What Day Is The Sabbath ???

[marksman]

Just looked into it, and you are correct about the original translation. But, so what? I don't think this changes that we can't worship on Sunday, this first day of the week.


Neither is it forbidden. We are commanded, even in the NT to worship and gather the together.


I agree.



Yes.

What I am pointing out is that there is no scriptural authority for Sunday meetings. Not whether we can meet on Sunday or not. Especially as we read they met daily in their homes which would have included Sunday evenings because they worked during the day on Sunday.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

All ten commandments are still in effect.

And so? Of course they all are but none like the Fourth of which IT IS WRITTEN "a keeping of the Sabbath Day is still in effect for the (Christian) People of God." Hebrews 4:9

But <<A transition took place;the end of the sabbath>> is a looong chance you take - the translation of Matthew 28:1 is not

the end of the sabbath

.
That is FALSE.
A real translation is "In the end(ing) = Late : ON : the Sabbath(-Day-of-the-week)" meaning the Seventh-Day-of-the-week of the Hellenistic Koine Christian cycle of seven "WEEK-days".

There is NO HOPE FOR THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK that it could have accommodated the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead which ALWAYS, STRICTLY has been the God-given PREROGATIVE of "MY HOLY DAY CALLED HONOURABLE SABBATH" Isaiah 58, distinguishing it from all non-Christian and Antichrist holy days and sabbath days of any idols like 'The day of the lord Sun'.

 

[marksman]

Nine of the Ten are in the NT. Not Sabbath commands!

Colossians 2:16
16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,

Amen Jesus!

Collosians 2 v 16 has nothing at all to do with the 10 commandments. See context.

 

[marksman]

What does sabbath actually mean? Sabbath is a day of rest - one in seven.

That is correct and it was established when God created heaven and earth. He allocated the seventh day for that day of rest and in all the history of Judaism that has NEVER changed, not even after the day of Pentecost.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

You execute those who work on the "Sabbath" as God COMMANDED Israel? Sabbath COMMANDS are ONLY in the Law of Moses and were ONLY for Israel!

Have you ever given the sombre possibility any thought, that even this death-penalty aspect (--not inside but alongside the Sabbath Commandment the Essence of which is the Rest of GOD upon it--), that even this death-penalty curse on its transgressors, could be believed as prophetic and TYPICAL of the Saviour's taking the penalty and curse upon Himself. Then while the penalty and curse for transgression of the Sabbath Commandment is so disproportionately heave and harsh, that for that very reason, God's grace thereby is increased?
LISTEN TO THE ALLITERATION, I LOVE IT I LOVE IT where Paul exclaims, 'Nomos de pareisehlthen hina pleonasehi to paraptohma: hou de epleonasen heh hamartia, hupereperisseusen heh charis hina hohsper ebasileusen heh hamartia en tohi thanatohi, houtohs kai heh charis basileusehi dia dikaiosunehs EIS DZOHEHN AIOHNION dia Iehsou Xristou tou Kuriou hehmohn.' Romans 5:20,21.

Which Commandment excelled "in death" penalty for its transgression? The Sabbath Commandment!
For the transgression of which Commandment therefore would disproportionately have "INCREASED GRACE EXCEEDINGLY"? None other than God's Sabbath Commandment!

Keep that in mind when next time you overindulge in your favourite delicacy of holding God's Sabbath Day in contempt.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I'll stick with the NT. No Sabbath for Christians!

"No rest for the wicked" that's NT i believe. Your analysis : 'Sabbath' correlates with 'rest'. Therefore 'Christians' correlates with 'the wicked'.

Be careful how you go around with Scripture. It's so easy to forget Scripture - if you are a Christian - is the Written Word of God.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Watch the new thread, 'Bible Rap' ...

 

[mailmandan]

It? There was more than one Sabbath command, including execution of those who worked on the Sabbath. I don't know of anyone who keeps the Sabbath commands, but some sure do try to force it on others.

