Melody,

in Hebrew, the latter part of the verse (Lev. 19:28) says  "u'ktovet ka'aka lo titnu bachem- ani YHVH"
which means-
and you (plural) shall not make in yourselves tatoos- I am the LORD.

Now I would guess that you don't read Hebrew, but this is a great time to start learning how.  I think it is a shame that all churches don't offer and strongly ephasize original language learning. The only reason that the text has survived this long is that there were those who did make a strong emphasis on learning the original languages.  (I'll get off my "original language" soapbox now).

As far as taking it literaly, are you saying that God didn't tell Israel not to tatoo themselves?  If you were part of Israel and Moses taught you not to tatoo yourself, how would you understand that?

When reading the text, you need to take the literal parts literally (though they may have deeper symbolic meaning etc), the poetic parts as poetry, narritive as narritive, etc.
In other words, genre plays into how a verse is to be understood as well as textual and historic context.

If you don't have the original language understanding, then you need to consult other people who have that understanding. I would recommend that you find some Bible scholars, and consult them before accepting the current practices of Christian youth (or what I am telling you).  Just because someone is a Christian, doesn't make what they do right as you pointed out.  

God speaks for himself through His word, but in translation is where we get bogged down.  I think that experientialism has been replacing our Biblical foundation for some time now.  Experience is good, and all believers will have experience with God to draw upon, but we also need to heed and take seriously (literally) what God says. If the word is not the foundation, then we will never be one in Messiah, but each man will do what is right in his own eyes (Deut. 12: worshipping God however they want.  This has led to the rise of such things as snake handling, and "Christian" nudist colonies!!

In all fairness, I realize that most believers who do get tatoos, just do it for fun, or to be a "witness", however misguided this may be.

If one does use it as a witness, and then the person one is witnessing to starts to read the Bible from front to back, it will then become clear that there is a conflict between the life of the witnessing person and the Bible, and that will just confuse them.  Besides, God doesn't need us to think of gimicks to attract people to Him, He draws them Himself and appoints the people He desires to talk to them.

BTW, Galations doesn't deal with the Biblical law, but the rabbinic law of conversion through circumcision.

If you are ever in need of a Bible while posting, use one of the online Bible search tools-
http://biblestudytools.net/OnlineStudyBible

They have several versions, and you can search for a phrase, etc.  They also have some study tools available as well.

I want to emphasize that I am only discussing tatoos and the Bible, I'm not judging you or anyone else on this matter.

As far as your comment that it is full of errors, are you saying the Bible is full of errors? Who were you saying was using the literal translation, the writer on the link, or Chesed?

Peace and Blessings,
-oneBook

musicllover-

a teacher might tell her students to write there names on the tops of their papers. Some write it in the top left the best friends group, others write in the top right,...... are any of these kids disobeying NO....sure the teacher could correct the children, but she/he sees the children doing what they were told, although maynot the the best way. And she still grades the papers put a star on the top and hands it back to the child.

Well, I would say the teacher said to put the name on the top left, and some of the students told other students to put it on the left. Thoses that listened to their peers and not the teacher won't get stars. The teacher isn't going to kick them out of class for that, but teach them the correct side.

Peace and blessings, may God dwell fully in our lives at this time of Sukkot.

-oneBook

Silver-

I have mostly been chating with musicllover, but I was wondering, what are you doing on the Sabbath tomorrow?  It is the first day of the feast of booths and I was wondering if you are doing something, and if so, what?

-oneBook

[into their own olive tree?]

lowflatrate-

I think there is a problem dividing the body of Christ up into "Jewish  and non-Jewish".  It's not a country club
But seriously, I have seen this same approach to understanding scripture and it is false.  The problem this approach creates, is that now there are two brides (of Christ), but only a covenant with one.  The sign of the covenant with Israel is the Sabbath, this is equivalent to a wedding ring-

The problem is that nowhere in the Bible (OT or NT) is a covenant made with anyone except Israel!!! God doesn't have a mistress (Gentile church), only a bride.  So where does that leave Gentiles like us that weren't born Jews?  Look what Eph says-
Eph 2:11-22
11 Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are "Uncircumcision" by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands-- 12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, 15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16 and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity. 17 AND HE CAME AND PREACHED PEACE TO YOU WHO WERE FAR AWAY, AND PEACE TO THOSE WHO WERE NEAR ; 18 for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit.

Note that being part of Israel is being part of Christ.  Paul goes to great lengths to make Gentiles understand that they are -

-Fellow citizens in Israel (Eph. 2:19 above)

-Circumcised
Rom. 2:26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?

-Sons of Abraham
Rom 4:16 For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all

-Grafted into Israel
Rom. 11:17-27
17 Now if some of the branches were broken off, and you, though a wild olive branch, were grafted in among them, and have come to share in the rich root of the cultivated olive tree, 18 do not brag that you are better than those branches. But if you do brag--you do not sustain the root, but the root sustains you. 19 Then you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." 20 True enough; they were broken off by unbelief, but you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either. 22 Therefore, consider God's kindness and severity: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness toward you--if you remain in His kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And even they, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in, because God has the power to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from your native wild olive, and against nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these--the natural branches--be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 So that you will not be conceited, brothers, I do not want you to be unaware of this secret: a partial hardening has come to Israel until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written: The Liberator will come from Zion; He will turn away godlessness from Jacob. 27 And this will be My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.

We are all children of Israel, albeit it sometimes feels like the ugly step-child of Israel.  Or maybe an adopted child- hmmm.... I seem to remember Israel (Jacob) adopting two Gentiles and one of them he said would become a multitude of Gentiles (nations)!!
(Gen. 48)

In most English NT translations, there is a distinction made that is false, by hiding when the word synagogue is used as in James 2:2-
For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;

The word translated "assembly" here is actually the word "synagogue" in the Greek.  

