greetings
If I may
Can a blind man lead others if he or she can’t see? If not, improper guidance can lead others to fall
For instance, John tells us in chapter 11, verse 41. The question is whether we were not blind in sin, you would have no guilt (sin) within you, and ask, I Am blind too, or are we blind as well, Jesus said, because you say you can see your sins shall remain
Rstats
I think I see where you are coming from First let me address your requests for a “list of works” like the ones spoken of in the references I shared, and also a list of works that I no longer do. Unfortunately, any list of works would be beside the point, simply because many, if not most of the works we do on a regular bases are only good or bad based on the reason we are doing them. But of course, you already know this. If you are out walking in the rain and a stranger offers you a ride, how are we to know if the stranger’s offer is a good or bad work? Does the stranger intend to help you, or does the stranger intend to take advantage of you? If you bring flowers to a woman, how do we know if that is a good work or a bad work? If you participate in or practice some religious action or activity, how can it be determined to be good or bad? Of course, it is judged good or bad based on the heart, and judgement is the sole arena of God. Every law we keep, every rule we obey, every work we work is still judged based on the heart. Even if we know of some laws that we cannot imagine any good reason for breaking them, we still can imagine keeping them for bad reasons. There is no problem keeping any of the Laws of God, except if one is kept for the wrong reason, then it too misses the mark. Proving this from scripture would not be difficult.
I said to Fritz “Resurrection day became a defining doctrine of the new Body of Christ.” To which you raised a concern. I understand your concern, and I believe using the word “doctrine” was not the best choice. However, I do still believe, both from scripture, and from history that gathering on resurrection day became a defining practice of the new Body of Christ. You said:
First, that is right, this scripture alone is not defining the practice that will follow, but it is (or may be) inaugurating it. Other scriptures chiming in with their corroborating testimony, when taken together form an accurate understanding of first century Christian norms. Early church history also confirms that meeting on the first day of the week was the consistent Christian practice, and it could even be considered a defining practice. In many early church writings we find the first day of the week being called “The Lord’s Day”, and so when John uses that term in Revelation, it is almost universally understood to be resurrection day, the first day of the week. One doesn’t actually prove the other, but taken together they form an understanding. To me, it’s an understanding, not a doctrine, if you get my distinction.
You also said:
You may be overlooking that John DID believe, based on the several times Jesus had plainly declared that is exactly what was about to take place, and based on his own testimony:
”Then the other disciple, who came to the tomb first, went in also; and he saw and believed.” John 20:8
There is also a corroborating verse that follows shortly after:
And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!” John 20:26
From John’s testimony, the following resurrection day, the disciples were again gathered, this time Thomas was there too. It sure feels like a scheduled meeting in a pre-determined place. Not proof, but it is beginning to come together. Then the next witness:
When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. Acts 2:1
As you know, Pentecost is 50 days after Passover; 7 full weeks plus one day. This celebrates the feast of firstfruits, which is what the resurrection of Jesus has also been called.
The next witness come later in Acts:
Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight. Acts 20:7
You are right, taken alone this is not proof, but taken within the group of scriptural testimonies with what we have preserved from church history, the margin of error is shrinking. Then we have Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians (and as it seems to the Galatians):
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the churches of Galatia, so you must do also: On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come. And when I come, whomever you approve by your letters I will send to bear your gift to Jerusalem. 1 Corinthians 16:1-3
This collection is supposedly to be taken up when the saints gather on the first day of the week.
Then we come to The Apostle John’s testimony in Revelation. A scene that does not seem to take place in assembly, and does not take place on the Sabbath (or that is what he would have said), but is “on The Lord’s day”.
I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet, saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,” Revelation 1:10-11
You are correct, that it can not be proven, from scripture alone, that the first Christians began meeting on the first day of the week. But for me, there is strong enough evidence to support the assertation.
greetings
anything that’s not of Christ it’s called a work grace gospel
See 2 Corinthians 11: 4
We all need a day of rest each week. As Jesus said, the sabbath was made for us, and not the other way around.
If we read the 10 Commandments we may notice the 4th command says, remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
Remember.
The Sabbath was already in practice. It wasn’t instituted only when the 10 Commandments were issued.
