Posted on 12/25/2006 6:31:44 AM PST by DouglasKC
It is not repeated in the New Testament now is it.
Where in the NT is the Sabbath repealed? Why are you so adamant about breaking the 4th Commandment? Jesus has very hard words for those who break the commandments, as does First John. Why do you wish to teach people to break God's Law? How can you believe in the Trinity and yet say that Jesus hasn't commanded the Sabbath? I don' believe in the Trinity, and I still believe that Jesus is the author of the Law, but for a Trinirarian, there can be no doubt.
The Christians met on the first day of the week, not the last, which was the sabbath day, so they were not observing any sabbath.
Theological dicussions require a certain amount of intellectual honesty.
Act 1:12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey.
Act 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.
Act 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
Act 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.
Act 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures,
Act 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
Now, here comes the famous one that all y'all try to say repeals the Sabbath:
Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
Col 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
What does this verse say? Does it say, "you will not be judged regarding the Sabbath days"? No. Does it say, "don't keep the Sabbath"? No. It says not to let men judge you in keeping these things. And again, who is the target audience here? Gentiles. People who never knew the Law. Why in the world would Paul waste his time teaching them the Law in person, only to write them a letter to say, "whatever you do, don't keep the Sabbaths"? That doesn't make a lick of sense, does it? In context, Paul taught these people to keep the Sabbath, among other things, and then they were faltering under pressure from their pagan friends (who probably called them judaizers), so he has to write to them to encourage them. But the next verse hammers it home! Those things ARE (present tense) a shadow of things TO (future tense) come. All hasn't been fulfilled! Jots and tittles still safely nestled in their respective places!
And where before Exodus, do you see anyone observing a Sabbath?
The Sabbaths were given to the Hebrews as stated very clearly in Ezek.20, as a sign of the special relationship between them and God.
The sabbath was given in Genesis. How do you reconcile this verse?
Gen 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.
How could Abraham keep commandments? What exactly could those commandments have entailed? Who wrote the book of Genesis?
Furthermore, Moses knew about the Sabbath prior to the Law being given. Law in Exodus 20, but Sabbath shows up 4 times in Exodus 16. Hmmmm.
And the Trinity is a Christian doctrine, held by Christians as well as by Catholics.
The doctrine of the Trinity is the product of a centuries long hellenized paganization of Christianity. It is purely Catholic and those who hold Catholic doctrines are themselves yielding to their claim on magesterium. Every doctrine that ever came out of the church of the universe neds to be thrown down and each Christian needs to work out his own salvation with fear and trembling. The doctrines of men, whether Papal or Calvinist, whether they wear the fish hat of dagon or a suit from Joseph A. Bank will be absolutely useless when Jesus returns and renders Judgment. You accept both the Father and Son as God do you not?
Yep. God the Father, check, God the Son, check.
Yes, and Jesus says that he is God as well (Jn.8,17).
Yep The concept of the trinity (or tri-unity) of God is very clear from the Scriptures.
Unity, check. 3 headed Janus god, nope. You did not address Matthew 28:19.
What's to address? You have 3 entities there with three names.
The Holy Ghost is called a 'he' in Jn.16:8 by the Lord Himself.
Thank God Jesus didn't call the Holy Spirit "she" or else you guys wouldn't have given up Marionism, either.
Joh 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
Joh 16:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
Joh 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
How many different entities does Jesus list here? I see 3, not one. How can Jesus go to the Father if He is the Father? Why would Jesus have to send the Spirit if He is the Spirit? By your math, they are all present at the same time.
His humanity is what took on the sins of the world and died, not his Deity, which cannot die.
Yep, the Word was made Flesh. Which is very puzzling why you believe there out to be a page separating the OT and the NT. Jesus is the Word of God. He wrote the Commnandments, yet you call yourself a Christian and don't keep his commandments. (Please see 1John 2:4 again). Beyond this, if Christ did not really die, then there is no salvation. If Christ did not really die, then it was all an academic exercise. Christ was actually a man, He said he came to do not His will, but the will of the Father "who art in heaven". Jesus was really on earth, 100%, and when He died, he really died, and the Father really resurrected Him.
Mat 12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah:
Mat 12:40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
If Jesus didn't die 100%, and He did not stay that way for 3 days and nights, then He was not Jesus. This is the ONLY sign He gave.
There is no verse 22 in Revelation 19. Are you telling me to read three chapters whole chapters of Revelation? What is your point? Revelation 5:9-10 plainly states that the priests will be taken out of every tongue and nation, which directly contradicts your thesis. You really ought to say, "Oh, I didn't see that one Chris, maybe you are on to something here."
Yes, those verses have to do with the ending of Jewish laws, not the Gentiles assuming them.
The 10 Commandments are the Eternal Law of Love, binding on all men.
1Jo 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
And that pertains to the nation of Israel, which no longer exists (in its theocratic state).
I fear that you believe the Jew is grafted into the house of Gentile when he prophesses Christ. Who is the Israel of God in Galations 6:16? Why are the Gentiles adopted into the house of Abraham, not the Hebrews grafted into the house of the Philistine? What is Paul talking about grafting branches into a root that already exists in Romans 11:17? Why does Jesus call the Canaanite woman a dog and say he came to the lost sheep of Israel in Mathew 15:21-24 instead of glorifying her Gentileness and her lawlessness and scolding the stupid lost sheep of Israel? (and back to the trinity thing, why does Jesus say he was "sent" in Mat 22:24? If He is part of a three headed god, who sent Him?)
Are you going to synagogue to worship?
Mat 18:20 "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst."
The Church worshipped in churches, not in synagoges on the first day of the week.
Church is Ekklesia, an assembly or congregation, not a building. Is Christ's Bride made of brick and mortar or of love and obedience? It has been morphed into meaning buildings, diocese, conferences, etc. by men who seek to use control me by using the Word of God. See 1Peter 5:1-5
Those who were assembling to hear Paul were unsaved at the time.
Tweet! doctrine of men alert, 15 yard penalty, repeat first down.
