Sabbath Day business

[JLB]

We keep the other nine commandments as they are written in the Law of Moses. Why not the Sabbath command as well? Please show me how we don't keep the other nine as the Law of Moses commands. Do not use Yeshua's example of lusting in one's heart being adultery. All he did was reveal the true boundaries of adultery from lusting in the heart to committing the literal act.

Do we put people to death for Adultery or picking up sticks on the Sabbath?

If you don't, then you don't keep the law of Moses.


JLB

 

[Sparkey]

Thats why taught his churches not keep company with sexually immoral people

I assume you are trying to quote that section Scripture to justify your off-hand remark that Paul learned from Jesus (oi vey!) Right? Either that, or we are just going around and around in circles with no way out (seemingly).

So, ignoring one of the most poorly constructed sentences that I've seen (in the last two days) let me remind you that the Section of the Holy Writ you quoted about things that do not enter the heart (stuff that Pharisees wanted to insist could be eliminated by handwashing rituals) was what Mark wrote (not Jesus). Are you sure that Paul had that particular scroll in mind when you said that Paul learned to say it's okay to eat pork chops from Jesus? And if so, are you certain that Paul was voluntarily blinded to the truth like you?

Look with care to that Scripture. Notice the context is hand washing. “Blessed are the pure in heart” is one of the fundamental teachings of Christ (Matthew 5:8). In Mark 7 Jesus explains that ceremonial washing is not necessary for spiritual purity or sound spiritual health. Unwashed hands DO NOT defile the heart.

According to the Holy Spirit, as given through Mark, Jesus pointed out that “whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods” (verses 18-19). This means that there is no need to go about following the leaven of the Pharisees who were adding stuff and making things much harder and they were tripping people and it is better to have a milestone hung around your neck than to start doing stuff like that.

And that's what Paul said too. Take care about your brother's conscience and do not allow your liberty to stumble others.

“Draught” (draft) is an archaic way to translate the Greek word aphedron, which means “a place where the human waste discharges are dumped, a privy, sink, toilet” (BibleWorks software). Aphedron is a masculine-gender noun, so “purifying” can refer to the end result of human waste, the toilet.

The Commentary on the New Testament:Interpretation of Mark explains the passage on the basis of this pertinent information: “The translation … 'This he said, making all meats clean' makes the participial clause ['purifying all foods'] a remark by Mark … that Jesus makes all foods clean— a remark … that we cannot accept … He is explaining to his disciples how no food defiles a man … As far as this thought is concerned, Jesus expresses it already in the preceding clause: 'and goes out into the privy.' What he now adds is that the privy [the end result of the digestive process] 'makes all food clean' … for all foods have their course through the body only, never touch the heart, and thus end in the privy … Since the disciples are so dense, the Lord is compelled to give them so coarse an explanation. In this, however, he in no way abrogates the Levitical laws concerning foods” (R.C.H. Lenski, pp. 297-298, emphasis added).​

Pharisees understood that God wanted clean hearts but they misunderstood the how to go about it and thought that they would improve on the LAW of MOSHE and they did that by twisting clear instructions into something that let them brush all lessor folks around while they stood, with fingers in their ears, and said, "Get outta my way for I am holier than thou," and even if they didn't speak English like we do? That is a fairly accurate rendition to the heart of what they said. I mean, they really said stuff like that.

Their 'I am holier than thou,' means, "HEY YOU! Do not defile me. I've just ritually washed my hands and you should too! Everybody should wash like me every time before they eat -- and do you think that Jesus is something? He's not. Even his discipled ones, the very ones that sit at the Teacher's (so called) feet fail to wash...

