sabbath keeping

[BavarianWheels]

Bavarian Wheels, you make some good points. Do you 'keep' the high Sabbaths as well and all the 'finer details' regarding the Sabbath e.g not lighting fires? Apologies if you answered this earlier. I've only read so far back.

No. These are the shadow of things. Hebrews 10:1 Col 2:17 Hebrews 8:5 These are the regulations...nailed.

Notice all of these texts refer to temple practices, food, etc. Nothing that makes God's Law (the 10) a shadow of things to come. The Sabbath of creation is not a shadow, but a memorial of. Re-read the 4th commandment.

I think I mention this in recent posts on this or the last page.
.
.

[catherine]

See if I have this right: The ten commandments or laws were in existence prior to being written on stone by God's finger. God was re-iterating what were already known laws and the most important everlasting laws. I can't imagine folks prior to Moses didn't know about these moral laws. Now the fact the fourth is the Sabbath (which is mentioned right at the beginning in Genesis) seems to lend weight to it's perpetual relevance. The stuff like circumcision, kosher, etc were not written on the stones, so these don't have the same significance.

I read an article about the 'days' that Paul was referring to in Romans and the Sabbath is never referred to as just 'day', so he was referring to the holy days or high days which as you point out were shadows of the things fufilled by Jesus:

http://www.colossians-2-16.com/romans-14-5.html

Paul says Heb 4:9: 'there remains then a Sabbath rest for the people of God'. An interesting article on this verse is here:

http://www.ucg.ca/booklets/ss/sabbath-rest.asp

[BavarianWheels]

See if I have this right: The ten commandments or laws were in existence prior to being written on stone by God's finger. God was re-iterating what were already known laws and the most important everlasting laws. I can't imagine folks prior to Moses didn't know about these moral laws. Now the fact the fourth is the Sabbath (which is mentioned right at the beginning in Genesis) seems to lend weight to it's perpetual relevance. The stuff like circumcision, kosher, etc were not written on the stones, so these don't have the same significance.

I read an article about the 'days' that Paul was referring to in Romans and the Sabbath is never referred to as just 'day', so he was referring to the holy days or high days which as you point out were shadows of the things fufilled by Jesus:

http://www.colossians-2-16.com/romans-14-5.html

Paul says Heb 4:9: 'there remains then a Sabbath rest for the people of God'. An interesting article on this verse is here:

http://www.ucg.ca/booklets/ss/sabbath-rest.asp

I read the second link and am now reading the first.
They do a much better job of answering this in a scholarly manner, which a few here would more appreciate rather than my elementary explanation. However the point(s) and conclusion is the same.

Let me remind Kurieuo: I have answered your questions and I posed a question which as of yet you have not answered...in fact to anyone that removes the Sabbath Command and follows Man's institution...

If (and I believe when) the government, through the guise of "family values" or similar, draws a line in the sand making the official worship day Sunday and in doing so removing freedom to worship, what will your thoughts be on this and ultimately, whom will you follow?
When the day comes and you need to make a choice, will you still be fully convinced of the unimportance of God's Law?
Which will you choose?

.
.

[Kurieuo]

If you have a conscience to keep the Sabbath which you believe is attending a church on a Saturday (?), then you are doing so because you believe it is what God wants. I have no issue there.

However, I am fully convinced while resting one day a week is a good pattern to follow, it is not obligatory since I am under a new covenant with Christ and the old no longer has any obligatory power over me. Unlike stealing, sexual immorality, murder, etc there seems to be no moral obligation to keep the Sabbath, other than God commanded Israel to keep it.

So although I feel you ignore a great deal of Scripture regarding the old and new covenants (including some I recently posted), I am hoping we could at least agree with Paul who writes: "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. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord." (Romans 14:5)

I answered your questions and I posed a question to you which you ignored. I'll pose it again in different words;

If (and I believe when) the government, through the guise of "family values" or similar, draws a line in the sand making the official worship day Sunday and in doing so removing freedom to worship, what will your thoughts be on this and ultimately, whom will you follow?

