The Sabbath day?


(RiderOnTheClouds) #1

So in my last thread I spoke about my views on Genesis 1. The purpose of Genesis 1 is to establish Yahweh as the sole creator, by making him fufill the roles performed by the gods of Egypt in the Egyptian creation myths. Alternatively it could be an account of creation simplified for an ancient context. With Yahweh using themes from Egyptian mythology so it could be understood better. But I am finding it hard to reconcile a non-literal interpretation of Genesis 1 with Exodus 20:8. If God didn’t create the earth in seven days why keep the Sabbath day holy. Can someone help?


BioLogos Irony (YEC/OEC)
My view of Genesis 1-2
(Jon) #2

In Exodus 20:11, the six days of creation in Genesis 1 are given as the reason for the Sabbath.

Exodus 20:
11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth and the sea and all that is in them, and he rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and set it apart as holy.

Three lines of evidence indicate that these words were not spoken by God, nor written by Moses either as a record of what God said at the time, or as words added as an explanation by Moses. The first is the fact that these words are not recorded as having been spoken by God; they refer to God in the third person. The chapter starts by recording God’s spoken words.

Exodus 20:
1 God spoke all these words:
2 “I, the LORD, am your God, who brought you from the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery.

When God is quoted directly, He refers to Himself in the first person; ‘I’, ‘Me’. When God is referred to in the third person (‘he’, etc), the words were not spoken by God at the time, but are someone else’s words about God. Throughout Exodus 20 we can see this change of reference. When the reference changes to the third person, an explanatory note is given about what God has said, introduced by the word ‘for’, or ‘that’.

  • First person (God speaking): 7 “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain,

  • Third person (explanatory note): 7 for the LORD will not hold guiltless anyone who takes his name in vain.

  • First person (God speaking): 8 “Remember the Sabbath day to set it apart as holy.

  • Third person (explanatory note): 9 For six days you may labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God; on it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, or your male servant, or your female servant, or your cattle, or the resident foreigner who is in your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth and the sea and all that is in them, and he rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and set it apart as holy.

  • First person (God speaking): 12 “Honor your father and your mother,

  • Third person (explanatory note): 12 that you may live a long time in the land the LORD your God is giving to you.

In verses 7 to 12, a commandment is given as a direct statement from God in the first person, and then one explanatory note is given by someone else speaking of God in the third person (‘His’, ‘He’).

The list of the ten commandments in Deuteronomy 5 shows a similar pattern, with three explanatory notes in exactly the same places; the commandment about taking God’s name in vain, the commandment about the Sabbath, and the commandment about honouring father and mother.

  • First person (God speaking): 11 You must not make use of the name of the LORD your God for worthless purposes,

  • Third person (explanatory note): for the LORD will not exonerate anyone who abuses his name that way.

  • First person (God speaking): 12 Be careful to observe the Sabbath day just as the LORD your God has commanded you. 13 You are to work and do all your tasks in six days, 14 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. On that day you must not do any work, you, your son, your daughter, your male slave, your female slave, your ox, your donkey, any other animal, or the foreigner who lives with you, so that your male and female slaves, like yourself, may have rest.

  • Third person (explanatory note): 15 Recall that you were slaves in the land of Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there by strength and power. That is why the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.

  • First person (God speaking): 16 Honor your father and your mother just as the LORD your God has commanded you to do,

  • Third person (explanatory note): 17 so that your days may be extended and that it may go well with you in the land that he is about to give you.

It is significant that when these explanatory notes are removed from Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5, the remaining text (quoted directly from God), is almost identical in both chapters. This strengthens the case that these words in the first person are being attributed to God (with Moses reporting them himself in his speech in Deuteronomy 5), whereas the words in the third person were added as explanatory notes by someone other than God. It also explains very well the differences between the two records of the ten commandments.

Additionally, when we examine these explanatory notes in the two records, we find the explanation given for the Sabbath in Exodus 20 is completely different to the explanation given in Deuteronomy 5.

Exodus 20:
11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth and the sea and all that is in them, and he rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and set it apart as holy.

Deuteronomy 5:
15 Recall that you were slaves in the land of Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there by strength and power. That is why the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.

