 |
Will,
I appreciate some of what you claim but I have to disagree with you on the bride.
The Bride at the wedding feast of the Lamb is THE CHURCH. I can appreciate Jerusalem & the New Jerusalem to come & the story of the Passover. But Revelation 22:17-The Spirit and the bride say,"Come!"... Now, since when does a city speak?
That's why I said that the City is not the Bride. In other words, it's a parable, if you read again what I wrote carefully, you'll
See that the Last Eve is supposed to show up in the last days, a life giving spirit. She is Mother God:) She's referred to as a city
Because she will fulfuill the prophecy of the 144,000 (Rev 14). Spiritual children, not physical. We have to know Mother God, in order
To entere the everlasting kingdom.
This is a revelation that was going to take place in the future. The Church was established when this revelation was given to John.
According to Gal 4:26 "But the Jerusalem that is above is free and she is our Mother"
The Bride is not the church. A building cannot give you the water of life only the Spirit (Father God) and the Bride (Mother God, The New Jerusalem).
Think about it. Why do we call God Father? Why not just, God? Everything God mad was so that on the last day we cannot have an excuse. Even plants
Have a male and female. Even batteries. Positive and Negative.
Rom 1:20
"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
This is what Jesus said:
Mat 13:35
"So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet:
"I will open my mouth in parables,
I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world."
That means there is something hidden in the creation of the world.
Gen 1:26
27:So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
So according to the bible, God created man in God's own image.
But how many images came out? 2 images came out. Male & Female
The word ELOHIM is plural for God. In the hebrew bible, God is referred to as ELOHIM
Which is plural for God.
Some may argue God was speaking to the angels in the creation but the Angels had no power of creation. Some may say he was talking to the church, but obviously the church didn't exist. Other says he was talking to us but as we now, we were being created back then.
Hmm,
Did you ever hear the expression"why have an Ishmael when you can have an Isaac?" Bc Isaac was the real deal. BC God made His covenant with Isaac. So, I see, the free man is in Isaac & the New Jerusalem?(Genesis 17:18) Ok, but where does the "mother" you mentioned come from? This is about the return of Jesus, I don't use the word"mother". Perhap you use gender thing but since God is written as the Father & Jesus the Son- I use "Him"
I see your point about the mother being the New Jerusalem in Galatians, but it doesn't hold much weight when describing the bride. The church of believers is the bride. Sorry if it sounded like a building!
Babylon- mother of the great prostitute in Revelation-- or the phrase mother nature--that's all that really stands out to me.
Here's a reference that supports' the bride 'meaning:The Bride of Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
God made his covenant with Sarah to be more specific. Because she was the free woman. Sarah represents Jerusalem, our Mother. The church cannot be the bride. A building cannot give you eternal life. Only the free woman can bare free children. That's why two covenants were made. Free woman bore Isaac, the free son whom inherited all of Abram's possesions. Hagar was the slave woman, whom delivers slaves. Old Covenant and New Covenant. New Covenant is the Passover, Jesus said "And I will raise him up at the last day" WHy the last day? Because obviously the bride, Jerusalem, our Mother shows up in the last days to give us eternal life.
This may not be the answer you seek, but Jews at Elephantine believed that God had a wife/consort whom they called (if memory serves me well) their mother in heaven, or some such.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
M:)
The Christian Church is not a building, and no one thinks it is. In the times of ancient Israel yahveh says, "You are married to me, o Israel" indicating the bride-bridegroom relationship between God and his people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Will144
With the apparent rejection of mashiach by the preponderance of Israelitish peoples, it is assumed that the disciples of Jesus mashiach became the new people of God with whom he established a new covenant or testament.
Therefore, citing them, the New People of God in the ecclesia of mashiach, corporately as the bride of Christ, re-establishes the covenant relationship with them in exactly the same way as it was in the time of the former or Old Covenant or Testament.
Romans chapters 9 to 11 is Paul's vindication of God's apparent getting it wrong by assuming that the chosen people would welcome his Son as the long-promised and eagerly awaited mashiach.
