|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
Ted's Sabbath
Subject: Re. Sabbath
Date: Fri., 15 May 1998 06:51:37 -0500
From: Mahlon <bible@tk7.net>
To: Ted Noel <tednoel@iag.net>Dear Ted,
Thank you for your reply. I am fully aware that whatever I respond to in the following reply will not change your position on Sabbath keeping. Therefore I will not take the position of wanting to argue with you. However I do want to respond to several comments that you have made. Scroll down through what you wrote to me, and you will notice an "M" in front of my response to your comments.In Christian Love, Mahlon
Ted Noel wrote:
Dear Mahlon,
After reviewing your essay "The Seventh Day", I feel that I must review several salient errors because they lead to an incorrect understanding of the Sabbath. You state that the Sabbath began at Sinai. If you will review Genesis 2:3, you will find that God created the Sabbath day in Eden before the fall.
(M)... This is simply not true! You have failed to see this major point that I made in the first few pages of my booklet. I also made this very important point in my "Letters Regarding the Sabbath Question". I take it that you have read this document. If you have, review it again because I ask this question, (and will also ask you the same question). Where does it state that the Sabbath day was created in Eden on the seventh day of creation? Ted, you must answer this question, because this is your only basis and proof for Sabbath keeping. All the theological twisting and turning that you people try to do to put, what is know as the "Sabbath day", in the garden of Eden will not work. I maintain that what is known as the "Sabbath day" was not in existence until Moses, which was a law of God imposed on the nation of Israel that represented God also "resting". This is a biblical fact!
This is confirmed in Hebrews 4:4, Where Paul quotes Genesis 2:3 in his argument for the Sabbath. You also state that the Sabbath does not appear prior to the tables of stone at Sinai. This is incorrect. Exodus 16:4 gives a different picture.
4 Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no. Ex 16:4 KJV
In this story, which appears before the tables of stone, God grant manna to the children of Israel on a weekly cycle with a Sabbath rest. This is given as a test to determine whether the people are observing God's law. Such a test cannot exist until they law exists.
(M)... You made the point very well in the importance of Israel being "tested" in observing the Sabbath on the "seventh day". However your premise is that this law existed prior to Moses, which is simply an assumption on your part, and is frivolous and also biblically incorrect.
Also, as Paul points out, there is no sin without the law, so there could be no fall without the law. The only possible conclusion from the facts is that the law existed before the fall, and that that the Israelites knew the law before they were given the law in written form. What then should we concern ourselves with about the future of the law. We may now turn to Ezekiel 20. The we find in verses 12 and 20 God's statement that the Sabbath is a permanent sign that the people recognized that God sanctifies them. Notice that this does not have anything whatever to do with the covenant.
(M)... If you will check Exod. 34:28 and Deut. 4:13 you will notice that the ten commandments (including the Sabbath) were the covenant. You are not being honest with the Bible!
We may also progress to Isaiah Chapter 66 where we find that the Sabbath is listed in verse 23 as being observed in heaven.
(M)... This scripture does not necessarily mean the Sabbath is observed in heaven. The point is, it could not be observed according to the laws of Moses.
We cannot use any allegorical way of looking at a seventh day of creation as some long period, because as we look at the text of the fourth commandment, it explicitly says in that this Sabbath is the seventh day of the week.
(M)... Again I remind you to be honest with the Bible! No, it does not say that the Sabbath is "seventh day of the week". The "seventh day" according to the fourth commandment is simply the day following the "sixth day". Where is logic and common sense anymore? The reason the importance of the seventh day is stressed is because this "showed" that God also "rested". It was a law that pointed toward the "Rest" of God.
It does not use the word week, but the implication cannot be missed. The word for "Day" is the same in both places, and the construction is the same in both places. Genesis gives explicit form to a 24 hour day by referring to evenings and morning. Exodus refers to days in the natural sense by referring to six days of work and one day of rest.
