| Author |
Message |
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 27
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 9:25 am: |     |
Jackob, what would you tell to a Jehovah's witnesse that throw his bible away because when hi was jw he misuse it?
Can you tell me what is the problem with keeping the Lord¥s day?
I ask you again, were the christians of the past not led by The Spirit? Or do you think that you are the only one that The Holy Spirit is leading today? |
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 28
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 9:25 am: | |
the only ones |
Helovesme2
Registered user
Username: Helovesme2
Post Number: 463
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 9:39 am: | |
Actually it probably wouldn't hurt a JW to put 'his' Bible away for awhile and use translations NOT put out by Watchtower, don't you think?
Mary |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1343
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 9:42 am: | |
Hebrews 4 is clear that any day is a day to find true "sabbath rest". (it is called "today" in place of the 7th day) It is not limited to a single day of the week. Sure, the early Christians were lead by the Spirit, but that does not mean everything they did was mandated by the Spirit. God did not necessarily command that they gather in honor of the resurrection, but they did it in honor and respect. We celebrate birthdays. No where does scripture mandate that and neither is it indicated as sin. So, it seems morally neutral on whether or not one honors such an occassion. If scripture does not command an observation, it seems dangerous to make a tradition (however good it may be) into a command purely by association of who honored it. Those same people may have kept the Jewish sabbath out of habit, but that doesn't mean we still observe the 7th day in the same way.
There is NO PROBLEM with keeping the Lord's day. If that is a holy day you honor, Romans 14 is clear that you honor it to the Lord and should not be judged. But neither should we be judged for not observing it as a holy day. Holy day issues are called disputable and are specifically mentioned as something NOT to be used to divide the body. |
Raven
Registered user
Username: Raven
Post Number: 413
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 9:55 am: | |
Different people come up with different perspectives. Each individual should base their theology on the Bible alone, and not what some theological giant decided was truth. Martin Luther is at least as great, if not greater, than Calvin in regard to theology and being led by the Spirit. And yet Martin Luther had a different perspective on the Sabbath/Sunday issue from Calvin as indicated in the quote below from "Luther's Small Catechism":
quote:Does God require us to observe the Sabbath and other holy days of the Old Testament? The Sabbath was a sign pointing to Jesus, who is our rest. Since Jesus has come as our Savior and Lord, God no longer requires us to observe the Sabbath day and other holy days of the Old Testament. (Matt 11:28, Matt 12:8, Col 2:16-17, Heb 4:9-10)
Does God require the church to worship together on any specific days? God requires Christians to worship together. (Acts 2:42,46, Heb 10:25) He has not specified any particular day (Rom 14:5-6, Gal 4:10-11) The church worships together especially on Sunday because Christ rose from the dead on Sunday.
This Lutheran perspective, in my opinion, fits most closely with what I read in the Bible alone.
Does that mean the Holy Spirit leads every person to ALL truth within their lifetime? I doubt it; no one understands everything all at once. Can the Holy Spirit directly use believers who don't understand ALL truth? Of course, because no one will ever understand ALL truth. I find it interesting that the Bible (particularly the New Testament) is not written like a formal legal document, spelling out the exact theological details that must be believed. It seems to me that God is more interested in a personal relationship, and that's why the main point of the Bible is to reveal Jesus. Yes, the Holy Spirit gradually leads believers into greater understanding throughout our lives, but just like our struggle with sin, we will never come the point where we can say we really understand all the theology that the Bible contains. Hopefully, believers will at least understand the simple, most important part--salvation is a free gift through Jesus alone. |
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 29
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 11:30 am: | |
When I said ®his® bible I meant The Bible.
Martin Luther on Holydays
It is well known that most Lutherans have always retained as part of their service to God both the Lord's day instituted by Christ as well as most of the major "holy days" instituted by the Papists. The practice is inconsistent with the principles laid down in the Formula of Concord which asserts,
We believe, teach, and confess that in time of persecution, when a plain [and steadfast] confession is required of us, we should not yield to the enemies in regard to such adiaphora, as the apostle has written Gal. 5,1: Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again in the yoke of bondage. Also 2 Cor. 6,14: Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers, etc. For what concord hath light with darkness? Also Gal. 2,5: To whom we gave place, no, not for an hour, that the truth of the Gospel might remain with you. For in such a case it is no longer a question concerning adiaphora, but concerning the truth of the Gospel, concerning [preserving] Christian liberty, and concerning sanctioning open idolatry, as also concerning the prevention of offense to the weak in the faith [how care should be taken lest idolatry be openly sanctioned and the weak in faith be offended]; in which we have nothing to concede, but should plainly confess and suffer on that account what God sends, and what He allows the enemies of His Word to inflict upon us.
Here, in the Epitome's fourth affirmation in chapter 10, we have a clear affirmation that when the enemy of the Gospel has commanded an observation as moral duty, sinful to neglect, the Christian should STAND FAST in the liberty wherewith Christ has made him free, by defending his Christian Liberty through an open dissent from that practice or profession imposed by the enemies of the Gospel. Certain it is that the entire liturgical year, with Christ-Mass, Ishtar, Good-friday, &c. is all one big idolatrous chain of bondage imposed by no authority but that of Antichrist. It cannot be said that Lutherans keep these days without evidencing a definite respect for the impositions of Antichrist. Were the celebration of Christ's advent kept in accordance with Christian Liberty, even setting aside Presbyterian principles of worship, that day of celebration would at least be appointed on a day far different from that ordained by Rome. Likewise, what reason can there possibly be for celebrating Christ's Resurrection on a particular day in the year, let alone the same day as the Pope, when it is certain, as well as taught by all Lutherans, that the Lord's Day was appointed for the weekly celebration of Christ's Resurrection. From these observations we may conclude, that even without respect for Presbyterian / Reformed Principles of Worship which deny that such ecclesiastical holydays may be classified as adiaphora, Lutheran principles at least condemn the Pope's holydays and thus condemn also the celebration of all holydays on those days appointed by the Pope, lest the observance of those days fail to distinctly declare our liberty from the laws of Antichrist and thus become a sinful and shameful failure on our part to stand fast as Christ's freemen. Sadly however, Lutherans cannot say that they "would not give place, no, not for an hour," but have for nearly 500 years given place to Rome, and sanctioned her idolatry.
Dr. Luther however, was one strongly opposed to the idolatry of Rome, whereby, through so many invented rites, consciences were ensnared and imposed upon by the laws of men. The following quotes taken from his "Treatise on Good Works" and his Letter "to The Christian Nobility of the German Nation," both written in 1520, evidence his holy hostility to Rome's holidays.
This first comment is taken from his "Treatise of Good Works" and refers to the duties of the third commandment, or the second commandment as Lutherans and Papists would have it. Here Luther identifies the heinous breach of that commandment, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain," involved in all holydays put to use for that purpose for which they are almost always used, namely: idleness, amusement, and the sins which Luther himself lists. Is it not ungodly how all of the world makes use of a day supposedly appointed to serve God, that they may serve their bellies and their own amusements, all under the pretense of "keeping holy day" and "remembering Jesus"? Certainly, Christians at least should seek the abolishing of such holydays whereby God's name is taken to call for a day of amusement.