Whereas Exodus 20:11 says the Sabbath was given to commemorate the six days of creation, Deuteronomy 5:15 says the Sabbath was given to commemorate the exodus from Egypt. This explanation is placed directly in the mouth of Moses, indicating that it is the reason he gave to Israel when teaching them the Law. However, the explanation given in Exodus 20:11 is not recorded as having been spoken or written by either God or Moses.

The only record of the explanation Moses gave for the Sabbath, is Deuteronomy 5:15. In this passage he says the purpose of the Sabbath is to commemorate the exodus from Egypt, and he shows absolutely no knowledge of the explanation found in Exodus 20:11. The only other passage in the Pentateuch which links the days of creation to the Sabbath, is also in Exodus. Once more we find a switch from God speaking in the first person (‘My’, ‘Me’, ‘I’), to someone else writing an explanatory note referring to God in the third person (‘He’).

Exodus 31:
12 The LORD said to Moses,
13 “Tell the Israelites, ‘Surely you must keep my Sabbaths, for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I am the LORD who sanctifies you.
17 It is a sign between me and the Israelites forever;
[explanatory note in the third person] for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.’ ”

To summarize, the text of Exodus 20:12 speaks of God in the third person in a manner indicating that the text is not quoting God; positive evidence the words here are not a direct quotation from God. The text of Exodus speaks of Moses in the third person; positive evidence that the book was produced by a later writer, and that this writer was not Moses.

Whereas Exodus 20:12 gives one reason for keeping the Sabbath, Moses’ quoted words in Deuteronomy do not give this reason; instead Moses’ quoted words give a completely different reason. The fact that Moses shows no knowledge of the reason given in Exodus 20:12; 31:17, and instead gives a completely different reason, demonstrates that he was not the writer of that reason in either of those passages.

Additionally, the connection of the Sabbath and the days of creation found in Exodus 20:12; 31:17, does not appear anywhere else in the entire Law of Moses, nor in any of the books of the Bible which were indisputably written before the exile. There is no evidence at all that anyone from Moses’ day to the exile, would have understood the Sabbath to be a commemoration of the days of creation.

This suggests that this explanation for the Sabbath was added by an inspired writer during the exile; as with the authorship of Genesis 1-11, Daniel is the most likely author. This does not mean the Sabbath is irrelevant to the creation, nor does it mean that the days in Genesis 1 are not intended to be understood as natural days. But it does mean that nothing in the Bible tells us the Sabbath was instituted by God in order to commemorate God’s day of rest, or to teach people that He created the universe and everything else in only six literal days.


What biblical reasons are there to accept the scientific view of the earth as billions of years old?
(Ray Bailey) #3

Thanks @Jonathan_Burke for that well thought out synopsis.

I myself have chosen to be a Sabbath keeper. However, it is from my perception that the Ten Commandments (without the expansions) is valid for everyone regardless of being one of the Chosen people or not.

I find it hard to see that Moses didn’t “know” the creation sabbath. Rather it did not suit his purpose in the context of what he was doing at the time. The Exodus account is part of the original establishment of the Children of Israel as a cohesive (more or less) tribal nation. Deuteronomy is 39 years later and speaking to a new generation. The needs of the time were different in the presentation and culture of the survivors of the 40 years in the desert.

Going back to the creation Sabbath story, even if it is an inclusion of an inspired exilic writer, since it is inspired it carries considerable weight to be placed as it is, rather than somewhere else later in the OT.

Give the Cosmic Temple premise, the “Day of Rest” is part of the establishment of the Lunar Calendar as the primary means of people (following Adam & Eve) to count the days. It is the day Adam’s (the particular one, not the archetype) communicating with Elohim (or as I presume the pre-incarnate Yeshua). I presume that when it says “…walked with them in the cool of the day” meant on the Sabbath.

This is one of the reasons I feel the current acceptance of the ancient (400 AD or so) change to Sunday is an ongoing unfounded premise for worship given the direct and up-front commandments.
(However, be it known that I do not agree with having to follow the 613 other laws and dietary restrictions that were for Israel.)
I also prefer to use YHWH’s name for the same reason.

As a Lunar calendar marker, and a religious application that was expanded to include Israel’s covenant, the Sabbath was established for multiple purposes at the same time.

Keep it up! I like this!

Ray :sunglasses:


(Jon) #4

The evidence is in his own words. When he explains the purpose of the Sabbath to the Hebrews, he says nothing about creation. He tells them it is a commemoration of their departure from Egypt.