This brings to mind your second point regarding the Jewish calendar. In this I will discuss two issues. The first issue is the three hundred sixty day year. You state that the Jews had a three hundred sixty day year based on Daniel 7:24 and its repetitions in Revelation. While your arithmetic is correct, your understanding does not exist. (See http://www.iag.net/~tednoel/d_prem_3.htm) There are several very good sites on the web which will allow you to review the Jewish calendar. The Jews maintained a solar year and never had a three hundred sixty day year. The year that the Jews observed ranged from three hundred fifty-three to three hundred eighty five days. They operated on a 19 year cycle with 7 leap years created by the addition of a thirteenth month. While your concern about a three hundred sixty day year failing to coincide with the solar year is valid, the Jews knew about it and fixed it.
(M)... If you will read my article again I never mention anything about a "Jewish calendar". I only show by prophecy where a biblical year means 360 days. Your interpretation of the Jewish calendar might be correct, but your understanding does not exist (as you so rudely accused me). I choose to believe the example that the Bible talks about.
Your second error comes from a further a misunderstanding of the Jewish calendar. You state that that Jews would shift the Sabbath day based on that the occurrence of feast days. You have the issue reversed.
(M)... No, you have it reversed. You keep misquoting me. I never stated that the Jews would shift the Sabbath day. Again, you might be correct on the "Jewish calendar", but your understanding of who the Jews are is not correct. My booklet speaks for itself, and please read it again. The holy days were scheduled to fall on certain days of the month according to the law. Again, please be honest with the Bible.
If you examine the way the Jewish calendar operates, you will find that the feast days are adjusted by adjusting the length of various months in order to avoid having them fall on specific "Impossible" days. As I said before, please investigate the Jewish calendar. There are several excellent web pages that you can use.
(M)... I would rather investigate the biblical example (as you should also).
You continually link the Sabbath with the old covenant. As I have shown the Sabbath existed in Eden long before there was any covenant, much less an old one or any of the multitudinous variations.
(M)... You continually link the "Jewish calendar" with the old covenant. May I respectfully remind you that you did not show that the Sabbath existed in Eden. That is plainly an assumption on your part.
The old covenant which you are so concerned with clearly did begin and end up across. That is prophesied in Daniel 9:27. However, we must not confuse the sacrificial system with the Sabbath which did existed long before the sacrificial system.
(M)... I am confused what you mean by "begin and end up across". I believe it is a mistake to assume that the "covenant" spoken of in Dan 9:27 is the "old covenant" as given by Moses. What you have just stated in regards to the Sabbath existing long before the sacrificial system must be biblically proven, and so far you have not done that.
You mentioned in the Deuteronomy 5:15, that the Sabbath was a memorial of the deliverance from Egypt. While this is true, it is also incomplete. The language of the Sabbath commandment clearly makes it a memorial of creation. This creation memorial authority is quoted by Luke twice in the book of Acts, and John in the book of Revelation, as the source of God's authority.
You make a point that the Sabbath must be kept according to Moses' instructions. This is incorrect since the Sabbath was in force for millennia prior to Moses. If Moses' instructions were needed, it would be impossible to keep it properly until Moses came along.
(M)... You have made my point exactly!! Thank you. It is impossible to correctly keep the "seventh day Sabbath" without Moses instructions.
It is obvious from your essay that you do not understand the difference between law keeping and legalism. I would suggest that you read the essay on my web page titled "Harmony of Law and Gospel". In it you will discover that there is a very clear difference between law keeping and legalism. Legalism is the practice of observing the law in order to be saved. Paul goes to great lengths in the New Testament to condemn this practice. Law keeping on the other hand, is the practice of keeping the law because we are saved, as a means of being obedient to our creator. There is a world of difference between these two practices. Law keeping is REQUIRED.