The first works of this Commandment are plain and outward, which we commonly call worship, such as going to mass, praying, and hearing a sermon on holy days. So understood there are very few works in this Commandment; and these, if they are not done in assurance of and with faith in God's favor, are nothing, as was said above. Hence it would also be a good thing if there were fewer saint's days, since in our times the works done on them are for the greater part worse than those of the work days, what with loafing, gluttony, and drunkenness, gambling and other evil deeds; and then, the mass and the sermon are listened to without edification, the prayer is spoken without faith.
Secondly, the following comment, taken from the same source. Here Luther, in discussing the fourth commandment (or third) again complains that ALL HOLYDAYS EXCEPT THE LORD'S DAY must be abolished. Because the institution of holydays merely gives all excuse to neglect their work for a day, thus leaving all to idle their time away, which they abuse through many vices, therefore all should be put to work, to keep them from their sins, to leave them less occasion to sin, and to promote the welfare of society spiritual and temporally.
XVII. Spiritually understood, this Commandment has a yet far higher work, which embraces the whole nature of man. Here it must be known that in Hebrew "Sabbath" means "rest," because on the seventh day God rested and ceased from all His works, which He had made. Genesis ii. Therefore He commanded also that the seventh day should be kept holy and that we cease from our works which we do the other six days. This Sabbath has now for us been changed into the Lord's day1, and the other days are called work-days; the Lord's day is called rest-day or holiday or holy day. And would to God that in Christendom there were no holiday except the Lord's day; that the festivals of Our Lady and of the Saints were all transferred to the Lord's day; then would many evil vices be done away with through the labor of the work-days, and lands would not be so drained and impoverished. But now we are plagued with many holidays, to the destruction of souls, bodies and goods; of which matter, much might be said.
In this third comment, Dr. Luther complaining of the degraded government of the Church, asserts that of ecclesiastical order, all that is left is a few fast-days and feast-days, which, according to Luther, "had better be done away with." So likewise at this day, "Christianity" has for most people become nothing but a toy made up of a few "holydays" used as an opportunity to prostitute the Truth of God to the pleasures of men in order to make them feel religious and spiritual as if they were Christians because they observed a few days of which God has said nothing, by performing rites that God has condemned. In our day as well as in Luther's, both the spiritual and temporal authority would serve God best by abolishing these so-called holydays and commanding men to concern themselves with the Truth of the Gospel and not the outward show of human ceremonies.
Now with regard to this work, things are almost worse than with regard to the first. The spiritual authority should punish sin with the ban and with laws, and constrain its spiritual children to be good, in order that they might have reason to do this work and to exercise themselves in obeying and honoring it. Such zeal one does not see now; they act toward their subjects like the mothers who forsake their children and run after their lovers, as Hosea ii. says; they do not preach, they do not teach, they do not hinder, they do not punish, and there is no spiritual government at all left in Christendom.
What can I say of this work? A few fast-days and feast-days are left, and these had better be done away with. But no one gives this a thought, and there is nothing left except the ban for debt, and this should not be. But spiritual authority should look to it, that adultery, unchastity, usury, gluttony, worldly show, excessive adornment, and such like open sin and shame might be most severely punished and corrected; and they should properly manage the endowments, monastic houses, parishes and schools, and earnestly maintain worship in them, provide for the young people, boys and girls, in schools and cloisters, with learned, pious men as teachers, that they might all be well trained, and so the older people give a good example and Christendom be filled and adorned with fine young people. So Paul teaches his disciple Titus, that he should rightly instruct and govern all classes, young and old, men and women. But now he goes to school who wishes; he is taught who governs and teaches himself; nay, it has, alas! come to such a pass that the places where good should be taught have become schools of knavery, and no one at all takes thought for the wild youth.
This fourth comment, the last which I take from his "Treatise of Good Works," Luther condemns both the hypocrisy and vanity of the religious practices of his day. Much "spiritual finery" is to be found in empty holidays commanded by men, but there is no spiritual value or use in them because they are "not commanded" by God. Likewise, these are mere such things as can be and are performed by some of the most profane men that ever lived. The same place where holidays prevail, so do all of the vices listed by Luther below, yea, with respect to holidays, often they will be found in the same place on the same day by the same people.
II. Behold how this precious, excellent work has been lost among Christians, so that nothing now everywhere prevails except strife, war, quarreling, anger, hatred, envy, back-biting, cursing, slandering, injuring, vengeance, and all manner of angry works and words; and yet, with all this, we have our many holidays, hear masses, say our prayers, establish churches, and more such spiritual finery, which God has not commanded.
Fifthly and lastly, this quote, cited in other reformed works against holydays, I cite in full, lest any accuse me of being dishonest. It is taken from Luther's letter "To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation," and again emphasizes the wicked abuses of holydays, which, having no moral obligation behind them, should rather be abolished than allowed to continue as occasions of sin and blind devotion or will-worship, which is condemned by the apostle Paul in his epistle to the Colossians.
18. All festivals should be abolished, and the Lord's day alone retained. If it were desired, however, to retain the festivals of our Lady and of the major saints, they should be transferred to the Lord's day, or observed only by a morning mass, after which all the rest of the day should be a working day. Here is the reason: since the feast days are abused by drinking, gambling, loafing, and all manner of sin, we anger God more on holy days than we do on other days. Things are so topsy-turvy that holy days are not holy, but working days are. Nor is any service rendered to God and his saints by so many saints' days. On the contrary, they are dishonoured; although some foolish prelates think that they have done a good work if each, following the promptings of his own blind devotion, celebrates a festival in honour of St. Otilie or St. Barbara. But they would be doing something far better if they honoured the saint by turning the saint's day into a working day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Jackob
Registered user
Username: Jackob
Post Number: 157
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 11:37 am: | |
Rafael,
Let me know if I understand you correctly: you compared the Sabbath with the Bible. Your idea is that the perversion of Scripture is not an argument for throwing it, and you are right on this point. In the same way, the perversion of the sabbath is not an argument of abandoning it.
But from this point of view, you must keept the seventh day Sabbath, not the Lord's day. Because the Sabbath was only perverted, it is normal to restore it to it's rightful place, to keep it correctly. Why change it, if in his
This is the basic argument of adventists, which I used very. They reason that the perversion of the sabbath by the people of Israel is not a valid reason to change the day, because the day in itself is good. We must only to keep it correctly, like we musy just to interpret the Bible correctly. The same Bible, the same Sabbath.
But the Bible presents another reason for the abandonement of the Sabbath. The Bible speaks about fulfillment, like new moons and festivals. This has nothing to do with the people. No people can interfere with the purposes of God. He realizes His purposes according to His plan.
