Should Christians keep the Sabbath & Feasts? - The 20 HARDEST Questions | w/ David Wilber, PD

So we shouldn't just accept the assumption that they weren't observing these things?

Well, David, how do you know that these people, these christians, were of the persuasion? I'm not Israel. I'm not jewish. These are a bunch of jewish things. Sabbath, feast. Why are we even talking about this?

The nations were intended to be attracted to these commandments.

We rest every day in our salvation. If you fail in one point, you're guilty of all of it. Do you have to be in the land?

The cynics were against that because Petey.

David, are you saying I need to stop going to church on Sunday? It matters profoundly to him. There's no question about that. Should it matter profoundly to us? Is this a new reformation? Thousands of people from all over the world have started to keep the biblical Sabbath and biblical feast days. But should we? Whether a true reformation or not in the least, this is a controversial and misunderstood subject and has now brought forth many hard questions, and they all need answers. Some of the questions such as, isn't Jesus now or Sabbath rest? Aren't feast days just a shadow? Can't we esteem any day we want? It doesn't truly matter. Isn't the old covenant now obsolete? Aren't the feast days and the Sabbath a jewish ordinance? And isn't keeping the law, legalism, or even dangerous for our own salvation? And then lastly, wasn't the Sabbath changed from Saturday to Sunday? Some of these and more we're going to be addressing here today, and I want to welcome my brother, David Wilbur on with me as he's going to help me get to the bottom of this. David, thank you so much for joining me, brother.

Yeah, it's an honor to be with you, man. Thank you so much for the invitation, and I'm looking forward to the discussion.

David is an apologist. He's written many books. He is a Bible teacher, CEO of Pronomium Publishing, and he's also the author of many theological articles, some of them appearing on outlets such as the Christian Post. My name is Peteye Vander Westhausen, and welcome to rise on fire. So, David, I think as we begin, maybe we should just unpack a little bit for people about what is the Sabbath that we're talking about? What are the biblical feast days that we're referring to? Just for anyone who may be new to all of these concepts, we're not necessarily talking about the Sabbath as it may be culturally or sort of today. Many people think about Orthodox Judaism. They think about many, many things like, you're not allowed to use electricity, you're not allowed to use a car and many such other ordinances that have become a very big part of keeping the Sabbath by people who keep the Sabbath today. But we're talking about the simple basic instruction of resting on the 7th day and not making anyone else labor or work as well. And when we're talking about the biblical feast days, we're talking about the feast of Passover, the feast of unleavened bread, the feast of first fruits. We're talking about the feast of Shavuot, also known as panty cost, as well as the feast of trumpets, the day of atonement and the feast of Sukkot. So enough with the definitions. I think we should just get right into it. David, let's open up with just the opening question here. Could you maybe share with us what are your thoughts behind why should Christians care about the Sabbath and the feast days?

Two answers come to mind as I think about that question. The first one really comes down to the fact that as Christians, as followers of the Messiah, that's what the word Christian means, followers of Christ. We love Jesus. And because we love Jesus, we keep his commandments. That's what he said, right? If you love me, keep my commandments. First, John five three says much the same thing. It says, for this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And so God commanded his people to do these things. He commanded his people to rest every 7th day. He commanded his people to remember the exodus at Passover and to observe the feast of Shavuot or Pentecost and the other festivals. And, you know, we'll talk more about this later on in the video. Some of the objections to doing those things from the New Testament. But based on my reading of the New Testament, there's no indication that any of these commandments were done away with. And so we love God. We love the Lord the Father, and we love Yeshua, the messiah, the son of God. And scripture says that because we love him, we will keep his commandments. A passage that I will probably reference many times tonight is Matthew 517 20. When Jesus said he did not come to abolish the law or the prophets, he did not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. And he said that nothing will pass away until heaven and earth pass away, and all is accomplished, that is, until the end of the age. And he even admonished his followers to do and teach the least of the commandments of the law. And so there's no indication in the New Testament that these have been done away with and so we should understand these commandments and do them because we love the Lord. And a second reason, if I may, is that THe SaBBAth and festivals are meaningful to us as believers, they memorialize important events that are central to our identity and mission. The festivals like PaSsovEr and SHavuot, they're all about the gospel message. They point to the Messiah, his work on the cross, what he has done for us. And these are important for us to remember. God told us to do these things because rituals are important. As an American, we celebrate the 4 July every year. It's a Holiday that we commemorate with certain rituals. And that's because it is meaningful to our identity as Americans. It's meaningful to us, and it's important that we remember those things. We remember where we came from, and we remember how we got to where we are. And. And so that's what the festivals are all about. That's what the Sabbath is all about. And so those are a couple of the reasons I would say that's good.