Then I need to see evidence for this. I need to see evidence that he knew about it, but just told the Hebrews something completely different at the time because it didn’t suit his purpose.

But this isn’t evidence that Moses knew about it very early on, and just didn’t mention it for 39 years.

Yes. But the socio-historical context of the inclusion informs how we should read it.

But this doesn’t require the entire universe to have been created in seven days.

Well Paul didn’t think it was necessary.


(Ray Bailey) #5

Then we’re even. You have no proof that he didn’t know and I have no proof that he did. We’re both arguing from absence!

No. But proof from text could also show that he did know about it which is why he used it, rather than presume an inclusion! Ockham’s Razor? That tells me, that rather than being edited, it was used for a purpose at the time.

If you want my take on the creation, see my topic Genesis 1:1-2 as Applied through John 3

I didn’t say that I did. I meant exactly what it says. Presuming the creation account was using an ANE model to explain the creation, with suitable editing to profile Elohim’s message through inspiration, that it has nothing to do with 24/7 creation, but Cosmic Temple narration. The function of the days of the week are to frame the storytelling model explaining mankind’s relationship to the world (of people and their place in it, not material existence) and with their deity.

Part of that process is to establish methods of timekeeping suitable for farmers and herdsmen. While the days are used in a relational manner, the Sabbath is used for weekly, timed with the Lunar “clock” for seasonal calendar purposes while also being for religious establishment

In addition, Moses, being raised in Pharaoh’s court, was very likely one of the best educated persons in all Egypt. Religion (including Egyptian and surrounding ANE cosmology), Alchemy, Government, Engineering, Military, all of it. So the often presumed explanations that Moses wasn’t the inspired writer of the first five books, is ludicrous to me. Even in the Genesis account. Do I think even an inspired exilic writer knew more than Moses who spent forty-day in Elohim’s presence? (even if forty-day is symbolic? One would have been more than enough!) Beside, the several times it mentions Moses “writing” after Mt Sinai is enough of itself proof he knew and wrote Genesis…

Again, you are arguing from absence. Paul was a devout Jew, and scholar. He apparently followed the laws including the Sabbath. Nowhere in the New Testament is there any clear indication of a day of worship other than the Sabbath, excepting the celebration of the Resurrection. Following customs of the time, well established in Jewish communities, it would have been an adjunct to the Sabbath days, not a replacement of them!

I argue Paul would have contended that abandoning the Sabbath in favor of a Sunday was unnecessary. But again, this is one argument that is largely absent facts on either side. Therefore, “The Last Order Standing” seems to be in order.

The later change to the Sabbath (325-430 AD)began with anti-semitic and anti-Christian persecutions 140-300 AD. This started moving Christians away from looking too “Jewish” and look more like “normal” pagans.The various councils concerning the Sabbath carefully avoid the underlying anti-semitism.

They also reflected the ideology that Christianity was going to “take over” paganism by absorbing pagan ideals, worship places, and rituals by “Christianizing” them. Sunday (day of the Sun God) is part of that process whereas “The Sabbath” is uniquely non-pagan in source. Changing the date of Easter was a part of that to get away from the lunar Jewish Calendar. This has nothing to do with the sanctity of the “Resurrection Sunday” worship over the Sabbath!

(Mark 27:2) “The Sabbath was made for the Man, not man for the Sabbath” is not a refutation of use, but reminder!
He was doing exactly what Genesis is saying about the Sabbath. A refocusing of the Pharisaic overemphasis on the rules and regulations of the Sabbath, rather than the “Rest & Worship” (and doing good for others) for which the Sabbath was intended.

Respectfully:sunglasses: Ray


(George Brooks) #6

@Reggie_O_Donoghue, I find @Jonathan_Burke’s treatment to be quite thorough and persuasive. I particularly like the compare/contrast on the difference in explanation offered in Deuteronomy 5 vs. Exodus 20.

Since Jon and I both agree that Genesis was most likely written after Exodus or Deuteronomy (even though dealing with the narrative of a time period earlier than either), it would seem likely that Genesis reflects the position favored by the Priests most associated with promoting the Exodus narrative: God rested, so the Hebrew will rest in the same manner.

