THE SABBATH

[Dorothy Mae]

Agreed.

Nothing was "added" to the Mosaic Law - rather, the Mosaic Law was added to the Ten Commandments which already existed.

The weekly Sabbath law already existed - it didn't begin at Sinai - and the fact that God demanded to know how long would Israel refuse to obey it proves that.

God absolutely says implicitly that the Sabbath existed in Eden. How?

Because 1 Chronicles 17:27 says when God blesses something, it's forever blessed and doesn't need a mountain top booster shot.

Therefore, when it says God blessed the Sabbath day, that blessing had to have been bestowed in Eden because the day had already been sufficiently blessed in Eden, thereby making any reference to the blessing of the Sabbath day a reference to the blessing of the 7th day in Eden.

I don't have to show you where He commanded Adam when I've already shown you the commandment existed before Sinai. Besides, Jesus Himself said the Sabbath was made for M-A-N, not J-E-W.

The Sabbath was not "a shadow of things to come" (Colossians 2:16 KJV) in the future - it was and is a memorial to that which happened in the past: Creation Week.

I've shown you that any reference to the blessing of the Sabbath day is a reference to the blessing of the 7th day because only one act of blessing of that day took place, according to 1 Chronicles 17:27 KJV.

The Sabbath day that we're going to observe for all eternity is an exception? How did you arrive at that conclusion?

I suspect work will be a joy in Heaven and rules won’t be needed in any case.

 

[Phoneman777]

I suspect work will be a joy in Heaven and rules won’t be needed in any case.

Amen - that's why we're told "love is the fulfilling of the law" - nobody is going to have to tell us to stop worshipping idols or keep the Sabbath holy or leave our neighbor's stuff alone. Our love for God will be our motivation for doing those things, as it is now our motivation for the same.

Which is why I highly suspect the anti-nominans in our midst: they think they're getting into heaven while convinced "love is refusing to fulfill the law".

 

[JLB]

Nothing was "added" to the Mosaic Law - rather, the Mosaic Law was added to the Ten Commandments which already existed.

The law of Moses was added (which includes 613 Commandments, one of which was the requirement to observe the Sabbath) to the Abrahamic Covenant.

This requirement for observing the Sabbath (according to the law) included death to anyone who did work on the Sabbath, so much as picking up a stick to kindle a fire.


This specific Sabbath ordinance is not found in any scripture before the law of Moses was added, nor after the law of Moses was abolished at the cross.





JLB

 

[Phoneman777]

The law of Moses was added (which includes 613 Commandments, one of which was the requirement to observe the Sabbath) to the Abrahamic Covenant.

JLB

There's only one problem with this idea that the Mosaic Law was added to the Abrahamic Covenant: Paul points out in Galatians 3:15 KJV - in order to testify of the unalterable nature of a covenant of God - that even a human covenant can't be altered once it's ratified.

The Abrahamic covenant was ratified way back in Genesis, rendering it unalterable.

Therefore, the thing to which the Mosaic Law was added in Exodus at Sinai couldn't have been the Abrahamic Covenant. It was the Ten Commandments, as I've been saying:

"Wherefore serve the (Mosaic) law? It was added (to the Ten Commandments at Sinai) because of transgression (of the Ten Commandments) until the Seed should come." - Galatians 3:19 KJV

 

[JLB]

The Abrahamic covenant was ratified way back in Genesis, rendering it unalterable.

Yes the law of Moses did change the Abrahamic Covenant, because the Covenant was based on God's promise. Brethren, I speak in the manner of men: Though it is only a man’s covenant, yet if it is confirmed, no one annuls or adds to it. Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,” who is Christ.

What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.
Galatians 3:14-19

The law was added without changing the promise.

Because the children of Israel were in bondage for 430 years, they were not walking in the the NUMBER ONE stipulation of the Covenant.

Walk before Me and be blameless; Walk with Me in My Presence and you will be blameless.

Walk in the Spirit and you will not fulfill the lust of the flesh.

The children of Israel were not walking with God, (they were in transgression) and learing from Him by faith the way Abraham learned from God; hearing His Voice directly.

When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am Almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless. And I will make My covenant between Me and you, and will multiply you exceedingly.” Genesis 17:1-2


So He gave them the "law" which became a "fence" around the covenant, with animal sacrifices for when the sinned.


Why?

Because in order to fulfilled His promise to Abraham to be an enemy to His enemies to “bless those who curse you”, and go before them and drive the giants out of the land He swore to Abraham and His Seed, they must remain "in Covenant" with Him.


So we see the adding of the law did not change the Promise.


This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Galatians 3:2


The Promise of the Father; the Promise of the Spirit was a part of the Abrahamic Covenant, before the law was added, and therefore the law could not change it, to prevent the Promise.

The Promise was to the “Seed”; not seeds.






JLB

 

[rstrats]

The scripture says they met and worshipped the first day of the week.

I'm not aware of any scripture which says that. What do you have in mind?

 

[atpollard]

Just a guess, but ...
Act 2:1 [NASB] 1 When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place.

