The fourth commandment

The Creator sanctified the seventh day sabbath from the creation of the world. He wrote the ten commandments with his own finger in stone. Man doesn't have the authority to change the sabbath. In fact, many have strained to attempt to prove that the New Testament believers did so. Daniel 7:25 says of the little horn (Antichrist) that, he shall "...think to change times and laws." The sabbath was officially changed by the Papacy at the Council of Laodicea on March 7, 364 A.D., 43 years after Constantine declared Sunday the day for christians to honor as the rest day. The Roman church also deleted the 2nd and split the 10th commandments, thus fulfilling Da 7:25.

I know this is what the 7th day Adventists teach (the "Sabbath" was done away with in the Christian church in the late 300's Ad). I am sitting here right now reading Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Tertullian's writings regarding the Sabbath and the observing of it. None of them believed in observing it------Justin Martyr wrote quite a bit on the issue. I would encourage you to seek out the writings of the ECF (Early church fathers)---especially the antenicene fathers which are the earliest church writings (80ad-300ad). You will clearly see that the nonobservance of the Sabbath was something that occured VERY early in church history and the most renowned Christians of that time believed Sabbath keeping did not grant God's favor. Here's a good site of their writings: http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/Click on the "V2". Blessings in Him............

I believe the very heart of the sabbath is a seeking to enter in the the rest that remained or is available to us in Christ Jesus.What do you think?

Yesterday I was thinking about this subject. It seems unusual that God would nullify one of the 10 commandments.Colossians 2:16,17 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.The only understanding is that Christ has fulfilled this, but the rest of the commandments will be fulfilled during the second coming? Christ is our rest.I personally take Sunday as my day of rest. I kind of set my own standard though. I allow myself to type here but I will not go to a store and allow my conscious defiled by knowing that someone had a excuse not to go to church because they had to work (for me).So as I shared that please do not judge me in my sabbath.But please share your thought with us.I care for you all.

I also see Christ as the fulfillment of the Sabbath----HE is our rest. One day set aside for Him for reflection/study/worship is fine, but I think truly what He desires of us is for us to rest in Him 24/7.I found it interesting reading some of the ECF's "blips" on this topic today. In their writings, they seem to be of the mind that keeping the Sabbath was not necessary for Adam nor any of the saints prior to the giving of the 10 commandments, therefore why is it that keeping a "day" is now what gives us favor with God----especially considering that scripture tells us that Jesus is the fulfillment of the Sabbath/rest for mankind? Interesting, valid point in my opinion. Blessings.........

------Justin Martyr wrote quite a bit on the issue.The writings of Justin martyr are very antisemetic and I believe this governed many of his beliefs. Sabbath (shabot) means "ceasation" and begins when the first star appears in the sky on Friday night and ends when the first star appears in the sky on Saturday night. It was a time of rest that God instituted as a pattern of His own behavior. Nevertheless, their remaineth a rest for the people of God. (Hebrews 4:9) It can be argued that we cease from our own works of righteousness when we are in Christ; as He is our rest. This does not change the day of rest being a Saturday. Man is not at liberty to change what day the Sabbath shall be. However, Sunday was the first day of the week and was celebrated as a day of worship by the early Christians. This plays out as follows:"The First Day of the Week"Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2,9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1,19; refer to the first day of the week as the day in which Christ arose from the dead. Matthew 28:1 reads Now after the Sabbath towards the dawn of the first day of the week." (RSV)Acts 20:7 refers to a day Paul taught at Troas when the Church gathered together to break bread. Paul preached until midnight in this passage. You know the story.I Corinthians 16:2 refers to when provision for the Saints in Jerusalem were to be set aside. This adds more weight that there were gatherings on Sunday. Moreover, Paul taught that none are to judge concerning meat, drink, new moons, and Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come. It is my understanding that the early Church (1st Century), which was comprised exclusively of Jews (up to Acts 10, roughly 10-15 years) and added Gentiles from Acts 10 to the present, celebrated BOTH Sabbath and the first day of the week (Sunday). The believing Jews would worship in the Synagogues along side the non-believing Jews on Shabot and continue on in celebration of Christ until Sunday afternoon. Then they continued daily in fellowship after that. When the unbelieving Jews got tired of the believers (minim) in their services (this was after the destruction of the Temple) under Rabban Gamaliel II there was a question asked if anyone knew a way to deal with the Christian heretics (minim), they found one, and its known as the Birkat ha Minim (12th ben.). It was an added benidiction that was recited by the Jews in the synagogues. Believing Jews had to endure synagogue services that essentially cursed them! Here is what it reads: 'for apostates (meshumaddim) let there be no hope, and the dominion of arrogance, do thou speedily root out, in our days; and let Nozrim (Believers) and minim perish in a moment, let them be blotted out of the living and let them not be written with the righteous'. (Cairo Genizah Version)This is one of the things that caused the split between the Believing Jews and the non-believers. Once these things became known in the Church apart from the believing Jews an overall hostility began to develop towards the Jews as a whole that unfortunately carried over into Church (Justin Martyr is a prime example). Soon Sabbath would be cut from celebration and deemed as Judaizing. This was a reactionary move more than a Biblical one. Yet to this day we enjoy what we know as "The weekend." It begins Friday night and ends Sunday night. If a Christian wants to rest Saturday he can do that. If he or she wants to work (wants to work :-?) they can do that also. Yet, Sunday is rarely a day of rest for me. It is a very busy day generally.God Bless,-Robert