It deserves repeating, "In this, however, he in no way abrogates the Levitical laws concerning foods”(ibid)

 

[Sparkey]

Do we put people to death for Adultery or picking up sticks on the Sabbath?
If you don't, then you don't keep the law of Moses.
JLB

Sure they do. They just don't do it the way you insist they do. Neither did Jesus. He stooped down and wrote in the dust. Look at the context if you want to prove what I'm saying. It's the CONTEXT of John chapter 8. The proof is in the details. Jesus didn't nit-pic her to death. He asked, "Did any of your accusers condemn you [to death]?" and then when she replied, "No, Lord." He said, "And neither will I." But if you're trying to imply that Jesus did not keep the LAW of MOSHE?!? He not only kept it, He fulfilled it! Every part. That man never sinned and never failed and now? God will give Him all things including you and me, my friend. We are being promised to Him, our betrothed. Can you hear it?

Jesus is not there to condemn but instead to give all a chance to LIFE. Even that adulteress. Even me, your Sparrow, for I too am an adulteress and I have fornicated under every single tree in Jerusalem (spiritually, that is, not really, I've never been blessed to travel that far) and yet He forgives because God hears hearts! And to answer again the question, "Did God beget MAN? [When Jesus was begotten by the Holy Spirit]" Yes, Jesus came in the flesh and if you have thinking otherwise? Perish that thought too!


ezrider Jesus had just returned to the Mount of Olives when that happened.

 

[jocor]

You may do the same for Sabbath. THAT is what Paul said, Let no man judge you about Saturday Sabbath stuff... (paraphrase). And he went further than that in his urging and admonishment and said that we are to "Let no man judge" about things like foods too. And although there are many who are fond of twisting what Peter's vision sheet meant (the one that had the creepy-crawly bugs on it and he said, "Not so, LORD," three times and you may count them if you want) that does not negate the fact that we are not supposed to sit in judgment over our brothers about stupid stuff like eating a pork rind. If I wanted, i could sit with you and make a pizza on Saturday and put salami on it and we could freely eat, but if you thought that it was not supposed to even so much as be cooked on Saturday, our day of rest? I could respect your custom and prepare it on Friday and that would not be sin.

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... (ibid)

I believe I addressed this passage earlier. You are misunderstanding Paul. He was referring to not allowing anyone outside the Body of Messiah to judge us. Elsewhere he clearly stated that we ARE to judge those within the Body (1 Co 5:12-13). If you would like, I will expound on it more.

 

[YosefHayim]

I already tried that, but the leadership of my Sunday church kicked me out because I had "fallen from grace." So much for the love Gospel.

Cool. Let's start a new church. We can be called: The First Sixth-and-Seventh Day Adventist Church.

That's two days. Don't let "First" and "Sixth-and-Seventh" confuse you. Don't let the "Adventist" part confuse you either. It's not SDA. Completely not related.

 

[Sparkey]

Cool. Let's start a new church.

A new church (called out one) has been started and is being started and we (I hope) shall become a nation born in a day, we shall speak the same things... and here, hidden in the church of those members of the Body of Christ, who come to CF.net -- are hidden and we may become part of that larger church in that we are all invited.

 

[jocor]

According to Moses, if a woman is caught in adultery then she should be stoned to death, without a chance to be forgiven of this sin, by repenting.

Likewise, according to The law of Moses, a person who gathers sticks on the Sabbath, are to be put to death as well.

Neither of these commandments are kept like this in the New Covenant.

If you can show a New Testament scripture, whereby after the cross the Apostles put a person to death for Sabbath Violation or Adultery then you will have made a valid point.

The Lord Jesus, Who was the lawgiver of the Old Testament, is the Mediator of the New Covenant, as He is also our High Priest.

We are no longer under Levi, as the law and the Priesthood has changed. Hebrews 7:12


JLB

You are failing to distinguish between the actual commands and the penalty for breaking them. All Ten Commandments continue as written under the New Covenant. The penalty phase (death) and the remedy phase (sacrifices) were dealt with by Messiah's death. To break any of the Ten can be remedied by asking for forgiveness through faith in Messiah's atoning sacrifice.

 

[Sparkey]

I believe I addressed this passage earlier. You are misunderstanding Paul. He was referring to not allowing anyone outside the Body of Messiah to judge us. Elsewhere he clearly stated that we ARE to judge those within the Body (1 Co 5:12-13). If you would like, I will expound on it more.

