What if Christians and about 2000 years of Christian theology were wrong, and the Law hadn’t been ‘nailed to the cross’?
What if God never changed the ‘rules’?
What if the word in our Bibles most always translated as ‘Law’ was often better translated as ‘instruction’ or ‘teaching’? And believers were rightly taught to see it as good and not a burden? What if the Law was something to be thankful for and to praise God for, as Psalm 119 teaches us?
What if all that the church has taught about the meaning of ‘grace’ and ‘freedom’ really meant something else?
Imagine for a bit, some identifying marks of the ideal congregation of saints.
They are joyful people, sharing freely with each other. You notice them!
They are kind and gentle.
They enthusiastically gather together many times during the week for study and prayer.
They rest on the seventh day from their daily-provision work. They stay away from shopping or restaurants on that day. And they don't see that day and those choices as a burden, but as a delight!
They gather together for feasts and fellowship 7 times a year, and not at all on christmas and easter.
They don't eat pork or shellfish.
Are those things hard to do? Impossible to accomplish? Of course not! Now suppose these people didn’t do these things because they were ‘rules’ or because they would get something out of it, but because they knew that their living this way brought delight to God? Suppose these people searched out the Scriptures (the Old Testament) and looked for and joyfully observed all that GOD had commanded, being willing to put aside all customs and traditions that didn’t fully uphold and agree with God’s instruction?
If ‘love’ is defined from God’s perspective, instead of from a human emotional or legalistic (following the letter rather than obeying the spirit of the law - which is harder to do) viewpoint, things might look different in congregations today.
The foundation of a believer’s faith has to be truth. And contrary to postmodern ideas, truth isn’t something individually determined. There is only ONE truth, and it exists regardless of people’s belief in or acceptance of it.
Most people in churches today call themselves Christians. But in reality, it isn’t Christ they follow, but Paul. They are actually Paulians!
Truth is…the ONE truth is…Christ never abolished God’s Law. Never, not the smallest bit. And He even taught that anyone who did teach that any part of it was abolished would be considered least in His Father’s kingdom. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in/by the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in/by the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:19, ESV)
Truth is…read in context, it is not clear that Paul ever taught that it was abolished either! Peter pointed out that some of the things Paul spoke of were being twisted by those who were ignorant of the truth, and that this twisting led to lawlessness. There are some things in (his letters) that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. (2 Peter 3:16b -17 ESV)
Truth is…if God did not speak through the prophets beforehand, in the Scriptures (Old Testament, remember) that something was going to happen...it isn’t true.
The Scripture is full of teaching of the Messiah; the gospel has been proclaimed from creation! The end has been told from the beginning! And God’s prophets never told us His Law would be ended, or be reserved for a select group of people, or be changed. His Law is forever. And one law was meant for one people. Older and younger brothers together, the same family. The Law was never meant to remain written on tablets of stone. It was always meant to be engraved on a willing, yielded heart.
And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules. (Ezekiel 36:26-27 ESV)
And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. (John 10:16 ESV)
What if?
December 19, 2009
December 15, 2009
Why is there church on Sunday? Part 4
How easy it is to subtly manipulate the simple instruction of God! How prone we are to walk according to our own understanding, all the while thinking we are pretty holy!
This is as true of our day as it was in the days Yeshua walked among us. Then, He lashed out at the religious teachers of the day for their twisting and manipulation of the pure truth of the ways of God. The christian church is just as guilty of this as the Jewish religious leaders.
But so are we individually. Each of us faces the battle with self will.
It has been hard to review this respected pastor's response to the question of why we don't worship on the Sabbath. I am perplexed almost beyond words at how what he says can come out of what I read in the Bible.
It's not just a case of differing opinions. What he says just isn't there. How can hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of dedicated and sincere believers, have gone along with this? Are they wrong? Or am I? Are there two versions of 'right'?
What if I'm totally out in left field, being the only one who isn't seeing what they see? What is going on here? Reading through the almost full page of this intelligent, learned and highly respected pastor's explanation of how the 'church fathers' (an unsavoury bunch on the whole, if you've ever read up on them) have 'proved beyond doubt that the early church worshiped on the Lord's Day' has been disheartening.
Who am I to question him? I have no education, no seminary or theological training. I only read the Bible, study it, ponder its words, pray for understanding and try to walk in the path of the ways of this revelation. Is that enough? I read it literally, then pray for understanding of its patterns, themes and examples.
I have to ask...why is it so important to the church to do away with the Sabbath? How has what was given as a sign of the covenant, and as a gift of rest and time to a nation of former slaves (as we were also, slaves in bondage to sin) become such a foul thing to the christian church?
It isn't as if they have simply transferred the day of rest to Sunday. While this was perhaps truer many years ago (though my father has shared his abhorrence of the 'Sunday thou shalt nots' of his childhood) today on Sunday we meet more christians from our former church at Costco than we do any other day of the week!
Some of what this pastor says is so beautiful. Yet almost in the same sentence, he makes a totally baseless claim. Example: The Lord's Day should never deteriorate into a legalistic, Old Testament, or Jewish Sabbath. Sunday should be experienced as a delight rather than a drudgery freighted with burdensome lists of DOs and DON'Ts. (To be honest, however, I don't see a problem in our culture or churches of keeping the Sabbath too strictly.) Presumably his reference to a 'Jewish Sabbath' means one that includes the man-made burden of additional rules which all but smothers the original beauty of the commandment. He appears to equate such an experience with 'a legalistic, Old Testament' observance. The Sabbath was always intended to be a joy and a delight. He even quotes God's words from Isaiah 58 on this at the end of his response, though apparently meaning the christian 'sabbath' of Sunday instead:
If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath, and from doing as you please on my holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the Lord's holy day honourable, and if you honour it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the Lord, and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob. The mouth of the Lord has spoken.
THIS is an 'Old Testament Sabbath'! How is this legalistic?
How quickly we like to apply all kinds of human rules to how we do things. According to this pastor, we should worship on Sunday because that's just the way its been done for years; the Bible says we should (it doesn't - see Parts 1-3) and so do the church fathers (they actually do, but many of them were very antisemitic and there was motivation for breaking with the Jews).
How about if, on the Biblical Sabbath, we just rest from our labour that provides for ourselves during the week, and allow those who work for us (including bus drivers and shop clerks) to have a break too, whether they take it or not?