And those verses have to do with the Jew ending his Jewish practices, not the Gentiles assuming them.
That is what the book of Galatians is about. Oh really, is that why there is a Letter of Paul to the Hebrews?
What is bizarre is that nowhere in the New Testament do the Apostles keep the Jewish Sabbath or sabbaths.
Not only was the Sabbath kept from creation through the first century, but Doug has proven it lasted until the 4th Century. So much so that the church of the universe had to use a pagan emperor's civil laws to get rid of it!
Yes, Christ kept the law, all of the Law and He has come to give us grace and truth, not the Law (Jn.1:17)
Joh 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
This is the part I alluded to before where I can understand differentiating between the 10 Commandments and the Law of Moses. If you read Exodus 20 closely, you will see that the 10 Commandments were given by God, not Moses. Moses started interceding at Exodus 20:19. Moreover:
Deu 4:12 "Then the LORD spoke to you from the midst of the fire; you heard the sound of words, but you saw no form--only a voice.
Deu 4:13 "So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.
Deu 4:14 "The LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that you might perform them in the land where you are going over to possess it.
But, if this isn't enough for you, hear the Word of the Lord:
Joh 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
Joh 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
Today (starting from Acts 2)saved Jews and saved Gentiles become Christians, and one Body.
That's a mighty thin Bible you got there.
I don't call myself a Protestant, I am a Baptist.
That's a new one on me. I don' call myself Protestant or Catholic either, but I have never heard a Baptist reject Rome, only protest it.
There is no difference between a Christian of either Jew or Gentile-spiritually.
But Paul was racially a Jew, that was his racial background.
Most Christians come from a gentile background and are not of the racial seed of Abraham.
Prove it from scripture.
It is defined as 'gross immorality'
Just "gross" imorality? Not just a little immorality? How do you define morality, btw?
The King James translaters kept the word as Easter because they knew the word Passover was incorrect,it being the days of unleavened bread, thus being after the 14th day.
Bwaaaaahaaaaaa. That is hilarious, man!
Since you have Greek software, I am sure you already know this, but I will post it just the same:
Easter (3957)
ēs´tẽr (πάσχα, páscha, from Aramaic פסחא, paṣḥā' and Hebrew פסח, peṣaḥ, the Passover festival): The English word comes from the Anglo-Saxon Eastre or Estera, a Teutonic goddess...
The book of Galatians is dealing with saved Gentiles who are being deceived into going into Jewish customs, e.g. circumcision.
I think we already went over this. Paul was called to the Gentiles. Galatians were Gentiles.
Chapter 4 is dealing with the difference between Law and Grace, the servant being under the Law, but the son being under grace.
Everyone has always been saved by Grace, the pre-incarnate believers, the folks who knew Jesus, and those of who profess the name of Jesus today. Salvation has never been able to be earned through works.
Thus, the 'weak and beggarly elements are the Law which could not save, nor could not even be kept (Gal.2) so they were exchanging one form of bondage (Idol worship) for another (legalism)
Read it again, the passage clearly states the Galations did not know God, nor did God know them, when they were using the "weak and beggarly elements".
Gal 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. (paganism reference, clearly) Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures....(Matt.22:29).
I err, huh? Which one of us is worhipping the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and which has declared the One True God's commandments to be of no effect?
Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
Thank you again for your thoughts. And, I am sorry about your dogs as well. These special pets always become a big part of our lives.
Of course the word 'Jew' doesn't show up until 11Ki.16:5-6 and before that they were known as Hebrews.
Normally, the scriptures refer to them as Israelites.... prior to that. The Tribe of Judah is called "Jew" to show the distinction between the two elements, and they will not be joined together again until the resurrection.....as one nation. [Ezekiel 37]
He is saying that neither food should be an issue (removing Jewish dietary restrictions), nor Sabbaths also (removing sabbath restriction)
This interpretation is so far out in left field all I can say is reread the answer Douglas posted to you (post #385) and address the issue of a different word for a Feast day. You have not done that and until you do....you've lost this argument as well. Greek is a very precise language and that is the reason the Holy Spirit inspired it to be written..... to avoid just what it is you are attempting here.
Second, if you want to cite historians you find that it is the historians who point out that the word Jew is a post-exile term for all the 12 tribes.
Almost right....(post exile)....it is a term for the Southern Kingdom. You have yet to show me where the Ten Tribes returned. I have given you multiple scriptures showing they will not be rejoined to Judah until the resurrection and all you can do is quote Luke 2:36.
Where does it say that they Apostles kept them?
Let's cut to the chase. Why do you hate the Sabbath so much? Why do you think the Roman Church has tried to convince the world that Our Saviour resurrected on a Sunday morning? Have you ever investigated the crucifixion/resurrection time line to see just how much error this doctrine actually is?
Are we to forget the one commandment Our Lord asks us to remember.....but still honor the others? This makes no sense.....until you understand why the Roman Church feels Sabbath worship is so threatening to them....and why they fought tooth and nail to destroy this day. There is not one hint throughout scripture that would lead one to believe the Sabbath is to be dishonored.....or forgotten.
Should say.... It has been morphed into meaning buildings, diocese, conferences, etc. by men who see to control men thought the use of the Word of God.
The Church is a spiritual body (Eph 1:23) and the Bride of Christ (Eph.5:30).
The control of men does not come by the word of God, but misusing the word of God, making it say what it doesn't say and adding traditions to the Bible.
No, they are mixed together today.
Many people of the other 10 tribes came back with Ezra.
We know that the tribe of Aser was represented by Anna.
God knows each individual's Jew's tribe and when the time comes to call out the 144,000 from the 12 tribes, they will come from those who we today call the Jews.
He is saying that neither food should be an issue (removing Jewish dietary restrictions), nor Sabbaths also (removing sabbath restriction) This interpretation is so far out in left field all I can say is reread the answer Douglas posted to you (post #385) and address the issue of a different word for a Feast day. You have not done that and until you do....you've lost this argument as well. Greek is a very precise language and that is the reason the Holy Spirit inspired it to be written..... to avoid just what it is you are attempting here.