If you need to spin your wheels in my hearing? It's okay. But I'm probably more stubborn than even you. It will fall on deaf ears. But if you just want a wall (a virgin) to bounce your ideas off? That's not me. I am more like a door (promiscuous) even though I have many traits that are shared by Song of Solomon 8:8 "little sister" that hath no breasts. I'm not easy to get milk from. I love the milk of the word and the simplicity of the message of Christ, and I'm trying and asking for miracles even as we speak but I drink milk with my meat. Mostly that's because I have no teeth, God took 'em from me because I used to delight in biting my friends with my words.

 

[YosefHayim]

A new church (called out one) has been started and is being started and we (I hope) shall become a nation born in a day, we shall speak the same things... and here, hidden in the church of those members of the Body of Christ, who come to CF.net -- are hidden and we may become part of that larger church in that we are all invited.

I think we should go back to calling it Ekklesia. Probably not that necessary 'cos I guess the word Church can be seen as unique to its meaning, but it has lost that uniqueness through tradition.

We are the called out. The building is not a church.

I suppose we could call ourselves Beth-El, that is: House of God (1 Cor 3:16).

 

[YosefHayim]

So much for the love Gospel

If love is lacking, that's Bad News.

If you get rid of Grace, you're getting rid of the Gospel for something else (Jude 1:4)

The Gospel is Good News. Else if, it's bad news.

 

[Sparkey]

I think we should go back to calling it Ekklesia.

And we should take back the rainbow --- because that's our promise, not theirs --and we should say 'glossolalia' instead of 'tongues' because everybody has preconceived ideas about stuff. Not just clean and unclean meats, not just Sabbath worship either.

But what do we do? We pray. Not just for ourselves alone anymore but our prayers and thinking is *NOW* focused on others because we know that our betrothed is NOT WILLING THAT ANY SHOULD PERISH and neither, then, it follows (because we follow), neither then are we. We are not willing that any should perish. Period.

Seriously, a new day is coming and that will be a day of dancing like David and we don't care if somebody wants us to wear royal robes and despises because they are given a glimpse of our celebration dance performed in PRIESTLY robes. David is the first King/Priest we see. A man after Gods own heart! Jesus is a King/Priest too! WE are called THERE. And the only way to get there is by sowing in peace. True peace. The "My peace I leave for you," kind.

"Any time two or more of you are gathered together (not scattered apart) there also am I".
WOOT! We have the victory! And who is that we, Sparrow? Is it the "we" of royalty? Is it you talking about you?

Nit! It is not me talking about me. It is me talking about us. It is the 'we of royalty' but I'm not taking off my priestly robe right now -- it is His Royalty, it belongs to your betrothed. It is The Bridesgroom's 'we' --and it's His Priestly ministry we are joined into first, his Royalty later..

 

[jocor]

If you need to spin your wheels in my hearing? It's okay. But I'm probably more stubborn than even you. It will fall on deaf ears.

Even though you are closed to hearing an interpretation that may expose error, I will post it anyway for the benefit of those reading behind the scenes without participating. If you choose to reply to it, please do so after considering and understanding what I am actually saying.

Colossians 2:16-17

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day or a new moon or a sabbath day:
Col 2:17 which are a shadow of the things to come; but the body is Christ's. KJV​

Let's first determine the context of chapter two. In verses 4 and 8 Paul warns the Colossians about deceivers. Then again, in verse 18, Paul gives his final warning about these same deceivers. In what way were they trying to deceive the Colossians? Verse 8 tells us that they were trying to exalt the traditions of men over the Messiah (verses 8 & 19).

Notice carefully the context; the traditions of men in verse 8, 18, and 22. The verses that occur between 8 and 22 must be understood based on the context of the traditions of men.