How about if we refrain from making too many rules for ourselves and others, and focus instead on the wonderful gift we've been given, and cultivate a genuine desire to please the Giver in how we use this gift?
How about if we refrain from making rules for or passing judgement on how others observe this day, beyond being available to them to together search out the Biblical truth, then letting them make up their own mind?
How about if we don't substitute a day of rest with frantic, intense 'study' or 'worship' or 'good deeds' that exhausts us or frazzles our family?
Sunday is actually a wonderful day to spend in some study, prayer, praise and corporate gathering. It's just not the Sabbath.
This is as true of our day as it was in the days Yeshua walked among us. Then, He lashed out at the religious teachers of the day for their twisting and manipulation of the pure truth of the ways of God. The christian church is just as guilty of this as the Jewish religious leaders.
But so are we individually. Each of us faces the battle with self will.
It has been hard to review this respected pastor's response to the question of why we don't worship on the Sabbath. I am perplexed almost beyond words at how what he says can come out of what I read in the Bible.
It's not just a case of differing opinions. What he says just isn't there. How can hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of dedicated and sincere believers, have gone along with this? Are they wrong? Or am I? Are there two versions of 'right'?
What if I'm totally out in left field, being the only one who isn't seeing what they see? What is going on here? Reading through the almost full page of this intelligent, learned and highly respected pastor's explanation of how the 'church fathers' (an unsavoury bunch on the whole, if you've ever read up on them) have 'proved beyond doubt that the early church worshiped on the Lord's Day' has been disheartening.
Who am I to question him? I have no education, no seminary or theological training. I only read the Bible, study it, ponder its words, pray for understanding and try to walk in the path of the ways of this revelation. Is that enough? I read it literally, then pray for understanding of its patterns, themes and examples.
I have to ask...why is it so important to the church to do away with the Sabbath? How has what was given as a sign of the covenant, and as a gift of rest and time to a nation of former slaves (as we were also, slaves in bondage to sin) become such a foul thing to the christian church?
It isn't as if they have simply transferred the day of rest to Sunday. While this was perhaps truer many years ago (though my father has shared his abhorrence of the 'Sunday thou shalt nots' of his childhood) today on Sunday we meet more christians from our former church at Costco than we do any other day of the week!
Some of what this pastor says is so beautiful. Yet almost in the same sentence, he makes a totally baseless claim. Example: The Lord's Day should never deteriorate into a legalistic, Old Testament, or Jewish Sabbath. Sunday should be experienced as a delight rather than a drudgery freighted with burdensome lists of DOs and DON'Ts. (To be honest, however, I don't see a problem in our culture or churches of keeping the Sabbath too strictly.) Presumably his reference to a 'Jewish Sabbath' means one that includes the man-made burden of additional rules which all but smothers the original beauty of the commandment. He appears to equate such an experience with 'a legalistic, Old Testament' observance. The Sabbath was always intended to be a joy and a delight. He even quotes God's words from Isaiah 58 on this at the end of his response, though apparently meaning the christian 'sabbath' of Sunday instead:
If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath, and from doing as you please on my holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the Lord's holy day honourable, and if you honour it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the Lord, and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob. The mouth of the Lord has spoken.
THIS is an 'Old Testament Sabbath'! How is this legalistic?
How quickly we like to apply all kinds of human rules to how we do things. According to this pastor, we should worship on Sunday because that's just the way its been done for years; the Bible says we should (it doesn't - see Parts 1-3) and so do the church fathers (they actually do, but many of them were very antisemitic and there was motivation for breaking with the Jews).
How about if, on the Biblical Sabbath, we just rest from our labour that provides for ourselves during the week, and allow those who work for us (including bus drivers and shop clerks) to have a break too, whether they take it or not?
How about if we refrain from making too many rules for ourselves and others, and focus instead on the wonderful gift we've been given, and cultivate a genuine desire to please the Giver in how we use this gift?
How about if we refrain from making rules for or passing judgement on how others observe this day, beyond being available to them to together search out the Biblical truth, then letting them make up their own mind?
How about if we don't substitute a day of rest with frantic, intense 'study' or 'worship' or 'good deeds' that exhausts us or frazzles our family?
Sunday is actually a wonderful day to spend in some study, prayer, praise and corporate gathering. It's just not the Sabbath.
Why is there church on Sunday? Part 3
A Reformed pastor is asked why there is church on Sunday, not Saturday?
His response was that while the command to observe the Sabbath is still valid, the church is not required to keep the Jewish Sabbath. He points out (using 'proof texts' though not in context) that since 'many things changed' about the 'Old Testament legislation', 'we should not be surprised if there were changes not only with respect to the worship, but also to the Sabbath itself.'
Next he insists 'In fact we do also see that the day of worship switched from the seventh to the first. This was undoubtedly inspired by Jesus' resurrection from the dead on Sunday. The first day, the day of the resurrection, is also called in Scripture, "The Lord's Day" (cf Luke 24:1; John 20:19; Revelation 1:10). In God's Word it is clear that the first Christians immediately began meeting together on that day (John 20:19, 26; Acts 2:1; Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2). This should not be confused with the fact that everywhere the apostles went, they naturally conducted their first evangelistic efforts in the Jewish synagogues on Saturdays (Acts 9:20; 13:5, 14; 14:1; 17:1-4, etc). But Christians worshipped together on Sunday.
There are a lot of proof texts given here. In summary, I examined each one and could find no evidence at all to support the christian church and this pastor's claim that the day of worship had been changed to Sunday, not that the church is not required to keep the Biblical Sabbath.
A brief note before diving into the rest of this: Scripture (which I call the Old Testament) does not actually say the Israelites must gather together at the temple to worship on the Sabbath. They did that, at least from some point, and it is not bad, but it was never commanded. The NT writers also do not say christians must go to church (be that Saturday or Sunday). While it is not a bad thing at all to gather once a week (or even more) for study of the Word and corporate praise, it is NOT commanded!! That is a human tradition.
The weekly Sabbath is a day set apart by God, on which He ceased from His labour, and on which He calls His people to do the same. His intent is for us to treat His weekly Sabbath as a joy and a delight, a privilege, not a burden to want to be released from!
Now let's get back to these Biblical claims for a change in Sabbath day. I'll list them below with notes, and in greater context if necessary.