• [Pentecost was on a Sunday, as was the day of His resurrection].

Act 20:7 [NASB] 7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.

1 Corinthians 16:2 [NASB] 2 On the first day of every week, each of you is to put aside and save as he may prosper, so that no collections need to be made when I come.

 

[rstrats]

Just a guess, but ...
Act 2:1 [NASB] 1 When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place.

• [Pentecost was on a Sunday, as was the day of His resurrection].

Pentecost is an annual festival. I assumed Dorothy Mae was referring to weekly 1st day meetings. And according to scripture, there are only 2 times mentioned where anyone got together on the 1st day of the week, and neither time says that it was for the purpose of rest and worship or for that matter that it was in honor of the resurrection.

Act 20:7 [NASB] 7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.

The "breaking of bread" can simply be saying that the disciples got together to eat a meal on this particular first day of the week . The phrase, "to break bread", does not have to refer to a religious service - unless it is specifically stated - but to dividing loaves of bread for a meal. "It means to partake of food and is used of eating as in a meal...... The readers [of the original New Testament letters and manuscripts] could have had no other idea or meaning in their minds" (E.W.Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, pp. 839,840.

But even if the breaking of bread mentioned always did refer to the Lord’s Supper, it had nothing to do with placing a special emphasis on the first (day) because Acts 2:46 says that they broke bread every day.

1 Corinthians 16:2 [NASB] 2 On the first day of every week, each of you is to put aside and save as he may prosper, so that no collections need to be made when I come.

Nothing is said here about anyone meeting together on the 1st day of the week. The text merely says that everyone should "lay by him in store" on the first day of the week. The Wemouth reads: "Let each of you put on one side and store up at his home".
Ballantine's Translation reads: "Let each of you lay up at home". The Syriac on this passage reads: "Let every one of you lay aside and preserve at home". And the New Catholic Edition of the Bible reads: "....let each one of you put aside at home and lay up whatever he has a mind to". This verse says nothing about resting or worshiping on the first day or even getting together on the first day.

 

[user.]

There's a difference regarding the Sabbath.
Reformed theology and Calvinist theology differ somewhat.

One believes the Sabbath was CHANGED.
One believes the Sabbath was ABOLISHED.

Could anyone here inform me which is which,
and what the difference is between CHANGED and ABOLISHED?

If not,
No problem.

The Sabbath was not abolished or changed, but is the fulfillment in Jesus Christ. Sabbath means rest and the seventh day could never give the true rest, it was only a shadow towards Jesus who is the true Sabbath. In Jesus Christ we find the true rest (Matt 11:28).

The Old Testament is only a shadow, and the New Testament is the fulfillment. Christianity is what God always wanted and the old Judaism was only there to prophesy Christianity.

 

[atpollard]

Pentecost is an annual festival. I assumed Dorothy Mae was referring to weekly 1st day meetings. And according to scripture, there are only 2 times mentioned where anyone got together on the 1st day of the week, and neither time says that it was for the purpose of rest and worship or for that matter that it was in honor of the resurrection.

Careful, in your quote from Dorothy, SHE said nothing about "rest" ... she said "worship". It is others that typically accuse Sunday Worshipers of attempting to redefine "Saturday" (the day God rested and Blessed) to the First day of the week. I cannot speak for all Christendom (I am not that big of a deal), but I have never conflated the two. God rested on Saturday, God blessed Saturday, God commanded Israel to obey a bunch of laws specific to Saturday, Jesus was resurrected on Sunday. Paul said I could worship God any day, my local congregation meets on Sunday to sing and praise God and share sermons.

I mentioned Acts 2 because THEY (the saints) were ALREADY TOGETHER on that particular Sunday (offering an indication that they met on Sunday) ... which is what Dorothy claimed and you had no scriptural knowledge of.

I'm not aware of any scripture which says that. What do you have in mind?

 

[atpollard]

But even if the breaking of bread mentioned always did refer to the Lord’s Supper, it had nothing to do with placing a special emphasis on the first (day) because Acts 2:46 says that they broke bread every day.

You are funny.

1. I was just suggesting what scripture Dorothy might have had in mind. As a Baptist ... I support your RIGHT to be doctrinally wrong. (Its called Individual Soul Liberty as a Baptist Distinctive).
2. Sure, a group of Christians gathering together, breaking bread (often a description of the Eucharist) and listening to sermons all night has NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH WORSHIP. [What was I thinking ... they didn't have a contemporary Praise Band and finish in an hour.]

 

[rstrats]

Careful, in your quote from Dorothy, SHE said nothing about "rest" ... she said "worship".

OK, leave "rest" out. She wrote: "The scripture says they met and worshipped the first day of the week. This was probably convenient and not an official edict."

I assumed that she was referring to regular weekly meetings on the 1st day of the week. I'm still not aware of any scripture which says that folks regularly got together on the 1st day of the week for worship. Perhaps I assumed incorrectly.