It is my understanding that the early Church (1st Century), which was comprised exclusively of Jews (up to Acts 10, roughly 10-15 years) and added Gentiles from Acts 10 to the present, celebrated BOTH Sabbath and the first day of the week (Sunday). The believing Jews would worship in the Synagogues along side the non-believing Jews on Shabot and continue on in celebration of Christ until Sunday afternoon.Hi RobertAs many of the early Christians outside the Land were gentile slaves it is unlikely that they kept either day as a 'sabbath'. The meeting at Troas clearly took place during the night when it would have been easier for slaves to gather when their days work was done.The reference to Troas in Acts 20 makes it sound as though the pattern was to meet on the first day of the week; On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight. (Act 20:7 NASB) It is likely that Paul began this dialogue late in the evening of the first day, Sunday.The Corinthian reference in a letter which was expected to be read elsewhere (1 Cor 1:2) certainly sounds as though the pattern for the whole church was to meet on the first day;On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come. (1Co 16:2 NASB)

As many of the early Christians outside the Land were gentile slaves it is unlikely that they kept either day as a 'sabbath'. The meeting at Troas clearly took place during the night when it would have been easier for slaves to gather when their days work was done.I don't at all disagree. I really just wanted to place things into the broader context to see how it all plays out. God Bless,-Robert

Romans 14:1-23 1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. 2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. 3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. 4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. 5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. 6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. 7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. 8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. 9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. 10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. 12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way. 14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. 16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of: 17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. 18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. 19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. 20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence. 21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. 22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. 23 And he that doubtethis damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

The Creator sanctified the seventh day sabbath from the creation of the world. He wrote the ten commandments with his own finger in stone. Man doesn't have the authority to change the sabbath. In fact, many have strained to attempt to prove that the New Testament believers did so. The day is of no significance to me as with several others who have written, but the point of alteration of the 10 commandments is significant. Did you realise that Paul altered another one?This is the original; Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. (Exo 20:12 KJV)… now here is Paul’s version… Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. (Eph 6:2-3 KJV)The original was Land focussed. It was part of the tenancy agreement between Jehovah (Israel’s personal name for God) and a people described as I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. (Exo 20:2 KJV) The 10 commandments are a legal document with very carefully defined ‘parties’. This is part of a covenant between Jehovah and the Exodus people.The inward essence of the 10 words however, is wider than Israel, and so Paul ‘alters’ it to make it relevant to folk who live in Ephesus who were never in bondage in Egypt. The ‘truth’ is captured but the localised details of the 10 commandments were Israel-specific. Paul take’s Moses’ promise of lasting tenancy of a specific territory – the Land always means the Promised Land in this sense – and transposes its abiding significance into a promise of longevity. Paul has transposed the truth that was originally given in a particular local setting into a universal context. This is what we should look for in a universal application of the Jewish Sabbath. The Sabbath, in fact, was the key identifier of the Sinai Covenant. Circumcision was older than Sinai, but the specific keeping of the Sabbath was the one unique feature of this Covenant.

I belong to a denomination that is almost legalistic in its approach to the sabbath.This has been a source of some dissagreements in the past.I tend to esteem all days the same but as to my personal disciplines I do set aside a day to do nothing but center on the Lord in my devotion and full attention. That day isn't sunday though.I've always struggled in giving an answer to this question about the sabbath though.

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Exo 20:8-11 KJV)The Sabbath day was specifically instituted within the Sinai Covenant and was community based. These laws were given to a community rather than to individuals and the Sabbath legislation makes this very plain. Its sphere of application is ‘within thy gates’ i.e. this is to be implemented on a city-wide bases. According to a Talmudic view if the Jews would only keep the Shabbat properly for two consecitive weeks, they would bring about the messianic Redemption.In some ways it is only possible to remember Sabbath on a city-wide basis. I may refuse to collect my milk on the Sabbath but the cow may well have been milked on the Sabbath. I may refuse to read my newspaper on the Sabbath and only take the Sunday version, but is such a case I am enjoying the labours of someone who broke the Sabbath. In a city/town based society it was literally possible to shut down everything for the day. Sabbath was viable in an exclusion zone of family or city but in a mixed community, as the most public sign of 'Jewishness' it was always contentious. Within that exclusion zone the stranger was required to conform to Sabbath.Strict Jews will try to implement this by various means, using time-switches rather than creating a spark with a manual switch and thereby ‘lighting a fire’ on the Sabbath. Sabbath, however, requires the whole community commitment to be workable. In fact it is only genuinely possible in a theocracy. Where state and church are separate it can never function properly. Israel was such a theocracy, but most of us do not live in such a setting.If a ‘Jew’ were enslaved by a gentile there would be no way in which he could ‘keep Sabbath’ but on the other hand if a gentile were enslaved by a ‘Jew’ the Jew was required to ensure that the gentile slave kept Sabbath. It is only where the local authority (whether in a home or a city) is theocratic that Sabbath could operate. It has been estimated that the slave population of Italy was in the proportion of 1:2 or approximately 33% of the population. One calculation is that during the Herodian period there were about 8m Jews in the world, of whom 2.35-2.5m lived in Palestine, the Jews thus constituting about 10% of the Roman Empire.It is interesting where Sabbath comes in the list. The commandments prior to this are all God-orientated while those after this are people orientated. If we were to divide the commandments up into Godwards and manwards where would be place Sabbath? The standard interpretation was that it was Godwards, but Christ challenged this and put it in the manwards list; And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. (Mar 2:27-28 KJV)The notion of holiness is also important. The original concept of qadesh/holy is separation. The people of Israel were set apart to be God’s own possession, hence And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. (Exo 19:6 KJV) It is important to remember that the purpose of the Sabbath was the well being of people and it was to be regarded, not so much as an imposition, but a relief. That it became a burden is clear, and this necessitated the prophet’s word which promised blessing under conditions which included; If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: (Isa 58:13 KJV)The Sabbath was the outward sign of this ‘holy people’; Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily ye shall keep my sabbaths: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am Jehovah who sanctifieth you. (Exo 31:13 ASV) - see also Ezek 20:12,20.The question that remains is ‘is there a Christian equivalent of the Sabbath?’ Where is the principle of Sabbath to be recognized in Christianity?

