Sabbath Arguments Answered #4

The Worldwide Church of God has abolished the Sabbath commandment - I answer their arguments

continued from previous page

MY COMMENT: Ah-AAAHHH, here we are at last with the standard argument used by the Protestants since they had to figure a way around not teaching as the Roman Catholic Church taught, namely: "We keep Sunday because the Church decreed the holiness of the Sabbath command would be transferred to Sunday." The Catholic Church says they have the authority by being the true church and the Pope being the vicar of Christ on earth, to change or make holy days. The Protestants rejecting this had to come up with other ways to get around the words of the 4th commandment, hence the argument Tkach now uses. This argument falls like a deck of cards when you understand HOW the Bible is written at times, and when you let the Bible speak for and interpret itself. 1. Turn to Matthew chapter 19. The Pharisees came to Jesus and asked Him if it was "lawful for a man to put away his wife for EVERY CAUSE"? (verse 3). There was one school of the Pharisees that said it was lawful - a man could divorce his wife for burning the toast. Jesus answered from the BOOK OF GENESIS. From the account of the creation of Adam and Eve - from Genesis 2:18-25. Jesus said it was NOT LAWFUL TO DIVORCE FOR JUST ANY REASON. The Pharisees went to Moses and claimed he, a servant of God, led and inspired of God, did say it was lawful (verse 7). Jesus answered that argument by saying: ".....Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: BUT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO" (verse 8). Jesus went back to the VERY BEGINNING and told them the ORIGINAL DESIRE AND INTENT OF GOD in making man and woman and bringing them together in marriage. The very words of Genesis chapter two, verses 13 to 25, carried WITHIN THEM, the intent of God that man could not put away his wife for any reason. Now look at those verses friend, those verses in Genesis do NOT SPELL OUT that original intent of God. It is not there in black and white, the words "put away your wife" are not there! The subject of divorce is NOT THERE! Do you see how the Bible is written AT TIMES? Certain specifics are not mentioned, but the INTENT is there! Jesus read those words in Genesis, looked deep into them, saw the clear intent of God in them, and answered the Pharisees by saying, "from the beginning it was not the intent or wish that man should put away his wife for every cause." So it was with the Sabbath friends. God blessed and hallowed and sanctified the 7th day of creation week, at the BEGINNING, for the INTENT that all mankind would remember it and keep it holy! You can look and look for God's law regarding marriage and divorce from Genesis to the time of the Old Covenant given to Israel, AND YOU WILL NOT FIND IT! It is not spelled out for you, but the law and intent of God was there in the beginning - Jesus said so! The intent and law of marriage from the beginning was that man have one wife only and that he could not put her away for every reason. Under the love and spirit of God it was the intent they remain married till death separated them. So it was with the Sabbath. Because you cannot find it spelled out for you in black and white until Moses and the giving of it to Israel DID NOT MEAN IT DID NOT EXIST AS A LAW OF GOD FOR ALL PEOPLE. The intent that God did make it a law for all men and women to follow and obey is found in Genesis 2, verses 2 and 3. The excuse that Genesis does not lay down or record specific words of a command to human beings "regarding keeping the day as a Sabbath" is a denial of the intent of God, and a "grasping at straws" of the rebellious carnal mind towards the laws and commandment of God. 2. Genesis does not use the word "Sabbath" but Exodus 20 does. Moses was inspired to say: "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" (verse 11). God calls (it was God speaking these words of the ten commandments - Deut.5) , the seventh day He blessed and hallowed at the beginning - the Sabbath day! The intent is clear to those whose hearts are right with the Lord, to those who hear His voice. 3. The new covenant says Noah was "a preacher of RIGHTEOUSNESS." It also says Lot was a "righteous man" - see 2 Peter 2: 4 - 9. What is a Bible definition of righteousness? Here it is: "all thy commandments are righteousness" (Ps.119:172). I can show you that from Genesis to Moses, all of God's ten commandments are mentioned directly or indirectly. Request the free article "The Ten Commandments before Moses." 4. It is written that God told Abraham his seed would multiply as the stars of heaven, that all nations through his seed would be blessed, BECAUSE.... " that Abraham obeyed my VOICE, and kept my CHARGE, my COMMANDMENTS, my STATUTES and my LAWS" (Gen.26:5). The child like in attitude and mind will see from all this that God's ten commandments, including the FOURTH ONE, was in full force and effect FROM THE BEGINNING. As a young child of seven, eight, nine, ten years of age, reading my Bible I so understood it. Truly I repeat with Jesus the words: "Thank you Father that you have hid these things from the wise and prudent, and have revealed them unto babes." 