Posted on 04/19/2013 9:44:14 PM PDT by DouglasKC
Why do most people keep holidays that are different from the festivals listed and described in the pages of the Bible?
Why do most people keep holidays that are different from the festivals listed and described in the pages of the Bible? When were the biblical feasts abandoned, and why? How can we be sure which sacred days Christians should observe?
Here are the answers!
Jesus Himself set an example for us (1 John 2:6) in observing the sacred festivals commanded in the Holy Scriptures (Matthew 26:17; Mark 1:21; Luke 4:16, 31; John 7:8-10, 14, 37). His apostles and their converts, walking in His footsteps and following His example, continued observing the same festivals (Acts 2:1; 12:2-4; 16:13; 18:4, 19, 21; 20:6; 27:9; 1 Corinthians 5:7-8). The Encyclopaedia Britannica (13th edition), under Festivals," states that it is "abundantly clear that Christ and His disciples observed the appointed Jewish feasts."
Faithful Christians continued, for several centuries after Christ's death, to follow His and the apostles' examples in keeping the festivals. But this all changed when a politicized and paganized form of Christianity developed within the Roman Empire.
Historian Stewart Easton explains how and when the change occurred—with the help of the Roman emperors. "Constantine [A.D. 306-337], though not baptized a Christian until he was on his deathbed, took an active interest in the [Christian] religion, presiding over the important Council of Nicea ... During the fourth century, under imperial protection ..., the Christian religion ... made rapid progress, even in the rural areas where the old gods had never altogether lost their appeal. When at the end of the century (A.D. 392) [Emperor] Theodosius I decreed that henceforth Christianity was to be the only religion in the [Roman] empire, the countryside perforce had to submit and adopt at least the forms of Christianity. But it would probably have been difficult for any observer to detect much difference ... It is clear that these folk knew little enough of the teachings or theology of Christianity, and the festivals and ceremonies of paganism for the most part were incorporated directly into the new official religion ( The Heritage of the Past: From the Earliest Times to 1500 , 1964, p. 402, emphasis added).
Charles Guignebert, who was a professor of the history of Christianity at the University of Paris, describes the continuation of the process: "Now at the beginning of the fifth century, the ignorant and the semi-Christians thronged into the Church in numbers ... They had forgotten none of their pagan customs ... The bishops of that period had to content themselves with redressing, as best they could, and in experimental fashion, the shocking malformations of the Christian faith which they perceived around them ... They had to be content with ... postponing until a later date the task of eradicating their superstitions, which they preserved intact ... This 'later date' never arrived, and the Church adapted to herself, as well as she could, them and their customs and beliefs. On their side, they were content to dress up their paganism in a Christian cloak" ( The Early History of Christianity , 1927, pp. 208-210, emphasis added). During this time—in the early centuries after the passing of the original apostles—observance of biblical practices, including the seventh-day Sabbath and God's festivals, practically disappeared from the new and growing religion. They were replaced with other practices and a new set of religious holidays.
Prophecy, however, reveals that God will require the whole world to observe these same biblical festivals in the future. For example, Zechariah prophesies that God will require people to attend the Feast of Tabernacles after Christ returns (Zechariah 14:16). Isaiah prophesies that people of all lands will regularly keep the weekly Sabbath during Christ's millennial reign (Isaiah 66:23 ). Isaiah and Micah prophesy of that time: "Many nations shall come and say, 'Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach us His ways, and we shall walk in His paths.' For out of Zion the law shall go forth, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem" (Micah 4:2; compare Isaiah 2:3).
Some faithful Christians to this day observe the sacred festivals, the same festivals of God that Christ kept. God instituted these annual occasions to keep His people aware of Christ's mission as the Messiah. These sacred days really are Christian festivals in every respect, and Christians everywhere should observe them.
Well, he also mentions "Sabbaths" so the answer is pretty obvious.
But fulfillment has come.
Do you want to find that word, "Judaizer" for me in scripture? I think you're really confusing that with the circumcision parties that were sent from James....and the Jerusalem Church [Galatians 2:12][Titus 1:10][Galatians 5:12][Acts 15:1].
Nothing was ever said against observing the Feasts, Sabbaths and Dietary regulations in scripture. If you think it was....I challenge you to show me.
You're interpretation of [Colossians 2:16] is exactly backwards from what Paul was explaining to these folks. Let's look at that passage without the added words the translators included.....to make it more clear for their heresy:
[Colossians 2:16-17] Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath "days": 17Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body "is" of Christ.
The highlighted words are not inspired. They were added by human translators.