Or translating the word usually translated "church" as "congregation" as in Acts 7-
37 "This is the Moses who said to the sons of Israel, God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from among your brothers. 38 He is the one who was in the congregation in the desert together with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our forefathers. He received living oracles to give to us.

Note in Stephen's speech above, that the church mentioned is Israel!!

Not to mention, when you read through the Exodus from Egypt, there are Gentiles with them then, and they are all addressed as sons of Israel!!  God goes on to say that -

Ex 12:49 - " The same law shall apply to the native as to the stranger who sojourns among you."

God accepted them, and they ate the Passover with the native Israelites (the above passage is in reference to Passover specifically, but the same thing applies to all the laws as we see later in the Torah).

As a friend of mine once said, "I'm in bondage?  If this is bondage, tie me up!!"
In keeping God's law, this is the only bondage I am in, and I wholly recommend it to all believers-
Rom. 6:17, 22 But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.

22 But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Note that God gives us freedom from slavery to sin, but that freedom is so that we can now follow Him and His commands.  This is why God redeemed Israel from slavery in Egypt and brought them to Sinai to become His slaves.

So what shall we say then?  Israel has not accepted the Messiah and has been blinded so that the Gentiles could come in.  Now that blindness is maintained through the ignorance of the Gentiles.  Check out Rom 10:9-20 -
9 But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, "I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU." 20 And Isaiah is very bold and says, "I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME."

This verse is talking about Gentiles!!  We are called Gentiles which means "nations".  But we are part of a nation, Israel, but not affiliated with the physical Israel directly.  That fits this verse to a T, and fits us, although that makes us ignorant.  What is it that we Gentiles are ignorant of?  The law of God.  Israel didn't accept Jesus (as the Messiah), but claims to follow God's law.  We on the other hand say we follow the Messiah, but we don't accept (all of) God's law.  Who's right? Put the two together and you have the right answer, accept God's law, and God's lawgiver (the Messiah).

Oh, and one last thing, in regards to this verse-
Matt 22:37-40

37 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.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Some use this to say that these are now the only 2 commandments that we have to keep.  This is in error.  If you break one command, you have broken them all.  If you break the Sabbath command, then you have not loved God with all your heart, soul, and mind. If you move your neighbor's boundry stone, then you are not loving your neighbor as yourself.

God's law is a law of grace, faith and love.  It is perfect, holy, and good.  If we as Christians didn't have a negative traditional view of the law, then we would be able to see that it tells us how to live like Messiah, it is His shadow, and I for one will dwell in it.

Well there's my 2 cents....  oh, and my standard disclaimer-
I DON'T BELIEVE WE ARE SAVED BY KEEPING THE LAW
I DON'T BELIEVE SUNDAY CHRISTIANS ARE GOING TO HELL

Jesus can forgive even not keeping the Sabbath, as long as it is not done in rebellion.

-oneBook

[(Silver, do you keep all the festivals and Sabbaths?)]

Hey musicllover-

Here are some further thoughts...

I understand your parable, at the same time, no carnal man did what Jesus did. And Jesus did "it" so all people would have a way into heaven.

The parable is not to say that a man can do what Jesus did, but to point out that when Jesus took us as his bride, He does have some things that He asks of us.  He has preferences as far as days he wants us to remember.  He doesn't do it so that we can earn our keep, but to celebrate the relationship He paid for with His own blood.

God doesn't have a scale

actually, He does, and on one side is each and every sin that a person commits, and on the other is the Lamb that was slain.  If He didn't have the scale, then His Son would not have had to die.

And I'm saying that the day is a man appointed day......yes I understand the to observe the Sabbath is a divine direction. Christians began meeting on the first day of the week to separate themselves from the Jews, they were fearful they would be killed like Jesus

So which is it?  If it is divine direction, it is not a man appointed day.  In fact, when God created the world, he set the stars and moon in place to mark when the festivals (Sabbaths) happen-

Gen. 1:14
Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night. They will serve as signs for festivals and for days and years.

Some English Bibles translate the word "festivals" as "seasons", but in Hebrew the word is "Moedim", and is the same one used of the festivals throughout the OT (including the Sabbath).


Now if you really want to put Silver on the ropes, ask him if he keeps the other festivals (SDAs don't typically)  
(Silver, do you keep all the festivals and Sabbaths?)

Additionally, when the "Jews" are mentioned in the NT, it is not referring to all Jews (otherwise the disciples would have separated from themseleves, and Jesus ), it is referring to the leadership and Sanhedrin in Jerusalem.  Remember that they wanted to get rid of Jesus because they didn't like that he was held as the Messiah by the majority of the Jews.  They were afraid to touch Him because of His and John's popularity-

Luke 20:5-8
 5 They reasoned among themselves, saying, "If we say, `From heaven,' He will say, `Why did you not believe him?' 6 "But if we say, `From men,' all the people will stone us to death, for they are convinced that John was a prophet."  7 So they answered that they did not know where it came from. 8 And Jesus said to them, "Nor willI tell you by what authority I do these things."

Luke 20:19
 19 The scribes and the chief priests tried to lay hands on Him that very hour, and they feared the people; for they understood that He spoke this parable against them.

And to address once again, they did meet on the first day in some places, but they were still meeting on the Sabbath as well and setting that day apart.  Paul is always going to synagogue etc.  Also interesting is that in Greek when it says "first day" it actually says "the first day from the Sabbath".  They still numbered all their days from the Sabbath.


And I don't think I can say this enough since it can be easy to lump all Sabbath keepers together-
I DON'T BELIEVE SUNDAY CHRISTIANS ARE GOING TO HELL
I DON'T BELIEVE YOU CAN BE SAVED BY KEEPING THE LAW
I WILL NOT SHOOT SPITWADS AT THE TEACHER... (oops, grade school flashback   )

I do believe that in keeping the commandments there is great reward
Psalm 19:7
 7 The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. 8 The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; The commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. 9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; The judgments of the LORD are true; they are righteous altogether. 10 They are more desirable than gold, yes, than much fine gold; Sweeter also than honey and the drippings of the honeycomb. 11 Moreover, by them Your servant is warned; In keeping them there is great reward.