The question that remains is ‘is there a Christian equivalent of the Sabbath?’ Where is the principle of Sabbath to be recognized in Christianity?I believe our "Sabbath rest" is in Christ:Hebrews 41 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

I 've considered this from Hebrews and even put it forward but to no staisfication to the hearers. Some traditions are hard for people to give up or break.I guess the fear is that if people don't feel some sort of pressure,(in a legalistic sense), they won't come to church on Sundays. So Ron's question is key, where does the sabbath fit in on the christian church and when in many churches they're meeting 4 and sometimes 5 times a week , where does the individual draw the line in the assemblying of our selves together?

1. It seems the NT focusses more on Sunday ("the first of seven days" and "the Lord's Day"), which I suppose symbolically represents the day of the Lord's resurrection. That's why the breaking of bread (Christian worship) and preaching seems to be associated with this day at several instances.2. I see no conscious connection of the Lord's day (Sunday) with the OT Sabbath day within the NT. I would hesitate to say that the Lord's day is the new Sabbath day for Christians. I tend to think that the significance of the Lord's day was derived from the unique event of Christ's death and resurrection.3. If we understand keeping the Sabbath as the identity marker of being a Jew as part of the covenant people of God, then it might explain why Hebrews effectively said that Christ is the fulfillment of Sabbath. Our true identity is found in Christ, who leads us to genuine rest intended by God.4. Nevertheless, I feel that the principle of sabbath can certainly be applied by Christians in a more universal and general way. I think it is theologically significant that God established in the creation account the rhythm of work six days, and rest on the seventh. Modern people tends to be workaholics, much to their detriment because they violated God's rhythm in nature. Obviously, setting aside time exclusively for God is part of God's pattern too.Just some quick thoughts... I don't think I introduced any new idea not discussed before in this forum?

much to their detriment because they violated God's rhythm in natureDoes anyone know if there is a thread on SI that deals with Natural Law? It would be a good discussion topic. :-) God Bless,-Robert

I did read a medical study some time ago on work and rest where they put forth illnesses as a result of over working and lack of proper rest and balance.When I read on the Welsh revival and Evan Roberts fall out, it would seem to me that in a religious sense he may not have taken time apart or away inorder to rest his body and mind. Like you I believe at least 1 day is important per week but not in a legallistic sense.Priciple of the Sabbath----I agree too , and that seems to be consistant with Hebrews "not forsakeing the assemblying of yourselves together". It seems that I read in Eusebuis' work on ecclesiastical history he mentions the habit of the roman church as meeting sat. after night fall andmeetings going through the nite.They would then go out in the morning and minister to the needs of thoughs drunkards sleeping it off in the streets of rome.And since many of the New converts were legally slaves an evening meeting seems probable.

Isn't it amazing how threads continue to rise up in different aspects which focus on God's provision for His people. In terms of REST, in the Jewish roots thread, everyone seems to have avoided answering the question for themselves. God did offer His REST to those who lived before Christ's incarnation. What do these Scritpures suggest in terms of hallowing God's Sabbath?Is. 56:1 Thus says the LORD:\t“Keep justice, and do righteousness,\tFor My salvation is about to come,\tAnd My righteousness to be revealed. 2 \tBlessed is the man who does this,\tAnd the son of man who lays hold on it;\tWho keeps from defiling the Sabbath,\tAnd keeps his hand from doing any evil.” 3 \tDo not let the son of the foreigner\tWho has joined himself to the LORD\tSpeak, saying,\t“The LORD has utterly separated me from His people”;\tNor let the eunuch say,\t“Here I am, a dry tree.” 4 \tFor thus says the LORD:\t“To the eunuchs who keep My Sabbaths,\tAnd choose what pleases Me,\tAnd hold fast My covenant, 5 \tEven to them I will give in My house\tAnd within My walls a place and a name\tBetter than that of sons and daughters;\tI will give them an everlasting name\tThat shall not be cut off. 6 \t“Also the sons of the foreigner\tWho join themselves to the LORD, to serve Him,\tAnd to love the name of the LORD, to be His servants—\tEveryone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath,\tAnd holds fast My covenant— 7 \tEven them I will bring to My holy mountain,\tAnd make them joyful in My house of prayer.\tTheir burnt offerings and their sacrifices\tWill be accepted on My altar;\tFor My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.” Also: Isaiah 58:11 \tThe LORD will guide you continually,\tAnd satisfy your soul in drought,\tAnd strengthen your bones;\tYou shall be like a watered garden,\tAnd like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail. 12 \tThose from among you\tShall build the old waste places;\tYou shall raise up the foundations of many generations;\tAnd you shall be called the Repairer of the Breach,\tThe Restorer of Streets to Dwell In. 13 \t“If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath,\tFrom doing your pleasure on My holy day,\tAnd call the Sabbath a delight,\tThe holy day of the LORD honorable,\tAnd shall honor Him, not doing your own ways,\tNor finding your own pleasure,\tNor speaking your own words, 14 \tThen you shall delight yourself in the LORD;\tAnd I will cause you to ride on the high hills of the earth,\tAnd feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father.\tThe mouth of the LORD has spoken.” How does the Lord accomplish this in those who honor His Sabbath? And to whom are these words addressed too?In ChristJeff