There are historians who have looked at earlier ANE traditions which are similar to the Sabbath tradition . . . but usually based on a monthly and mid-monthly calendar. The Hebrew weekly tradition appears to be a unique expression and development - - part of the Hebrew cultural (and divine) genius.


(Ray Bailey) #7

@gbrooks9 Are you suggesting the weekly (as in two per half moon, and 4 per a full moon) is not a valid usage of an ANE type? A bit more precise, but different? The other ANE monthly and mid-monthly all had religious significance.

Ray :sunglasses:


(Roger A. Sawtelle) #8

I think you misunderstand why Christians celebrate the Lord’s Day on Sunday. Jesus arose from the dead on the First Day. He was still in the grave on the Sabbath. Pentecost, the Gift of the Holy Spirit and the birth of the Church, took place on the First Day. Is there any surprise that we celebrate the First Day as the Lord’s Day?

On the other hand you know that the Jewish leaders took the fourth commandment as absolute, which i8t would be if it were based on a six day Creation. However you need to read this text very carefully.
_John 5:16-18 (NIV2011) _
_16 So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. _
_17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” _
18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

Here Jesus says that God the Father and God the Son did not stop working after the sixth day, but continue to work, continue to create even until now.

Finally John 1:1-3 is the NT Creation story which affirms evolutionary, not revolutionary, change.

Christianity is not a legalistic faith. You can celebrate the Sabbath as a day of rest if you wish, but it is not part of the Christian faith. The First Day is the Lord’s Day, when we celebrate Jesus Christ and Good News of His salvation.


(Ray Bailey) #9

Let me give you a bit of background. I graduated with an M-Div and worked in my denomination for all my life, both paid and lay. I can read Greek, and having a working knowledge of Hebrew. I have served on a number of church boards, denominational boards, and a publishing house.I am firmly aware of the arguments you put forth. I agreed for them most of my life!

I went through a decade of where my faith was shaken. I turned to the scriptures and prayer, reading the Bible multiple times back to back while praying I was led to

I don’t misunderstand it, I disagree with it because there is no foundation for it in either the New Testament, or to be found as a definite decision of somebody other than the fourth century church fathers, who we seldom so involved in the “truth” of Christianity that the “rule” of christianity.

On the topic again,
Have you read any of the source material of the 3rd and 4th century church fathers? The background of the Councils? It is not as cut and dried as we modern’s like to suppose it is!
The proof you offer are anecdotal. There is no text from a prominent early church father that supports Sunday. There is no concrete evidence that the reasoning you support is anything other than the wishful thinking that the decisions made by Constantine, and the councils was Biblically correct! The background sources show the infighting, anti-semitism, and religious/governmental take-over rampant that plagued the times.

And as I noted, the power of the church was first established as a government! Does that ring any alarm bells in your mind? Never, ever, has the church had the authority to be a civil rulership. We protestants (against the advice of some of the reformers) have accepted some of the hand-me-downs from the corrupted ages of the Catholic church!. We don’t want to talk about it. It is too uncomfortable. Reading the fine print in many scholarly works there are notations of these issues. But they never seem to come into the open. and when they do, the people who call attention to them are called "renegades, unhappy people, or cultic… (to be fair some are unbalanced, but not all by any means). But it does not mean that they have not seen some truth?

[quote=“Relates, post:8, topic:36271”]
Christianity is not a legalistic faith. You can celebrate the Sabbath as a day of rest if you wish, but it is not part of the Christian faith. The First Day is the Lord’s Day, when we celebrate Jesus Christ and Good News of His salvation.
[/quote] (I bolded part)

I can agree about the legalistic. And yes, there is a choice! I can worship on the Sabbath. And I do NOT do it out of compulsion. This is totally voluntary. I find it strange that every time somebody mentions being a Sabbath Keeper, Christians point out they are being legalistic! How about if they have an honor for the Father that supersedes the “grace” of permission?

And, Sir, (saying this gently) are you telling me I am not a Christian? There are a whole bunch of Christians out here that do not fit what you term “Christianity” like you just did. (Messianic Jews for one).

I apologize if I offend you. It is not my intent. However, this is something that is part of the path I have chosen. Yet, it doesn’t mean I will lie down to it. I sincerely hope we both learn something from this.


(George Brooks) #10

@RLBailey

That was not my intention. I think a weekly calendar world pretty well.

