The arguments to change our Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday
that you offered are as good as they get in my opinion.
There are yet other arguments to attempt to prove that the
Christian Sabbath is the first day look:
1 Corinthians 16:2 Upon the first day of the week let
every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered
him, that there be no gatherings when I come.
The reasoning behind using this verse is that the wording is
identical to the wording concerning the tithe laws:
as God hath prospered indicates a proportional thinking.
If you have been prospered much then you owe much as in 10%.
Then it is proposed that Tithing has always been an "element"
of true and corporate worship - when looking into the Sabbath
it must be distinguished between personal and private worship
which men are commanded to do always compared to corporate or
group worship which is commanded 1 day in 7 as contrasted to
ordinary "work days" as in 6 days thou shalt work.
The argument against this is that Paul was speaking concerning
something other than the tithe - meaning an offering that would
be given to him to take back to Jerusalem or elsewhere and
that it is mere presumption to assume it to mean the tithe
as well as another argument that proposes that "gathering"
together of the tithe is different than the offering of it.
In any case - there are always arguments against all arguments.
To counter the verse you have just mentioned it is pointed out
that at that time men were "breaking bread" every day:
Acts 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple,
and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat
with gladness and singleness of heart,
So then proving that bread was broken on the first day is yet
Inconclusive because they did so not only on the Sabbath.
Also - Peter and Paul may have healed on a day apart from
the Sabbath as they entered the temple daily - not only on the Sabbath:
Acts 5:42 And daily in the temple, and in every house,
they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.
I keep Sunday - mostly because it makes sense socially.
Not because I can prove beyond doubt that Sunday was kept by
the apostles in that day.
Also - I highly doubt the Sabbath COULD have been changed
prior to 70 AD because of what Christ had said:
Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and
earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass
from the law, till all be fulfilled.
We know that even Paul continued in the Old Covenant but that
the "night was well spent" concerning that Covenant.
Not one thing of the law could pass prior to 70 AD:
Romans 13:12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand:
let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us
put on the armour of light.
You can not have a night that is "well spent" in less than 40 years
and then have the last little portion of night continue
for another 2 thousand years and counting.
Paul properly understood that the Law would remain intact
until all was fulfilled in order to institute the New Covenant
look at the verse just before that one:
11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high
time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation
nearer than when we believed.
Most people James will never be able to explain why Paul said this.
How could it be that they were "saved" and yet their Salvation
was nearer than when they were first converted to faith.
I will tell you - they add to the meaning of the words of Christ - "it is finished":
John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar,
he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
Many sermons have been preached that teach that salvation was completed
at the cross and that the New Covenant was completely inaugurated:
Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath
made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old
is ready to vanish away.
Just as their Salvation was closer so was the Old Covenant
"ready" to vanish away - it had not yet passed away even as Jesus said:
Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law,
or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass,
one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law,
till all be fulfilled.
Not all was fulfilled at the cross - much of what had been predicted
could not be fulfilled until he days of vengeance:
Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance,
that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
It was only after this fulfilling of all prophecy that the New
Covenant was completely instituted and even Jewish people could
forsake the Old Covenant Ceremonial Laws.
That was the problem that caused so much debate and even stumbled Peter.
Should Gentile believers be circumcised?
Why did Paul have a man circumcised after fighting so hard against it.
Did Paul cave into Jewish peer pressures?
1 Corinthians 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised?
let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in
uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
This verse teaches that the Jews remain Jews and the Gentiles
remain as Gentiles but look:
Acts 16:3 Him would Paul have to go forth with him;
and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which
were in those quarters:
for they knew all that his father was a Greek.
The man Paul circumcised was known to have a Greek father but:
Acts 16:1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold,
a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus,
the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess,
and believed; but his father was a Greek:
Because his mother was Jewish - Paul had to have him circumcised
to avoid the debate - is he gentile or is he Jew?
He was raised as a gentile but his blood was still Jewish.
Paul had him circumcised - Paul was not compromising anything
that he had ever taught.
The Jews were bound under the "Order of Aaron" until everything
was fulfilled - then and only then could even a jot or tittle
of that Ceremonial law be changed - moral law never changes.
Now - if you try to say that the Sabbath is moral law - that
never changes - but men argue only the day is changed.
The Sabbath contained within the 10 commandments is all
MORAL LAW
The Sabbaths that are specific to the ceremonial laws after
the order of Aaron are ceremonial - here are a few:
Leviticus 16:27 And the bullock for the sin offering,
and the goat for the sin offering, whose blood was brought
in to make atonement in the holy place, shall one carry
forth without the camp; and they shall burn in the fire
their skins, and their flesh, and their dung.
28 And he that burneth them shall wash his clothes,
and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp.
29 And this shall be a statute for ever unto you:
that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month,
ye shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all,
whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that
sojourneth among you:
30 For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you,
to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins
before the LORD.
31 It shall be a sabbath of rest unto you, and ye shall
afflict your souls, by a statute for ever.
Here is another Ceremonial Sabbath:
Leviticus 23:16 Even unto the morrow after the seventh
sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a
new meat offering unto the LORD
I could go on - these James are what was referred to by Paul here:
Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat,
or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new
moon, or of the sabbath days:
The sabbath days refers not to the weekly but the ceremonial ones.
"New moon and holy day" are distinctly ceremonial even as
the very next verse reveals:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
The Old Covenant Ceremonial law was a Shadow of the New and the
work of Christ - not just at the cross.