Keeping a day holy to God is not bad in itself, but keeping it as condition of our acceptance before God is a false gospel. And in the Old Covenant the keeping of the Sabbath was a condition of acceptance before God. When a man worked on sabbath he was put to death, condemned by God and people. This is not a perversion of the Sabbath, the Sabbath was made a condition of acceptance before God in the Old Covenant by God Himself. Not because God promoted a false Gospel but because God wanted to institute a ministry of death to make clear that the legalism is a closed road, is a wrong way, nobody can comply with the condition, including keeping the Sabbath.
Yes, keeping the Lord's day as a sabbath is not a bad thing if this is not a condition of salvation, it's optional, it's the personal choice of the person who keep it. This means that the Romans 14 applies to the Lord's day also. |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1494
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 1:34 pm: | |
There are some good references on the www.soundofgrace.com web site that showed that John Calvin and Martin Luther's views were similar. As I have said before, there is one of our FAF members who is reading John Calvin's sermons on the Ten Commandments, and he loves the book. He says that Calvin states the very same views in that book about the Sabbath that Dale Ratzlaff articulates in "Sabbath in Christ".
So rafael, using Calvin as an authority may not be valid. I will have to get that book and come up with some of the quotes. It was only later when the Westminster Confession was formulated, that they took liberties in establishing Sunday as binding.
Stan
|
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 30
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 2:06 pm: | |
Jackob, who is talking about of keeping the sabbath in order to win salvation? What do you think of christian history?
Tell me do you work 7 days a week?
What would you tell to a christian that work 7 a week because we are not under the 10 commandaments?
Jackob what is wrong with the next statement:
I Love the Lord's Day
"The Sabbath was made for man"
DEAR FELLOW-COUNTRYMEN,-As a servant of God in this dark and cloudy day, I feel constrained to lift up my voice in behalf of the entire sanctification of the Lord's day. The daring attack that is now made by some of the directors of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway on the law of God and the peace of our Scottish Sabbath - the blasphemous motion which they mean to propose to the shareholders in February next - and the wicked pamphlets which are now being circulated in thousands, full of all manner of lies and impieties- call loudly for the calm, deliberate testimony of all faithful ministers and private Christians in behalf of God's holy day. In the name of all God's people in this town, and in this land, I commend to your dispassionate consideration the following
REASONS WHY WE LOVE THE LORD'S DAY.
I. Because it is the Lord's day. -"This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice, and be glad in it" (Ps. cxviii. 24). "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day" (Rev. i. 10). It is His, by example. It is the day on which He rested from His amazing work of redemption. Just as God rested on the seventh day from all His works, wherefore God blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it; so the Lord Jesus rested this day from all His agony, and pain, and humiliation. "There remaineth therefore the keeping of a Sabbath to the people of God" (Heb. iv. 9). The Lord's day is His property, just as the Lord's Supper is the supper belonging to Christ. It is His table. He is the bread. He is the wine. He invites the guests. He fills them with joy and with the Holy Ghost. So it is with the Lord's day. All days of the year are Christ's, but He hath marked out one in seven as peculiarly His own. "He hath made it," or marked it out. Just as He planted a garden in Eden, so He hath fenced about this day and made it His own. This is the reason why we love it, and would keep it entire. We love everything that is Christ's. We love His word. It is better to us than thousands of gold and silver. "O how we love His law! it is our study all the day." We love His house. It is our trysting-place with Christ, where He meets with us and communes with us from off the mercy-seat. We love His table. It is His banqueting-house, where His banner over us is love-where He looses our bonds, and anoints our eyes, and makes our hearts burn with holy joy. We love His people, because they are His, members of His body, washed in His blood, filled with His Spirit, our brothers and sisters for eternity. And we love the Lord's day, because it is His. Every hour of it is dear to us-sweeter than honey, more precious than gold. It is the day He rose for our justification. It reminds us of His love, and His finished work, and His rest. And we may boldly say that that man does not love the Lord Jesus Christ who does not love the entire Lord's day. Oh, Sabbath-breaker, whoever you be, you are a sacrilegious robber! When you steal the hours of the Lord's day for business or for pleasure, you are robbing Christ of the precious hours which He claims as his own. Would you not be shocked if a plan were deliberately proposed for breaking through the fence of the Lord's table, and turning it into a common meal, or a feast for the profligate and the drunkard? Would not your best feelings be harrowed to see the silver cup of communion made a cup of revelry in the hand of the drunkard? And yet what better is the proposal of our railway directors? "The Lord's day" is as much His day as "the Lord's table" is His table. Surely we may well say, in the words of Dr. Love, that eminent servant of Christ, now gone to the Sabbath above: "Cursed is that gain, cursed is that recreation, cursed is that health, which is gained by criminal encroachments on this sacred day."
II. Because it is a relic of Paradise and type of Heaven.-The first Sabbath dawned on the bowers of a sinless paradise. When Adam was created in the image of his Maker, he was put into the garden to dress it and to keep it. No doubt this called forth all his energies. To train the luxuriant vine, to gather the fruit of the fig-tree and palm, to conduct the water to the fruit-trees and flowers, required all his time and all his skill. Man was never made to be idle. Still when the Sabbath-day came round, his rural implements were all laid aside; the garden no longer was his care. His calm, pure mind looked beyond things seen into the world of eternal realities. He walked with God in the garden, seeking deeper knowledge of Jehovah and His ways, his heart burning more and more with holy love, and his lips overflowing with seraphic praise. Even in Paradise man needed a Sabbath. Without it Eden itself would have been incomplete. How little they know the joys of Eden, the delight of a close and holy walk with God, who would wrest from Scotland this relic of a sinless world! It is also the type of heaven. When a believer lays aside his pen or loom, brushes aside his worldly cares, leaving them behind him with his week-day clothes, and comes up to the and comes up to the house of God, it is like the morning of the resurrection, the day when we shall come out of great tribulation into the presence of God and the Lamb. When he sits under the preached word, and hears the voice of the shepherd leading and feeding his soul, it reminds him of the day when the Lamb that is in the midst of the throne shall feed him and lead him to living fountains of waters. When he joins in the psalm of praise, it reminds him of the day when his hands shall strike the harp of God- Where congregations ne'er break up, And Sabbaths have no end.
When he retires, and meets with God in secret in his closet, or, like Isaac, in some favourite spot near his dwelling, it reminds him of the day when "he shall be a pillar in the house of our God, and go no more out." This is the reason why we love the Lord's day. This is the reason why we "call the Sabbath a delight" A well-spent Sabbath we feel to be a day of heaven upon earth. For this reason we wish our Sabbaths to he wholly given to God. We love to spend the whole time in the public and private exercises of God's worship, except so much as is taken up in the works A necessity and mercy. We love to rise early on that morning, and to sit up late, that we may have a long day with God. How many may know from this that they will never be in heaven! A straw on the surface can tell which way the stream is flowing. Do you abhor a holy Sabbath? Is it a kind of hell to you to be with those who are strict in keeping the Lord's day? The writer of these lines once felt as you do. You are restless and uneasy. You say, "Behold what a weariness is it" "When will the Sabbath be gone, that we may sell corn?" Ah! soon, very soon, and you will be in hell. Hell is the only place for you. Heaven is one long, never-ending, holy Sabbath-day. There are no Sabbaths in hell.
