Where does the Bible say...

[BarneyFife]

mid they are invalid or imposters then they are not successors

Unintelligible

 

[theefaith]

Thinking is required

 

[BarneyFife]

Good Morning B5!

Thank you for your articulate response. Some of these things we have gone back and forth on several times so I won't beat a dead horse. Here are my final closing points:

I agree with you that Scripture never comes right out and says "I, God, under the New Covenant with my people Command That All Christians will now worship on Sunday, the Lords Day, and that Saturday will remain for the Jews under the Old Covenant". Sooooo what do we have:

We have in Scripture is Paul telling Christians that Jesus “canceled the bond which stood against us with its legal demands . . . Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of.....a Sabbath. You and your ilk are still being held in bondage to the Old Covenant.

We have In Scripture Jesus only mentions keeping 9 of the 10 Commandments.....He left out "Keep holy the Sabbath". You and your ilk, starting about 500 years ago, brought it back up.....Jesus NEVER did!!! He made it clear that we must adhere to the 9 moral principles contained in the Old Testament law and that they are still binding on us. Keeping holy the Sabbath is a ritual law and rituals can be changed or cancelled. Which takes us back to what Paul said in Colossians 2 about no one judging (what you call "warning") by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. I will listen to the teacher Paul. You can listen to your 16th Century teachers.

We have Scripture that makes it clear that 1st Century Christians gathered on the first day of the week...Sunday...and considered it the Lords Day. You don't!

We have 1st Century historical writings that match up with Scripture and make it clear that they worshiped on Sunday.

We have a person who was a student of the Apostle John and a Bishop for the Church in Antioch wrote that they 'no longer observed the Sabbath'! I trust the writings that man over the writings of your 16th century men. I straight up asked you why do you trust your men (and not Ignatius). Your flippant response (2 questions back to me) was a dodge on your part because you have no logical defense for following the teachings of men that are 500 years old.

Scripture, Christian History and a 1st Century Bishop who was a student of an Apostle are against you.....I shouldn't say YOU....I should say the people who falsely taught you.

I find it bizarre that you would equate Luke 4:16 with 1 John2:6. They have NOTHING to do with each other!

Mary

Again:

There is no Biblical evidence that the Sabbath has been changed. And in view of the fact that it was given before sin entered the world, in view of the fact that it was written in stone, in view of the fact that it says “remember”, and in view of many other facts, there is no reason to conclude that it has been changed by the Creator.

 

[Marymog]

Again:

There is no Biblical evidence that the Sabbath has been changed. And in view of the fact that it was given before sin entered the world, in view of the fact that it was written in stone, in view of the fact that it says “remember”, and in view of many other facts, there is no reason to conclude that it has been changed by the Creator.

There is no biblical evidence that abortion is murder/wrong....Do you support abortion?

 

[BarneyFife]

Good Morning B5!

Thank you for your articulate response. Some of these things we have gone back and forth on several times so I won't beat a dead horse. Here are my final closing points...........


Mary

Interestingly, only one of the Ten Commandments is typically repudiated by Christians in our day. And even more interestingly, it is the one commandment that begins with the word “remember.”

Some justify their Sabbath-breaking by saying that the Law has been abolished.

But these have forgotten that:

Not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. Ro 2:13

Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Ro 3:31

Jas 1:25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

The passages where Paul discusses the abolition of the ceremonial law they misunderstand.

And this is despite the fact that there are several tell-tale differences between the Ten Commandments and the ceremonial laws. These enable the observant reader to correctly identify when the ceremonial system is being discussed.

For one thing, the ceremonial laws were hand-written while the Ten Commandments were carved in stone by God’s own finger. (Ex 31:18). So when we read of the “handwriting” in Col 2:14, we have a hint that it is speaking of the ceremonial laws.

For another thing, the ceremonial laws involved….ceremonies or, as Paul calls them, “ordinances.” So when we read of the “handwriting of ordinances” we have a hint that we are reading of the ceremonial laws.