While I can see that this might pose a big issue for an SDA like yourself, I see no issue with whatever day one chooses to worship on. I think it would be great to for a person to freely worship God, on any day or every single day, as a person is able to in a free response out of a love for God.

When the day comes and you need to make a choice, will you still be fully convinced of the unimportance of God's Law?
Which will you choose?

As for the unimportance of God's Law, I believe it is important as it reveals our weakness and need for God's grace. It helps to show us for who we really are and points to Christ, and our need for Him in whom the Law was fulfilled.

It also continues to be important to those who remain under it, and who will therefore be judged by it. There are two ways to God: Keeping to the old convenant which was based on observing God's law 100%, or by accepting our failure to live up to God's law and placing our faith in Christ and hope in His promise.

Now, you might claim to take God's law more seriously than those who depend entirely upon God's grace offered through Christ, but in reality I don't think you really do at all. For example, Exodus 31:14 has 'Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death; whoever does any work on that day must be cut off from his people.' Do you believe this should be followed? If not, then when was this jot removed? On the otherhand, I think the following passage explains perfectly why we are no longer bound to Exodus 31:14 and the rest of God's Law:

• 13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross. 16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. (Colossians 2:13-17)

For anyone further interested in a discussion on keeping the Sabbath, it was discussed quite thoroughly 5 years ago in the thread On keeping the Sabbath (and I'm sure several times since between Bavarian and other posters). This topics seems to be a favourite of yours Bavarian, and I hope you are not offended in my saying I'm really not interested to discuss this topic further with you as I feel I have really said all I've wanted to say in our previous discussions.

[Canuckster1127]

It's sad I think when people confuse God's approval with His affection. God's approval is met in Christ. God's affection is not conditioned upon our performance.

[Byblos]

I think many are confusing what Bav is saying with what they think he's saying. To clarify to the best of my ability, he never once mentioned adherence to the law, he only referred to God's Commandments. Moreover, he never once related adherence to the commandments with salvation. In fact, he repeatedly stated our inability to keep the commandments 100% but his central point is that it does not negate our obligation to keep them, including the Sabbath. My only contention, therefore, with what he is saying is the Saturday vs. any other day issue. Otherwise, I am in full agreement with him.

[DannyM]

I think many are confusing what Bav is saying with what they think he's saying. To clarify to the best of my ability, he never once mentioned adherence to the law, he only referred to God's Commandments. Moreover, he never once related adherence to the commandments with salvation. In fact, he repeatedly stated our inability to keep the commandments 100% but his central point is that it does not negate our obligation to keep them, including the Sabbath. My only contention, therefore, with what he is saying is the Saturday vs. any other day issue. Otherwise, I am in full agreement with him.

Byblos, you must be tele-whatdoyercallit... I was thinking virtually the same thing! I don't think there should be too much disagreement for both 'sides.'

[BavarianWheels]

I think many are confusing what Bav is saying with what they think he's saying. To clarify to the best of my ability, he never once mentioned adherence to the law, he only referred to God's Commandments. Moreover, he never once related adherence to the commandments with salvation. In fact, he repeatedly stated our inability to keep the commandments 100% but his central point is that it does not negate our obligation to keep them, including the Sabbath. My only contention, therefore, with what he is saying is the Saturday vs. any other day issue. Otherwise, I am in full agreement with him.

You are correct, Byblos. The issue is Sabbath vs. any other day. Thank you for noticing. Maybe you understand my frustration in relaying this point when all I keep getting in return is that I'm promoting legalism. I'll now reply to Kurieuo.
.
.

[BavarianWheels]

As for the unimportance of God's Law, I believe it is important as it reveals our weakness and need for God's grace. It helps to show us for who we really are and points to Christ, and our need for Him in whom the Law was fulfilled.