1. The claim for the first day being called 'The Lord's Day': Luke 24:1 But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared. Note that the phrase 'on the first day of the week' is an interpretation and is debatable. The Greek actually directly translates as 'And day one of the Sabbaths'. This phrase is sometimes also translated as 'the day after the Sabbath'. Since in the time period of Passover, there were weekly Sabbaths as well as special Sabbaths, the 'day after the Sabbath' does not necessarily mean it was also Sunday, the first day of the week. So to read into this passage that the day was Sunday (even though it may have been) is already reading an assumption into the text.
An equivalent to this verse, Matthew 28:1 (in direct translation from Greek) reads 'And late on Sabbath, in the evening of day one of Sabbath, came Mary the Magdalene and the other Mary, to view the tomb.' If you read this literally, it says they came late on that Sabbath! In those days, some considered a Hebrew day to run from evening to evening, so the day after the Sabbath could be considered to begin around sundown on the Sabbath. If that Sabbath was a weekly one, in our timeframe, that would be on Saturday after sundown. NOT Sunday. And it actually reads 'and late ON Sabbath' perhaps they were there even before the Sabbath was completely over, which would make sense. If the tomb was less than a Sabbath day's walk for them (one of the additional rules) they would be permitted to walk, as long as they were not carrying a heavy load (another rule).
John 20:19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." This phrase, in Greek, directly translates as 'It being then late in that day, in the day one of the Sabbaths...' If you read all of John 20, the timing is the same as when Yeshua appeared to the Marys. 'That day' whichever day of the week it was, was busy! This verse, in its direct translation from the Greek, agrees with what Yeshua said in Matthew 12:8, that 'The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath." He appeared to his disciples at the close of that day. This verse, however, does NOT tell us that Sunday is now replacing the Sabbath as 'The Lord's Day.'
Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet. This is the ONLY place in the New Testament where the phrase 'The Lord's Day' actually appears. Reading Revelation, you quickly see that 'The Lord's Day' is not referring to Sunday, but the 'great and terrible Day of the Lord' ... the Judgment Day. There is NOTHING here, either in this verse or in its greater context, to indicate that the day John received his revelation on a Sunday!
2.The claim that christians 'immediately began meeting together on that day' (Sunday): From John 20:19 (above) we see that the 'christians' who were actually the Hebrew Jewish disciples, did not immediately organize a church service! They were gathered together for 'fear of the Jews'. If the Jewish leaders had crucified Yeshua, would they be next? The text simply read literally, they were hiding in fear, not meeting to worship.
John 20:26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." This again, says nothing about the disciples meeting to worship, though perhaps this time they were. Eight days later would technically be a week and one day, not the following Sunday.
Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. Of course they would have been all together in one place...it was commanded in the Torah that all Israelite men meet for Shavuot (Pentecost) in Jerusalem. It does not say what they were doing.
Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight. The weekly Sabbath day (work ceased on the ‘day’, people generally didn’t work at night) ends at sundown on what is our Saturday. At the close of the Sabbath, a religious (man-made) ceremony called Havdalah is held to mark the separation between the holy (Sabbath) and the common (the six days of work). After this bread may be 'broken' as part of a meal. In the account of Acts 20, it is more likely Paul was planning to leave in the morning (of our Sunday) and stayed late into the night talking.
1 Corinthians 16:2 On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come. There is nothing here either about Sunday being a worship day. The Greek direct translation actually says 'one of the Sabbaths' not 'the first day of the week'. Even translated 'first day' the verse goes on to say 'each of you' meaning this is an individual responsibility, not a corporate one that might happen at a meeting.
Next...a look at the teachings of the 'church fathers' used as further support for Sunday replacement of the Biblical Sabbath
His response was that while the command to observe the Sabbath is still valid, the church is not required to keep the Jewish Sabbath. He points out (using 'proof texts' though not in context) that since 'many things changed' about the 'Old Testament legislation', 'we should not be surprised if there were changes not only with respect to the worship, but also to the Sabbath itself.'
Next he insists 'In fact we do also see that the day of worship switched from the seventh to the first. This was undoubtedly inspired by Jesus' resurrection from the dead on Sunday. The first day, the day of the resurrection, is also called in Scripture, "The Lord's Day" (cf Luke 24:1; John 20:19; Revelation 1:10). In God's Word it is clear that the first Christians immediately began meeting together on that day (John 20:19, 26; Acts 2:1; Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2). This should not be confused with the fact that everywhere the apostles went, they naturally conducted their first evangelistic efforts in the Jewish synagogues on Saturdays (Acts 9:20; 13:5, 14; 14:1; 17:1-4, etc). But Christians worshipped together on Sunday.
There are a lot of proof texts given here. In summary, I examined each one and could find no evidence at all to support the christian church and this pastor's claim that the day of worship had been changed to Sunday, not that the church is not required to keep the Biblical Sabbath.
A brief note before diving into the rest of this: Scripture (which I call the Old Testament) does not actually say the Israelites must gather together at the temple to worship on the Sabbath. They did that, at least from some point, and it is not bad, but it was never commanded. The NT writers also do not say christians must go to church (be that Saturday or Sunday). While it is not a bad thing at all to gather once a week (or even more) for study of the Word and corporate praise, it is NOT commanded!! That is a human tradition.
The weekly Sabbath is a day set apart by God, on which He ceased from His labour, and on which He calls His people to do the same. His intent is for us to treat His weekly Sabbath as a joy and a delight, a privilege, not a burden to want to be released from!
Now let's get back to these Biblical claims for a change in Sabbath day. I'll list them below with notes, and in greater context if necessary.
1. The claim for the first day being called 'The Lord's Day': Luke 24:1 But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared. Note that the phrase 'on the first day of the week' is an interpretation and is debatable. The Greek actually directly translates as 'And day one of the Sabbaths'. This phrase is sometimes also translated as 'the day after the Sabbath'. Since in the time period of Passover, there were weekly Sabbaths as well as special Sabbaths, the 'day after the Sabbath' does not necessarily mean it was also Sunday, the first day of the week. So to read into this passage that the day was Sunday (even though it may have been) is already reading an assumption into the text.
An equivalent to this verse, Matthew 28:1 (in direct translation from Greek) reads 'And late on Sabbath, in the evening of day one of Sabbath, came Mary the Magdalene and the other Mary, to view the tomb.' If you read this literally, it says they came late on that Sabbath! In those days, some considered a Hebrew day to run from evening to evening, so the day after the Sabbath could be considered to begin around sundown on the Sabbath. If that Sabbath was a weekly one, in our timeframe, that would be on Saturday after sundown. NOT Sunday. And it actually reads 'and late ON Sabbath' perhaps they were there even before the Sabbath was completely over, which would make sense. If the tomb was less than a Sabbath day's walk for them (one of the additional rules) they would be permitted to walk, as long as they were not carrying a heavy load (another rule).
