For a long time I was confused about the difference between what the Bible calls the “Old Covenant” and the “New Covenant.” I imagine many westcoastwitness.com readers still struggle with some confusion between the two.
This post has been made in hopes of clearing up that confusion.
The Old Covenant was in effect during the time before Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection when the Jews were living under the Mosaic Law, or, the Old Law, and is associated with the Old Testament and the leadership of Moses.
The New Covenant went into effect after Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection that fulfilled the requirements of the Old Covenant and Old Law, and is associated with the New Testament and the leadership of Jesus.
When I was in college a professor of mine named Dr. Phil Thompson presented my class with a handout put together by a man named Jack McKinney. I’d like to share the contents of that handout with you today as I’ve found them to be very helpful.
Jack McKinney uses 2 Corinthians 3 to compare/contrast the Old Covenant to the New Covenant in a way that really helped clear up a lot of confusion for me … check it out:
The Old Covenant vs. The New Covenant
- Old Covenant – Moses as Minister (2 Corinthians 3:13-15; John 1:17; Hebrews 3:5)
- New Covenant - Jesus’ Disciples as Ministers (2 Corinthians 3:6; John 16:12-15)
- Old Covenant - A Covenant of the Letter (2 Corinthians 3:6)
- New Covenant - A Covenant of the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:6-8)
- Old Covenant - A Covenant which Kills (2 Corinthians 3:6)
- New Covenant - A Covenant which Gives Life (2 Corinthians 3:6 – literally “makes alive”)
- Old Covenant - A Ministry of Death (2 Corinthians 3:7)
- New Covenant - A Ministry of Life (2 Corinthians 3:6)
- Old Covenant - A Ministry of Condemnation (2 Corinthians 3:9)
- New Covenant - A Ministration of Righteousness (2 Corinthians 3:9)
- Old Covenant - A Covenant Written with Ink (2 Corinthians 3:3)
- New Covenant - A Covenant Written with the Spirit of the Living God (2 Corinthians 3:3)
- Old Covenant - A Covenant Written on Stone (2 Corinthians 3:3-7)
- New Covenant - A Covenant Written on the Heart of Man (2 Corinthians 3:3; Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 11:19-20; 36:26)
- Old Covenant - A Covenant which came with Glory (2 Corinthians 3:7; Exodus 34:29-35)
- New Covenant - A Covenant which came with the Greatest Glory (2 Corinthians 3:8-11)
- Old Covenant - A Covenant whose Glory was Passing/Fading (2 Corinthians 3:7)
- New Covenant - A Covenant whose Glory Continues to Shine (2 Corinthians 3:18)
- Old Covenant - A Veiled or Covered Glory (2 Corinthians 3:12-16)
- New Covenant - An Unveiled, Ever-Increasing Glory (2 Corinthians 3:18)
- Old Covenant - A Covenant Destined to be Done Away (2 Corinthians 3:11; Hebrews 7:12, 8:13, 10:9)
- New Covenant - A Covenant Destined to Last Forever (2 Corinthians 3:11; Hebrews 13:20)
McKinney goes on to note:
It was not merely the glory (GREEK: Doxa; cf. English “doxology”) which was transient in nature, but the Old Covenant itself. A close reading for 2 Corinthians 3:11 makes that clear, though some commentators have missed this. It is especially clear from 2 Corinthians 3:7, where Paul speaks of the “ministry that brought death … engraved in letters on stone” coming with glory (NIV). It does not make sense to say that the glory of the Old Covenant “came with glory.” To understand this chapter, one must turn back to the situation in Exodus 34, and even then Paul’s argument may seem a bit strange to us. Still, his line of reasoning in one that is quite acceptable to that of the rabbinical interpretation of his time. It is not, of course, as if the Old Testament were of no value to the Christian. As the tutor or schoolmaster whose purpose was to lead to Christ, it has tremendous value for us, but the fact that “now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law” (Galatians 3:19-23, 25; 2:19-21).
I’ve retyped the original handout by Jack McKinney as it was given to me with a couple of minor changes (mostly typos), and encourage any serious Bible student to download and study it.
That leads me to the question: what should we do with the teachings surrounding the Old Covenant today? Should we simply ignore them, or are they still applicable?
I really appreciate the way Mark Driscoll explains this on pages 46 & 47 of his book On the Old Testament (A Book You’ll Actually Read):
I have also been asked many times whether we need to obey all commands in the Old Tesatment. The short answer regarding law is that all of the Old Testament commands/laws were fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Matthew 5:17-18). This does not mean that we do not love and value the Old Testament law. But it does mean that we are no longer under it. Similarly, when I was in high school I had to sign an attendance sheet every day, go to assemblies, and bring a note if I had been sick. Since the graduation requirements have been met, I am no longer bound to do those things. This does not mean they were bad, only that they are completed. However, there are some laws from high school that are still binding on me. For example, at my school I was not allowed to kill anyone, sell drugs, or steal. These laws are still applicable to me, even though I have graduated.
Likewise, there are three kinds of laws in the Old Testament.
First, there are ceremonial laws, which are related to the priesthood, sacrifices, temple, and cleanness. These are now fulfilled in Jesus (for example, nearly the entire book of Hebrews addresses this issue for Jews who struggled with the Old Testament laws once they were saved). These laws are no longer binding on us because Jesus is our Priest, Sacrifice, Temple, and Cleanser.
Second, there are civil laws, which refer to the governing of Israel as a nation ruled by God. Since we are no longer a theocracy, these laws, while insightful, are not directly binding on us. As Romans 13 says, we must now obey our pagan government because God will work through it, too.
Third, there are moral laws, which prohibit such things as stealing, murdering, and lying. These laws are still binding on us even though Jesus fulfilled their requirements through His sinless life. Jesus Himself repeats and reinforces nine of the Ten Commandments. The only exception is the Sabbath, because that is part of the ceremonial law. Now our rest is in the finished work of Jesus, not just a day.
In Summary, the ceremonial and civil laws of the Old Testament are no longer binding on us, while the moral laws are.
Is there value in studying the laws surrounding the Old Covenant? Absolutely.
Does that mean we’re still bound to all of them? As both Mark and Jack explain above, no.
Tags: 2 Corinthians 3, 2 Corinthians 3:12-16, 2 Corinthians 3:13ff, 2 Corinthians 3:18, 2 Corinthians 3:3, 2 Corinthians 3:3-7, 2 Corinthians 3:6, 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, 2 Corinthians 3:7, 2 Corinthians 3:8-11, 2 Corinthians 3:9, ceremonial law, civil law, compare old to new covenant, compare old vs new covenant, compare/contrast old covenant to new covenant, compare/contrast old vs. new covenant, different kinds of old testament law, dr. phil thompson, driscoll, Exodus 34, Exodus 34:29-35, Ezekiel 11:19-20, Ezekiel 36:26, Galatians 2:19-21, Galatians 3:19-23, Galatians 3:25, Hebrews 10:9, Hebrews 13:20, Hebrews 3:5, Hebrews 7:12, Hebrews 8:13, jack mckinney, Jeremiah 31:31-34, Jeremiah 31:33, John 16:12-15, John 1:17, Mark Driscoll, moral law, moses vs. jesus, Old Covenant & New Covenant, old covenant verses new covenant, old covenant vs. new covenant, old law vs. new law, old vs new covenant, On the Old Testament, on the old testament (a book you'll actually read), phil thompson, three kinds of old covenant laws, three kinds of old testament laws, What's the Difference Between the Old Covenant & New Covenant?
We LOVE Jack McKinney! Our whole family often attend his Wed night class at College Church in the summer. The class is for 60-year-olds and older. We don’t care….he’s THAT good!!
Hiya Julie
I can see why!
Actually, the moral laws of the Old Testament are not binding on us. They were replaced by Jesus with a higher standard. Instead of being commanded not to kill, He told us not even to hate someone. Instead of committing adultery, we should not even look at a woman lustfully….
G,
I found your reply interesting. Although I understand what you are getting at, I cannot help but think that Jesus did not replace the OT with any higher standards. In fact, I believe God has always kept very high standards for His people. Although Jesus may call us to go “above and beyond” the old law, if we read the OT closely, Jesus really wasn’t sharing much “new” information. He was rather reviving the standards God originally intended. I agree that Jesus calls His disciples to high standards, however, it seems that God has always kept His standards fairly high.
