some without their ever having died - under the "One Gospel".

Christ was telling Nicodemus that he should already know these basic truths of salvation SINCE he was a teacher of the OT text.

Christ was coming -- from the very start - as the saviour of the World - because "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son" to be the Atonement for our sins. That was always the plan. The fact that the jews ALSO decided to rebell against their creator and God - was not "needed" to save the world. As Paul points out in Romans 11 - they made a mistake - but God was not "so-loving-just-the-jews" until they made that mistake. From the start - He so loved the World.

Bob said --
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Isaiah 66 statement about the New Heavens and New Earth - shows the "eternal" scope of the Creator's memorial of creation -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#1. The 10 commandments say nothing about animal sacrifices.

#2. In Isaiah 66 we are talking about the "new Heavens and New Earth" not about the earth prior to the 2nd coming.

#3. God declares "His purpose" is that All mankind keep the Sabbath "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL mankind come before Me to worship".

This clearly shows the scope was not limited to the Jews - was eternal EVEN in the New Earth of Rev 21 etc.

Also - Adam and Eve had nothing to "sacrifice" on their first Sabbath when as Christ said "the Sabbath was made for Mankind" - it was never true that you needed an animal sacrifice to celebrate the Creator's 7th-day memorial of creation week and His literal act of creating mankind.

Even - so we will be able to come before God - in the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath" with "all mankind.

In Summary.

When God says - that in the New Earth "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall All mankind come before Me to worship" - your view must respond...

"Not only is that not true - but God never intended all mankind to be observing Sabbath even in the OT".

When Christ said "the Sabbath WAS made for MANKIND" your view has to be "no the Sabbath was only made for the Jews".

When God said in Exodus 20:8-11 that the making of the 7th-day as a holy day that is applicable to all mankind - was done via the act of God resting - and that this act alone justified the making of that day as a Holy day ...

Your view must say "no it did not. It was not until God gave the command at Sinai that there was any justification for keeping the day".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Christ said "If you Love Me KEEP My commandments" - pre-cross to His pre-cross Jewish followers. The Commandments of God were fairly well known at that time - especially to the Jews.

That they would know this to include the 10 commandments is obvious. That they would know it to include the Deut 6:5 commandment to Love God with all the heart - as well as the Lev 19:18 command to Love our neighbor as ourselves - is also evident. That they might come to think of those commandments as "God's bad ideas" is not well supported in scripture.

Apparently the readers of James chapter 2 - were equally well informed on those points and had no misgivings about "the Commandments showing a lack of love for Christ". The point seems to be consistent with the Words of Christ "IF you Love Me KEEP My commandments".

The real issue in our discussion has more to do with any of these commandments - and the topic of "Obedience vs Rebellion" and how that relates in any way to the Gospel and the New Birth.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob said

Yes, people were saved by grace, but they were not regenerated. Regeneration was an additional gift given to us after the Cross to give us the power to really obey god. Israel had the Law, including the sacrificial system, but that did not adress the sin nature.

1: No, but in Isaiah 66, which you are using as one of your main proofs, does mention the sacrifices. If you are trying to teach the eternality of one, how can you ignore the other? If one is still to be observed in the letter, then why not the other? Remember, the real issue is not "doing away with" laws, or especially "God's bad ideas", but the Laws being shadows of future realities, and thus fulfilled.

2, 3: As I had said, this was conditional on Israel remaining faithful and fulfilling its mission to the world. Since the Old Covenant was in effect when this was written, it assumes it still would be when we entered the eternal Kingdom. No, this was not a "bad idea", but God was writing the lesson in Israel's history that Laws by themselves were not the solution to man's sin.

Also, Adam and Eve's "sacrifice" was the animals killed to give them skins as covering. Even though they did not sacrifice the animals, God did it completely for them, this set the principle.

It is very easy to get purely into speculation at this point. We do not know exactly what the world would have been like if man hadn't fallen. But the Bible does say the Law was added because of sin. So the sabbath probably still would have had some significance, but there still would have been no strict Law on it. After the Creation, it was not mentioned again or commanded until God had set up his nation, Israel. Then, it was frequently mentioned, either admonishing to keep it, or condemning those who didn't; it was the center of their whole identity. When God ushers in the New Covenant, it soon falls back into obscurity from the central focus it had. In Revelation's views of the New Heaven and New earth, which are the final word, there is no mention of it. If it was so important, then wouldn't it be reiterated like all of the other commandments?