That's where you're wrong. The LAW is not to reveal our weakness, it reveals SIN. If, then, the LAW reveals sin, to do otherwise IS TO SIN.
(pardon the caps, but you're really confused on what the law is)

It also continues to be important to those who remain under it, and who will therefore be judged by it. There are two ways to God: Keeping to the old convenant which was based on observing God's law 100%, or by accepting our failure to live up to God's law and placing our faith in Christ and hope in His promise.

Once again you are fully wrong. Please give scripture for anyone EVER keeping the old covenant and thus being saved by it. NEVER. What does Paul say of Abraham?? I think you know. They were required to keep the "code" of circumcision and all that went with the law of Moses...never was God's law done away with. Paul even plainly states this in Romans. You're a much more intelligent person than I am, but it baffles me that something so simple is twisted so much.

Now, you might claim to take God's law more seriously than those who depend entirely upon God's grace offered through Christ, but in reality I don't think you really do at all. For example, Exodus 31:14 has 'Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death; whoever does any work on that day must be cut off from his people.' Do you believe this should be followed? If not, then when was this jot removed? On the otherhand, I think the following passage explains perfectly why we are no longer bound to Exodus 31:14 and the rest of God's Law:

If you wish to cast the first stone, then so be it. It's much like how God told Adam and Eve about the Tree, "for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die."
The pronouncement of death, while it may've been carried out in the OT word for word, is a pronouncement of ultimate Judgement. God will judge those that desecrate HIS DAY.

• 13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross. 16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. (Colossians 2:13-17)

I love this. First of all the context is CIRCUMCISION. Where in God's 10 is circumcision? Second...if you're going to do away with the Sabbath, then ALL of the "code" is gone (since you equate "code" with God's 10) Thirdly, and quite telling too, WHICH one of the 10 "regulations" stood against us and why? The Cross triumphed over God's HOLY, RIGHTEOUS, and TRUE Law as to do away with it? I think Paul disagrees with your interpretation of "doing away". If so, then it's not so holy, righteous and true is it.

Lastly the most telling point is the first word of verse 16; THEREFORE. This is then making a statement on the previous points the writer has made. If there was any doubt what the writer was referring to just previous to the THEREFORE, he makes it plain here.

Eat or Drink - where in the 10 is anything about eating or drinking?
Religious festivals - Where in the 10 is anything about religious festivals (notice the plural)?
New Moon - Where in the 10 is there anything about new moons celebrations?
a Sabbath day - There were many 'sabbaths' celebrated, yet only ONE Sabbath. The translators simply put a capital where it did not belong. Look up the original text.

For anyone further interested in a discussion on keeping the Sabbath, it was discussed quite thoroughly 5 years ago in the thread On keeping the Sabbath (and I'm sure several times since between Bavarian and other posters). This topics seems to be a favourite of yours Bavarian, and I hope you are not offended in my saying I'm really not interested to discuss this topic further with you as I feel I have really said all I've wanted to say in our previous discussions.

I know you're not interested in discussing. The tell-tale sign is you wont answer my question of whom you'll follow given an ultimatum...one that has been given already to many people in the past, even today (in some remote places) and will be in the future.

So again I'll ask a plain question; Whom will you follow in the end when given two to choose from?

You're the moderator and so you have the power to make it all go away, but the fact is, I've shown how you're mistakingly interpreting the plain words of scripture. Byblos, while disagreeing with me on the DAY, at least sees what you have accused me of saying as not what I've said at all.
.
.

[Canuckster1127]

You seriously don't see a connection between circumcision and the 10 commandments?

Look at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15. Clearly the church met at that time to decide whether Gentiles should keep the "Law of Moses". What prompted this we're told were certain teachers who equated circumcision as necessary for gentiles. It says right in the passage in that the issue was "Acts 15:1 Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." Why didn't they say according to the custom taught by Abraham?

In the end the solution proposed was to "20Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."

