Secondly, it's blatantly untrue that the Apostles did not "authorize" the keeping of the Feasts, and indeed, the whole Torah.
The Christian church recognizes that the Lord's Supper has replaced Passover in God's new covenant economy. I don't think this basic fact in dispute.
What is in dispute is the juadizing of the Lord's Supper to that it precisely mimicks something that is more akin to the traditions of the apostate rabbis rather than what we see, for example, in 1 Cor. 11 which is devoid of any uniquely Jewish trappings.
"... Therefore let us keep the feast, ..."
Note, it does not say, "Let us therefore keep all the feast days of the Jews as the Jews", which is apparently what you think it says. You believe gentiles should become religiously Jewish. That is not the NT take on things.
The fact remains that there is no authority in the New Testament for observing all the old covenant feast days according to an arbitrary tradition invented in an era that is post-apostolic and post-temple.
And it not a matter of "practical Marcionism" to suggest judaizing Christians have no authority for doing what they claim to be doing. It's merely pointing out the obvious; the klaw has changed, the cultic shadows have given way to the universal substance under the ruler of all nations, King Jesus.
Indeed, such would be impossible within introducing tradition no different from the traditions of the post-temple apostate rabbis of Judaism.
Since I've already dealt with this issue at length, I'm not going to rehash it here.
That's a rather hollow claim since we all agree that "Torah" has been significantly altered in the new covenant. Any plain reading of the book of Hebrews can make that clear. So the question is how much has God altered the law to fit conditions under the term of the new covenant? Has God written the law on our hearts that we ought to observe the judaistic Passover or feast of trumpets? Has God witten the law on our hearts that we ought not to shave around the sides of our heads, or not to wear clothing of mixed materials?
What "tradition" shall we follow on these things?
It might do well to consider Edersheim's comments of the matter of trumpets:
In the law of God only these two things are enjoined in the observance of the ‘New Moon’—the ‘blowing of trumpets’ (Num 10:10) and special festive sacrifices (Num 28:11-15). Of old the ‘blowing of trumpets’ had been the signal for Israel’s host on their march through the wilderness, as it afterwards summoned them to warfare, and proclaimed or marked days of public rejoicing, and feasts, as well as the ‘beginning of their months’ (Num 10:1-10). The object of it is expressly stated to have been ‘for a memorial,’ that they might ‘be remembered before Jehovah,’ it being specially added: ‘I am Jehovah your God.’ It was, so to speak, the host of God assembled, waiting for their Leader; the people of God united to proclaim their King. At the blast of the priests’ trumpets they ranged themselves, as it were, under His banner and before His throne, and this symbolical confession and proclamation of Him as ‘Jehovah their God,’ brought them before Him to be ‘remembered’ and ‘saved.’ And so every season of ‘blowing the trumpets,’ whether at New Moons, at the Feast of Trumpets or New Year’s Day, at other festivals, in the Sabbatical and Year of Jubilee, or in the time of war, was a public acknowledgment of Jehovah as King. Accordingly we find the same symbols adopted in the figurative language of the New Testament. As of old the sound of the trumpet summoned the congregation before the Lord at the door of the Tabernacle, so ‘His elect’ shall be summoned by the sound of the trumpet in the day of Christ’s coming (Matt 24:31), and not only the living, but those also who had ‘slept’ (1 Cor 15:52)—’the dead in Christ’ (1 Thess 4:16). Similarly, the heavenly hosts are marshalled to the war of successive judgments (Rev 8:2; 10:7), till, as ‘the seventh angel sounded,’ Christ is proclaimed King Universal: ‘The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ, and He shall reign for ever and ever’ (Rev 11:15). (Temple—Its Ministry and Services, Chapter 15 The New Moons: The Feast of the Seventh New Moon, or of Trumpets, or New Year’s Day)Note that (ethnically Jewish but religiously Christian) Edershiem does not go to the excess of suggesting that the Second Coming will be on the old covenant day called "Rosh Hashanah". No one can know that, and there is certainly not enough information in the Scripture to draw such a conclusion, otherwise I'm sure Edershiem would have made that connection.