I press the subject because I love the Sabbath of the Lord, and I hope that all the world will know Sabbath peace someday.

Sunday worship will NOT send anyone to hell, not even no worship will do that......BUT  not knowing who Jesus is will

Not worshipping God WILL send you to hell, although I think when you said worship, you meant "singing in church", not "serving God".
I think people use the term worship incorrectly (as far as the Bible goes).  They usually mean praise (which would be singing or reciting) when they say worship, but that is limiting worship from it's rightful sense.  This may also explain why you mentioned in your post that Jesus did healing, etc. on every day.  I agree He did, but that has no bearing what-so-ever on the Sabbath day issue.  Perhaps a clarification on what sanctification is would help.  Sanctify means to make holy, to set apart.  To make holy is to make something the way God says to.  If you do what God says, it sanctifies what you are doing.  I.E. if you cease from working on the Sabbath and spend time with your family and faith community, then you are causing the day to fulfill the purpose it was intended for by God, and that glorifies God who sanctified it in the first place (set it apart for meeting with Him).  The Tabernacle and Temple had the same thing going on, when the priests obeyed God, the Temple became holy (sanctified by God's word obeyed), and God promised to dwell among Israel. When they desecrated the Temple (did things God prohibited, or didn't do things God commanded) then God wouldn't dwell with them.  

Let's see what Silver has to say about the other Sabbaths... Silver?

Blessings on you and yours-
oneBook

musicllover-

I am not saying they weren't worshipping at those meetings, I like you believe that we should worship 24x7.  The word translated worship in Hebrew is avodah (serve/work).  We are His servents, and as such we serve Him every day, which means we obey His commands.  Consequently, in order to worship Him on the Sabbath, we need to stop working, and hold a holy convocation, and set the day apart.  This is the Biblical mandate for the Sabbath.  He is the judge of how well we obey (heart attitude, thoughts, etc), but there are physical actions involved in the worship of God.

Let me say further that yes, we could keep the Sabbath and at the same time commit other sins, and it would not cancel them out, or somehow make it so that God will save us.

Let me also address the word belief, because I think that this word is misunderstood.  Belief as it is used in the Bible implies action based on trust in God's character and word.

James 1:22 - 25
22 But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his natural face in a mirror; 24 for once he has looked at himself and gone away, he has immediately forgotten what kind of person he was. 25 But one who looks intently at the perfect law, the law of liberty, and abides by it, not having become a forgetful hearer but an effectual doer, this man will be blessed in what he does

Note in the above passage that the law of liberty (God's law) is compared to a mirror where we see the image of ourselves as God would have us.  God's law describes the image of the Messiah and how to demonstrate in a real way love for God and our neighbor.

Look also at this verse

Romans 2:13-16
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

Here, the Gentiles do what the Law requires even though they do not have the Law. In this case, Paul is using the term Law to denote the Jewish leadership.  Why do I say that?  Because the Jewish leadership forced Jews to keep the Law (and all their additions), but not Gentiles unless they were circumcised and became Jews.  Therefore the Gentiles are a Law to themselves (they enforce the Laws on themselves) and their conscience bears witness when they keep or break them.  Does this contradict Eph. 2? Not at all, neither of the above verses is dealing with how to be saved, but how to live after you are saved.  The fruit of salvation is that we keep the Law of God with all our heart, and when we break it, then we repent and God forgives.  This is the duty of Israel, and since all Christians are a part, it is our Christian duty.

You can meet any day of the week to sanctify and sing to God, but make sure you also set apart the days God said to, that is worship too, and not setting them apart is "knowing what is good to do and not doing it" (Jas. 4:17)

Let me leave you with a final thought in the form of a parable-

There was a woman who was wooed by a man and gave herself over to him. Eventually he was abusive to her, and would not let her go.  After some time, another man came and freed that woman, and married her and treated her well, and showed her real love.  The man and his bride would comemorate the special events in their relationship every year, until one year when the woman forgot about an event.  As the years went on, more of the special times were forgotten, and eventually, the woman started celebrating the special events with her husband on the days of her former lover.

If you were this man, how would you feel?

Peace and Blessings brother,

-oneBook

[Not of works, lest any man should boast.]

-----part 2------

To be saved, we have to have a covenant with God, in order to take part in the covenant, we have to be part of Israel.  Why?  Show me a covenant in the Bible that is made with anyone besides Israel.... there are none.  God doesn't have mistresses, only a bride (and only one at that).

The practices of the church today came partially from the Catholic church, which derived much of it's practice from paganism.  They pray to the "queen of heaven" who is mentioned as a false God in the OT (Jer. 7:18, 44:17,18,19,25).  Constantine the first "Christian" emperor of Rome was a sun god worshipper, and in his mandate that Sunday should be observed, he calls it the "venerable day of the sun".  He then goes on to forbid worship on the Sabbath on pain of death.  This is straight out of the anti-Christ playbook-
Dan. 7:25

25 'He will speak out against the Most High and wear down the saints of the Highest One, and he will intend to make alterations in times and in law; and they will be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time

I'm not saying that anyone who doesn't keep the Sabbath is the anti-Christ, but that they are inadvertently following his agenda.  Constantine when on to murder his own family (after he became a "Christian").

I would tell anyone not to take my word for it, but when you go back and examine the 1st century "church" what you find is much more like a synagogue.

Paul goes to speak in the synagogue every place he goes.  They continue to meet there if the synagogue accepts the message, but if not, then they are forced to meet in houses, etc. Note in James 2:2-

For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;

The word translated "assembly" here is actually the word "synagogue".  