Hi Bro. Jeff,There may have been some sort of 'rest' that the people experienced who were heirs of salvation; but there was a deliverance that took place at the Cross and the resurrection that brought a new level of rest to the people. Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. There is a bondage that existed under the Old Covenant in which the people were afraid to die. We are also told there remains a rest to the people of God. That statement has a lot of eschatological ramifications; but I think we can see clearly that we under the New Covenant have a 'rest' in the here and now that those who were all their lifetime in fear did not have.God Bless,-Robert

Br. Ron wrote:It is interesting where Sabbath comes in the list. The commandments prior to this are all God-orientated while those after this are people orientated. If we were to divide the commandments up into Godwards and manwards where would be place Sabbath? The standard interpretation was that it was Godwards, but Christ challenged this and put it in the manwards list; And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. (Mar 2:27-28 KJV)Br. Ron is correct. The Sabbath was made for man. Many look to obeying the Law, and the consequences of not obeying. But what is the purpose for the Sabbath? It is for man, and is meant to fill men. Again look to Isaiah 56 and 58. What is the right understanding? In ChristJeff

Br. Robert wrote: There is a bondage that existed under the Old Covenant in which the people were afraid to die. We are also told there remains a rest to the people of God. That statement has a lot of eschatological ramifications; but I think we can see clearly that we under the New Covenant have a 'rest' in the here and now that those who were all their lifetime in fear did notListen to Isaiah 58:Is. 58:1 “Cry aloud, spare not;\tLift up your voice like a trumpet;\tTell My people their transgression,\tAnd the house of Jacob their sins. 2 \tYet they seek Me daily,\tAnd delight to know My ways,\tAs a nation that did righteousness,\tAnd did not forsake the ordinance of their God.\tThey ask of Me the ordinances of justice;\tThey take delight in approaching God. 3 \t“Why have we fasted,’ they say, “and You have not seen?\tWhy have we afflicted our souls, and You take no notice?’\t‘In fact, in the day of your fast you find pleasure,\tAnd exploit all your laborers. 4 \tIndeed you fast for strife and debate,\tAnd to strike with the fist of wickedness.\tYou will not fast as you do this day,\tTo make your voice heard on high. 5 \tIs it a fast that I have chosen,\tA day for a man to afflict his soul?\tIs it to bow down his head like a bulrush,\tAnd to spread out sackcloth and ashes?\tWould you call this a fast,\tAnd an acceptable day to the LORD? 6 \t“Is this not the fast that I have chosen:\tTo loose the bonds of wickedness,\tTo undo the heavy burdens,\tTo let the oppressed go free,\tAnd that you break every yoke? 7 \tIs it not to share your bread with the hungry,\tAnd that you bring to your house the poor who are cast out;\tWhen you see the naked, that you cover him,\tAnd not hide yourself from your own flesh? 8 \tThen your light shall break forth like the morning,\tYour healing shall spring forth speedily,\tAnd your righteousness shall go before you;\tThe glory of the LORD shall be your rear guard. 9 \tThen you shall call, and the LORD will answer;\tYou shall cry, and He will say, “Here I am.’\t‘If you take away the yoke from your midst,\tThe pointing of the finger, and speaking wickedness, 10 \tIf you extend your soul to the hungry\tAnd satisfy the afflicted soul,\tThen your light shall dawn in the darkness,\tAnd your darkness shall be as the noonday. Do these verses speak of the bondage you speak too?What is God's solution?In ChristJeff

Do these verses speak of the bondage you speak too?I don't know that there is a correlation at all. My point is that Hebrews tells us clearly that through fear of death they were all their lifetime subject unto bondage. The passage in question is a treatise on genuine repentance. Yet, even if they repent they can only glean the maximum benefits allowed under the covenant. This makes them to fall way short of 'a better covenant' that is established on 'better promises.' God Bless,-Robert

The seventh day sabbath isn't the same as "sabbath days." 1 John 2:4 reads, "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him." Why is it, that, christians believe it's ok to break the fourth commandment, but not the other nine? Jesus said, "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

"And they continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart." (Acts 2:46). The christians fellowshipped daily, but still kept the sabbath (Acts 13:14,27,42,44;15:21;18:4). He is the "Lord of the Sabbath". The "Lord's Day" has always been the sabbath. No man has the authority to change any of the Ten Commandments.

well I'm no rocket scientist but where the word refers to Jacob---Isa 58 it refers to the nation of Israel. I believe we were talking about the sabbath as a Law in order to obtain a blessing from God where we keep it and we'er blessed for having kept it. Well brothers---you guys can keep as much of the law as you want. I am only righteous through(in the agency of ) Jesus Christ. In his FINISHED works and I take it no further. I add nothing to it and I rest in it fully presuaded that He(Jesus) is able to keep/complete/finish/ that which has been comitted unto him (my eternal soul) against that day.I don't say this in a demeaning manor or trying to be hurtful verbally , but I refuse to be brought under a law that better men than me couldn't keep.Grace , Grace, what a wonderful thing. As the old hymn writter said My hope has found a resting place not in device or creed.......On Christ the solid rock I stand all other ground is sinking sand...

The early assemby of Jewish believers(i pick my words very carefully) were still jewish or hebrew--. The Idea of "church" was introduced by the Apostle Paul and was very gentle and was an original thought as to the organizational context of believers. Before Paul outside of one instance with Peter -n- Cornilius , the gentles were still excluded from the promises of God and of Jesus as Messiah , and inorder to even begin to know about Jesus gentile had to become proyslites(sp. mistake--srry).