III. Because it is a day of blessings. -When God instituted the Sabbath in paradise, it is said, "God blessed the Sabbath day and sanctified it" (Gen. ii. 3). He not only set it apart as a sacred day, but made it a day of blessing. Again, when the Lord Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week before dawn, He revealed Himself the same day to two disciples going to Emmaus, and made their hearts burn within them (Luke xxiv. 13). The same evening He came and stood in the midst of the disciples, and said, "Peace be unto you;" and He breathed on them and said, "receive ye the Holy Ghost" (John xx. 19). Again, after eight days, - that is, the next Lord's day,-Jesus came and stood in the midst, and revealed Himself with unspeakable grace to unbelieving Thomas (John xx. 26). It was on the Lord's day also that the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost (Acts ii. 1 ; compare Lev. xxiii. 15, 16). That beginning of all spiritual blessings, that first revival of the Christian Church, was on the Lord's day. It was on the same day that the beloved John, an exile on the sea-girt isle of Patmos, far away from the assembly of the saints, was filled with the Holy Spirit, and received his heavenly revelation. So that in all ages, front the beginning of the world, and in every place where there is a believer, the Sabbath has been a day of double blessing. It is so still, and will be, though all God's enemies should gnash their teeth at it. True, God is a God of free grace, and confines His working to no time or place; but it is equally true, and all the scoffs of the infidel cannot alter it, that it pleases Him to bless His word most on the Lord's day. All God's faithful ministers in every land can bear witness that sinners are converted most frequently on the Lord's day-that Jesus comes in and shows Himself through the lattice of ordinances oftenest on His own day. Saints, like John, are filled with the Spirit on the Lord's day, and enjoy their calmest, deepest views into the eternal world. Unhappy men, who are striving to rob our beloved Scotland of this day of double blessing, "ye know not what you do." You would wrest from our dear countrymen the day when God opens the windows of heaven and pours down a blessing. You want to make the heavens over Scotland like brass, and the hearts of our people like iron. Is it the sound of the golden bells of our ever-living High Priest on the mountains of our land, and the breathing of His Holy Spirit over so many of our parishes, that has roused up your satanic exertions to drown the sweet sound of mercy by the deafening roar of railway carriages? Is it the returning vigour of the revived and chastened Church of Scotland that has opened the torrents of blasphemy which you pour forth against the Lord of the Sabbath? Have your own withered souls no need of a drop from heaven? May it not be the case that some of you are blaspheming the very day on which your own soul might have been saved? Is it not possible that some of you may remember, with tears of anguish in hell, the exertions which you are now making, against light and against warning, to bring down a withering blight on your own souls and on the religion of Scotland? To those who are God's children in this land, I would now, in the name of our common Saviour, who is the Lord of the Sabbath day, address
A WORD OF EXHORTATION.
1. PRIZE THE LORD'S DAY.-The more that others despise and trample on it, love you it all the more. The louder the storm of blasphemy howls around you, sit the closer at the feet of Jesus. "He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet" Diligently improve all holy time. It should be the busiest day of the seven; but only in the business of eternity. Avoid sin on that holy day. God's children should avoid sin every day, but most of all on the Lord's day. It is a day of double cursing as well as of double blessing. The world will have to answer dreadfully for sins committed in holy time. Spend the Lord's day in the Lord's presence. Spend it as a day in heaven. Spend much of it in praise and in works of mercy, as Jesus did.
II. DEFEND THE LORD'S DAY.-Lift up a calm, undaunted testimony against all the profanations of the Lord's day. Use all your influence, whether as a statesman, a magistrate, a master, a father, or a friend, both publicly and privately, to defend the entire Lord's day. This duty is laid upon you in the Fourth Commandment. Never see the Sabbath broken without reproving the breaker of it. Even worldly men, with all their pride and contempt for us, cannot endure to be convicted of Sabbath-breaking. Always remember God and the Bible are on your side, and that you will soon see these men cursing their own sin and folly when too late. Let all God's children in Scotland lift up a united testimony especially against these three public profanations of the Lord's day
(1) The keeping open of Reading-Rooms-In this town, and in all the large towns of Scotland, I am told, you may find in the public reading-rooms many of our men of business turning over the newspapers and magazines at all hours of the Lord's day; and especially on Sabbath evenings, many of these places are filled like a little church. Ah, guilty men! how plainly you show that you are on the broad road that leadeth to destruction. If you were a murderer or an adulterer, perhaps you would not dare to deny this. Do you not know-and all the sophistry of hell cannot disprove it- that the same God who said," Thou shalt not kill," said also, "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy?" The murderer who is dragged to the gibbet, and the polished Sabbath-breaker are one in the sight of God.
(2) The keeping open Public-Houses-Public-houses are the curse of Scotland. I never see a sign, "Licensed to sell spirits," without thinking that it is a licence to ruin souls. They are the yawning avenues to poverty and rags in this life, and, as another has said, "the short cut to hell." Is it to be tamely borne in this land of light and reformation, that these pest-houses and dens of iniquity-these man-traps for precious souls-shall be open on the Sabbath, nay, that they shall be enriched and kept afloat by this unholy traffic, many of them declaring that they could not keep up their shop if it were not for the Sabbath market-day? Surely we may well say, "Cursed is the gain made on that day." Poor wretched men! Do you not know that every penny that rings upon your counter on that day will yet eat your flesh as if it were fire-that every drop of liquid poison swallowed in your gaslit palaces will only serve to kindle up the flame of "the fire that is not quenched"?
(3) Sunday Trains upon the Railway.-A majority of the directors of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway have shown their determination, in a manner that has shocked all good men, to open the railway on the Lord's day. The sluices of infidelity have been opened at the same time, and floods of blasphemous tracts are pouring over the land, decrying the holy day of the blessed God, as if there was no eye in heaven, no King on Zion Hill, no day of reckoning. Christian countrymen, awake! and, filled by the same spirit that delivered our country from the dark superstitions of Rome, let us beat back the incoming tide of infidelity and enmity to the Sabbath. Guilty men! who, under Satan, are leading on the deep, dark phalanx of Sabbath- breakers, yours is a solemn position. You are robbers. You rob God of His holy day. You are murderers. You murder the souls of your servants. God said, "Thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy servant;" but you compel your servants to break God's law, and to sell their souls for gain. You are sinners against light. Your Bible and your catechism, the words of godly parents, perhaps now in the Sabbath above, and the loud remonstrances of God-fearing men, are ringing in your ears, while you perpetrate this deed of shame, and glory in it. You are traitors to your country. The law of your country declares that you should "observe a holy rest all that day from your own words, works, and thoughts;" and yet you scout it as an antiquated superstition. Was it not Sabbath-breaking that made God east away Israel? And yet you would bring the same curse on Scotland now. You are moral suicides, stabbing your own souls, proclaiming to the world that you are not the Lord's people, and hurrying on your souls to meet the Sabbath-breaker's doom. In conclusion, I propose, for the calm consideration of all sober-minded men, the following
SERIOUS QUESTIONS.