"Also in the day of your gladness, in your appointed feasts, and at the beginning of your months, you shall blow the trumpets over your burnt offerings and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; and they shall be a memorial for you before your God: I am the Lord your God." (Num. 10:10)
The trumpet sounding was not limited to one day of the year in ancient Israel. But it was indded related to the offering of sacrifices to the Lord. To single out one day, Rosh Hashanah, and try to identify that with the Second Coming is still arbitrary.
BTW, I'm not going to mention Christmas/Easter since that not my schtick and I do not need to defend the practices of others. If someone else wants to argue the biblical basis for observing "Christian holy days" they can do so. Romish Christmas and judaizing Rosh Hashanah are the same in my book.
There is the less need for apology for any digression here, that, besides the intrinsic interest of the question, it casts light on two most important subjects, For, first, it illustrates the attempt of the narrowest Judaic party in the Church to force on Gentile believers the yoke of the whole Law; the bearing of St. Paul in this respect; his relation to St. Peter; the conduct of the latter; and the proceedings of the Apostolic Synod in Jerusalem (Acts xv.). St. Paul, in his opposition to that party, stood even on Orthodox Jewish ground. But when he asserted, not only a new ‘law of liberty,’ but the typical and preparatory character of the whole Law, and its fulfillment in Christ, he went far beyond the Jewish standpoint. Further, the favorite modern theory as to fundamental opposition in principle between Pauline and Petrine theology in this respect, has, like many kindred theories, no support in the Jewish views on that subject, unless we suppose that Peter had belonged to the narrowest Jewish school, which his whole history seems to forbid. We can also understand, how the Divinely granted vision of the abrogation of the distinction between clean and unclean animals (Acts x. 9-16) may, though coming as a surprise, have had a natural basis in Jewish expectancy (a), and it explains how the Apostolic Synod, when settling the question,(b) ultimately fell back on the so-called Noachic commandments, though with very wider-reaching principles underlying their decision (Acts xv. 13-21). Lastly, it seems to cast even some light on the authorship of the Fourth Gospel; for, the question about ‘that prophet’ evidently referring to the possible alteration of the Law in Messianic times, which is reported only in the Fourth Gospel, shows such close acquaintance with the details of Jewish ideas on this subject, as seems to us utterly incompatible with its supposed origination as ‘The Ephesian Gospel’ towards the end of the second century, the outcome of Ephesian Church-teaching - an ‘esoteric and eclectic’ book, designed to modify ‘the impressions produced by the tradition previously recorded by the Synoptists.’ (Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, APPENDIX XIV. The Law in Messianic Times)These comments are found in a section dealing with the rabbinic view that during the messianic age the ceremonial law and the feasts were to cease. Edersheim notes, "But the Talmud goes even further, and lays down the two principles, that in the ‘age to come’ [the age of Messiah] the whole ceremonial Law and all the feasts were to cease."Notes:
(a) The learned reader will find a very curious illustration of this in that strange Haggadah about the envy of the serpent being excited on seeing Adam fed with meat from heaven - where another equally curious Haggadah is related to show that ‘nothing is unclean which cometh down from heaven.’
(b) Yalkut i. 15, p. 4, d , towards the middle. A considerable part of vol. iii. of ‘Supernatural Religion’ is devoted to argumentation on this subject. But here also the information of the writer on the subject is neither accurate nor critical, and hence his reasoning and conclusions are vitiated.
That is an odd statement to make considering the fact that Paul, as a highly trained scholar of "The Law", claimed he had always followed the Law.
If as you say.....Paul is instructing the newly converted Christians to not observe the Laws and Ordinances of The God of Israel.....then Paul is hereby proved to be a liar.
That's one thing you got right. No need to worry about anything Jewish being left in.
