Does the day of Christ ressurection tell us to worship on Sunday?

[Kathryn]

That still doesn't get you to "three days and three nights".

- Day 1: Friday
- Night 1: Friday sunset to Saturday sunrise
- Day 2: Saturday
- Night 2: Saturday sunset to Sunday sunrise

And the tomb was found empty at dawn on Sunday. Even counting a part as a whole, you have two days and two nights, not three days and three nights.

Edit: even if you say that they found the tomb empty slightly later than dawn (and allow for the possibility that Jesus was in the tomb for a few minutes on Sunday and count this as a whole day), that still only brings you up to 3 days and 2 nights; it still falls short of Jesus' prophecy.

How Long Was Jesus in the Tomb?

BY WAYNE JACKSON
“Christ predicted that he would be raised from the dead ‘the third day’ (Mt. 16:21). However, he also declared that he would rise ‘after three days’ (Mk. 8:31). To complicate the seeming difficulty, Jesus further stated that he would be in the grave ‘three days and three nights’ (Mt. 12:40). These references, which some see as disharmonious, puzzle sincere Bible students. What is the explanation?”
The solution lies in understanding how the Jews measured time. According to a common Hebrew idiom, any part of a day could be counted as the whole day and night.1 There are many examples of such usage in the Scriptures.
The rain of the flood was upon the earth “forty days and forty nights,” or, simply “forty days” (Gen. 7:12, 17).
In 1 Samuel 30:12-13, the expressions “three days and three nights” and “three days” are equivalent to one another.
When Israel asked Rehoboam to lighten its burdens, he said: “Depart ye for three days, then come again to me.” The context subsequently says that they returned on “the third day” (1 Kgs. 12:5,12).
When Esther was about to risk entrance into the king’s presence, she requested her fellow Jews to neither “eat nor drink three days, night or day,” but on “the third day,” she went in unto the king (Esth. 4:16; 5:1).
Finally, note this. The Pharisees said to Pilate, "This deceiver said while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. Command therefore, that the sepulcher be made sure until the third day (Mt. 27:63-64).
Clearly there was flexibility in the Hebrew mode of expressing time.
One must understand, therefore, how the Israelite people spoke of time.
How Long Was Jesus in the Tomb? : ChristianCourier.com


How long was Jesus dead in the tomb? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by Kathryn
It was the custom during that time to count each portion of a day as a day. For instance, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.

That still doesn't get you to "three days and three nights".

As Katryn posted, it fulfills the prophecy as Jesus was referring to Jonah.
Friday day(portion) (Days as understood, NOT hours.)
Saturday(night and day portions)
Sunday(Night portion)
It is, also, in agreement with the context of the four Gospels.

 

[sojourner]

Hi sojourner, The same "excuse" can be used for any disobedience. In fact, didn't Eve "see that the "tree" was good fo food, "pleasant to the eyes", "and a tree desired to make one wise"????
For many years, I attended church(several) on Sunday and the reason given for Sunday observance was---Jesus arose on that day.

The Israelites looked upon the "serpent of brass" to be healed from being snake bit; then they began to worship that "image". I had to be destroyed because it became a replacement for the True GOD.
The day upon which Jesus Christ arose, was given the status of the Seventh day Sabbath and Eusebius admits of the change to Sunday and Constantine gave legal(governmental) sanction to the fact in his decree to change it(March 7, A.D. 321). That's all history---and on the authority of man----NOT GOD.

That doesn't answer my question of how celebrating the resurrection is, in any way disobedient. Your reasoning is basically that, because the Bible doesn't say to celebrate the resurrection, we ought not to do it. So I suppose that, because the bible doesn't say to evangelize via TV, we ought not to do it? Because the Bible doesn't say to us electronic sound reinforcement during our services, we ought not to do it? That's messed up!

The "Remember the Sabbath" is GOD's Authority. Any change is "disobedience".

Oh? How? By virtue of it's being in the Bible? You do realize that human beings (with agendas, I might add) wrote the Bible? Perhaps you'd like to argue that, because it's in the bible, the earth is a flat disc -- period?