There is nothing in the Greek that changes the meaning of Rom.14 regarding the considering one day special and another not.
The English is accurately representing the Greek, it is referring to days.
I saw references to 1Cor.8, but nothing dealing directly with the issue of days
Second, if you want to cite historians you find that it is the historians who point out that the word Jew is a post-exile term for all the 12 tribes. Almost right....(post exile)....it is a term for the Southern Kingdom. You have yet to show me where the Ten Tribes returned. I have given you multiple scriptures showing they will not be rejoined to Judah until the resurrection and all you can do is quote Luke 2:36.
Well, if the tribe of Asar is represented there why not the other tribes?
It is clear that in 2Chronicles 35:18 both Judah, the Levites and Israel were present.(623BC)
That is almost hundred years after the 10 tribes went into captivity (721 BC)
The two tribes are offically rejoined at the 2nd Advent, but they are now mixed together and we do not generally know who is from what tribe. Where does it say that they Apostles kept them?
Let's cut to the chase. Why do you hate the Sabbath so much? Why do you think the Roman Church has tried to convince the world that Our Saviour resurrected on a Sunday morning? Have you ever investigated the crucifixion/resurrection time line to see just how much error this doctrine actually is?
Christ resurrected sometime after 5PM Jewish time Saturday (which would be for the Jews Sunday)
Are we to forget the one commandment Our Lord asks us to remember.....but still honor the others? This makes no sense.....until you understand why the Roman Church feels Sabbath worship is so threatening to them....and why they fought tooth and nail to destroy this day. There is not one hint throughout scripture that would lead one to believe the Sabbath is to be dishonored.....or forgotten.
The Sabbath has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church.
It states in 1Cor.16 that the local church was gathering on the first day of the week, not the last day.
The Sabbaths were given for Israel, as a sign of the Covenant between them and God.
It was never followed by anyone before the Hebrews and it is not for the Church today.
Anyone can throw out of context scriptures, which is what you are doing.
It is not repeated in the New Testament now is it. Where in the NT is the Sabbath repealed? Why are you so adamant about breaking the 4th Commandment? Jesus has very hard words for those who break the commandments, as does First John. Why do you wish to teach people to break God's Law? How can you believe in the Trinity and yet say that Jesus hasn't commanded the Sabbath? I don' believe in the Trinity, and I still believe that Jesus is the author of the Law, but for a Trinirarian, there can be no doubt.
Another words, it is not in the New Testament. The Christians met on the first day of the week, not the last, which was the sabbath day, so they were not observing any sabbath. Theological dicussions require a certain amount of intellectual honesty.
Well, they did, as depicted very clearly in 1Cor.16:2,
Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay him in store
Act 1:12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey. Act 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down. Act 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath. Act 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. Act 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures, Act 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
Yes, theological discussions do require intellecual honesty.
None of the passages deal with the church meeting together.
They have to do with the Apostles going to unbelieving Jews and Gentiles.
The local church met on Sunday in private homes.
Now, here comes the famous one that all y'all try to say repeals the Sabbath: Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Col 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. What does this verse say? Does it say, "you will not be judged regarding the Sabbath days"? No. Does it say, "don't keep the Sabbath"? No. It says not to let men judge you in keeping these things. And again, who is the target audience here? Gentiles. People who never knew the Law. Why in the world would Paul waste his time teaching them the Law in person, only to write them a letter to say, "whatever you do, don't keep the Sabbaths"? That doesn't make a lick of sense, does it? In context, Paul taught these people to keep the Sabbath, among other things, and then they were faltering under pressure from their pagan friends (who probably called them judaizers), so he has to write to them to encourage them. But the next verse hammers it home! Those things ARE (present tense) a shadow of things TO (future tense) come. All hasn't been fulfilled! Jots and tittles still safely nestled in their respective places!
Yes, those days are a shadow of things to come and the church was not observe them, they are for the Jewish Millennial reign (Isa.66)
Once again, Paul states that the Christian is not to worry about days, but can regard every day alike (Rom.14:5).
And where before Exodus, do you see anyone observing a Sabbath? The Sabbaths were given to the Hebrews as stated very clearly in Ezek.20, as a sign of the special relationship between them and God. The sabbath was given in Genesis. How do you reconcile this verse? en 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. How could Abraham keep commandments? What exactly could those commandments have entailed? Who wrote the book of Genesis?
Moses wrote the book of Genesis, but the commandments that Abraham obeyed were those that were revealed to him.
Was there a commandment about marrying one's sister in the Law (Lev.18:9), well Abraham did not have that one and married his half-sister.
The Commandments that the Jews received revealed more of God's law than had been required before.
The Sabbath was given as a sign of the covenant between God and the Jew (Ezek.20) and thus it is not required for the Christian today.
Furthermore, Moses knew about the Sabbath prior to the Law being given. Law in Exodus 20, but Sabbath shows up 4 times in Exodus 16. Hmmmm.
It doesn't show up to anyone but to Israel, now does it?
It was made offical in Exodus 20, as were the other laws.
Funny how it doesn't show before the Hebrew people become a nation with the Exodus.
And the Trinity is a Christian doctrine, held by Christians as well as by Catholics. The doctrine of the Trinity is the product of a centuries long hellenized paganization of Christianity. It is purely Catholic and those who hold Catholic doctrines are themselves yielding to their claim on magesterium. Every doctrine that ever came out of the church of the universe neds to be thrown down and each Christian needs to work out his own salvation with fear and trembling. The doctrines of men, whether Papal or Calvinist, whether they wear the fish hat of dagon or a suit from Joseph A. Bank will be absolutely useless when Jesus returns and renders Judgment.
That was a nice bit of empty rhetoric.
You accept both the Father and Son as God do you not? Yep. God the Father, check, God the Son, check.
So you believe in at least two persons who are both God?
Yes, and Jesus says that he is God as well (Jn.8,17). Yep The concept of the trinity (or tri-unity) of God is very clear from the Scriptures. Unity, check. 3 headed Janus god, nope.