I don’t think your conclusion is correct. Christ taught and through His Spirit He ministers “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:2) It is based on divine spiritual principles or virtues that exist in the heart of God. Infinitely higher than the ten commandments could ever be. They were prohibitions against acted offences hence ;thou shalt not’. Compare spiritual virtues of Galatians 5:18-23 and Paul’s conclusion. Christ’s ‘law’ enter into the heart of man and are “written” (Jeremiah 31) or produced there. There are six examples of Christian perfection in Matthew 5:21-48 and these are referred to as the six antitheses. An antithesis is a contrast or opposition of words or sentiments. Using the repeated formula “You have heard it said / But I say to you” and “It was also said to you / But I say to you,” Jesus makes the contrast between the accepted interpretation of the Mosaic law and His teaching which internalizes and intensives the Law of Moses to yield a new standard of obedience. Jesus will use this formula to teach six examples of New Law Christian conduct, and He will use the formula six times in 5:21-22; 27-28; 31-32; 33-34; 38-39; and 43-44 but in verse 26 His additional “I say to you” makes His use of the authoritative “I say to you” number seven times. The seven times repetition of Jesus’ command “I say to you” emphasizes the spiritual perfection to which He calls Christian disciples of all generations.
Are relationship is not to OC law but to NC grace!
Jesus didn’t “replace” the Old Laws. What he did was confront the traditional interpretations of the Pharisees and explained what the original laws were intended for. He is explaining the spirit of the law, not replacing it.
Yes, yes, yes! good post.
Some people are simply fixated on law. The New Covenant is a NEW covenant. It is not based on old covenant law, it is based on grace and truth ministered through the Spirit. Read Jeremiah where God through the prophet, says that the New Covenant is NOT LIKE the Old Covenant. Why is it that people find it so hard to believe God’s word?
Interesting, since I’m preaching from Exodus for the next 3 months! The problem I have with the 3 kinds of OT law, is that I’m not convinced the Scripture makes those distinctions.
In which version of the 10 Commandments, or anywhere in Scripture is the Sabbath separated from the other 9? That doesn’t mean I’m imposing the Sabbath on the church, just that I’m not sure that the “ceremonial” classification is a good reason not to.
The followup question is if it’s all been fulfilled etc. why did God preserve it, and why do we study it? (not that we actually do study it much.)
Hiya Pete – Scripture itself doesn’t make those distinctions, but it’s the best explanation I’ve heard so far and it makes sense.
I personally believe a person so inclined could make a strong case that it’s still God’s will for man to have a day of rest every seven days.
As for the question, “if it’s all been fulfilled, why did God preseve it, and why do we study it?”, I share my opinion about that in this post.
Good post, Wes. I share your view of the differences between the old and new covenants. About the only thing I disagree with is the ministerial bullet you quoted from that handout. If Moses was the minister of the Old Covenant, that made God’s laws known to His people, then it should be the Holy Spirit that is the minister of the New Covenant, since He is the only One that can write them into our hearts.
Although the disciples are great examples for us to follow, remember that they were fearful and doubting, until the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit filled them with courage, righteousness, and understanding. We need to remember Who made them great, and that we can be on the same level as them, even higher.
Through His death on the cross, Jesus opened the way for anyone to enter the Holy of Holies, not just the high priest. While in Moses’ time, he was the mediary between God and men, now Jesus acts as our mediary, providing us direct access to God. He truly is wonderful!
Hiya Greg. The word translated “minister” can also be translated “servant.” The Holy Spirit certainly ministers and serves – you’ll get no disagreement from me about that.
Thanks for the comment
It was a divine help while i was actually studying the Book of Jeremiah regarding the new covenant and i was going to share this on my sunday class.
I love God’s people, thank you for being obedient to the work of the Holy Spirit in You.
Amen, i will be back surely…..lol
Why does it seem as if the old covenant is old and faded, and the new covenant…well, new and in fashion? Oh that’s right, because all those quotes are from the new testament! It’s self-advertisement.
Can you furnish a specific list of all those laws in the New Covenant that are different (i.e. really new) from those given in the old one?
unable to download Jack McKinney handout – “site not found”.
This is not meant to be contentious in any way. Where do you see the Bible diving the law into 3 parts. It never makes that distinction in scripture that I can see. It says clearly in Rom 7 that the believer has died to the law – no distinction as to any particular part, thus, it must mean we died to the entire law? Or, said another way, the believer now has no relationship to the law. It clearly says in 1 Tim 1:9 that the law is NOT for the righteous. Again, doesn’t distinguish any part of the law.
The phrase “Old Testament” is found in only one verse of scripture. Testament is same word that could be translated as “covenant” as I understand it. Question – what is being referred to as the old covenant? Is it just the Mosaic Law? Are non-believers under the old covenant today? I’m really trying to get a handle on how all the covenants, esp Old and New fit together, as I see this as critical to understanding the entire Bible. Your help would be appreciated. I would also like the read the above referenced article if you have it.
Sincerely, Rick
The link to McKinney’s handout has been fixed – thanks for the heads up. I recently had some work done on my webserver, and a few things were moved around.
As to your observation: I do not believe the Bible ever makes the three-part distinction. That observation is Mark Driscoll’s (or whoever he heard it from), and it makes sense in a way.
Certainly there are parts of the Old Law that are still applicable for disciples of Jesus, but the difference between us and the Jews of old is it is not our following those laws that make us God’s people – it is through Jesus Christ we are God’s people.
There are basically two functions of the old Law: 1) to reveal what sin is, 2) to reveal our need for a Savior, and some would add a #3 – to be fulfilled in Jesus proving He is that Savior.
Thanks for your reply Wes.
As to “parts” of the Law – man divided it, not God. The believer is dead to ALL of the Law. The Law is still alive and necessary to bring the unbeliever to faith in Christ. We NOW live by faith, not by Law. Living by law (any part of it) equals death. Death is the absence of life. Jesus is life. Living by Law results in not experiencing the Life of Christ; not that we don’t have His life (that’s forever), but that we don’t experience His life. Living by any Law, Biblical or those we put our self under (I must have a 30 min. quiet time, memorize 1 verse of scripture/day, go to church every Sunday morning/evening, give 10%, etc) causes one to focus on self – am I keeping the Law, am I doing enough, am I doing as well as the guy in the pew across the isle, etc. The mind set on the flesh is death. We are to set our minds on things above!
Thanks again for your comments Wes. Still like to hear your thoughts on what is actually meant by the Old Covenant.
If you’re interested in studying this more, you might do some digging into what’s called “the new perspective on Paul.” Read a summary here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Perspective_on_Paul
There’s plenty of books to read too.
I was just reading the comment by Mark Driscoll when He talks about the the 3 laws of the Old Covenenat. Ceremonial. Civil and Moral Laws. I have to say that when He says that Yeshua only keeps only nine of the commandments and says the Sabbath is the only one was apart of cermonial law. and so we don’t have to observe that command because now by faith we just rest in Christ. I have to say that is not true because the Sabbath was established as a day of rest in Genesis Chapter 2 which says” By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day He rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy because on it he rested from all the work of creating that He had done.”
And if God made it a holy day then I think it still should be observed as a day of rest. For the sabbath was made for man not man for the Sabbath.
Clearly, the Galatian heresy is alive and well today. It is gaining momentum with the rise of certain Messianic groups and gaining strength among established Christian groups which, now, not satisfied with God’s grace grounded on Christ’s finished work, would drag us back under the Law.
So it is works versus grace.
Legalism is where I initiate works and God must respond. Grace is where God initiates works and I respond.
I think we do well to go back to basics. I do not pretend to have all the answers but this is my take:
Salvation is fully provided by God. He initiated and I responded. I trusted, accepted, received. Now, I am in complete in Christ (Col 2:10). Obedience (or sanctification—already provided in salvation) likewise: God initiates, I respond. I submit and I receive. God’s initiating of my salvation and my obedience from the heart, is solely HIS work—a work of grace, not MY works but HIS (Eph. 2:8-10), which then become mine in reality. Grace works, I receive and reveal in my life and actions. Result? – total harmony with law. Hence, the law fulfilled in Christ is being fulfilled in me (a member of the Body) by His Spirit. For example. Old Covenant commandment: “thou shalt not kill” becomes New Covenent imperative: “love, don’t even hate”. Old Covenant “thou shalt not covet” becomes New Covenant “love, don’t even lust”.
Good works are the natural fruit of genuine faith and salvation. Both covenants are about law but the law is applied differently in each. Law is God’s will or expectations for and of man. The OC (Law through Moses) ministered law externally, demanding outward obedience (behaviour) in exchange for physical blessings but it was unable to produce a change of heart or attitude. The NC (Spirit through Christ) ministers law internally (Jer 31:31-34) creating obedience from the heart. The heart is renewed (), resulting in a change of spirit, attitude and behaviour. The OC law was written on stone or paper (2 Cor 3); the NC law is written on the heart. The NC is not the Ten Commandments but a reformulation of ALL old covenant laws (“moral” and “ceremonial”) into their highest spiritual intent and summed up in divine love. In other words, it is the same law but with a change of form and mode of expression. The first is “letter”; the second is “spirit”. Result? – Obedience.
For me personally, I envisage how the inhabitants of heaven keep God’s law. I suspect that they do by nature God’s will. That’s the way I see it for the redeemed now, and when they are glorified.