The convolution isn't by me, but by those who have been in tune to their own "continual evil imaginations" for the last 4500 years.

Sooo... you're blaming others for your interpretations? wonderful!

"peer reviewed"??? Who are "peers"? They are "like-minded"--"equals"--The "bias" doesn't have to be with "one individual", but with the group.

Nope. In fact, even those peers who disagree with a certain exegetical claim usually agree that the "other side" making the claim has come to a responsible conclusion. Because responsible exegetes understand what you, apparently, do not: That the texts are multivalent.

Correct! The prophecy was "think to change times and laws". In reality, those who have made "decrees and traditions---made by man" have "thought" and "the believing persons of such thinking" are the ones who are deceived into being on that "broad way"

All -- repeat, all decrees and traditions are "made by man."

Jesus isn't going to and I can't produce the stone tablets.

Then you have no case.

As Jesus said to Thomas, John 20:27-29, "Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust [it] into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.[/u ]"

We both know that this passage has nothing to do with my request.

Jesus/and the Scriptures have given "examples" enough for one to "believe" or "deny HIM". Now, the choice is in the control of the individual.

I'm not questioning the validity of Jesus. I'm questioning the validity of your claim.

NO, as you said, """I'm not responsible for what other people do.""", BUT you are responsible for your own decisions/Beliefs.

Then, because you have no responsibility for what I do, you also have no authority to call what I do into question.

Therefore, Is it the "group's thinking" or by the correct Scripture giving correct understanding to Scripture that determines beliefs??

The scripture is only "correct" and "correctly understood" (again), when it is responsibly exegeted. The "we" indicates those who either responsibly exegete, and/or apply that exegesis to the texts in question. The bible does not stand alone. it requires interpretation. By human beings.

 

[james2ko]

How Long Was Jesus in the Tomb? “Christ predicted that he would be raised from the dead ‘the third day’ (Mt. 16:21). However, he also declared that he would rise ‘after three days’ (Mk. 8:31). To complicate the seeming difficulty, Jesus further stated that he would be in the grave ‘three days and three nights’ (Mt. 12:40). These references, which some see as disharmonious, puzzle sincere Bible students. What is the explanation?” The solution lies in understanding how the Jews measured time. According to a common Hebrew idiom, any part of a day could be counted as the whole day and night.1 There are many examples of such usage in the Scriptures. The rain of the flood was upon the earth “forty days and forty nights,” or, simply “forty days” (Gen. 7:12, 17). In 1 Samuel 30:12-13, the expressions “three days and three nights” and “three days” are equivalent to one another.

1. So if they are equivalent to one another this means they are both the same length of time. How can one reckon a Friday to Sunday crucifixion and resurrection???? After all, Christ said He would be in the grave three days and three nights (which sincerely agreed was a 72 hr period) and other scriptures say He would rise the third day?

When Israel asked Rehoboam to lighten its burdens, he said: “Depart ye for three days, then come again to me.” The context subsequently says that they returned on “the third day” (1 Kgs. 12:5,12).

2. I Kings 12 : 5, "Depart yet for three days, then come again unto me." The story continues with verse 12: "So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam the third day, as the king had appointed, saying, Come to me again the third day." The people left "for three days" and did not return until "after three days" - "as the king had appointed." Let us suppose they had first met the king sometime on Friday. As they were ordered to return at the end of three days, they could not have returned before the same time of day the following Monday. Now was Monday "the third day" from the day they had originally met with the King?

The first day from that Friday was Saturday; the second day from that Friday was Sunday; and the third day was Monday - exactly the time the king expected them to return. Monday, not Sunday, was the third day from Friday. Notice how the Bible counts from one period of time to another. Notice Nehemiah 5:14: "...I was appointed to be their governor in the land of Judah, from the twentieth year even unto the two and thirtieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that is TWELVE YEARS ..." Notice that from the 20th year to the 32nd year is TWELVE YEARS, not thirteen years. Similarly, the third day from a Friday is a Monday, not a Sunday!

When Esther was about to risk entrance into the king’s presence, she requested her fellow Jews to neither “eat nor drink three days, night or day,” but on “the third day,” she went in unto the king (Esth. 4:16; 5:1).