For another thing, the ceremonial laws were kept in the side of the ark as a “testimony against them.” De 31:26. (The Ten Commandments, by way of contrast, were contained inside the ark.) So when we read of ordinances “against” men, we have a hint that we are reading of the ceremonial laws.

For another thing, the ceremonial laws were “types” or “shadows” or symbols of future events. When we read of laws that are shadows of a reality, we know that we are reading about ceremonial laws.

These are enough hints to help us understand Col. 2:14-17.

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; . . . 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: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Col. 2:14-17.

While Paul speaks of the moral law of Ten Commandments as being “spiritual”, he speaks of these ceremonial laws as being “carnal.”

Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. . . . For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. Ro 7:12, 14

Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. Heb 9:9-10

Part of the Jewish ceremonial system included feast days that were symbols of the Christ’s death, of Christ’s resurrection, of the day of Pentecost, and of other significant events in Christian history. These were ceremonial “sabbaths” and were distinguished from the Seventh-day Sabbath. And being ceremonial, they were not to last past the cross.

When John wrote his gospel, he called them “Jewish.”

Joh 2:13 And the Jews’ passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,

Joh 5:1 After this there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.

Joh 6:4 And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.

Joh 7:2 Now the Jews’ feast of tabernacles was at hand.

Joh 11:55 And the Jews’ passover was nigh at hand: and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the passover, to purify themselves.

These ceremonial “sabbaths”, (See Lev 16:31; 23:24, 32; 25:4) particularly the Passover, were the sabbaths “which are a shadow of things to come” and were a “figure for the time.”

The most confusing of the Jewish Sabbaths, for the early Christians, was Passover. On one hand, it seemed that it was a ceremony fulfilled and now pointless. Jesus, the Passover, had been crucified.

On the other hand, Jesus had instituted the Last Supper, with rituals in some ways parallel to the Paschal rituals, at the very time of the Passover.

This led to a widespread belief among Jewish Christians that the Passover should be kept, but without eating the lamb. Passover without lamb is the eating of bitter herbs. (Ex 12:8; Nu 9:11).

And this is the reason for Romans 14. Paul refused to condemn Passover keepers. But he also refused to condemn those who recognized that the Passover was no longer binding. Both parties were trying to honor God by their relation to the day; both were trying to honor God by their relation to the eating of herbs.

Unlike the feasts, which are called Jewish in the five passages quoted above from John, the Sabbath needed no introduction to Gentile believers reading John’s gospel, or the other gospels for that matter. The Sabbath is always called “the Sabbath.”

Jesus calls himself the Lord of the Sabbath (Mr. 2:28; Is 58:13) and so shows that the “Lord’s Day” of Revelation 1 was none other than the Sabbath. Gentiles who wished to hear the gospel after the Jews waited, not one day to Sunday, but a week until the “next Sabbath.” Ac 13:32-34.

Even when taking the gospel to the Gentile nations it was Paul’s normal manner of work to teach on the Sabbath (Ac 17:2). Rather than undermining the truth of the gospel, he used this habit as a manner of persuading “both Jews and Greeks” “every Sabbath.” Ac 18:4.

 

[BarneyFife]

There is no biblical evidence that abortion is murder/wrong....Do you support abortion?

Thou shalt not kill (murder).

 

[BarneyFife]

Thinking is required

Proper spelling and grammar are required to communicate effectively.

 

[Illuminator]

Again:

There is no Biblical evidence that the Sabbath has been changed. And in view of the fact that it was given before sin entered the world, in view of the fact that it was written in stone, in view of the fact that it says “remember”, and in view of many other facts, there is no reason to conclude that it has been changed by the Creator.

No one is concluding the Creator changed the sabbath to Sunday, the first day of the week. It was changed by the Apostles because Jesus didn't rise from the dead on the last day of the week.