Hi i really like this so i re post on my blog because there is many people asking me that difference i believe there is more to dig but this here i short and can give idea thanks for post i hope you not mind i re post i translate to other language too Portuguese Bless you
In moral Law you say only nine is repeated, Do you mean God abolish or rebuke Sabbath? During time of Jesus public ministry He still observing Sabbath. Example when Jesus get angry when the house of prayer of His Father and that Sabbath, front of it they are making business. So my question is Where can We find in the BIBLE verse that SUNDAY is Holy or our Rest day?
“In moral Law you say only nine is repeated, Do you mean God abolish or rebuke Sabbath?”
Good question David.
First of all the Bible does not describe the Ten Commandments as “moral” law. That, like “ceremonial” law, is a classification of man. While it is a useful classification, it must be used with extreme caution. I believe that the Ten Commandments contain a mix of moral and ceremonial. On the other hand is any law free from moral obligations? The Sabbath is, by its very nature, a ceremonial law; its manifold observances commemorate Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian slavery by the Creator God. A crucial point also to remember is that according to the Torah, it is forbidden to isolate any law from the sacrificial system. All things had to be sanctified through the blood of the sacrifices. Therefore to keep the Sabbath without breaking it, one is required by the Law to offer the obligatory Sabbath sacrifices. It would be no different today UNDER THE MOSAIC LAW. So, if you are going to observe the Sabbath today without breaking it, you need the Levitical priesthood, High Priest, Altar, Temple …. That’s impossible for many reasons which I will not go into. That’s why any so-called Sabbath keeping today is actually a total farce and a breach of the Law of Moses. As we know from Paul and James, if one is going to keep the Law, he must keep the WHOLE Law. It’s all or nothing! But, of course, we are no longer under the dispensation of Law (Moses); we are under the dispensation of Grace and Truth (Christ). Christ fulfilled all law and continues to fulfill it through His Body, the Church, through the ministry of His Spirit. He is our Sabbath Rest.
“During time of Jesus public ministry He still observing Sabbath. Example when Jesus get angry when the house of prayer of His Father and that Sabbath, front of it they are making business.”
Yes, of course Jesus kept the Sabbath. He was a Jew and was under the Law of Moses because the dispensation of Law was still in force, that is, until the Cross. There was a transition between the two dispensations, but, significantly, there was no doubt that the dispensation of Law had come to an end when the Temple was destroyed in AD 70!
“So my question is Where can We find in the BIBLE verse that SUNDAY is Holy or our Rest day?”
You cannot. There is no verse in the New Testament that stipulates the keeping of any day as a rest day. The keeping of the Lord’s Day as the first day of the week came to be known, is a tradition that has never been a substitute for the Jewish Sabbath. According to Paul, Christians are not bound by any day of the week and we are not to judge any person for the day they want to keep as a holy day. This explains, too, why the NT is silent about the Sabbath. If the Sabbath was in force, Paul would have made it very plain to his Jewish readers and especially to Gentile converts. He would have given clear detailed instructions how it is to be kept. He mentions not a word. But, then that is what we should expect given that the sacrificial system came to an end at the Cross.
God hallowed the seventh day following His creation. This set apart day was practiced by Abraham, per Genesis 26:5. Just what were these “commandments, statutes, and laws” if they weren’t God’s rules that He gave on Sinai? Also, the Sabbath command was called a “law” PRIOR to Sinai, Exodus 16:28. The Ten Words (commandments) were written in STONE by the finger of GOD and place INSIDE the ark. This is extremely significant, as we can see the REAL ark (as opposed to the temporal earthly man made ark) mentioned again in the book of Revelation, chapter 15. Jesus Christ kept the Sabbath because it is a moral law, just like “do no murder” and “do not steal”. To break the fourth command is “sin” as defined in I John 3:4 (breaking God’s law).
The teaching of sin and it’s definition is practically nil in mainstream pseudo Constantinian Christianity. Sun god day keepers are simply practicing pagan Babylonian ways and are following the edicts of Rome and her early emperors, who venerated the “day of the sun”. The Bible warns, “Come out her my people” in Rev. 18:4. The same people who proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ are still in Babylon by keeping sun god day, venerating winter soltice (Christ Mass) and lauding Ashtoreth (celebrating Easter).
God’s ways are simple and clear. His instructions are not difficult to read or follow. Yet millions of so-called “Christians” are NOT obeying Him as a life practice. What are the consequences of this? Romans 6:23 tell us that the “wages of sin (breaking God’s law) is death (permanent death in the lake of fire), but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Repentance is KEY to obtaining the grace of God. Repentance from what though? Repentance from sin (breaking God’s law). Paul taught that keeping the law FOR righteousness is impossible, for all have sinned. He was also very clear in the fact that repenting from sin means that one stops breaking the law and starts keeping it. “Do we then make void the law through faith? GOD FORBID! Rather, WE ESTABLISH THE LAW.” (Rom. 3:31) Why did Paul say this? Because IF we have repented we are making a life practice of following God’s instructions for how to live (rather than continuing in sin), which most certainly includes abiding by His fourth command.
It’s interesting that Hebrews 3 prefaces Hebrews 4 by telling us the disobedience of those who died in the wilderness for profaning God’s laws, in specific His holy Sabbaths, as Ezekiel 20 aptly reminds us, which is why we can KNOW that Hebrews 4 is a direct reference to the literal seventh day Sabbath-keeping as vital to obtaining God’s promise of eternal rest (eternal life).
Jesus Christ spoke of a future event and prayed that we would not have to flee in the winter or on a Sabbath. Also, the seventh day Sabbath will be observed in the world under the rule of Jesus Christ, a law for the WHOLE WORLD, along with keeping the feast of tabernacles, Zechariah 14.
So, we see the Sabbath command from Genesis to Revelation (14:12, 22:14). It hasn’t been “done away”, “kept for us by Jesus Christ”, etc. How can Jesus keep God’s seventh day Sabbath for us? We are INDIVIDUALLY MORALLY responsible to God to obey Him ourselves. To NOT obey Him is not only “sin”, but is also tantamount to NOT knowing Him. I John 2:3-4.
Those who teach AGAINST God’s seventh day Sabbath command simply don’t know Him. They just know of Rome’s indoctrination, which is what most theologians spout having come from seminaries that propagate Roman Catholic doctrines and creeds, not the Bible’s.
Derek, God made the 7th day holy (sanctified). What makes something sanctified? By setting it apart. Is the seventh day holy in and of itself? I don’t think so. It looks and sounds like any other day to me. No, for a day to be holy it has to be observed as holy and in a specific way. For God to have required Adam to keep the seventh day holy necessitated clear stipulations from Him HOW it was to be kept, i.e. observed. Did Hed so? No. Why not? Because it was GOD who rested and He rested from HIS work. He continues in that rest. So He is the One keeping it holy. Did He ask Adam to rest? No, because for one thing Adam did not have any work to rest from. Pre-Fall Adam obeyed by his moral nature God’s universal law but observance of a day is not something that can be written on the heart morally (and don’t forget Adam’s moral nature was already created BEFORE the seventh day). Keeping something holy is all about rituals
Contd.
And assuming it had been ordained (which it most certainly was not) any observance on Adam’s part would have been purely commemorative thus making the Sabbath a ceremonial day. Fact is, if God asked Adam to do something in connection with the seventh day why is it not recorded in Genesis for his posterity? Not only is it absent but God didn’t even call the 7th day “the Sabbath”. Some scholars believe that in Genesis 2 Moses is writing back into the Genesis account what God commanded him hundreds of years later at Sinai. That would make sense and if true further diminish the likelihood of the Sabbath being a creation ordinance. That’s my honest understanding from scripture. You cannot argue from silence
Contd You can read through the whole of the first book of the Bible and there is not a word about the Sabbath. It is only when we get to the story of Moses and Aaron we see them causing the people to rest from their labours. I am forced by dint of scriptural silence to state that there is nothing in the Bible pre-Sinai covenants where it explicitly states that God gave the Law (the Mosaic Law) to the Patriarchs.
The law of Moses was only given to the Jews (Deuteronomy 5:1-3). The Gentiles were also under law but not under the law of Moses. We know that there was law to the Gentiles because without law there is no sin (Romans 5:13). It is clear from Romans 1 that they had transgressed law because they are condemned in sin by Paul, showing their need for a Saviour from their sins. This law has been called various things throughout time. Some have called this law to the Gentiles the “Adamic law” (Romans 5:14). From Romans 8:2 this law to the Gentiles has also been called “the law of sin and death.” In most cases, this law to the Gentiles has been called “universal moral la.” though this is not a Biblical term. Up to this point, there is no reason for argument, for we must accept that Gentiles are under law (whatever name one chooses to call it) and the Jews were under the law of Moses.
Contd
The fact that God ordained the Sabbath to be kept by the children of Israel prior to giving the Law on Sinai in no way provides a prima facie case for claiming that the Sabbath commandment existed pre-Exodus. Arguing from silence is a poor hermeneutic. I suggest its another way of defining speculation.