Have you explained how pesach is become the New Covenant? If so, then I am sorry I missed it.
M:)RGANITE
The ideal according to the Bible is:Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
One Lord,
One Faith,
One Baptism.
If that is not a scriptural prescription for unity, then there is none. However, it is not the only plea for unity. Actually, it is more a directive than a plea. Paul writes to the church at Corinth condeming the fact that there were serious schisms among them; some boasting that they were of Paul, others that they were of Apollos, others of Cephas, and still others of Christ; which led Paul to ask sharply, "Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?"
There were endless strifes as well as divisions among them, which caused Paul to denounce them as carnally minded. They were so disunified that they were in the habit of going to law one with another, and that before the world, in violation of the teachings of Jesus Christ. They desecrated the ordinances of the Lord's Supper by their drunkenness, for which they were sharply reproved by the Apostle. They ate and drank unworthily, "not discerning the Lord's body; for which cause many were sickly among them, and many slept" (that is, died).
There were heresies also among them, some denying the resurrection of the dead, while others did not possess the knowledge of God, which the Apostle declared was their shame. This sharp letter of reproof made the Corinthian saints sorry after a godly fashion, that brought them to a partial repentance, but even in the second epistle, from which we learn of their partial repentance, the Apostle could still charge that there were many in the Church who had not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they had committed.
From this second letter, we also learn that there were many in the church at large who corrupted the word of God, and that there were those in the ministry, who were "false prophets, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ."
This is the unity that should mark the congregations of the church of Christ. Where it is absent, God is displeased. Now this is a different matter than those who are on thr broad path, for these are they who will say they are on the strait and narrow way, but unless they are unified they are found walking after some other master. How then can anyone say there is no call for unity among Christians in the Bible?
Vagrant interpretations that lean too far into allegory are capable of leading people astray much more quick than any other means, and we should avoid stretching and torturing the scriptures to make them say what we imagine is right even when it contradicts what is written. God made his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as individual covenants.
But in the time of Moses he made his covenant with the whole people of Israel, not with an individual, and it is clear from the scripture that the New Covenant was with a whole people and not wirh a woman alone.
M:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morganite
Don't be sorry
Mat 26:17-19
N the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover?"
18He replied, "Go into the city to a certain man and tell him, 'The Teacher says: My appointed time is near. I am going to celebrate the Passover with my disciples at your house.' " 19So the disciples did as Jesus had directed them and prepared the Passover. "
What did Jesus want to celebrate? He said Passover three times.
Mat 26:26-28
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body."
27Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. 28This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
Jesus fulfilled the O.T. passover by celebrating it with bread and wine. It is celebrated once a year only. The 14th day of the 1st Month according to the Sacred Calendar. This is the New Covenant for the forgiveness of sins. Not communion or euchrist, or Lord's Supper, Jesus called it Passover
John 6:53
Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh (passover bread) of the Son of Man and drink his blood (Passover Wine), you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.
As you can see, Jesus celebrated the Passover with his desciples. Let's see if it's important or not to celebrate the Passover
Luke 22:15
"And he said to them, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer
Before he suffered he "eagerly" wanted to celebrate the Passover. Not communion, or anything else, Jesus called it Passover.
"And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."
20In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you."
That is the New Covenant. But if you notice, Jesus said "and I will raise him up at the last day" In order for us to be raised up and go to heaven, we must celebrate the Passover.
According to the Bible it will happen when the world is one new world order, after 7 years of ruling and so on. I think it may happen like that, truly I do, we have seen two men close to achieving world domination, Napoleon and Hitler.
How close were each of them to world domination country by country?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha_Male81
We seem to be talking about different things. All that you say is true within the Church, but there are a lot of people reading these posts who are in no way connected with the Church. There is no way the Church and unbelievers can achieve unity unless one or the other gives up what they believe. I think you have misunderstood me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morganite
A question for Will144: Are you arguing for keeping one or more points of the Law?