Here is the Greek: ¶ Μὴ not οὖν therefore/then τις some/any (nom) ὑμᾶς you(pl) (acc) κρινέτω let-him/her/it-be-JUDGE-ing! ἐν in/among/by (+dat) βρώσει eating (dat) { ἢ or ἐν in/among/by (+dat) πόσει drinking (dat) ♦ καὶ and/also ἐν in/among/by (+dat) πόσει drinking (dat) } , ἢ or ἐν in/among/by (+dat) μέρει parts of the country (dat) ἑορτῆς festival (gen) ἢ or { νουμηνίας new moon (gen), new moons (acc) ♦ νεομηνίας new moon (gen), new moons (acc) } ἢ or σαββάτων sabbaths (gen) ·
ἅ who/whom/which (nom|acc) ἐστιν he/she/it-is σκιὰ umbra (nom|voc) τῶν the (gen) μελλόντων let-them-be-ABOUT-ing! (classical), while ABOUT-ing (gen) , τὸ the (nom|acc) δὲ But also σῶμα body (nom|acc|voc) { χριστοῦ Messiah (gen) ♦ τοῦ the (gen) χριστοῦ Messiah (gen) }
Do you know what the "Body of Christ (Messiah)" is? It's commonly referred to as the Church....believers.
Now....read the passage without the added words placed there by biased translators, attempting to put a "spin" on Holy Scripture. Here it is for your edification:
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths which are a shadow of things to come..... but the body of Christ.
In other words the inspired Greek tells these previously pagan Colossians to not pay any attention to criticism they were receiving for their new found observances of the Feasts, Sabbaths, New Moons and Dietary regulations. That is.....except, of course...... from members of the Body of Christ...the Church.
See how clear the word of Yahweh is when you brush away the scales from your Catholic/Protestant eyes?
Now......what exactly contradicts Romans 14?
Wait a sec. I not saying anything "against" observing the Feasts if someone wants to. All I've said is Christians are under no obligation to do so. If someone wants to observe the feasts, sacrifice goats or even howl at the moon - have at it.
O.K. Fair enough.
Why would he say these things were just a "shadow of the things to come" but that the substance "belongs to Christ" if he was defending them? That makes no sense and would completely contradict Romans 14.
Now......what about [Romans 14] and the supposed contradictions? Let's nail this one done.....because there are no contradictions.
The only thing fulfilled at this time has been the Sacrifice. The sacrificial rites were abolished upon the Cross. They were a shadow of His sacrifice. The Ten Commandments remain intact.
They are not offensive and I never said they were offensive. Reread my post again and again until you get it. Thank you.
Still awaiting your explanation here......of what the contradiction is. I'm very curious to know what it is that is conflicting to you.
The contradiction was based on my previous understanding of some other posts claiming that Christians are obligated to celebrate the OT festivals. That would contradict Rom. 14 in that it is passing judgment on a Christian for their decision to follow or not follow the Jewish (non-moral) law. Rom 14 says it doesn't matter one way or the other what a person chooses in this regard. Which is why in my last post I said I have no problem with someone celebrating them if that's what they want to do. "As for the one weak in faith, welcome him but not to quarrel over opinions."
Romans 14 is an interesting passage of scripture....and universally misunderstood because of purposeful and deliberate mistranslations by the Main Stream Church and their translators. They attempt to bring this passage closer to the false theology they have been teaching for 1700 years rather than just letting the Greek speak for itself....making everything very clear.
This chapter is not about the Law....or any Law. It is simply an effort by Paul to settle a dispute by new Christians in Rome regarding the meat acquired from Roman meat markets that had been sacrificed to idols. It was not a "Big Deal" (verse 1). It was about some folks wishing to eat vegetables (verse 2) on certain days (verse 5) and the fact they were being ridiculed for doing so (verses 3&4) by other Christians had caused some strife....and Paul was attempting to mediate. The days mentioned were the days the Temple Priests Throughout Rome sold "Sacrificed" meat to the local markets to be purchased by the general public.
Paul explains the non importance of this in another passage [I Corinthians 8] and explains that idols are nothing so if you aren't sure whether or not the meat was "tainted" by being sacrificed to a pagan idol....then go ahead and eat it because idols are nothing! But if the possibility that it was sacrificed still bothers you....then don't eat it. Eat vegetables that day without criticism from others (verse 13/Romans 14).
The Greek word for "day" used in this passage (verses 5&6) is HEMERA (ἡμέραν) and designates a normal day of no religious significance. They are not disputing whether the Sabbath Day (σάββατον) should still be observed and the word Sabbath appears no where in this passage.
One of the most deliberate mistranslations (to agree with Catholic Theology) in scripture occurs in [Romans 14] and is found in the 14th verse:
King James: I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
Here is the Greek: Οἶδα I-have-KNOW-ed καὶ and/also πέπεισμαι I-have-been-PERSUADE/CONVINCE-ed ἐν in/among/by (+dat) κυρίῳ lord (dat); a lord ([Adj] dat) Ἰησοῦ Jeshua (dat, gen, voc), Jeshua (indecl) , ὅτι because/that οὐδὲν not one (nom|acc) κοινὸν common/vulgar ([Adj] acc, nom|acc|voc) δι’ through (+acc), because of (+gen) { αὐτοῦ him/it/same (gen) ♦ ἑαυτοῦ him-/her-/itself (gen) } · εἰ if μὴ not τῷ the (dat) λογιζομένῳ while being-RECKON-ed (dat) τι some/any (nom|acc) κοινὸν common/vulgar ([Adj] acc, nom|acc|voc) εἶναι to-be , ἐκείνῳ from that place (dat) κοινόν common/vulgar
The word the translators want you to believe says "Unclean" is KOINOS and actually means "Common" or Vulgar. Why do they want you to believe it says unclean? So they can continue to push their false tradition that the Dietary Laws of Yahweh were done away with.....and it's now O.K. to eat everything. When the temple priests made their sacrifices with clean meat (beef, lamb, chicken, etc.) it then became "Tainted" and was referred to as "Common" because of the pagan sacrifice.... and this was what some of the folks were upset about.