But there is a more serious issue here for professed “sabbath keepers” and it is this. If you wish to maintain sabbath-keeping then you are in real trouble. Why? Those who place themselves under the Law are obliged to keep ALL the Law (600 plus laws) and, not least, the sacrificial laws INSEPARABLY CONNECTED WITH THE SABBATH and to do so PERFECTLY. Nobody has authority to separate the Sabbath from the law of blood sacrifices mandated by God for the seventh-day Sabbath observance. Did you ever consider this fact Derek?
Contd
Yet sabbatarians presume to do just that! So are sabbatarians keeping the Sabbath according to the commandment? Of course not! By disregarding law as it appears in the Torah, they are actually desecrating the Sabbath every week and their so-called “sabbath keeping is a total farce. Ask any Jew about the Law and they will tell you that to keep the Bible strictly according to the Torah you need the Levitical priesthood, the High Priest, the Altar, The Temple etc. And it will NEVER HAPPEN because God took it all away in AD70. So, think about that Derek. Your so-called “sbbath-keeping” is not only a farce but it militates against the work of Christ as the Lamb of God. The Sabbath was never required of Gentiles. It was commanded only of Israel to whom it was the Old Covenant Sign.
There is not a single commandment to keep the Sabbath in the NT and nowhere do the Apostles command Gentiles to observe it. (Cf decision of Jerusalem Council for the Gentiles – Acts 15) Nowhere does Paul detail exactly how the Gentiles are to observe it, which is rather remiss of him, don’t you think, if the Sabbath commandment is obligatory, considering he was the Apostle to the Gentiles?
Contd
The Sabbath was a Covenant Sign, a weekly ceremony commemorating Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian bondage by the Creator. This is reflected in the prelude to the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20. Christians are NOT delivered from Egyptian bondage! Christians are NOT under law to Moses; they are under law to Christ. Christ’s law as shown in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5) is of an infinitely higher standard and scope (even universal) than a mere ten holy laws which are actually prohibitions against enacted offences a fact incidently which is selectively overlooked by most teachers of the law.
Derek, ALL the Law and the Prophets is fulfilled in Christ (He announced this on the Cross) and if you are in Him you are complete in Him (Col 2:10). We have a righteousness APART from the Law revealed through us (Rom 6:14). The law is written on our hearts (Jer 31) not on stone or in a book! (2 Cor 3) The result?- a change of attitude and behaviour which fulfills all the righteous demands of the Law. When a man is led by the Spirit of Christ he is a a son of God and all the fruits of the Spirit will be present not one will be missing.
Contd
Righteousness is ministered to the Christian through Christ’s Spirit, not through tablets of stone or in a book!
Derek
When I said your so called sabbath-keeping is a “farce” I meant only in the sense that unless it is strictly in accordance with Torah. I am in no way implying that your personal attempt at sabbath-keeping (whatever form that may be) is not a genuine attempt on your part to obey what you perceive to be God’s will. I was a sabbath-keeper for 33 years and sincerely tried to obey the 4th commandment according to all that I knew on the subject. Any sincerity in sabbath-keeping is not the issue here – I hope that is clear. In peace.
Thanks for taking time to comment.
GOD gave an instruction. “Remember to keep the Sabbath day holy”. The “Torah” instructions are simple: Cease from labor on the seventh day, having worked the other six. It’s a practical instruction for life. It is a MORAL issue because to NOT keep the fourth command is a sin, just like murder and stealing, etc. It’s serious, but not difficult to practice, at all. People find every excuse under the sun to ignore the glaring, simple, fourth command. It is a sign between God and the people that REALLY believe Him.
When scripture is “rightly divided”, it is manifest that God’s practical instruction for how to live is a sign between Himself and true believers. Anything short of that will disqualify a person from the first resurrection, which is the warning Jesus gave to one of the seven “churches” … i.e., people who were proclaiming the gospel, but had left their “first love”. We know what Jesus meant by “first love” when he quoted from the Hebrew scriptures to love the LORD with all one’s heart, soul, and mind. This is the greatest command.
The only way to love GOD is to do what He says, simply outlined in the first four commands. THAT is HOW to love GOD. To not comply with these is to NOT love God … which is why Jesus gave the warning and consequence of REMOVING a person’s candlestick out of its place … i.e., being disqualified for the first resurrection at his return.
Those who claim to know GOD have a moral responsibility to not practice breaking His law, which is sin … which is WHY the writer of Hebrews emphasized obedience to God as vital to eternal life as a direct result of having repented from breaking His law and being forgiven.
Mainstream Christianity is antinomian and twists Paul’s and other Greek testament writings thereby muddying the simple truth regarding what sin is and its consequences. One must qualify for God’s grace by repenting and asking forgiveness and STOPPING sinning. When a person STOPS sinning he STARTS obeying GOD. It’s that simple.
Again, the literal seventh day Sabbath is found from Genesis to Revelation. There has been NO abrogation, annulling, “doing away with”, etc, the fourth command. GOD has not annulled the very instruction that IS (not was) a shadow of the millennial rest under the reign of Jesus Christ (the seventh thousand years in the history of mankind) and is likened to the permanent rest that is promised to those who qualify for it.
Disclaimer: I am not part of any cult, among which I include Seventh Day Adventism, and the Hebrew Roots Movement (Messianic groups), or any Roman indoctrinated denomination (which includes all of them in some form).
Why have you chosen to ignore all the points I made? We are not writing essays here although I must own up to writing some very long replies that are long enough to be conceived of as such. Surely we are debating points. If you ignore the issues I raised with in response to your own post, I will be forced to assume that you are unable to refute them.
Additional note: I meant to include the World Wide Church of God in my “cult” list.
Point 1. You stated, “Keeping something holy is all about rituals.” However, the Bible teaches that keeping the seventh day Sabbath is all about “ceasing from labor”.
There is nothing “ritualistic” about following God’s instructions for working six days and not working one. To profane the Sabbath is to ignore the simple, practical instruction. My guess is that most church-going people who teach against God’s instruction for Sabbath-keeping manage to practice sun day keeping ritualistically, even using the same format week after week. These sun day services involve far more ritual than God’s simple edict to cease from labor on the seventh day of the week.
Point 2. You stated, “And assuming it had been ordained (which it most certainly was not) any observance on Adam’s part would have been purely commemorative thus making the Sabbath a ceremonial day.”
One has to really do some dangerous stretching to ignore or try to get around Exodus 20:8-10:
“Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shall you labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall not do any work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor the stranger that is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.”
GOD hallowed the seventh day. We don’t hallow the day. He did. We are to obey Him by following His instruction for how He wants it kept.
So, we can see in the plain language of Exodus 20-10 that God most certainly DID “ordain” (as you put it) Sabbath keeping. According to God, it’s not up for question or debate. The penalty for Sabbath breaking was death. It still is because it is a moral law, just like the other nine commands that flank it. “The wages of sin is death …”, Romans 6:23
Point 3. You stated, “You can read through the whole of the first book of the Bible and there is not a word about the Sabbath.”
The Hebrew word “shabbat” literally means a “ceasing” or “stopping”. The meaning and intent of God is therefore clear in Genesis 2:2-3:
“And on the seventh day God ended His work, which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made. And God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because that in it he had rested from all His work which God created and made.”
THIS is “word” about the “Sabbath” … very clearly.
Also, we see Abraham keeping God’s laws in Genesis 26:
“Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” Genesis 26:5
Evidently God’s commands and laws were made known to Abraham or he couldn’t have kept them. Since God does not change, we can rest assured that Abraham knew the very same laws that were announced on Sinai and made a record of by Moses.
Because the Sabbath command is not specifically listed, are we to assume Abraham did not keep it? By this same argument, we could also include ALL of the commandments, yet the language is clear. Abraham kept God’s COMMANDMENTS and LAWS.
Further evidence is that the Sabbath is referred to as a “law” in Exodus 16 PRIOR to Sinai:
“And it came to pass that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread … And he (Moses) said to them, this is that which the LORD has said, ‘Tomorrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the LORD…’ And Moses said, … Six days you shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none. And it came to pass that there went out some of the people on the seventh day toi gather, and they found none. And the LORD said unto Moses, ‘How long do you refuse to keep My COMMANDMENTS and My LAWS?” Exodus 16:22-28
NOTE: No “Levitical priesthood or blood sacrifices” are necessary to keep God’s seventh day Sabbath.
We can plainly see the Sabbath was a “commandment” and “law” PRIOR to Sinai. So, when we go back to Genesis 26 and read that Abraham kept God’s “commandments” and “laws”, we can sure that the Sabbath was one of them.
The name of the Messiah is not mentioned in Genesis either. Are we to assume Abraham had no knowledge of the coming Messiah? Contrariwise, we know without doubt that Abraham knew of the Messiah by Jesus’ own words in John 8:58:
“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it and was glad.”