(1) Can you name one godly minister, of any denomination in all Scotland, who does not hold the duty of the entire sanctification of the Lord's day?
(2) Did you ever meet with a lively believer in any country under heaven - one who loved Christ, and lived a holy life - who did not delight in keeping holy to God the entire Lord's day?
(3) Is it wise to take the interpretation of God's will concerning the Lord's day from "men of the world," from infidels, scoffers, men of unholy lives, men who are sand-blind in all divine things, men who are the enemies of all righteousness, who quote Scripture freely, as Satan did, to deceive and betray?
(4) If, in opposition to the uniform testimony of God's wisest and holiest servants-against the plain warnings of God's word, against the very words of your catechism, learned beside your mother's knee, and against the voice of your outraged conscience-you join the ranks of the Sabbath-breakers, will not this be a sin against light, will it not lie heavy on your soul upon your death-bed, will it not meet you in the judgment-day?
Praying that these words of truth and soberness may be owned of God, and carried home to your hearts with divine power-I remain, dear fellow-countrymen, your soul's well-wisher, etc.
December 18, 1841.
Robert Murray McCheyne |
Insearchof
Registered user
Username: Insearchof
Post Number: 56
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 4:13 pm: | |
If I am not mistaken, Calvin used the 'Sabbath' as a day to worship and as a day of 'recreation' -for instance, he was know to play games with his children on the Sabbath (Sunday). Some of his contemporaries were shocked by what he considered appropriate activity on the Lords Day.
I don't think anyone on this board has ever said that we should not gather to worship God. The difficulty comes when the day is treated as conditional for salvation.
InSearchOf |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3691
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 5:00 pm: | |
In response to your question about tradition, Rafael, I do not believe church tradition is authoritative for Christ-followers. The Bible, not tradition, is God-breathed and is "useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Tim. 3:16)
Similarly, "the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividng sould and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account." (Hebrews 4:12)
These things cannot be said of church tradition. The Bible is the only "collection" of instruction that God claims as completely breathed out by Himself. The same Holy Spirit who filled the first converts beginning at Pentecost still fills all believers today. He is more than adequate to teach us God's truth through God's own legacy, Scripture.
As Raven said on another thread somewhere, probably no single Christ-follower gets every single bit of truth; we all grow at different rates and ways, with varying sorts of depth and application. We can trust the Holy Spirit to teach us the essentials: the reality of Jesus and what salvation involves. We can trust Him also to reveal what we need to know from the Bible.
We cannot look to any outside source or commentary and hope to stay grounded in the words God breathed to His prophets and apostles. We have to learn from the original source, not from the secondary sources. The secondary sources are helpful as added background information and for historical records, but they are not our original source of God's will and intentions.
So no, I personally do not believe I need to observe church tradition if it teaches something the Bible does not teach.
Colleen |
Jackob
Registered user
Username: Jackob
Post Number: 158
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 10:02 pm: | |
If the Sabbath was just perverted and keeping the sabbath is Ok, why do you not keep it? Why do you not keep the seventh day sabbath? This is the question adventist asked every sunday sabbatarian.
Like I said, it's nothing wrong to keep any day, as long as it is not a condition for acceptance before God. This means that Sabbath has nothing to do with salvation, in any way, it's not connected with salvation in the slightest way. With other words, not keeping the Sabbath (saturday or sunday)doesn't jeopardize the salvation of anybody. He is free to work on any day, and is not bound by any duty to keep any day holy.
I rest 2 days, saturday and sunday, in Romania the working week is 5 days. This doesn't mean that I keep one of them holy. My rest is not uniterrupted, I work at home, I help my wife with shopping and other things. I can rest on a day and work on this day also, for myself, not for my job.
|
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 31
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 5:59 am: | |
jackob, I¥m not talking about of keeping the sabbath in order to win salvation or as a condition of salvation.
I do not keep the old seventh day becaouse we as christians have a new day, the first day of the week, the Lord¥s day.
Jackob, what is wrong with Mr. McCheyne¥s sermon?
Mrs. Tinker, do you know that jehovah¥s witness say the same thing than you about the christian history and tradition?
Do you know that jw say that they dont believe in Trinity because this doctrine was not directely taught by the apostols?
That They reject the doctrine of the Trinity because the word ®Trinity® is not in the bible?
Do you know that you are doing like them, when you reject the Lord's day?
Would you tell me what means for you the next bible charter:
1Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;
2Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.
3As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
4Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
5Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
12And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
13Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.
14And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
15This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
16Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.
17Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
18This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare;
19Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:
20Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
|
Raven
Registered user
Username: Raven
Post Number: 414
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 8:56 am: | |
I don't think any of us believe in the Trinity because of "church tradition," but we believe it because that teaching is clearly taught in the Bible, even without using the word "Trinity." Chris put together a very thorough "Bible only" study on this very topic recently, on another thread.
It really doesn't matter what a theologian taught, the early church fathers, or whoever. A friend sent me a link today from the news where ancient Coptic Scriptures were recently found that tell the story of Judas Iscariot a little differently. These "Scriptures" state that Jesus asked Judas to betray Him, and Judas was only obeying Jesus. Does that mean these "Scriptures" are inspired, just because they are so old and written so close to the time of the apostles? No, it just means there was never a time of pure doctrine outside the Bible, and never will be. That's why it's dangerous to base beliefs on any writing or teaching outside of the Bible alone.
As has been stated before, it's certainly okay to "keep" any day at all because of Christian liberty that Paul speaks of in Romans 14. But I see nothing in the Bible alone that tells me a Christian is supposed to keep one particular day, or it's a good principle to. It's up to individual choice between the individual and God. |
Jeremiah
Registered user
Username: Jeremiah
Post Number: 74
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 10:03 am: | |
Rafael,
If you read too much tradition you're likely to want to become part of the church you read about... and if you go back before the 1500's, it isn't Protestant.
Colleen,
What is somewhat of a mystery to me is that people will believe in the "Bible alone" and disregard the tradition that established what is and what is not in the Bible. I personally can say that I believe the Bible because the church guided by the Holy Spirit told me what the Bible is. I can go back and read about it in the councils. And there's Eusebius, and Melito of Sardis, and others who tell of how it came to be.
But to believe the Bible without holding any regard for the church which defined and then preserved the Bible for us, is to me like cutting off the branch one is sitting on. It kind of boils down to "I believe the Bible just because."
At this point in time, to me that's a little too much like "I bear you my testimony that the Book of Mormon is true".
If it wasn't for the monasteries and all the monks doing the copying of the scriptures and other writings, we probably wouldn't have 90% of the manuscripts of the Bible which are extant.
Jeremiah |
Jackob
Registered user
Username: Jackob
Post Number: 159
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 10:15 am: | |
What's wrong with mr. McCheyne¥s sermon?
quote:And we may boldly say that that man does not love the Lord Jesus Christ who does not love the entire Lord's day. Oh, Sabbath-breaker, whoever you be, you are a sacrilegious robber!