By the way, the Jews who rejected the message really objected to the inclusion of gentiles in Israel without circumcision, not that Jesus was the Messiah.  Read the excerpt from a book that my wife posted on another discussion-

http://forums.christiansunite.com/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=5004

The leadership in Jerusalem had issues besides that having to do with authority- if Jesus was the Messiah, king of Israel, then the disciples should be rulers of Israel (as Jesus said they would be).  Of course in the issue with Paul, he was outside Jerusalem where the leadership jealousy was an issue, and now the issue was with gentile inclusion jealousy.

In all this, we must realize that when we see gentiles in the NT, they are God fearers who go to synagogue, and follow the word of God to the best of their understanding.  The word was only the OT, and you can bet they were eating kosher, keeping Sabbath, etc. if they knew about it.  Think about it, if you were a believer and the only Bible you had stated "God said to do xyz" then you would do it!  Not only that, but all God's people do what it says as well (physical Israel).

So brother Israel, when you read Romans 10 and 11, realize that you have been grafted in to Israel by the grace of God, and that all the things that God commanded to Israel to do, he has placed on your heart (Jer. 31, and Heb. .  Note here also, the New Covenant is made only with Israel, and the Law that Israel had broke will be kept by all since it will be on their heart.  A friend of mine asked me once if I have God's law written on my heart, so I of course said "yes".  Then he asked me, what are the 10 commandments then?  At the time, I think I got a few of them right, but it somewhat illustrated the point that sometimes we get used to saying things without dwelling on the reality.

Eph 2:8

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. 11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of edicts contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: 22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Blessings and Peace on you and all Israel

-oneBook

-----end of part 2-----

------part 1----------

musicllover-

You have elicited a 2 part post from me, a first on this newsgroup (I think).  Sorry for conferring you with the "honor" but I just don't feel that I am communicating clearly, although writing more won't necissarily fix that, I can't wait to take another writing class.

Yes, just to re-affirm, the Sabbath is the 7th day, and the first day is just that.  The corresponding days on are calendar are -
Sabbath- fri. night through sat. day
first day- sat. night through sun. day
second day- sun. night through mon. day

The first point I was trying to make is the reason the disciples met on the first-day was in order to keep the Sabbath holy (by not handling money, and setting the day apart by having a ceremony at the end, not traveling on the Sabbath). In other words, there is not reason to think they were setting it apart as a special meeting time at all for religious meetings, only for getting money, or they happened to be together after the Sabbath was over.  Our congregation meets all day on the Sabbath and we do the Havdallah ceremony at the end to set the Sabbath apart and mark the end of the day (at sundown sat.).  So we are also together on the first day of the week consequently as most observant Jews are to this day. Don't forget it was Jesus custom to go the synagogue on the Sabbath-
Luk 4:16

He came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. He entered, as was his, into the synagogue on the day of Shabbat, and stood up to read.

The point I was making about the Romans 14 passage is that it is not saying that some worship on Sabbath and some worship on Sunday, but that some think all the intermediate days of a holiday are holy, and some think only the one's God declared holy are holy.  In other words, it doesn't support the view that we should keep sun. unless the context is left out.

Additionally, none of the disciples were Christians, and neither was Jesus.  What I mean is, sun. observance was not practiced, neither were alter calls, there were no churches, and nothing that we would recognize as distinctly Christian.  If one of the disciples came into a church today, assuming they could understand English,  they would wonder why we don't mention the exodus from Egypt in our songs and prayers, and why we don't keep the Sabbath, and why we don't keep the festivals.
You see to them, Jesus was the Messiah because the law and the prophets (another term for Scripture) testified that he was.  The law and the prophets also tell us that the Messiah will not change the law, and if someone comes saying he speaks for God and does tell the people not to obey any of the laws, then that person is a false prophet -

Deut 13:1-5

1 " If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying, ' Let us go after other gods (whom you have not known) and let us serve them,' 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD your God is testing you to find out if you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 " You shall follow the LORD your God and fear Him; and you shall keep His commandments, listen to His voice, serve Him, and cling to Him. 5 "But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has counseled rebellion against the LORD your God who brought you from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, to seduce you from the way in which the LORD your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from among you.

In this passage, going after other gods is equated with not obeying the commandments.  This explains why Jesus clarified in Matt. 5 that he did not come to do away with them (that would be the equivalent of serving other gods).  He went on to add that whoever (Jew or gentile) teaches the law and keeps it, will be called great in the kingdom, while whoever (Jew or gentile) breaks them and teaches others to break them will be called the least.
He also stated that heaven and earth will not pass away before the law.

Secondly, the church is not mentioned in the Bible.  The word church is a Latin word that was used later to translate the Greek word ecclesia (sp?).
This word was previously used to describe Israel.  Check out Stephens speech-

Acts 7:37 - 38

"This is the Moses who said to the sons of Israel, `GOD WILL RAISE UP FOR YOU A PROPHET LIKE ME FROM YOUR BRETHREN.' 38 "This is the one who was in the congregation in the wilderness together with the angel who was speaking to him on Mount Sinai, and who was with our fathers; and he received living oracles to pass on to you.

The word congregation above is the same one translated church most everywhere else (ecclesia).  This is to make a distinction that doesn't exist in the Bible between Israel and "the Church".  From the disciples view, they were the righteous remnant of Israel along with the gentiles who believed, and through the Messiah, the gentiles became part of Israel, and God's covenant with Israel.  When in the NT they say that the Jews persecuted the "church" (ecclesia), what the NT writers are conveying is that the "Jews" that were persecuting them were the same "Jews" that Stephen points out didn't follow God in the wilderness.


----end of part 1-------

Hey musicllover,

Yes, that would put us into day two since sundown (or monday as we call it).  This part I think you have down, but I am afraid I confused you on the Sabbath/1st day issue.