5. Now, finally on this point, let us use the word of God to interpret itself to us. Turn to Romans 6:23. Mark it - the wages of SIN is DEATH. What is sin? The Bible answers in 1 John 3:4 and Romans 7:7. Sin is the breaking of the law of God. Does that law have "points"? Yes, James answers in the book of James 2: 10,11. Where can we find all those points listed? In Exodus chapter twenty. Now turn to Romans chapter 5. Let's read verses 12 to 14. Sin entered the world, came on the scene for humans by one man - Adam. What is sin? The breaking of the law of God that has points - ten points, which includes the 4th. All humans from Adam on have sinned, and have come under the penalty of death. Verse 13, Paul is telling us that even before the law was given in a special way to Israel, SIN WAS IN THE WORLD! The law of God in its ten points was in existence before it was codified and given to the children of Israel. Sin, Paul says, is not imputed or charged to man if there is no law. You cannot be given a speeding ticket if there is no law to tell you that you cannot go faster than "x" miles an hour. God' s law must have been in existence from the BEGINNING because Adam and all mankind have sinned, and sin is the transgression of the law, which says "thou shalt not covet" which is the law of Exodus 20, that has ten points, which James says if we only break one we are guilty of all. Romans 5:14. Death REIGNED from Adam to Moses. All from Adam had sinned (verse 12) though it may not have been the sin that Adam committed, but it was sin and death came upon all people because ALL (from Adam on) have sinned. What is sin? Sin is the breaking of the law of God, the law that says "thou shalt not covet" - the ten commandment law that was codified into points and given to Israel under Moses at Mt. Sinai . But before that event happened, sin (the breaking of that law) was in the world, because Adam and everyone since Adam had broken that law - had sinned - and had come under the penalty of that law - death. I have painstakingly repeated myself as I have expounded to you the truth of what Paul is teaching in these verses. Using the Bible to interpret itself is one key to understanding it correctly. Paul says "......where no law is, there is no transgression" (Romans 4:15). Also he wrote: "for by the law is the knowledge of sin" (Romans 3:20). In all these verses Paul pointed to the law of God - the law that contained "thou shalt not covet" (Romans 7:7). He knew what law he spoke about, he knew his readers would know what law he was referring to. He had ample space to make it clear to them that from Adam to Moses there was only nine points to the law, no Sabbath command, IF that was the truth of the matter. But, no such explaining was given, no such explaining was needed, for it just was not so. The law of God (which defines what sin is) as given and codified to Israel in ten points, was in existence from the very beginning, from Adam to Moses. The Sabbath commandment was MADE at the beginning, and it was made for ALL MANKIND (Mark 2:27). TKACH AGAIN: Even if the Sabbath were a command from creation, which it isn't, Colossians 2:16-17 tells us that the Sabbath is a shadow, and that Christ is the reality to which it pointed. Now that the reality, Christ, has come, the shadow, as a binding law, is no longer in force, regardless of when it began.... MY COMMENT: Turn to Colossians 2:16,17. Does it say what Tkach tells you? I see words about "men judging" and "the body of Christ" (the word "is" does not appear in the original Greek). I see things mentioned that "are a shadow" - the word "are" is in the Present Indicative tense in the Greek - which are presently, today, continuing to be shadows. I see all this but I do not see words like "done away," "nil and void," " no longer binding as a law," "no longer in force," and I certainly see no such sentence as, "Sabbath is the shadow, and that Christ is the reality to which it pointed. Now that the reality, Christ, has come, the shadow, as a binding law, is no longer in force." I see no such language. Neither did Albert Barnes (who I have previously quoted from) see such language, and knowing as he did that the law of God was a moral law of perpetual obligation, did not believe Paul was here teaching that the 4th commandment was no longer binding on Christians. Peter said that SOME THINGS Paul wrote were HARD TO UNDERSTAND, and, "which they that are unlearned and unstable WREST, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:16). It is not the intent of this publication to expound the true meaning of Paul's writing in Colossians chapter two. I have a separate article on that subject free upon request. And you may also like to see what Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi writes about it in his well acclaimed book "Form Sabbath to Sunday." MORE WORDS FROM TKACH: We have, through faith in Christ, entered the spiritual reality of the Sabbath. MY COMMENT: Certainly there is a spiritual reality to the Sabbath. Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi in his book "Divine Rest for Human Restlessness" expounds all that in great detail. But the whole basic teaching of Tkach and his right hand men is the keeping of a Sabbath in a spiritual sense ONLY and not the letter or the physical. Their teaching is now that of the Jehovah's Witnesses and others. STILL MORE FROM THE WORLDWIDE NEWS OF JAN. 24th 1995: To think that it, as an old covenant command, is still a requirement for the people of God, is to miss the point of it, to minimize the coming of the Messiah, and is no better than going back into animal sacrifices and circumcision. . MY COMMENT: Keeping the Sabbath as related by all of God's word, is to minimize the coming of the Messiah, according to Tkach. NOTHING COULD BE FARTHER FROM THE TRUTH! He has either never read or has deliberately forgotten all that Dr. Bacchiocchi has written concerning the Sabbath and the Messiah. The point of the Messiah coming in the flesh, one very important point, was to DIE FOR THE SINS OF MANKIND! ! If sin could be just forgotten about with the waving of the hand of God, then Jesus did not have to come and give His life on the cross for you and me and all mankind. The coming of the Messiah to die for us was in part because we had BROKEN AND TRAMPLED ALL OVER GOD'S HOLY SABBATH DAY! When we start to look at things the way God looks at things, when we start to think as God thinks (Isaiah 55:7-9), then we will see this statement from Tkach is MOUNTAINOUS PIG SWILL! This man, this leader of the WCG, has the audacity to put the holy Sabbath day commandment contained in the perfect law of liberty, the law that is Holy, Just, and Good, the law that Paul said was SPIRITUAL. This man dares to put that Sabbath commandment in the same bag of goods along with "animal sacrifices" and circumcision, claiming that keeping the Sabbath as outlined by Exodus 20, is no better than doing physical sacrifices and physical circumcision. This teaching and blasphemy from his mouth shows how inept, incompetently inane, asinine, nonsensical, and foolish, is his reading of the Bible. Never, in my wildest crazy nightmares as a young boy, did I ever from my reading of the Bible, come up with the notion that the 4th commandment and the keeping of it, was no better than doing animal sacrifices. The Church of England school I attended, for the first half hour of the day was devoted to the reading and study of God's word, the teachers and Anglican priests, never taught such gibberish, babble, balderdash mumbo-jumbo. In those days during the 40's and 50's they taught us to stand and recite all the ten commandments as found in Exodus 20. They taught us they were God's perfect holy and righteous law. They taught us those laws were good, wonderful, and if obeyed would bring the world utopia. Never in all those years in Sunday School from the age of seven, was I ever taught that any one of the ten commandment, including the Sabbath command, if obeyed was no better than doing animal sacrifices. I never heard such language from any mouth of all those Bible teachers of mine. I read my Bible, I entered Bible quizzes and competitions, and won prizes and certificates for my efforts. It blows my mind that anyone claiming to be a Bible teacher and guide to others could ever come up with a comment that Sabbath keeping as given in the ten commandment is "no better than going back into animal sacrifices and circumcision." This truly shows you the perverseness of the mind of Tkach Sr. Let us study for a while that which pertains to physical circumcision, the Sabbath, and the New Covenant. Question: When was circumcision introduced to the world? Answer: At the time of Abraham - Genesis 17. Question: When was the Sabbath introduced to the world? Answer: On the 7th day of creation week - Genesis 2. Question: To whom was circumcision given? Answer: To Abraham and his seed - Genesis 17:9-14. Question: To whom was the Sabbath given? Answer: To mankind - Mark 2:27. Question: Who spoke the ten commandments with His own voice to Israel? Answer: God - Deuteronomy 5. Question: Was the law of circumcision included in those ten commandments? Answer: No! See Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. Question: Was this law of the ten commandments so glorious that upon Moses carrying the tablets of stone containing them, his face shone so brightly, he had to veil it? Answer: Yes indeed - see 2 Corinthians chapter 3. Question: Did this law show what sin was? How many have sinned? What is sin's penalty? Was this the administration of death? Answer: The answers are found in these scriptures - Romans 3:20; I John 3:4; Romans 7:7; 3:23: 4:15; 7:10; 2 Corinthians 3. Question: Is there any scripture that says circumcision defines what sin is? Answer: Not one verse in the entire Bible - search it and see for yourself. Question: What did Paul teach about physical circumcision in comparison to the law and commandments of God? Answer: "Circumcision does indeed profit if you keep the Law; but if you habitually transgress the Law; your circumcision is made uncircumcision. But if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision becredited to him (as equivalent to) circumcision? Then those who are physically uncircumcised but keep the Law will condemn you who, although you have the code in writing and have circumcision, break the Law. For he is not a (real ) Jew who is only one outwardly and publicly, nor is (true) circumcision something external and physical. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and (true) circumcision is of the heart, a spiritual and not a literal (matter). His praise is not from men but from God" (Romans 2:25-29 Amplified Bible). "For circumcision is nothing and counts for nothing, neither does uncircumcision, but (what counts is) keeping the commandments of God" (1 Corinthians 7:19 Amplified Bible). To Paul's eyes there was no comparison between physical circumcision and the commandments of God (which included the Sabbath command). They could not be put in the same bag of trash and thrown out or "done away with." Question: Did Paul ever teach that people should not get circumcised or have their children circumcised if they wanted? Answer: No, he certainly did not - read Acts 21:17-25; 24:10-27; 25:1-27; 26:1-28. Paul did not teach against circumcision, only that physical circumcision was not required for salvation. Question: Did some in the Church of God teach that you had to be physically circumcised to be saved? Answer: Yes - Acts 15:1. Question: Did Paul disagree with their teaching on this matter? Answer: Yes - Acts 15:2. Question: Did this matter of physical circumcision become a major issue in the Church? Answer: Yes - see Galatians 2:1-5; 3:1-3; 5:1-6,11,12; 6:12-15. Question: Did this circumcision teaching get so out of hand that the New Testament Church had to call a ministerial conference to decide the issue once and for all? Answer: Yes - see Acts 15. Question: What was the outcome of the issue? Answer: Physical circumcision was not required to be saved - Acts 15. Question: Is the keeping of the commandments of God required to be saved? Answer: Read Matthew 19:16,17; 1 John 2:4; Revelation 22:14. Question: Was physical circumcision a big part of Israelite life? Answer: It was such a dominant part of life, and such importance had been placed on it, that to say it was not necessary to be saved was looked upon by some in the church as heresy. The contention grew so great that a MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE in Jerusalem was called to argue the issue and to make a final church wide decision. All this trouble and effort over physical circumcision. Question: Was the observance of the Sabbath in the letter, a major part of Israelite life? Answer: Yes indeed it was. Any casual reader of the new covenant should be able to see the truth of that. The Jews (the religious Jew, especially of the Pharisee party) had made a fetish, an obsession, a passion, out of observing the Sabbath in the letter. It was an integral, indispensable, inherent requisite for the worship of the true God - Jew and Gentile alike were to keep the Sabbath if wanting to serve the God of Israel. Question: Do you think that anyone (including Paul) teaching in the new covenant Church that literal Sabbath keeping was "done away" or not needed, would face no stiff opposition from others, and from especially those of the Pharisee party within the Church? Answer: There was such a stir, a tumult, a huge commotion made about physical circumcision when Paul and others CHANGED IT to the spiritual heart and not the letter that was required for salvation, that a Jerusalem MINISTERIAL MEETING WITH THE WHOLE CHURCH IN ATTENDANCE HAD TO BE CALLED TO ARGUE THE MATTER INTO A FINAL DECISION. There would have been NO LESS A COMMOTION MADE OVER SOMEONE TEACHING THE LETTER OF THE SABBATH COMMAND WAS NO LONGER BINDING!! The commandments of God in Paul 's eyes and the other apostles were MUCH GREATER in spiritual importance than physical circumcision. Can you imagine any CHANGE or "doing away with" the Sabbath command going UN- NOTICED, without a stir, causing no arguing, no disputing, no ministerial conference in Jerusalem to debate the issue? If you can believe this was the case then you surely are out of touch with the reality of reading the new covenant, and are blissfully dreaming away in never-never-land with bugs-bunny as he chomps away on his carrot. I have shown you from the book of Acts, the religious Jews COULD FIND NO FAULT IN PAUL, NEITHER IN HIS TEACHING OF MOSES AND THE LAW, OR IN HIS LIFE! The only thing they could bring against him was that he taught about one called Jesus and the resurrection from the dead. With that knowledge any FIRST GRADER would see that Paul did not "change" or "do away" with the observance of the Sabbath as found in the ten commandments and old covenant. He taught a CHANGE in the law of circumcision - from the physical to the spiritual heart - to be saved. He did not teach you could not be physically circumcised, only that it did not save you. THE JEWS COULD FIND NO FAULT IN HIM! If Paul had changed the Sabbath into something only "spiritual in Christ", if Paul had "done away" with the letter of the Sabbath altogether, if he had been teaching you could CHOOSE ANY DAY for the Sabbath (as some today claim he taught in Romans 14), if he had been ridiculing, scoffing at, correcting those that were keeping old covenant Sabbaths, if he had been teaching such people to forsake such days, if he had been preaching that those days were all fulfilled in Christ, were only a shadow and now "nailed to the cross" in Christ and not to be observed in the letter, if he had been teaching and living that breaking old covenant Sabbath days was no longer a sin, if he had been TEACHING AND LIVING ANY OF THIS, YOU CAN BET YOUR BOTTOM DOLLAR THE JEWS WOULD HAVE BEEN ON HIS CASE, DOWN HIS NECK, PINNING HIS HIDE TO THE DOOR SO FAST IT WOULD HAVE MADE YOUR HEAD SPIN INTO BLUBBER!! It is the height of madness to stand the law of physical circumcision on the same platform as the law of the ten commandments which includes the 4th commandment concerning the Sabbath day. Only deceivers and wolves in sheeps clothing coming to devour the flock and get a following after themselves, would try such oratory tactics. Let us now study that which pertains to animal sacrifices, the Sabbath and the New Covenant. Question: Was there any animal sacrificing before Moses? Answer: Yes, there was. Genesis chapter 4 is the first account. Cain and Abel offered sacrifices. They must have learned to do this from their parents - Adam and Eve. Animal sacrificing does go back to the beginning. Question: Can we find in God's word any instruction regarding a detailed Priesthood/Sacrifice system, before the time of Moses? Answer: No! From the accounts recorded before the time of the old covenant priesthood/sacrifice system given under Moses to Israel, it would appear physical sacrificing to God of animals was ( 1) voluntary ( 2) done by individuals, or heads of families ( 3) performed when God commanded it to be done. Question: Is there any instructions about a systematic priesthood/animal sacrifice law, in Exodus chapters 12 to 15, as Israel came out of Egypt? Answer: No there is not! Question: When God revealed the 7th day Sabbath to Israel (they had lost the knowledge under Egyptian slavery), in Exodus 16, was there anything about animal sacrifices included in obeying this law of God? Answer: This law of the Sabbath is revealed to Israel without any instructions regarding a laborious daily sacrificial system by a set priesthood. Question: How important did God think His TEN commandments was when He revealed them to the children of Israel? Answer: So important that He SPOKE THEM WITH HIS OWN VOICE, and the people of Israel HEARD THAT VOICE - see Deut.5. Question: Was it originally God's intention to give Israel a detailed daily sacrificial system? Answer: No it was not! See Jeremiah 7:21-24. Question: What did God want the Israelites to do? Answer: They were to obey the Lord and walk in all His ways that He commanded them. Question: What were the foundational commands He wanted them to obey, and the ones He felt so important that He spoke them to Israel with His own voice? Answer: The TEN COMMANDMENTS! Question: Is the Sabbath command one of those Ten Commandments? Answer: Yes, it is the 4th commandment Question: Did animal sacrifices FORGIVE sins? Answer: No! Physical sacrifices never took away sins - see Hebrew 10:1-4. Question: What did animal sacrifices do? Answer: They reminded the people how they were sinners. Question: If we look at animal sacrificing and look at obeying God, which comes out on top in God's eyes? Answer: Obeying and doing the will of the Lord - see Hebrews 10:1-5. Question: Was it foretold which Jesus would do - animal sacrifices plus the will of God, or the will of God without animal sacrifices? Answer: Is found in Hebrews 10:1-5. Question: Did Jesus ever sin? Answer: 1 Peter 2:21,22. Question: Did Jesus set us an example to follow? Answer: 1 Peter 2:21. Question: Those who say Jesus is living in them are to walk in whose footsteps? Answer: 1 John 2:6. Question: Did Jesus observe the 4th commandment, even in the letter as is fitting in the eyes of God? Answer: Read Luke 4:16 and the entire four gospels. Question: What is the new covenant definition of sin? Answer: 1 John 3:4; Romans 7:7; James 2:10-12. Question: What law contains "thou shalt not covet"; "Do not kill"; "Do not commit adultery" ? Answer: The ten commandment law as found in Exodus 20. Question: Did Jesus ever break that law? Answer: No never! Jesus kept the law of the ten commandment PERFECTLY in the letter and the spirit. He never sinned in thought, word, or action. He observed the ten commandment, including the Sabbath command PERFECTLY. He did the will of God. Never offered an animal sacrifice, but obeyed the law of God that has points - ten points, and He set us a flawless example in doing so. Question: Is Jesus the same today as He was yesterday? Answer: Hebrews 13:8. His obedient character towards the Father and His commandments is the same today as when He walked this earth. Question: Did Jesus give a specific answer to the young rich man who asked Him what he should do to inherit eternal life? Answer: Yes, He got very specific in His answer - see Matthew 19:16-19. Question: Which commandments was Jesus referring to? Answer: Obviously the Ten Commandments. Jesus did not quote every one of the ten, but the young man would get the point, just as any person with a right heart towards God today, would understand Jesus meant all ten commandments. I was able to understand this when I read it as a boy of nine years old. James also was inspired to tell us that if you break any one of the points of this law you are guilty of all, and that law will judge you. Question: Did Jesus tell the young rich man that to inherit eternal life he would also have to keep the animal sacrifice law? Answer: No way! No such language can be found anywhere in the words of Jesus. Question:   Did the Temple rituals/Priesthood/Sacrifices come to a stop when Jesus died on the cross? Answer: Not at all! A quick glance over the book of Acts will show you that all the temple rituals continued as before even after the death of Christ. What shocks some Christians is the realization that under the request of James and the elders, Paul and four others partook of temple rituals and offerings, see Acts 21:17-26. It was not a sin to participate in temple sacrifices and rituals. Paul did not teach that people should not circumcise their children or participate in temple sacrifices and rituals, while the priesthood and temple was still operating. What Paul taught was that those physical things were not required to do in-order to be saved. And to prove that this is what he really taught, Paul performed and participated in some temple rituals. While the temple stood and while the priesthood was still functioning, a Christian could, if they wanted, practice those physical rituals. It was not required to be saved, it added nothing to your standing with God, those sacrifices and