Jesus entered into the Holy of Holies made without hands
at the right hand of the Father in heaven - salvation was
perfected until the High Priest returned a second time
to the congregation:
Hebrews 9:23 It was necessary therefore that the
copies of the things in the heavens should be
cleansed with these; but the heavenly things themselves
with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made
with hands, which are the figures of the true;
but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins
of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear
the second time without sin unto salvation.
Christ appeared without sin in 70 AD in a cloud unto salvation
The night was "well spent" but it was not yet spent.
It is not possible James for the Jews to have celebrated a
weekly sabbath that was changed before all things were fulfilled.
It then remains
Did the Gentiles celebrate on Sunday
The gentiles were not under any burden to observe the order of
Aaron except those things they had decided to command in these verses:
Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us,
to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood,
and from things strangled, and from fornication:
from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
31 Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation.
Some maintain that even these commands predated the Order of Aaron
and can be found in Genesis long before Moses - if so I am
at a loss as to why men do not yet observe these things.
I maintain but am open to review that they made a compromise
to help Gentile believers to overcome the horror Jews would suffer
concerning the practice of such thing alongside the Old Covenant Jews:
1 Corinthians 8:12 But when ye sin so against the brethren,
and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
It was mere charity to ask Gentiles to observe any part of the Old Covenant.
Paul was not accused of teaching Gentiles to forsake the Covenant
but rather Jews - look:
Acts 21:21 And they are informed of thee, that thou
teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses,
saying that they ought not to circumcise their children,
neither to walk after the customs.
Paul NEVER EVER taught the Jews the Old Covenant had ended for them.
It would not end until Christ proved it over when He destroyed the
temple at the second coming when He returned and finish
the work of salvation and completely fulfilled the Old Covenant
pattern returning from the Holy of Holies at the Right hand of the Father
look also:
Acts 25:8 While he answered for himself,
Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple,
nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.
Paul performed animal sacrifices after the cross being a Jew.
James - only this view reveals that Paul was not a compromiser
in these verses:
21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all
the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses,
saying that they ought not to circumcise their children,
neither to walk after the customs.
22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come
together: for they will hear that thou art come.
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee:
We have four men which have a vow on them;
( Old Jewish Covenant- BV)
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at
charges with them, that they may shave their heads:
and all may know that those things, whereof they were
informed concerning thee, are nothing;
but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
(the law spoken of here is Old Covenant ceremonial law
under Aaron spoken of as the "law of Moses" by the common Jew)
25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written
and concluded that they observe no such thing,
(Gentiles not commanded by God to serve under Mosaic ceremonial law)
save only that they keep themselves from things offered
to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying
himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the
accomplishment of the days of purification,
until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.
Paul is not denying the sacrifice of Christ by continuing to
observe things that yet pointed to His Cross
but rather is in perfect compliance with what Christ had said
that not one jot or tittle would be removed until He had
finished that work and completed their salvation.
If Gentiles observed a different day than the Jews - would that
not have divided the church of that day?
It seems most preposterous to suggest that Paul would have
ever entertained any idea of forcing Gentiles to observe
shadows and types that were "ready to pass away" and to also
make a different day to worship that the Jews themselves would observe.
It is sometimes put forth that the Jews continued to observe
under Aaron on Saturday while they enjoyed another Sabbath
under Melchizedek
Psalms 110:4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent,
Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
that does not work - what becomes of the other portion of the
Moral and perpetual Sabbath:
Exodus 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
To make 2 days Sabbaths breaks the law itself.
Any view of the day of rest must also contain the concept
of working 6 days - the day must differ in this respect.
Working day VRS. Non-working day
I find any attempt to prove that Christ instituted a different
day for Gentile believers to celebrate on to be futile scripturally.
Remember that in Gentile lands - most churches contained both
Jews and Gentiles - only in Israel were Jews who continued
as they should have to keep the Old Covenant law separated
from their gentile brothers.
Exclusively Christian gatherings in homes were enjoyed by mixed company:
Acts 21:28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man,
that teacheth all men every where against the people,
and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks
also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.
Gentiles were not only not commanded to keep the temple laws
but they were forbidden - Paul never took Greeks into the temple.
The man he had circumcised as a Jew was likely left outside as a Gentile.
29 (For they had seen before with him in the city Trophimus an
Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)
In any case –
I keep Sunday because I recognize that the Sabbath is kept both
"corporately and socially" in a land.
It is common for men to serve on Sunday in Canada.
WE MUST KEEP THIS IN MIND
2 Corinthians 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of
the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit:
for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
We recognize that Christ has given to us a moral code contained
within the 10 commandments.
Men who say that 9 of them are moral and yet 1 of them
is ceremonial make fools of themselves publicly.
They are the moral law - that was to be applied under all
dispensations to all generations.
It will never be right to break any of them - including the 4th.
However - the Sabbath being made for us - in that Christ plainly
teaches it is God's gift to us - we need not burden it with
legalities that serve no end.
I think it only adds to confusion and feeds those who oppose it
to attempt to make it compulsory to keep it on Saturday.
Even our days are tainted with the names of gods that are no gods.
Saturn's day and Sun day are remnants of Greek gods who are no gods.
I may be wrong - I make no issue as do the 7th day fellows
over opposing those who keep Sunday as the Sabbath.
Rather - I rejoice that in this godless and lawless age
that Christians acknowledge and keep the day regardless
of the tradition that has changed the day to Saturn's day.
I would rather focus on the unity we have in keeping it
that the disunity we have concerning the day it should be kept.
God bless you James - yes I am moving to China.
Brian |