3. Does this imply that "three days and three nights" means only one day and two nights or some other variation? Suppose Queen Esther had requested the Jews late Friday evening, shortly before sunset, to fast. The first day of their fast would have been Saturday; the second day would have been Sunday; and on the third day --Monday-- the Queen would have entered the king’s palace. Isn't that plain and simple? The Jews did not fast parts of three days, but three days, night and day! Notice that in each of these examples, three days means three days, not parts of three days or only a day and one-half. There is no exception! After three days does not mean after one and a half days. It means after three days!

Finally, note this. The Pharisees said to Pilate, "This deceiver said while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. Command therefore, that the sepulcher be made sure until the third day (Mt. 27:63-64). Clearly there was flexibility in the Hebrew mode of expressing time.[/b One must understand, therefore, how the Israelite people spoke of time.

4. Wait a sec. Didn't he say in point 1 above that both terms-- three days and three nights and three days-- are equivalent? But now the term is flexible?

 

[Catholicjeff]

The original command to observe the Sabbath was linked to the Creation story that we find in Genesis 1 (cf. Exodus 20). We also find it linked to the deliverance from bondage in Deuteronomy 5. When Jesus the Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week, we now find our day of rest being linked to a new creation and a new deliverance from bondage.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The original command to observe the Sabbath was linked to the Creation story that we find in Genesis 1 (cf. Exodus 20). We also find it linked to the deliverance from bondage in Deuteronomy 5. When Jesus the Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week, we now find our day of rest being linked to a new creation and a new deliverance from bondage.

Where in Genesis is there a command to keep a Sabbath day ?

It was not until Moses time that provided a special set of laws that included a whole system of rest days [Sabbaths] set aside for worship. From sunset Friday til Saturday sunset besides the 7-year Sabbaths, Jubilee-year Sabbaths, Nisan 14, etc. -Exodus 20 vs 8-10; Deut. 5 v 14; 15 vs 1,2,12

That temporary Constitution of the Mosaic law was temporary for the Jews.
The Sabbath day came to an end at Jesus' death. - Romans 10 v 4.

Command for a weekly Sabbath was Not included among necessary things.
Romans 14 v 5; Acts 15 vs 28,29.

Galatians [4 vs 9-11] shows Not to put emphasis on observing or going back to the elementary things or the bondage of the Mosaic law.

 

[sincerly]

1. So if they are equivalent to one another this means they are both the same length of time. How can one reckon a Friday to Sunday crucifixion and resurrection???? After all, Christ said He would be in the grave three days and three nights (which sincerely agreed was a 72 hr period) and other scriptures say He would rise the third day?

James, You are misquoting me. The context of the four Gospels is that Jesus was placed in the tomb on Friday (preparation day---the sixth day of the week). The LORD was in the tomb all of the seventh day Sabbath and arose the third day before sun-up)the first day of the week(Sunday). -----NOT a 72 hour period.

 

[james2ko]

James, You are misquoting me. The context of the four Gospels is that Jesus was placed in the tomb on Friday (preparation day---the sixth day of the week). The LORD was in the tomb all of the seventh day Sabbath and arose the third day before sun-up)the first day of the week(Sunday). -----NOT a 72 hour period.

James, it is not known when Jonah was tossed into the sea and the "fish" swallowed him; neither is it recorded at what time he was placed on dry land. Yes, three whole days and nights do have 72 hours, but the unrecorded times are unknown. Therefore, definition 2a is appropriate----and is in agreement with the scriptural account.

here's the post where I retrieved your quote:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2886635-post91.html

You agree three days and three nights equals 72 hrs but you don't agree Christ really meant what He said when He stated He would be in the grave three days and three nights? It sounds like tradition has taken center stage over proper exegesis.

 

[Catholicjeff]

Where in Genesis is there a command to keep a Sabbath day?

