Sunday--is it the new SABBATH???

[jasd]

>>There's absolutely no evidence of this at all.<<

What other evidence is needed to support a straight read of Writ.

"cause to cease" is cause to cease and means cause to cease. Period.

I'll get to the rest of your post another time - putting my 'puter to bed.

[jasd]

>>He's covering his eyes, not theirs.<<

Yes, yes! a straight read! who said otherwise?

[Richard Holbrook]

Originally Posted By: jasd

>>Isaiah 66:23 And it shall come to pass, [that] from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

Indeed, following the events of verse 22, to wit: “For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, ...”

In the meantime the original OT seventh-day Sabbaths of the Lord Gd are known only to Him.

There's absolutely no evidence of this at all. It is merely your speculation and has no basis in history or in anything else. The weekly cycle has never been lost.

As has been said many times before, the Sabbath was made for mankind's benefit and it therefore makes utterly no sense for God to keep mankind from knowing which day is the Sabbath. Besides, the NT is replete with proof that the Sabbath is well known.

You're completely misunderstanding Hosea 2: 11 in which God says that He will "cause all" of Israel's "mirth to cease... Her Sabbaths-- all her appointed feasts." He is not saying He will make them forget which day of the week it is. He is saying that he will punish them for using the Sabbath and other holy days in false worship.

See Matthew Henry's comments:

1. God will take away the occasions of their sacred mirth— their feast-days, their new moons, their sabbaths, and all their solemn feasts. These God instituted to be observed in a religious manner, and they were to be observed with rejoicing; and, it seems, though they had departed from the pure worship of God, yet they kept up the observance of these, not at God’s temple at Jerusalem, for they had long since forsaken that, but probably at Dan and Bethel, where the calves were, or in some other places of meeting that they had. They observed them, not for the honour of God, nor with any true devotion towards him, but only because they were times of mirth and feasting, music and dancing, and meeting of friends, received by tradition from their fathers. Thus, when they had lost the power of godliness, and denied that, yet, for the pleasing of a vain and carnal mind, they kept up the form of it; and by this means their new-moons and their sabbaths became an iniquity which God could not away with, Isa. 1:13. Now observe, (1.) God calls them their new-moons and their sabbaths, not his (he disowns them), but theirs. (2.) He will cause them to cease. Note, When men by their sins have caused the life and substance of ordinances to cease it is just with God by his judgments to cause the remaining show and shadow of them to cease. 2. He will take away the supports of their carnal mind. They loved the new-moons and the sabbaths only for the sake of the good cheer that was stirring then, not for the sake of any religious exercises then performed; these they had dropped long ago; and now God will take away their provisions for these solemnities (v. 12): I will destroy her vines and her fig-trees. Note, If men destroy God’s words and ordinances, by which he should be honoured on their feast-days, it is just with him to destroy their vines and fig-trees, with which they regale themselves. While they took the pleasure of these, they gave their lovers the praise of them: "These are my rewards which my lovers have given me; I may thank my stars for these, and my worship of them; I may thank my neighbours for these, and my alliance with them.’’ And therefore God will destroy them, will wither them with a blast, or bring in a foreign enemy that shall lay the country waste, so that their vineyards shall become a forest; the enclosures shall be thrown down, as is usual in war; all shall be laid in common, so that the beasts of the field shall eat their grapes and their figs.

Thank you John, but I think you're wasting your time

[Ted Oplinger]

jasd,

Have read through the thread; your take on Hosea and Jeremiah concerning the Sabbath is not the first time I've heard of that treatment of Sabbth and Israel/Judah. Yours is actually quite mild, compared to some I've read/heard.

I remain unconvinced of the arguments you've presented. The Sabbath remains on very firm ground, indeed.

If we are going to question the Sabbath due to the confusion surrounding texts and events, why not question the other institution coming to us from Eden - marriage? There's a lot more confusion on that issue in today's society (for much the same reasons - selfish interest) than on the Sabbath...but no one I know of in the SDA church is advocating the abolition of one man, one wife as the defining of marriage...

Right now, I can say for now I find nothing in the prophets to say God was taking the Sabbath from His people. I find plenty of evidence God was completely disgusted by the attitude with which his Covenant in general was held by Israel - from impatience and contempt for the Sabbath/New Moon, to the presenting of sacrifices outside of faith (aka, in the manner of Cain - as if thousands of slaughtered animals were the only requiement of a Holy God for atonement for sin.

I find plenty of disgust for His Sabbath being drug through the mud, and His declaring Israel and Judah to be unworthy of it. Yet Ezekiel (contemporary of Daniel) explicitly states the Sabbath of God remains as a sign between God and His people. Even as Judah began her languish in exile. The Sabbath wasn't hidden from her, nor taken from her. It would belong to the remnant returning to God from exile.