One might wonder if the foundation for counting weeks by 7 days at a time originated with the pagan heavenly Seven…


(Ray Bailey) #11

At least the Pagans thought so. But I tend to believe the pagans picked it up post-Adam (what is the latest genetic age of Adam, 150k years?). Plenty of time for the revelation of Elohim to leak into the society.

Otherwise, I tend to think there is an inbuilt “clock” in us that prefers that (at least in the genealogy of Adamic descendants. Many of the eastern asians as sub-african’s had five day or 10 day weeks, which fits just fine in a lunar cycle.


(Jon) #12

No, because I have clear evidence for what Moses believed to be the purpose of the sabbath; the only statement in which he explained it, and in which he said its purpose was to commemorate the Exodus. So I have a statement which says he believed it was to commemorate the Exodus, but you have none which say he believed it was to commemorate creation.

Occam’s Razor states that the most efficient explanation of all the evidence, is most likely to be true. As you can see, my argument actually addresses all the evidence. For example, my argument takes into account the evidence that Genesis 1-11 was written during or after the exile, and the evidence that the record of the ten commandments in Exodus contains edits from a third party (which incidentally reconciles the differences between the record of the ten commandments in Exodus, with the corresponding record in Deuteronomy).

There’s nothing in the entire Bible which says Moses wrote Genesis. That’s significant. Not only that, but we have a record of what he did write, and it doesn’t include Genesis.

I am not arguing from absence. I am arguing from the fact that Paul stated explicitly that no one should be judged for observing Jewish holy days or not observing them. For Paul, sabbath was optional, not a binding observance. The fact that the early Christians met on the first day of the week (Sunday), shows they didn’t believe the sabbath was the compulsory day for their worship.


(Ray Bailey) #13

This is the whole point of what I am getting at. It is NOT compulsory. Thanks for the details on your scholarship. I appreciate it and will take it under advisement.

Question: How to explain that I do not believe celebrations of Jewish Holy days (as the are so linked to the sacrificial system), while still keeping the Sabbath? Most christians lump them together because of Paul’s statement.

What I tend to buck against is the reaction I get when I say I am a Sabbath Keeper from other Christians. It is usually an immediate attack as if I have strayed beyond the pale and am “not Christian” as I was just told on another topic that my theology was “not Christian”.

I do not believe this out of compulsion. I believe this because at a low point in my life the power of the Sabbath became rooted in my search for a more meaningful relationship to God.

I do need to find a better methodology in explaining it.

You obviously have a strong theological understanding. Have any suggestions?

Thanks, Ray :sunglasses:


(Phil) #14

Ran across this shared by a friend, that puts the seventh day as a covenant between God and man, interesting read:


(Roger A. Sawtelle) #15

@RLBailey

Raymond, sorry for the confusion, but I am glad that we get in touch. I hope BioLogos will fix that glitch.

The problem as I understand it is that God has made TWO covenants with God’s people, the Old Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant based on the Life, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Unfortunately most Christians are not very aware of the fact that we have a New Covenant with God separate from that of the Jews.

The primary evidence for this is found in the words of Jesus found in the Last Supper, when He said, “This cup is the New Covenant in My Blood, which is shed for you and for many.” So while the words of the Psalm are true, the covenant of the OT is not the Covenant of the NT. The Sabbath of the OT is not the same as the Lord’s Day of the NT.

The Lord’s Day appears once in the NT in the last book, Revelation 1:10-11 (KJV)

10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last:

I put my stock on the Lord’s Day which was consecrated by Easter and Pentecost. You have a dim view on the early Church Councils, and I expect there are reasons for this, but from my perspective they established a sound theological basis, the Trinity, for the Church. I support Athanasius who underwent much persecution for his faith.

The Jewish faith was rooted in the King (Messiah.) The Christian Church is an organization that is a rival for the government for loyalty. There is a dynamic tension between Church and State that needs to be worked out.

There are4 a number of Christians and semi-Christians who worship on Saturday. The Jehovah’s Witnesses are one. Seventh Day Adventists are a border line another. I am not here to judge them, that is God’s job.

I would say that if their faith is based on the continuation of the Mosaic Law, they are on a very weak theological foundation. This is not the same as saying they are not Christian, which is based on one’s relationship to Jesus.