Scripture can only be “rightly divided” using hermeneutics, but most importantly God’s spirit to teach how to put it all together. The only pre-requisite to having God’s spirit is obedience to Him, Acts 5:32.
Point 4. You stated, “The fact that God ordained the Sabbath to be kept by the children of Israel prior to giving the Law on Sinai in no way provides a prima facie case for claiming that the Sabbath commandment existed pre-Exodus. Arguing from silence is a poor hermeneutic.”
First of all, God hallowed the seventh day following creation, which establishes the fact of the Sabbath (ceasing from labor) “pre-Exodus”.
Point 5. The New Testament teaches that to keep the law FOR righteousness is impossible because all have sinned (broken the law in one point or another). The New Testament also defines sin as breaking God’s law. It teaches that we are to repent from sin (breaking God’s law). To repent from breaking God’s law is to stop sinning and start keeping God’s law instead.
Paul said, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid! Rather, we establish the law.”
We establish the law because we are no longer breaking it, but keeping it. It is a misconception to think that being “under the law” means that a person is “keeping it”, when the opposite is true. To be “under the law” is to NOT have repented from breaking it and thereby have the death penalty (the second death via the lake of fire) looming as a consequence. The “law of sin and death” is self-defined and does not refer to God’s law that is perfect and good and is what converts a person, Psalm 19:17.
Those “under grace” have repented from sin and are practicing a lifestyle of obeying God. Those “under the law” are still facing the death penalty for NOT keeping God’s ways. Repentance is vital to receiving God’s forgiveness and grace.
You also stated that, “Nobody has authority to separate the Sabbath from the law of blood sacrifices mandated by God for the seventh-day Sabbath observance.”
Where in God’s fourth commandment to keep the Sabbath is a “mandate for blood sacrifices”? Where is the mention of “mandated” sacrifices for Sabbath keeping in Exodus 16, where the seventh day Sabbath is called a commandment and a law? The answer is there is NO “mandate” by God for blood sacrifices as part of Sabbath keeping.
Point 6. You stated, “Ask any Jew about the Law and they will tell you that to keep the Bible strictly according to the Torah you need the Levitical priesthood, the High Priest, the Altar, The Temple etc.”
A rabbinical Jew will also tell you that Jesus Christ is burning is excrement this very moment (according to their Talmud). So, let’s just stick with scripture. The fourth command is about “ceasing from labor” on the seventh day. It’s simple. God said to work six days and NOT work on the seventh day. That’s the command He said to REMEMBER.
Sabbath keeping is a command of God for everyone. Those who know Him, keep it. Those who do not know Him, do not keep it, I John 2:3-4. The Sabbath command is not for a genetic race of people from an ancient time. It is an instruction of God for all, but only those who know Him keep it, because only those who know Him actually believe Him enough to obey Him, a.k.a. living faith.
John stated that the commandments they followed were “old” and from the “beginning”, I John 2:7. The apostles lived by the Hebrew scriptures. The Greek scriptures had not seen their completion yet. We see Paul keeping the Sabbath throughout the book of Acts.
Two chapters in Hebrews are devoted to teaching the importance of keeping the Sabbath. Hebrews 3 tells of the disobedience of those who died in the wilderness for profaning God’s laws, with an emphasis on their having profaned the Sabbath, Ezekiel 20. Hebrews 4 begins with a warning to not do what they did and then reminds the reader of the seventh day Sabbath with the clear reminder in Hebrews 4:9 that a “sabbatismos” (Sabbath keeping) REMAINS for the people of God (believers).
The popular mantra “Jesus is our Sabbath rest” makes no sense, especially in light of the fact that the Sabbath is a physical day of the week and we are to physically not work on that day. The fourth command is a practical way to live and aligns a person with the Creator. To NOT keep it is to NOT be in alliance with God and I wouldn’t recommend that place to anyone.
Point 7. You stated, “The Sabbath was a Covenant Sign, a weekly ceremony commemorating Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian bondage by the Creator.”
The Sabbath is no such thing. Brian, where are you getting these wild ideas?
The Sabbath is NOT a “ceremony” and it was NOT established to commemorate Israel’s deliverance from Egypt!
Let’s let scripture tells us what the seventh day is, when it was hallowed, and why:
“And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it; because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made.” Genesis 2:2-3
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God: in it you shall not do any work … for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Wherefore, the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” Exodus 20:8-10
Exodus refers to the day that God hallowed at creation as the Sabbath. Therefore, we can KNOW that the Sabbath was a law at this point in history of man, a law that Abraham kept.
Point 8. You stated, “ALL the Law and the Prophets is fulfilled in Christ (He announced this on the Cross) and if you are in Him you are complete in Him (Col 2:10).”
No, all of the law and prophets are NOT fulfilled. Four of the holy days foreshadow events that are YET to come. But let’s hear it from Jesus Christ himself:
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, till heaven and earth pass, not one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, until all be fulfilled.” Matthew 5:17-18
Have heaven and earth passed away yet? (Maybe I didn’t get the memo.)
Jesus continues:
“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.” Matthew 5:19
Point 9. Justification by faith comes through Jesus Christ. However, no one can be forgiven of sin unless he repents and begins obeying God. The tablets of stone cannot save. They lead a person to salvation because it is the law that points out what it is we need to repent of. Jesus Christ cannot obey God for us. Every person is individually, morally responsible to God for his own actions. What Jesus Christ has done is made a way to have our sins propitiated so that we can be cleansed and forgiven of sin and thereby stand justified before a holy God. What Jesus Christ has not done is repent or obey for us.
Brian, I understand that you are not attacking my sincerity here, nor am I attacking yours. Peace.
for you are breaking the sabbath every week and are therefore under the condemnation of the law. Indeed in ancient Israel you would be stoned to death!
Sabbatarians need to heed the following:
The sabbath, as was circumcision and other commands, were first given as part of the body of the law from the Old Covenant. On “EVERY Sabbath” there was to be a burnt offering.
If you choose to observe or/and go back under an OT law:
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish oughtfrom it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Deuteronomy 4:2
( the same “add not” and “diminish ought” applies to the NEW Covenant which the church has polluted by adding in dozens of unscriptural traditions and doctrines. *see Revelation 22:18-19)
God said in the law “DO ALL” many, many times, and this was repeated by Paul and James, and as Paul wrote in Gal. 4:21 “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?”
Leviticus 19:37 And ye shall observe allmy statutes, and allmine ordinances, and do them
Deut 31:12 … and fear the LORD your God, and observe to do all the words of this law
Galatians 5:3 Yea, I testify again to every man that receiveth circumcision*, that he is a debtor to do thewholelaw. 4) Ye are severed from Christ, ye (who) would be *justified by the law; ye are fallen away from grace. *to render just or innocent:
James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
In the same way the Sabbath. Btw, circumcision and the sabbath were the two signs of the Old Covenant. The sign of the New Covenant is the Lord’s Supper.
Derek
My answer to your objections:
Point 1. “There is nothing “ritualistic” about following God’s instructions” O
On the contrary to observe the sabbath according to the Law involved much ritualism not mentioned in the wording of the fourth commandment. It is listed in Book of the Law (which you have selectively chosen to ignore and comprises Leviticus and Numbers). God specified very clearly the things the ancient Hebrews were required to observe in addition to the sabbath sacrifices listed in Leviticus and Numbers. I suggest you study the Law and become familiar with what it demanded before making such a astounding claim.
Point 2. “One has to really do some dangerous stretching to ignore or try to get around Exodus 20:8-10 …. We are to obey Him by following His instruction for how He wants it kept.”
Exactly, and thereby you condemn yourself because you believe that you are still under the Law of Moses. But that dangerous stretching includes getting around the Book of the Law with its specific sabbath laws that you are flouting. You had better start keeping it perfectly soon for you are breaking the sabbath every week (CONTD ABOVE)
Point 3. “The meaning and intent of God is therefore clear in Genesis 2:2-3” It may be clear to you but it is not to me. I am not persuaded by your generalisations and lack of scripture. You have failed to address my remarks in on Genesis and are simply reading into the verses what you want.
“Also, we see Abraham keeping God’s laws in Genesis 26:5” 5.
The burden is upon you to show me from Genesis where these covenant laws that God made with Abraham include the Sabbath. Chapter and verse please.
“Because the Sabbath command is not specifically listed, are we to assume Abraham did not keep it?” We are not to assume anything. You continue to argue from silence. This is not an acceptable way to exegete scripture.
“By this same argument, we could also include ALL of the commandments, yet the language is clear. Abraham kept God’s COMMANDMENTS and LAWS.”
Show me chapter and verse what these are.
Point 3 contd
“Further evidence is that the Sabbath is referred to as a “law” in Exodus 16 PRIOR to Sinai”. God was already teaching the Israelites what His will was prior to the formal declaration of the Law at Sinai but as I said before this does not prove that He taught the patriachs the same. But I have already addressed this in my last post.