John 20:19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." This phrase, in Greek, directly translates as 'It being then late in that day, in the day one of the Sabbaths...' If you read all of John 20, the timing is the same as when Yeshua appeared to the Marys. 'That day' whichever day of the week it was, was busy! This verse, in its direct translation from the Greek, agrees with what Yeshua said in Matthew 12:8, that 'The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath." He appeared to his disciples at the close of that day. This verse, however, does NOT tell us that Sunday is now replacing the Sabbath as 'The Lord's Day.'
Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet. This is the ONLY place in the New Testament where the phrase 'The Lord's Day' actually appears. Reading Revelation, you quickly see that 'The Lord's Day' is not referring to Sunday, but the 'great and terrible Day of the Lord' ... the Judgment Day. There is NOTHING here, either in this verse or in its greater context, to indicate that the day John received his revelation on a Sunday!
2.The claim that christians 'immediately began meeting together on that day' (Sunday): From John 20:19 (above) we see that the 'christians' who were actually the Hebrew Jewish disciples, did not immediately organize a church service! They were gathered together for 'fear of the Jews'. If the Jewish leaders had crucified Yeshua, would they be next? The text simply read literally, they were hiding in fear, not meeting to worship.
John 20:26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." This again, says nothing about the disciples meeting to worship, though perhaps this time they were. Eight days later would technically be a week and one day, not the following Sunday.
Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. Of course they would have been all together in one place...it was commanded in the Torah that all Israelite men meet for Shavuot (Pentecost) in Jerusalem. It does not say what they were doing.
Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight. The weekly Sabbath day (work ceased on the ‘day’, people generally didn’t work at night) ends at sundown on what is our Saturday. At the close of the Sabbath, a religious (man-made) ceremony called Havdalah is held to mark the separation between the holy (Sabbath) and the common (the six days of work). After this bread may be 'broken' as part of a meal. In the account of Acts 20, it is more likely Paul was planning to leave in the morning (of our Sunday) and stayed late into the night talking.
1 Corinthians 16:2 On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come. There is nothing here either about Sunday being a worship day. The Greek direct translation actually says 'one of the Sabbaths' not 'the first day of the week'. Even translated 'first day' the verse goes on to say 'each of you' meaning this is an individual responsibility, not a corporate one that might happen at a meeting.
Next...a look at the teachings of the 'church fathers' used as further support for Sunday replacement of the Biblical Sabbath
Why is there church on Sunday? Part 2
Having examined the context of Colossians 2:16 to determine there is no validity here for the statement that 'the church is no longer required to keep the Jewish Sabbaths', lets look at some other statements made by the Reformed pastor in his answer to the person asking why we worship on Sunday.
'Remember', he responds, 'before Jesus rose from the dead, the Old Testament legislation was still in effect. Not only did God's people in Jesus day worship on Saturday, they also had priests, offered sacrifices and circumcised believers and their children. Following Jesus resurrection, however, many things changed. The Old Testament priesthood changed because now Jesus is our only High Priest and every believer is a priest (cf. 1 Peter 1). The sacrificial system changed because Jesus was the once-for-all sacrifice for sin and believers now offer their lives and praises to God as living sacrifices (Romans 12:1, Hebrews 13:15). The sacrament of circumcision was changed to baptism because 'bloody' sacraments were no longer appropriate after Jesus' blood was shed (Colossians 2:11-12). We should not be surprised if there were changes not only with respect to the worship, but also to the Sabbath itself.'
The main assertion in his response is that the Levitical system which is part of the Torah, is ended, changed to a new system. On this he bases an assumption that the Sabbath also has been changed. But are his claims valid? Has the priesthood changed?
In Exodus 19:6, at Mt Sinai, God tells Israel 'you shall be for me a kingdom of priests, a holy nation'. ALL of them were meant to be a kingdom of priests. In 1 Peter 2:5 and 9, Peter echoes this.
While the Levitical system remained, believers in Messiah were to consider themselves a SPIRITUAL priesthood. Interestingly, Revelations 5:10 and 20:6 tell us this entire priesthood will reign on the earth! So it does not appear that the spiritual replaces the physical but completes it.
Remember that the physical system is a shadow of the spiritual. The written Torah is a shadow of Yeshua, the Living Torah. HE is the Torah we are to follow. The written is valid, but incomplete. Therefore, it is not finished or ended, it exists to point us to the Living Torah. Perfection can't be attained through the written Torah, but it exists for a purpose. If it is indeed overturned, then the words of the prophets such as Isaiah would be false.
There are many references to continued sacrifices in the days after Messiah returns. Look at these from Isaiah 56:
1Thus says the LORD:"Keep justice, and do righteousness, for soon my salvation will come, and my deliverance be revealed.2Blessed is the man who does this, and the son of man who holds it fast,who keeps the Sabbath, not profaning it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil." 3Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say, "The LORD will surely separate me from his people";and let not the eunuch say, "Behold, I am a dry tree."4For thus says the LORD:"To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant,5 I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters;I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off. 6"And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants,everyone who keeps the Sabbath and does not profane it, and holds fast my covenant—7 these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer;their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar;for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples."8The Lord GOD, who gathers the outcasts of Israel, declares,"I will gather yet others to him besides those already gathered.
Has the sacrificial system changed? Not if burnt offerings and sacrifices are still to be made after the final gathering (Isaiah 56).
The pastor cites Romans 12:1. This verse does not say the system has changed. It is instead an explanation of our spiritual worship. The physical system was well explained in the Torah, remember. Hebrews 13 continues the explanation of this spiritual sacrifice. But it too does not say the Levitical system had ended.
Has circumcision been replaced with baptism? The proof text here is Colossians 2:11-12. This passage speaks, as do the previous passages, of the spiritual Torah of which the written Torah is a shadow. It is further explanation. It does NOT say that circumcision has been changed to baptism. As a matter of fact, that statement in particular is a huge and illogical jump in reasoning.