(M)... I have no problem with what you have just stated. I agree with you that law keeping is required. If you are assuming that I believe the Sabbath command can be ignored then you have indeed misunderstood my booklet! It is just that my premise on Sabbath keeping happens to be different than yours. Yours is based on the seventh day of the week (which this phrase is not found in the Bible). I believe Sabbath keeping has always been, and always will, be based on "resting" or "ceasing" one day out of seven to allow for "God's time". By the way, I think I do understand what "legalism" is.
In your discussion regarding the elements of the world from Colossians and Galatians you need to study. Paul is giving reference to paganism references wherein the people worshipped malevolent spirits. As part of the way to appease the spirits, people kept all sorts of various ceremonial rules, including eating, drinking, and observance of days. There is no reference to the old covenant and the mosaic prescriptions within those passages.
(M)... You are indeed very wrong when you say that Paul in the book of Galations made no reference to the old covenant! Shame on you! References to the law of the old covenant in the book of Galations are found a number of times. The problem of the Galation Church was that they were deceived into believing in the "works of the law", therefore the "works of Christ" were done in vain for them. The Galations desired to be "under the law". Read it for yourself in Gal. 4:21.
You refer to Colossians 2:14 in what was nailed to the cross. I suggest you refer back to the Greek. The "handwriting of ordinances" which Paul makes reference to is an idiom which refers to judicial pronouncements that were recorded against criminal miscreants. In it, Paul is saying that Jesus nailed our guilt to the Cross. He is not making any reference whenever to the old covenant.
(M)... What you have just stated is the opposite of what is plainly stated in Col. 2:16. In the old covenant is precisely where you will find the laws of meat and drink offerings, new moons, holy days and the Sabbath days. You really do need to restudy the book of Col. and also the book of Gal. and believe what Paul is saying; and not some "judicial pronouncements". Paul himself stated what the "ordinances" were if you care to believe an apostle of God.
You refer to Matthew 5:17 where Jesus makes reference to " the law and the prophets". It is important to understand that Jesus in saying that he was to fulfill law and the prophets, was actually saying he was the fulfillment of all the prophecies made in the books of the law and the prophets,. The phrase " the law and the prophets" is a standard description of the Hebrew old Testament. It is a serious error if anyone assumes that Jesus in saying this is trying to say that the law is being done away with.
(M)... I agree, Jesus did not come to do away with the law, however he did fulfill what the law demanded; which was a perfect sacrifice.
You assert that Paul does not mention the Sabbath. I suggest that you look in Ephesians 6:1 to 3. In that text, Paul makes it clear that the fifth that commandment is part of a list which occurs in a specific order. There are only two places where that list appears. They are in Exodus and Deuteronomy in the ten commandments. the only possibility from this statement of Paul, is that he considers that the entire ten commandment list is fully in force.
(M)... I do agree with you on this point in that Paul obviously refers to the ten commandments. However the point that I maintain is that Paul did not mention the Sabbath. Is this not true? The entire list is fully in force (as you put it), including the fourth commandment, however it is no longer kept according to the laws of the old covenant.
You go through a large discussion trying to make the Sunday after the crucifixion, that is, the day upon which Jesus rose, to not necessarily be Sunday as we know it. This is disingenuous, and totally ignores the fact that the day upon which he was crucified was referred to as " the preparation day". This can only be Friday by our calendar. The rest of the surrounding text makes it clear that the Sabbath in question was not just the weekly Sabbath but also a high day. Your argument attempts to take away the obvious truth of the statements.
(M)... You lost me here because I do believe Christ rose on a Sunday. Yes, I also believe Christ was crucified on a Friday. Please read my booklet again, and also the article "Letters Regarding the Sabbath Question". You will find that the only possible difference is that the Sabbath following Christ's death had to be the "first day of unleavened bread", since Christ was the Passover. This particular Sabbath is recorded by the gospels as a singular Sabbath. Therefore was not the weekly Sabbath, but nevertheless happened to be the seventh day of that particular week as the gospels clearly imply. However it could also have been recorded as a weekly Sabbath based on "Jewish" law at that time (not Moses law). My understanding and this possibility is explained in the "Letters Regarding the Sabbath Question".