And yet it's evident that despite this consensus at that time in the early church (much like an earlier consensus to pick Mattathias as Judas' replacement) that these didn't all stand. I Cor 8 puts it then in the context that it is not forbidden but rather out of respect for those of weaker conscience, (apparently Jewish believers who have been culturally conditioned in this direction) the guideline is given. The reference again here to the Sabbath simply ties back in Jewish History and the synagogue. Apparently Sabbath keeping didn't rise even to the level of these dietary elements of the Mosaic law in terms of a priority to communicate to these Gentiles.

Lately I've been reading and studying more of the teaching and practices of the early church. I took the time to look up some of the references to this issue in the early church and here's some of what I've found.

I'll start with a few of the New Testament passages to lay the ground work.

Gal 4:9-11 9 But now that you know God--or rather are known by God--how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? 10 You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! 11 I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

Eph 2:13-15 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations

Col 2: 13- 16 13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross. 16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.

(Look at that ..... circumcision and the Sabbath day equated in the same flow of thought within scripture .....)

"But every Lord's day . . . gather yourselves together and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned" (Didache 14 [A.D. 70]). (The Lord's Day in the early Church meant Sunday)

"[T]hose who were brought up in the ancient order of things [i.e. Jews] have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's day, on which also our life has sprung up again by him and by his death" (Letter to the Magnesians 8 [A.D. 110]).

"[W]e too would observe the fleshly circumcision, and the Sabbaths, and in short all the feasts, if we did not know for what reason they were enjoined [on] you—namely, on account of your transgressions and the hardness of your heart. . . . [H]ow is it, Trypho, that we would not observe those rites which do not harm us—I speak of fleshly circumcision and Sabbaths and feasts? . . . God enjoined you to keep the Sabbath, and imposed on you other precepts for a sign, as I have already said, on account of your unrighteousness and that of your fathers . . ." (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 18, 21 [A.D. 155]). Justin Martyr.

(Look at that. Circumcision and Sabbath keeping equated again.)

"But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead" (First Apology 67 [A.D. 155]). Justin Martyr

"[L]et him who contends that the Sabbath is still to be observed as a balm of salvation, and circumcision on the eighth day . . . teach us that, for the time past, righteous men kept the Sabbath or practiced circumcision, and were thus rendered 'friends of God.' For if circumcision purges a man, since God made Adam uncircumcised, why did he not circumcise him, even after his sinning, if circumcision purges? . . . Therefore, since God originated Adam uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, consequently his offspring also, Abel, offering him sacrifices, uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, was by him [God] commended [Gen. 4:1—7, Heb. 11:4]. . . . Noah also, uncircumcised—yes, and unobservant of the Sabbath—God freed from the deluge. For Enoch too, most righteous man, uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, he translated from this world, who did not first taste death in order that, being a candidate for eternal life, he might show us that we also may, without the burden of the law of Moses, please God" (An Answer to the Jews 2 [A.D. 203]). Tertullian

"The apostles further appointed: On the first day of the week let there be service, and the reading of the holy scriptures, and the oblation [sacrifice of the Mass], because on the first day of the week [i.e., Sunday] our Lord rose from the place of the dead, and on the first day of the week he arose upon the world, and on the first day of the week he ascended up to heaven, and on the first day of the week he will appear at last with the angels of heaven" (Didascalia 2 [A.D. 225]).

"Hence it is not possible that the [day of] rest after the Sabbath should have come into existence from the seventh [day] of our God. On the contrary, it is our Savior who, after the pattern of his own rest, caused us to be made in the likeness of his death, and hence also of his resurrection" (Commentary on John 2:28 [A.D. 229]).

"The Sabbath was the end of the first creation, the Lord's day was the beginning of the second, in which he renewed and restored the old in the same way as he prescribed that they should formerly observe the Sabbath as a memorial of the end of the first things, so we honor the Lord's day as being the memorial of the new creation" (On Sabbath and Circumcision 3 [A.D. 345]). Athanasius

"Fall not away either into the sect of the Samaritans or into Judaism, for Jesus Christ has henceforth ransomed you. Stand aloof from all observance of Sabbaths and from calling any indifferent meats common or unclean" (Catechetical Lectures 4:37 [A.D. 350]). Cyril of Jerusalem

I can go on. I've barely scratched the surface. It's clear from the scripture itself as well as the writings of the early church that sabbath keeping and circumcision were seen very much as tightly tied together.