More later - it's late, and don't have the time to probe your thoughts on the matteras detailed as needed.

[Emma]

God changed the rules from the O.T. to the N.T., from the old covenant to the new covenant, then it is fully appropriate to believe that the Sabbath was changed to Sunday and that the Covenant/Law was done away with in favor of salvation by grace through faith.

[Lutz13]

If God never changes, then why would He change His Sabbath?

[Emma]

God changed the rules from the O.T. to the N.T., from the old covenant to the new covenant, then it is fully appropriate to believe that the Sabbath was changed to Sunday and that the Covenant/Law was done away with in favor of salvation by grace through faith.

Jesus said "Think not that i am come to destroy the law,or the prophets,i am not come to destroy but to fulfil."Matthew 5:17

Christ fulfilled the moral law by obeying,by bringing out its fulness of meaning,by showing its intense spirituality,and he established it on a surer basis than ever as the eternal law of righteousness.Verse 18 also says Till heaven and earth pass one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled

Verse 19 "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments,and shall teach men so ,he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven"

I see and i believe that from these verse it is evident that all the ten commandments are binding in the christian dispensation and that Christ had no though of changing them. One of these commands the observance of the seventh day as the Sabbath.Christ did not came to change the Sabbath because from his own words we see that he came for no such purpose.

[Musicman1228]

Emma,

You left out one very important word when you put up the quote that I made; you left out "IF" at the beginning. I was asking a rhetorical question (asked and answered). My point was that God DID NOT change anything from the O.T. to the N.T., human beings changed lots of things, but not God; the Sabbath as 'day of worship and rest' is only one of many.

[Ted Oplinger]

God changed the rules from the O.T. to the N.T., from the old covenant to the new covenant, then it is fully appropriate to believe that the Sabbath was changed to Sunday and that the Covenant/Law was done away with in favor of salvation by grace through faith.

God changed the rules? Need some good evidence for that...

By the way, welcome to the Theology forum...

A question or two there, sister: If God changes the rules, how can YOU be sure He hasn't changed the rules again since? If He changes anything, our assurance of salvation is immediately in jeopardy.

Second...Christ fulfilling the Law means the Law is of none effect anymore? Fulfillment = abolishing?

If I should obey every traffic law for a day, does that mean for the next day I can drive as recklessly as I can? After all, I fulfilled them...

If I today fulfill the laws that say don't murder, don't steal, don't perjure...that means tomorrow I can do all of the above? After all, I fulfilled them all...

If human justice says such thoughts are ridiculous, why would we treat Divine justice with such frivolity?

"I came not to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to abolish the Law and the Prophets"...Is that what Christ really said?

Food for thought there...

[BobRyan]

The Old Testament is not "the Old Covenant".

The New Testament starts with the Gospels - 30 years before the Cross. It is pre-cross Gospel.

Gal 3:7 points to "pre-cross Gospel" in the days of Abraham.

Heb 4:2 points to "pre-cross Gospel" preached to Israel in the Wilderness for 40 years "just as it was preached to us also".

One gospel -- not two. that is the big surprise for many Christians.

in Christ,

Bob

[Richard Holbrook]

The only difference is that the law is written on our hearts, which in no way means we disregard it. Right?

[Stewart (SDA)]

I hope this is not too much of a tangent.

But I find it interesting that the first mention of Sunday being the new "Christian Sabbath", was not until the 12th century.

(A comment from J.N. Andrews book, The History of the Sabbath p. 371)

"It should be observed... that the earliest mention of Sunday as the Lord's day, is in the writings of Tertullian (AD 160-220); Justin Martyr, some sixty years before, styling it [only] "the day called Sunday;" while the authoritative application of that term [i.e. the Lord's day] to Sunday was by Sylvester, bishop of Rome, more than one hundred years after the time of Tertullian.

The earliest mention of Sunday as CHRISTIAN SABBATH is thus noted by [the church historian] Heylyn:--

"The first who ever used it to denote the Lord's day... is one Petrus Alfonsus -- he lived about the time that Rupertus did -- [which was the beginning of the twelfth century] who calls the Lord's day by the name of Christian Sabbath."

________

Stewart.

[Emma]

God changed the rules? Need some good evidence for that...

[Richard Holbrook]

He read the quote you posted and misunderstood.

[BobRyan]

The only difference is that the law is written on our hearts, which in no way means we disregard it. Right?

The only difference between the saved OT saints of Heb 11 and those around them in the OT that were lost - is that for the saved OT saints of Heb 11 - the Law was written on the heart.