Now it bears saying here that the Torah clearly calls for sacrifices to be offered to God at the temple in Jerusalem. And that is no longer possible. But that does not mean the system has necessarily ended. It appears, instead, to be an even greater pointer to the sacrifice Yeshua made. That the Israelites could no longer cover their unintentional sins with animal sacrifices offered in the prescribed manner should have made them even more aware of their need for Messiah. Perhaps had they cried out as a nation, He would have opened their eyes to the truth. Instead, they replaced the Levitical system with one of their own making, called rabbinic Judaism.
All in all, there is not convincing Biblical evidence given, that the statements the pastor makes are valid. If it is not proven that the church is no longer required to keep the Jewish Sabbath, if it is not proven that the Old Testament priesthood changed, that the sacrificial system changed and that circumcision has been replaced with baptism...then what?
Next in Part 3...the claim that the day of worship has been switched from the seventh to the first.
'Remember', he responds, 'before Jesus rose from the dead, the Old Testament legislation was still in effect. Not only did God's people in Jesus day worship on Saturday, they also had priests, offered sacrifices and circumcised believers and their children. Following Jesus resurrection, however, many things changed. The Old Testament priesthood changed because now Jesus is our only High Priest and every believer is a priest (cf. 1 Peter 1). The sacrificial system changed because Jesus was the once-for-all sacrifice for sin and believers now offer their lives and praises to God as living sacrifices (Romans 12:1, Hebrews 13:15). The sacrament of circumcision was changed to baptism because 'bloody' sacraments were no longer appropriate after Jesus' blood was shed (Colossians 2:11-12). We should not be surprised if there were changes not only with respect to the worship, but also to the Sabbath itself.'
The main assertion in his response is that the Levitical system which is part of the Torah, is ended, changed to a new system. On this he bases an assumption that the Sabbath also has been changed. But are his claims valid? Has the priesthood changed?
In Exodus 19:6, at Mt Sinai, God tells Israel 'you shall be for me a kingdom of priests, a holy nation'. ALL of them were meant to be a kingdom of priests. In 1 Peter 2:5 and 9, Peter echoes this.
While the Levitical system remained, believers in Messiah were to consider themselves a SPIRITUAL priesthood. Interestingly, Revelations 5:10 and 20:6 tell us this entire priesthood will reign on the earth! So it does not appear that the spiritual replaces the physical but completes it.
Remember that the physical system is a shadow of the spiritual. The written Torah is a shadow of Yeshua, the Living Torah. HE is the Torah we are to follow. The written is valid, but incomplete. Therefore, it is not finished or ended, it exists to point us to the Living Torah. Perfection can't be attained through the written Torah, but it exists for a purpose. If it is indeed overturned, then the words of the prophets such as Isaiah would be false.
There are many references to continued sacrifices in the days after Messiah returns. Look at these from Isaiah 56:
1Thus says the LORD:"Keep justice, and do righteousness, for soon my salvation will come, and my deliverance be revealed.2Blessed is the man who does this, and the son of man who holds it fast,who keeps the Sabbath, not profaning it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil." 3Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say, "The LORD will surely separate me from his people";and let not the eunuch say, "Behold, I am a dry tree."4For thus says the LORD:"To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant,5 I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters;I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off. 6"And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants,everyone who keeps the Sabbath and does not profane it, and holds fast my covenant—7 these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer;their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar;for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples."8The Lord GOD, who gathers the outcasts of Israel, declares,"I will gather yet others to him besides those already gathered.
Has the sacrificial system changed? Not if burnt offerings and sacrifices are still to be made after the final gathering (Isaiah 56).
The pastor cites Romans 12:1. This verse does not say the system has changed. It is instead an explanation of our spiritual worship. The physical system was well explained in the Torah, remember. Hebrews 13 continues the explanation of this spiritual sacrifice. But it too does not say the Levitical system had ended.
Has circumcision been replaced with baptism? The proof text here is Colossians 2:11-12. This passage speaks, as do the previous passages, of the spiritual Torah of which the written Torah is a shadow. It is further explanation. It does NOT say that circumcision has been changed to baptism. As a matter of fact, that statement in particular is a huge and illogical jump in reasoning.
Now it bears saying here that the Torah clearly calls for sacrifices to be offered to God at the temple in Jerusalem. And that is no longer possible. But that does not mean the system has necessarily ended. It appears, instead, to be an even greater pointer to the sacrifice Yeshua made. That the Israelites could no longer cover their unintentional sins with animal sacrifices offered in the prescribed manner should have made them even more aware of their need for Messiah. Perhaps had they cried out as a nation, He would have opened their eyes to the truth. Instead, they replaced the Levitical system with one of their own making, called rabbinic Judaism.
All in all, there is not convincing Biblical evidence given, that the statements the pastor makes are valid. If it is not proven that the church is no longer required to keep the Jewish Sabbath, if it is not proven that the Old Testament priesthood changed, that the sacrificial system changed and that circumcision has been replaced with baptism...then what?
Next in Part 3...the claim that the day of worship has been switched from the seventh to the first.
December 14, 2009
Why is there church on Sunday?
A Reformed Church pastor was asked the following question:
Why is there church on Sunday? The Ten Commandments say that the seventh day, or Saturday, is the Sabbath. Jesus, in Luke 4, worshiped on Saturday. Aren’t Christians worshipping on the wrong day?
His response agreed it was correct that Jesus worshipped on Saturday, and that Luke 4 teaches it was His custom to worship weekly with the people of God. The Ten Commandments include the commandment to honour the Sabbath, he says, that has not changed. In fact, he affirms, the Sabbath was ordained in creation! It affords believers and their families the chance to receive one of God’s chief blessings. He goes on to make some statements, backing them up with Scripture. I’d like to take a closer look at them.
His first statement is the subject of this piece, and also the foundation on which the rest of his explanation is built. In it he claims that while the fourth commandment remains valid, the church is no longer required to keep the Jewish Sabbath! On what does he base this claim? On Colossians 2:16.
Now this is a pretty big statement that he makes here. According to the Law of God, refusing to honour His Sabbath was an offense punishable by death! Did GOD change His Law? Or is it a new ‘human tradition’?
Bear in mind that, in the New Testament letters (the Apostolic letters), we have only one side of the discussion. The writers are giving answers, but we don't see the questions. So to flatly state 'this is what Paul (Peter, James) meant' is a bit presumptuous. (And to build an entire religion on it is something else.)
We can carefully examine the context of statements within letters, and try to understand them in light of other historical evidence of the day. We MUST regard each statement in light of the Torah (instruction, Law) found in the Old Testament, for if they are of YHVH, they will not break His commands. Yeshua Himself warns that anyone who breaks the least of His commandments will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 5:19).
