Jethro Bodine
Member
smaller, your answer to this question will help us understand you better.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
How Do You Honor the Sabbath?
- Thread starter KevinK
- Start date
smaller
Member
In the sense of Romans 13:8-10? Absolutely.
smaller
Member
Being a captive of evil in any sense is abhorrent to me. But I also understand that the sin that dwells in my flesh is not capable of being legal or legally acceptable. That's why the practice of law for self justifications is not only worthless, but impossible.
smaller
Member
What is the law of the O.T. really for? Take your pick of laws therein. They all work the same way.
Romans 3:20
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Moving on:
Romans 7:
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
Romans 7:13 shows us what the commandment does to sin indwelling the flesh.
1 Corinthians 15:56
The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
Romans 3:20 shows us that the law proves we have sin in the flesh, and therefore, on this basis, there shall be NO FLESH JUSTIFIED in Gods Sight.
Both Romans 7:13 and 1 Cor. 15:56 show us that sin dwelling in the flesh is actually strengthened by the LAW to become utterly sinful.
That's what happens when we put our flesh UNDER the law. Trying vainly to justify the flesh when that can not happen.
There is a very very good reason for the law. It is to make us know our GUILT before God in Christ. An irreversible conclusion, against sin dwelling in the flesh. And we are to shut our mouths in this regards, as there is no solution available other than death to the flesh. The "whole world" and "every mouth" therein is guilty, period.
Romans 3:19
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
I accept Paul's conclusions on these matters. The LAST place I will go is to make an opposite conclusion, trying to fox God in Christ into thinking my flesh with sin dwelling therein is JUSTIFIED by law keeping. That's NOT a happening deal, period. When believers go there, they are turned into instant liars and hypocrites.
So yes, there is an intentional trap set by the LAW. And it is precisely that trap which will spring up into lying hypocrisy of the flesh, claiming otherwise.
We are JUSTIFIED in the SPIRIT by faith in Christ, Alone, as our Savior, and simultaneously we are CONDEMNED in the FLESH because of the presence of sin dwelling in it and evil present with us.
Any assembly that abides in these scriptural facts, I will participate with the members therein, because they are IN TRUTH. When they practice MIXING? Pass. Such are just an assembly of phonies. I think they'll be saved anyway. And I think that for my own good, admittedly.
I might say that the BASIS of the ASSEMBLY is a critical component.
Paul quite purposefully double dealt his own participation in both Jewish legalism, NOTE: because it did not entail eternal damnation to the Jews, Romans 11:25-31, and also fellowshipped apart from the laws of Judaism.
1 Corinthians 9:
19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
And yes, there is a vast difference between the two sights. Paul knew "how" to handle BOTH aspects, quite adroitly. I might observe that his sights were set in an identical manner.
Romans 3:20
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Moving on:
Romans 7:
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
Romans 7:13 shows us what the commandment does to sin indwelling the flesh.
1 Corinthians 15:56
The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
Romans 3:20 shows us that the law proves we have sin in the flesh, and therefore, on this basis, there shall be NO FLESH JUSTIFIED in Gods Sight.
Both Romans 7:13 and 1 Cor. 15:56 show us that sin dwelling in the flesh is actually strengthened by the LAW to become utterly sinful.
That's what happens when we put our flesh UNDER the law. Trying vainly to justify the flesh when that can not happen.
There is a very very good reason for the law. It is to make us know our GUILT before God in Christ. An irreversible conclusion, against sin dwelling in the flesh. And we are to shut our mouths in this regards, as there is no solution available other than death to the flesh. The "whole world" and "every mouth" therein is guilty, period.
Romans 3:19
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
I accept Paul's conclusions on these matters. The LAST place I will go is to make an opposite conclusion, trying to fox God in Christ into thinking my flesh with sin dwelling therein is JUSTIFIED by law keeping. That's NOT a happening deal, period. When believers go there, they are turned into instant liars and hypocrites.
So yes, there is an intentional trap set by the LAW. And it is precisely that trap which will spring up into lying hypocrisy of the flesh, claiming otherwise.
We are JUSTIFIED in the SPIRIT by faith in Christ, Alone, as our Savior, and simultaneously we are CONDEMNED in the FLESH because of the presence of sin dwelling in it and evil present with us.