““NOTE: No “Levitical priesthood or blood sacrifices” are necessary to keep God’s seventh day Sabbath.” I am incredulous that you make this statement. Any Bible student worth his salt knows otherwise. ALL things were required to be sanctified by blood and the blood at that time was from the ordained sacrifices. That’s why there were special sacrifices on the sabbath; double burnt offerings (Numbers 28:9-10).9: “‘However, on the sabbath day there will be two sound year-old male lambs and two tenth measures of fine flour as a grain offering moistened with oil, together with its drink offering, 10 as a sabbath burnt offering on its sabbath, along with the constant burnt offering and its drink offering.
The sacrifice was the same for both the morning and evening sacrifice. What would happen is that a lamb would be sacrificed and that bread and wine would also be offered up. Numbers 28 tells us that this sacrifice is to be a continual offering, meaning forever.
During both of these sacrifices certain prayers were required to be said.
On “every sabbath yet another “everlasting covenant” Levitical Sabbath command was to:
5 …take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes thereof: two tenth parts of an ephah shall be in one cake.
And thou shalt set them in two rows, six on a row, upon the pure table before the Lord.
And thou shalt put pure frankincense upon each row, that it may be to the bread for a memorial, even an offering made by fire unto the Lord.
Every sabbath day he shall set it in order before the LORD continually; it is on the behalf of the children of Israel, an everlasting covenant.
And it shall be for Aaron and his sons; and they shall eat it in a holy place: for it is most holy unto him of the offerings of the Lord made by fire by a perpetual statute. -Lev.24.
Now try telling me that this is not ritual? And this is not half the story of what was required or prohibited on the Sabbath day!
Point 3 contd
“We can plainly see the Sabbath was a “commandment” and “law” PRIOR to Sinai. So, when we go back to Genesis 26 and read that Abraham kept God’s “commandments” and “laws”, we can sure that the Sabbath was one of them.”
Derek, your method of interpreting Bible is unacceptable because it is based on pure assumption. You make one assumption and then draw further assumptions from your first assumption! You are arguing in a vacuum. Additionally you interpret Genesis by reading into it what you read in Exodus!!
The “name of the Messiah is not mentioned in Genesis either. Are we to assume Abraham had no knowledge of the coming Messiah?”
No, we do not have to “assume” anything because as you rightly stated, Jesus evidenced Abaham knew. But you have provided no evidence that Abraham kept the sabbath. On the contrary (a point you also chose to ignore from my previous posts) scripture tells us that the covenant that was made with the Hebrews was NOT the same as that made with the patriarchsrs.
“most importantly God’s [we need] spirit to teach how to put it [scripture] all together. The only pre-requisite to having God’s spirit is obedience to Him, Acts 5:32.”
Really? Do you understand that without the Holy Spirit, who is the source of our spiritual life, we are not even spiritually alive?Obedience (works) are the fruit of salvation (new birth) commonly referred to as the “fruits of the Spirit”. Christ tells us that we cannot do anything without Him (Jn 15). You betray a legalistic theology which is not surprising since your focus is law and not the Spirit who is the source of our obedience.
By the way the Spirit does not circumvent His own Word or contradict what He has revealed in the Word.
Point 4. “First of all, God hallowed the seventh day following creation, which establishes the fact of the Sabbath (ceasing from labor) “pre-Exodus”.”
It establishes no such thing if by “ceasing from labour” you want to relate this to man’s duty. You are grasping at straws.
Point 5. “The New Testament teaches that to keep the law FOR righteousness is impossible because all have sinned (broken the law in one point or another).”
We are not required to keep the Law of Moses period because we are not under law but under Grace. The righteousness that the Law demands is imputed to us by Christ and imparted by His Spirit and received by grace through faith. It is a righteousness APART FROM LAW and yet witnessed by the Law.
Point 5 contd “The New Testament also defines sin as breaking God’s law.”
The correct definition of sin is “missing the mark” and this RESULTS in also transgressing God’s law. We all fall short of the glory of God.
“To repent from breaking God’s law is to stop sinning and start keeping God’s law instead” Yes and no. The righteousness of Christ does not conflict with the righteous demands of the law but fulfills the requirements of the law. We receive His righteousness not by trying in our own strength to obey as you teach but by faith. It is GOD who works in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure. Again you show you
“Paul said, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid! Rather, we establish the law.”
We establish the law because we are no longer breaking it, but keeping it.”
Exactly, but your understanding how we keep the law is what is flawed. See above.
“It is a misconception to think that being “under the law” means that a person is “keeping it”, when the opposite is true. To be “under the law” is to NOT have repented from breaking it and thereby have the death penalty (the second death via the lake of fire) looming as a consequence.”
???? Where do you get your ideas from? Derek, being “under the law” is being under obligation to obey the law in all its requirements. Christ was under the law, being a Jew. So if we apply your definition He is made a sinner and destined for hell! You are the one who is destined for hell because you are breaking the sabbath and all its requiements every week! Brother, you need to repent of your failed law-keeping. You could of course accept the simple Gospel and accept Jesus’ law-keeping in your stead.
Point 5 contd. “You also stated that, “Nobody has authority to separate the Sabbath from the law of blood sacrifices mandated by God for the seventh-day Sabbath observance.” Where in God’s fourth commandment to keep the Sabbath is a “mandate for blood sacrifices”? Where is the mention of “mandated” sacrifices for Sabbath keeping in Exodus 16, where the seventh day Sabbath is called a commandment and a law? The answer is there is NO “mandate” by God for blood sacrifices as part of Sabbath keeping.”
I disagree. I told you in my last post that the ten commandments are purely a summary if you like of ALL the covenant law. The full specification of exactly how the Sabbath was to be kept is mandated in the Book of the Law. Like Adventists you deliberately cast off the Book of the Law in which incidently is recorded the ten commandments (twice) and which was given BEFORE the ten comandments on stone.
Point 6. You stated, “Ask any Jew about the Law and they will tell you that to keep the Bible strictly according to the Torah you need the Levitical priesthood, the High Priest, the Altar, The Temple etc.”
A rabbinical Jew will also tell you that Jesus Christ is burning is excrement this very moment (according to their Talmud). So, let’s just stick with scripture.”
Be that as it may, they are sticklers for law and know full well how to keep the Torah, and even though you want to uphold the Law of Moses the evidence is that you have much to learn about the Law. I refered you to the Jews because you simply will NOT stick with scripture.
“The fourth command is about “ceasing from labor” on the seventh day. It’s simple. God said to work six days and NOT work on the seventh day. That’s the command He said to REMEMBER. Sabbath keeping is a command of God for everyone.”
Wrong. The Bible tells us that the Sabbath was given to the Jews. When a stranger came into the camp they were expected to keep the sabbath.
“Those who know Him, keep it. Those who do not know Him, do not keep it, I John 2:3-4.”
That’s pure opinion. You are reading “the ten commandments” into 1 John 2:3-4 which is what Adventists typically do because they cannot conceive of any other “law” outside of the Decalogue.
Point 6 contd “John stated that the commandments they followed were “old” and from the “beginning”, I John 2:7. The apostles lived by the Hebrew scriptures. The Greek scriptures had not seen their completion yet.”
Yes, Derek, it is true that the early church did not have the New Testament in writing nevertheless they were being taught b by the Discples neverthless and Paul clearly taught that the Old Covenant and its laws were abrogated. So you need to take another look at what John meant by old and new.
“We see Paul keeping the Sabbath throughout the book of Acts.”
Of course, because he was a Jew and the Sabbath was enshrined in state law. That does not mean he acceepted in principle as binding on Christians. Acts 15 tells us otherwise. See my previous post where I dealt with this objection more fully.
“Two chapters in Hebrews are devoted to teaching the importance of keeping the Sabbath.”
Point 6 contd You refer to Hebrews 3 and 4. I will say this: Until you accept the gospel of grace you are still in your sins and therefore have not entered into Christ’s rest. For anyone who has not given up on their law-keeping there remains a rest, the rest that is ours in Christ. That rest makes every sense since it is Christ’s works NOT ours that we rest in. It is disobedience to Christ and marked unbelief that refuses to accept God’s rest and draw people back under the Law and the OC sign, the sabbath.
Point 7 Your objection vis-a-vis the sabbath not being a ceremony is dealt with above. The ten commandments are made up of what Adventists call “moral”and “ceremonial law”. This is to be expected considering that they represent ALL the Law.
The language of the ten commandmengs makes it clear that it is specifically addressed to a certain race of people in a certain geographical location. This is evident nar not only from the prologue but from some of the specific commandments themselves.
Consider, in Eden there was:
no “work” “sons” “daughters” “manservants” “maidservants”, “strangers” and no “gates” (at least not belonging to Adam and Eve). (4th Commandment) Universal law? I don’t think so!