Actually, it appears that Antichrist will never achieve world domination. His rule will be marked by war, and there are nations mentioned in the Middle East that will not be subject to him. BUT, in those areas where he does rule, it will be totalitarian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha_Male81
If I have misunderstood you, then I am sorry. I do not intend to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
I cannot accept that any but those inside the community of Christians can affect Christian unity/disunity. That matter is in God's mind and our hands, and wars will cease when men refuse to fight.
Christ's ideal is unity within His church, not unity with those outside the church. Can we achieve Christians unity and come to one Lord, one faith, and one baptism? I will say that my question is really this:
"Does the will exist within the whole of Christianity to do what Jesus and God want and come together, bury our differences, and do what is right, or is all Christendom committed to divisiveness, separation, and ungodly internecine war?"
If we are not unified, are we, then, really Christ's? Why do we call Jesus "Lord" but do not do what he commands?
M:)RGANITE
Aha! The question of Judaizing Christianity. Perhaps a shade of Seventh Day Adventism, or Messianic Jews, or Jews for Jesus, or some such cult. All these Judaizing groups militate against the spirit and word of the NT.Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
By Law, you mean the Mosaic ritual Law and not the law of the gospel of Jesus? If you love me keep my commandments (the Law of the gospel of Jesus Christ)...
Perhaps I am mistaken, huh?
Yes, maybe something to do with Levitical or Mosaic law, which cannot pertain to Christians because of the new covenant. (See Galatians 3) Will, it is close to heresy to apply your statements from a Christian perspective.
The Mosaic Law in Leviticus was given to Moses specifically for the Jewish people. There is a big difference between the Mosaic law (written by Moses hand, given to the Jews) and the Ten Commandments which are for everyone ( they were written by God, on tablets of stone, kept in the ark of the covenant). I don't have to keep the law of Moses but Jesus Christ enables me to not steal, not to fornicate, not to murder etc. (which are the ten commandments)... Yet the Ten commandments were summed up by Jesus as "Love God" and "love your neighbor".
What about "the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God"? That's in the Ten Commandments, yet few Christians observe it. Jesus certainly didn't change it. It wasn't discarded by Christians until many years later, in an attempt to appeal to sun-worshipping Romans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
Are you the grinch who stole Christmas and missed all the JOY?Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
See this article . I thought we observed on Sunday because the Lord rose on a Sunday. I am partly correct.
"for the joy of the Lord is your Strength"(Ne 8:10)
Why do Christians worship on Sunday instead of Saturday?
It's OK with me if you want to pick which of the ten commandments to obey. The link you provided says that Christians aren't bound by ANY of the Old Testament laws, including the Ten Commandments, but that's not what you said in your post. It just seems to me that if you believe that there is an important difference between the Ten Commandments and the other Mosaic laws, you'd want to obey ALL of them. There are plenty of rationalizations for why Christians keep Sunday, but none of them have any scriptural basis, as far as I can tell. As a historical matter, the practice started quite awhile after Jesus' time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
And it's OK with me if you are a seventh-day adventist. And I guess you didn't read the highlighted area about why we don't practice the Old Law either. BTW, are you very familiar with scripture? Because they do have scriptural basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
But as far as history goes- the Apostles broke bread on the 1st day of the week.
See the refute page:
Constantine's decree: "On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed." (Constantine, March 7, 321. Codex Justinianus lib. 3, tit. 12, 3; trans. In Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 380, note 1)
Answer: Constantine did not change the Sabbath to Sunday, he merely created the first "Sunday closure law" because Christians had been worshipping on the first day of the week since apostolic times.
Sabbatarians can't get their story straight! Who changed the Sabbath? Is it the pope, Constantine or some Christians in Rome?
* First they say the Pope changed the Sabbath. Then, when that proves false, they claim Constantine changed it! Then when that is proven wrong they now say that "Christians in Rome" changed the Sabbath to Sunday
* There is nothing here to say that Constantine changed anything. Constantine is making a civil decree that because Christians were already meeting on Sunday, as they were doing since the time of the Apostles, that Christians should not work on Sunday. Read it again!
* Today, it is not a sin to work on any day of the week! But it is a sin to not partake of the communion and give every first day of the week! Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:1-2; Heb 10:24-25
Three wrong guesses, you’re out!