Please, note: I never said there was a command to keep a Sabbath day in Genesis. I was pointing out that the command given in Exodus 20 was linked to the Creation story found in the first chapter of Genesis. "Remember to keep holy the sabbath day. Six days you may labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord, your God. No work may be done then either by you, or your son or daughter, or your male or female slave, or your beast, or by the alien who lives with you. In six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them; but on the seventh day he rested. That is why the LORD has blessed the sabbath day and made it holy." (vv. 8-11)

 

[Catholicjeff]

The Sabbath day came to an end at Jesus' death. - Romans 10 v 4.

Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill..." (Matthew 5:17) So, I have to disagree with your comment. Even the verse you made reference to points to Jesus being the fulfillment of the law, not its destroyer: "For Christ is the end of the law for the justification of everyone who has faith." Therefore, I think the question to be asked is, In what way did Jesus fulfill the Sabbath commandment? In my estimation, Jesus is our Sabbath rest, in whom we may truly find rest.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill..." (Matthew 5:17) So, I have to disagree with your comment.

You do?

But aren't you arguing that Jesus abolished the portion of the law that said, effectively, "rest on Saturday" and replace it with something new that says "rest on Sunday"?

I can understand the argument behind saying Saturday is an obligatory day of rest. I can understand the argument behind saying that there is no longer an obligatory day of rest at all. What I can't understand is the argument behind saying that Sunday, not Saturday, is now an obligatory day of rest.

You say that the law wasn't abolished? Fair enough, but that law says "the seventh day", not "the first day".

 

[Catholicjeff]

You do?

But aren't you arguing that Jesus abolished the portion of the law that said, effectively, "rest on Saturday" and replace it with something new that says "rest on Sunday"?

I can understand the argument behind saying Saturday is an obligatory day of rest. I can understand the argument behind saying that there is no longer an obligatory day of rest at all. What I can't understand is the argument behind saying that Sunday, not Saturday, is now an obligatory day of rest.

You say that the law wasn't abolished? Fair enough, but that law says "the seventh day", not "the first day".

That is true. The Law says "the seventh day". However, in my first post I pointed out that the reason for observing a day of rest that is given in Exodus 20 is because God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. The reason that is given in Deuteronomy 5 is that God delivered the Israelites from bondage in Egypt. When Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week, he brought with that Resurrection both a new creation and a new deliverance from bondage. All I am saying is that nothing has changed in the fact that the reason for observing a day of rest is still linked to a creation and a deliverance from bondage.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is true. The Law says "the seventh day".

So Saturday.

However, in my first post I pointed out that the reason for observing a day of rest that is given in Exodus 20 is because God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh.

Right... Saturday.

The reason that is given in Deuteronomy 5 is that God delivered the Israelites from bondage in Egypt.

... on Saturday.

When Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week, he brought with that Resurrection both a new creation and a new deliverance from bondage.

Does that mean that it's no longer true that God rested on the seventh day or delivered the Israelites from bondage in Egypt?

All I am saying is that nothing has changed in the fact that the reason for observing a day of rest is still linked to a creation and a deliverance from bondage.

And all I'm saying is that the Third Commandment (or Fourth for the Protestants) says "the seventh day" specifically. It's all fine and good if you think that the Resurrection means that you should make Sunday a day of rest (though I'd ask you to tell us how that actually works - AFAIK, there's nothing in the New Testament where God says "start worshipping on Sunday now because of the Resurrection"), but I don't think it works for you to appeal to the Third Commandment as your reason for worshipping on Sunday.

If Jesus' Resurrection implies that Christians should worship on Sunday AND the Old Law hasn't been abolished, then it seems to me that the result of all this would be that Christians should have TWO obligatory days of worship every week: Saturday to honour the Old Law AND Sunday to honour Christ.

What doesn't work is to argue, effectively, that because of Jesus, seven equals one.

 

[sincerly]

here's the post where I retrieved your quote:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2886635-post91.html

You agree three days and three nights equals 72 hrs but you don't agree Christ really meant what He said when He stated He would be in the grave three days and three nights? It sounds like tradition has taken center stage over proper exegesis.

Originally Posted by sincerly
James, it is not known when Jonah was tossed into the sea and the "fish" swallowed him; neither is it recorded at what time he was placed on dry land. Yes, three whole days and nights do have 72 hours, but the unrecorded times are unknown. Therefore, definition 2a is appropriate----and is in agreement with the scriptural account.