What is the sabbath? or better yet how do you keep the sabbath?even beter than that---how does the sabbath fit into the NT church and the believers practical expression? Do we buy gas ---food---watch tv---listen to the radio??? I can if you like draw the line very very fine on the keeping of the sabbath if you like and conclude every man, woman and child guilty of its breach , I believe the heart of the sabbath is finding rest in the finished work of Christ and the fellowship with the Father, but its meant to be an every day expression where we take the sabbath rest in us --with us daily, and do the works of Jesus Christ in the world.

"And they continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart." (Acts 2:46). The christians fellowshipped daily, but still kept the sabbath (Acts 13:14,27,42,44;15:21;18:4). He is the "Lord of the Sabbath". The "Lord's Day" has always been the sabbath. No man has the authority to change any of the Ten Commandments.Your verses above to 'prove sabbath keeping' don't do what you intend them to do. These simply report that on the Sabbath they visited the synagogue. What better way to preach the gospel to the Jews. These are just 'date stamps' not proof of Sabbath keeping. Sabbath is the name of a day; it still is in Polish. I frequently preach in Poland 'on Sabbath' but I am not thereby 'keeping Sabbath'.poniedziałek \twtorek \tśroda \tczwartek \tpiątek \tsobota \ti.e. SabbathniedzielaThe same would be true for Belorussian, Bosnian, Bulgarian, Catalan, Croatian, Czech, Greek, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, Slovak, Spanish, and Ukrainian. It is just the name of a day in the week.

The seventh day sabbath isn't the same as "sabbath days." 1 John 2:4 reads, "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him." Why is it, that, christians believe it's ok to break the fourth commandment, but not the other nine? Jesus said, "If ye love me, keep my commandments."I can only speak for this Christian rather than 'christians', but I don't 'keep' any of the commandments given by Moses to the people of Israel. By His grace I 'fulfil the righteous requirement' of the law. Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. (Mat 22:37-40 KJV) These 'two' commandments are the only ones that apply to me as a Christian.

The early assemby of Jewish believers(i pick my words very carefully) were still jewish or hebrew--….Before Paul outside of one instance with Peter -n- Cornilius , the gentles were still excluded from the promises of God and of Jesus as Messiah , and inorder to even begin to know about Jesus gentile had to become proyslites(sp. mistake--srry). Hi dohzmanI don't think you have picked your words quite carefully enough. ;-)I don't know of any evidence to suggest that in the early days of the Acts Gentiles had to be proselytes. Certainly a group arose which would have liked that to be the case; And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. (Act 15:1 KJV) Prior to this the church in Jerusalem had not even required Titus to be circumcised, which was an essential part of becoming a proselyte. But not even Titus, who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. (Gal 2:3 NASB) This passage is saying quite specifically that the pattern even in Jerusalem was never for Gentiles to have to become proselytes; it is a key piece of evidence for Paul's case as he expresses it in Galatians.The Gentiles were only excluded by the incomplete understanding of the early Jewish Christians; they were always included in the work of the cross.The Idea of "church" was introduced by the Apostle Paul and was very gentle and was an original thought as to the organizational context of believers.Paul actually became ‘part’ of an already existing church in Antioch. And he left for Tarsus to look for Saul; and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. And for an entire year they met with the church and taught considerable numbers; and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch. (Act 11:25-26 NASB)Before that there had been ‘churches’ in Judaea. I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea which were in Christ; but only, they kept hearing, "He who once persecuted us is now preaching the faith which he once tried to destroy." (Gal 1:22-23 NASB) These ‘churches of Judaea’ (please note the plural 'churches') were in existence at least 14 years before Paul’s 'Gentile' missions.

I think most objections from sscr01 have been aptly answered. There's an interesting issue he raised:The "Lord's Day" has always been the sabbath. No man has the authority to change any of the Ten Commandments.The only reference to "the Lord's Day" in the NT is Rev. 1:10, and I have always supposed that it is connected with the phrase "first day of the seven days," which appears several times in Acts in connection with the breaking of bread. I note also that Francis Turretin, a Puritan, argued:From Rev. 1:10, where John says that "he was in the Spirit on the Lord's day"; not verily on the Jewish Sabbath because he undoubtedly would have named it; not on some one day only of the seven because thus the title would be ambiguous, calculated to confuse rather than explain; but on that day on which Christ had arisen, on which the apostles were accustomed to assemble to perform sacred worship and on which Paul had ordered collections to be made, as was the custom in the primitive church. Since he speaks of that day as known and observed in the church, there is no doubt that it had been distinguished by this name from the received usage of the church. Otherwise, who among the Christians would have understood what John meant by this appellation, if he intended to designate some other day? Historically, this identification of the "Lord's Day" with Sunday, the day of Christ's resurrection is strong, going all the way back to Ignatius in written documents.Question for everyone: Do you think biblically it is clear enough in Rev. 1:10 that John intended to mean Sunday?