Any assembly that abides in these scriptural facts, I will participate with the members therein, because they are IN TRUTH. When they practice MIXING? Pass. Such are just an assembly of phonies. I think they'll be saved anyway. And I think that for my own good, admittedly.
I might say that the BASIS of the ASSEMBLY is a critical component.
Paul quite purposefully double dealt his own participation in both Jewish legalism, NOTE: because it did not entail eternal damnation to the Jews, Romans 11:25-31, and also fellowshipped apart from the laws of Judaism.
1 Corinthians 9:
19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
And yes, there is a vast difference between the two sights. Paul knew "how" to handle BOTH aspects, quite adroitly. I might observe that his sights were set in an identical manner.
Sorry, I have a misunderstanding of "sacred assembly".
I'm gonna have to research that to satisfy myself.
What ‘work’ is forbidden on the Shabbat?
Most Americans see the word “work” and think of it in the English sense of the word: physical labor and effort, or employment. Under this definition, turning on a light would be permitted, because it does not require effort, but a Hakham, a Rabbi, would not be permitted to lead Shabbat services, because leading services is his employment. Jewish law prohibits the former and permits the latter. Many Americans therefore conclude that Jewish law doesn’t make any sense.
The problem lies not in Jewish law, but in the definition that Americans are using. The Torah does not prohibit “work” in the 20th century English sense of the word. The Torah prohibits “melacha” (מְלָאכָה), which is usually translated as “work,” but does not mean precisely the same thing as the English word. Before you can begin to understand the Shabbat restrictions, you must understand the word “melacha”.
Melacha generally refers to the kind of work that is creative, or that exercises control or dominion over your environment. The word may be related to “Melech” (king; מלך). Avodah (permitted labor) comes from the root eved - slave. The quintessential example of melacha is the work of creating the universe, which G-d ceased from on the seventh day. Note that G-d’s work did not require a great physical effort: he spoke, and it was done.
The word melacha is rarely used in scripture outside of the context of Shabbat and holiday restrictions. The only other repeated use of the word is in the discussion of the building of the sanctuary and its vessels in the wilderness, in Shemot (Exodus) Chapters 31, 35-38. Notably, the Shabbat restrictions are reiterated during this discussion,[3] thus we can infer that the work of creating the sanctuary had to be stopped for Shabbat. From this, our Hakhamim, our Rabbis, concluded that the work prohibited on Shabbat is the same as the work of creating the sanctuary. They found 39 categories of forbidden acts, all of which are types of work that were needed to build the sanctuary.
Malaka is creative work. Avodah is labor that does not create. HaShem rested on the seventh day from creating. We rest on the seventh day from creating as well.
Abstaining from melacha on Shabbat is a loyalty test from The King. It is the yardstick of a covenant. That is why the penalty for breaking the Shabbat - is death!
Carrying the weight of water is burdensome. But, if you scuba dive and immerse yourself in the water, then bearing the weight of the water becomes a pleasure. Even so, one immersed in Torah and Shabbat will never find its commands to be burdensome. HaShem says that the Shabbat is a precious gift stored away in His treasury for the Jewish people.
Part of a Sabbatical Study By Rabbi Dr. Hillel ben David
Most Americans see the word “work” and think of it in the English sense of the word: physical labor and effort, or employment. Under this definition, turning on a light would be permitted, because it does not require effort, but a Hakham, a Rabbi, would not be permitted to lead Shabbat services, because leading services is his employment. Jewish law prohibits the former and permits the latter. Many Americans therefore conclude that Jewish law doesn’t make any sense.
The problem lies not in Jewish law, but in the definition that Americans are using. The Torah does not prohibit “work” in the 20th century English sense of the word. The Torah prohibits “melacha” (מְלָאכָה), which is usually translated as “work,” but does not mean precisely the same thing as the English word. Before you can begin to understand the Shabbat restrictions, you must understand the word “melacha”.
Melacha generally refers to the kind of work that is creative, or that exercises control or dominion over your environment. The word may be related to “Melech” (king; מלך). Avodah (permitted labor) comes from the root eved - slave. The quintessential example of melacha is the work of creating the universe, which G-d ceased from on the seventh day. Note that G-d’s work did not require a great physical effort: he spoke, and it was done.
