| Author |
Message |
Tracey
Registered user
Username: Tracey
Post Number: 306
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 4:35 pm: |     |
This website is pretty good..
It talks about why the 4th is misinterpreted as being moral but notes that all of Jesus' references to the sabbath were ritual related.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer's%20Corner/sabbath_moral_or_ceremonial_law.htm
|
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 809
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 9:14 am: | |
I'm surprised by the Col 2 references in the journeys of those who have mentioned it. B has told me that Col 2 does not refer to the 7th day sabbath, but only the "other" sabbaths. When i have pointed out that Lev 23 says the 7th day sabbath is a feast day, he says it does not say that it is not a moral law and a feast day at the same time. He seems to have "explanations" as to why what I read in scripture is "wrong" and I would know if I were "really" interested in the truth of the Bible. So, how'd ya'll get over those "explanations"? I presume you've heard some of them too? |
Tracey
Registered user
Username: Tracey
Post Number: 313
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 9:55 am: | |
Melissa,
Check out that website listed above..
It gives a good case (scriptures incl.) about the defintions of moral (God's character eternal) vs. the def. of ceremonial (not rel. to character). And how SDAs have from the beginning improperly defined what the terms really mean |
Thomas1
Registered user
Username: Thomas1
Post Number: 171
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 10:13 am: | |
Melissa,
Look up the greek references to the word "sabbath" in Col. 2: You will find that it is very specific to the Seventh Day and the Jewish Sabbath. Rather shoots the feet off of that argument.
In His Grace
<><
Thomas |
Tracey
Registered user
Username: Tracey
Post Number: 314
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 11:22 am: | |
I would add look up the Hebrew over the Greek even.. |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 766
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 11:34 am: | |
For the record, since translations and original langues are confusing topics:
Colossians was not written in Hebrew. Only the OT books were written in Hebrew. No NT book was written in Hebrew. All NT books were written in Koine Greek.
So to look at the word for "Sabbath" (sabbaton) in Col. 2 we have to have a Greek lexicon, not a Hebrew lexicon.
I hope this helps clarify.
Chris |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 474
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 4:35 pm: | |
Melissa, several things helped me get over those "explanations."
1. If "sabbaths" meant the feast day sabbaths, then Paul would be redundant by mentioning them twice!
2. The exact same phrase (feast days, new moons, and sabbaths) is used in the OT when talking about the weekly Sabbath. (Ezekiel 45 is a very good example, as it's very clear from the context that it's talking about the weekly Sabbath) It's even the same words in the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) as in Colossians 2.
3. I found that that phrase (feast days, new moons, sabbaths), or something similar, is always (in the OT and NT--also Gal. 4:10) in either ascending or descending order. You go from yearly, to monthly, to...weekly! 
4. The same word "Sabbaths" is used in the NT to refer to the weekly Sabbath many times, and in the NT is ONLY used to refer to the weekly Sabbath.
Kevin Mortenson (aka "colporteur") from the revivalsermons.org forum has a sermon on his web site, by an SDA, which actually admits that it means the weekly Sabbath in Colossians 2. It even lists the points that non-SDAs will use to prove it to the SDAs! Samuele Bacchiocchi also admits this, but this other SDA is not as liberal as Samuele B, and has a totally weird way of explaining the passage. Here's the link: http://www.mortensonministries.org/sermoncol.htm
Jeremy |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 1728
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 8:12 pm: | |
Yes, I read in Mr. Bacchiocch's book that he agrees that the word Sabbath means the weekly Sabbath but then he spins it to say that it only means the burdons that people heap on the day. |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 476
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 8:45 pm: | |
Susan, yeah, I've heard about that argument before. And that is the most ridiculous arguement, because how could extra burdens or perversions of the commandment be a shadow of Jesus?!?! That is like the ultimate blasphemy of Jesus!
Jeremy |
Tracey
Registered user
Username: Tracey
Post Number: 321
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2005 - 7:11 am: | |
Jeremy,
Your connections can really surprise me sometimes!
Tracey |
Tracey
Registered user
Username: Tracey
Post Number: 327
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2005 - 10:16 am: | |
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer's%20Corner/sabbath_moral_or_ceremonial_law.htm
read this:
Some people claim that the weekly Sabbath is a moral law, and therefore required today. They often claim this simply because they assume that the Ten Commandments are all moral laws.
The Sabbath law says that behavior that is perfectly acceptable one day is forbidden the next, merely because it is a different day of the week. But God's morality does not change with the days of the week. If it is moral one day, it is moral on all others. God certainly has the right to require different things on different days, but we need to understand that this would be a ceremonial law, not a law about what is moral all the time.
But even more clearly, Jesus compared the Sabbath to ceremonial laws. When his disciples were criticized for picking grain on the Sabbath, Jesus used the example of David eating the tabernacle showbread (Matt. 12:1-4). He said, if David could eat the showbread, my disciples can pick enough grain to eat.
Notice that the argument doesn't work if the Sabbath is more important than showbread ó the Pharisees could have said, It's permissible to take liberties with the showbread, but the Sabbath is more important, so we have to be more careful about it. No, in order for the logic of the argument to work, the showbread has to be just as important as the Sabbath. Only then could the comparison carry any weight. The point is that Jesus deliberately used a ritual law as a point of comparison for the Sabbath.
Jesus also compared the Sabbath to the sacrificial laws (Matt. 12:5). The priests were allowed to work on the Sabbath because the requirement to sacrifice animals was more important than the requirement to rest on the Sabbath. The ritual law was more important than the Sabbath law. This again shows that there is nothing intrinsically wrong about working on the Sabbath. It was permitted for priests. It is not a universal law required for all peoples at all times. Rather, the Sabbath was a ritual law, specifying when certain kinds of work could or could not be done.
Jesus also compared the Sabbath to circumcision (John 7:22). Again, ritual work was allowed (even required) on the Sabbath, because the ritual law was more important than the requirement to rest on the seventh day. The ritual law was more important than the Sabbath. Again, Jesus is putting the Sabbath into the company of ritual laws.
The article is linked above that it referenced..
Thank God for studiers of the Bible! |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 815
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2005 - 11:44 am: | |
Thanks everyone for the references. I am clear on the Sabbath issue, I was just wondering how those processing out started seeing the old arguments with new eyes. |
Tracey
Registered user
Username: Tracey
Post Number: 328
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2005 - 12:41 pm: | |
Yeah, I just thought this was an excellent articleand site. Had seen scriptures provingit was ceremonial. or how cer. and mor. differ. |