I mentioned Acts 2 because THEY (the saints) were ALREADY TOGETHER on that particular Sunday (offering an indication that they met on Sunday) ... which is what Dorothy claimed and you had no scriptural knowledge of.

But it says nothing about worship.

 

[rstrats]

You are funny.

How so?

1. I was just suggesting what scripture Dorothy might have had in mind.

If it was, it was not applicable.

1. As a Baptist ... I support your RIGHT to be doctrinally wrong. (Its called Individual Soul Liberty as a Baptist Distinctive).

That's ok with regard to Baptist doctrine.

1. Sure, a group of Christians gathering together, breaking bread (often a description of the Eucharist) and listening to sermons all night has NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH WORSHIP. [What was I thinking ... they didn't have a contemporary Praise Band and finish in an hour.]

Oh, come on; sarcrasm is beneath you.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

OK, leave "rest" out. She wrote: "The scripture says they met and worshipped the first day of the week. This was probably convenient and not an official edict."

I assumed that she was referring to regular weekly meetings on the 1st day of the week. I'm still not aware of any scripture which says that folks regularly got together on the 1st day of the week for worship. Perhaps I assumed incorrectly.


But it says nothing about worship.

It’s highly unlikely they met for a church potluck as you would have it.

 

[rstrats]

It’s highly unlikely they met for a church potluck as you would have it.

Acts 2:46​

So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart...

 

[Alfred Persson]

There's a difference regarding the Sabbath.
Reformed theology and Calvinist theology differ somewhat.

One believes the Sabbath was CHANGED.
One believes the Sabbath was ABOLISHED.

Could anyone here inform me which is which,
and what the difference is between CHANGED and ABOLISHED?

If not,
No problem.

In the NT we see Jewish Christians went to the Temple on Saturday, but also held Church on Sunday:

On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come. (1 Cor. 16:2 NKJ)

Compliments of ChatGPT

Question: Among Calvinists what is the distinction made between the "Sabbath being changed" and the "Sabbath being abolished?"

Within the realm of Calvinism, there can be variations in how individuals and theological traditions understand and interpret the concepts of the "Sabbath being changed" and the "Sabbath being abolished." However, I can provide you with a general overview of the distinctions that are commonly made.

1. Sabbath being changed: Some Calvinists believe that with the coming of Jesus Christ and the establishment of the New Covenant, the Sabbath observance was transformed or "changed" from the seventh day of the week (Saturday) to the first day of the week (Sunday). They argue that this change is rooted in the resurrection of Jesus, which occurred on a Sunday (the first day of the week). This perspective suggests that while the Sabbath commandment remains, its observance shifted to Sunday as a way to commemorate the resurrection and the new creation brought about by Christ.
2. Sabbath being abolished: On the other hand, some Calvinists hold the view that the Sabbath commandment, along with its specific regulations, has been "abolished" in the sense that it no longer applies to Christians under the New Covenant. They argue that the ceremonial and legal aspects of the Old Testament Sabbath have been fulfilled in Christ, and believers are no longer bound to observe a specific day as a holy Sabbath. Instead, they emphasize that Christians should approach every day as a day of worship and rest in Christ, without the need for rigid Sabbath regulations.

It's important to note that these perspectives may vary among different Calvinist denominations, theologians, or individuals within the broader Calvinist tradition. Some Calvinists may lean more towards the "changed" perspective, while others may hold a view closer to the "abolished" position. Additionally, there are also Calvinists who advocate for Sabbath observance on Saturday, aligning with a more traditional seventh-day Sabbath belief.

It's always recommended to consult specific Calvinist teachings, confessions, or theologians to understand their particular stance on this matter, as interpretations can differ within the broader framework of Calvinism.

 

[rstrats]

In the NT we see Jewish Christians went to the Temple on Saturday, but also held Church on Sunday:

On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come. (1 Cor. 16:2 NKJ)

1 Corinthians 16 does not say that the Corinthians met together on the first day of the week. The text merely says that each one of them lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper on the first day of the week. The Wemouth reads: "Let each of you put on one side and store up at his home". Ballantine's Translation reads: "Let each of you lay up at home". The Syriac on this passage reads: "Let every one of you lay aside and preserve at home". And the New Catholic Edition of the Bible reads: "....let each one of you put aside at home and lay up whatever he has a mind to".

This verse says nothing about going to church on the 1st day of the week.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Acts 2:46​

So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart...

42And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. 43And awed came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles


That’s not a potluck

 

[rstrats]

42And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. 43And awed came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles That’s not a potluck

You're missing the point. Regardless of what the reason/s may have been for their activity, they did it daily. So the Acts account can't legitimately be used as support for the 1st day of the week being a special day for worship apart from the other days of the week.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

You're missing the point.

No, I found a few verses before that said they did pretty what a church service is…teaching, preaching, praying….

Regardless of what the reason/s may have been for their activity, they did it daily.

And? Destroys your idea of one day a week Sabbath church meeting.

So the Acts account can't legitimately be used as support for the 1st day of the week being a special day for worship apart from the other days of the week.

It says there was no special day….certainly not Saturday.