You attempt to show that the apostles kept sabbath only as a matter of convenience. You list the number of texts where they went to the synagogue to meet with the Jews. However, when you get to Acts 16:13, you make a grievous error. In that text Paul went to the riverside where he thought there would be a place of prayer. This event occurred in northern Greece, where there were few Jews. A place at the riverside would not be a meeting place for the Jews. This would have been a gentile meeting place, that is a place where converts met to worship. Since it was on the Sabbath that he went there, these converts will also worshipping on the Sabbath.
(M)... This fact does not change anything. You did not mention that they were in that city "certain days". My question is, what are these "certain days"? I believe that this is referring to certain "holy days", therefore this Sabbath could have been a holy day, and would therefore be the reason why it was mentioned.
I would suggest that you look up Samuele Bacchiocchi's page. He can get you a copy of his doctoral dissertation, published by the Pontifical Vatican University Press. In it he traces the change from Sabbath to Sunday (title of the book), and shows how the quotes you use from the ante-Nicene fathers simply do not show what you wish them to show. In fact, the early church KEPT SABBATH, as a matter of doctrine, not out of legalism, but loving law keeping.
(M).. I would very much rather put my trust in the Holy scriptures, and yes, also the "Church Fathers" instead of Samuel Bacchiocchi’s opinions and his web page. His premise on the Sabbath is also wrong, and he has carefully and skillfully "made" the Sabbath fit with his premise. It is so sad that many sincere Christians (including you, Ted) are taken in by his writings.
I trust that you truly mean what you say when you say " I stand corrected if something is not biblical incorrect". I take that sort of stance very seriously in my writing as well. Please consider what I have said. Also, look in depth at what I have written and published on my page. I can support every point I make very carefully. I do not need to go to allegorical interpretation such as those you use.
(M)... You have not shown where anything in my material is not biblically correct. As a matter of fact, it was you that was very weak in biblically proving where the Sabbath is indeed the seventh day of the week. I do not mean to sound offensive, but it is you that needs to consider what I have said to you. I rejoice in that you also take the same stand as I do in wanting to know where you could be wrong, and truly allow the holy scriptures to teach us. My sincere desire is to lead people to the Bible, and I certainly do not mean to use allegorical interpretations (as you put it). If you have any doubt as to what I believe about "law keeping" and the ten commandments, please read my booklet "Repentance and Obedience". Thank you kindly for your time and may the God of Israel be with you in your search for the truth. Please do stay in touch.
http://www.tk7.net/users/bibletruths
In His Service, Mahlon
Subject: Re. Sabbath
Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 09:17:53 -0500
From: Mahlon <bible@tk7.net>
To: Ted Noel <tednoel@iag.net>Ted Noel wrote....
Dear Mahlons,
I will be brief. I believe that the your position on the Sabbath rests on the thinnest of foundations. You assert that since Genesis 2:3 does not contain the phrase "of the week", that it cannot refer to a weekly cycle and a specific day within it. This would put God in a position of sanctifying a single day of the entire history of the earth. It would also negate all of your arguments regarding Other meanings for the Sabbath and a week. It is important to realize that even when the phrase "Of the week" is omitted in the old Testament it is understood by the writers of the old Testament.
All this aside, it is important to notice the language which God uses regarding the Sabbath. Throughout the old Testament it is referred to it as "My Holy Sabbath day", or similar phrases. It is never referred to as your Sabbath day. It is always the day set aside by east of the Lord. When we go to the New Testament, we see the definite article used in the Greek. It is of "the Sabbath day" not "my Sabbath day" or "your Sabbath day".