But things had changed! Christ had magnified the commandments, so that they were more than simply was was written in the letter in Ex./Deut. In Hebrews 4, we see the sabbath is recognized as resting in Jesus, not refraining from work on a day. (I know what you're thinking" ""he refrains from his workS as God had done" is talking about trying to earn salvation, not a day of rest-- see context. The rest had to be entered, and some would be barred, so this is not talking about physically "resting" on a day, which anybody could do. God was not earning salvation, of course, but the point is "workS", not work, as on a particular day.) This right here shows how the Sabbath transposes into our new covenant.

 

Eric Said --

The point made above about Christ speaking to Nicodemus refutes the statement you made above. In fact if your statement was correct what Christ "should" have said is "Nicodemus - you can't possibly know this now - but one day in the future it WILL become a true statement that you must be born of the spirit to enter the kindgdom of heaven".

Clearly that idea is not found in John 3.

Worse! What we find is that based on exising scripture Christ argued this was ALREADY fact - and that Nicodemus was already accountable as an OT Bible teacher in Israel - for knowing and teaching this truth.

Praise God! One Gospel! One way of salvation in ALL ages!

The depraved sinful nature "apart from the Holy Spirit" is simply " to be in open rebellion against God". That is "not" what we find in Heb 11. That is not what we find in Matt 17 with Moses and Elijah. That is not what we find with Elijah and Moses - who are both taken to heaven.

God said "David is a man after My own heart" - only possible via the New Birth.

Saul prophesied in his rebellious state - but was not born again at that time. But the saints listed in Heb 11 - thousands and perhaps millions included by the statements made there - could ONLY have been born again to be the people that they are shown to be in that chapter.

In Christ,

Bob

 

When Isaiah 66 hits the transition point - and the 2nd coming of Christ is described (just as we see Paul describe it in 1Thess 2) -- there is in fact "no" mention of "animal sacrifices" from then to the end of the chapter. But we DO have the "New Heavens and the New Earth" just as we see in Rev 21.

And we "DO have.. From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL mankind come before Me to worship".

Isaih 66.

15 For behold, the LORD will come in fire And His chariots like the whirlwind, To render His anger with fury, And His rebuke with flames of fire.
16 For the LORD will execute judgment by fire And by His sword on all flesh, And those slain by the LORD will be many.


To be literally fulfilled at Christ's second coming. A worldwide - global scope.


17 ""Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go to the gardens, Following one in the center, Who eat swine's flesh, detestable things and mice, will come to an end altogether,'' declares the LORD.
18 ""For I know their works and their thoughts; the time is coming to gather all nations and tongues. And they shall come and see My glory.


Again - to be literally fulfilled. Though possibly at the Rev 20 post-millenial resurrection of the wicked.


19 ""I will set a sign among them and will send survivors from them to the nations: Tarshish, Put, Lud, Meshech, Rosh, Tubal and Javan, to the distant coastlands that have neither heard My fame nor seen My glory. And they will declare My glory among the nations.


Though we have no animal sacrifices here - we do see what appear to be wounded people, weak or infirmed people "on litters" in the next section.



20 ""Then they shall bring all your brethren from all the nations as a grain offering to the LORD, on horses, in chariots, in litters, on mules and on camels, to My holy mountain Jerusalem,'' says the LORD, ""just as the sons of Israel bring their grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD.
21 ""I will also take some of them for priests and for Levites,'' says the LORD.


But then the context returns to the New Heavens and the New Earth of Rev 21.


22 ""For just as the new heavens and the new earth Which I make will endure before Me,'' declares the LORD, ""So your offspring and your name will endure.
23 ""And it shall be from new moon to new moon And from sabbath to sabbath, All mankind will come to bow down before Me,'' says the LORD.


The New Heavens and New Earth point is solidified - because that is the only time when all the wicked of this planet will have been turned into corpses - with unquenchable fire.

This can not reference any time prior to that.


24 ""Then they will go forth and look On the corpses of the men Who have transgressed against Me. For their worm will not die And their fire will not be quenched; And they will be an abhorrence to all mankind.''


This is just impossible to miss.

In Christ,

Bob

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christ said "If you Love Me KEEP My commandments" - pre-cross to His pre-cross Jewish followers. The Commandments of God were fairly well known at that time - especially to the Jews.

That they would know this to include the 10 commandments is obvious. That they would know it to include the Deut 6:5 commandment to Love God with all the heart - as well as the Lev 19:18 command to Love our neighbor as ourselves - is also evident. That they might come to think of those commandments as "God's bad ideas" is not well supported in scripture.

Apparently the readers of James chapter 2 - were equally well informed on those points and had no misgivings about "the Commandments showing a lack of love for Christ". The point seems to be consistent with the Words of Christ "IF you Love Me KEEP My commandments".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I forgot to add - that James 2 is making the point that "we Christians" Are to "live and Act as those who are to be judged by the Law of Liberty".