Cheyne said that we don't love Jesus. This is a serious accusation, in fact he said that we are not christians, because christians love Jesus. Apostle Paul said: If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema(1 Corinthians 16:22) The same word Paul used for those who preached another gospel, a false gospel (Galatians 1:8, 9) It means to be accursed, it means that the person had fallen from grace. If this doesn't mean that this person is lost, I don't know what means to be lost. McCheyne said boldly that we are not christians, we don't love Jesus, we are robbers, and are accursed.
Cheyne judges us based on our keeping or not keeping of Lord's day. This means that Sabbath keeping is a condition of salvation. Everybody who disregards it, and didn't keep it holy, is a lost man.
In this way the Lord's day is connected with our salvation, and keeping it holy is not an option. When I wrote about the sabbath as a condition of salvation, I have this objective in mind, that the sabbath has nothing to do with our standing before God, with our salvation. If we don't keep it, we are still saved, we are christians who love Jesus, and not robbers.
If you don't believe that the Lord's day is not connected with our salvation, you will not have a problem considering us saved persons, christians who love Jesus. This is the problem with McCheymne sermon.
|
Jeremiah
Registered user
Username: Jeremiah
Post Number: 75
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 10:32 am: | |
Here's something to consider;
4:12
for the reckoning of God is living, and working, and sharp above every two-edged sword, and piercing unto the dividing asunder both of soul and spirit, of joints also and marrow, and a discerner of thoughts and intents of the heart;
4:13
and there is not a created thing not manifest before Him, but all things are naked and open to His eyes -- with whom is our reckoning.
Unlike the NIV and some other translations, this passage from Hebrews in the Young's Literal translation makes it evident that the "word" spoken of in Hebrews 4:12 is the same thing as "God" who sees all things in verse 13. In other words, "word" refers to Jesus, the living word of God. And in the early Christian worship, they did believe Jesus was present among them in worship! Just read the rest of the verses to the end of Hebrews 4;
4:14
Having, then, a great chief priest passed through the heavens -- Jesus the Son of God -- may we hold fast the profession,
4:15
for we have not a chief priest unable to sympathise with our infirmities, but one tempted in all things in like manner -- apart from sin;
4:16
we may come near, then, with freedom, to the throne of the grace, that we may receive kindness, and find grace -- for seasonable help.
Jeremiah
|
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3697
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 1:46 pm: | |
Jeremiah, Hebrews 4:12-13 does refer to God's "word". In fact, the metaphor of the double-edged sword is used not only in Hebrew is used in Revelation 19:11-16 and 21 where the rider of the White horse has a double-edged sword coming out of His mouth which will judge those who receive the mark of the beast. Ephesians 6:17 the "sword of the Spirit" is "the word of God".
These references all refer to the transmissable word of God, not specifically to the Person of Jesus. The New Bible Dictionary by inter-Varsity Press says this, "To the early church the word was a message revealed from God in Christ, which was to be preached, ministered and obeyed. It was the word of life (Phil 2:16), of truth (Eph 1:13), of salvation (Acts 13:26), or reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:19), of the cross (1 Cor 1:18)."
In the Young's tranlation the translation is "the reckoningof God". "Reckoning" is NOT Jesus. It is His judgment; His analysis; the living power that pierces our souls and reveals our motives to oursleves. This living law, living power is transitted to us in Scripture.
The Study Notes on Hebrews 4:12 say this, "God's truth was revealed by Jesus (the incarnate Word; see Jn 1:1, 14), but it has also been given verbally, the word referredc to here. This dynamic word of God, active in accomplishing God's purposes, appears in both the OT and the NT (see Ps 107:20; 147:18; Isa 40:8; 55:11; Gal 3:8, Eph 5:26, Jas 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23). The author of Hebrews describes it as a living power that judges as with an all-seeing eye, penetrating a person's innermost being."
As for respecting the church which selected the canon of Scripture, I have to differentiate between an "organized" church and the invisible Body of Christ. Clearly God oversaw the selection of manuscripts which was canonized as Scripture. Clearly men of God responded to His Spirit in doing this selecting. Yet the fact that these men of God were bishops in the church does not make them more knowledgable or revered than any other Christ-follower.
All Christ-followers live by the teachings of the apostles as recorded in Scripture. The fact that the early fathers were closer to the apostles in time does not make them necessarily more accurate. God gave them very clear work to do for Him. It was up to the early church fathers to clarify what was heresy and what was orthodox. They established the standards which are still valid today. But these standards are based on the truth found in Scripture. They didn't wrestle with heresy apart from referring to the Bible.
We can thank God for gifting these men with His wisdom and discernment, but they were simply doing the work God created in advance for them to do (Ephe 2:10).
God still gives His people His work to do; the work today is different from in the early days. But the tradition of the church fathers is no more "sacred" than the contributions of any Christ-follower. Everything must be evaluated by Scripture.
Colleen |
Jeremiah
Registered user
Username: Jeremiah
Post Number: 76
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 3:30 pm: | |
Ok you win Colleen, with the "word of God" not being specifically Jesus in Hebrews 4:12.
I don't see it as specifically the written word either though. I like the term "reckoning" I think.
I'm intrigued by your comment that even if a person was a bishop in the early church it does not make him more knowledgeable or revered than any other Christian. This makes me wonder; what is so special about Peter, James, John, Paul, or others? Were they also on the same level as just any Christian? What about the term "holy apostles" in Ephesians 3:5? Did God give the apostles and prophets something which was not given to anyone since then? I guess that would be strongly implied at least, if a person does not believe in a visible organized church.
The interesting possibility I am seeing is that the context in which the Bible was written down nearly 2000 years ago may still be preserved intact in the worship of certain visible organized churches which exist today. Context is very important when trying to understand a written document.
The first time Paul's epistles were read in the churches to which they were addressed, there was a certain context. People worshipped a certain way, and had cultural customs which Paul was aware of, and all of this put together made Paul's communication to them quite understandable.
Imagine the possibility of that context being preserved over 2000 years. Imagine if the worship style is the same today as back then. Imagine if many of the customs of those people are still present today. Imagine if you became part of that 2000 years old context, and were thus able to see application and meaning in the written Word because of being a member of the body of the living Word today. Imagine if the Holy Spirit is still present in the church.
This is what I think I'm seeing in some of the churches which have a visible historical connection to the first Christian churches.
I remember seeing a whole lot more meaning in Hebrews chapter 10 after studying about the liturgy and worship practices of the Orthodox Christians, for instance. I would put myself in the congregation, and realize what is going on around me during worship, and then hear Hebrews being read during the service. Context makes a big difference because terms that might be unusual in modern American life take on meaning in the worship of the early church.
A person can read about something, but that isn't the same as experiencing something. John tried to write out what he experienced, when writing the book of Revelation. But the book is merely "about" what he saw... and we don't see what John saw unless God takes us where John went. We only get glimpses through writing.
I really like this idea of a living church with the presence of the Holy Spirit in it. But even that is limited... the Holy Spirit has to be living in me, in order for me to see heaven. I think however that I as a branch cannot be separate from the vine which is Christ, and I think that means that I must be part of Christ's body. This is one reason I should be part of that living church with the Holy Spirit in it.