Even when Sabbatarians today set out to keep the Sabbath day, are they truly "keeping the Sabbath?" To "keep the Sabbath" as it was required under the old covenant would involve compliance with specific regulations (Exodus 16:23; 35:3; Leviticus 23:32; Jeremiah 17:21) that were strictly enforced.

If keeping the Sabbath day was still required today, so would the burnt offerings which went along with them (Leviticus 19:30; 23:2-3; Numbers 28:1-10; 29:39-40; I Chronicles. 23:30-31; II Chronicles 31:2-4; Isaiah 1:13). So no kindling a fire in any of your dwellings on the sabbath (Exodus 35:3). Every man must remain in his place on the sabbath (Exodus 16:29). No trading (Amos 8:5). No marketing (Nehemiah 10:31; 13:15,19).

These were commanded by God to Israel (Exodus 35:1). "The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come as a lasting covenant. It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he abstained from work and rested." (Exodus 31:16-17). Moses gives the reason the Sabbath was given to the nation Israel: “Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (Deuteronomy 5:15).

If keeping the Sabbath day is still in affect, then why don't Sabbatarians seek to obey ALL that the LORD has commanded? How can someone keep a certain law when he only keeps part of it? If the Sabbath day laws were still in effect today, then according to Exodus 31:12-18; 35:1-3; and Numbers 15:32-36, anyone who profaned the Sabbath was put to death and any person who does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from his people. So who is going to enforce that? The Jewish synagogue or perhaps the Seventh day Adventist church? Since we do not live under a theocratic state under the old covenant as ancient Israel did, no Sabbatarian can live consistently under these Mosaic regulations.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

What does sabbath actually mean? Sabbath is a day of rest - one in seven.

"a sabbath" you will find in the Bible reserved for the "feasts" of Israel.

The passover, at first had just one such sabbath, the first day of the First Month as it LATER institutionalised and was called a "sabbath" like every first day of every month which could fall on any day of the week.

As this first day of the month sabbath became institutionalised, so the fifteenth day of the First Month also became institutionalised and was called a "sabbath" and could fall on any day of the week.

This type of sabbath was distinct from "the / My Sabbath(s) OF THE LORD the day The Seventh Day" : OF THE WEEK. Leviticus 23:3 and 38 in clear chiastic (crossed) juxtaposition to sabbaths OF FEASTS in verses 4 and 37.

Both types of 'sabbaths' are clearly and unmistakably DISTINGUISHED and contrasted in the New Testament in, for example, the Last Passover of Jesus in the Gospels, cf. John 19:31 "great-day-of-sabbath" of the passover X Luke 23:56 "Sabbath according to the (Fourth) Commandment".

Therefore 'sabbath' is NOT just <a day of rest> or <- one in seven> of any feast-sabbaths. The ESSENTIAL meaning of "the Sabbath-of-the-week" as in Matthew 28:1 is that it was "the day The Seventh Day Sabbath OF THE LORD GOD" DAY OF HIS OBTAINING LORDSHIP BY RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD AND GRAVE "THAT DAY BONE-ESSENTIAL DAY : OF THE LORD".

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

If I show you would you keep it?

Hebrews 4:9
9 there doth remain, then, a sabbatic rest to the people of God,

If I showed you <<a sabbatic rest>> is false, will you keep it?

 

[Marymog]

Too many to number.

I know, I know....you’re a self taught theologian which means you’re never wrong.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Even when Sabbatarians today set out to keep the Sabbath day, are they truly "keeping the Sabbath?" To "keep the Sabbath" as it was required under the old covenant would involve compliance with specific regulations

When Sabbatarians today set out to keep the Sabbath day, they truly are preposterous and usurp the prerogative of the "Son of Man" "My Righteousness the LORD .. Who "claims the Sabbath is His .. that protects the Sabbath and prevents the hand of the polluter from polluting it or doing it any harm, THE LORD HATH UTTERLY SEPARATED ME FROM his (vagabond) people." "Said Jesus: Therefore the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath".

By the way, which and what <old covenant> are you talking about that involved <compliance with specific regulations>? The only 'old covenant' in the OT was the people's undertaking in wantonness that regarded no regulations-- which or whatever.