You're just simply wrong in your attempt to try and separate them to justify your point of view Bav.

blessings,

bart

[Canuckster1127]

Addressing another issue that is continually brought up with regard to the 10 commandments. Bav, please correct me if I'm misrepresenting but it seems to be a recurrant theme with you that the 10 commandments are a definitive group and they exist as a group that cannot be separated from one another.

As I look at it, the scriptures themselves do not do this or teach it and so it would appear that this concept is coming from somewhere else.

The ten commandments are treated as a group in only three places in scripture other than when the were given in Exodus 20.

Exodus 34:28 Moses was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant—the Ten Commandments.

Interesting, isn't it? Here the 10 commandments are equated as the covenant between God and Israel. (What's the outward sign of that covenant by the way? That's right, circumcision.)

Deuteronomy 4:13 13He declared to you his covenant, the Ten Commandments, which he commanded you to follow and then wrote them on two stone tablets.

Seems to be saying the same thing. The 10 commandments are equated with the Old Covenant.

Hebrews 8:6-13 (New International Version)
6But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.

7For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8But God found fault with the people and said[a]:
"The time is coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
9It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."

13By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

Seems the Old Covenant (equated twice in the OT with the 10 commandments) with it's outward sign of circumcision (which the early church recognized was no longer in effect following Christ) was written on stone tablets but this new covenant is written on men's hearts. That sounds remarkably like the internal work of the Holy Spirit upon our spirits.

I 've heard you repeatedly ask if the "commandment" against murder is in effect implying that if we continue to hold that murder is wrong then we must maintain that sabbath keeping is still in effect. What you're doing here is confusing moral law with societal law, I believe. Want to know the answer? The "law" on the stone tablets against murder in the spiritual sense ARE no longer in effect for the believer. That law has moved from stone to heart and it's now something much more.

That's why Jesus said as He did,

Matt 5:21-23 21"You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brotherwill be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,[c]' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Jesus law has moved from the stone to the heart and it governs more than outward actions, because Jesus is looking to the time that His life, death and resurrection will bring about something very new.

The OT has moved to the NT. The old covenant has moved to the new covenant. Stone chiselled by God's finger has moved to hearts renewed and brought alive. The priesthood of the temple has moved to the priesthood of every believer. The Sabbath of the seventh day has moved to the Sabbath of the heart that remains at rest in the peace of God.

The Sabbath that you appeal to in the ten commandments wasn't instituted there. It was given in Exodus 16 before then.

Exodus 16: 21-23 21Each morning everyone gathered as much as he needed, and when the sun grew hot, it melted away. 22 On the sixth day, they gathered twice as much—two omers for each person—and the leaders of the community came and reported this to Moses. 23 He said to them, "This is what the LORD commanded: 'Tomorrow is to be a day of rest, a holy Sabbath to the LORD. So bake what you want to bake and boil what you want to boil. Save whatever is left and keep it until morning.' "

It wasn't attached to other laws then before the 10 commandments and as I've mentioned, they weren't tied together following that without it being equated with the old covenant. When we look at the old covenant in the totality of the Law of Moses there are multitudes of worship laws, including the Sabbath that are no longer in effect. Why? Because God no longer dwells within a physical temple or tabernacle which required priests to perform ritual and which also required a societal day universally recognized for work to cease for focus.

The 10 commandments are referred to individually without the others far more than they are referenced collectively. That seems odd, doesn't it Bav, if they are a collective group that is somehow different than the collective Mosaic law that you want to try to believe are somehow "greater" and "more important" laws than all the other laws given in the same generation.

In the NT when it speaks of the greatest commandments, the 10 are not even quoted then but rather the essence of what God is going to write on the hearts of men through the new covenant.