How do we know this is a deliberate mistranslation? Let's look at the King James again: [Acts 10:14] But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
look at that! The King James has used to word "Common" and the word "Unclean" in one sentence! Let's look at the Greek!
Ὁ the (nom) δὲ But also Πέτρος Peter (nom) εἶπεν he/she/it-SAY/TELL-ed , Μηδαμῶς certainly not , κύριε lord (voc); a lord ([Adj] voc) · ὅτι because/that οὐδέποτε never ἔφαγον I-EAT-ed, they-EAT-ed πᾶν every (nom|acc|voc) κοινὸν common/vulgar ([Adj] acc, nom|acc|voc) { ἢ or ♦ καὶ and/also } ἀκάθαρτον unclean ([Adj] acc, nom|acc|voc) .
Here is another passage which uses the correct word (AKATHARTOS) for "Unclean": [Revelation 18:2] And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
And the Greek: Καὶ and/also { ἔκραξεν he/she/it-CRY-ed-OUT ♦ ἔκραξεν he/she/it-CRY-ed-OUT ἐν in/among/by (+dat) } ἰσχυρᾷ mighty ([Adj] dat) φωνῇ sound/voice (dat); you(sg)-are-being-SOUND-ed, he/she/it-should-be-SOUND-ing, you(sg)-should-be-being-SOUND-ed , λέγων while SAY/TELL-ing (nom) , { Ἔπεσεν he/she/it-FALL-ed ♦ Ἔπεσεν he/she/it-FALL-ed ἔπεσεν he/she/it-FALL-ed } Βαβυλὼν Babylon (nom|voc) ἡ the (nom) μεγάλη great ([Adj] nom|voc) , καὶ and/also ἐγένετο he/she/it-was-BECOME/HAPPEN-ed κατοικητήριον dwelling (nom|acc|voc) { δαιμόνων demons (gen) ♦ δαιμονίων demons (gen) } , καὶ and/also φυλακὴ prison (nom|voc) παντὸς every (gen) πνεύματος spirit/breath (gen) ἀκαθάρτου unclean ([Adj] gen) , καὶ and/also φυλακὴ prison (nom|voc) παντὸς every (gen) ὀρνέου bird (gen) ἀκαθάρτου unclean ([Adj] gen) { καὶ and/also μεμισημένου having-been-DESTEST-ed (gen) ♦ [ καὶ and/also φυλακὴ prison (nom|voc) παντὸς every (gen) θηρίου brutal person (gen) ἀκαθάρτου unclean ([Adj] gen) ] καὶ and/also μεμισημένου having-been-DESTEST-ed (gen) } .
In [Romans 14] the translators choose to call KOINOS "Unclean", but they cannot do that in [Acts 10] because the actual Greek word that DOES mean "Unclean".....sits there right beside the word "KOINOS/Common". So....you see.....when the Church (through their translators) come upon an opportunity to push their agenda (Romans 14:14) they really have no problem falsifying what the original language actually says.....and people just sit in their pews every Sunday believing it!
>> “So....you see.....when the Church (through their translators) come upon an opportunity to push their agenda (Romans 14:14) they really have no problem falsifying what the original language actually says.....and people just sit in their pews every Sunday believing it!” <<
.
From whence cometh:
Matthew 7:
[21] Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
[22] Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
[23] And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Thank you for posting this.
Thanks for the reply...sorry about not getting back to it sooner.
Scripture details a number of "covenants", or agreements, between man and God. For example:
Gen_9:17 And said to Noah, "This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the earth."
This is a covenant that God made specifically with Noah, but extended it to all a flesh. His sign of the agreement is the rainbow. This covenant is still in effect.
When scripture speaks of the "old" covenant it's not talking about everything that is in the books of the old testament. It is talking specifically about the covenant that was struck at Mount Sinai, the heart of which was the ten commandments.
Exo 34:28 So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.
The new covenant:
Heb 8:8 Because finding fault with them, He says: "BEHOLD, THE DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH—
An important thing to realize is that the word translated "new" is more accurately "refreshed", or "renewed". It's the greek word (transliterated) "kainos". Contrast this with the "neos" which means recently born, or new.
So the "new" covenant is really renewed as the next verses show:
Heb 8:9 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS IN THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DISREGARDED THEM, SAYS THE LORD.
What was wrong? "They" did not continue in his covenant. The covenant was broken by the people.
Heb 8:10 FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS IN THEIR MIND AND WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
The heart of the new and the old covenant is the same...the ten commandments. The difference is that they are no longer just words written on stone, but they are written on our hearts through the agency of the holy spirit.
The written "law" is our school master that defines sin. The laws, when written on hearts, are the written definition of Godly love toward our Lord and others.
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.