Do you regard both the Father and Son (being God) co-equal and co-eternal?
You did not address Matthew 28:19. What's to address? You have 3 entities there with three names.
Yes, each being God, three persons, one Godhead.
Why would you name attach the name of the Father and Son to a 'force'?
The Holy Ghost is called a 'he' in Jn.16:8 by the Lord Himself. Thank God Jesus didn't call the Holy Spirit "she" or else you guys wouldn't have given up Marionism, either.
Well, Christ did call the Holy Spirit 'he' which is a Person.
Since I do not believe in 'Marionism' I will attribute that your attempts to avoid the weakness of your arguments by appealing to 'red herrings'.
Joh 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Joh 16:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me; Joh 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; How many different entities does Jesus list here? I see 3, not one. How can Jesus go to the Father if He is the Father? Why would Jesus have to send the Spirit if He is the Spirit? By your math, they are all present at the same time.
Jesus is the Second member of the Trinity, the Father the first member, the Holy Ghost the third.
You are confusing the Trinity with Sabballianism, which makes God one in three modes.
That is also a heresy.
His humanity is what took on the sins of the world and died, not his Deity, which cannot die. Yep, the Word was made Flesh. Which is very puzzling why you believe there out to be a page separating the OT and the NT. Jesus is the Word of God. He wrote the Commnandments, yet you call yourself a Christian and don't keep his commandments. (Please see 1John 2:4 again). Beyond this, if Christ did not really die, then there is no salvation. If Christ did not really die, then it was all an academic exercise. Christ was actually a man, He said he came to do not His will, but the will of the Father "who art in heaven". Jesus was really on earth, 100%, and when He died, he really died, and the Father really resurrected Him.
And what does that have to do with the fact that Christ is the end of the Law (Rom.10:5)
The commandments in 1Jn.2:4 are summed in two, love God and man, and they are completed by walking in the Holy Spirit (Rom.6), not an obedience to Jewish laws (Acts 15)
Mat 12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah: Mat 12:40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. If Jesus didn't die 100%, and He did not stay that way for 3 days and nights, then He was not Jesus. This is the ONLY sign He gave.
And who said that He did not die, His humanity died.
He had two natures.
I thought you said you believed that Jesus Christ was God.
There is no verse 22 in Revelation 19. Are you telling me to read three chapters whole chapters of Revelation? What is your point? Revelation 5:9-10 plainly states that the priests will be taken out of every tongue and nation, which directly contradicts your thesis. You really ought to say, "Oh, I didn't see that one Chris, maybe you are on to something here."
I wasn't say to read Rev.19:22, I was saying read the last three chapters which state Christ coming back with His Church and setting up the Millennial kingdom and then the eternal kingdom.
Yes, those verses have to do with the ending of Jewish laws, not the Gentiles assuming them. The 10 Commandments are the Eternal Law of Love, binding on all men. 1Jo 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
Yes, that is right, we keep his commandments by being filled with the Spirit, not by keeping the Sabbath, which were not for the Church.
So if we are filled with the Spirit, we need not keep any Sabbath, we are keeping the commandments.
And that pertains to the nation of Israel, which no longer exists (in its theocratic state). I fear that you believe the Jew is grafted into the house of Gentile when he prophesses Christ. Who is the Israel of God in Galations 6:16? Why are the Gentiles adopted into the house of Abraham, not the Hebrews grafted into the house of the Philistine? What is Paul talking about grafting branches into a root that already exists in Romans 11:17? Why does Jesus call the Canaanite woman a dog and say he came to the lost sheep of Israel in Mathew 15:21-24 instead of glorifying her Gentileness and her lawlessness and scolding the stupid lost sheep of Israel? (and back to the trinity thing, why does Jesus say he was "sent" in Mat 22:24? If He is part of a three headed god, who sent Him?)
Clearly you are a very confused about what dispensational theology teaches and are just swinging at straw men.
Dispensational theology says that the Jew has been set aside while the 'fullness of gentiles' be brought into the church (Rom.11).
When that is complete the Jew will resume it's center of God's prophetic plan.
Christ said that when the Jew rejected Him that he would take the Kingdom of God (spiritual kingdom-Rom.14) from them and give it to another nation (Matthew 21:43), but the Jew will still receive the Kingdom of Heaven, which is a literal, physical Kingdom at the 2nd Advent.
Are you going to synagogue to worship? Mat 18:20 "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst."
So you are not going to a synagogue to worship, thus, you are not following Jewish traditions.
The Church worshipped in churches, not in synagoges on the first day of the week. Church is Ekklesia, an assembly or congregation, not a building. Is Christ's Bride made of brick and mortar or of love and obedience? It has been morphed into meaning buildings, diocese, conferences, etc. by men who seek to use control me by using the Word of God. See 1Peter 5:1-5
The local church gathered on the first day of the week.
The Church (all believers) are united spiritually with Christ.
The local 'church' is an assembly that gathers to worship and learn the word of God and use their spiritual gifts and has a distinct structure of Pastors/teachers and Deacons.
It can meet on any day to worship, not just Saturday or Sunday.
Those who were assembling to hear Paul were unsaved at the time. Tweet! doctrine of men alert, 15 yard penalty, repeat first down.
That is what the verse says.
But it always easier to ignore what the verse actually says when you want to believe something false.
The Gentiles do not believe the Gospel until verse 48, after the Jews rejected it.
There is no church meeting on the Sabbath day.
And those verses have to do with the Jew ending his Jewish practices, not the Gentiles assuming them. That is what the book of Galatians is about. Oh really, is that why there is a Letter of Paul to the Hebrews?
Yes, Gal. is to the Gentiles, telling them not to return to Jewish practices and the Book of Hebrews is to Jews who were returning to those old practices and Paul tells them that what they have now is better.
What is bizarre is that nowhere in the New Testament do the Apostles keep the Jewish Sabbath or sabbaths. Not only was the Sabbath kept from creation through the first century, but Doug has proven it lasted until the 4th Century. So much so that the church of the universe had to use a pagan emperor's civil laws to get rid of it!