Now here Bav, is where I have to say something that is hard. I accept that you do not believe that keeping the Sabbath or any of the other 10 commandments or multitudes of OT laws is the basis of salvation. I accept and respect that you practice Sabbath keeping as a response to what you believe God has done. Yet, for all the claims that this is not legalism, I have only to look at the tradition of the SDA and you and I both are going to have to admit that the practices there go well beyond the 10 commandements and just keeping the sabbath. Let's look at SDA material itself:

22. Christian Behavior:
We are called to be a godly people who think, feel, and act in harmony with the principles of heaven. For the Spirit to recreate in us the character of our Lord we involve ourselves only in those things which will produce Christlike purity, health, and joy in our lives. This means that our amusement and entertainment should meet the highest standards of Christian taste and beauty. While recognizing cultural differences, our dress is to be simple, modest, and neat, befitting those whose true beauty does not consist of outward adornment but in the imperishable ornament of a gentle and quiet spirit. It also means that because our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit, we are to care for them intelligently. Along with adequate exercise and rest, we are to adopt the most healthful diet possible and abstain from the unclean foods identified in the Scriptures. Since alcoholic beverages, tobacco, and the irresponsible use of drugs and narcotics are harmful to our bodies, we are to abstain from them as well. Instead, we are to engage in whatever brings our thoughts and bodies into the discipline of Christ, who desires our wholesomeness, joy, and goodness. (Rom. 12:1, 2; 1 John 2:6; Eph. 5:1-21; Phil. 4:8; 2 Cor. 10:5; 6:14-7:1; 1 Peter 3:1-4; 1 Cor. 6:19, 20; 10:31; Lev. 11:1-47; 3 John 2.)

In practice, there's a great deal of emphasis upon what we are not to do rather than proactive focus upon what we are to do. Now, I don't have a problem with anyone adopting any of these practices. There's a very fine line however between that returning to legalism. I'm going to say it. The point of view with regard to Sabbath Keeping however and these inclination to my mind demonstrates to me how one leads to the other. The circumcision of the heart that moves one from seeing God as demanding performance of us for our acceptance to that of grace is apparently at best, pushing right up against the limits.

So anyway, I'm sure this will anger you. I'm directly addressing what I see as your most repeated argument and frankly, it just doesn't hold up.

blessings,

bart

[Canuckster1127]

Addressing another issue that is continually brought up with regard to the 10 commandments. Bav, please correct me if I'm misrepresenting but it seems to be a recurrant theme with you that the 10 commandments are a definitive group and they exist as a group that cannot be separated from one another.

As I look at it, the scriptures themselves do not do this or teach it and so it would appear that this concept is coming from somewhere else.

The ten commandments are treated as a group in only three places in scripture other than when the were given in Exodus 20.

Exodus 34:28 Moses was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant—the Ten Commandments.

Interesting, isn't it? Here the 10 commandments are equated as the covenant between God and Israel. (What's the outward sign of that covenant by the way? That's right, circumcision.)

Deuteronomy 4:13 13He declared to you his covenant, the Ten Commandments, which he commanded you to follow and then wrote them on two stone tablets.

Seems to be saying the same thing. The 10 commandments are equated with the Old Covenant.

Hebrews 8:6-13 (New International Version)
6But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.

7For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8But God found fault with the people and said[a]:
"The time is coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
9It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."

13By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

Seems the Old Covenant (equated twice in the OT with the 10 commandments) with it's outward sign of circumcision (which the early church recognized was no longer in effect following Christ) was written on stone tablets but this new covenant is written on men's hearts. That sounds remarkably like the internal work of the Holy Spirit upon our spirits.

I 've heard you repeatedly ask if the "commandment" against murder is in effect implying that if we continue to hold that murder is wrong then we must maintain that sabbath keeping is still in effect. What you're doing here is confusing moral law with societal law, I believe. Want to know the answer? The "law" on the stone tablets against murder in the spiritual sense ARE no longer in effect for the believer. That law has moved from stone to heart and it's now something much more.