I hope that this clarifies my position.


(Ray Bailey) #16

Okay, You know I have missed that one! I have read it a hundred times and failed to make the connection!
I firmly object to the hiding of YHWH’s name behind “The Lord” in the OT, but have firm convictyion that “The Lord” in the New testament is referring to the Lord Jesus (excepting the OT quotations unless it was a referral to Jesus. “The Day of the Lord” in the OT is certainly a reference to the “Day of Jesus” (even though the text says The Day of YHWH), as the returning King in retrieving the righteous and judgement for the unrighteous.

I am amazed that I have missed that one point.

I agree with your assessment on the Trinity. Jesus Wars by Philip Jenkins is a real eye-opener. That is the same infighting that colors my outlook on the establishment of the Lord’s Day (now under revisement).

I want to make claer that my veneration fo the Sabbath is not based on the covenantal aspects. It came out of seeking God in a very low time in my life. Traumatic experiences led me to read the bible many times, seeking something more than what I had learned and practiced over the years.

The result was two-fold. One was seeing YHWH revealed behind “The Lord” in the English Bibles. That lead to a study of YHWH and how the name is specifically used in connection with his chosen people (from Eve (used first time) to Seth, to Shem, to Abraham, to Issac, to Jacob, to Moses, then the people. Any time "Elohim YHWH or Elohim was used, it reflected judgement or change concerning the nations.

The second was seeing there was something special about the Sabbath. The promises of the covenant for health, well being, and all. I know these are offered in the NT as well. But something struck me as having tremendous power I was unable to grasp before.

I have spoke with a number of pewople who have gone through this same process of trauma, isolation in reading the word, and coming to the same conclusions on YHWH and the Sabbath.

I can’t explain it. I also feel very strongly that I am not slighting Jesus in any way, as everything he does in in honor to the Father!. Hence, I worship and Honor Jesus, but there is something in me that is driving me to honor the father even more and willingly observe “his day” in conjunction with going to church on Sunday. I know some say this isn’t possible. but I cannot change what I have experienced.

Oh, and I have read the SDA and other YHWIst groups material and do not agree with them for all the reasons any evangelical would. I just won;t go that far in this as I have not been called to that. These two items are all that I feel called to.

Thanks for the input! You have given me much to think on!


(Roger A. Sawtelle) #17

@RLBailey

Raymond,

Let us get some thing straight. YHWH is the sacred Name of God revealed to Moses on the sacred mountain. YHWH is the Name of God that YHWH forbid the Jews to “take in vain.” Because the Name of God is sacred and powerful, YHWH forbid people to misuse it.

The use of LORD (Adonai) in place of YHWH is the OT is a Jewish convention, not a Christian one. Christians use it, although I agree that it is important to explain it and not use it all the time, in deference to Jewish usage that goes back to OT times.

The important thing for me is its meaning, which as explained to Moses, was “I AM THAT I AM.” YHWH is free to do and to be Whoever YHWH chooses to be.

The early Christians were accustomed to calling Jesus, Lord. They transferred the usage of Adonai in the OT to Kurios (Sir) in Greek. Thus a Greek common word of deference became a title of God. “The Lord (Jesus) is my Shepherd.”

This part of how Jesus became seen as God, because He was connected with YHWH. YHWH named Hi9m and gave Him a YHWHist name meaning “YHWH saves,” Yeshua, transliterated by the Greeks into Jesus.

Exodus 3:15 And God said moreover to Moses, Thus say to the people of Israel, YHWH God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My Name forever, and this is My memorial unto all generations.

Today it seems that Jesus is God’s Name forever.

However the OT Day of YHWH (the Lord) is not the same as the NT Lord’s Day. The Day of the Lord is the Second Coming, while the Lord’s Day is the Day set aside for worship of the Lord Jesus or the First Day of the week.

I do not know if you know these things or not. Just in case you don’t and for others would might not, I am going over them. They are also explained in my book, The GOD Who RELATES.

However YHWH and the Sabbath are not the most important aspects of this situation, the two covenants are. YHWH and the Sabbath are pert of the Old Covenant. You need to be a part of the New Covenant, which is based entirely on the Person of Jesus Christ.

Jesus is the Alpha and Omega of the Christian faith. Trust in Jesus and He will give you the love, the peace, and the wisdom that you need, not the old covenant. Please forgive me if I am being overly blunt.