Nobody proved anything.
There is not a scripture that states anyone in the Old Testament before Exodus 16 kept any Sabbath.
Nor, is there any scripture that states the Church kept it after.
Yes, Christ kept the law, all of the Law and He has come to give us grace and truth, not the Law (Jn.1:17) Joh 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. This is the part I alluded to before where I can understand differentiating between the 10 Commandments and the Law of Moses. If you read Exodus 20 closely, you will see that the 10 Commandments were given by God, not Moses. Moses started interceding at Exodus 20:19. Moreover: Deu 4:12 "Then the LORD spoke to you from the midst of the fire; you heard the sound of words, but you saw no form--only a voice. Deu 4:13 "So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone. Deu 4:14 "The LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that you might perform them in the land where you are going over to possess it. But, if this isn't enough for you, hear the Word of the Lord: Joh 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. Joh 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
And if they did not believe what Moses wrote they would not believe that Christ was their Messiah.
That has nothing to do with anyone keeping the Sabbath after the Jewish nation is dispersed.
Paul says that that the Law is not of faith, but the just shall live by faith and the Christian is to walk by faith (Gal.3, 2Cor.5).
Today (starting from Acts 2)saved Jews and saved Gentiles become Christians, and one Body. That's a mighty thin Bible you got there.
That is where the Church began.
At least I read my Bible, all of it.
I don't call myself a Protestant, I am a Baptist. That's a new one on me. I don' call myself Protestant or Catholic either, but I have never heard a Baptist reject Rome, only protest it.
Well, that is not suprising since your understanding of Church history is clearly very weak.
What the Protestant's were 'protesting' were the RCC's use of the Law instead of Grace.
There is no difference between a Christian of either Jew or Gentile-spiritually. But Paul was racially a Jew, that was his racial background. Most Christians come from a gentile background and are not of the racial seed of Abraham. Prove it from scripture.
Prove what?
Do you come from the racial seed of Abraham?
Paul did.
Most people saved today are gentiles, not Jews.
Paul states in Romans that the 'hardening of the Jews' is so the 'fullness of the Gentiles' can come in (Heb.9-11).
You haven't proven anything you stand for yet from scripture.
It is defined as 'gross immorality' Just "gross" imorality? Not just a little immorality? How do you define morality, btw?
That is how the dictionary defines it.
I can tell you that morality has nothing to do with keeping the Sabbaths.
The King James translaters kept the word as Easter because they knew the word Passover was incorrect,it being the days of unleavened bread, thus being after the 14th day. Bwaaaaahaaaaaa. That is hilarious, man!
It is-well it is true.
The Passover was kept on the 14 day and the verse says now it was the days of unleavened bread.
The Feast of Unleavened Bread had already begun and the day of Passover was already over.
So, the correct translation is Easter, not Passover.
Since you have Greek software, I am sure you already know this, but I will post it just the same: Easter (3957) ēs´tẽr (πάσχα, páscha, from Aramaic פסחא, paṣḥā' and Hebrew פסח, peṣaḥ, the Passover festival): The English word comes from the Anglo-Saxon Eastre or Estera, a Teutonic goddess...
And the creator of the word 'passover' Tyndale, translated the word 'Easter'in that passage as well as others.
One can use what is known a 'dynamic equalivant' when translating from language to another.
The modern King James 21, has 'Easter'.
In the Greek, there is no word 'Passover' and the Roman Catholic Douey Rheims, just translitates it 'pasche'.
So if you want to go by the 'Greek' then you have to translate the word as 'pasche'.
If you ask a modern Greek today what is their word for Easter, they would tell you pasche
The book of Galatians is dealing with saved Gentiles who are being deceived into going into Jewish customs, e.g. circumcision. I think we already went over this. Paul was called to the Gentiles. Galatians were Gentiles.
Yes, and the issue they were dealing with was going back to Jewish traditions, like circumsion.(Gal.2:12-13)
Do you even ever read your Bible?
Chapter 4 is dealing with the difference between Law and Grace, the servant being under the Law, but the son being under grace. Everyone has always been saved by Grace, the pre-incarnate believers, the folks who knew Jesus, and those of who profess the name of Jesus today. Salvation has never been able to be earned through works.
Yes, and that is what the Jews stumbled over, counting on the Law to save them and they were deceiving the Gentiles into going back to it.
The Law was only meant to show how bad a sinner one was, not to save anyone.
Thus, the 'weak and beggarly elements are the Law which could not save, nor could not even be kept (Gal.2) so they were exchanging one form of bondage (Idol worship) for another (legalism) Read it again, the passage clearly states the Galations did not know God, nor did God know them, when they were using the "weak and beggarly elements".
You really are quite deceived.
The Galations were saved,(Gal.3:2), 'This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith'.
These were saved Gentile converts who were being deceived by the Jews who followed Paul trying to get them to keep Jewish laws.
Paul had past throught there earlier (Gal.4:15).
So the 'weak and beggerly elements' are those that the Gentiles had left and would return to if they started following Jewish practices.
Gal 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. (paganism reference, clearly) Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Dropping a bit of context there aren't you?
They zealously affect you but not well , who is the 'they' it is the Jewish circumsion group that would had the Gentiles start follow days, months, time and years.
Read the entire chapter not the verses you want to read and read them in context with the other chapters.
You are just trying to explain away verses that you can't deal with scripturally by ignorning the context.
Talk about being dishonest!
Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures....(Matt.22:29). I err, huh? Which one of us is worhipping the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and which has declared the One True God's commandments to be of no effect?
You are not worshipping the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob if you deny the name that He has given us, The Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
You are not worshipping the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob by following laws you were not meant to follow, and who Abraham, Issac and Jacob never followed-Sabbath observance.
Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
And there are three that bear record in Heaven the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one.
There is no requirement for any Christian to follow the sabbath or any Jewish law not clearly repeated in the New Testament.
We walk by faith, not by the Law.
By the way, I do not observe Christmas or Easter.
I have no problem with those who do, but I do not place any special emphasis on them.
No, here is what is happening.