James, You failed to see and understand(exegete) that "BUT".. The facts of the recorded actions do not compute to 72 hours; nor do the written records of those events that Passover period negate a Sunday (First day of the week) resurrection prior to the rising of the sun( dawn). "IT IS WRITTEN".

 

[sincerly]

That doesn't answer my question of how celebrating the resurrection is, in any way disobedient. Your reasoning is basically that, because the Bible doesn't say to celebrate the resurrection, we ought not to do it. So I suppose that, because the bible doesn't say to evangelize via TV, we ought not to do it? Because the Bible doesn't say to us electronic sound reinforcement during our services, we ought not to do it? That's messed up!

Sojourner, have you negated the Decalogue(Ten Commandments)?? The breaking of one is the breaking of them all.(James 2:10)

"celebrating/acknowledging" that Jesus Chrst arose on the First day of the week is one thing. However, when one substitutes/replaces that day for the day to "worship" the Creator GOD then one is being disobedient to the Creator GOD.
HIS wording on those tablets of Stone which were witnessed by the People at the foot of Sinai---by Hearing the oral voice of GOD speak those laws and then had the opportunity to see the Tablets (twice).
Those people knew the difference between the first day of the week and the seventh day Sabbath----- For forty years they were reminded by the absence of "manna" each and every seventh day Sabbath.

The "Remember the Sabbath" is GOD's Authority. Any change is "disobedience".

Oh? How? By virtue of it's being in the Bible? You do realize that human beings (with agendas, I might add) wrote the Bible? Perhaps you'd like to argue that, because it's in the bible, the earth is a flat disc -- period?

Above. Are you denying that it was the HOLY SPIRIT who gave the instructions to holy and obedient prophets to disclose GOD'S instruction/information to the people?? Yes, those holy prophets were giving the agenda of GOD to the people-----and in most instances to warn them to repent and return from "disobedience."
The Bible does not state "that the earth is a flat disc".

The convolution isn't by me, but by those who have been in tune to their own "continual evil imaginations" for the last 4500 years.

Sooo... you're blaming others for your interpretations? wonderful!

This bit of exegesis by you concerning my above answer actually proves my point. Thanks.

Nope. In fact, even those peers who disagree with a certain exegetical claim usually agree that the "other side" making the claim has come to a responsible conclusion. Because responsible exegetes understand what you, apparently, do not: That the texts are multivalent.

I understand what valency means in chemistry, but the principles of GOD as given in the Scriptures retaines the same principle meaning everywhere in scripture. GOD isn't the author of confusion. HIS principles retain their same validity.

All -- repeat, all decrees and traditions are "made by man."

Only in the sense that HIS/GOD'S are presented to the recipients by GOD through the prophets.
Otherwise, yes, and those are "secularly" given and understood as such.

Then you have no case.

Wrong! Truth comes from/through the witness of the Scriptures. as Jesus said in John 5:45-47, "Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is [one] that accuseth you, [even] Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (see Luke 24:27, 44-48.)

Quote=sincerly; Prev.) "As Jesus said to Thomas, John 20:27-29, "Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust [it] into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.[/U]"
As Jesus said to Thomas, John 20:27-29, "Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust [it] into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed."

We both know that this passage has nothing to do with my request.

But, It does. The "witness" of the scriptures is being "doubted" by you---and your "request"--to produce the stone tablets which GOD wrote with HIS finger.

Then, because you have no responsibility for what I do, you also have no authority to call what I do into question.

Just as GOD sent the Holy Spirit to enlighten the people who were believing falsely/contrarily to HIS expressed instructions, Jesus gave commandment to "Go and tell the whatsoever I have told you"---Which was recorded to be given to us for that purpose. (A witness---for or a denial of.)

The scripture is only "correct" and "correctly understood" (again), when it is responsibly exegeted. The "we" indicates those who either responsibly exegete, and/or apply that exegesis to the texts in question. The bible does not stand alone. it requires interpretation. By human beings.