It was the deceivers of verses 4, 8, and 18 that were judging the Colossians regarding the things mentioned in verse 16. They had been imposing their man-made commandments and traditions upon the Colossians. Paul told them not to allow anyone to judge them concerning those matters. An important addition was made in the KJV that does not appear in any Greek manuscript. The word "is" in verse 17 was added, which changes the meaning of Paul's statement. That is why it is written in italics. Retaining the word "is" implies the thought of shadow vs. reality. In other words, Messiah fulfilled the shadow of the things mentioned in verse 16. However, if you remove the added word "is", it implies that we should not let any man outside the body of Messiah judge us in respect to these things. Indeed that is in line with the context of Paul's previous statements. Notice Col 1:18 & 24 and Col 2:19, all of which teach us that the body of Messiah is the church or all true believers. Some translators render the Greek "soma" as "substance" or "reality". The word should be translated "body" just as it was within the context of chapters 1 & 2 above.

Verse 17 states that these things "are" a shadow of things "to come" not that they "were" a shadow that was now fulfilled. Paul wrote this epistle approximately 30 years after Messiah's death and resurrection and yet he still spoke of them as unfulfilled shadows of something in the future. When the reality truly comes, then the shadows will be fulfilled. For example, Yeshua was not the fulfillment of the Feast Days, especially those of the 7th month. They have not been fulfilled yet and won't be until Yeshua's second coming.

 

[Sparkey]

Even though you are closed to hearing an interpretation that may expose error, I will post it anyway

I meant it when I said it was okay. I have no problem (with you posting), and you don't need my permission. I'll read it ready to digest it and will try to prove what you have said... It just takes a long time... that's what I mean. It will appear to fall on deaf ears (unless it is confirmed in my heart by Him)

Going back to give it a proper read now... but still, probably won't reply and won't engage in battle even if I do. Or, at best, that is my intent at the moment before I read what you have written...

*wink*

EDIT: Okay, I've skimmed it. Let me ask you... Do you know what a pork chop tastes like? Have you ever, even once, tasted an unclean food? It's rhetorical. No need to answer me. I trust you know exactly what I mean.

Keep it short, we are burdening the "Stay on Topic" rule even now.

 

[JLB]

And if so, are you certain that Paul was voluntarily blinded to the truth like you?

“Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him...

Food can not defile a person.

Gentiles and Jews are both a part of the New Covenant.

Do you honestly think that Gentiles are required to eat Kosher, to comply with New Covenant requirements?

Is that honestly what you believe?

19 because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods?”

All foods of all people's, nations, tongues and tribes.

Try your best to read this verse carefully, please...

for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

if you have food to eat, whether steak or hamburger, pork chops or chicken, bacon, fish or shrimp, then give thanks to God and be at peace.

JLB

 

[Sparkey]

“Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him...

Food can not defile a person.

____________________

Wrong place to debate this, JLB
but let me try real quick before we return to topic; sale of foods on Sabbath
“Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him...

UNWASHED HANDS can not defile a person.

And yes, I misquoted you on porpoise or while riding a dolphin if you'd rather

Colossians 2:16-17
Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day or a new moon or a sabbath day:
Col 2:17 which are a shadow of the things to come; but the body is Christ's. KJV

(no offense, jocor) But I really do agree with you. Especially when we take you out of context and apply what you said to the very old, almost ancient PORK WAR that was settled years and years ago, right here, on this very forum.

for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

I am not the one who mistakenly said that Jews could eat pork chops even if their conscious said it was sin. Even If they want to follow that, it it not Sin for them to abstain from eating unclean foods. Got it? Just like it is not sin for jocor to attend services or worship on Saturday.And JLB ?

If you want to continue to argue it, I would suggest you go back to first mention and then trace your way through my entire objection to your off-the-cuff statement in order to completely eliminate your assumptions about what I said as if it were leaven and you were preparing for the feast of the Passover. Get rid of the leaven of the Pharisees. Every stinking bit. Then open a Private Conversation with me. We are both off topic here. And there is absolutely no BIBLICAL need or command to wash hands before every meal. But I have heard that washing hands is the best way to keep babies from getting sick. So it's not bad to wash either. WE just can not vaunt our favorite pet peeves as if they are keys to heaven. They aren't. Jesus did not throw out the LAW of MOSHE.

