Twisted Logic on the Sabbath

[D. Allan]

Quote:

Paul is here speaking of "disputable things."

Yes, I think so too. But it appears to me that after mentioning 'disputable things' he then gives those two examples of disputable things: one mans' faith allows him to eat anything, the the one of weak faith eats only vegatables. And the paralelism of the next passage with the first: one mans considers one day sacred, one considers them all alike. Then is verse six Paul again mentions the two examples.

RO 14:1 Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2 One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4 Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

RO 14:5 One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7

~dallan

[David Koot]

Quote:

Paul is here speaking of "disputable things."

And the paralelism of the next passage with the first: one mans considers one day sacred, one considers them all alike.

First of all, there is nothing in the text about anyone considering a day to be 'sacred.' It is not in the Greek, either, which reads, 'krinei hemera par' hemera'. Secondly, there is no reference to the Sabbath. This verse does not deal with the weekly Sabbath, but with days which some consider special, and others do not.

[D. Allan]

Quote:

The specific issue is foods offered to idols.

Sorry, David. I can't see it. Paul says the 'dispute' to be avoided is one about eating Vegetables Only or eating Meat also.

Personally, I don't like to eat a corpse of any animal. But if you do so, then Paul tells you to accept me, to not judge me. Because God has accepted me.

~dallan

[D. Allan]

Quote:

there is nothing in the text about anyone considering a day to be 'sacred.'

The word 'sacred' is use in the NIV translation. My interlinear Greek transliteration is: "v.5One judges a day above a day; another judges every day."

The King James Version: "One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day..."

I'm not going to have a dispute with you about it, David. I accept you no matter what day you esteem for you esteem it as unto the Lord; and you belong to the LORD, and HE will make you stand. Amen.

~dallan

[olger]

Evidently.

So the Sabbath does not matter anymore? Might as well become a Sundaykeeper? After all, it doesn't matter to God...

olger

[David Koot]

Paul says the 'dispute' to be avoided is one about eating Vegetables Only or eating Meat also.

But the reason for that was the pagan custom of offering the meat to an idol before it was put up for sale. The issue was not dietary choices, but foods which had been offered to idols.

[David Koot]

The word 'sacred' is use in the NIV translation. My interlinear Greek transliteration is: "v.5One judges a day above a day; another judges every day."

The King James Version: "One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day..."

The NIV does editorialize, to an extent. It is a bit free with some of the translation. The issue right now is not judging someone else, but determnining what the Bible really says. Some of the modern versions, particularly, have made changes which are not really supported in the original, due to the beliefs of the translators. One might consider them 'judgment calls,' but in making those calls, sometimes translators rely on their own doctrinal understanding.

As for having a dispute, the issue is one of determining the meaning of the word. That is not a personal dispute. Nor would it seem okay to simply leave it at, 'whatever you want to believe.' God promised to send the Spirit of truth to guide His people into all truth.

So, as far as determining the correct meaning of the Greek words, first of all we note that the word 'sacred' or 'holy' is not in the original. that was added by the translators of the NIV. The ONLY words in the original were 'judges day for day.' Thus, the application clearly is quite broad.

Secondly, there is no reference to the Bible Sabbath, or to the weekly day of worship. There is no support for using this verse in reference to the Sabbath.

Dave

[Beryl]

Very true, Bravus!

[Daryl]

Did you know Dwight Moody was a Sabbath keeper?

How do you know Dwight Moody was a Sabbath Keeper?

[D. Allan]

David, you may be right that the Apostle Paul was thinking of ceremonial days in Romans 14:5. Although, to me he is very general and all-inclusive about it. He's not very specific.

btw - Paul probably doesn't forbid us to have a disscussion about it. A discussion results when the parties are willing to learn. A dispute results when the parties are only willing to teach! It is the disputes Paul dislikes, esp. when some condemn those holding different beliefs. For he states that every man must do what he believes in. If its not from faith it is sin, he says.

Evidently some were 'condemning' those who held different opinions. Paul's main emphasis or purpose, as i see it, is to keep the brethern together, and not to teach doctrine. He says, "let us stop passing judgement on one another"; and "let us make every effort to do what leads to peace and mutual edificatiion;" and "accept one another than, just as Christ accepted you;" And"may God give you a spirit of unity."

Then he closes the topic by saying the Christ became a servant of the Jews so that the Gentiles may glorify God. And then he quotes scriptures that say the Gentiles will sing praises and put their hope in Him, God. Could this passage (ch.14:1 - 15:11) have been written to persuade Jews to be more accepting of Gentiles in their congregations? I think it is something we need to take to heart today, almost 2000 yrs. from the time Paul wrote.

~d.allan

[D. Allan]

Quote:

So the Sabbath does not matter anymore? Might as well become a Sundaykeeper? After all, it doesn't matter to God...