The so called "inspired prophet" Ellen White originally claimed the Pope started "Sunday worship" White later changed her mind and said the Emperor Constantine introduced "Sunday worship" in 325 AD. Today, Adventists blame the interaction of Sunday worship on Christians in 135 AD and not the Pope or Constantine!
Guess #1: the Pope introduced Sunday worship.
The Roman Catholic Pope DID NOT change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday as Sabbath keepers falsely teach. Yes Catholics do claim they changed the Sabbath, but they also claim that Peter was the first pope! Sabbath Keepers reject the Catholic claim that Peter was the first pope, so they are in grave error for accepting the Catholic claim that the pope changed the Sabbath to Sunday!
Guess #2: It was Constantine in 325 AD.
Constantine (325 AD) DID NOT change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday as Sabbath keepers falsely teach. Christians never kept the Sabbath from the apostolic age (33 AD) through the time of Constantine (325AD). Constantine merely made the first "Sunday closure law", since it had already been the day Christians worship for 300 years!
Today’s guess #3: Christians in 135 AD.
The historical claims of Samuele Bacchiocchi, Seventh-day Adventist, refuted. Bacchiocchi is likely the top Seventh-day Adventist historian in the world. His search for the origin of "first day worship" has led him to reject the traditional position of his church, and his founding prophet, Ellen G. White who claimed "Sunday keeping" began with Constantine in 325 AD. His view, which is increasingly being adopted by the Seventh-day Adventist church, is that Christians in 135 AD were first to worship on the first day of the week.
The truth: Apostles in 33 AD introduced Sunday worship.
In addition to Acts 20:7 and 1 Cor 16:1-2, click here for irrefutable historical proof!
I'm not a seventh-day adventist, I just think your inconsistency is amusing. First, you say that the Ten Commandments "are for everyone" and then you say that one of them doesn't apply to you. We're not so different, really. We both pick what to accept and what to disregard. Nothing wrong or surprising about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
So, you weren't looking to debate anything, you were looking to find something wrong with me that you could pretend to find amusing!!Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
Jesus summed up the Commandments 1) Love the Lord your God... 2) Love your neighbor like yourself. The others are to learn from.
So, don't be so anti-Christian in the future & maybe you won't have to pick & choose an argument.
Thank you Jesus.
I 'm not pretending! I really am amused. This kind of contorted and selective use of the Bible is why I can't take it too seriously when I'm beat about the head and shoulders with Bible texts by people who are trying to convince me to believe like they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
We all decide to accept some things and disregard others in whatever holy books we read. Nothing wrong with that. There's no need insist that only one holy book is legitimate, and only one interpretation of it is valid. Unless you're trying to be funny.
I'm confused now - so there are only 2 commandments, the other are suggestions?Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
ordinaryguy,Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
We werediscussing the Christian Bible, weren't we? Yet you throw up your hands & accuse someone, (perhaps me because you wrote under my quote) that there's no need to insist (see above) So where did that statement come from? I never said there weren't other interpretations rfrom the Bible, & whether my Holy Book is the only one valid for me, is my business. Certainly, I see, you never address the original question. Is anyone to take your Biblical/ Christian seriously? How credible a Christian (or religious Jew) are you when you post in threads like "zodiac matching", tarot cards, & astrology? Yes, I looked up your posts.
Seems like you serve 2 masters to me.
The one that is quite telling is this:
Question
#1
Old Dec 10, 2006, 06:12 PM
ordinaryguy
Senior Member
ordinaryguy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Down on the farm
Posts: 612
ordinaryguy will become famous soon enoughordinaryguy will become famous soon enoughordinaryguy will become famous soon enough
Heretic, apostate or what?
I used to believe that the Bible was the directly inspired word of God. I believed that Adam and Eve's sin corrupted the whole world and caused all people to be born into sin. I believed that God demanded death as the punishment for sin and that Jesus died to satisfy this demand and make salvation possible.