Jeremiah |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3698
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 5:03 pm: | |
Jeremiah, of course the church is a living organism with the Holy Spirit living in it. Ephesians 2:19-22 clearly explains that we who are sealed with the Spirit (Eph 1:13-14) are being built together in Christ into a living temple in which God lives by His Spirit. But this commentary is to Christ-followers in general, not to a specific "church" bearing a specific tradition.
Yes, Paul addressed this to the Ephesians, but verse 19 clarifies that they, Gentile believers, are now no longer "foreigners and aliens but feelow citizens with God's people." They and all God's people, Jew and Gentile alike, are being built into this holy temple in which God dwells. 2 Peter 2:4-5 also talksóto Jewish believers this timeóabout the fact that they are being built like "living stones" into "a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood."
This living church indwelt by the Holy Spirit is neither the "Orthodox" nor the "Catholic" church. It is the church of all believers, Jew and Gentile alike.
Yes, I believe the apostles were special. They were taught by Jesus Himself, and He clearly appointed them to establish the church. The same Ephesians passage states that the church [as you also stated, Jeremiah] is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets. Revelation 21:14 echoes this statement when John reports that the 12 foundations of the New Jerusalem have the names of the 12 apostles on them.
Of course the apostles were in a singular category.
According to the New Testament, the Living Church with the Holy Spirit living in it is the sum of all believers who are united by the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 4:4-5 states, "There is one body and one Spiritójust as you were called to one hope when you were calledóone Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all..."
Paul was clearly writing to a small group of believers separated by great distance from other believers in other cities. The "one body" cannot be an organized church tradition; it is the timeless body of Spirit-filled believers.
As far as worship tradition goes, the NT does not specify any tradition except meeting together and observing baptism and the Lord's Supper and encouraging one another with one's spiritual gifts and with praise. Hebrews actually explains why the priestly, vestmented tradition has been replaced by Jesus' high priesthoodóand, as Peter said, we the body of Christ are a nation of priests. All the symbols of the Hebrew temple service have been fulfilled in Christ. The ceremonies, incense, vestments, etc. all met their fulfillment in the life and death and resurrection of Jesus.
I'm not saying it's wrong to practice liturgy, etc. I'm just saying it's not prescribed. The Bible defines the church very differently from the way the Orthodox and Catholic churches define "church".
I'm not criticizing your leanings toward Orthodoxy, Jeremiahóand I do appreciate your digging and studying and opennessóbut I have deep theological differences with that tradition.
Colleen |
Jeremiah
Registered user
Username: Jeremiah
Post Number: 77
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 7:20 pm: | |
Colleen,
I just have to make another observation here... 
It's very simple to explain the vestments, incense, priests, and liturgy, that you see in the Orthodox churches. Just read descriptions of what heaven is like! Such as the book of Revelation.
The theology is this;
"But ye have come unto Mount Zion and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn, who are written in Heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel."
Since this is where the church is during worship, it only makes sense to make it look, sound, and smell just like what the spiritual reality is.
Seems to me the old covenant worship was made to look like heaven too. Images of angels on the walls, incense, vestments, an altar, etc. And some very detailed specific directions as to those!
But in the Old Covenant there were some real differences. One small difference is that there weren't saints in Heaven back then, so only icons of angels on the walls. A major difference was the sacrifices were mere icons of the future real sacrifice. Orthodox theology has it that in the Eucharist, we partake of that one sacrifice for all time, for real.
I don't think the general layout of Heaven has changed a whole lot. There have been new "spirits of just men made perfect" added every so often as people pass away here. I think that worshippers of God are still to participate in the worship of heaven.
It seems that having pictures of famous Bible characters lining your church was something practiced by both church and synagogue, based on discoveries at Dura Europos from around 250 AD; http://www.philthompson.net/pages/icons/duraeuropos.html
There is a bit of difference in church structure now compared to when the Apostles were alive... the church is bigger now. Back then there were "elders and deacons". That turned into "bishops priests and deacons" somewhere around the time the last apostles died, as evidenced by reading Ignatius of Antioch. There came a time when there were too many Christians in one city for one bishop to take care of alone, thus "priests" or presbyters.
I know you do have deep theological differences with Orthodoxy, as do most of the people on this board. I think that some of those differences may be simply a lack of knowledge about it, and I'm happy to engage in discussion from time to time. There's no hurt in hearing different perspectives I think.
Jeremiah
|
Cathy2
Registered user
Username: Cathy2
Post Number: 113
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 8:44 pm: | |
Jeremiah,
I appreciate what I have learned from you about the Eastern Orthodox churches' traditions, when you have posted in the past 2 months. It got me thinking about church history, history in general, and on other things.I have no problem with it all, as long as works are never involved in a doctrine.
One reason that I am interested is that my oldest daughter was just named Godmother of my adopted niece's (non-SDA) baby. She married a Russian man. They just christened Alyona in the Russian Orthodox Church, in The Arab Emerites, where they live. My daughter understands that this is a scacrement and lifetime responsibility to take very seriously. She has visited an Orthodox church in the states, but I have not.
I would like to know some more of the differences. Plus, I am beginning to see, very starkly, what and how they became philosophicaly different between East and West. Mystical vs. Rationalism. If you would like to share some sites with me, my email is: choosier1@msn.com
I enjoy learning about the various ways in which how the Body of Christ worships our Lord.
As far as the word 'church'....we Christans, Beleivers, are The Church. Not a building, a place, a certain group.
We are 'salt and light'; sprinkled and diffused everywhere around the Globe. If salt is lumped in one palce...well, if you swallow a concentrtated lump of salt, you throw up. If light is concentrated in one, intense beam, it blinds or even can kill you. One particular group is not THE ONE of Christ's Body. There are Believers in every denomination on earth and Christ knows his own. Personally, I've met quite a few of them.
This is all what I have come to believe from scripture, not what someone told me.
There are fussess all over the place on this issue of A Church. The conservative home-church people think that any 'organized religion'-- even a mild, plain Baptist service--is of 'Babylon' and 'Jezebel'; to all the way to all the other controversies and extremes over 'church'.What is it, who is it, how to do it. ?????
As Colleen wrote, we have one Lord, one Spirit, one Baptism. And one Supper. The rest are differences in how we worship and express, imho.
I have found 'cathedrals' with my Lord in nature (without worshipping nature); yet, I go to a church bulding in a Lutheran church, at this time. Perhaps, in the future, I might go somewhere else. I don't know; only God knows. It might be in my home. But Christ will be there, that I do know, in whatever way and manner we worship, read scripture, make music, have communion and build one another up in the Lord, love our needy neighbor, and live the pure Gospel doctrine of grace/faith.
I know that there is not agreement on all of this and other issues with myself and others, but that is ok, too. We are in one Lord. My only desire is to share Christ.
Jeremiah, would you email me and tell me how they preach, teach and express Christ? I liked that young's verse you gave. What versions are preferred with them? Why?
Thank you, if you have time. If you do not, it is all right.