I can't speak for God, Olger. But for the Apostle Paul, it seems that at least one thing is more important than some others, and that is how you treat or think of your brothers and sisters-in-Christ. STOP JUDGING AND CONDEMNING one another Paul says. Don't look down on your brothers and sisters who hold different opinions or beliefs than you hold, he advises. Rather try to please them and build them up, for Christ did not even please Himself. Do you think we should give Paul's counsel more weight than we do today?

~d.allan

[David Koot]

David, you may be right that the Apostle Paul was thinking of ceremonial days in Romans 14:5. Although, to me he is very general and all-inclusive about it. He's not very specific.

btw - Paul probably doesn't forbid us to have a disscussion about it. A discussion results when the parties are willing to learn. A dispute results when the parties are only willing to teach!

[olger]

Hi Allen. Thanks for your thoughts. Do you keep the seventh-day Sabbath?

Incidentally, I don't see the seventh day Sabbath mentioned in Romans 14, but rather a principle that relates to personal preference items outside of divine command.

regards,

olger

[LifeHiscost]

(See Neh. 13:15-22; Matt. 12:1-21; Ez. 22:7-8, 25-26; Luke 6:6-11; Mark 3:4; John 5:1-22; John 7:23; Mark 2:27; Luke 13:10-17, 14:1-6; Isaiah 58:1-14; Matt. 11:16-30; 1 Kings 12:1-19; Isaiah 9:4, 10:27; Gal. 4:21-5:5; Acts 15:10,11.)

Originally Posted By: LifeHiscost

...A very valid point. One to keep in mind when tempted to believe the conduct of men is that which should be followed as opposed to accepting the sure Word of God.

"And you shall be witnesses... unto the uttermost parts of the earth" "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works..."

I read each verse as I had time, and wish to indicate the wisdom of each. To expect each Christian to fulfill the conduct registered by each verse, to our satisfaction, would be to place another's salvation or possibly even our own, subject to man's frail ability of fulfilling all righteousness in the limited power of man's faulty understanding.

"For not knowing about God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God." Romans 10:3 NASB

"That no flesh should glory in his presence.

But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." 1 Cor 1:29-31 KJV

Regards!

[D. Allan]

Quote:

You presented that idea, didn't bring it up as a question or possibility. Were you discussing, or teaching? What expertise did you bring to the table? I, among others, responded to your presentation. The expertise I bring to the table is in the are of Biblical Greek and theology. Now, you said that "a discussion results where the parties are willing to learn." Speaking for yourself, do you see yourself as willing to learn?

Yes, i feel i have learned. I did originally see Paul as speaking of the weekly Sabbath, but upon consideration i thought he could have been speaking not of weekly sabbaths. He isn't specific. And as i read more of the context it became apparant to me that sabbath-keeping and meat-eating were not his main subjects. He seems to be mainly concerned with not being judgemental with fellow christians who believe differently. So I feel I have learned since I first spoke up in this 'discussion.'

It's been a long time since i studied Greek under Ivan Blazen. I still have my grammar book. I got A's in that class - but it has been ages. Kairete, adelphon. Is my verb tense right? Is it correct to put 'brother' in the objective case?

~d.allan

[D. Allan]

Olger, I was there in church last Saturday, and the one before and the one before.......

~d.allan

[David Koot]

Kairete, adelphon. Is my verb tense right? Is it correct to put 'brother' in the objective case?

Indeed. Chairete, adelphon. Good street Greek.

Regards, Dave

[D. Allan]

I goofed. not a 'k' but 'ch' is correct. 'xaipete' almost looks like the greek letters.

[D. Allan]

Quote:

Incidentally, I don't see the seventh day Sabbath mentioned in Romans 14, but rather a principle that relates to personal preference items outside of divine command.

Everyone has their own personal preferences. Paul is saying, 'Don't have disputes about them, don't argue about them. Don't condemn your fellow Christians for believing differently. Allow them the same freedom of conscience that God allows you.' Humans are capable of disputing just about anything.

I wonder how the 'cermonial laws' are different. Didn't Moses claim to recieve them from God Himself on the mountain?

~d.allan

[David Koot]

Since you have studied NT Greek (Blazen, no less!) I thought maybe you might find a couple of tidbits interesting. Have mentioned these earlier, but would be interested in your comments. The fact that 'sabbatwn' occurs without the article, I find most interesting. Did a word study using the Greek concordance some years ago, and found that sabbatwn without the article does not refer to the weekly Sabbath (whereas with the article it does). The second item of interest is the use of the singular in the verb, 'estin.' I find this intriguing in view of the fact that the precding nouns are all plural. I conclude from this, that Paul is referring to the entire typical/ceremonial system as a shadow of Christ's sacrifice.

Any thoughts?

Dave

[D. Allan]

Thanks, Dave, for sharing your 'tidbits.' I'll take your word on study you did for 'sabbatwv.' It sounds reasonable to me. I notice, however, that Paul doesn't use the word for a sabbath here in Romans 14. He just says 'day.' I might translate it like this: 'One man thinks one day is more important than a different day. Another man thinks every day is important.' It could be that one man prefers the 'Passover' to the feast of tabernacles or whatever.