The principles of the Scriptures are clear when "Scripture interpretes Scripture". It is man's inserted traditions and decrees made which are contrary to the Principles given by GOD which are false.
That is why Paul praised the Bereans, Acts 17:11,"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so".

Your """it requires interpretation. By human beings.""" is contrary in that one is "leaning upon one's own understanding/(interpretation)".

 

[james2ko]

Originally Posted by sincerly
James, it is not known when Jonah was tossed into the sea and the "fish" swallowed him; neither is it recorded at what time he was placed on dry land. Yes, three whole days and nights do have 72 hours, but the unrecorded times are unknown. Therefore, definition 2a is appropriate----and is in agreement with the scriptural account.

James, You failed to see and understand(exegete) that "BUT".. The facts of the recorded actions do not compute to 72 hours; nor do the written records of those events that Passover period negate a Sunday (First day of the week) resurrection prior to the rising of the sun( dawn). "IT IS WRITTEN".

You continue to rehash your illogical premise. The overwhelming evidence I've presented in this thread and this one speaks for itself and there's more. But I'll stop for now as I see you are struggling with what has already been presented. Carry on with your Friday to Sunday Easter tradition. But just remember, you cannot claim ignorance in the judgment.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill..." (Matthew 5:17) So, I have to disagree with your comment. Even the verse you made reference to points to Jesus being the fulfillment of the law, not its destroyer: "For Christ is the end of the law for the justification of everyone who has faith." Therefore, I think the question to be asked is, In what way did Jesus fulfill the Sabbath commandment? In my estimation, Jesus is our Sabbath rest, in whom we may truly find rest.

In 'Jesus being our Sabbath rest, in whom we may truly find rest' would mean the temporary Mosaic law Sabbath is Not binding on Christians.
Jesus fulfilled all of the Constitution of the Mosaic law binding on the Jews.
Do you keep on the Sabbath the law as found at Numbers 28 vs 9,10?_____

Jesus being a Jew under law observed Jewish law.-Matthew 12 v 12
At Jesus death Christ became the 'end' of that Jewish law. - Rom 10 v 4
That would mean being 'discharged' or 'set free' from that Jewish law.
- Rom 7 v 6
That would include all of that Jewish law taken completely out of the way. 'void'-
-Eph. 2 vs 13-15; Col. 2 vs 13,14
'All' taken away would be including the 'whole system of Sabbaths' whether it be the days or years.- Rom 14 vs 4-6; Col. 2 v 16
A 'system' would be more than just one day but a system of days.
For example: When 'two Sabbaths' would fall on the same 24-hour period it was distinguished by being called a Great Sabbath [Solemn] such as Nisan 15 when it coincided with the regular Sabbath day.-John 19 v 31.
Scrupulously observing 'days' months, seasons, years was No longer in effect.
-Gal. 4 vs 10,11
Did Jesus apostles at any time command a Sabbath observance?
Rather it was not until the time of Constantine who decreed Sunday a day of rest for all except farmers.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Please, note: I never said there was a command to keep a Sabbath day in Genesis. I was pointing out that the command given in Exodus 20 was linked to the Creation story found in the first chapter of Genesis. "Remember to keep holy the sabbath day. Six days you may labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord, your God. No work may be done then either by you, or your son or daughter, or your male or female slave, or your beast, or by the alien who lives with you. In six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them; but on the seventh day he rested. That is why the LORD has blessed the sabbath day and made it holy." (vv. 8-11)

How many 'Christian' people do you know go to work on the Sabbath?
If they go to their jobs on the Sabbath, should they be excommunicated for working on the Sabbath?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

That is true. The Law says "the seventh day". However, in my first post I pointed out that the reason for observing a day of rest that is given in Exodus 20 is because God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. The reason that is given in Deuteronomy 5 is that God delivered the Israelites from bondage in Egypt. When Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week, he brought with that Resurrection both a new creation and a new deliverance from bondage. All I am saying is that nothing has changed in the fact that the reason for observing a day of rest is still linked to a creation and a deliverance from bondage.