Consider that the Lord is not giving the land of Canaan to Christians (5th Commandment) Universal law? I don’t think so!
Consider again that Christians have not been delivered out of Egypt nor have they been in bondage in Egypt. Universal law? I don’t think so!
Point 8. I belive Christ fulfilled all the Law and the Prophets for salvation otherwise we are still under the Law and the Prophets and must continue offering sacrifices. And He is continuing to fulfill it through His Body the Church. He has fulfilled the Law and the Prophets as the Servant. He stands in the place of Israel and whereas Israel came short He did not.
Matthew 5:17-19 quoted.
Of course. Jesus taught obedience to the Law. He was, after all, teaching the Jews who were still under the Law. Jesus was not sent to the Gentiles; He was sent to the lost sheep of Israel. His gospel was to the Circumcision and so was the gospel of the rest of the Disciples with the exception of Paul whose gospel was to the Gentiles. That’s another reason why you will not see Paul commanding the Sabbath.
Derek, I am not prepared to continue this debate with you. Its up to you to agree or disagree as you choose. God bless you.
Christ always spoke in parables in public. “Heaven and earth” applies to the era of the nation of Israel whose world came to an end in AD70. Christ said “until” twice in this passage. And the “until” happened the “heaven and the earth passed away”! But what did He mean? Christ was using symbolism here which was quite a common thing for prophets to do in His day; and He was also a prophet remember. The Bible is full of “heavens” and the “earth” inferences. The context of these shows that it is a reference to leaders and the people. Joseph, for example, spoke of his parents as the “sun and the moon” and his brothers as the “stars”. Peter talked of the heavens and the earth of old which passed away when referring to the Great Flood. This is common in prophetic language throughout the Old Testament and even in the New Testament. I will send you the memo seeing as it is 1942 years too late in your case
Point 1. You stated, “… circumcision and the sabbath were the two signs of the Old Covenant. The sign of the New Covenant is the Lord’s Supper.”
Circumcision, like water baptism, were signs that identified God’s people. However, Acts 15 takes great pains to teach that physical circumcision is not a requirement for salvation, and in John 1 we learn that John baptized with water, but Jesus came to baptize with God’s spirit. So, these physical signs, circumcision and water baptism, are not requirements for salvation. Romans 2:28-29 defines a true Jew as one who is circumcised of the heart, not flesh.
The seventh day Sabbath is a sign between God and His people (believers), and also a point blank command … something we are to remember to do. Neither baptism nor circumcision are listed in the ten commands, but the seventh day Sabbath keeping IS.
What laws are obsolete now? The temporal laws that required temporal high priests and temporal sacrifices. These are obsolete because we have a permanent high priest and a permanent sacrifice. The physical temple is not necessary anymore and neither are human high priests or sacrifices of bulls and goats. (Hebrews and Ephesiains) What Jesus Christ did was remove the ENMITY between Jew and Gentile, meaning that he made the Levitical ordinances obsolete. Gentiles were not allowed into the inner court of the physical temple. Jesus Christ did away with the distinguishing of Jew and Gentile, making the two one.
The Bible does not teach that God’s laws for how to live have been “done away” as many antinomians wish to proclaim. The Bible teaches that the temporal sacrificial system under human priests was made obsolete by the once for all sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Now we have a PERMANENT priest, a PERMANENT sacrifice, and PERMANENT promises … which is the only difference between the covenant of old that is “ready to vanish” as Hebrews 8 teaches.
If God’s laws are “done away” then there is nothing left to define sin. Murder is okay now … adultery is fine … stealing, not a problem. But we know that these are called sin because I John 3:4 gives us the definition of sin; breaking God’s law … which is WHY the fourth commandment is vital to salvation … because the practice of breaking it is sin … and the wages of sin is death (permanent death via the lake of fire).
The consequence of Sabbath breaking has not changed. Death was the penalty. It still is. The punishment in ancient Israel was physical death. The only difference now is that the punishment for not repenting from sin is permanent death in the lake of fire, which is also called the second death because it is final.
Point 2. You stated, “On the contrary to observe the sabbath according to the Law involved much ritualism not mentioned in the wording of the fourth commandment.”
Where is this “ritualism” in Exodus 16, where God commanded His “law”, the seventh day Sabbath keeping, to be kept? The people were simply to NOT gather food (work) on the seventh day. There is no other ritual involved in “ceasing from labor”. The fourth command is practical and simple. Those who keep it align themselves with the Creator because it is the Creator that hallowed this day. NOWHERE in all of scripture has this day been UNhallowed.
When scripture is harmonized, we can see that the temporal practices of Israel are obsolete. Therefore, no animal sacrifice is necessary for any of God’s required Sabbaths, to include His holy days, which believers also keep in contrast to the worlds holidays that most practice in keeping with Babylonian mystery cult sun worship.
Point 3. You quoted me, “One has to really do some dangerous stretching to ignore or try to get around Exodus 20:8-10 …. We are to obey Him by following His instruction for how He wants it kept.”
That’s right. Exodus 20:8-10 is blatant instruction by God. To practice NOT WORKING on the seventh day is simple to follow. To NOT practice this tantamount to idolatry … because it means that a person does not acknowledge the Creator. Simple.
Point 4. You stated, “It may be clear to you but it is not to me. I am not persuaded by your generalisations and lack of scripture. You have failed to address my remarks in on Genesis and are simply reading into the verses what you want.”
I DID address your comments regarding the Sabbath in Genesis. Listen carefully: The fourth commandment that appears in Exodus 20:8-10 hearkens BACK TO CREATION and calls this day the SABBATH. So, we can KNOW it was the SABBATH that God instituted AT CREATION.
One more time: Exodus calls the day that God hallowed AT CREATION THE SABBATH. Therefore, the SABBATH was instituted AT CREATION.
Sabbath keeping was a “law” before Sinai, as I aptly pointed out. Anyone can read Exodus 16 and see plainly that God made a BIG DEAL about keeping His seventh day Sabbath and called it a “LAW” and “COMMANDMENT”.
These are PLAIN FACTS that are not up for question because they are THAT PLAIN.
Point 5. You stated, “The burden is upon you to show me from Genesis where these covenant laws that God made with Abraham include the Sabbath. Chapter and verse please.”
I just did. Again, Exodus calls the seventh day that God hallowed at creation the SABBATH. So, the SABBATH was instituted AT CREATION as a “law”. We know this because God called it a LAW and COMMANDMENT *PRIOR* to Sinai. With these two FACTS in mind, we then look at Genesis 26:5:
“…Abraham .. kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.”
Keeping in mind that the Sabbath was instituted AT CREATION and something GOD made a big deal about BEFORE Sinai, one can then KNOW the Sabbath was one of the COMMANDMENTS and LAWS that Abraham obeyed.
Verse and chapter? Exodus 20:8-10, Genesis 2:2-3, and Genesis 26:5
Point 6. Since the temporal priesthood and ordinances in conjunction with are obsolete, we can know that keeping the Sabbath now does NOT necessitate these temporal rituals. There is no more earthly physical temple, no more earthly human priests, and no more types of temporal sacrifices. Jesus Christ is the permanent High Priest, and is the permanent sacrifice. This is NO WAY disannuls the fourth command, just like it in no way disannuls the other commands.
Point 7. You stated, “Additionally you interpret Genesis by reading into it what you read in Exodus!!
Right. That is how scripture is “rightly divided” … by using principles of hermeneutics. Exodus calls the seventh day that was hallowed at creation the SABBATH. “Shabbat” simply means “ceasing”. So, there was a CEASING from labor AT CREATION, and God hallowed this seventh day. It is the SABBATH from the week of Creation. THAT is when the SABBATH came to be a law of God that He taught His people PRIOR TO SINAI.
Point 8. You stated, “Christ tells us that we cannot do anything without Him (Jn 15). You betray a legalistic theology which is not surprising since your focus is law and not the Spirit who is the source of our obedience.”
Is God “legalistic”? He has moral laws that if we practice breaking, we receive bad consequences. Those who practice murder, for instance, will NOT see the kingdom. Those who practice stealing, will NOT see the kingdom. Why? Because these have not repented from their sin, but are practicing ignoring God’s laws.
The Bible teaches that sin is breaking God’s law, I John 3:4. So, we have sin defined for us by God through His word. To repent from sin is to STOP breaking His law and START keeping it. Is that legalism? No, it’s called OBEDIENCE.
Faith without works isn’t faith at all. Living faith is proven by obedience to God. If a person REALLY believes God, he obeys Him. No one is given God’s spirit who does NOT obey Him. Acts 5:32.
Legalism would be keeping the law FOR our own righteousness, which is impossible because we’ve all broken the law in one point or another. What Jesus Christ did is allow God to forgive us these sins and not hold them to our account. But if we practice breaking His law He DOES hold them to our account.