What is the chapter and verse for the verb 'estiv'? I can't find it.

Don't get excited about my 'greek,' Dave. It has been many, many years. Professor Blazen was a wonderful teacher. We had a lot of laughs in that class. :E Could it be 45 years already! Yes.

Xaipete! ev ton Theov

~d.allan

[olger]

The Ceremonial Law was given because men transgressed the Moral Law. That may help draw a distinction.

[David Koot]

.I'll take your word on study you did for 'sabbatwv.' It sounds reasonable to me. I notice, however, that Paul doesn't use the word for a sabbath here in Romans 14. He just says 'day.'

Did I EVER have a senior moment!!!! How embarrassing!!! I somehow switched gears to Col. 2. Dunno how that happened! That is what I was referring to. v. 16, I believe. That is where Paul speaks of 'sabbatwn'. It is especially of interest because the other issues mentioned, food, drink, festival, new moon, ARE ALL SINGULAR!!!!!!!!! That, to me,is truly exciting!!! Thus, if Paul meant to refer to the weekly Sabbath, which is consistently 'sabbaton' we would expect him to be consistent and use the singular. Instead, he used 'sabbatwn' which, without the article, consistently is NOT the weekly Sabbath!!

'estiv' appears in v. 17 of Col. 2. Again, the singular is used, which I find very interesting and which, I might add, some translations have BUTCHERED!!! I mean, the whole passage! They have twisted it so as to give the appearance of making the seventh-day Sabbath optional, a matter of personal choice, rather than God's direction.

Xairete en to onoma tou Kuriou, adelphon.

Dave

[aka]

Thanks so much for going through the steps of clarification on the verses of Colossians 2:16-17

DaveK said :

The word for 'sabbaths' there is sabbatwn, WITHOUT the article! Plural sabbaths. The weekly sabbath is typically 'ta sabbata.' When the plural sabbatwn is used WITH the article (twn sabbatwn) the reference is to the seventh-day sabbaths. WITHOUT the article, it does not, but refers to holy days in a broad sense.

........the seventh-day Sabbath points BACK to Creation.

D.Allen said :

.....to show how we are to treat those who have different ideas about religion than we do..... evidently.

Then was thrown into the arena this :

" RO 14:5 'One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind'.This very passage is very often used by those who worship on Sunday, as proof that the NT, and Paul the apostle do not support any requirement of keeping the Bible Sabbath."

I ponder :

So twisted logic appeared on the scene with these passages of scripture getting followers of Christ to believe they have the freedom to declare any-ole-day for a fulfilling of the Decalogue's 4th commandment.

I was a Sunday keeper the first 25 yrs of my life. It was in my 25th year as the Sabbath honoring truth was told me during my bible study with sda minister. All my life was never a moment when I rejected the fact that The Sabbath was saturday the seventh day of the week. I accepted the fact and believe what was...was...and is no more important for NT believers to be bound to a day like as written in Rom 14:5. It was this verse justifying my going along with the majority of sunday honoring folk.

I just mentioned in argument to the sda minister that we are living in a new dispensation which allows the authority of the Ur-Church to celebrate the Resurrection day as the worship day of rest from secular activities.

However in the course of bible study,the influence of the Holy Spirit caused me to renounce Sunday worship and honor God's day that He chose.

Over the years I have made statements to others of the body of Christ, who are not SDA members, that they are to please God by honoring the Saturday as a rest day. The purpose was designed by God for us to stop secular emphasis and rest bodily so to turn with full attention in worshipping Him more intently.

I know four persons who have changed their 'horses' because of my witness.

[aka]

Questions :

1.) "One judges a day above a day; another judges every day."

Is this statement encrouched in the thought context of weekday sabbaths of certain holidays being honored?

Or is it in argument of keeping the weekly seventh day for honoring the Decalogue commandment day?

This verse is the pivot of all arguments for Sunday worship I get from the 'other' sheep.

Having been in the mind-set earlier in life of believing there is for the NT believers a new dispensation of living out one's faith in God and handling the tiny jot and titles of the 600+ OT laws differently then kosher orthodox Jews of Pre-Babylon days, I can understand how denominational believers uses 'judging a day' verse to justify their God's Law laxness in working on Saturday.

2.) Have any of you testimony of words from converted-to-Sabbath honoring (away from Sunday honoring believers) by already born-again Christians 'why' they are now honoring the Sabbath?

I would like to see in print such testimonies for the sake of becoming aware of what their crucial point for their change of attitude was.

The minister pointing out to me my need to obey God in the matter helped vitally I admit. But mainly with me it was a revelation by Holy Spirit using what I had in my heart aready.

1. God does not change.

2. Shadows of truths pointing to Christ have been fulfilled.

3. Sabbath weekly has to do with Creation and is not some shadow truth. Doesn't hang (directly) with Christ's atonement or resurrection.

4. Not one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. If nine of the big ten commandments should not be passed away then surely the one on the Sabbath honoring should stay equally active for a believer. Just as God laid it out and on the Day he chose.