I am reading what the verse says in English.
Nothing is said about observing any day, since as Paul says, one can regard every day alike.
So your appeal to the 'Greek' is just smoke and mirrors.
Rom 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
Paul makes it very clear that the 'day' is just that a day, any day of the week.
So the word 'holy day' doesn't have to mentioned and it is you who is making an assumption that there are Holy Days in the New Testament.
You are free to observe or not observe.
Don't let yourself be judged on what you do or don't observe.
No, you're not. You're reading what a translator says it says in English and then you're inserting your own opinion into it.
Rom 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
Paul makes it very clear that the 'day' is just that a day, any day of the week.
Actually, you're the one making the assertion that the "day" being referred to is one, or all, of the Lord's holy days. Specifically, you're making the interpretation that Paul, who believed "all that is in the law and prophets" is saying that it's "optional" for those who follow God to observe his holy days. You're saying it's "optional" followers of God observe the 4th commandment.
You're simply wrong because as has been pointed out, this verse IN CONTEXT has everything to do with days devoted to eating and drinking practices and nothing to with the Lord's holy days. One cannot read chapter 14 of Romans and come away with anything different unless one is reading it with blinders on. Which of course you are. You're reading it with the blinders of culture, tradition and history.
So the word 'holy day' doesn't have to mentioned and it is you who is making an assumption that there are Holy Days in the New Testament.
There certainly are holy days in the new testament. As pointed out previously, there is a specific greek word that designate these days as none other than the days created by Christ for his followers to observe. This word is found in the following verses:
Mat_26:5, Mat_27:15, Mar_14:2, Mar_15:6, Luk_2:41-42 (2), Luk_22:1, Luk_23:17, Joh_2:23, Joh_4:45 (2), Joh_5:1, Joh_6:4, Joh_7:2, Joh_7:8 (2), Joh_7:10-11 (2), Joh_7:14, Joh_7:37, Joh_11:56, Joh_12:12, Joh_12:20, Joh_13:1, Joh_13:29, Act_18:21,Col_2:16
You'll note that it is NOT used in Romans at all, much less Romans 14.
So I don't have to assume that there are holy days. But you, in your eagerness to keep your tradition, have to rationalize away the fact that up to this point, the followers of God traditionally, biblically, historically and religiously observed the holy days that the Lord created.
It looks to me like your belief system is based on selected passages from the Bible which, when blown way out of context, permit one to divide scripture into two groups. Anything that sounds remotely hard or like you might have to "do" something goes into the "stupid, inferior Jew" pile, and all the stuff that sounds like you can do whatever you like goes into the "me" pile.
You had simply said "yes". Here we are, many kilobytes later, arriving at the same exact conclusion. The discussion has come full circle.
Moses wrote the book of Genesis, but the commandments that Abraham obeyed were those that were revealed to him.
Funny how it doesn't show before the Hebrew people become a nation with the Exodus.
Gen 2:2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.
Gen 2:3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.
Yes, that is right, we keep his commandments by being filled with the Spirit, not by keeping the Sabbath, which were not for the Church.
You cannot show me a scripture that repeals the Sabbath.
Dispensational theology says that the Jew has been set aside while the 'fullness of gentiles' be brought into the church (Rom.11).
When that is complete the Jew will resume it's center of God's prophetic plan.
Which is in direct contradiction with scriptures that I have posted time and again. There is neither Jew nor Greek.
It can meet on any day to worship, not just Saturday or Sunday.
I think we have finally hit on the root of the problem. You can meet on any day to worship. You can fellowship whenever you wish. However, the Commandment says to keep the Sabbath Holy and to rest on it. It is not until later on in the Law of Moses where the Sabbath Commanded to be a Holy Convocation. I know of a Sabbatarian Congregation in Wichita the actually meets on both days!
There is no church meeting on the Sabbath day.
This is devoid of scriptural proof.
Paul says that that the Law is not of faith, but the just shall live by faith and the Christian is to walk by faith (Gal.3, 2Cor.5).
Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
At least I read my Bible, all of it.
Apparently, you skipped the verse I just posted above this one.
Prove what? Do you come from the racial seed of Abraham? Paul did. Most people saved today are gentiles, not Jews. Paul states in Romans that the 'hardening of the Jews' is so the 'fullness of the Gentiles' can come in (Heb.9-11). You haven't proven anything you stand for yet from scripture.
Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
That is how the dictionary defines it. (iniquity)
G458
ἀνομία
anomia; from G459; lawlessness: - lawless deed (1), lawless deeds (2), lawlessness (12).
I can tell you that morality has nothing to do with keeping the Sabbaths.
You got a scripture for that?
One can use what is known a 'dynamic equalivant' when translating from language to another.
You're theology is quite dynamic.
You are just trying to explain away verses that you can't deal with scripturally by ignorning the context.
Talk about being dishonest!
I am, huh? How's about squaring your "dynamic" theology with those huge verses above?
You are not worshipping the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob by following laws you were not meant to follow, and who Abraham, Issac and Jacob never followed-Sabbath observance.
Mat 7:22 "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'
Mat 7:23
[II Kings 17:22-23] The Israelites persisted in all the sins of Jeroboam and did not turn away from them until the LORD removed them from his presence, as he had warned through all his servants the prophets. So the people of Israel were taken from their homeland into exile in Assyria, and they are still there.
The above scripture was written after the Southern Kingdom of Judah was taken captive to Babylon (590 B.C.), some say written By Jeremiah....others say by Ezra himself.....after the return. There is no scripture that chronicles their return from Assyria and I have pointed out in several previous posts that some Israelites did indeed choose to stay with Judah [II Chronicles 11:14-17][II Chronicles 15:9]. These folks were obviously not of great number because of the comments in the above paragraph about Israel still being in Assyria! These few Israelites, by migrating to Judah from the north, became known as Jews.....much the same way as the Tribe of Benjamin and the portion of Levi that decided to stay with Judah.
To reiterate.....you cannot find any of the ten tribes mentioned in the two books that chronicle the return of the Jews from Babylon. By this time, in the absence of the Ten Tribes, Judah itself is now being referred to again as Israel....as they rightfully should be.