Just as were the other 9 commands.
As to the question , should we honor the Sabbath day? Sabbath traditionally is from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.
My humble opinion is, yes. If we feel led to.
Remember, Jesus reiterated the nine Commandments.
He also said, until heaven and earth pass away not one jot or tittle will be removed from the law.
The Sabbath was made for us, remember.
Jesus was Lord of the Sabbath. He who gave it to us. It is a gift from God.
Which is why I think Jesus didn’t reiterate the 4th Commandment as he did the other 9.
The temple authorities prosecuted the 4th Commandment,insisting violation of the 4th should result in death.
Which is why I think Jesus and his Disciples were found working on Sabbath day. Under the temple authorities this would lead to death.
However,that wasn’t what God willed. Which I think is why Jesus disobeyed the prohibition.
Sometimes, we will encounter members of Christ family who insist Sabbath is only for the Jews. (Remember the Sabbath day)
Would that then mean the other 9 Commandments are too?
We Gentiles are grafted into the spiritual tree of Israel. Abraham was Gentile.
I think if a Christian wants to honor God’s gift of Sabbath day,they certainly should do so.
I don’t foresee God holding it against us at the judgement.
The Bible says on the seventh day God rested. The scriptures that refer to the sabbath day always say the seventh day- Not the seventh day of the week
First and foremost, we need to state the obvious. Who established and initiated this Blessed and Sanctified day called the Sabbath. The answer is found in Genesis chapter 2 verses 1-3. Our creator, whom we the followers of Jesus, call our God. He rested on the seventh day.
The Hebrew word Sabbath is typically translated as (rest), and in Hebrew it means to cease, to stop, to desist (quit working).
Second, we need to establish the obvious, when was this day of rest established? Answer: in the beginning, God created the Heaven and the Earth.
Third, the Sabbath was not first given to Israel through Moses on Mount Sinai as we have just established.
So, after the great flood because mankind had again become so wicked and pagan, apparently only a few humans continued to honor God‘s Sabbath. So, God found it necessary to reestablish the validity of the Sabbath for (mankind). In fact, God wanted to reestablish all of his principles that had always existed, and he chose to set apart a group of people, an especially chosen nation, that he would use to serve him, and to achieve his purpose, that nation was Israel.
One of the myriads of things that God told Moses to do as the leader of the newly formed nation of God, was to bring back Shabbat worship.
Observing the Sabbath, the seventh day was a sign of those who were members of the congregation of people who trusted God, that is, Sabbath observance was an indicator of those who gave their alliance to God. In turn, such an observance also indicated all of those who God declared as sanctified, holy.
Fourth, why is the Sabbath now a very debated and confusing matter for most believers?
We have many historical documents at our fingertips, due to the wide scope of the Internet, and as a result, if we so desire, have opportunity to seek out understanding.
The following information may be very contentious, but no personal offense to anyone is intended. This information is available to anyone to look into for themselves, because there’s not space or the time to provide the full breath and scope in this forum. Here are bits and pieces for thought.
One reason often given why the church does not observe the seventh day Shabbat, (or in some people‘s view, the church has changed Shabbat from the 7th day to the 1st day of the week), is that the Sabbath was given to Israel, and therefore is only intended for Israel. Or it is taught that Shabbat was simply part of the laws of Moses, that is, Sabbath observance is
commanded in those rules and ordinances set down at Mount Sinai shortly after Israel departed Egypt.
History shows that around the late 2nd century A.D. it became a goal of the now Gentile dominated church to abandon anything that seemed to apply to the Jewish people, eventually in the fourth century, the church officially abolished the Shabbat.
This information can be found in the actual church documents from the several meetings, of the ecumenical councils convened by the emperor Constantine. Specifically read the council of Laodicea document, canon # 29, as established in the middle part of the 4th century A.D., and you will find that the church explicitly declared the Sabbath to be a Jewish holiday and therefore the church should have no part in it.
The (council) decided it would be better to end the practice of Sabbath observance altogether, and begin a new observance. This new observance was to take place on the day of the week that our Messiah arose. The first day of the week.