Historically, this identification of the "Lord's Day" with Sunday, the day of Christ's resurrection is strong, going all the way back to Ignatius in written documents.Question for everyone: Do you think biblically it is clear enough in Rev. 1:10 that John intended to mean Sunday?No, I don't. I don’t think there is any evidence to support the idea that this phrase was a reference to Sunday. The word translated 'Lord's' is an adjective; kuriakos. The word comes from kurios meaning Lord, but we have no real equivalent in English for this word adjective. If we were linking together another noun and adjective we might get 'king' and 'royal' or we might link together 'emperor' and 'imperial', but we can't really do this with 'lord' because it produces 'lordly' which means something quite different. The predominant feature about this day in Rev 1:10 is The Lord.This is a day characterised by the nature of the Lord; a day in which the Lord is predominant. The adjective is only used here and in When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. (1Co 11:20 KJV) This supper is characterised by the nature of the Lord; a supper in which the Lord is predominant.The ‘supper’ was being used by each to make their own personal statement regarding their wealth or uniqueness. The supper was being used for self-publicity. The church at Corinth was plagued by this ‘each one of you says I…’ The supper which was to ‘show forth’ his death.. to sin, and the world and self, was being used as a platform for self-centredness and conspicuous personal difference . Paul reminds them that the ‘supper’ is not a supper at which they reign and flaunt themselves, but a supper in which Christ’s Lordship is set forth.These are not genitives which would usually be produced by the genitive case and could then be translated 'of the Lord' or 'belonging to the Lord'. To understand the term in the Revelation, we need to get the atmosphere of the Revelation. Everything John had known was in ruins; country, capital city, temple, priesthood. Even the churches were in a dire state. To top it all John, who is now a very old man, is shipped to Patmos. It must have seemed that everything had gone wrong and that the powers of darkness were winning the battle. This is the atmosphere of the Revelation and John is shown a throne. The throne is occupied. The imagery is that in spite of all that appears contrary God is still on the throne and all will work according to His will. He, and not Caesar, is Lord.In his natural conditions he was in Patmos but John’s prophecy was given while he was ‘in the spirit on the day characterised by the Lord’. He entered this ‘condition’ and from this perspective all is well; it is all under the will of the Lord. The throne of John’s vision becomes the central reference point to the prophecy; Spirits are ‘before’ the throne, Christ sits ‘in’ the throne, a rainbow surrounds the throne, 24 seats circle the throne, a sea of glass is in front of the throne, worshippers cast their crown before the throne… and so on. The Revelation is the Day dominated by the Lord, and His Throne.Robertsons Word Pictures quotes the work of Deissman Deissmann has proven (Bible Studies, p. 217f.; Light, etc., p. 357ff.) from inscriptions and papyri that the word kuriakos was in common use for the sense “imperial” as imperial finance and imperial treasury and from papyri and ostraca that hēmera Sebastē (Augustus Day) was the first day of each month, Emperor’s Day on which money payments were made. Robertson goes on to conclude that the Christian's used this term to designate Sunday, but the question is does it mean pertaining to the Lord or belonging to the Lord. It would be so much easier to use the genitive to show ownership that I still feel that the real sense of the word here is 'pertaining to the Lord' rather than 'belonging to the Lord'. Fitting this into 1 Corinthians seems to work too; this is the supper that pertains to the Lord (not to your self-advertisment).

To understand the term in the Revelation, we need to get the atmosphere of the Revelation. Everything John had known was in ruins; country, capital city, temple, priesthood. Even the churches were in a dire state. To top it all John, who is now a very old man, is shipped to Patmos. It must have seemed that everything had gone wrong and that the powers of darkness were winning the battle. This is the atmosphere of the Revelation and John is shown a throne. The throne is occupied. The imagery is that in spite of all that appears contrary God is still on the throne and all will work according to His will. He, and not Caesar, is Lord.It makes me think about Isaiah 6 when Uzziah had died and the prophet sees the LORD high and exalted. The darkest nights seem to be the times when God speaks the clearest. It has been at times when I felt God had abandoned me that He revealed Himself. Praise God!

dohzman wrote:well I'm no rocket scientist but where the word refers to Jacob---Isa 58 it refers to the nation of Israel. I believe we were talking about the sabbath as a Law in order to obtain a blessing from God where we keep it and we'er blessed for having kept it. Well brothers---you guys can keep as much of the law as you want. I am only righteous through(in the agency of ) Jesus Christ. In his FINISHED works and I take it no further. I am not argueing that we are to keep one day holy as opposed to another. My focus in on why does God give man the Sabbath. Every word that proceeds from God's mouth has a purpose behind it doesn't it? The focus of this thread should in my view be on what are the results of His promise. What does the Sabbath mean to man? Jesus said He is the Lord of the Sabbath. That means the content of the Sabbath relates to what He does for man. Isaiah 56 and 58 gives us some insight into what the Sabbath promised for those who listened.Is. 56:5 \tEven to them I will give in My house\tAnd within My walls a place and a name\tBetter than that of sons and daughters;\tI will give them an everlasting name\tThat shall not be cut off. What does it mean to be given an "everlasting name'?7 \tEven them I will bring to My holy mountain,\tAnd make them joyful in My house of prayer.\tTheir burnt offerings and their sacrifices\tWill be accepted on My altar;\tFor My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.” Do we have this joy today? Why not?Isaiah 58:11 \tThe LORD will guide you continually,\tAnd satisfy your soul in drought,\tAnd strengthen your bones;\tYou shall be like a watered garden,\tAnd like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail.Do we who live under the New Covenant experience the results of this promise? If not why?14 \tThen you shall delight yourself in the LORD;\tAnd I will cause you to ride on the high hills of the earth,\tAnd feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father.\tThe mouth of the LORD has spoken.” God promised He would feed those who obeyed with the heritage of Jacob. Who has been at the place where the angels ascend and decend the ladder between earth and heaven? Who has experienced His kingdom here on earth? Really what is the Sabbath all about? Why does God give it to man?In ChristJeff

What I note here is that the gentiles were not part of the jews sect as believers of Jesus as messiah and that while the free gift was available it was not even being offered to gentiles. All the Jewish believers meet daily from house to house but there was not a clear cut break from the temple worship , the early jews were just another sect within judiasium.As to my use of the term church , you were right, that term was used earlier in the NT I missed it, lol.~~~~opps. There's really no concrete evidence outside of Cornileus that gentiles were accepted into fellowship until after the Lord raised up Paul. Your reference in Acts15 is well after Paul had started upon his ministry to the gentiles.But that said I do appreciate your reference to the 2 laws of love in our fulfilling the laws and the prophets and just reading them again has been of great use to me at this time in my life personally,thank you.