Now I believe that the Bible is a book of spiritual wisdom similar to many other such books in the world, but not the directly inspired word of God or the only true scripture. I can understand sin as separation or estrangement from our spiritual source, but I don't think death is the punishment for it, and I don't believe that Jesus' death was necessary to save anyone from it. I think he was killed because he attacked the idea that God has a "chosen people" and that membership in this group confers special spiritual benefits. Although he probably could have avoided being crucified, I think he decided to take it to the limit to make a point about the fruits of spiritual pride, arrogance and bigotry.
My question is, am I properly classified as a heretic, an apostate, a heathen, an unbeliever, or what?
Needkarma,Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
The 10 Commandments in the O.T. are guides for living & to be learned from.
The New T. describes almost all of them. But it does not enforce the "Sabbath" commandment. This was the point someone made about me picking & choosing commandments!
Please see Matthew 19:18-19; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans13:9-10. I do not have time to write them out today. I mean, I do obey the Commandments for the most part, but as a Christian, I do not have to obey the Sabbath. We (my Church) doesn't discriminate against observing 7th-day Adventists at all.
I go with the New Testament mostly. The early Christians were persecuted. They held their "services" on the 1st day of the week. Part of that tradition came from wanting to distinguish themselves from the Jews. I don't know the whole story,but I go with what the Christian worship always was without pointing the finger at the Church leaders saying, "You are breaking a Commandment! Poof! They can read the New Testament for themselves!
Peace to you.
I'm not anti-Christian, I'm anti-fundamentalist, whether Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, or Rastafarian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
I only accused you of being inconsistent for saying that the Ten Commandments apply to everyone, and then saying that one (or more?) of them doesn't apply to you. If you do indeed believe that there can be more than one legitimate Scripture, and more than one valid interpretation of the Bible, I salute you for your broad mindedness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
Which question is that? If you mean the OP about the Second Coming, I did address it. See post #71.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
I'm at a loss to understand how you conclude that I'm either a Biblical Christian or a religious Jew. I am neither and haven't claimed to be. I thought the post you quoted made that pretty clear. Who are the two masters that you think I serve?Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrotia
Morganite--
If you don't mind, I'd appreciate your thoughts on when and why the early Christians began to worship on Sunday. I respect your knowledge of early church history, and I've always wondered how the change came about. It seems like abrogating one of the Ten Commandments would have been a pretty big deal and surely must have generated more debate and controversy than the writers of the New Testament relate, which leads me to think it must have happened later. How long after Jesus' death did it occur, and was it at least partly an attempt to co-opt the Roman sun cults as I've supposed? I don't really have a dog in the fight, I'd just like to know the history of it in more detail.
Let me get this straight:
So Jesus left, and he is coming back but really he is still here? Or, he left, and will come back but he is not still here? If he is not still here, then there are a lot of poor disillusioned people walking around telling me they have him. Where do they have him if he is not here and where did he go if they don't really have him? Heaven? So how will he get from heaven to here and if people really do have him, how can they have him if he is in heaven and not here? If he is not here, but will come back here, and he is in heaven, what is he doing there, getting ready to come back here? So just how long does it take him to get ready? I'm ready and I'm here. Is he not ready and he is over there or is he ready and really over here? Or both? Or will he be here when he is ready? How long does it take to get from there to here? How long does it take to get from here to there? Where? Over there. When? That's the question. How? Don't know. Who? Jesus. Why? Don't know.
Don't know.
What an amazing composition! Congratulations. I will attempt to address your questions in fewer words than it took you to present them. Should I fail in the endeavour, please pardon me.Quote:
Originally Posted by magprob
Jesus was here and then he left, but he will return 'in like manner' to his departing. What is meant by having Jesus in your heart is not the physical indwelling of Christ, but the influence of the Holy Spirit, who serves as Comforter during the period of Christ's physical absence from earth.
The time of his return is a matter for God alone. Even Jesus did not know when that would be, although he left clues. The Parousia is not, evidently, a matter of jesus preparing himself, but of the earth preparing to receive him.
Jesus moves at the speed of Jesus, which is the speed of light divided by the distance from heaven to earth. Do the math.
I am happy to serve as your deconfuser.