Cathy |
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 32
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, April 10, 2006 - 5:29 am: | |
Jeremiah, thanks for your advice, would you please recommend to me a good material to start, I think it will be good.
Jackob, would you please tell me the meaning of 1 timoty chapter one? |
Jackob
Registered user
Username: Jackob
Post Number: 163
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Monday, April 10, 2006 - 8:36 am: | |
To explain an entire chapter online it's a heavvy task. Also you provided no comment about the chapter. Perhaps you want me to adress a specific point. In this case it's up to you to show me the point you have in view. What's your opinion which makes you think that my view about Lord's day is in opposition with this chapter? It's more easy, and useful first to present clearly your understanding, and after this I'll show mine.
What I can say at this moment, is the fact that my MD adventist friend used this chapter to promote sabbath keeping, presuming that the sabbath is included in the general term "law". I pointed him that the sabbath breaking is not mentioned by name, even other sins are mentioned. If his supposition is all right, and you make the samesupposition, the law here must include only the SEVENTH DAY Sabbath, because there are no other Ten Commandments, there is no other fourth commandment than those who mentioned the SEVENTH DAY Sabbath. If your position is the same as my MD friend, and I will recognize the validity of it, I'll choose my adventist friend's interpretation and return to keep the seventh day sabbath, because the fourth commandment require from me to keep the seventh day, not the Lord's day.
|
Jeremiah
Registered user
Username: Jeremiah
Post Number: 78
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 10, 2006 - 10:54 am: | |
Rafael,
If you want to read the writings of the early Christians, you can find them online at www.earlychristianwritings.com . My favorite site about the Orthodox church is www.philthompson.net . It's simply a matter of reading lots of church history. If you start with the writings written immediately after the Bible was written and progress towards our time, you'll get a pretty good picture of what Christianity was like.
Jeremiah |
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 33
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, April 10, 2006 - 2:55 pm: | |
3As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
4Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
5Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
QUOTE
I pointed him that the sabbath breaking is not mentioned by name, even other sins are mentioned.
unholy and profane--those inwardly impure, and those deserving exclusion from the outward participation in services of the sanctuary; sinners against the third and fourth commandments.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871
Profane (Page: 1143)
Pro*fane" (?), a. [F., fr. L. profanus, properly, before the temple, i. e., without the temple, unholy; pro before + fanum temple. See 1st Fane.]
1. Not sacred or holy; not possessing peculiar sanctity; unconsecrated; hence, relating to matters other than sacred; secular; -- opposed to sacred, religious, or inspired; as, a profane place. Profane authors." I. Disraeli.
The profane wreath was suspended before the shrine. Gibbon.
2. Unclean; impure; polluted; unholy.
Nothing is profane that serveth to holy things. Sir W. Raleigh.
3. Treating sacred things with contempt, disrespect, irreverence, or undue familiarity; irreverent; impious. Hence, specifically; Irreverent in language; taking the name of God in vain; given to swearing; blasphemous; as, a profane person, word, oath, or tongue. 1 Tim. i. 9. Syn. -- Secular; temporal; worldly; unsanctified; unhallowed; unholy; irreligious; irreverent; ungodly; wicked; godless; impious. See Impious.
Profane (Page: 1143)
Pro*fane", v. t. [imp. & p. p. Profaned (?); p. pr. & vb. n. Profaning.] [L. profanare: cf. F. profaner. See Profane, a.]
1. To violate, as anything sacred; to treat with abuse, irreverence, obloquy, or contempt; to desecrate; to pollute; as, to profane the name of God; to profane the Scriptures, or the ordinance of God.
The priests in the temple profane the sabbath. Matt. xii. 5.
2. To put to a wrong or unworthy use; to make a base employment of; to debase; to abuse; to defile.
So idly to profane the precious time. Shak.
Webster Dictionary, 1913
Impiety.
N. impiety; sin &c. 945; irreverence; profaneness &c. adj.; profanity, profanation; blasphemy, desecration, sacrilege; scoffing &c.v.
[feigned piety] hypocrisy &c. (falsehood) 544; pietism, cant, pious fraud; lip devotion, lip service, lip reverence; misdevotion[obs3], formalism, austerity; sanctimony, sanctimoniousness &c. adj; pharisaism, hope &c. 858. precisianism[obs3]; sabbatism[obs3], sabbatarianism[obs3]; odium theologicum[Lat], sacerdotalism[obs3]; bigotry &c. (obstinacy) 606, (prejudice) 481; blue laws.
hardening, backsliding, declension, perversion, reprobation.
sinner &c. 949; scoffer, blasphemer; sacrilegist[obs3]; sabbath breaker; worldling; hypocrite &c. (dissembler) 548; Tartufe[obs3], Mawworm[obs3].
bigot; saint [ironically]; Pharisee; sabbatarian[obs3], formalist, methodist, puritan, pietist[obs3], precisian[obs3], religionist, devotee; ranter, fanatic, juramentado[obs3].
the wicked, the evil, the unjust, the reprobate; sons of men, sons of Belial, the wicked one; children of darkness.
V. be impious &c. adj., profane, desecrate, blaspheme, revile, scoff; swear &c. (malediction) 908; commit sacrilege.
snuffle; turn up the whites of the eyes; idolize.
Adj. impious; irreligious &c. 989; desecrating &c.v.; profane, irreverent, sacrilegious, blasphemous.
un-hallowed, un-sanctified, un-regenerate; hardened, perverted, reprobate.
hypocritical &c. (false) 544; canting, pietistical[obs3], sanctimonious, unctuous, pharisaical, overrighteous[obs3], righteous over much.
bigoted, fanatical; priest-ridden.
Adv. under the mask of religion, under the cloak of religion, under the pretense of religion, under the form of religion, under the guise of religion.
Phr. giovane santo diavolo vecchio[It].
10I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet...
Revelation 1:10 (King James Version)
It was the apostle's comfort that he did not suffer as an evil-doer, but for the testimony of Jesus, for bearing witness to Christ as the Immanuel, the Saviour; and the Spirit of glory and of God rested upon this persecuted apostle. The day and time when he had this vision was the Lord's day, the Christian sabbath, the first day of the week, observed in remembrance of the resurrection of Christ. Let us who call him "Our Lord," honour him on his own day. The name shows how this sacred day should be observed; the Lord's day should be wholly devoted to the Lord, and none of its hours employed in a sensual, worldly manner, or in amusements. He was in a serious, heavenly, spiritual frame, under the gracious influences of the Spirit of God. Those who would enjoy communion with God on the Lord's day, must seek to draw their thoughts and affections from earthly things. And if believers are kept on the Lord's holy day, from public ordinances and the communion of saints, by necessity and not by choice, they may look for comfort in meditation and secret duties, from the influences of the Spirit; and by hearing the voice and contemplating the glory of their beloved Saviour, from whose gracious words and power no confinement or outward circumstances can separate them. An alarm was given as with the sound of the trumpet, and then the apostle heard the voice of Christ. (Matthew Henry)
|
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 34
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, April 10, 2006 - 3:03 pm: | |
Thanks, Jeremiah |
|