Notice that the Royal Law he Quotes in James two is that of Deut 6:5 and also that of Lev 19:18.

Then the Law of Liberty - is simply a quote of the Ten Commandments.

There is no sense of "gasp!! We can't possibly keep those - because then salvation would be by works!".

The Point made here is that when it comes to "obedience" vs "rebellion" the Gospel never promotes "Rebellion".

So even though obedience does not "save us" - still we will be judged by these laws - and rebellion will never be the "model" for a Child of God.

As John said in 1John 2 -- the one who says he has come to know Christ and yet does not walk in harmony with the way Christ walked - is not telling the truth.

In Christ,

Bob

 

"transition point"? I think you're putting in some sort of division that is not really there. This is a conditional promise of what Heaven would have been like under the old covenant. Of course, God knew that a new Covenant would be needed, but still, He often speaks to Israel in terms of the Old Covenant being eternal. Actually, He was writing the lesson in the history of Israel that a new covenant with new birth would be needed.

Of course, both the God of Israel and Christ are YHWH, and here is revealed a single Coming, once again, as if the Old Covenant was all there was. Since Israel failed, God would have to come in the person of the Messiah, and die to pay for the sins of the world. Then there would be a second coming where all of this would be fulfilled, except that since it was a new covenant, various elements of the Old Covenent mentioned in such prophecies would be changed.
We are spending a lot of time on whether the Sabbath will be kept in the Kingdom, but it is possible that God could have some special worship gathering on the sabbath). But in reality, don't you think we will come every day to worship Him? If the sabbath rest is "eternal", won't this state be 24/7? As I said, laws were not "done away", but instead, magnified. What was a one day a week affair will be everyday, and the one day a week worship was a foreshadowing of what Christ will bring all of into. We are to emulate that as much as possible now, and that is why the NT does not deal in mandatory once a week worship. (even though many soon after assumed it was simply moved to Sunday)

This is apart of the context, and we see the priesthood is still in effect. In Heaven there will be no Temple (Rev.21:22)

Once again, noone is teaching the laws are done away. They are magnified (Matt.5), and actually, it's when they are magnified that we see that we have never really kept any of them at all. This is not to build an argument that "oh, we can't keep them so do what you want". We strive to live by God's standard in the spirit, not in the letter.

 

Once again, noone is teaching the laws are done away. They are magnified (Matt.5), and actually, it's when they are magnified that we see that we have never really kept any of them at all. This is not to build an argument that "oh, we can't keep them so do what you want". We strive to live by God's standard in the spirit, not in the letter.

That is a good point. Rebellion is never "The way of the cross" nor is it what we find recommended in 1John2 where John tells us to walk even as Christ walked. He points out that if we claim to know Christ and yet do not walk in submission and obedience to God as He did - we are in fact not telling the truth.

I think we can at least agree on that basic.

In Christ,

Bob

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Isaiah 66 hits the transition point - and the 2nd coming of Christ is described (just as we see Paul describe it in 2Thess 1) -- there is in fact "no" mention of "animal sacrifices" from then to the end of the chapter. But we DO have the "New Heavens and the New Earth" just as we see in Rev 21.

And we "DO have.. From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL mankind come before Me to worship".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am just pointing out the clear unmistakable "second coming language" that we see in 2Thess chapter 1 AND in Isaiah 66


14 Then you will see this, and your heart will be glad, And your bones will flourish like the new grass; And the hand of the LORD will be made known to His servants, But He will be indignant toward His enemies.
15 For behold, the LORD will come in fire And His chariots like the whirlwind, To render His anger with fury, And His rebuke with flames of fire.
16 For the LORD will execute judgment by fire And by His sword on all flesh, And those slain by the LORD will be many.

17 ""Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go to the gardens, Following one in the center, Who eat swine's flesh, detestable things and mice, will come to an end altogether,'' declares the LORD.
18 ""For I know their works and their thoughts; the time is coming to gather all nations and tongues. And they shall come and see My glory.



Notice it is world wide "the sword on all flesh" it is "all nations" it is the Lord God Himself coming with fire - as 2Thess 1 also points out.

The same clear language about the 2nd coming that we see both in the NT and OT - is used in Isaiah 66.

Even so - the same clear language about the New Heavens and New Earth is used in Rev 21 and in Isaiah 66.

Impossible to miss.

And the applicable scope is "clear" - it is "All mankind" for "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall All mankind come before Me to worship".

This shows that God's intent was the application of the sabbath to "all mankind".

No wonder Christ said "The Sabbath was MADE for Mankind" in Mark 2.


In Christ,

Bob