Score: Magprob 207 - M:)RGANITE 121
M:)RGANITE
Part III
This conclusion is supported by the fact that the first day of the week (Sunday) is called a sabbath eight times in the original Greek Bible. Why would the first day of the week (Sunday) be called a sabbath in the Bible if it were not a sabbath? And how did it become a sabbath other than as we have explained?
"In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week. . . ." (Matthew 28:1. In Greek, "sabbath" instead of "first day of the week.")
This text may be confusing because of its reference to two sabbaths, unless one keeps in mind the fact that the Christian sabbath (first day of the week) follows immediately the Jewish sabbath (seventh day of the week). Hence the reference to two sabbaths.
And very early in the morning the first day of the week. .. (Mark 16:2. In Greek, "sabbath" instead of "first day of the week.")
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week.
Now upon the first day of the week. .. . (Luke 24:1. In Greek, "sabbath" instead of "first day of the week.")
The first day of the week. . . . (John 20:1. In Greek, "sabbath" instead of "first day of the week.")
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week. (John 20:19. In Greek, "sabbath" instead of "first day of the week.")
And upon the first day of the week. .. . (Acts 20:7. In Greek, "sabbath" instead of "first day of the week.")
Upon the first day of the week. .. . (1 Corinthians 16:2. In Greek, "sabbath" instead of "first day of the week.")
From the foregoing, it should be clear that the writers of the New Testament fully understood that the first day of the week (Sunday) was a sabbath day, and that it was the day upon which the saints met to worship.
The early church historians stated that the first day of the week, the day on which the Lord arose from the tomb, was held sacred by the Christians as a day of worship. This, together with the evidence we have already submitted, refutes the claims of some that the change from Saturday to Sunday was instituted by Constantine, Emperor of Rome:
. . . It is indeed true, that Constantine's life was not such as the precepts of Christianity required; and it is also true that he remained a catechumen (unbaptized Christian) all his life, and was received to full membership in the church, by baptism at Nicomedia only a few days before his death. … That Constantine, long before this time, A.D. 324, declared himself a Christian, and was acknowledged as such by the churches, is certain. It is also true, he had for a long time performed the religious acts of an unbaptized Christian, that is, of a catechumen; for he attended public worship, fasted, prayed, observed the Christian Sabbath and the anniversaries of the martyrs, and watched on the vigils of Easter, etc.” (Mosheim's Church History, Book 2, Century 4, Part 1, Chap. 1:8.)
. . . The Christians of this century, in piety, assembled for the worship of God and for their advancement of the first day of the week, the day on which Christ reassumed his life; for that this day was set apart for religious worship by the apostles themselves, and that, after the example of the church at Jerusalem, it was generally observed, we have unexceptionable testimony.”(Mosheim's Church History, Book 1, Century 1, Part 2, Chap. 4:4.)
Those who were brought up in the ancient order of things, have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath (Jewish or seventh day), but living in the observance of the Lord's day (first day) on which also our life was sprung by him and his death. (Epistle to the Magnesians, 101 A.D. Chap. 9, Ignatius.)
On one day, the first day of the week, we assembled ourselves together. (Barderaven, A.D. 130.)
And on the day which is called Sunday, there is an assembly in the same place of all who live in cities, or in country districts; and the records of the Apostles, or the writings of the Prophets, are read as long as we have time. . . . Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, when He changed the darkness and matter, made the world: and Jesus Christ our Savior, on the same day, rose from the dead. . .. (Justin Martyr, Apologies, 1:67 A.D. 140.)
He, in fulfilment of the precept according to the gospel, keeps the Lord's day. (Clement of Alexandria, Book 7, Chap. 12, A.D. 193.)
We neither accord with the Jews in their peculiarities in regard to food nor in their sacred days. (Apologies, Sec. 21, A.D. 200.)
We ourselves are accustomed to observe certain days, as for example, the Lord's day. (Origen, Book 3, Chap. 23, A.D. 201.)
But why is it, you ask, that we gather on the Lord's day to celebrate our solemnities? Because that was the way the Apostles also did. (De Fuga XIV:11, 141,200 A.D.)