Many people of the other 10 tribes came back with Ezra.
Chapter and Verse, please?
It is clear that in 2 Chronicles 35:18 both Judah, the Levites and Israel were present.(623BC)
[II Chronicles 35:18]The Passover had not been observed like this in Israel since the days of the prophet Samuel; and none of the kings of Israel had ever celebrated such a Passover as did Josiah, with the priests, the Levites and all Judah and Israel who were there with the people of Jerusalem. As stated earlier.....in the absence of the "Now Banished" Ten Tribes, the writers of "Kings and Chronicles" refer to the Southern Kingdom as Israel many times. [II Kings 23:21-23] is a companion verse to the scripture you provided and talks of the same event during the reign of King Josiah. If you notice further on in the chapter (verse 26-27) Nevertheless, the LORD did not turn away from the heat of his fierce anger, which burned against Judah because of all that Manasseh had done to provoke him to anger So the LORD said, "I will remove Judah also from my presence as I removed Israel, and I will reject Jerusalem, the city I chose, and this temple, about which I said, There shall my Name be."
Now, if The Ten Tribes are now back in town....as you seem to think....what do you think God will tell them to do while he is banishing Judah to Babylon? "Hang around the beach for 70 years or so....they'll be back!"
Christ resurrected sometime after 5PM Jewish time Saturday (which would be for the Jews Sunday)
Scripture does not agree with this statement: [Matthew 28:1] oye <3796> de <1161> {NOW LATE} sabbatwn <4521> th <3588> {ON SABBATH,} epifwskoush <2020> (5723) {AS IT WAS GETTING DUSK} eiV <1519> {TOWARD [THE]} mian <3391> {FIRST [DAY]} sabbatwn <4521> {OF [THE] WEEK,} hlqen <2064> (5627) {CAME} maria <3137> {MARY} h <3588> {THE} magdalhnh <3094> {MAGDALENE} kai <2532> {AND} h <3588> {THE} allh <243> {OTHER} maria <3137> {MARY} qewrhsai <2334> (5658) {TO SEE} ton <3588> {THE} tafon <5028> {SEPULCHRE.}
I'm sure I don't need to tell you that "Late on Sabbath" means.....still the Sabbath day. And I'm sure you have read verse 6 that says: "He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay." As it was getting dusk means "not yet quite sunset". Mary is visiting the tomb late on Saturday and finds that our Saviour has risen! Even the King James, in it's clumsy manner says, "In the end of the Sabbath".....meaning late in the daylight period of Saturday.
There is a 2000 year old conspiracy to try and convince mainstream Christianity that our Lord resurrected on Sunday. This allows "YOU KNOW WHO" to celebrate their "INVINCIBLE DAY of the SUN".
There are no.....repeat....no scriptures that even hint of a Sunday resurrection! There are many scriptures that prove a Sabbath resurrection! You've just read one!
It states in 1Cor.16 that the local church was gathering on the first day of the week, not the last day.
The first verse gives it away....A collection for God's people! Verse 3 says Paul is taking the money to Jerusalem. Aren't there any of God's people in Corinth? This verse clears this up; [Acts 11:28] One of them, named Agabus, stood up and through the Spirit predicted that a severe famine would spread over the entire Roman world. (This happened during the reign of Claudius.) The disciples, each according to his ability, decided to provide help for the brothers living in Judea. This they did, sending their gift to the elders by Barnabas and Saul.
They were collecting for a specific thing [Romans 15:25-28] references the same offering. It was to be given to a specific person (Paul) at a specific time (when he came through town) at a specific place (lay by him in store) at home and the command to do this is specific to the Corinthians.
Finally, this letter says Paul will be arriving during during the "Days of Unleavened Bread" (verse 8). Sabbaton should be translated as the First of the Sabbaths.....not first of the week! There were 2 High Sabbaths during the Feast and 7 weekly Sabbaths during the counting of the Omer to Pentecost. The King James and other translations have murdered this scripture, trying to make it fit their Sunday agenda!
I'll close by asking the same question as before. Why do you hate God's Sabbath so much? You have lost this argument as long as you cannot show me a scripture that says, "Do not worship The lord on Saturday, anymore!"
Wow...that's some mighty big writing... :-)
No....that's some mighty....writing big!
Maybe not....but you still seem to think that the King James translation of Passover to Easter [Acts 12:4] is legitimate. (post #398)
You'll note that the King James is the only translation here that says "Easter".
But, I'm with you. If folks want to celebrate Christmas.....fine. Just know exactly what it actually is you are celebrating. It's definitely not the birth of our Saviour!
I'm sorry....that should be post #382 where you said Easter was the correct translation!
Yes, that means that the other tribes are mixed in with Judah, just as I said.
To reiterate.....you cannot find any of the ten tribes mentioned in the two books that chronicle the return of the Jews from Babylon. By this time, in the absence of the Ten Tribes, Judah itself is now being referred to again as Israel....as they rightfully should be.
I can find Asar mentioned in Luke and you have admitted that there were those who stayed in the South, so we know that the other tribes are now mixed with Judah.
So, today, all Jews are considered to be from any of the 12 tribes.
Many people of the other 10 tribes came back with Ezra. Chapter and Verse, please?
They stayed with the Southern kingdom as you admitted above, so they came back with them.
We know that the tribe of Aser was there, now don't we.
So save the double talk.
You have admitted that people from the other tribes were with Judah when the 10 tribes went to Assyria.
100 years later they were found having a passover feast with Josiah.