So what the majority of the institutional church has been practicing for 1700 years, is not a Sabbath which was moved by one day, from the 7th to the 1st day. Rather it is an entirely different celebration, established by the Roman church at the council of Laodicea in 364 A.D., at the direction of then current empire of Rome Constantine.
To sum it up, we find that in reality, God
established the Shabbat immediately upon finishing his creation, (long before there was such a thing as an Israelite). So whatever your doctrine on the Sabbath is, the Sabbath was not something given to and reserved for some specific group of people, namely Israel. It is simply historically, a scripturally inaccurate to say that the Sabbath was first given to Israel. It was given to humanity in general immediately upon the finish of creation.
I choose to believe, we should observe the Sabbath the way God intended it. Because God is above man. God is the one that chose this day and blessed it. No matter what man or what church doctrine states, God’s statement to his creation is supreme.
One thing I’ve learned in my walk of faith, is that whatever you have been taught or believe to be so at one moment in time and space, can and will be transformed (expanded), by the renewing of your mind, as long as you allow the Holy spirit of God to guide you.
All the information above is “(not)(not)” to say that church observance on the 1st of the week, (Sunday) is wrong!
The primary intent is only directed at the observant of the 7th day Sabbath.
Steppingstone, you laid a solid foundation—but you stopped halfway up the mountain. Yes, the Sabbath was blessed at Creation (Genesis 2:2–3), and yes, Israel was commanded to keep it (Exodus 20:8–11), but here’s the cold, hard New Covenant reality: Christ fulfilled the Law (Matthew 5:17), became our true rest (Hebrews 4:9–11), and nowhere—nowhere—did the apostles command the Church to keep the Sabbath. You can wave Constantine’s dirty laundry all day, but the early Spirit-led Church met on the first day (Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2) because they worshiped the risen Lord, not a calendar date.
Want to honor God? Rest in Christ, not the shadows (Colossians 2:16–17).
Yes we still need the Sabbath whether you celebrate it on Saturday , Sunday or what have you. It is the day the Lord gave us for rest and to spend time reflecting on Him. And with Him.
I like your comment Lighthouselady!! 
So even though it is generally painted by the Church that Jesus abolished the Old Law and gave mankind a new Law, even He plainly says in Matt. 5:17-19 that this is not the case. Rather, Yeshua went about separating God’s Laws (as given to Moses) from Traditions that men had developed over the centuries ABOUT those laws; Traditions that had become the basis of Judaism (and much of it wrong-minded), and were often set against the spirit of the Torah. And our Messiah also explained and expounded on the divinely intended MEANING of the Laws of Moses, and how many of the words of the prophets concerning the coming Messiah (now present) were fulfilled in Him. Jesus has fulfilled all the prophecies spoken of Him.
These direct oracles come from God’s Messiah, Yeshua, in the New Testament; yet even the bulk of these NT oracles are but repeats and reminders of what God spoke through the OT prophets, or are exegesis of the Law as given long ago. Of course where most Believers get tripped up is that they think that what Yeshua offered and spoke was brand new, because they’ve neither read nor been taught the Torah, (OT).
It’s unfortunate the Word of God is only understood by some through a 21st century mindset and not combined with a 1st century understanding of that time and culture.
So we can rightly assume that Jesus’ words are as oracle, because He claims to be God, which is (of course) the entire basis of our Christianity.
Steppingstone, you’re right that Jesus didn’t come to abolish the Law—but you left out the punchline: He came to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17). Fulfill doesn’t mean “keep it going like nothing changed,” it means complete, satisfy, bring to its intended goal—the Greek word is plēroō, and it smashes the idea that we’re still bound to Sinai.
Yes, Christ explained the Law—and then climbed up on a cross and nailed the old covenant to it (Colossians 2:14). That’s not 21st-century ignorance talking—that’s first-century apostolic doctrine. The Law was a tutor to lead us to Christ (Galatians 3:24–25), but when faith came, we were no longer under the tutor. Period. Full stop.
You can’t mix the old wine of Moses with the new wine of the Spirit (Luke 5:37–39). Jesus didn’t come to patch up Judaism—He came to build something brand new on His blood and His Spirit (Hebrews 8:13). If you’re still dragging Moses into the throne room, you’re missing the fact that the veil was torn (Matthew 27:51).
