Posted on 07/01/2023 5:39:55 PM PDT by vespa300
Update (June 29, 2023): The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of a Pennsylvania postal worker who lost his job for refusing to take Sunday delivery shifts due to his Christian observance of the Sabbath.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...
There are three types of law in the Bible. This is known as the Tripartate View of the Law.
Moral: Summarized in the 10 Commandments, they are binding on all mankind. Breaking them is what we go to hell for. Our breaking of them is what Jesus offered Himself on the cross to atone for.
Civil: Uniquely a church and a state, Israel had civil type laws regarding such things as latrines and borders and the draft and such.
Ceremonial: These are the laws that kept you ceremonially clean. Breaking them was not necessarily a sin. You could be unclean by giving birth, having your period, caring for the sick, or burying the dead. These are not sinful things, but, they made you ceremonially and unclean. Shrimp and pork consumption are basically part of the ceremonial law, and, the dietary laws are specifically done away with in Acts.
Hope this helps.
>>>Yeah, the Pharisees were after Jesus for breaking the Sabbath and healing people and gleaning wheat and eating it on the Sabbath.......Oh...Wait, Um....Hm.>>>
Yeah, just like the evangelicals of today who also say Jesus broke the Sabbath. Same things the pharisees said!
Jesus goes out of his way to perform miracles on the Sabbath. Must have been pretty important for him to show the true meaning and blessing of the Sabbath instead of what man had done to it.
But he didn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. He said it was Made for man! Amen.
I am in favor of the ruling but I do not believe calling Gerald Groff an "it" is good way of showing your "love".
It seems like you are not so much in favor of him and his win as you are in favor of using his example to try to put down other people.
Once again, not a very Christian attitude.
He is a good example. You perhaps, have a little work to do.
Suggest you consider during worship in service tomorrow. But that is up to you.
>>>Whoa buddy, step away from the bottle>>>>
Whoa buddy how bout that Postal dude!
>>>I am in favor of the ruling but I do not believe calling Gerald Groff an “it” is good way of showing your “love”.>>>>
Wait whoa.....are you saying you also believe in the 10 commandments including the Sabbath? This could be a new trend here.....well? Do ya?
ROMANS 14: 5
The law of Moses consists of more than 600 individual laws, or commandments, including the 10 main ones.
(How many is he keeping?)
The Law was not given to all humankind.
God made a covenant, or an agreement, with the descendants of Jacob, who became the nation of Israel.
God gave his laws to this nation only.
The Bible makes this clear at Psalm 147:19, 20.
Then why the Law?
What purpose was it that God gave his law to Israel?
Paul answered: “To make transgressions manifest, until the seed should arrive to whom the promise had been made . . . Consequently the Law has become our tutor [or, teacher] leading to Christ.” (Galatians 3:19-24)
The special purpose of the Law was to protect and guide the nation of Israel so that they might be ready to accept Christ when he arrived.
So when Christ came and gave his perfect life as a sacrifice, what happened to the Law?
It was removed. “We are no longer under a tutor,” Paul explained. (Galatians 3:25)
The removal of the Law was a relief to the Israelites. It had shown them up as sinners, for all of them fell short of keeping that Law perfectly.
“Christ by purchase released us from the curse of the Law,” Paul said. (Galatians 3:10-14)
The Bible also says: “Christ is the end of the Law.”—Romans 10:4; 6:14.
>>>ROMANS 14: 5>>>>
LOL....study up on annual sabbaths vs. the sabbath made at creation for man before sin.
This post office guy did. He’s got the wrong day but at least he knows the difference between annual sabbaths and feasts vs. the one in the middle of the 10 commandments.
How bout that guy huh? What do you think about him?
In the first council of Jerusalem described in Act 15 it was decided that Greek converts to Christianity did not have to keep most parts the ceremonial parts of the Jewish law. This council was attended by both Peter and Paul and probably John and Luke. Between those four they wrote probability 85% of the New Testament.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Jerusalem
It doesn’t help, at all.