The argument that the Sabbath is defined by Jesus' use is valid. In the gospels, Jesus is referred to as performing acts on the "the" Sabbath day. This is a reference to a specific day. We see this reference carried throughout the gospel and all and into the epistles. We never see verbiage which would allow an indefinite sabbath. Wealways see that the Sabbath is a specific day of the seven day weekly cycle.
I would hate to find myself in the position of arguing with God about his holy Sabbath day. After all, he is My creator, and the Sabbath is the memorial of my creation. It is also the sign of my obedience to him. The creation does not question the creator. It is the ideal sign of the seal of God as mentioned in revelation.
Regarding Exodus 16:4, I do not attempt to say that the law existed prior to Moses, although there is good evidence that that is true. My point is based on the fact that the test regarding the observance of the Sabbath would be invalid until Sabbath commandment had been given. The first record of the Sabbath commandment given to Moses occurred after the manna began, therefore the Sabbath and the rules for observing it were known before the tables of stone were given on Sinai. This separates the Sabbath from any connection with a covenant beginning at Sinai.
I will briefly mentioned in the Jewish calendar and feast days. There were certain combinations of feast days and weekly Sabbaths which could not be allowed to occur. To avoid this occurrence the Jews throughout history have adjusted the lengths of various months in order to avoid having these "impermissible" combinations occur. I stand on the truth of this point. The Jews were very careful to observe the specified feast days. You cannot avoid a historical facts.
I observe the Sabbath as an obedient creation. I do not look for excuses to go along with a crowd. Sunday keeping is going along with the crowd
I am attaching several hypertext files so that you can understand more clearly the reasoning behind my position.
In Him, Ted Noel
tednoel@iag.net
http://www.iag.net/~tednoel/index.htm
Hi again Ted,
Thank you for the prompt response to my last message. As I mentioned to you in my last message I do not want to argue about the Sabbath. However I find myself wanting to do just that. You obviously have your mind made up about the Sabbath, and I also have equally as well. I am convinced there is nothing I can point out to you that will cause you to rethink your position on the Sabbath. Therefore this e-mail message will be written as a matter of record, and will also be used for future reference.You stated that my position on the Sabbath is on the "thinnest" of foundations. I want to point out to you that your foundation seems to be on the "Jewish calendar", and your assumption that the Sabbath is a memorial of creation. It would be in your best spiritual interests to investigate who the "Jews" really are, and their hatred and agenda of deception that they have toward the true Israel of God. You might want to consider downloading from my web page, and carefully reading my booklets "Lost Israel and the Gentiles" and "How Did Jesus Christ Die?".
It was the law of the six "work" days as given by Moses that could be called a memorial of a "renewed" creation, and not the Sabbath day as you falsely assume. The law of the Sabbath as given by Moses pictured and pointed toward the "Rest" of God (not the creation). This is carefully explained in my "Seventh Day" booklet. Please read it again. It is very strange indeed that you people never attempt to explain or make reference to this "Rest". The Bible talks about it, why don't you? This is what God blessed and sanctified on the seventh day of a "renewed" creation. Read it for yourself and simply believe what Gen. 2:2-3 is saying (you no doubt have this scripture memorized). There is nothing whatsoever mentioned in these verses, or makes reference to, about a Sabbath day! My question therefore to you is; why do you take it upon yourself to assume that it does? If the Sabbath day was made at this time it most surely would have stated this. Why does not God mention this if the supposed conviction and truth on the Sabbath day rests and is dependent on the Sabbath day being made at this time? It is not mentioned simply because this was not when the Sabbath day was made!