Christ is the final Word (Hebrews 1:1–2). The Law pointed to Him. The prophets pointed to Him. And now that He’s here, we don’t camp out at the road signs—we run to the risen King.
The translation of “to fulfill” is lekayem in Hebrew (le-KAI-yem), which means to uphold or establish, as well as to fulfill, complete or accomplish. David Bivin points out that the phrase “fulfill the Law” is often used as an idiom to mean to properly interpret the Torah so that people can obey it as God really intends.
The word “abolish” was likely either levatel, to nullify, or la’akor, to uproot, which meant to undermine the Torah by misinterpreting it. For example, the law against adultery could be interpreted as only about cheating on one’s spouse, but not about pornography. When Jesus declared that lust also was a violation of the commandment, he was clarifying the true intent of that law, so in rabbinic parlance he was “fulfilling the Law.”
The key is that the phrase “fulfill the Law” is a rabbinic idiom. It is found several other places in the New Testament and in Jewish sayings too.
The phrase “fulfill the Law” has another sense, which is to carry out a law – to actually do what it says.
These two meanings of “fulfill” shed light on Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:19:
Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Here the two actions of “practicing” and “teaching others to do the same” are an exact parallel to the two idiomatic senses of “fulfill.” In contrast, the words “break” and “teach others to break” are the idiomatic senses of “abolish.”
With this in mind, you can see that Matthew 5:19 parallels and expands on Jesus’ words about fulfilling and abolishing the Torah in Matthew 5:17. By understanding this idiom we see that Jesus was emphatically stating that his intention was to explain God’s Word and live it out perfectly, not to undermine or destroy it.
Why was Jesus emphasizing this point? Most likely because the Jewish religious leaders had accused him of undermining the Torah in his preaching. Jesus was responding that he was not misinterpreting God’s law, but bringing it to its best understanding.
Furthermore, if any of his disciples twisted or misinterpreted its least command, they would be considered “least” in his kingdom. Jesus’s entire ministry as a rabbi was devoted to getting to the heart of God’s Torah through what he said and how he lived.
Notice that on at least one occasion, Jesus leveled this same charge against the Pharisees. He accused them of nullifying the law to honor one’s mother and father by saying that possessions declared corban(dedicated to God) could not be released to support one’s elderly parents (Mark 7:11–12).
Certainly Jesus fulfilled the law by obeying it perfectly. But as a rabbi, he also “fulfilled” it by clarifying its meaning and enlightening people about how God truly wanted them to live.
My brother, please take care not place your feet in concrete concerning God‘s word and limit his hand of Grace to broaden your understanding in time. Peace, Shalom
Here is my statement of Faith, in case anyone has doubts.
I truly believe in the “whole” Word of God. The Torah, Tanakh, and New Testament. I believe Jesus to be my Savior. He is the only way to God YHWH our Father. I believe by faith, my sins have been forgiven, because Jesus willingly provided His life’s blood and His living water as our sacrificial Lamb. It is by God’s Grace we are saved. Jesus, Yeshua, sent us a comforter, His Holy Spirit, to comfort, guide and lead us into all truth. Not just any truth, His Holy and Righteous truth. 
Steppingstone, I appreciate your zeal for the “whole Word of God” — but brother, you’re trying to pour new covenant wine into old covenant wineskins, and Jesus warned exactly against that (Luke 5:36–39).
Yes, “fulfill” (lekayem) can mean to properly interpret—but you’re stopping short again. Christ didn’t just clarify the Law—He completed its purpose (Romans 10:4). If the Law still stood over us the same way, then explain why Hebrews 8:13 says the old covenant is “obsolete and ready to vanish away.” Obsolete doesn’t mean “still enforceable with better interpretation”—it means superseded.
Jesus didn’t die so we could just have a better Torah study group. He died to establish a better covenant, built on better promises (Hebrews 8:6). He didn’t come to tweak the Law; He came to be the once-for-all sacrifice it pointed toward (Hebrews 10:1–10).