There is onlye ONE Gospel as Paul points out in Gal 1:6-11. That Gospel was "preached to US just as it was to THEM ALSO" Heb 4:2.

Salvation only works one way.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

I hope this is not too much of a tangent.

But I find it interesting that the first mention of Sunday being the new "Christian Sabbath", was not until the 12th century.

Good point. The idea that God needed to change the moral law or something about the moral law after the resurrection of Christ is at the center of why people think that the Ten Commandments were abolished at the cross or at the very least - the 4th commandment was either deleted or edited then.

in Christ,

Bob

[Richard Holbrook]

Originally Posted By: Rich4truth

The only difference is that the law is written on our hearts, which in no way means we disregard it. Right?

The only difference between the saved OT saints of Heb 11 and those around them in the OT that were lost - is that for the saved OT saints of Heb 11 - the Law was written on the heart.

There is onlye ONE Gospel as Paul points out in Gal 1:6-11. That Gospel was "preached to US just as it was to THEM ALSO" Heb 4:2.

Salvation only works one way.

in Christ,

Bob

But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Jer 31:33

This is future tense. So are you saying the only difference in the old and the new covenant is that we no longer have to observe the ordinances? (the killing of goats and such?) What are you saying the difference is? ....Please explain.

[Dr. Rich]

Bob wrote: "There is only ONE Gospel as Paul points out in Gal 1:6-11. That Gospel was "preached to US just as it was to THEM ALSO" Heb 4:2."

Well then, isn't Paul's whole gospel built around one verse found in Gen. 15:6? Isn't this where Paul got the theology of 'righteousness by faith' from? It sure looks like this in Gal. chapter 3 anyway.

[BobRyan]

Jesus said "Abraham saw my day and was glad" in John 8.

Paul says Abraham was given the Gospel in Gal 3:7.

The word of God is pretty clear on this point.

in Christ,

Bob

[Richard Holbrook]

Then verily the first [covenant] had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary. Heb 9:1

But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. Heb 8:6

For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Heb 8:7,8

You didn't answer my question Bob, Are you saying there is no difference?

[jasd]

>>Jesus clearly taught that the Sabbath would be in existence long after His ascension. Matt. 24:20.<< [ed.jasd]

Not to lend to text what isn’t there nor to nit-pick, however...

Matt 24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

Per the Sabbath day and the Jew: allow me to come back via the much-bruited route of ‘context’. Jews of Jesus Christ’s time were constrained by such laws as determined the distance one might journey upon the Sabbath day – it being approximately 2,000 yards – slightly more than a mile. Should a Jew have wished to journey more than that 1 mile – he or she must needs have, priorily the Sabbath, placed an article of food (or, some say, any personal item) at that 1 mile distance – and establish another perimeter of his domicile from which he or she may journey another mile.

One couldn’t go a far or safe distance upon the Sabbath day – bummer, but one admires the wit that cautioned, “Pray ye that your flight be not [...] on the Sabbath day.”

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:John317

Isaiah 66:23 And it shall come to pass, [that] from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

Quote:jasd

Indeed, following the events of verse 22, to wit: “For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, ...”

In the meantime the original OT seventh-day Sabbaths of the Lord Gd are known only to Him.

>>There's absolutely no evidence of this at all. It is merely your speculation and has no basis in history or in anything else.<<

What part of the above do you take issue with – and please substantiate your position.

>>The weekly cycle has never been lost.<<

I did not suggest otherwise. How did you read that into my posts? What I do purport is that –

The weekly Sabbaths vis-à-vis the Feasts and other set indicators cannot be restructured per the original OT calendar. Sure, one may exegete and assert that – a repeated common cycle of seven represents the formulae of the OT calendar, but – he or she would be wrong. As I’ve already stated,

the best minds of the Jewish economy failed and invented instead such as the ‘postponements’. Etc.

>>As has been said many times before, the Sabbath was made for mankind's benefit and it therefore makes utterly no sense for God to keep mankind from knowing which day is the Sabbath.<<

You have the direct words of Gd and yet you attempt to circumvent and presume upon those very words. How could Gd have made His intentions more clear? And, have I not seen posted upon these boards over and over again that – Gd does nothing without first advising His people via His prophets!?

>>Besides, the NT is replete with proof that the Sabbath is well known.<<

No, what you have is evidence that the Jews kept a seven-day cycle without regard to how that cycle might relate to the Feasts, or other – no mas.

>>You're completely misunderstanding Hosea 2: 11 in which God says that He will "cause all" of Israel's "mirth to cease... Her Sabbaths-- all her appointed feasts."<<

“cause to cease” is “cause to cease” and means “cause to cease”.