God rested from his 'creative works' on his 7th rest day which is still ongoing today as it was on going in the apostle Paul's day. -Hebrews 4 vs 4-10

Resting from creative works [creating] does not mean in connection to stopping or resting from all works.
Just as Jesus said that his Father works and so does Jesus.
-John 5 v 17; 6 vs 27-29

While on Earth didn't Jesus refer to himself as Lord of the Sabbath?
-Matt. 12 v 8
The literal Jewish Sabbath day was just a 'shadow of things to come'.
-Col. 2 vs 16,17
A 'shadow' is not the real thing but a substance of something.
In connection with 'things to come' [future] there is a Sabbath in which Jesus is said to be 'Lord'. As 'Lord of Lords' Jesus will rule all earth for a 1000 years.
- Rev. 19 v16; 20 v 6
During Jesus time on earth, didn't Jesus perform some of his most outstanding powerful works on the Sabbath?
-Luke 13 vs10-13; John 5 vs 5-9; 9 vs 1-14
Those Sabbath works were showing us on a sample small scale just what Jesus will be doing [future] on a LARGE or GRAND scale, when Jesus brings mankind to spiritual and physical healthy human perfection of having a perfectly healthy sound heart, mind and body during his coming messianic 1000-year reign over earth, or earthly subjects of God's kingdom, which will be like a period [millennial] Sabbath rest for both earth and mankind.
-Psalm 72 v 8

 

[sojourner]

"celebrating/acknowledging" that Jesus Chrst arose on the First day of the week is one thing. However, when one substitutes/replaces that day for the day to "worship" the Creator GOD then one is being disobedient to the Creator GOD.

"Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." Doesn't mention worship. it does mention "remembering." (BTW, the word "worship" implies that work is being done. Worship is a shape of events in which transformation takes place. The Greek word for worship is leiturgia: The work of the people. Doesn't sound like we should be worshiping on the Sabbath, if we're to do no work.)

Are you denying that it was the HOLY SPIRIT who gave the instructions to holy and obedient prophets to disclose GOD'S instruction/information to the people??

Yes.

The Bible does not state "that the earth is a flat disc".

It does. And it further states that the sky is a rigid dome, upon which are fixed the sun, moon, and stars -- and that the dome turns around the earth, making the sun and moon and stars appear to move.

I understand what valency means in chemistry, but the principles of GOD as given in the Scriptures retaines the same principle meaning everywhere in scripture. GOD isn't the author of confusion. HIS principles retain their same validity.

No, but we are. And different people understand things differently. The bible has not lasted because it is true, but because it is able to support multiple meanings.

Only in the sense that HIS/GOD'S are presented to the recipients by GOD through the prophets.

Even the prophets were human. Even Jesus was human.

Truth comes from/through the witness of the Scriptures.

...which come from human beings with agendas.
Again: Show me the tablets.

But, It does. The "witness" of the scriptures is being "doubted" by you

No -- it's your interpretation of the texts that I doubt.

and your "request"--to produce the stone tablets which GOD wrote with HIS finger.

You're the one insisting that such actually exists. I'm asking you to produce it.
I don't doubt the truths contained in the metaphor. I doubt the reality of the metaphor.

Just as GOD sent the Holy Spirit to enlighten the people who were believing falsely/contrarily to HIS expressed instructions, Jesus gave commandment to "Go and tell the whatsoever I have told you"---Which was recorded to be given to us for that purpose. (A witness---for or a denial of.)

Yeah, but you're not doing that. You're not an apostle.

The principles of the Scriptures are clear when "Scripture interpretes Scripture".

the scripture was written in ancient Hebrew and Greek. Do you read those? Somebody has to translate and interpret, so that those funny characters make sense to us.

It is man's inserted traditions and decrees made which are contrary to the Principles given by GOD which are false.

The texts are man's traditions and decrees.

"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so".

"They" also spoke the language and were less than 30 years removed from the events described.

Your """it requires interpretation. By human beings.""" is contrary in that one is "leaning upon one's own understanding/(interpretation)".

Soo... we don't have to come to an understanding of the texts? We're just supposed to look at funny, foreign characters, without vowels, punctuation, or even separation between words, and magically glean meaning from them?