It would seem to make sense since John would have had no real way in knowing the proper times and days. I suppose anytime we'er taken up into the presence of THE LORD JESUS its all about him---its his day. Interesting thought since Jesus is suposed to be our sabbath. He does inhabit eternity.

What I note here is that the gentiles were not part of the jews sect as believers of Jesus as messiah and that while the free gift was available it was not even being offered to gentiles. All the Jewish believers meet daily from house to house but there was not a clear cut break from the temple worship , the early jews were just another sect within judiasium.This is largely true. At the beginning the earliest Christians interpreted the work of Christ in the narrow terms of their racial concepts.As to my use of the term church , you were right, that term was used earlier in the NT I missed it, lol.~~~~opps. There's really no concrete evidence outside of Cornileus that gentiles were accepted into fellowship until after the Lord raised up Paul. There is considerable evidence; When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, "Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." So then those who were scattered because of the persecution that occurred in connection with Stephen made their way to Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except to Jews alone. But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who came to Antioch and began speaking to the Greeks also, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a large number who believed turned to the Lord. The news about them reached the ears of the church at Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas off to Antioch. (Act 11:18-22 NASB) This is the church in transition. I quoted the final comment of the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem because it is setting the scene for the next momentous events. The effect of the events at Cornelius’s house was part of God’s preparation.The Greek speaking Jews in Antioch began to ‘speak the word’ to their Gentile neighbours. It may be significant that the usual words for preaching; keErussoO and euaggelizoO are not used here but just the simple word for ‘talking’; these brave hearts from Cyrpus and Cyrene just ‘chatted the word’. The result was that a ‘large number’ believed and turned to the Lord. It is important to remember that at this point in Paul’s life he was in Tarsus and apparently keeping a fairly low profile in that Barnabas went to Tarsus to ‘search him out’ and eventually ‘found’ him.The point I am making is that Gentiles were being incorporated into a local church in Antioch before Paul was properly part of it.Your reference in Acts15 is well after Paul had started upon his ministry to the gentiles. That was my point. In the period recorded by Paul in Galatians 2 there was no question that Gentiles e.g. Titus would need to submit to Jewish laws. Galatians, by the way, probably comes in between Acts 14 and Acts 15. The scenario is that after Paul’s ‘mission to Galatia’ he discovered that others had followed in his tracks with an increasingly ‘Judaizing’ message. News of this reached Paul back in Antioch and he, and others in Antioch sent a letter; this is Galatians. Paul was obviously the author but he claims that the others with him were in agreement with his position. Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;) And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia: (Gal 1:1-2 KJV) We don’t know who ‘all the brethren’ refers to, but if it refers to others in the church at Antioch, this letter is semi-official.In Galatians he shows that he was accepted and welcomed in Jerusalem some time before this, as was Titus, who was not required to be circumcised. That was the state in Jerusalem at that time. Peter’s subsequent visit to Antioch went well and Peter was regularly meeting with the saint is Antioch; many, if not most, of whom were Gentile.However, when ‘certain came from James’ Peter changed his behaviour. Whether or not the phrase ‘from James’ is supposed to indicate an official delegation or simply some we were especially associated with him, remains an open question. The effect on Peter was that he ‘feared’ and compromised; he began to ‘withdraw and separate’ from the Gentile believers in Antioch and, presumably, identified himself more conspicuously with the Jewish converts. Paul rebuked him openly for this behaviour.That is the point at which Paul wrote Galatians to remedy a need in the churches of Galatia which threatened to follow Peter’s pattern. Galatians having been written, the situation at Antioch further deteriorates with the arrival of a group of men from Judaea. What is Peter’s case had been wrong behaviour has now solidified as wrong doctrine. They teach that circumcision is essential to salvation. Paul and Barnabas clearly opposed these men in Antioch (Acts 15:2) Paul and Barnabas, and perhaps others in Antioch, stood their ground and a fierce argument ensued. It was decided to take the matter to the Apostles and elders in Jerusalem.We needn’t continue the story beyond this other than to say the narrative in Galatians and in Acts shows a worsening situation. This was not the way things had been earlier.