And on that point, you know, brother, on the feast days, I think a lot of people think of them as this fulfilled thing that God gave but are no longer relevant to. But as you made a reference to, we have these spring feasts. They were all about the messiah, Jesus first coming. How with Passover, feast of unleavened bread. As Israel was taking the leaven out of their homes during the feast of unleavened bread, all of the things were going down regarding his sacrifice, his crucifixion, him being put in the grave, and so on. Him removing the sin in that literal way from Israel as well. It didn't stop there, because at the full festivals, feast of trumpets devotement, feast of Sukkot, these are pointing to what is to come. His second coming. It was about the spring feast, about his first coming, fall feast, about his second coming. Thessalonians talks about he's coming back at the sound with the blowing of trumpets. We all know this as christians, but yet we see also in the feast days, there's something there. And perhaps right now, many people are coming to this, like what's going on here because of the way the world is, because they're looking to his coming. And by nature, that draws us back to the feast days that speak of his coming, just like the others spoke of his first coming. And, yeah, David, I love what you shared also, just about how this mattered profoundly to Jesus, because Yeshua ultimately kept the Sabbath and the feast days every week and every year of his life from being a child you know, I remember in Luke 241, his parents went to Jerusalem every year for the feast of Passover. And also in John 714, it says, now, in the midst of the feast, Jesus went up into the temple and taught that famous sermon he gave at the feast of tabernacles. So it matters profoundly to him. There's no question about that. Should it matter profoundly to us as well? That's what we are going to dig into further. So let's go on to the second question. The book of Hebrews says, jesus is our rest. We don't need a physical Sabbath day anymore. Hebrews 4911 so I'll just read those few verses for us all to get on the same page there, he says. So then there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God. For whoever has entered God's rest has also rested from his works, as God did from his. Let us therefore strive to enter that rest so that no. 1 may fall by the same sort of disobedience. All right, so the argument or the question goes that, well, Jesus is our Sabbath rest. He is our salvation. And therefore we don't need to rest on the 7th day because we rest every day in our salvation. And so, you know, just my thoughts. I think that it is absolutely true that the Sabbath points to Jesus, that his, his coming as our rest, our final rest, our place of redemption, our place of resting from our own labors of the law keeping that could never save us. In other words, what you do by nature is never going to be perfect. We fall into sin and we need our sin cleanse from us. That is the gospel. So by faith we believe in Yeshua and he cleanses us by the work of the cross by dying for our sins. Right? So we. I think this is a good time to just say this from the beginning here. We love the gospel. We understand it's by faith in Christ alone that we are saved. I'm. But then the question is, does this now, this rest that the Sabbath points to in Christ, does this replace the physical 7th day, the commandment? And so, you know, I think I would just read this in Matthew 1129 we all know this verse. Yeshua says, take my yoke upon you and learn from me for I am gentle and lowly in heart and you will find rest for your souls. Right? So he's talking about that rest but he's also quoting from the prophet Jeremiah in Jeremiah 616 who speaks of this rest for our souls. And he says, thus says the Lord, stand by the roads and look and ask for the ancient paths where the good way is, and walk in it and find rest for your souls. But they said, we will not walk in it. And so Jeremiah writes about this ancient path, this way, which Jesus said, I'm the way. I'm the truth. I'm the life. So the way that he walks is the ancient path, because he obeyed his father perfectly. He obeyed the law of God. He walked in it. And he said, my burden is light, not the heavy burdens of the traditions of man and things that may nullify the commandments of goddess. Mine is light. Take this upon you, this Yoke, and find rest. So he's saying. He's quoting Jeremiah and saying, follow God's ways. Follow me, be safe by me, and find rest in that. David, do you have anything to add to that?

That was beautifully put. I would just. I mean, you put it well. Does this metaphorical interpretation of the SabbAth do away with the literal commandment? You know, paraphrasing what you. What you said earlier, the way you phrase the question, and, yeah, that doesn't make sense for a couple reasons. First, it was very common, still is common for jewish authors. But in the. In the first century, we have evidence of jewish authors giving metaphorical interpretations of the Sabbath and festivals without ever suggesting that the literal observance of these commandments was unnecessary. We see this in Philo, for instance. Example, he talks about Passover and using a lot of figurative language and talks about the figurative and metaphorical meanings of it. And so, yeah, Philo didn't think that the literal commandment to keep Passover was done away with just because he talked about it in this symbolic and figurative way. Similarly, yes, the author of Hebrews does talk about the Sabbath as a symbol of the rest that we have in him, but that doesn't do away with the literal commandment. Paul teaches that marriage is a symbol of the church's relationship with Christ, but nobody thinks that the literal marriage institution is therefore now done away with. He also teaches that baptism is a symbol of our new life in Christ. Right? In romans six, we die and we rise with Christ through baptism. But nobody believes that that symbolism, or the reality to which that symbol points, does away with the literal commandment to baptism baptize people anymore. So there's no reason similarly, to say that the Sabbath's deeper meaning pointing to our ultimate rest in Christ does away with the literal commandment. And I would actually argue that the reference to the Sabbath in Hebrews four nine actually supports the idea that we should keep the Sabbath. The author is saying that Sabbath rest that we engage in every single week points us to the deeper meaning. It points us to the rest that we have in Christ. And so just like baptism or any other ritual, we do that. We do it because of its symbolism. And, you know, that it makes sense because his readers were already observing the Sabbath, you know, and so he's able to readily use that as a symbol to point to its greater meaning and saying, hey, do this with this deeper meaning in mind. That's what he's saying.