That's why Jesus said as He did,

Matt 5:21-23 21"You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brotherwill be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,[c]' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Jesus law has moved from the stone to the heart and it governs more than outward actions, because Jesus is looking to the time that His life, death and resurrection will bring about something very new.

The OT has moved to the NT. The old covenant has moved to the new covenant. Stone chiselled by God's finger has moved to hearts renewed and brought alive. The priesthood of the temple has moved to the priesthood of every believer. The Sabbath of the seventh day has moved to the Sabbath of the heart that remains at rest in the peace of God.

The Sabbath that you appeal to in the ten commandments wasn't instituted there. It was given in Exodus 16 before then.

Exodus 16: 21-23 21Each morning everyone gathered as much as he needed, and when the sun grew hot, it melted away. 22 On the sixth day, they gathered twice as much—two omers for each person—and the leaders of the community came and reported this to Moses. 23 He said to them, "This is what the LORD commanded: 'Tomorrow is to be a day of rest, a holy Sabbath to the LORD. So bake what you want to bake and boil what you want to boil. Save whatever is left and keep it until morning.' "

It wasn't attached to other laws then before the 10 commandments and as I've mentioned, they weren't tied together following that without it being equated with the old covenant. When we look at the old covenant in the totality of the Law of Moses there are multitudes of worship laws, including the Sabbath that are no longer in effect. Why? Because God no longer dwells within a physical temple or tabernacle which required priests to perform ritual and which also required a societal day universally recognized for work to cease for focus.

The 10 commandments are referred to individually without the others far more than they are referenced collectively. That seems odd, doesn't it Bav, if they are a collective group that is somehow different than the collective Mosaic law that you want to try to believe are somehow "greater" and "more important" laws than all the other laws given in the same generation.

In the NT when it speaks of the greatest commandments, the 10 are not even quoted then but rather the essence of what God is going to write on the hearts of men through the new covenant.

Now here Bav, is where I have to say something that is hard. I accept that you do not believe that keeping the Sabbath or any of the other 10 commandments or multitudes of OT laws is the basis of salvation. I accept and respect that you practice Sabbath keeping as a response to what you believe God has done. Yet, for all the claims that this is not legalism, I have only to look at the tradition of the SDA and you and I both are going to have to admit that the practices there go well beyond the 10 commandements and just keeping the sabbath. Let's look at SDA material itself:

22. Christian Behavior:
We are called to be a godly people who think, feel, and act in harmony with the principles of heaven. For the Spirit to recreate in us the character of our Lord we involve ourselves only in those things which will produce Christlike purity, health, and joy in our lives. This means that our amusement and entertainment should meet the highest standards of Christian taste and beauty. While recognizing cultural differences, our dress is to be simple, modest, and neat, befitting those whose true beauty does not consist of outward adornment but in the imperishable ornament of a gentle and quiet spirit. It also means that because our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit, we are to care for them intelligently. Along with adequate exercise and rest, we are to adopt the most healthful diet possible and abstain from the unclean foods identified in the Scriptures. Since alcoholic beverages, tobacco, and the irresponsible use of drugs and narcotics are harmful to our bodies, we are to abstain from them as well. Instead, we are to engage in whatever brings our thoughts and bodies into the discipline of Christ, who desires our wholesomeness, joy, and goodness. (Rom. 12:1, 2; 1 John 2:6; Eph. 5:1-21; Phil. 4:8; 2 Cor. 10:5; 6:14-7:1; 1 Peter 3:1-4; 1 Cor. 6:19, 20; 10:31; Lev. 11:1-47; 3 John 2.)

In practice, there's a great deal of emphasis upon what we are not to do rather than proactive focus upon what we are to do. Now, I don't have a problem with anyone adopting any of these practices. There's a very fine line however between that returning to legalism. I'm going to say it. The point of view with regard to Sabbath Keeping however and these inclination to my mind demonstrates to me how one leads to the other. The circumcision of the heart that moves one from seeing God as demanding performance of us for our acceptance to that of grace is apparently at best, pushing right up against the limits.