Let's take a closer look at Colossians 2:16…in its context of the entire chapter of Colossians 2.
1For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, 2that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 4I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. 5For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the firmness of your faith in Christ. 6 Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, 7 rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. 8See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 9For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 11In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. 16Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. 18Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, 19and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. 20If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— 21 "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" 22( referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? 23These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.
Paul (generally agreed to be the writer) encourages the Colossian congregation to reach greater understanding of the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Messiah. THAT understanding will help protect them from being led astray by arguments which sound good but are designed to lead them away from truth. Yeshua is the embodiment of the Law of God, perfectly fulfilled.
Paul encourages the Colossians to walk after HIM (Yeshua), to become rooted and established in HIS truth. To themselves walk in the perfection of the Law! Not to walk in the shadow of an outward conformity only, but to walk (run, as in Psalm 119:32) in the fulness of the Law lived out from the purity of a renewed heart. NOT to substitute false truth presented through human interpretation, and walk after it.
Human arguments and worldviews (philosophy) are very attractive, yet empty. Human nature rebels against submitting to the truth of our need to be saved. We can’t contribute to our salvation; we can only humbly accept it. Our sin nature doesn’t want to do that!
Paul reminds the Colossians that their debt of sin (with its sentence of death) was cancelled! That those who held power over them in their weak state of sin are effectively made powerless! He warns them not to let themselves again become enslaved to the bondage of human tradition, of human attempt to merit God’s grace.
Two of the main issues of the day were emphasis on strict rules for purity, and honouring the Sabbath and holy days. Paul touches on this here in verse 16.
Other historical documents bear out this 'scrupulosity concerning meats' (purity) their 'superstition as respects the Sabbaths' (note the plural...this includes high holy Sabbaths), their 'fancies about fasting and new moons' (Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus).
Man-made ‘fence laws’ were enacted so if any law were broken, it would be the fence law and not the Law of God. This is a fine sounding argument but ineffective. It controlled only the outward behaviour and had no impact on the heart state out of which obedience is meant to come.
Paul compares this man-made emphasis on how to celebrate holy days or how to eat (the human teaching of ritual purification of the hands, for example, so as not to transmit ‘uncleanness’ to food) with the worship of angels and the practice of ‘asceticism and severity to the body’. None of these things are Scriptural. Paul told them not to let anyone judge them based on man-made rules. What he was NOT teaching them was to do away with the Sabbath! That is a ludicrious conclusion.
Based on the context of verse 16, it is the opinions on HOW to observe the Law that the writer was discussing. The Sabbath, the holy days, the (simple) food laws God gave, were given to point us to our need for Messiah. They spelled out righteousness for us and showed us our shortcoming and our need for saving. They show us what righteousness looks like. They are not Messiah! They cannot save us! They show us HIS righteousness. They are a shadow of Him. IN Him is all the fullness of the teaching and instruction (the Law) of God, perfectly shown. HE is the light to the nations that Israel, because of sin, could never be.
These simple laws had become covered over with human laws that became an enormous burden for the people. So, Paul reasons, why then do you turn back to these empty attempts at self justification? These are human laws and teachings! Paul strongly writes that BECAUSE Yeshua has cancelled the record of debt that was against them, thereby disarming the rulers and authorities who held power over them, they are not to again allow anyone to judge them in their celebration of holy days or in how they ate their food, and submit themselves again to the teachings of the human rules and human laws.
In context, Paul could not be referring to the Torah, the Law of God given at Mt Sinai. There is no evidence here that the Law of God regarding food and drink or holy days is altered in any way. And most clearly, there is NO evidence that Paul is establishing a new law of his own, that the Sabbath and the holy days are ended!
Finally, it is said that whenever you see a ‘therefore’ statement, look what it is there for!
Reading the verse before as well as verse 16, it reads: And you…God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. Therefore (because HE forgave you) let no one (no human) pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.
Because HE forgave you and cancelled the sentence of death you were under, don’t let any human (religious) ruler or authourity pass judgment on you, as to their opinions of how you eat, drink or worship. Only God has the right to do that! Our human interpretation of what is acceptable to God can only ever be a shadow. In Christ is found the truth.
Next time...based on the assumption described above (that the church is not required to keep the Sabbath) the Reformed pastor gives his reasons (backed up with Scripture) for the change of Sabbath to Sunday.
Why is there church on Sunday? The Ten Commandments say that the seventh day, or Saturday, is the Sabbath. Jesus, in Luke 4, worshiped on Saturday. Aren’t Christians worshipping on the wrong day?
His response agreed it was correct that Jesus worshipped on Saturday, and that Luke 4 teaches it was His custom to worship weekly with the people of God. The Ten Commandments include the commandment to honour the Sabbath, he says, that has not changed. In fact, he affirms, the Sabbath was ordained in creation! It affords believers and their families the chance to receive one of God’s chief blessings. He goes on to make some statements, backing them up with Scripture. I’d like to take a closer look at them.
His first statement is the subject of this piece, and also the foundation on which the rest of his explanation is built. In it he claims that while the fourth commandment remains valid, the church is no longer required to keep the Jewish Sabbath! On what does he base this claim? On Colossians 2:16.
Now this is a pretty big statement that he makes here. According to the Law of God, refusing to honour His Sabbath was an offense punishable by death! Did GOD change His Law? Or is it a new ‘human tradition’?
Bear in mind that, in the New Testament letters (the Apostolic letters), we have only one side of the discussion. The writers are giving answers, but we don't see the questions. So to flatly state 'this is what Paul (Peter, James) meant' is a bit presumptuous. (And to build an entire religion on it is something else.)
We can carefully examine the context of statements within letters, and try to understand them in light of other historical evidence of the day. We MUST regard each statement in light of the Torah (instruction, Law) found in the Old Testament, for if they are of YHVH, they will not break His commands. Yeshua Himself warns that anyone who breaks the least of His commandments will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 5:19).
Let's take a closer look at Colossians 2:16…in its context of the entire chapter of Colossians 2.
1For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, 2that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 4I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. 5For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the firmness of your faith in Christ. 6 Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, 7 rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. 8See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 9For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 11In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. 16Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. 18Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, 19and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. 20If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— 21 "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" 22( referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? 23These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.