Let me just give a sample of how a normal Sabbath would go down, hopefully that will be less confusing than my other posts-

fri. just before sundown
   the disciples are gathering to usher in the Sabbath, and light lamps before sundown for light (the Saducees would not light any lamps, and sat in darkness on the Sabbath). The cooking would be done, and at the point they light the lamps, they no longer do any work, and start reciting the blessings and Scripture over the Sabbath and over the food. They break bread and eat.

fri. after sundown
   in the glow of the lamps, the disciples finish eating, and then bless God for the meal (grace after meals).  They would have also most likely discussed God's word (they only had the OT at this point) and then sang some of the Sabbath Psalms as is the custom to this day.

sat. morning
    the disciples rise and eat a simple meal that was prepared before the Sabbath, or something that takes no preparation (like fruit). They then would have walked to the local synagogue (or the Temple if they were in Jerusalem).  The service consists of the prayer service (liturgy) that is a collage of Scripture sang and canted in an interactive service.  Next the scrolls would be brought out and some people would read from the Torah (law) and the prophets (each book had it's own scroll).  Then a teacher would expound on the reading and answer questions.

sat. afternoon
   the disciples stay and eat (break bread) in the synagogue and discuss the word and fellowship all day (and attempt to persuade them about the Messiahship of Jesus).

sat. just after sundown
   to mark the end of the Sabbath, they light lamps, and talk/fellowship on into the first day which started at the point they lit the lamps.

So, from the above imaginary account, I hope you can get a clear idea of the timeframe of Sabbath observance.  Meeting on the first day of the week (sat. night) was not part of the Sabbath per se, but an extension of it (they just couldn't get enough ).  So to clarify, if one were to meet on sunday day, then they would be meeting on the latter half of the first day, not the Sabbath.

I think the above should clearly settle the timing of the Sabbath, so I would like to discuss some of the verses that lend ambiguity to the necessity of the Sabbath. Starting with
Rom. 14:1 - 6

1 Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions.  
2 One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only.  
3 The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him.  
4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.  
5 One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.  
6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.  

Now there is a big difference in how I used to read this verse and how I understand it now.  There are a few things that changed it for me-
1.   the identity of the weaker brother
2.   the identity of the days in verse 5

In regards to #1 above, I read a very good book (with lots of really big words) called “The Mystery of Romans” by Mark Nanos.  This book I think made one major point and that is that the weaker brother is a Jew who doesn’t believe that Jesus is the Messiah. In fact, the weakness of his faith is that he doesn’t believe in the one God sent.  This also explains why he only eats vegetables, as this was something that Jews would do if they didn’t know if the meat was free from idolatry (at the time, most meat markets would say prayers to their gods over the meat, and the sages of Israel declared that Jews should not buy meat at a gentile market for that reason).  So vegetables were the way around that, since the idolaters didn’t usually say blessings over the vegetables.
If you read through Romans with this perspective, then it makes the whole book more cohesive.  When he talks about loving your enemy, he is talking about Jews that don’t believe that Jesus is the Messiah as in
Rom. 11:28

From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers

Secondly, about the days in verse 14:5, to start with, this section is dealing with opinion, not Scriptural precepts (as in verse 1).  This book was written primarily to the gentiles who were fellowshipping in the synagogue in Rome.  Paul had taught them that it is ok to buy meat from the market, but if someone told you it was offered to an idol, not to eat it (1 Cor. 8:13, 10:25-28).  As I mentioned already, the sages of Israel didn’t allow Jews to eat meat from the gentile market at all.  Paul’s exhortation here is for a gentile not to pass judgment on a Jewish brother (who doesn’t believe in Jesus as the Messiah) because they won’t eat meat.  Note that it is assumed throughout that the meat is kosher, Paul doesn’t mention it because it is laid out in Scriptures, and being in the synagogue, they would already know what God said can be eaten and what can’t.
So if we take this view, then the days mentioned in Scripture (Sabbath, Passover, Yom Kippur, etc.) were taken for granted that they were holy (undisputed), so what days in verse 14:5 do people have opinions on?  We know that in that time period there were no groups recorded that thought all days were holy (that is the antithesis of holiness- if all days are set apart, then there is nothing to distinguish one day from another and it is therefore no longer set apart).  There were also no groups that observed no days.  So what is Paul talking about?  In the festivals of Passover/unleavened bread and the Feast of Booths, they are celebrated for 7 and 8 days respectively.  For Passover/unleavened bread, the scriptures tell us that the 1st and 7th days of Passover are Sabbaths (no work). For the Feast of Booths, the 1st and 8th days are Sabbaths.  The days in between are called the intermediate days of the festival.  According to Scripture, there is no prohibition to working on these days, however, there were many Jews who held that all the days of these festivals were Sabbaths, and would have the same rules on all of them.  This is a tradition and opinion that the gentiles didn’t have to agree with, and Paul tells them that although they don’t have to do it, don’t get down on the Jews that hold that conviction.  To strengthen this point, note that verse 2 and verse 5 parallel so that –
“One person has faith that he may eat all things” is the same one who “regards one day above another”

-and-

“but he who is weak eats vegetables only” is the same one who “regards every day alike”.


So it appears the first person is a gentile believer, and the second a Jew who believes in God but doesn’t accept His Messiah.

Furthermore, this same theme is taken through the broken and grafted chapters, stressing that the gentiles should not be arrogant over the natural branches (that were broken off).

Well, I think that is enough for now, I’m interested to hear your response, and Silver, you are totally welcome to chime in, I’m interested to hear your take on this passage.

Peace and Blessings on you both.

-oneBook

[to prayer]

musicllover-

partially, at sundown is when the day of the week changes, so sat. evening is the first day, while sat. day is the 7th (Sabbath).  Likewise, the 7th day starts at sundown on fri., but before sundown, it is the 6th day. You could think of it as having two calendars, and you shift the days on one up about a quarter day (it varies through the year due to changes in sundown- earlier in winter and later in summer).