Gentile pork eaters as well as Sabbath keeps dudes are being judged unrighteously. We are being hypo-crits (OOPS! I meant hyper, not hypo -- but then, there is some of both going on. hyper critical is what I was thinking when I typo'd it as hypo but that's all Greek to me) is why.

 

[Sparkey]

Do you honestly think that Gentiles are required to eat Kosher, to comply with New Covenant requirements?

Not even for a second. No, but I do think that you have great trouble understanding honest attempts at communications.

Is that honestly what you believe?

Asked and answered. Move on.

The Greek word translated “purifying” is a participle and must agree in grammatical gender with the noun it describes. Because this participle has a masculine ending, it cannot refer to “stomach,” which is in the feminine gender in Greek. Thus many scholars instead relate “purifying” back to “He said.” (ibid)
​

We're talking about a problem of the antecedent. Simple.


TOPIC IS: Sale of stuff on Sunday (or Saturday, as the case may be)

 

[Sparkey]

TO: Classik

Thanks for this thread.

I know it's a headache for the Mods but they are a friendly sort and this is a lively conversation. I love it!

But maybe you could redirect the conversational flow back to the Original Topic that you (as the OP) had in mind? It will save the mods some trouble if you don't mind?

I'm as guilty as anybody (probably more so) for wandering - but I have a ready excuse. I'm an ol man, and like that Ol Man River that Mark Twain wrote about, I meander all too well. ed

I can't think of any reason for a casual conversation in The Lounge (or as old timers call it, in General Talk) to swell to 250 posts without a moderator or two coming to prick the bubble. This is a flesh battle and I need to apologize for my part in it. I love listening and saying, "Say on!" while almost daring others to continue. But please, mods? WE all need grace. Maybe me more than others? But we all do need unmerited favor. Okay, maybe not reba -but we can't all be as taciturn as she.

I open my mouth too much, believe it or not

 

[ezrider]

There is a big difference between salvation and justification. They are not the same, yet you use them interchangeably.


We keep the other nine commandments as they are written in the Law of Moses. Why not the Sabbath command as well? Please show me how we don't keep the other nine as the Law of Moses commands. Do not use Yeshua's example of lusting in one's heart being adultery. All he did was reveal the true boundaries of adultery from lusting in the heart to committing the literal act.

So let me ask you this jocor. If you start off with breaking the first commandment, what benefit do you have from keeping the others, whether unto faith or unto justification?

 

[ezrider]

Bashing?

The living water exists within each of us, whether we believe it so or not. We are each His precious stones, and we would do wise to remember that Moses struck the rock to bring forth the fountains of waters. But the rock it not ours to strike, it is the Lord to do with has he sees fit and according to his good pleasure. He will cause the fountains of the deep to open at a time of his choosing. It is not up to us. But if the rain should full and my cup spills over, should I spill some of the rain onto the rock, well no harm done. Eventually the foundations of the deep will be breached without striking the rock. But patience is a must for the rain to do its work. Because erosion is a long, sloooowww. process. And some rocks are much harder than others, but all rocks will eventually succumb.


edit: addon

And if they should find themselves too stubborn and unwilling to succumb, then do know this. That what the rain does not wash away, the fire shall consume it, and utterly break it down, but the water within shall return unto the Lord.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Bashing?

Discussing the scriptures is now bashing?

This is a desperate attempt at a logical fallacy, to try and ridicule the person rather than believe the scripture.

While out of the other side of your mouth you call others a lying false prophet, and not a brother.

Funny.


JLB

It seems you won't sleep until you come up with some argument against jocor's law keeping that can't be refuted. Your's, unfortunately, is a very common response to those who feel they should keep Sabbath as a matter of faithful obedience, just as others feel they should not murder or commit adultery as a matter of faithful obedience.

For some reason when we say we must be obedient Christians--do not steal, do not covet, etc.--as a matter of obligation to God we aren't doing it to be justified (not talking about you, of course), but when a person says they're keeping the Mosaic festival and Sabbath cycle and not doing it to be justified they get scolded for trying to earn their salvation, as if it's completely impossible to do that for any other reason than trying to be justified.