The word melacha is rarely used in scripture outside of the context of Shabbat and holiday restrictions. The only other repeated use of the word is in the discussion of the building of the sanctuary and its vessels in the wilderness, in Shemot (Exodus) Chapters 31, 35-38. Notably, the Shabbat restrictions are reiterated during this discussion,[3] thus we can infer that the work of creating the sanctuary had to be stopped for Shabbat. From this, our Hakhamim, our Rabbis, concluded that the work prohibited on Shabbat is the same as the work of creating the sanctuary. They found 39 categories of forbidden acts, all of which are types of work that were needed to build the sanctuary.
Malaka is creative work. Avodah is labor that does not create. HaShem rested on the seventh day from creating. We rest on the seventh day from creating as well.
Abstaining from melacha on Shabbat is a loyalty test from The King. It is the yardstick of a covenant. That is why the penalty for breaking the Shabbat - is death!
Carrying the weight of water is burdensome. But, if you scuba dive and immerse yourself in the water, then bearing the weight of the water becomes a pleasure. Even so, one immersed in Torah and Shabbat will never find its commands to be burdensome. HaShem says that the Shabbat is a precious gift stored away in His treasury for the Jewish people.
Part of a Sabbatical Study By Rabbi Dr. Hillel ben David
Shabbat is a taste of the Olam HaBa. The 39 forbidden labors are what give it this flavor. It is like a good recipe: The recipe must be followed exactly, down to the smallest detail, if it is to produce the desired results. The 39 forbidden labors are:
1. Carrying
14. Plowing
27. Chain-stitching
2. Burning
15. Planting
28. Warping
3. Extinguishing
16. Reaping
29. Weaving
4. Finishing
17. Harvesting
30. Unraveling
5. Writing
18. Threshing
31. Building
6. Erasing
19. Winnowing
32. Demolishing
7. Cooking
20. Selecting
33. Trapping
8. Washing
21. Sifting
34. Shearing
9. Sewing
22. Grinding
35. Slaughtering
10. Tearing
23. Kneading
36. Skinning
11. Knotting
24. Combing
37. Tanning
12. Untying
25. Spinning
38. Smoothing
13. Shaping
26. Dyeing
39. Marking
1. Carrying
14. Plowing
27. Chain-stitching
2. Burning
15. Planting
28. Warping
3. Extinguishing
16. Reaping
29. Weaving
4. Finishing
17. Harvesting
30. Unraveling
5. Writing
18. Threshing
31. Building
6. Erasing
19. Winnowing
32. Demolishing
7. Cooking
20. Selecting
33. Trapping
8. Washing
21. Sifting
34. Shearing
9. Sewing
22. Grinding
35. Slaughtering
10. Tearing
23. Kneading
36. Skinning
11. Knotting
24. Combing
37. Tanning
12. Untying
25. Spinning
38. Smoothing
13. Shaping
26. Dyeing
39. Marking
Last edited:
Douglas Summers
Member
If that is what you do to honor the Lord (not the day). For what ever a man does to honor his Lord is between him and the Lord. The Sabbath given to Israel was not a day of worship. It was simply a day of rest for man and beast. (The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath)
If you keep the law of the Sabbath because it is a law to justify yourself before God, then it is of works, for not accepting the Grace of God by faith (a gift from God) puts you under the whole law, which is void of grace.
In Hebrews where it talks of a Sabbath days rest (for the Sabbath day was just that, a day of rest from all your works) It 's meaning is then that man has rested from the works of the Law by faith in God, an eternal rest.
If you will notice, there is a lot of unrest on this forum as some argue over the meaning of words, of doctrines so called and of private interpretations. Yes, we are to contend for the Faith (earnestly) But not contending for denominational teachings.
Last edited:
I wonder....if we love God with ALL our heart, ALL our mind, ALL our strength, ALL our soul, and love ALL our neighbors as ourselves and if we pray without ceasing, live and walk according to the Spirit, and put on our Lord Jesus Christ every minute of every day how could we possibly act with any more honor, reverence, or glory toward God on a Sabbath day?
Jethro Bodine
Member
jocor's argument is, "why wouldn't you?"
I see the point, though my conscience does not compel me to do that. And since the point is valid I must leave him to do that. Who are we to judge the person who's heart is so full of love for God that they keep a literal Sabbath because of that love? Just because that impulse of love is absent in our own hearts are we entitled to decide it can't be in someone else's heart? Paul says if they are doing it with thankfulness in their hearts we need to leave them alone and not destroy the work of Christ.