The early believers kept the Agape feast (also mentioned in Jude 1:12) on sat night (the 1st day of the week). There was a 3rd century work called "The Aposolic Constitutions" that outlined the rules for the feast, and even detail on how the lamps should be lit. Note that in Acts 20:7-11, that it does mention lamps, which tells us it is at night, and the fact that they mention the lamps is a good indication that this was an agape feast.  The tradition of having lamps is part of the keeping of the Sabbath, specifically of the Havdallah ceremony.  So the disciples passed on the tradition of having a closing ceremony for the Sabbath, and this morphed into the Agape feast and later disappeared all together.

We know they still met on the Sabbath because the disciples who stayed in Jerusalem met at the Temple daily, and participated in the prayer service.  This last piece of info is gleaned in this verse- Acts 3:1

Now Peter and John were going up to the Temple at the ninth hour, the hour of prayer.

also Acts 2:42 - 47

42 They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43 Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe; and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles. 44 And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common; 45 and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need. 46 Day by day continuing with one mind in the Temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart,  47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved.

note that in the above, where it says "to prayer", in Greek actually has the definate article so should be read "the prayer".  This strongly suggestes participation in the liturgy of the Temple, for in Jewish circles, the liturgy was called "the Prayer" quite often.

Well, that's enough for now.  I've got to go work (it's one of the 6 days of labor   )

Peace and Blessings, and congrats on the 100 year birthday of your fellowship.

-Onebook

Silver,
while I agree that we should be keeping Sabbath, I don't see how you can state that other people are going to Hell who don't.  The issue is that if it is a sin not to keep Sabbath, then can't the atonement of Jesus cover that too?

Look in 2 Chron. 30:18-20

18 For a multitude of the people, {even} many from Ephraim and Manasseh, Issachar and Zebulun, had not purified themselves, yet they ate the Passover otherwise than prescribed. For Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, "May the good LORD pardon  19 everyone who prepares his heart to seek God, the LORD God of his fathers, though not according to the purification {rules} of the sanctuary." 20 So the LORD heard Hezekiah and healed the people.

Notice that eating the Passover sacrifice while being unclean puts you in a death penalty situation (cut off), but Hezikiah prayed and God listened and forgave the people.  It was because they didn't know any better, and God saw their heart was in the right place so He even performed miricles of healing for them.

Remember also the words of Paul in Rom. 14:3-4

God is the righteous judge, and can make His servants stand

I think God is big enough to correct another brothers errors.  You have already judged your brother and sentenced him.  Just tell them what is good about Sabbath and defend your position, but don't assign their eternal resting place.

musicllover-
I think the 144,000 thing is from the JW's and I believe that Silver is in the SDA church...

musicllover-

Let me clarify-
The days have names, but they are named with numbers.  Additionally, the Sabbath does have a special name it shares with all the other holidays (Shabbat). So we see that there is a Shabbat on the first and last day of Passover/Unleavened bread, etc. (see Lev. 23)

I see that you consider that sunday is the 1st day of the week, so you must agree that the Sabbath is the 7th, so I won't belabor that point.

As for as the verses you posted, let me start by clarifying how the Sabbath is kept.  The Sabbath starts on what we would call by our current week friday at sundown and finishes on saturday at sundown.  All the time from saturday sundown to sunday sundown is the 1st day.  This is because the Hebrews took their reckoning of days from the Genesis account- "and there was evening and there was morning....".

So, when it states that they were up late on the first day of the week, it means saturday night.  This makes sense in the following verse, since Paul would not travel on the Sabbath, and after sundown, it is too dark to travel.

Acts 20:7-12
7 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. 8 There were many lamps in the upper room where we were gathered together. 9 And there was a young man named Eutychus sitting on the window sill, sinking into a deep sleep; and as Paul kept on talking, he was overcome by sleep and fell down from the third floor and was picked up dead.

You see, when celebrating the Sabbath, to this day Jews have a service at the end that drags on into the first day called Havdallah.  This is done in order to set apart the Sabbath (keep it holy) from the rest of the week.
This also would explain why the collection is done on the first day of the week, since they also wouldn't have collected money on the Sabbath-

1 Cor 16:2 On the first day of the week  let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collection when I come

Another interesting study is to compare Havdallah with the Agape feasts of the early believers, but that is a separate discussion/study.

In the Revelation verse you quoted-

Rev. 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day

This may be better translated - "I was in the Spirit on the Day of the Lord"
This is a better translation in that it informs the reader what the following events relate to, i.e.- the era that is spoken of by all the prophets (there is another good comparison study).

I also wanted to address this statement-

And what of the teaching that Christians choose to worship on Sunday to keep them separate from the Jews.

This teaching came later in the church, and mostly happened because of the Fiscus Judaicus (Jewish Tax) levied by Rome on all Jews, of which the Christians were considered part!!  Since they practiced biblical feasts, etc, they were lumped in with the Jews.  At this point, Christian Gentiles started to hide all external Biblical observance, and even dump some all together.  Since the Gentiles had become more numerous than the Jewish adherents, that became the overwhelming character of Christianity, although it was not the same Christianity that Jesus, Paul, or the disciples practiced.

I also notice that there is a tendency to separate "spiritual" from physical practices, but this seems to be opposite the idea of spiritual that is proclaimed in scripture.  The whole idea of sanctification is to take the physical world and make it serve God, thus sanctifying it.  Holiness is accomplished in a physical body.  God placed our spirits in a body because He wanted holy people, He could have just made us spirits if he wanted us that way.  

And finally, as I said before, I don't think this is an issue about whether or not someone who doesn't observe the Sabbath is going to hell, but I pose this as a question to us who are followers of Jesus, to suggest that maybe we have not been walking in all truth, and maybe we can recover it still...

Blessings and peace-

Onebook

[For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.]

to musicllover-
sorry, I forgot to remove the footnotes (R##) from the Romans text (doh!)

To DreamWeaver-
I guess I did, but I agree with what you wrote, so the difference in understanding must be in definition of terms,  and interpretative tradition/hermeneutics.