 

[mailmandan]

When Sabbatarians today set out to keep the Sabbath day, they truly are preposterous and usurp the prerogative of the "Son of Man" "My Righteousness the LORD .. Who "claims the Sabbath is His .. that protects the Sabbath and prevents the hand of the polluter from polluting it or doing it any harm, THE LORD HATH UTTERLY SEPARATED ME FROM his (vagabond) people." "Said Jesus: Therefore the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath".

By the way, which and what <old covenant> are you talking about that involved <compliance with specific regulations>? The only 'old covenant' in the OT was the people's undertaking in wantonness that regarded no regulations-- which or whatever.

In regards to “the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath,” this statement was in response to the accusation by the Pharisees that Jesus' disciples were breaking the law regarding resting on the Sabbath while going through the fields and plucking heads of grain. (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 6:1-5) Jesus responded to them by giving an example from the Old Testament in which David was once in need of food and was given consecrated bread that was only lawful for the priests to eat (1 Samuel 21:1-6).

The bread served a practical need for David and his men, just as with Jesus and His disciples, the grain served a practical need. David and his men were not acting sinfully in eating the showbread, and neither were Jesus’ disciples by plucking heads of grain on the Sabbath.

Jesus' was rebuking the accusing Pharisees who had turned the Sabbath into a burden by adding restrictions beyond what God’s law said. The disciples had not broken God’s law, but merely violated the Pharisees’ own legalistic, interpretation of the law. Jesus reminded the Pharisees of the original intent of the Sabbath rest.

There is only one old covenant and I already explained compliance with specific regulations in post #149.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

In regards to “the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath,” this statement was in response to the accusation by the Pharisees that Jesus' disciples were breaking the law regarding resting on the Sabbath while going through the fields and plucking heads of grain. (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 6:1-5) Jesus responded to them by giving an example from the Old Testament in which David was once in need of food and was given consecrated bread that was only lawful for the priests to eat (1 Samuel 21:1-6).

Jesus was of the same tribe as David. Jesus is Priest of the Most High after the order of indestructible Life. David was the author of the sanctuary and sacrificial and PRIESTLY laws. God made David high priest after no tribal, but after sovereign Law of the Only Immortal God and LAWGIVER Jesus Christ.

God be merciful to me a sinner

 

[FHII]

What I am pointing out is that there is no scriptural authority for Sunday meetings. Not whether we can meet on Sunday or not. Especially as we read they met daily in their homes which would have included Sunday evenings because they worked during the day on Sunday.

Well I agree with you that there isn't scripture that says we must or even should meet on Sunday. There is scripture that says they met on Sunday and (after checking in to the verse) 1Cor 16:2 DOES say they were to set aside money on Sunday. We may have to revisit that phrase again.

On the other hand, I don't see a verse that say they met "daily" in "homes". No doubt they were apt to meet any day of the week. Yes they were homes but what you fail to realize or acknowledge is that they ceased to be homes when Church was being held. They went back to being homes when the service was over.

You also fail to mention or acknowledge they (Jesus and the Apostles) taught in synagogues and temples (that I DO have a verse for).

Marksman, I don't mind people meeting in homes on whatever day of the week. Even with that, there are prescribed guidelines on how to conduct it. What I do not agree with is a tearing down today's Churches and schedules. I have no problem with bucking tradition, but not if the tradition is in line and/or allowed in the Bible.

 

[mailmandan]

Jesus was of the same tribe as David. Jesus is Priest of the Most High after the order of indestructible Life. David was the author of the sanctuary and sacrificial and PRIESTLY laws. God made David high priest after no tribal, but after sovereign Law of the Only Immortal God and LAWGIVER Jesus Christ.

You choose for Pharisaic law of vipers against God, Christ and David's Law which suits you conspicuously.

Know for absolutely certain, that it is BLASPHEMY to accuse the ONE WHO IS THE LAWGIVER of breaking his own Law.