>>>The Bible also says: “Christ is the end of the Law.”—Romans 10:4; 6:14.>>>>
U folks are funny how you manage to talk yourselves out of the 10 commandments “law” as if it’s the “law” you got a problem with. We all know it’s the Sabbath that’s the problem.
Anyways, what do you think of this guy? Isn’t that something? Sounds like you wouldn’t risk a job over the Sabbath. He was willing to. I bet God likes that. He’s no flake.
Sabbath is not required for us under the New Covenant on the same basis by which we say that animal sacrifice is not required: it is fulfilled by the person and work of Jesus, but His perfect obedience and perfect work on the cross.
You are free to worship Jesus on any day you want.
The people who I’ve met in my life who judge the most are evangelicals and drug addicts, and many overlap.
>>>That said, I’m happy the man won his case...too bad you’re using it as a cudgel.>>>>
Tough crowd up here friend. Kind have to play hardball with this bunch. Anyways, so uh.....do you believe in the 10 commandments including the Sabbath? I sense a trend here.
I’m thinking, if maybe we can get people to at least begin to look at the proper use of the moral law, and question what they have been taught about it........who knows? We could end up with more people like this guy. I love this guy!
I am unsure how you got that out of what I said.
I simply stated that I was in favor of the ruling. The fact is that when you hire someone and you make an agreement with them you should abide by it. Punishing your employee rather then keeping your word is rather despicable.
Also I am not in favor of Commiezon being given yet another government sweetheart deal on my dime.
Are you?
>>>>Sabbath is not required for us under the New Covenant on the same basis by which we say that animal sacrifice is not required: it is fulfilled by the person and work of Jesus, but His perfect obedience and perfect work on the cross.
You are free to worship Jesus on any day you want.>>>>
Riiight.....sure. Sorry, not buying it. Sabbath isn’t “required” to the person who loves Jesus. It’s a blessing, a gift. I think you have a lot of studying scripture to do.
The ceremonial laws, the moral law as in the 10 commandments..etc. Uh, you do know John saw the Sabbath in Revelation right? The “Lord’s day”.....God is the Lord and he calls the Sabbath his holy day.
Anyways. what do you think of this guy who won his case this week? He refused to work on Sunday. Isn’t that awesome! Are you impressed?
>>>I simply stated that I was in favor of the ruling.>>>
Just wondering if you believe in the 10 commandments.....all 10. yes or no will do. You don’t have to answer. I get it if you don’t. Just curious...no big deal.
“The moral law stands on an entirely different foundation from the ceremonial or ritual law.”
God gave man his own will to decision. (Matthew 23) So by requiring people to work on the sabbath, depending on what day it is based upon different religions is man’s decision...both to require it and work it.
I guess my question is where was he when he was briefed prior to taking the job that he wouldn’t be required to work any day assigned even holidays? If he had a problem with that, he never should have accepted the job offer. Now he’s decided he doesn’t want to work on his sabbath so what has he been doing and why now? It isn’t the job of the employer to determine if he can’t work a given day for religious purposes if the original job wouldn’t allow it.
“Protestants used to believe what this guy believes.”
Depends on how far back you go with those beliefs. There was also a belief that a fair days wage for a a fair day’s work was part of the trust in both the employer and employee. So what prompted this sudden pulling back by the employee after he was aware he could be assigned to work on any day and he agreed to take the job under those terms?
But this is not over, yet. The case now returns to the lower courts.
The justices clarified law that made it illegal for employers to discriminate based on religion, requiring that they accommodate the religious beliefs of workers as long as the accommodation does not impose an “undue hardship on the employer’s business.” The court had previously defined the statutory term “undue hardship” by saying that employers should not have to bear more than what the court called a “de minimis,” or trifling, cost.
Having to reassign people to work extra hours which may cause overtime in the terms of big money when all the employees step forward, will exceed trifling cost as it could be thousands, will have to be addressed and decisions made. All the SCOTUS did was pass the buck.
wy69
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.