The so-called 'old covenant' was replaced. Why? The reason is explained in Hebrews 10:8, 10 where we're told, "Because finding fault with them I will make a new covenant". God found fault with the people, not with His own laws. Because the people would not obey His laws, He said that He would establish a new covenant, one in which He would "put my laws in their mind and write them on their hearts".

I have too often ran into people who appear to believe that the problem was God's law, so this was nice to hear that someone was paying attention to the text and saw the problem was with the people.  You are quite right that we cannot live up to God's righteousness and so He imputes it to us through His Son, but does that mean that we don't attempt to live righteously?  Besides, in the law, it symbolically teaches us that God will atone for our sin (in the sacrifice). If the law is God's standard of righteousness, then we should fulfill it (to the best of our ability) and consider it our duty, not that we are working to earn a reward as in Lu. 17:7-10-

7 "Which of you, having a slave plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, `Come immediately and sit down to eat'? 8 "But will he not say to him, `Prepare something for me to eat, and properly clothe yourself and serve me while I eat and drink; and afterward you may eat and drink'? 9 "He does not thank the slave because he did the things which were commanded, does he? 10 "So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say, `We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done.' "

This takes humility, and we must constantly realize that God owns us.
When you said at the end of your post "and with his Spirit in us we can overcome also, if we are willing to put forth the effort.", what are we putting forth effort to do?  I know we don't put forth effort to be saved, but we do serve God and that takes effort.  This is consistent with Eph 2:8-10-

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

The last part (verse 10) is not memorized by many, but is our focus once we have been saved.  We have been saved FOR good works, not BY them. I think this is in agreement with your point of view (so far).

Sometimes as Christians, we get hung up on the beginner stuff (salvation and turning from dead works), not that we shouldn't remember those from time to time, but as Hebrews states, we need to move on to more mature subjects-
Heb. 6:1-8

1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment.

One question I have is- what are the "washings" (note it is plural)?  I think I am conversant in the other subjects, but if I don't have a handle on this beginner subject, doesn't that show a deficiency in the teaching I have received in the Church?  Do you know what the "washings" are?

So, I think our departure is how we live (to some degree).
Obviously, you agree, I take it that we should live out these-
Love the Lord with all your heart, mind, strength (Deut. 6:4)
Love your neighbor as yourself (Lev. 19:18)
9 of the 10 commandments (Ex. 20)
No homosexuality (Lev. 20:13)

Please let me know if my assessment is way off.
Do you consider these to be living out the good deeds God prepared in advance for us to do?

What are the particulars of loving God and my neighbor?  Is it the warm, fuzzy feeling I get when I sing to God, or pray?  I don't always get them, but is that love?
I would say that is a side effect of love, but love itself must manifest itself by obedience wouldn't you agree?
We mostly differ on what to obey-
Just the commands we find in the NT (which are re-iterated from the OT)
-or-
All the commands we find in the Bible.

I think when it comes down to it, this difference is due to dispensationalism, which I don't subscribe to.  Now I know from reading many posts here that you consider that without dispensationalism, you can't get to the truth in the Bible, but you do have to admit that it is a derived interpretive tradition, and it is not based on a literal text.  Not that interpretative tradition is bad, it can help us see things sometimes, or make sense of something that didn't make sense before, but it can also cause us not to see what the text is saying.  Interpretative tradition is like having glasses that filter out out some things and bring other things into focus.  But I think from time to time, we need to look at the text and remove all our traditions, and use the historical, grammatical context to illuminate the text.

One last thing I would like to add is that I don't subscribe to systematic theology either.  I think that we need to view Scriptures in as an open system, not a closed system.  This means that when we find verses that don't seem to jive, we don't have to make up an explanation (we should try to find one), but just leave them in tension.  Especially where it involves God's nature, since this issue has caused so many splits, cults, etc.  Notice in 1st century Judaism, they believed the Messiah would be divine, but there was never an argument recorded until quite some time after the NT.  While I don't subscribe to it, I do believe that it can be used as a technique to study, but we have to set it aside sometimes to make sure that we aren't putting meaning into the text that is not there.

So now you know more of my position, I would like to hear clarification on yours, and also feedback on my understanding of your position.

Peace and blessings brother-
Onebook

[they R106 were entrusted with the oracles R107 of God.]

Peace and blessings musicllover,

A good question, and for the answer, we have to go a bit into the original language (Hebrew).

So in the account in Gen., the days are identified as day one, second day, third day, fourth day, fifth day, and seventh day.  In Hebrew - yom echad, yom sheni, yom shlishi, yom revi'i, yom chamishi, yom shishi, and yom shevi'i.

An interesting side note- the numbering on the first day is cardinal, and the rest of the days ordinal.  I just think it is interesting.

In the Hebrew calendar, they didn't have names of the week other than the numbers.  From Genesis to the Gospels, and even to this day, the Hebrews use the same designations for the days of the week in their calendar.

How do we know that it wasn't changed somewhere in between? Maybe the Jews are keeping the wrong day?  Another related question will shed light on this- how do we know that the Old Testament and New Testament weren't botched or corrupted?  God entrusted the Scriptures to Israel as we see in Rom. 3:1-2.
1 Then what advantage F46 has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Great in every respect. First of all, that they R106 were entrusted with the oracles R107 of God.

So God entrusted them with Scripture, so also he entrusted them with the Sabbath.  Jesus would have corrected them if they had it wrong, but He, being the Lord of the Sabbath (the originator), did not dispute it, but disputed how it should be kept.  It is instructive to note that the issues Jesus argues with them are not mentioned in the Biblical law (picking food, healing, etc...), but were purely traditions of the elders.  Also, they are usually criticizing Jesus' disciples, and not him (except for the healing).

Does that answer your question, or give you a whole bunch more?

God Bless,
Onebook

DreamWeaver, does BEP agree with your stance on the law?