And who do you think is going to eat up the trash you try sell for the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

When did I accuse the law giver of breaking His own law? That is a straw man argument. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is not trash and I certainly am not buying what you are selling and neither are my brothers and sisters in Christ on the Christianity Board. Your true colors are obvious.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

When did I accuse the law giver of breaking His own law? That is a straw man argument. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is not trash and I certainly am not buying what you are selling and neither are my brothers and sisters in Christ on the Christianity Board. Your true colors are obvious.

I realised myself, full well, that I was wrong with my last post to you. I actually started realising it while writing. I read my post over and over, and yours as well, and it got clearer and clearer every time that I misjudged your post -- and you, your message and your intentions. I had the time to fix or delete my post. I did not. I stand, shown wrong with the spirit that is not the spirit of Christ. I won't go on with my self-justification. May Christ have mercy upon me.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Jesus responded to them by giving an example from the Old Testament in which David was once in need of food and was given consecrated bread that was only lawful for the priests to eat (1 Samuel 21:1-6).

Jesus was of the same tribe as David. Jesus is Priest of the Most High after the order of indestructible Life. David was the author of the sanctuary and sacrificial and PRIESTLY laws. God made David high priest after no tribal, but after sovereign Law of the Only Immortal God and LAWGIVER Jesus Christ.

What Jesus did at that occasion was to draw the parallel between his intermediate and priestly ministry and that of David. David had every right the levitical priests had to the shewbread; he moreover very politely asked to have it, FOR HIS MEN WHO WERE HUNGRY just like Jesus' disciples!
David in fact did not ask for shewbread which was still to be displayed on the altar, but for the loaves the seven days for showing expired -- just like Jesus did not allow his disciples to have one kernel of the corn unlawfully, but only what the Law allowed the passer-through of the cornfields to eat on them but not to take away any.
So even the DAY that Jesus used in this very beautiful paradigm correlated with David the sanctuary law-giver's experience SHOWING Jesus had all AUTHORITY and the priests -- at that time for no lawful reason, Sadducees -- who assumed all power of judgement HAD NONE!

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

There is only one old covenant and I already explained compliance with specific regulations in post #149

No <old covenant> ever has been a covenant of God. The <<only one old covenant>> was man's.

 

[Brakelite]

Even when Sabbatarians today set out to keep the Sabbath day, are they truly "keeping the Sabbath?" To "keep the Sabbath" as it was required under the old covenant would involve compliance with specific regulations (Exodus 16:23; 35:3; Leviticus 23:32; Jeremiah 17:21) that were strictly enforced.

If keeping the Sabbath day was still required today, so would the burnt offerings which went along with them (Leviticus 19:30; 23:2-3; Numbers 28:1-10; 29:39-40; I Chronicles. 23:30-31; II Chronicles 31:2-4; Isaiah 1:13). So no kindling a fire in any of your dwellings on the sabbath (Exodus 35:3). Every man must remain in his place on the sabbath (Exodus 16:29). No trading (Amos 8:5). No marketing (Nehemiah 10:31; 13:15,19).

These were commanded by God to Israel (Exodus 35:1). "The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come as a lasting covenant. It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he abstained from work and rested." (Exodus 31:16-17). Moses gives the reason the Sabbath was given to the nation Israel: “Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (Deuteronomy 5:15).

If keeping the Sabbath day is still in affect, then why don't Sabbatarians seek to obey ALL that the LORD has commanded? How can someone keep a certain law when he only keeps part of it? If the Sabbath day laws were still in effect today, then according to Exodus 31:12-18; 35:1-3; and Numbers 15:32-36, anyone who profaned the Sabbath was put to death and any person who does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from his people. So who is going to enforce that? The Jewish synagogue or perhaps the Seventh day Adventist church? Since we do not live under a theocratic state under the old covenant as ancient Israel did, no Sabbatarian can live consistently under these Mosaic regulations.

Why is it when a Sabbath keeper suggests the day is still relevant and lost none of it's holiness or sanctity as given it at creation, people accuse Sabbath keepers as legalists? Then you post the above demanding Sabbath keepers ought to be even more legalist in order to rightly observe Sabbath!