 

[theefaith]

Again:

There is no Biblical evidence that the Sabbath has been changed. And in view of the fact that it was given before sin entered the world, in view of the fact that it was written in stone, in view of the fact that it says “remember”, and in view of many other facts, there is no reason to conclude that it has been changed by the Creator.

the sabbath was of the old creation and old covenant we are a new creation and new covenant with new feasts, new sacraments and new sabbath by the authority of Jesus Christ Matt 16:18 18:18

And the old points to the new, the real propitiatory sacrifice of Christ is the new sabbath

you don’t remain in the means of salvation of the old??? Do you!

 

[BarneyFife]

The 1st century Church didn't have a bible sooooo they couldn't have done "bible study". Another bizarre statement.

I find it interesting that so many people don't recognize that the Gospel was preached from the Old Testament all throughout the first and at least half of the 2nd century. It's in there. Jesus said so.

 

[BarneyFife]

It was changed by the Apostles because Jesus didn't rise from the dead on the last day of the week.

No, it wasn't. They had no authority to do so.

 

[BarneyFife]

the sabbath was of the old creation and old covenant we are a new creation and new covenant with new feasts, new sacraments and new sabbath by the authority of Jesus Christ Matt 16:18 18:18

And the old points to the new, the real propitiatory sacrifice of Christ is the new sabbath

you don’t remain in the means of salvation of the old??? Do you!

How do you think people were saved in the Old Testament?

 

[Brakelite]

The Sabbath could not have been changed after Calvary. Paul correctly stated in his letter to the Hebrews that a testament cannot be changed after the death of the testator. If the Sabbath that was practiced and was such an integral component of the old covenant needed to be changed at all, it had to have been done so before Jesus died... And be done by Jesus. Jesus suggested no such change, either before or after His death. In fact, quite the opposite.
KJV Matthew 5:17-19
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[theefaith]

The Sabbath could not have been changed after Calvary. Paul correctly stated in his letter to the Hebrews that a testament cannot be changed after the death of the testator. If the Sabbath that was practiced and was such an integral component of the old covenant needed to be changed at all, it had to have been done so before Jesus died... And be done by Jesus. Jesus suggested no such change, either before or after His death. In fact, quite the opposite.
KJV Matthew 5:17-19
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

the law and the prophets is fulfilled and there is a new creation and a new covenant and new Jerusalem and new everything

 

[BarneyFife]

the law and the prophets is fulfilled and there is a new creation and a new covenant and new Jerusalem and new everything

Nice sweeping generalization. Not very fidelitous to proper hermeneutics.

 

[theefaith]

Nice sweeping generalization. Not very fidelitous to proper hermeneutics.

Bible alone no hermenutics context or anything else, that’s the Protestant way
Sola sola sola

Revelation 21:5
And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

 

[Brakelite]

the law and the prophets is fulfilled and there is a new creation and a new covenant and new Jerusalem and new everything

If I choose not to steal, am I fulfilling the law?

 

[mjrhealth]

If I choose not to steal, am I fulfilling the law?

If you have to steal because your family is starving , would God condemn you for it, or be like the pharisees.

Luk 6:1 And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields; and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands.
Luk 6:2 And certain of the Pharisees said unto them, Why do ye that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days?
Luk 6:3 And Jesus answering them said, Have ye not read so much as this, what David did, when himself was an hungred, and they which were with him;
Luk 6:4 How he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone?
Luk 6:5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

There are none good but God

 

[Brakelite]

If you have to steal because your family is starving

In Australia and most of the rest of the western world, people do not starve. There are so many freely offered food packages available here it would be only pride that would stop you from taking advantage. If you lived in a place where food wasn't available, where would you steal it from?
As for the disciples. They weren't stealing. It was common law to grant anyone to help themselves to grain as they passed by. Not like today where a farmer would shoot you if you took as much as an apple from a overhanging branch. Or if you were in Britain, send you to Australia.

Anyway, I posed the question in order to ascertain what he means by the word, fulfil. Nothing to do with hypothetical starvation.

 

[Marymog]

I find it interesting that so many people don't recognize that the Gospel was preached from the Old Testament all throughout the first and at least half of the 2nd century. It's in there. Jesus said so.

Hi B5,

The Church reads from the OT during it's services.