Paul (generally agreed to be the writer) encourages the Colossian congregation to reach greater understanding of the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Messiah. THAT understanding will help protect them from being led astray by arguments which sound good but are designed to lead them away from truth. Yeshua is the embodiment of the Law of God, perfectly fulfilled.
Paul encourages the Colossians to walk after HIM (Yeshua), to become rooted and established in HIS truth. To themselves walk in the perfection of the Law! Not to walk in the shadow of an outward conformity only, but to walk (run, as in Psalm 119:32) in the fulness of the Law lived out from the purity of a renewed heart. NOT to substitute false truth presented through human interpretation, and walk after it.
Human arguments and worldviews (philosophy) are very attractive, yet empty. Human nature rebels against submitting to the truth of our need to be saved. We can’t contribute to our salvation; we can only humbly accept it. Our sin nature doesn’t want to do that!
Paul reminds the Colossians that their debt of sin (with its sentence of death) was cancelled! That those who held power over them in their weak state of sin are effectively made powerless! He warns them not to let themselves again become enslaved to the bondage of human tradition, of human attempt to merit God’s grace.
Two of the main issues of the day were emphasis on strict rules for purity, and honouring the Sabbath and holy days. Paul touches on this here in verse 16.
Other historical documents bear out this 'scrupulosity concerning meats' (purity) their 'superstition as respects the Sabbaths' (note the plural...this includes high holy Sabbaths), their 'fancies about fasting and new moons' (Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus).
Man-made ‘fence laws’ were enacted so if any law were broken, it would be the fence law and not the Law of God. This is a fine sounding argument but ineffective. It controlled only the outward behaviour and had no impact on the heart state out of which obedience is meant to come.
Paul compares this man-made emphasis on how to celebrate holy days or how to eat (the human teaching of ritual purification of the hands, for example, so as not to transmit ‘uncleanness’ to food) with the worship of angels and the practice of ‘asceticism and severity to the body’. None of these things are Scriptural. Paul told them not to let anyone judge them based on man-made rules. What he was NOT teaching them was to do away with the Sabbath! That is a ludicrious conclusion.
Based on the context of verse 16, it is the opinions on HOW to observe the Law that the writer was discussing. The Sabbath, the holy days, the (simple) food laws God gave, were given to point us to our need for Messiah. They spelled out righteousness for us and showed us our shortcoming and our need for saving. They show us what righteousness looks like. They are not Messiah! They cannot save us! They show us HIS righteousness. They are a shadow of Him. IN Him is all the fullness of the teaching and instruction (the Law) of God, perfectly shown. HE is the light to the nations that Israel, because of sin, could never be.
These simple laws had become covered over with human laws that became an enormous burden for the people. So, Paul reasons, why then do you turn back to these empty attempts at self justification? These are human laws and teachings! Paul strongly writes that BECAUSE Yeshua has cancelled the record of debt that was against them, thereby disarming the rulers and authorities who held power over them, they are not to again allow anyone to judge them in their celebration of holy days or in how they ate their food, and submit themselves again to the teachings of the human rules and human laws.
In context, Paul could not be referring to the Torah, the Law of God given at Mt Sinai. There is no evidence here that the Law of God regarding food and drink or holy days is altered in any way. And most clearly, there is NO evidence that Paul is establishing a new law of his own, that the Sabbath and the holy days are ended!
Finally, it is said that whenever you see a ‘therefore’ statement, look what it is there for!
Reading the verse before as well as verse 16, it reads: And you…God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. Therefore (because HE forgave you) let no one (no human) pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.
Because HE forgave you and cancelled the sentence of death you were under, don’t let any human (religious) ruler or authourity pass judgment on you, as to their opinions of how you eat, drink or worship. Only God has the right to do that! Our human interpretation of what is acceptable to God can only ever be a shadow. In Christ is found the truth.
Next time...based on the assumption described above (that the church is not required to keep the Sabbath) the Reformed pastor gives his reasons (backed up with Scripture) for the change of Sabbath to Sunday.
December 2, 2009
In the Beginning, God...
In the Beginning…Genesis One Verse One
Some people today claim that the Biblical account of creation is a myth, in an otherwise true book. Is this consistent with the rest of Scripture? In other words, can you believe in evolution, even in a limited way, and also believe in the God of the Bible?
Read through and consider carefully what the Bible teaches. None of these verses have been chosen to fit a preconceived idea; they are chosen simply because they refer to how and why the universe came to be. It is left to you to ponder and consider if and how it matters:
References to creation are sprinkled throughout the Bible. In Job 38-39, in poetic style, God identifies Himself and speaks:
Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind and said… Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me: …Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.Who determined its measurements—surely you know? Or who stretched the line upon it?On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone? …Or who shut in the sea with doors when it burst out from the womb… and said, 'Thus far shall you come, and no farther, and here shall your proud waves be stayed' …Has the rain a father, or who has begotten the drops of dew?
In reference to the lunar/solar cycles:
Do you know the ordinances of the heavens? Can you establish their rule on the earth?
Regarding man: Who has put wisdom in the inward parts or given understanding to the mind?
Regarding idols such as the wild ox worshipped for its fierceness: Do you have faith in him that he will return your grain and gather it to your threshing floor?
Throughout these chapters, God speaks and clearly claims full responsibility for creation in all its intricacy. This is in poetic form, though, could it be mere imagery? Are there further non-poetic claims in the Bible?
For behold, he who forms the mountains and creates the wind, and declares to man what is his thought, who makes the morning darkness, and treads on the heights of the earth— the LORD, the God of hosts, is his name! (Amos 4:13)
He who made the Pleiades and Orion, and turns deep darkness into the morning and darkens the day into night, who calls for the waters of the sea and pours them out on the surface of the earth, the LORD is his name; who makes destruction flash forth against the strong, so that destruction comes upon the fortress. They hate him who reproves in the gate, and they abhor him who speaks the truth. (Amos 5:8-10)
In Isaiah 42:5, God, identified specifically as the Creator, speaks again and does not refute Who He is: Thus says God, the LORD, who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and what comes from it, who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it:
In Isaiah 44:24, God Himself claims to be the only one who created and sustains His creation: Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb: "I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,
In Isaiah 45:12, God (verse 1 reveals who is speaking) specifically and unequivocally claims: I made the earth and created man on it; it was my hands that stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host.
Again in Isaiah 45:18, which specifically claims that the earth was not created to sit empty, but formed for a specific purpose: For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it;he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!):"I am the LORD, and there is no other.