So anyway, I'm sure this will anger you. I'm directly addressing what I see as your most repeated argument and frankly, it just doesn't hold up.

blessings,

bart

[catherine]

Canuckster, you said ''In the NT when it speaks of the greatest commandments, the 10 are not even quoted then but rather the essence of what God is going to write on the hearts of men through the new covenant.''

The greatest commandment: 'You must love the Lord your God with your whole heart, soul and mind'. Surely this is a 'summary' of the first four commandments.

The second greatest commandment: 'Love your neighbour as yourself' - this summarises the remaining six.

So Jesus here is quoting the ten commandments but in a much more 'real', 'spiritual' way, to show the importance and scope of the ten commandments???


Also, 'the written code that was nailed to the cross' cannot be referring to the ten commandments. How does that make sense??? The priestly system, animal sacrifice, physical circumcision, etc - these shadows I can 'see' as being done away with, but how can the ten commandments. I bet if the Sabbath hadn't been included in the ten, it wouldn't even be disputed.

[BavarianWheels]

You seriously don't see a connection between circumcision and the 10 commandments?

That's right. Simply put, circumcision is not part of the 10. Notice the 10 were placed INSIDE the ark, and the regulations written by Moses (obviously directed by God) were placed OUTSIDE the ark?

Simple question. Why?
The answer is because THESE were the shadow of things to come...they would be nailed to the Cross and left as the 'old' covenant that NEVER was about keeping the Law for salvation. Salvation has always been from Christ, through Faith as Paul acknowledges.
.
.

[Canuckster1127]

Canuckster, you said ''In the NT when it speaks of the greatest commandments, the 10 are not even quoted then but rather the essence of what God is going to write on the hearts of men through the new covenant.''

The greatest commandment: 'You must love the Lord your God with your whole heart, soul and mind'. Surely this is a 'summary' of the first four commandments.

The second greatest commandment: 'Love your neighbour as yourself' - this summarises the remaining six.

So Jesus here is quoting the ten commandments but in a much more 'real', 'spiritual' way, to show the importance and scope of the ten commandments???


Also, 'the written code that was nailed to the cross' cannot be referring to the ten commandments. How does that make sense??? The priestly system, animal sacrifice, physical circumcision, etc - these shadows I can 'see' as being done away with, but how can the ten commandments. I bet if the Sabbath hadn't been included in the ten, it wouldn't even be disputed.

Catherine, I believe your questions are answered in the rest of the post. Certainly the greatest commandments are seen by many as summarizing the 10 commandments. However, in that regard they also summarize every other commandment ever given and the 10 are not specifically referenced nor are the two commands summarized unique to the 10. So, you'd have to make an assumption there and if Christ intended with his answer to quote or elevate the 10 over any of the other old covenant laws, He could have done so. What we do know for certain is that the only other 2 places in scripture where the 10 commandments are referenced they are specifically called the "Old Covenant" and this is precisely what is done away with by the New Covenant.

The issue is no longer based on performance to an external law. The new covenant is based upon the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and written in the renewed heart and spirit we have.

Look carefully at the passage quoted from Hebrews and if you need additional clarification, where it says first covenant or old covenant, then replace it with the words "10 commandments" which I've shown you is the direct equivalent in the OT to the Old Covenant.

I'll do it for you.

Hebrews 8:6-13 (New International Version with modification as suggested by the equivalence of the Ten Commandments with Old or First Covenant)
6But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the 10 commandments, and it is founded on better promises.

7For if there had been nothing wrong with the 10 commandments, no place would have been sought for another. 8But God found fault with the people and said[a]:
"The time is coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
9It will not be like the 10 commandments
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my 10 commandments
and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."

13By calling this covenant "new," he has made the 10 commandments obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

Now is it clearer?

bart