rituals did not take away your sins, at best it was only a reminder you were a sinner and its shadow of blood led you to the real blood that could take away your sins - the blood of Jesus. After 70 A.D. when the temple was destroyed by the Roman armies, and the priesthood ended, it was impossible to partake of those rituals even if you wanted to. It is a fact of history that after 70 A.D. when there was no more temple sacrificing, the Sabbath Day command was still being observed by Jewish and Gentile Christians. Even when the false church grew and gained predominance and Sunday worship was practiced by the majority of those who called themselves Christian, the argument was not so much that NO Sabbath day was to be observed, or that you could choose whatever day you desired, but the argument was that Sunday, the first or eighth day (whichever way you looked at it) was the new covenant "Lord's Day." Again let me repeat: Church History proves my last sentence to be correct. Neither the true or false Church of God believes that when animal sacrificing came to an end in 70 A.D. at the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple, so also was there an end to keeping a Sabbath day holy to the Lord. The contention eventually became WHICH day - Saturday or Sunday - the 7th or 1st day of the week - which was the new covenant Sabbath to be observed by Christians? Question: In connection with the ceremonial, sacrificial, and administrative laws associated with the Levitical priesthood and temple, were such words used as: obsolete, set aside, ready to disappear, growing old, taken away,? Answer : Yes - see Hebrews 5 7:1 8 ; 8 :13; 1 0 : 9. Question: What does this same book of Hebrews say about the Sabbath command? Answer: Hebrews 4:9 The original Greek uses the word Sabbatismos, meaning Sabbath keeping. The Greek is also in the present tense - a "Sabbathkeepi ng , remains for the people of God." If the one is "obsolete" and the other "remains," they DO NOT BELONG IN THE SAME CATEGORY! Question: Is the Sabbath and animal sacrifices both referred to as "shadows" ? Answer: Yes they are. See Colossians 2:16,17 and Hebrews 10:1 Notice in Colossians chapter two no such words are used for the Sabbath as "obsolete," "set aside ," "ready to disappear," "taken away." These words are only used in connection with the temple rituals and physical sacrifices. The Sabbath is a "shadow of things to come" as it not only portrays the redemptive rest in Christ, but also foreshadows and pictures the FUTURE rest (Hebrews 4:11) that Christians will experience when Jesus establishes God's Kingdom on earth. This reality (future immortality in God's Kingdom) has not yet taken away the shadow. That's why Paul used the PRESENT TENSE in Colossians 2:17 for the word "are." The Sabbaths of God picture something that is YET to come. It is therefore incorrect and erroneous to consider the Sabbath an "obsolete shadow." Question: Does am apple cast a shadow? Does the statue of Liberty cast a shadow? Answer: Yes they both cast shadows of themselves. Question: Would you classify an apple and the statue of Liberty as being in the same category of things? Answer: No! Unless you have a wild imagination. An apple would be categorized with and among perishable fruits and vegetation. The statue of Liberty would be categorized as long lasting lifeless physical object. Both cast a shadow, but they certainly do not belong in the same category. An apple will, if left out in the sun to cast a shadow soon "grow old," be "ready to disappear," and be "taken away" and stop casting its shadow when it has reached its purpose for being and goes back into the ground. The shadow of the statue of Liberty will last MUCH LONGER as it is naturally different than an apple. Under normal conditions it would last many centuries longer than an apple or a bail of straw. Sure, in time the weather would bring the statue of Liberty to powder, but if maintained for its purpose, it would last (we are of course excluding all events such as earthquakes) until its purpose was deemed finished, then it could be destroyed. Its shadow and reality could then come to an end. So it is with the Sabbath day. It still casts a shadow because part of its reality has not yet been fully completed - the rest of the Kingdom to come that physical mankind will experience. When there is no more physical humans then and only then could it be said that the Sabbath's shadow and reality has been completed and it is no longer needed. The Sabbath was made for mankind, when there is no more physical mankind, there will be no more need of the Sabbath, but not until then. WORLDWIDE NEWS JANUARY 24th, 1995: But the Sabbath and Holy Days, along with the other ceremonial observances of the old covenant, are fulfilled in Christ and are not binding in their physical observance in the new covenant. MY COMMENT: Once more the Protestant teaching of lumping the Sabbaths of God with the ceremonial rituals and dumping them into the same bag to be thrown out with the trash, comes out from Tkach in the above statement. This kind of theology from the Protestants gained wide support only in relatively recent decades. As I have shown you, the old Bible commentators such as Albert Barnes did not teach or believe that the Sabbath command of the ten commandments was just "ritual" or "ceremony" and came to an end at the cross. MORE FROM THE JANUARY 24th 1995 WORLDWIDE NEWS: The Sabbath and Holy Days become holy time for us as we devote them to