From the Council of Nicea (325):(excerpted)
It was declared to be particularly unworthy for this, the holiest of all festivals, to follow the custom [the calculation] of the Jews, who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and whose minds were blinded.In rejecting their custom,(1) we may transmit to our descendants the legitimate mode of celebrating Easter, which we have observed from the time of the Saviour's Passion to the present day[according to the day of the week]. We ought not, therefore, to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Saviour has shown us another way; our worship follows a more legitimate and more convenient course (the order of the days of the week); and consequently, in unanimously adopting this mode, we desire, dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews, for it is truly shameful for us to hear them boast that without their direction we could not keep this feast. How can they be in the right, they who, after the death of the Saviour, have no longer been led by reason but by wild violence, as their delusion may urge them?
They do not possess the truth in this Easter question; for, in their blindness and repugnance to all improvements, they frequently celebrate two passovers in the same year. We could not imitate those who are openly in error. How, then, could we follow these Jews, who are most certainly blinded by error? for to celebrate the passover twice in one year is totally inadmissible. But even if this were not so, it would still be your duty not to tarnish your soul by communications with such wicked people[the Jews].
That's why the church needed to change the calendar, needed to do away with the Sabbath and started Sun-day worship, in 'honor of the venerable Sun'. Why they needed to distance themselves from Passover and celebrate Easter, a name derived from the pagan godess of fertility, widely known at the time.
The church has done nearly all it could to distance themselves from the root that they 'claim' to be grafted unto. Yet, it resembles nothing of the root anymore.
The part I want to specifically point out is this: for the Saviour has shown us another way;
An actual admission that the church has deviated from 'the way' and gone after 'another way'!! And to top it off, they give credit to Yehoshua for this 'new way'. The church admits that this 'other way' is more CONVENIENT!
Ah, once again, lacking any Biblical argument, you fall back on the supposed "unbroken" tradition of the Church (never mind that there has consistantly been a persecuted minority which kept the Feasts). If you're going to constantly choose tradition over Scripture, why don't you just go all the way and convert to Catholicism?
You've still not shown any Biblical argument that any part of the Torah was understood by the Apostles to be done away with along with the Old Covenant in place of the new. Are you ever going to attempt to find one for us?
Note, it does not say, "Let us therefore keep all the feast days of the Jews as the Jews", which is apparently what you think it says.
It says, "Let us therefore keep the (Passover) Feast." In what way do you suppose that they were keeping it other than the way that Yeshua Himself kept it and commanded it to be kept? What Scripture can you cite in support of your view?
You believe gentiles should become religiously Jewish. That is not the NT take on things.
I believe that Gentile believers should keep the Torah on the basis that our Lord kept the Torah, and we are supposed to be emulating Him by the power of His Spirit, and because having the Torah written on our hearts is a specific promise of the New Covenant. I agree with the Apostles, however, that no one is saved on the basis of keeping the Torah, but on the basis of their trust in Yeshua the Messiah. I further agree that no one is saved on the basis of their Jewishness, and that Jewishness and Gentileness is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God (in faith, by the power of His Spirit, not in our own ability) is what matters.
What you refuse to see is that the New Testament commands Jews to stay Jewish and to keep the whole Torah (1 Co. 7:18, Gal. 5:3). There was never any question in their minds that Jewish believers should keep the Torah; in fact, when Sha'ul was charged with teaching otherwise, he took a Nazrite oath and went to sacrifice in the Temple in order to prove the charge false (Acts 21:20ff).
Now, if Yeshua taught His Jewish disciples to keep the whole Torah, which He plainly did and you have not yet even attempted to refute, and if He commanded them to "and teach all nations (i.e. Gentiles) . . . Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Mat. 28:19-20), which you yourself cited, how then are we to suppose that they took that to mean that the Gentiles should be taught to violate the Torah?