Jethro Bodine
Member
This would be true if jocor was keeping the Sabbath for reason of justification. But he plainly says he is not. He knows the difference between justification by faith in Christ, and justification by performing works of the law. Just because we can't fathom keeping the law for reasons other than trying to be justified by doing that (thanks to centuries of misinformation from the church) does that mean it's impossible for anyone to be able to?
Jethro Bodine
Member
It's what we call 'church'.
Jethro Bodine
Member
But what about for the reason jocor does it?
Is it impossible that he keeps the command to keep Sabbath for the same reason the rest of us choose to, for example, 'do not steal'? It's downright judgmental to insist we can go to church on Sunday because we love God and have faith in Christ, but then turn right around and tell a Sabbath keeper that it's impossible for them to do that for the same reason.
Lol, some churches are anything but a "sacred assembly".
smaller
Member
I have no issues with the LAWs as stipulated by Romans 13:8-10, and exactly zero LAWs followed to merit salvation. Just because one does not murder, steal or commit adultery has no bearing whatsoever on being and remaining a sinner, which is the general point of order.
There is a marked difference in how believers approach the subject matter. Whatever any believer does with the law has no bearing on me. I would consider it pointless hypocrisy to go sit in a roman catholic pew and amen their stands for example, just as I would consider it similarly in many assemblies.
JohnDB
Member
Let me be straightforward.So, you are not attacking me? This entire post is one big attack.
I have posted on a wide variety of topics and joked around as well. The problem is, you cannot defend your unscriptural anti-Sabbath view, so you say all manner of evil against me and then imply that you don't necessarily hold those views about me, but others might. Yeah right.
I want to know something about you other than that you go to church on Saturday (and are thin skinned about it) and that you only watch football on Sunday (jets fan).
But you seem to be rather stubborn about letting us see your fruits of the Spirit.
Not asking for you to crow about them.
But Saturday worship is not a fruit of the Spirit that proves to the average believer that you are indeed one of us. (Again not saying you are not one of us) .
Saturday worship is not a divination tool proving who is and who isn't a believer.
Lewis
Member
You 100% correct
Douglas Summers
Member
The Church did not change the Sabbath Day to Sunday (which is the first day of the week). The Church met on the first day of the week (to honor the Sabbath) as the day of rest. They met on Sunday as a memorial of Christ resurrection, and it was on a Sunday (first day of the week) that He ascended to heaven upon a cloud. (The day of Pentecost) (Acts 1:10-11) (Acts 2:1-4) (Matt. 28:10) (Mark 16:9) (Luke 24:1) (John 20:19) And from that time on, the early Church Leaders met on Sunday to break bread and to teach and preach the Gospel (Acts 20: 6-16)
Before Immorality became the dominant practice in the United States, a law called the" Blue Law" Gave Saturday and Sunday to Honor the Jew and the Gentile Their days of worship. Most people worked only 5 days a week back then. Catholicism (I Think) was the church that called Sunday (The Lords Day). That is why they think that the revelation of Jesus The Christ as given to John, was while he was in worship, as in Church, because it says, "he was in the Spirit on the "Lords Day". The Lords day is "The Day of the Lord", which is the Day of God's judgment upon the Gentile Nation for their treatment of His people.
J
jocor
Guest
The question in the OP is "How do you honor the Sabbath?", not "How do you honor God?" However, by honoring the Sabbath, we honor God;
If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD (YHWH), honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: Then shalt thou delight thyself in the LORD (YHWH); and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the LORD (YHWH) hath spoken it. Isa 58:13-14
This is a simple rule of sowing and reaping. Honor Yahweh by honoring the Sabbath and He will honor you.
Lewis
Member
Constantine Made Sunday a Civil Rest Day
When Emperor Constantine I—a pagan sun-worshipper—came to power in A.D. 313, he legalized Christianity and made the first Sunday-keeping law. His infamous Sunday enforcement law of March 7, A.D. 321, reads as follows: “On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.” (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3, trans. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 5th ed. (New York, 1902), 3:380, note 1.)
The Sunday law was officially confirmed by the Roman Papacy. The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed, “Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).