God, but they are not holy time in the sense that the old covenant is still in force. When the people of God, who are made holy through faith in Jesus Christ, devote time to the worship of God, that becomes holy time. It becomes holy time because it is devoted to God, who is holy, not because that particular time is itself holy. MY COMMENT: Ah, it is so good that this bold faced heretic has put his words on paper. This is no "hear say." His teaching is out on plain display for anyone to see. Do you see what Tkach says here friend? THERE IS NO HOLY TIME THAT GOD SAYS IS HOLY BECAUSE HE PUT HIS PRESENCE INTO IT, SANCTIFIED IT, AND HALLOWED IT - MADE IT HOLY, Tkach says. it never happened, or if it did at one time, it is not so any more, according to Mr.T. Now this leader of the WCG says time only becomes holy as we decide to devote whatever hours to worship God. Then that time becomes holy. So it could be the hours of Tuesday, or Friday, or Sunday, or Saturday. This is Jehovah's Witnesses talk, as well as some Protestant groups. There are no hours, there is no day of the week that is of itself holy because God said it was holy, in Tkach's mind or teaching. But what says the Lord? It is written: "And God BLESSED THE SEVENTH DAY, and SANCTIFIED IT (set it apart): because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made" (Genesis 2:3). Once more I must go back to my childhood in Sunday School and the Church of England School I attended. As a child of 7, 8, and 9 years old, I could understand this verse in Genesis. It was so obvious to me. God, on the seventh day of creation rested from the physical work He had been doing and BLESSED and SET APART that day as special to Him, a day that His presence was IN, in a special way. I had been taught in religious classes about Moses and the BURNING BUSH, how God spoke to him and told him to take off his shoes because the GROUND on which he stood was "holy ground" (Exodus 3:1-5). Oh, some may argue that God is everywhere, in everything, so the universe is holy. Let them reason so if they must, but this verse in Exodus tells me that God put His very presence into that piece of ground in a special way, and that area of earth became HOLY GROUND, and Moses was to take off his shoes! God has the right to make something HOLY if He chooses, for He is God. Man is not God, God is God, and He made the ground Moses was standing on HOLY ground. He also made the seventh day of creation week a BLESSED and SANCTIFIED day, set apart from all other days. As a young child I had read Mark 2:27 where Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man - mankind. I had read Psalm 111:7,8. I had read Matthew 19:17-19. How simple it was, how easy to understand, the 7th day was hallowed from the beginning, it was a part of the wonderful, holy, good, ten commandments, and as long as there is human kind on this earth those commandments which contained the 4th one, are FAST FOREVER, and ARE SURE! It was so simple to understand for the simple minded who had no argument to argue with God, who had no commandment they wanted to get around, who only saw how wonderful the world would be if all people and nations would obey those ten points of that holy law. Did God HALLOW - make HOLY that seventh day of Genesis chapter two? Turn to Exodus 20 and verse 11. Read it friends! Mark it well! Remember it! The Lord rested the seventh day, He blessed the Sabbath day, and He HALLOWED IT! Tkach can say all he wants to say. He can talk till he is blue in the face. He can repeat over and over to you until the cows come home, that there is no holy time. He can tell you this till he is blue or green or red in the face AND IT WILL NOT ALTER THE SCRIPTURES! It will not make the hours of the 7th day when they arrive for you, UN-holy time. Tkach backs up his statement WITH NO SCRIPTURE! He talks and talks with his statements of dogma, as if HE WERE GOD MAKING THE RULES AND DECIDING WHAT IS HOLY AND WHAT IS UNHOLY. The 7th Day Sabbath was made holy from the beginning. It was holy under the old covenant. I see not one verse of the new covenant that says it is NOW UN-holy. Those who come to the beginning of the Sabbath day and because of the hardness of their heart, or because they are deceived into believing lies that it is no longer holy, WILL NOT MAKE IT SO! They can break it, trample all over it with their dirty shoes, ignore it, scoff at it, do their secular work on it, find their own pleasure during it, but it WILL STILL REMAIN AS HOLY TIME. All they will have done is SIN by breaking that 4th point of God's holy law. All they will have done is put themselves UNDER THE PENALTY OF ETERNAL DEATH (Romans 6:23), unless they acknowledge their sin, repent of it, and cry out to God for mercy and grace through the blood of Jesus, who died because of sin, because the holy law that defines sin could not be cast aside or done away with. The wages of sin is still death: "For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries" (Hebrews 10:26,27). ONCE MORE FROM TKACH: But we do not need to, and should not, judge one another with respect to the days we devote to God (Colossians 2:16; Romans 14:5). MY COMMENT: Again and again Tkach hits this ball for you to catch - no judging, no judging, no judging each other when it comes to the holy days that God set apart and made holy. We are to believe that Paul told the Galatians he did not want them to turn and observe these "beggarly elements" of old covenant days (remember the words "old