In Jeremiah 5:22, in a stern warning from God (against those who turn against Him), God identifies Himself as Creator of the sea: Do you not fear me? declares the LORD. Do you not tremble before me? I placed the sand as the boundary for the sea, a perpetual barrier that it cannot pass; though the waves toss, they cannot prevail; though they roar, they cannot pass over it. But this people has a stubborn and rebellious heart; they have turned aside and gone away. They do not say in their hearts,' Let us fear the LORD our God, who gives the rain in its season, the autumn rain and the spring rain, and keeps for us the weeks appointed for the harvest.'
David, described by God as a man after His own heart, indicating that God approves of him, in Psalm 33:6, also testifies that God spoke creation into existence, just as claimed in Genesis: By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host.
While many of David’s songs of praise are written in poetic style, the claims to God’s authourship of creation are clear: The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech,and night to night reveals knowledge.There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard. Their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.
Again in Psalm 136:5 and 104:8, among many others: …to him who by understanding made the heavens, for his steadfast love endures forever …The mountains rose, the valleys sank down to the place that you appointed for them.
Psalm 104:9 references the flood, and God’s promise to Noah to never again destroy the earth with a flood: You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth.
The New Testament also speaks of creation and its Creator, never disproving what Genesis clearly says. John 1:1-3 clearly says that nothing happened by chance in creation, nothing was made without a Creator: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
In Acts 14, Paul and Barnabas preach that man’s understanding is without value or life (vain), that only God is to receive worship. …we bring you good news, that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them.
In Paul’s famous speech at the Aereopagus (the place in Greece for philosophical discussion), when he had the opportunity to speak to learned people, this is what he unhesitatingly claimed: The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man…
Hebrews 11:3 recognized that it takes faith to believe what we were not there to see. It also confirms that what is was made out of what is not (something made from nothing). By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
In 2 Peter 3, the writer speaks of a time coming (now) when people would refuse to believe that God did create the universe, just as recorded in the Scripture. It also explains why those people would refuse to believe: …I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation." For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.
Some people today claim that the Biblical account of creation is a myth, in an otherwise true book. Is this consistent with the rest of Scripture? In other words, can you believe in evolution, even in a limited way, and also believe in the God of the Bible?
Read through and consider carefully what the Bible teaches. None of these verses have been chosen to fit a preconceived idea; they are chosen simply because they refer to how and why the universe came to be. It is left to you to ponder and consider if and how it matters:
References to creation are sprinkled throughout the Bible. In Job 38-39, in poetic style, God identifies Himself and speaks:
Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind and said… Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me: …Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.Who determined its measurements—surely you know? Or who stretched the line upon it?On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone? …Or who shut in the sea with doors when it burst out from the womb… and said, 'Thus far shall you come, and no farther, and here shall your proud waves be stayed' …Has the rain a father, or who has begotten the drops of dew?
In reference to the lunar/solar cycles:
Do you know the ordinances of the heavens? Can you establish their rule on the earth?
Regarding man: Who has put wisdom in the inward parts or given understanding to the mind?
Regarding idols such as the wild ox worshipped for its fierceness: Do you have faith in him that he will return your grain and gather it to your threshing floor?
Throughout these chapters, God speaks and clearly claims full responsibility for creation in all its intricacy. This is in poetic form, though, could it be mere imagery? Are there further non-poetic claims in the Bible?
For behold, he who forms the mountains and creates the wind, and declares to man what is his thought, who makes the morning darkness, and treads on the heights of the earth— the LORD, the God of hosts, is his name! (Amos 4:13)
He who made the Pleiades and Orion, and turns deep darkness into the morning and darkens the day into night, who calls for the waters of the sea and pours them out on the surface of the earth, the LORD is his name; who makes destruction flash forth against the strong, so that destruction comes upon the fortress. They hate him who reproves in the gate, and they abhor him who speaks the truth. (Amos 5:8-10)
In Isaiah 42:5, God, identified specifically as the Creator, speaks again and does not refute Who He is: Thus says God, the LORD, who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and what comes from it, who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it:
In Isaiah 44:24, God Himself claims to be the only one who created and sustains His creation: Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb: "I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,
In Isaiah 45:12, God (verse 1 reveals who is speaking) specifically and unequivocally claims: I made the earth and created man on it; it was my hands that stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host.
Again in Isaiah 45:18, which specifically claims that the earth was not created to sit empty, but formed for a specific purpose: For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it;he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!):"I am the LORD, and there is no other.
In Jeremiah 5:22, in a stern warning from God (against those who turn against Him), God identifies Himself as Creator of the sea: Do you not fear me? declares the LORD. Do you not tremble before me? I placed the sand as the boundary for the sea, a perpetual barrier that it cannot pass; though the waves toss, they cannot prevail; though they roar, they cannot pass over it. But this people has a stubborn and rebellious heart; they have turned aside and gone away. They do not say in their hearts,' Let us fear the LORD our God, who gives the rain in its season, the autumn rain and the spring rain, and keeps for us the weeks appointed for the harvest.'
David, described by God as a man after His own heart, indicating that God approves of him, in Psalm 33:6, also testifies that God spoke creation into existence, just as claimed in Genesis: By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host.
While many of David’s songs of praise are written in poetic style, the claims to God’s authourship of creation are clear: The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech,and night to night reveals knowledge.There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard. Their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.
Again in Psalm 136:5 and 104:8, among many others: …to him who by understanding made the heavens, for his steadfast love endures forever …The mountains rose, the valleys sank down to the place that you appointed for them.
Psalm 104:9 references the flood, and God’s promise to Noah to never again destroy the earth with a flood: You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth.
The New Testament also speaks of creation and its Creator, never disproving what Genesis clearly says. John 1:1-3 clearly says that nothing happened by chance in creation, nothing was made without a Creator: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
In Acts 14, Paul and Barnabas preach that man’s understanding is without value or life (vain), that only God is to receive worship. …we bring you good news, that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them.
In Paul’s famous speech at the Aereopagus (the place in Greece for philosophical discussion), when he had the opportunity to speak to learned people, this is what he unhesitatingly claimed: The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man…
Hebrews 11:3 recognized that it takes faith to believe what we were not there to see. It also confirms that what is was made out of what is not (something made from nothing). By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
In 2 Peter 3, the writer speaks of a time coming (now) when people would refuse to believe that God did create the universe, just as recorded in the Scripture. It also explains why those people would refuse to believe: …I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation." For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