The debate of the NT, I believe, is not about whether men should keep the whole Torah in faith, but on two things:
1) Whether a person had to be Jewish (circumcised) to be saved. The answer is a resounding no.Sha'ul claims to keep the whole Torah (ibid., Acts 25:8) and to remain a Pharisee (23:6). Either he was telling the truth, in which case he both kept the Feastdays and taught others to do the same, or he is a liar and his books should not be in the Bible.2) The proper relationship between grace, faith, and works. The answer was that salvation was by God's grace alone, received by faith (trusting in the Messiah and His sacrifice), which would in turn result in repentence from sin and keeping God's commands.
It is ludicrous to interpret the letters of Sha'ul to contradict the actions of Sha'ul.
The fact remains that there is no authority in the New Testament for observing all the old covenant feast days according to an arbitrary tradition invented in an era that is post-apostolic and post-temple.
Already answered, and simply repeating yourself doesn't constitute a counter-argument: Show me where in the NT is there any authorization to cease to observe the Sabbath and the other Feastdays.
You keep saying that the "law has changed" as a matter of rote. Prove that it has. At best, you can make a case (which causes a contradiction in Scripture) that the sacrifices have been transferred to the Cross, but that says nothing about whether we should continue to observe God's Appointed Times.
Again, the simple fact is that the very passage in Hebrews (chapter 8) which speaks of a change in the covenants quotes from Jer. 31, which states in no uncertain terms that the New Covenant includes the Torah!
Your entire hang-up about "rabbinical tradition" in observing the Feasts is hypocritical. On the one hand, you decry extra-Biblical (but not yet shown to be anti-Biblical) tradition in keeping the Feasts of the Lord, but you keep your own extra-Biblical traditions in observing Sunday, for example.
That's a rather hollow claim since we all agree that "Torah" has been significantly altered in the new covenant.
You're still presuming that which you have yet to prove, I see. And it's obvious that you've either not read my arguments on my blog or that you have no answer to them.
Has God written the law on our hearts that we ought to observe the judaistic Passover or feast of trumpets? Has God witten the law on our hearts that we ought not to shave around the sides of our heads, or not to wear clothing of mixed materials?
I know He has on mine. I can't speak for what's written on your heart.
What "tradition" shall we follow on these things?
Why don't you agree to follow God's written commands, and then worry about the "traditional" details?
It might do well to consider Edersheim's comments of the matter of trumpets:
Funny, that seems pretty close to what I wrote.
Note that (ethnically Jewish but religiously Christian) Edershiem does not go to the excess of suggesting that the Second Coming will be on the old covenant day called "Rosh Hashanah".
So?
No one can know that, and there is certainly not enough information in the Scripture to draw such a conclusion, otherwise I'm sure Edershiem would have made that connection.
Oi vey. You've not yet presented anything other than uncertainties and mud in the water. You've not presented a single argument from Scripture to show that I'm wrong--all you've done is make another silly argument from silence: "Well, if Edersheim didn't say it, it can't be true."
Moreover, you've once again applied a double-standard out of your kneejerk dislike for anything Messianic or Jewish: You quote Edersheim, who essentially agrees with me about the symbolism of the Feast of Trumpets and who does so because he read the same Jewish traditional sources that I did.
How do you not see the hypocrisy of that? Seriously, did it never occur to you for even a moment that Edersheim was probably one of my sources?
I swear TC, you're making it more evident with every post that if I said the sky was blue, you'd go out of your way to argue that it was mauve.
The trumpet sounding was not limited to one day of the year in ancient Israel.
True. Yet God singled out one of those New Moons in particular. Did you ever wonder why? Or did you just dismiss such a question as irrelevant because of your Reform bias?
Romish Christmas and judaizing Rosh Hashanah are the same in my book.
You have no Feasts to honor the Lord at all in your life then? Small wonder your posts sound so bitter. And you also loose all right to ever use the "Church tradition" argument ever again, since the universal tradition of the Church is to have special days to particularly remember and reinact what God has done for us.
We've been here and done this, TC. And you once again demonstrate that you do not have a cogent, logical, Biblical argument against my Messianic beliefs.