I rejoice that you love the Torah—but don’t chain yourself back to Sinai when the invitation is to come boldly to the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16). Christ didn’t just explain Moses. He surpassed him. Moses brought law; Jesus brought life (John 1:17).
The Law was a beautiful shadow. But now the Light has come.
Don’t set up a tent under the shadow when the Son is shining.
I am not sure why this is being discussed. Keeping the Sabbath (whatever that might mean to a person) or not is not relevant to being a Christian. As Paul clearly wrote to the Corinthians, “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.”
Was that in 1st Corinthians or in 2nd Corinthians?
KPuff,
re: “You may be overlooking that John DID believe…: ‘Then the other disciple, who came to the tomb first, went in also; and he saw and believed.’ John 20:8”
And believed what? Mary M. had told him that “They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb and we do not know where they have laid Him”…”Then the other disciple, who came to the tomb first, went in also; and he saw and believed.”
Seems he believed what Mary had said - that the Messiah had been taken from the tomb - not that He had been resurrected.
re: “There is also a corroborating verse that follows shortly after: 'And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, ‘Peace to you!’ John 20:26 From John’s testimony, the following resurrection day, the disciples were again gathered, this time Thomas was there too. It sure feels like a scheduled meeting in a pre-determined place.”
But after eight days would be the 2nd day of the week.
Oh rstrats, you’re trying to juggle the text like it’s Silly Putty, but the Word of God doesn’t stretch to fit our theories—it cuts to reveal truth.
Let’s deal with it straight:
John 20:8 says “he saw and believed.” Believed what? That someone stole the body? That’s not belief—that’s despair. But the text doesn’t say “he saw and panicked,” or “he saw and agreed with Mary.” It says he believed—and the Greek (pisteuō) is the same word used consistently for faith in Christ, not fear of grave robbers.
Now yes, verse 9 clarifies they didn’t yet understand the Scripture that He must rise—but that doesn’t mean John didn’t believe Jesus was alive; it means he hadn’t yet connected all the dots from prophecy. There’s a difference between not understanding the why, and seeing enough to believe the what.
As for your calendar gymnastics—yes, “after eight days” from Sunday is the following Sunday. It’s inclusive counting, standard in Jewish reckoning. So instead of trying to pin a resurrection timetable on Roman calendar logic, maybe ask: why is Jesus showing up to His disciples on the first day of the week—again?
Because resurrection changed everything. The first day became the Lord’s Day (Revelation 1:10), not because Constantine declared it, but because Jesus kept showing up on it.
So let’s not reduce the empty tomb to a missing-body mystery. The apostles didn’t preach stolen remains—they preached Risen Redeemer, and they risked their lives for it. No one dies for a grave robbery conspiracy.
John saw.
John believed.
And the Church has never been the same.
Jesus is our Sabbath rest. Matthew 11:28-30
re: ''Oh rstrats, you’re trying to juggle the text like it’s Silly Putty, but the Word of God doesn’t stretch to fit our theories—it cuts to reveal truth."
In the immortal words of Pee Wee Herman, “I know you are but what am I?”
re: “Let’s deal with it straight: John 20:8 says ‘he saw and believed.’ Believed what? That someone stole the body?”
Well, that’s what Mary M. had told him. And since, as you note, he didn’t know that scripture had said that the Messiah was to be resurrected, the only logical thing to think was that he now believed that what Mary had said was true and not that the Messiah was alive.
re: “As for your calendar gymnastics—yes, “after eight days” from Sunday is the following Sunday.”
What is after one day from Sunday? And for that matter, what is one day from Sunday?
re: “…why is Jesus showing up to His disciples on the first day of the week—again?”
At the earliest it would have been the second day of the week.
re: “Because resurrection changed everything. The first day became the Lord’s Day…”
Agree. But not because scripture says it was the first day of the week. Nor does scripture show anyone observing the first day of the week as a day of rest and worship or in recognition of the resurrection, much less as a regular weekly event.
re: “… (Revelation 1:10)”
Nowhere in the verse is the first day of the week mentioned.
Benny,
re: “Jesus is our Sabbath rest. Matthew 11:28-30”
Why did you reference my post to KPuff which said nothing about the Sabbath?
BTW, you have a question directed to you in post #74.