Jesus Christ cannot repent for us or obey for us. WE are responsible to God to do this for ourselves. However, it is ear-tickling and popular to believe that Jesus Christ obeyed for us and that we are absolved of any further moral responsibility to God, when that idea could not be further from truth and teaching of scripture.
Point 9. You stated, “We are not required to keep the Law of Moses period because we are not under law but under Grace. The righteousness that the Law demands is imputed to us by Christ and imparted by His Spirit and received by grace through faith.
”
Then why does Paul say, “For not hearers of the law are just before God, but the DOERS of the law shall be justified.” ?
The answer is found when harmonizing his writings. Paul taught that keeping the law FOR one’s own righteousness is impossible, “for all have sinned”. He also taught that “the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is NOT SUBJECT to the law of God, neither can it be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But YOU (believers) are NOT in the flesh, but in the spirit…” Romans 8:6-9
Also, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid! How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer in it. … Let not sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in the lusts therof. … For sin shall not have dominion over you: For you are not under the law, but under grace. What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid!”
Being “under the law” is not NOT have repented from sin, but be facing the death penalty (permanent death in the lake of fire, aka, the second death). To be “under grace” is to have repented from breaking God’s law and to be forgiven. Paul makes a HUGE point that because we have been forgiven and are NOT facing the death penalty, should we continue breaking God’s law? His answer over and over is emphatically NO, meaning that we should be KEEPING THE LAW instead of BREAKING IT.
Paul stated clearly: “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.” Romans 7:13-14
Paul in NO WAY disannuls God’s law for how to live. Paul himself practiced keeping the Sabbath, as was his custom, Acts 17.
Point 10. “Where do you get your ideas from? Derek, being “under the law” is being under obligation to obey the law in all its requirements.”
Right. To be under the law is to be directly accountable to it. It is the standard by which all of mankind will be judged. Those who have repented from breaking it are forgiven (under grace). Those who have not repented are not forgiven and this law will condemn them permanently. So, to be “under the law” is to be facing the death penalty. To be under grace is to NOT be under the second death penalty, but because of repentance and forgiveness, be under God’s grace instead.
Those who think they are “under grace” while continuing to practice breaking the fourth command are given stark warnings by Jesus Christ in Revelation 2 to repent of “leaving your first love” or else have your candlestick REMOVED. The way to love God (first love) is to abide by His instructions for HOW to love Him, aka first four commandments.
Point 11. Just for the record, I am not a Seventh Day Adventist, which I view as a cult. Quite unlike the Seventh Day Adventists I seek to follow ALL of God’s instructions for how to live, to include keeping HIS holidays (as opposed to the worlds’) and abide by HIS food perimeters, and HIS cleanliness instructions, etc.
Point 12. You stated, “You are reading ‘the ten commandments’ into 1 John 2:3-4 which is what Adventists typically do because they cannot conceive of any other ‘law’ outside of the Decalogue.”
(Again, I am NOT an Adventist) Really? John himself a fews verses away specifies to which law he is referring. In context:
“And hereby we do know that we know Him, IF we keep His commandments. He that says, ‘I know Him, but does not keep His commandments is a liar and the truth is not in him…Brethren, I write NO NEW commandment to you, but an OLD COMMANDMENT which you had from the BEGINNING. The OLD COMMANDMENT is the word which you have heard from the beginning.” I John 2:2-7
There was no “New Testament” for these early believers. They studied from the Hebrew scriptures on what was expected of them.
Jesus Christ spoke IN THE FUTURE of a time where he prayed that the flight of believers would not be in the winter or on a Sabbath day.
The Sabbath WILL BE KEPT by the whole world in the future kingdom under the rule of Jesus Christ because the government will be God’s laws, which are universal to mankind. Those who know Him, already obey them. Those who do not know Him, ignore them or even teach against them. Zechariah 14.
Where did Paul teach that God’s laws have been “abrogated”?
Where in ALL of scripture is the teaching that God’s seventh day Sabbath has been VOIDED OUT?
Answer: There is NO PLACE in all of scripture that teaches that the seventh day Sabbath has been made void, abrogated, annulled, disappeared. Paul did not teach that God’s laws that define sin have been VOIDED OUT.
Point 13. You stated, “It is disobedience to Christ and marked unbelief that refuses to accept God’s rest and draw people back under the Law and the OC sign, the sabbath.”
No one can have “God’s rest” (a reference to the future promise of eternal life) unless he KEEPS GOD’S LAWS (also called OBEDIENCE) that springs forth from living faith. It is actually “marked unbelief”, as you put it, to IGNORE God’s instructions for how to live. To do so is call UNBELIEF, the very thing the people died in the wilderness because of their refusal to obey God.
No one receives eternal life who does not meet God’s qualifications for repentance and belief on His Son. His qualifications are simple, Revelation 14:12, yet most choose the broad path anyway. The way is narrow because few choose to REALLY believe God enough to follow His instructions.
Point 14. News Flash! Heaven and earth HAVE NOT PASSED AWAY. As I said, FOUR of the holy days foreshadow prophetic events that HAVE NOT YET HAPPENED. So, the law has not” disappeared” or been “done away with” or “no longer applies”.
The Feast of Trumpets foreshadows the return of Christ; the Day of Atonement foreshadows the first resurrection; the Feast of Tabernacles foreshadows the 1,000 year reign of Christ; the Great Last Day foreshadows the time after the ‘rest of the dead” are raised to life and the second great harvest. ALL of these are YET TO COME. Therefore, the law has not been “done away” and “heaven and earth” have not passed away, a saying of Jesus that let’s us know the extent to which the law will stand.
Point 15. Conclusion: The Sabbath was from Creation, God having hallowed the seventh day at that time. The Sabbath was called a LAW BEFORE Sinai, was kept BEFORE Sinai, was written by the finger of God, was placed INSIDE the ark, was kept throughout Israel’s history, was kept by Jesus Christ, was kept by Paul, was taught expressly in Hebrews 3 and 4, was spoken of by Jesus as a future event, and WILL BE KEPT in the FUTURE kingdom on earth.
God’s command: “Remember to keep the Sabbath day holy…” Exodus 20:8-10
God is not kidding regarding His instructions. Mainstream religion makes up their own laws and rejects God’s at their own peril.
To persuade people to simply obey God is sometimes futile. It appears this is the case here. I hope anyone reading these comments will consider God’s simple instructions and ask themselves why they religiously keep sun god day instead.
When discussing the difference between the Old and New Covenants it is essential to remember that going back to the Law to prove a thing is not always a good thing to do. I came acorss the following recently and I subscribe to every word:
“Paul said that if we wish to apply the law of Moses as pertaining to our righteousness before God, then we must apply all the Law and not just selected portions. The reason is because the Law of Moses contained a curse on the person who did not apply all the law.
This does not mean that the law of Moses has no moral codes to consider. Paul said that the Law could be used as a teaching instrument as long as we used it ‘lawfully,’ which means that we cannot use the law as an instrument of righteousness. We are not under the law of Moses, but under the law of Christ.” (Pastor Buddy Martin)
It is interesting to read how certain individuals interpret everything (even antideluvian and early Christian history through what has been called “the lens” of the Mosaic Law, and then impose their narrow views on others in an attempt to bind them to a law which St Paul took great pains to point out was given only to the nation Israel. But strangely, many Christians, who notwithstanding they do recognise that the Law was uniquely Jewish and temporary in nature, also fail to understand that the Law of Moses was instituted as an indivisible unit and that the “ten commandments” (due, not least, to their representative nature as “the covenant”) cannot be upheld in isolation from the Mosaic Code. The result is that these commandments have been been adopted by Christian individuals, groups, communities and nations for perhaps centuries. Etched in the nation’s mindset they have come to be regarded as epitomising the highest standard of moral living. And no doubt they have served to keep in check the passions of the unrighteous. But this prominence has also come at a price. It has led some into the mistaken notion that the seventh day (Saturday) is a holy day for Christians. So one mistake has led to another. Now, when it is pointed out to the latter lot that their basis for upholding the Sabbath is erroneous their “ten commandment” mindset naturally recoils in horror and they feel justifed in resorting to vehement denounciations of their opponents as “lawless”!
But what these and other supporters of the Decalogue fail to see, is that the Decalogue (as has been stated above) is only ten laws out of a far greater number of “moral” laws that along with “ceremonial” and “civil” laws constituted the entire Mosaic Code. There were quite literally dozens of laws of no less value and importance for obedient living. Yet these other statutes never seem to see the light of day and hardly receive a mention in the pulpit, eclipsed as they are by the inordinate reverence paid to the Ten! So it seems to me, that attempts on this forum to set the record straight and return the “ten commandments” back to their Old Covenant context is a worthy cause indeed.
Meanwhile, we should turn our attention to the New Testament where, interestingly enough, we find nine of the ten commandments cast into a new higher and broader spiritual context and set among gems of equal worth and importance.