I would say this represents my position, but have had some debate with BEP on some issues, and from my understanding, he would not agree (maybe I didn't understand him).

Maybe some clarification is in order (BEP if you're listening).
Let me state my position clearly-
I agree that salvation is by grace/faith, not works.

My statements concerning the law are under the context of the life of the redeemed, not the entrance requirements of the unsaved.

I would not agree with statements made by SilverSurfer to the effect that those who keep Sunday will go to hell.
God is the righteous judge, and can make His servants stand (Rom. 14:3-4)

I had a friend that was at a conference in the Philippines about the law in relation to the believer, and the first question he got from the pastors he was talking to (those opposed to the teaching of God's law in the books of Moses) was - "If I don't keep the Sabbath, am I sinning?"

This is the heart of the Sabbath debate, since when I say I think we should keep the Sabbath (not for salvation, but out of love/obedience) then in the mind of the sunday observing Christian that translates to me telling them that they (and all the rest of the mainstream Christian church) are not in line with God, and sinning.

I am not trying to point out sin but to demonstrate that the Sabbath is our heritage and a delight  as delineated in Isa. 56.  This passage shows that for one, gentiles can be grafted in, and two, the sign of our covenant relationship is the same one God gave to Israel!  This passage is NOT saying "if you keep the Sabbath - go to heaven", but that it is a part of the covenant between God and all His people.

"Our heritage?" you may ask, "I'm not Jewish".  However the Sabbath is not Jewish either, and was instituted at creation.
In one post, I noticed that one person pointed out that it was not commanded in Gen. and that is true, the terminology is not a command.  However the bottom line is that the Sabbath is the first thing in all of creation that God sanctified.  Once God speaks, His word is permanent, and the day cannot be un-sanctified.

At the very least, a sunday Christian must admit that God considers that day sanctified even if they choose not to sanctify it.  Now if they believe that Israel is a separate entity from the gentiles, and that only Israel is commanded to keep the Sabbath, then they would be (from their viewpoint) in a position where they were not commanded to keep the Sabbath (since they are not part of Israel), but that God still considers it sanctified.  A good question to ask here is - "if God considers the day holy, shouldn't we?"

Secondly, if a sunday Christian did believe they are part of Israel by engrafting (Rom. 11), then they would have to conclude that they were living in sin since the command would now apply to them.  If they don't change their action to reflect their conviction, then they would have to rely on the fact that Jesus' sacrifice would atone for their sin.  This has obvious problems, the foremost being intentional sin and atonement.

I believe that although many Christians may not keep Sabbath, they will not be excluded from the Kingdom for that reason.  It would be their heart intention that God will judge, and that is what I was trying to get at above. I believe most Christians live by their convictions, and I believe even if they are mistaken about the Sabbath, that God will accept them and correct them Himself.

Ollie posted about the burden of the Law, and while I agree that sin is a burden that is created by transgressing the law, the burden of the law that Jesus identified was the man made regulations of the sages of that time-

Matthew 23:1-12
1 Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3 therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them. 4 They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger."

This informs us to the meaning of this passage-

Acts 10:28
        28 And he said to them, "You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean."

God wasn't concerned that Peter still wasn't eating pork, but wanted Peter to realize that although the sages made a law (not in God's law) that Jews and Gentiles are to stay separate, even if the gentiles in question are observing the law as we know from historical sources that the "God fearers" did. Even if they were eating kosher and attended your synagogue, a Jew was not allowed to fellowship with them until they were circumcised.  God's point was that he determines who is in Israel, and who isn't, not the sages.

This also makes sense of the verse in Acts where James talks of the law as a burden neither we nor our fathers could bear-

Acts 15:10
        10 "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?"

Putting a gentile through circumcision would also mean that they would have to obey all rabbinic law (the burden to heavy to bear) since they would be placed under the authority of the Sanhedrin.  Even Rome recognized their authority, and while Romans looked down on converts to Judaism, they did still recognize the authority of the Sanhedrin over that person.  Paul however was convinced that the gentiles should not be exposed to that burden, and the council agreed.  They only imposed restrictions on activities relating to idolatry (sexual fornication, strangled animal meat, ingesting blood, and any idol related practice).

This gets to the very heart of the Law vs. Grace debate since the Law that is opposed to grace is not God's law, but the laws that the sages created that are opposed to God's Grace.  The giving of the law to Israel was an act of grace in and of itself.

Does this in any way demean the sacrifice of our Master and Lord? Not at all, rather I believe that the law teaches us to live as He lived. The law teaches us what the Messiah would do, and how we would recognize Him.

Earlier I posted a statement that I was sure would be challenged, but heard nothing back.  It was something to this effect-

"there are no covenants made anywhere in Scripture (NT/OT) with anyone but Israel, and there is no salvation for anyone outside of a covenant"

 I was curious if anyone knows of a place where there is a covenant made with anyone except Israel?  I've been looking....
Even the New Covenant in Hebrews / Jer. 31 is made with Israel....

I consider each sunday Christian an Israelite brother (not to be confused with a Jew) who does keep most of the law -
Love the Lord with all your heart, mind, strength (Deut. 6:4)
Love your neighbor as yourself (Lev. 19:18)
9 of the 10 commandments (Ex. 20)
No homosexuality (Lev. 20:13)

In everyday life, the only difference someone would see between me and them is that I speak positively about God's law, and do some of the smaller laws (kosher/fringes), and sanctify the Sabbath.

Out of all of these differences, the Sabbath was the only one that had a death penalty attached to it.  I say this not because I think they should be put to death (although we all deserve that), but because I want to point out how important it was to God.  This is why I think of all things law related, the Sabbath is the starting place on restoring the missing law and our missing heritage.

If you have a problem with these commands, then you should have a problem with baptism as well since it is the same type of command- not done for salvation, but as a covenant sign.  Responses?  This post has a some Sabbath arguments as BEP directed me to this forum to continue a thread from another forum.