Br. Robert wrote:I don't know that there is a correlation at all. My point is that Hebrews tells us clearly that through fear of death they were all their lifetime subject unto bondage. The passage in question is a treatise on genuine repentance. Yet, even if they repent they can only glean the maximum benefits allowed under the covenant. This makes them to fall way short of 'a better covenant' that is established on 'better promises.' Br. Robert, I believe you were refering to Isaiah 56 and 58 when you wrote,"The passage in question is a treatise on genuine repentance." I agree with your assessment in part. My first point is this, only God can bring about "genuine repentance in a individual. God made a promise that if they kept the Sabbath they would be able to repent of bondage to wickedness and the other manifestations of sin in their lives mention in 56 and 58. The Sabbath is the means by which God gives man the ability to have genuine repentance. Br Robert wrote:Yet, even if they repent they can only glean the maximum benefits allowed under the covenant. And I believe you based this one the Scripture which you mention: My point is that Hebrews tells us clearly that through fear of death they were all their lifetime subject unto bondage. For the benefit of those who might read this I will post the section of Scripture you refered to. Heb. 2:10 For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. 11 For both He who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all of one, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, 12 saying:\t“I will declare Your name to My brethren;\tIn the midst of the assembly I will sing praise to You.”13 And again:\t“I will put My trust in Him.” And again:\t“Here am I and the children whom God has given Me.”Heb. 2:14 Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. 16 For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham. 17 Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted."In this section of Scripture we find that the writer of Hebrews defines the work of Christ, that being His ministry of sanctifing those He died for. The writer states that both Christ and those He aids are one."11 For both He who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all of one, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, "In the next verses, the writer define who Christ calls His brethren by posting 3 different times in OT Scripture. 12 saying:\t“I will declare Your name to My brethren;\tIn the midst of the assembly I will sing praise to You.”13 And again:\t“I will put My trust in Him.” And again:\t“Here am I and the children whom God has given Me.”The writer again clarifies who it is that Christ brethren are in verse 16."16 For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham."So we see here that the writer of this Scripture identifies who it is that Christ is one with. Again verse 11: "11 For both He who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all of one, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, "So if the seed of Abraham is one in Christ what covenant is the writer speak of? Again you wrote:Yet, even if they repent they can only glean the maximum benefits allowed under the covenant.By being made one with Christ, what is the maximum benefit? Yes those who were Christ brethren prior to His death were in fear of death because Christ had not yet finished His work on the cross. The work of Satan on the first Adam was still enforced. Yet Christ still sanctified His brethren, " but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham."Genuine repentance is only granted by God. Genuine repentance come through the grace that is received by the individual that honors His Sabbath. The Lord is the Lord of the Sabbath. The seed of Abraham is given rest though the Lord of the Sabbath.In ChristJeff

Concerning the "Lord's day" in Rev. 1:10, philologos said:No, I don't. I don’t think there is any evidence to support the idea that this phrase was a reference to Sunday. The word translated 'Lord's' is an adjective; kuriakos. The word comes from kurios meaning Lord, but we have no real equivalent in English for this word adjective. If we were linking together another noun and adjective we might get 'king' and 'royal' or we might link together 'emperor' and 'imperial', but we can't really do this with 'lord' because it produces 'lordly' which means something quite different. The predominant feature about this day in Rev 1:10 is The Lord.Thank you. I agree that the context of Rev. 1:10 does not demand that the "Lord's day" be understood as Sunday. It is also quite probable that this phrase means "the day belonging to the Lord". Nevertheless, I think Christians are still justified to call Sunday the Lord's day on the basis that the first day of the week is the day of the Lord's resurrection, the day of the Lord's victory and exaltation. However, I am aware that this is not explicitly taught in the scriptures. I am thinking along this line:The word translated “belonging to the Lord” (kuriakos) occurs only here and one other place in the NT. The other instance is 1 Co 11:20 where Paul refers to the “Lord’s Supper” (literally, “the Supper belonging to the Lord”). The significance of this word appearing in only these two instances cannot be missed. The Lord’s Supper was, in the first century, the purpose for the church meeting (see the chapter entitled “In Remembrance Of Me”). Likely, the reason that the Supper was called the kuriakon deipnon (“the supper belonging to the Lord”) is precisely because the day for eating the Supper was itself called the kuriakon hemeran (“the day belonging to the Lord”). The above quotation is taken from an article, "On the Lord's Day" by Eric Svendsen (http://www.ntrf.org/sunday.html).To bring this back to our topic on Sabbath, I think biblical precedent does seem to indicate that early Christians came to see new significance in Sunday as the day of Christ's resurrection (noting though, that there is no explicit teaching on which day to worship in the NT). In contrast, the Sabbath day faded in importance because they see Christ as the ultimate fulfillment of Sabbath rest (cf. Hebrews).

The word translated “belonging to the Lord” (kuriakos) occurs only here and one other place in the NT. The other instance is 1 Co 11:20 where Paul refers to the “Lord’s Supper” (literally, “the Supper belonging to the Lord”).Hi Samthis isn't a point I would want to take a big stand on but would you say that 'kuriakos' is best translated as 'belonging to the Lord'? I think it would better be 'pertaining to the Lord':that could still mean it 'belonged to the Lord' but would leave the interpretation wider.kuriakos is an adjective, not a genitive form which would definitely be 'of' or 'belonging to the Lord'. If I were inventing language I would translate this 'lord-ish', and would use words like 'kitten-ish', 'child-ish', 'soulish', as my justification.Incidentally, kuriakos, is where our English word 'church' comes from. It probably always meant the 'building' which pertained to the Lord. The use of the word church was avoided by Tyndale who used congregation but the KJV Anglican translators reverted to 'church'. pity but that's politics for you!

In Isaiah 58 God promises those who obey His Sabbaths that they will be fed with the heritage of Jacob. Listen again to Isaiah 58:14."Then you shall delight yourself in the Lord; and I will cause you to ride on the high hills of the earth, and feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father. The mouth of the Lord has spoken."We know that God's words do not return void. We know some of the things that God brought into Jacob's life. Listen to one of these accounts.Jacob. 28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed. 29 And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there. 30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."In the King James version, God has given Jacob a new name, Israel. Then listen to these words,"for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men..." What is this power? What is the source of Israel's heritage? In ChristJeff

philologosthis isn't a point I would want to take a big stand on but would you say that 'kuriakos' is best translated as 'belonging to the Lord'? I think it would better be 'pertaining to the Lord':that could still mean it 'belonged to the Lord' but would leave the interpretation wider.I myself do not have a firm position on this because my knowledge in Greek is very elementary. But your argument makes sense to me.