You have assumed all along, and are deceived to believe that by the act of God "resting" on the "seventh day" somehow means this "rest" was mysteriously transferred on a certain day which has continually cycled on a weekly basis from the creation, which you believe is Saturday. And you accused me of being on a thin foundation! You fail to realize that by the act of God "resting" means it is a continual "rest" (not one day in seven), simply because the physical works of the "renewed" creation are finished; as the book of Hebrews explains. It was this "Rest" that was created and made holy, which Adam and Eve enjoyed in the Garden of Eden before the fall. It was not a Sabbath day, as you claim. It is this "Rest" of God that believers can also enjoy and enter into by faith, as the book of Hebrews also explains. It is this "Rest" that the children of Israel were continually reminded of by the law of the Sabbath day, which is why under Moses it is called "My Holy Sabbath", etc. (as you put it). They could not enter into this "Rest" with God, simply because of unbelief in this "Rest". Read it for yourself in the book of Hebrews as you are aware. I do not know how much plainer I can get with you.
Keep in mind, Ted, the Sabbath day given to Moses was considered holy from God's point of view simply because it was used in a ceremonial fashion to "show" something very precious and holy. By the command of God some Israelites failed to "rest" every seventh day. Therefore making a mockery of God's "Rest"; which is why there was a death penalty in being careless with very serious instructions that pointed toward God's "Rest". The "Rest" of God is what is holy and always was holy. It is not some physical day that is holy, which a "Jewish calendar" has determined hundreds of years after the death of Christ! Come on Ted, use some common sense and realize we are talking about a "Holy Rest" that the Creator of the universe is presently in! The enemies of Jesus Christ have managed to deceive sincere people to put their spiritual emphasis on a certain day of the week, and not on the Creator God and His "Rest".
You pointed out to me not to ignore historical facts. What facts? I certainly do not ignore the fact that the "Jews" came up with a calendar attempting to falsely copy biblical time schedules. What does this prove? I am pointing out to you that you should ignore these "Jewish" facts, and start considering biblical facts. As you carefully explained, you would not want to argue with God about the Sabbath. Are you going to explain to God your premise on Sabbath keeping was based on the "Jewish" calendar? It is very true, we all must face our Maker some day and give an account on how we handled and respected the precious truth of God. As for me, I certainly do not want to reject truth. The truth of God should be the highest priority in a believer's life! We are all deceived to some degree, which is why I believe it is not necessarily a sin to be innocently deceived. The sin comes about when we willingly allow deception, and refuse to grow in the knowledge of God, and refuse to act on the truth of God to become undeceived.
You have stated that "Sunday keeping is going along with the crowd". This statement is indeed very weak in building a foundation on the Sabbath. It is true that the vast majority of our churches have the correct day for worship, but at the same time are making a total mockery of the fourth commandment. It is a shame and a disgrace that so-called Christianity will set aside this day for the very purpose to seek their own pleasure and activities, and blindly ignore "God's time". It is a very obvious fact that on this special day (Sunday), the god of "sports" (small g) has replaced the God of the Bible in the minds of most so-called Christian people. This great nation was built on biblical values and principles and the ten commandments, and there was a time when the people of this nation took church attendance very serious. Yes, Ted, at one time in our precious history we were a nation that worshipped on Sunday, and even made laws to protect "God's time"! Today we are a people indeed blessed of God, and we never consider that we owe these blessings to God-fearing men and women that founded and built this great nation. We blindly ignore and we take for granted that these God-fearing Christian people understood their divine calling, and also understood correct worship! You may do with this what you want, but I believe the spiritual foundation of this nation, and how this nation found its greatness, is rooted in Sunday church attendance! I also believe we as a blessed people and nation are slowly losing our freedoms, greatness, and blessings because we blindly ignore the profound importance of believing and teaching correct doctrine, which goes along with correct worship and church attendance.
I must sign off for now and I really hope that you will take these comments to heart. I do not know anything about you, but want to extend a hand of friendship. Since you are sincere about your convictions, I will even consider you a brother in Christ. Have you been (or are) a member of the World Wide Church of God or an offshoot of this Church? I was a member of this Church in the early 70's. I hope to hear from you again soon. May God bless you.
Sincerely, Mahlon
http://www.tk7.net/users/bibletruths
Questions or comments?... Email: wickey777@verizon.net