M:)RGANITE
Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
PART II
Speaking of the law of Moses, the apostle Paul stated: "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith." (Galatians 3:24.)
If the law of Moses was the schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, it would seem perfectly reasonable to assume that when Christ came, there would be no further need of the schoolmaster. When we understand that the law of Moses, including its sabbaths, was a schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, we are better able to understand why the Lord permitted his prophet Hosea to declare that he would cause Israel's sabbaths to cease: "I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts."
(Hosea 2:11.)
When Hosea's prophecy was fulfilled, the way was obviously opened for the introduction of a new sabbath. The Savior understood that a change was to be made in the sabbath:
And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. (Mark 2:27-28.)
Jesus did not come to break the law but to fulfill it. Thus, in him, the Jewish sabbath was fulfilled, as was the remainder of the law of Moses, which was the "schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ." Hence, when Christ came, he became also Lord of the sabbath. He himself declared that he came to fulfill the law: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." (Matthew 5:17.)
Since Jesus came to fulfill the law, why should some still want to retain it? Why should they not prefer to accept that which Jesus brought to take the place of the law, which includes the new sabbath, the first day of the week or the Lord's day (Sunday), the day upon which Jesus arose from the tomb?
John, the beloved disciple of the Lord, while banished upon the Isle of Patmos "for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ," wrote: "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet." (Revelation 1:10.)
Why should this day be called "the Lord's day," if it were not a sacred day? Remember, "the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath." Because the day on which the sabbath was observed was changed, the apostle Paul realized that the saints would be criticized, as they were for other practices to which the Jews objected: "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." (Colossians 2:16.)
This warning from the apostle Paul would have been entirely uncalled for were the saints worshiping on the Jewish sabbath, for the Jews then would have had no occasion to judge them on this matter. There is no record that the saints observed the Jewish sabbath as a day of worship following the resurrection of the Savior. The apostles did, however, meet with the Jews in their synagogues on their sabbath to teach them the gospel. (See Acts 13:13-44; 17:1-2.)
The records are quite complete, however, in indicating that the saints often met to worship on the first day of the week (Sunday), the Lord's day, or the day that Jesus arose from the tomb:
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. (John 20:19, 26.)
And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. (Acts 20:7.)
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. (1 Corinthians 16:1-2.)
The following scripture is particularly significant, since the day of Pentecost was the day following the Jewish sabbath:
And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to peak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. (Acts 2:1-4. See also Leviticus 23:15-16.)
What consistent explanation can be given for the fact that the saints met to worship on the first day of the week - Sunday, the Lord's day, the day upon which the Savior rose from the tomb - instead of on Saturday, the Jewish sabbath, except that the Lord did cause the Jewish sabbaths to cease, as the prophet Hosea declared he would? Jesus instituted a new sabbath, the Lord's day, thus becoming "Lord also of the sabbath."
PART IQuote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
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 sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” (Genesis 2:2-3.)Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
It is clear that "God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work." But from a study of the scriptures it would appear that the first commandment given through any of the prophets that the people should observe this as a day of worship was that which was given through Moses about 2500 years after the creation. In Deuteronomy we learn why God gave the commandment to the children of Israel at that time:
The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. . . .
Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee. . . .
And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.
(Deuteronomy 5:2-3, 12, 15.)
From this scripture it is apparent that this was a new covenant the Lord made with Israel in Horeb; that he had not made this covenant with their fathers; that he made this covenant so that they might remember that they were servants in the land of Egypt; and that the Lord their God brought them out through a mighty hand and by a stretched-out arm, and therefore the Lord their God commanded them to keep the sabbath day.
This commandment to observe the sabbath day was incorporated in the law of Moses, as were also the sabbatic year and the forty-ninth and the fiftieth-year sabbath.