covenant holy days" do not appear in that book). Paul is supposed to be saying the same kind of thing to the Colossians, we are to believe. Then to the Romans we are to understand Paul is saying it is okay to observe days and devote them to God as we ourselves choose. They were not told that such were "beggarly elements" or that doing so would be "in bondage." And if it was fine for the Jews and Gentiles of Rome to observe days, surely some would have chosen the holy days of the old covenant, certainly the Christian Jews would have been inclined to have chosen those days, as it was part of their heritage. There is far too much contradiction, confusion in these three passages of Paul to understand them the way that certain Protestant funny-mentalists explain them. And they are even more contradictory in the light of other new covenant passages such as James 2:10-12. But such is the reading of the Bible from the daughters of BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION. Their reading of the Bible is a mystery and it is confusion (that 's what the word Babylon means). Let me give you a key to the reading and understanding of the new covenant. The first books you should read are the four Gospels, then the book of Acts, after them the books known as "the general epistles" - James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1,2,3, John, and Jude, then Hebrews. Those books will give you the basic foundation of the new covenant, basically easy to understand. Then after digesting the fundamentals and having a firm foundation of truth you are ready to begin to tackle the deeper theology of Paul and his epistles. You will have already read that Peter said some things of Paul are hard to understand, and many who are unlearned do twist and pervert to their own destruction. Those "unlearned" as Peter called them, are those who have not even come through grade school - who have no basic foundation of solid truth to stand on, and because of their carnality towards the law and commandments of God, are easily led by Satan to pervert the writings of Paul and be taken away into practicing sin. In studying Paul you will be wise to refer to such works as before mentioned, works like " Barnes' Notes on the New Testament." Barnes is not 100% accurate on all things he comments about, but he did have his foundation correct, namely the ten commandments are all God's moral law which is not in ANY part "done away with" under the new covenant. You will also be wise to build your foundation on the life and writings (the Psalms) of David, the man whom the Lord said was a man after His own heart. If you think "grace" is only new covenant then you have never read the Psalms of David. The Psalms of David will show you the truth of the matter regarding "law" and "grace" and how both are indispensable to salvation and inheriting eternal life. These foundational parts of the word of the Lord (also including the book of Genesis) was what I was raised on as a child. I had so many years feeding on this basic teaching of God that when I was 18 and came to North America and ran smack dab into the funny-mentalists (as I call them) of Protestantism with all their arguments from Paul (perverted understanding) as to why the 4th commandment is "changed" or "done away" under the new covenant, I was able to LAUGH at them, and answer from the simple foundation of God's word. Yes, I literally did laugh at some of the ministers and church leaders who talked to me about such theology. I answered them from the grade school scriptures and asked them if the Bible contradicted itself - they WERE SPEECHLESS AND COULD NOT ANSWER ME! Actually it was not until after these encounters that I delved into deep study of the writings of Paul and his (as Peter said) hard to understand passages. I had the foundation and I KNEW that Paul could not possibly contradict either himself or the other scripture. The well known old theologians like Barnes were a help. Tkach uses the book of Galatians, as do many of the other unlearned, to pervert the truth of the old and new covenant and the 4th commandment. By and large these men talk about things they haven't got a clue about - they are theological dunces, wolves in sheeps clothing, whitened graves full of dead men's bones, who come to destroy and devour the flock of God. They themselves will not go into the Kingdom and they prevent many who would, from entering. The majority of the religious leaders of the masses during Christ's time would not hear Jesus, they said He was a crazy man, inspired of the Devil. The plain truth was it was they who were mad and led of the Devil. The masses of people would not or could not understand Jesus, but He said the true sheep heard His voice and knew who spoke the truth of the word of the Lord. It is still the same today. Those who have their nose in the Bible, who read it from cover to cover, who love the Lord with all their heart and soul and mind, who have the attitude of a David in loving the law and grace of God, will KNOW THAT TKACH IS A FRAUD, A FALSE PROPHET, AN ANI-CHRIST! THEY WILL KNOW THAT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN IS THE PLAIN TRUTH OF THE MATTER. They will not hear or follow those who offer them liberty but are themselves the servants of sin and lawlessness. They will serve and obey the will and commandments of the Lord, while knowing they are truly saved by grace through faith and not of works lest any man should boast. TO BE CONTINUED Written April 1995