>>He is not saying He will make them forget which day of the week it is. He is saying that he will punish them for using the Sabbath and other holy days in false worship.<<

That is tangential and wresting...

>>See Matthew Henry's comments:

1. God will take away the occasions of their sacred mirth— their feast-days, their new moons, their sabbaths, and all their solemn feasts.<<

And how might Gd have accomplished this?

>>These God instituted to be observed in a religious manner, and they were to be observed with rejoicing;<<

Umm, Day of Atonement? “rejoicing”? already with the errors?

>>... (1.) God calls them their new-moons and their sabbaths, not his(he disowns them), but theirs. (2.) He will cause them to cease. Note, When men by their sins have caused the life and substance of ordinances to cease it is just with God by his judgments to cause the remaining show and shadow of them to cease. 2. He will take away the supports of their carnal mind. [...] and now God will take away their provisions for these solemnities (v. 12):<<

Though Matthew Henry tends to floridity, he does note here that Gd can and does “cause to cease” and “takes away”...

[jasd]

>>Yours is actually quite mild, compared to some I've read/heard.<<

I’d be interested to see what form the less mild expositions proffer.

>>I remain unconvinced of the arguments you've presented. The Sabbath remains on very firm ground, indeed.<<

Indeed, and known only to Gd.

>>If we are going to question the Sabbath due to the confusion surrounding texts and events, why not question the other institution coming to us from Eden - marriage?<<

Other than the legal claim the State has upon the children issuing from a State-licensed marriage – I haven’t a brief with marriage per se.

>>There's a lot more confusion on that issue in today's society (for much the same reasons - selfish interest) than on the Sabbath...but no one I know of in the SDA church is advocating the abolition of one man, one wife as the defining of marriage...<<

I believe in the Biblical definition of marriage; that said, we live in more complex times and we now have to differentiate between the exactitudes of marriage and such as civil unions.

>>Right now, I can say for now I find nothing in the prophets to say God was taking the Sabbath from His people.<<

I repeat what I told John317, “cause to cease” is “cause to cease” and means “cause to cease”.

>>...to the presenting of sacrifices outside of faith (aka, in the manner of Cain<<

Actually, I don’t think Writ provides the details re the sacrifice Gd asked the brothers to perform.

>>...as if thousands of slaughtered animals were the only requiement of a Holy God for atonement for sin.<<

Indeed, especially contrasted with the following – “For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:” (Jer 7:22)

>>Yet Ezekiel (contemporary of Daniel) explicitly states the Sabbath of God remains as a sign between God and His people.<<

I found two verses in Ezekiel where sign and Sabbath are mentioned together.

Eze 20:12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I [am] the LORD that sanctify them.

(Eze 20:13) But the house of Israel rebelled against me...

Eze 20:20 And hallow my sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I [am] the LORD your God.

(Eze 20:21) Notwithstanding the children rebelled against me:

I probably missed the text “Sabbath of God remains as a sign between God and His people”. You might post it for me.

>>Even as Judah began her languish in exile. The Sabbath wasn't hidden from her, nor taken from her. It would belong to the remnant returning to God from exile.<<

One would think so, wouldn’t one? However, there yet remains the preCaptivity prophecy of Jeremiah...

Lam 2:6 ...the LORD hath caused the solemn feasts and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion,

One, forgetting the solemn feasts and sabbaths, is obliged to then rely upon a calendar that was Babylonish in origin, in terminology, calculation, and function.

[jasd]

>>...the Ten Commandments were abolished at the cross or at the very least - the 4th commandment was either deleted or edited then.<<

All of the Ten Commandments with the exception of the 4th are reiterated in the NT.

[John317]

>>...the Ten Commandments were abolished at the cross or at the very least - the 4th commandment was either deleted or edited then.<<

All of the Ten Commandments with the exception of the 4th are reiterated in the NT.

Are you positive of that? Show exact quotes in the NT of the first three commandments of the moral law.

Why would God need to repeat them in order for you or anyone else to obey them? To require this of God would be to show Him disrespect and to be disobedient to Him.

The Sabbath commandment is shown to be valid after the death of Christ . About 30 years after Christ's ascension to heaven, Luke was inspired by the Holy Spirit to point out that the women who followed Jesus "rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment." In Matt. 24: 20, Jesus also spoke of the Sabbath being kept in the distant future, giving no indication that it was to be abolished.

If the Sabbath was going to be abolished, it would have needed to be abolished BEFORE the death of Christ, not afterwards. There is no changing or adding to a covenant after it has been ratified, and the New Covenant was ratified by the shedding of Christ's blood.