Is this just for christians to answer. I was rasied christian for 18 yrs, but when I started daing my fiancé I stopped. I disagree w/ a lot of things in the bible. But I still do believe in god and jesus. I personally don't think the world is ending soon, or that Jesus is coming back soon. If he does I guess I was wrong lol. This may be off topic, but my problem is, having no control over my life or destiny. To me, christianity take's that away. But, I hope if its all true, God tells me before its too late. I'd rather not burn in hell. But then again, why do we? Just because we choose to live our lives. I think its just a way for controlling people. Right now I'm nothing and I'm good with that until I find out I was wrong. But I don't like being told what to do or how to think. That's my problem. I just don't understand why god if he loves us, makes us do what he says and if we don't we go to hell, that's dumb. What is he, a dictatior? Good day all.
I am sorry that you are lost. In my case, the opposite happened. I found myself through becoming a Christian, and I also found direction, purpose, and hope. Perhaps some day you will find the same blessings. I hope and pray that you will.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raynefreak
I do not believe that the Bible when properly understood reveals a God as uncaring and cold as you have been taught. God does not condemn those who do not know him properly. He works with them to bring them to him, gently and with love.
M:)RGANITE
Thanks for the discourse, Morganite...
I guess I still find it odd that modern Christians place so much significance on the Ten Commandments that they'll get in huge legal battles over where they can be displayed, but they really only take nine of them seriously. I'm sorry, but I don't find it convincing to argue that the fourth commandment, unlike all the others, is part of the Mosaic ceremonial laws that God really shouldn't have written on the tablets of stone in the first place.
I also am still skeptical that the apostles made the switch immediately after Jesus' death, but it caused hardly a ripple of comment or debate. Especially since the very question of whether Jesus' mission was even relevant outside the Jewish community was so much of an issue for the early believers. The faction who saw him as the Jewish Messiah first and foremost would have hardly been willing to accept the change without a fight.
Or so it seems to me, but I'm no scholar. Thanks again, M:) .
Thanks Morganite. You certainly cleared that up nicely. I would have never thought of the Greek text- it's Greek to me. You sound like a Biblical scholar! God Bless.
Yea, but I don't like the religion. It's too anoying. I mean God's never done crap for me, I've always done it myself. We are who we are and what we become because of what we do. Not because some invisable thing does it. BUT that's my opinion. I'm not going to listen to anyone but myself, so listening to some god is anoying. If I listened to him my life would be ruined. I'd have no life. No fiancé, no friend's no nothing. So to try to make it like I should believe just makes me turn away more. I don't believe half his words. Its all mumbo jumbo to me.
Well, not to dance around to the subject, and before even a question comes up about my faith, I believe that if Jesus did/does return our society would falsely label him, or wrongfully accuse him. All too often we see homeless people in the street, and think to ourselves, "Crazy old man" when they talk to themselves. If Jesus were to show up TODAY, in America, we'd throw him in a looney bin. It's the way it works. Because if anyone questioned his abilities, I don't think that he should (or would for that matter) show them, because he believes and knows we should have faith.Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
All too often, questions like this spark up arguments across the world about the return, or is he here? You have voices from all sides. Ultimitly no one is denied his love. If he showed up, today, and we had him 5150'd he'd still love us. He'd forgive, and understand us. Do I think it will be before, during or after the Great Tribulation. I don't know. I can safely say, that simplely having faith, weither you go to church every Sunday, or once a month, or never. We all have a place.
You seem to be preaching way too much Alene. I said I'm not a christian. I my have doubt's. I'm offened that you keep preaching to me. I get enough of that from my gram. I don't follow christianity. I'm my own person, I do what I want. But its anoying for you to keep taking about it and making it like I worship satan. Sorry, I don't. I may be interested in wicca, but that's my business. If you ask me, christians an God are the one's whom made me question and walk away. I don't care if people disagree, I have good reasons for what I think or lack of. But I'm not going to listen to you trying to feed some crap BS in my head. I origanlly posted an answer to the question. Then you start your preaching. I'm sure your not with out sin. BEFORE preaching me the bible, know that I was a christian for 16 yrs. I read the bible and can qoute it better then you possibly. I can though back anything you dish, so be prepareed.
THOSE WITHOUT SIN, CAST THE FIRST STONE!
I know the bible too... so don't thump.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:36 PM. |