(Ray Bailey) #18

Thanks for that. Yes I know all of that. I have an extensive study over five years on the subject. You believe the name of YHWH is reserved for the Israelites only. I beg to differ. The TEN Commandments are given to ALL Nations and a guide. This does NOT include the covenant. The Ten Commandments are the part of the OT covenant that is carried forward into the NT. "No Jot or Tittle of the Law will pass away) Ten Commandments, not the OT covenantal laws.
(Yes, we will have to disagree on this. With grace!)

Sorry, but I take your admonishment with understanding. Yet your arguments will not sway me as I have certainly lived through all of them for a long time. Feel free to believe as you have been taught. We both will stand in the grace and glory of Jesus, and worship him, and then we will all turn (see Revelation) and worship the Father YHWH Almighty. Jesus always defers his glory to the Father. If we glorify the Father also, (by using his name appropriately) then there is no objection or difference between our understanding of the Trinity. Just our expression of it.

We constantly sing and pray saying “in the Name of the Father” What is that name? We know we are talking about the Father of the Godhood. If we don’t use his name, isn’t that a sin of omission, rather than a sin of commission? I believe I am not sinning in taking his name in vain (making empty or worthless), but what are you doing by not ever saying it (except in scholarly journals?

As to the difference in the Lord’s day. Yes, the OT "The Day of the Lord is not the same as The Lord’s Day! there is a definite difference in syntax between the two phrases).
TDotL is the Judgement upon the nations for maltreatment of his people, AND the rescue of his people. The diatribes of Amos and so forth are reminding the Israelites that they had been promising a “painless wonderful” Day of the Lord, and being reminded that it was going to be terrible because of their unbelief.

The fact that the Day of the Lord is also the coming of Jesus on The Day of The Lord to judge all the unrighteous. I believe that the Day of the Rapture is the same instant (as we go up) that judgement falls down. Jesus is the strong right arm of judgement and his second coming begins the “wrath of God” upon the nations.
I strongly recommend The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church for a fresh take that includes the Jewish Timeline of Prophecy into the Rapture (which has been largely ignored by Chrstians. Go’ds prophetic calendar is definatly ased on the re-establishemnt fo Israel and thereafter. So the Rapture must include the Day of the Lord as part of the sacheme.

The Lord’s Day for “Christian” worship is the day of worship and has no direct connection to the Day of the Lord.

Ray :sunglasses:


(Ray Bailey) #19

Sorry, Jim. I forgot to thank you for this link. I found it most engaging. I agree that the Forming and Filling model is the proper function of the creations tory. The “Rest” detail is great.

Making it a covenant between all mankind and God certainly gives more punch to the idea tha the Sabbath day might “still” be i9n play, even after the Ressurection? Something to look at.

I need to look at this more.

Thanks :sunglasses:


(Roger A. Sawtelle) #20

@RLBailey

You are thinking about sin in the OT legalistic manner. That is why I fear that you have rejected the New Covenant of Jesus Christ for the Old Mosaic Covenant.

Galatians 3:1-6 (NIV2011)
1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.
2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?
3 Are you so foolish? After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh?
4 Have you experienced so much in vain—if it really was in vain?
5 So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?
6 So also Abraham “believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

One difference between you and the Galatians who Paul is talking to is you speak as if you never accepted the New Covenant. It appears that accepted this new covenant as a upgrade to whatever you had and decided that this is your final goal, instead of continuing until you came to your ultimate destination. Thus you allowed the better to block the Right,

The Ten Commandments are the part of the OT covenant that is carried forward into the NT.(Yes, we will have to disagree on this. With grace!)

The Ten Commandments are not a part of the New Covenant. The New Covenant Law is Love God with all your heart, mind, spirit, and strength and love other as Jesus has loved you. The New Covenant is not an extension of the Old Covenant as Jesus, Paul, and the rest of the Bible make clear.

This is not just some sort of semantic disagreement. This is a fundamental difference that is not acceptable in the Body of Christ. Grace does not overcome it if one is does not accept salvation by grace.

Please do not say that the Church is somehow corrupted and that is why you disagree with it. The church is not perfect in many ways, but our salvation rests in Jesus Christ, so it is Him that you are rejecting, not the church.

.