It is clear that in 2 Chronicles 35:18 both Judah, the Levites and Israel were present.(623BC) [II Chronicles 35:18]The Passover had not been observed like this in Israel since the days of the prophet Samuel; and none of the kings of Israel had ever celebrated such a Passover as did Josiah, with the priests, the Levites and all Judah and Israel who were there with the people of Jerusalem. As stated earlier.....in the absence of the "Now Banished" Ten Tribes, the writers of "Kings and Chronicles" refer to the Southern Kingdom as Israel many times. [II Kings 23:21-23] is a companion verse to the scripture you provided and talks of the same event during the reign of King Josiah. If you notice further on in the chapter (verse 26-27) Nevertheless, the LORD did not turn away from the heat of his fierce anger, which burned against Judah because of all that Manasseh had done to provoke him to anger So the LORD said, "I will remove Judah also from my presence as I removed Israel, and I will reject Jerusalem, the city I chose, and this temple, about which I said, There shall my Name be."
And the verse is very clear-Judah and Israel are mentioned separately.
I know the 10 tribes were gone in Assyria, but these who remained.
Stop your double-talking.
Now, if The Ten Tribes are now back in town....as you seem to think....what do you think God will tell them to do while he is banishing Judah to Babylon? "Hang around the beach for 70 years or so....they'll be back!"
Did I say that the 10 Tribes as tribes were present?
I said that that there were people from the 10 tribes present and those went into exile with Judah and returned with her.
Clearly you love straw men arguments.
Christ resurrected sometime after 5PM Jewish time Saturday (which would be for the Jews Sunday) Scripture does not agree with this statement: [Matthew 28:1] oye <3796> de <1161> {NOW LATE} sabbatwn <4521> th <3588> {ON SABBATH,} epifwskoush <2020> (5723) {AS IT WAS GETTING DUSK} eiV <1519> {TOWARD [THE]} mian <3391> {FIRST [DAY]} sabbatwn <4521> {OF [THE] WEEK,} hlqen <2064> (5627) {CAME} maria <3137> {MARY} h <3588> {THE} magdalhnh <3094> {MAGDALENE} kai <2532> {AND} h <3588> {THE} allh <243> {OTHER} maria <3137> {MARY} qewrhsai <2334> (5658) {TO SEE} ton <3588> {THE} tafon <5028> {SEPULCHRE.}
The Lord was in the tomb three days and three nights,starting on Wednesday after sundown, and Jewish time is from sunrise to sunset.
The Lord could have risen anytime after Sat. sunset.
So for the Jew the first day of the week (Sunday) would have begun anytime after Sunset Sat.
I'm sure I don't need to tell you that "Late on Sabbath" means.....still the Sabbath day. And I'm sure you have read verse 6 that says: "He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay." As it was getting dusk means "not yet quite sunset". Mary is visiting the tomb late on Saturday and finds that our Saviour has risen! Even the King James, in it's clumsy manner says, "In the end of the Sabbath".....meaning late in the daylight period of Saturday.
The word for 'in the end of'(Opse) can mean 'long after' 'the sabbath having passed'(Strongs 3796). As for the word for the word you think means 'dusk', epiphosko and it means to 'dawn' not dusk (see Strongs 2020)
The interliner got it wrong!
What the Bible says 'as it began to dawn, which means early morning the women came to the tomb.
Christ rose sometime before dawn.
When the sabbath was past and very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.(Mark.16:2).
It is amazing how a little comparing scripture with scripture will clear up any confusion about the 'Greek'.
There is a 2000 year old conspiracy to try and convince mainstream Christianity that our Lord resurrected on Sunday. This allows "YOU KNOW WHO" to celebrate their "INVINCIBLE DAY of the SUN". There are no.....repeat....no scriptures that even hint of a Sunday resurrection! There are many scriptures that prove a Sabbath resurrection! You've just read one!
I just gave you Mark.16:2.
Every reference to the Resurrection is to the 1st day of the week.
You cannot show one translation that translated the verse as you believe it should be with 'dusk' instead of 'Dawn
And you had to run to a poorly translated interliner.
Any English translations that say they went to the tomb as dusk was beginning?
Every translation I have reference to has the word dawn not dusk, because that is what the Greek word is.
Christ rose on the first day of the week which was a Sunday.
He rose sometime after sundown and the women went to the tomb in the early morning when the Sabbath had ended.
It states in 1Cor.16 that the local church was gathering on the first day of the week, not the last day. Yes, Paul was collecting for a specific thing but he was instructing how to gather the money, in there Finally, this letter says Paul will be arriving during during the "Days of Unleavened Bread" (verse 8). Sabbaton should be translated as the First of the Sabbaths.....not first of the week! There were 2 High Sabbaths during the Feast and 7 weekly Sabbaths during the counting of the Omer to Pentecost. The King James and other translations have murdered this scripture, trying to make it fit their Sunday agenda!
No, why would 'sabbaton' be translated 'as the first of the sabbaths'(plural) if the word is in the singular.
The sense determines the meaning and in this context it is referring to Sunday, not Saturday.
Iit is you who is murdering the scripture with your weird translations!
As I said, the first step in heresy is 'wresting' the scriptures.
So now you are just making up your own translations.
There is no word 'sabbaton' in 1Cor.16:8, the word is Pentecost.
So what the heck are you talking about?
I'll close by asking the same question as before. Why do you hate God's Sabbath so much? You have lost this argument as long as you cannot show me a scripture that says, "Do not worship The lord on Saturday, anymore!"
No, I have won the argument by showing that the Sabbath is for a sign to the Jews (Ezek.20) and it is nowhere given to the Church or seen to be followed by anyone before Exodus 16.
Your Sabbath observance is simply legalism and has nothing to do with anyone's Christian walk.
And all of your scripture twisting and word play does not change the fact that you cannot find a single New Testament passage after Acts 2 that requires any Christian to keep any Sabbath.
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect to holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days (Col.2:16)
Can't get much clearer than that!
Those things will come back but are not for today.(Vs.17)
No, the King James is not the only translation that has the word 'Easter', the King James 21 has it as well.
Moreover, Tyndale, Bishops, The Great Bible, the Geneva 1557 had it as well.
Historically the passover had to occur on the 14th day and the feast of unleavened bread began on the 15th.
The Greek word can and should be translated as Easter for that verse because it is the correct word to use.
The modern Greek word for Easter is pascha.
No Sabbath given as part of the New Testament law.
Christian is not under Law, he walks by Grace.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.