Keeping the Sabbath on Saturday

  • Thread starter Thread starter Flanick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Let’s back up just a bit. He fulfilled the law and the prophets, of course!
But healing, commanding the healed to walk home (more than a “Sabbath day’s journey”) the Apostles picking heads of grain and eating, the distance walking etc. all were done on the Sabbath.

Had He fulfilled it at that time? I think some bloodshed completed that and all of this occurred before that.
 
The Sabbath
Shouldn’t we celebrate and put our Sabbath back to Saturday?
Although the Sabbath-keeping Commandment of Exodus 20:8-11 is associated with the universally-applicable events of Creation in Exodus 20:11, in context it is also associated with a particular event in the history of a particular people, namely, the Sabbath day when God liberated the Jewish people from their slavery in Egypt. (See Exodus 20:2) Its association with that particular event in the history of that particular people is explicitly made in Deuteronomy 5:15.

Because of the Commandment’s explicit association in the Old Testament with a particular event in the history of a particular people, you should not assume that “Man,” in general, “needs to keep it.” At most, you can only say that, under God’s Old Covenant with the Jewish people, the Jewish people need to keep it.

I know, arguments from silence are not very convincing but I think it worth noting that, in all the writings of the New Testament, neither Jesus Christ nor any of his apostles explicitly commanded their disciples to keep holy the Sabbath nor did they condemn Sabbath-breakers. And Jesus certainly had that the perfect opportunity to do it when he listed which commandments needed to be kept and he conspicuously omitted that one. (See Matthew 19:18-19; Mark 10:19; Luke 18:20) In Colossians 2:16-17, St Paul explicitly describes “a Sabbath” but only as a thing that is “a shadow,” i.e., as one of the devotional practices (of the Old Covenant), along with circumcising the flesh, not tasting certain foods and drinks, keeping the new moons and other appointed festivals, that are not part of the New Covenant and are not binding on Christians. Thus, St Paul elsewhere said, “One man esteems one day as better than another, while another man esteems all days alike. Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind.” (Romans 14:5)

I suggest you read the section on “The Third Commandment” in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 2168-2195; begin here.
 
Last edited:
But healing, commanding the healed to walk home (more than a “Sabbath day’s journey”) the Apostles picking heads of grain and eating, the distance walking etc. all were done on the Sabbath.
Ok, and none of that violates the sabbath, maybe according to the man made traditions of the Pharisees it did but certainly not according to the original intentions of the Law which the pre-incarnate Christ himself delivered to Moses. Christ was perfect in every way, he followed the Law of Moses perfectly and if he didn’t then he wouldn’t have been able to fulfill it.
 
Christ was perfect in every way, he followed the Law of Moses perfectly and if he didn’t then he wouldn’t have been able to fulfill it.
In Matt 5:32 and 19:9 we have an instance of Jesus explicitly changing a law laid down by Moses. Moses taught that a husband is free to divorce his wife, provided that he complies with certain required procedures. Jesus says he now instituting a stricter law, under which a husband no longer has the right to divorce his wife, except in the case of certain circumstances described by the Greek word porneia. Different churches attach different meanings to this Greek word, but that doesn’t alter the fact that in these passages Jesus is changing one of Moses’ laws laid down in Deuteronomy.
 
Last edited:
Have you read the Mosaic Law? Why would 1) accusations arise at all? and 2) why would Jesus defend His actions if there was no violation?
 
That’s not violating the Law, Jesus is rather establishing the guidelines for the new covenant which would soon be initiated. Again, Jesus never violated the Law. Doing so would have meant Jesus was not perfect, it would have meant he was sinning by violating the covenant God made with Israel. He was there to fulfill that covenant and usher in a new one. He himself said that he did not come to abolish the Law (which would mean violation) but rather to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17).
 
Last edited:
Debating over the Law was a common rabbinical practice in those times. Jesus, the perfect rabbi, our Teacher and Lord, knew best.
 
Absolutely. Have you? It sounds like you’re about to mischaracterize my argument as saying we should still be following the Law, which I am in no way saying.
 
Last edited:
You see, unfortunately beside the sacrifice of Christ, beside His image, His incarnation and inner transformation people searching something else and insist that something is more important than that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top