That's good. And I think that's important to remember. What you just said with the culture is, in the first century is so different from today, especially in Israel, right? At that point, we see that it's culturally normative to keep the Sabbath, to go to the synagogue, to hear the Torah being read. It is normative to year after year go to keep the feasts. These are things that are so normal that it would be weird and strange for anyone to not participate. It was in the rhythms of the culture itself. So, yeah, amen. Good. Thank you, David. I was well stated. All right, next. Question number three is Paul said that the feast days and the Sabbaths are only a shadow. Let's read it. Therefore, let no one pass judgment on you in question of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Now, the big question here is that we need to answer, and what you need to ponder as you're listening to us here, is, who's doing the judging? And what are they judging the people for doing? Are they judging these christians for keeping the Sabbath or for not keeping the Sabbath? And to answer that, I think what's really important is we need to get into the context to figure out who these people are doing the judging. I'll read a few more verses here. Colossians 218, let no one disqualify you. Insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world? Do you submit to regulations, do not handle, do not taste, do not touch, referring to things that all perish as they are used according to humanity, precepts, and teachings, these have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they're of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh. David, this is a very common, very common argument. What would you say to someone who is saying, look, don't judge me. We shouldn't judge anyone for keeping any days, feast day, Sabbaths, new moons, anyone can do whatever they want, right?

So, yeah, I'm going to spend a little bit of time on this one because this does come up a lot. And so there's a lot to get into here. But you set it up perfectly, and that is the right question. The question you asked earlier is who was doing the judging of. And so the standard antinomian interpretation of this passage, and antinomian, it literally just means against law. It's the idea. It's a doctrine which states that christians are freed from our obligation to obey the law of Moses. That's what antinomian. That's what the word means. And so the standard antinomian interpretation is that Paul is telling his readers, who are predominantly gentile believers, not to let people judge them for not keeping the Sabbath and festivals because they are merely shadows. And now that the Messiah, who is the substance, has come, the shadows are pointless. Christ has come, and so we don't need the shadows anymore. And so that's a very common understanding of this passage. However, there's a growing number of New Testament scholars who challenge this antinomian reading. For instance, there is a really good paper that I would recommend people read. It's by doctor Brian Allen, and it was published in the Journal for the study of Paul and his letters. And the paper is titled removing an arrow from the supersessionist Quiver, a post supersessionist reading of colossians 216 through 17. And in this paper, what Alan demonstrates is that the colossian believers, they were not being judged for neglecting the Sabbath and festivals. Rather, they were being judged for keeping them. And so the main question is, why were Paul's readers in Colossians being judged? Was it for, as you know, antinomian interpretation suggests, was it for neglecting the Sabbath and festivals, or was it, as Brian Allen suggests, was it for keeping them? Was that why they were being judged? Well, if you read the passage just by itself, without any context, you could literally go either way. So you kind of, the question is, do we have any good reason to prefer one interpretation over the other? And what I want to point out here is that the antinomian interpretation is based on two assumptions. Number one, the colossian believers did not observe the Sabbath and festivals. That's the first assumption. The second assumption is that their critics were observing them. Hence, based on those two assumptions, it makes sense to interpret this passage as Paul telling his readers not to let critics judge them for neglecting the Sabbath and festivals. However, Brian Allen and other scholars completely undermine this reading by showing how these two assumptions are false. First, we have a ton of evidence in the New Testament itself that both Paul and the earliest gentile followers of Christ observed the Sabbath and festivals. The book of acts repeatedly mentions gentile believers attending synagogue services on the Sabbath alongside jewish believers. In one corinthians five eight, Paul explicitly instructs the jewish and gentile believers at Corinth to celebrate Passover. Outside the Bible, we have historical sources that show that during the second century AD, gentile congregations in Asia and Asia Minor, and the Colossae is in Asia, they were still celebrating Passover at the same time that Jews celebrated it. So this is in the second century. And there's a. You know, we see this in Eusebius, right? There is a big debate between the churches in the east and the west about when to celebrate the Sabbath, when to celebrate Passover. Do we do it the same time the Jews do it, or do we do it on the Sunday after the time that Jews do it after the 14th of Nisan? And so there's a ton of evidence that Jews and Gentiles were continuing to observe the festivals in the second century. According to two fifth century church historians like Socrates, Scholasticus, and Sozomen, almost the entire christian world outside of Alexandria and Rome continued to keep the Sabbath as late as the. As late as the fifth century. So there is good evidence in support of the idea that gentile believers in the first century, including the Colossians, would have observed the Sabbath and festivals alongside jewish believers. So we shouldn't just except the assumption that they weren't observing these things.

Well, David, how do you know that these people, these Christians, were of the persuasion that they. That they are keeping the Sabbath? How do you know they're not a group, one of the groups that were breaking away? We're saying, no, we're not going to do that. You know, what would you say to someone who's saying that?

I would say prove it in the text. If you could demonstrate that in the text, that would be a good start. So far, all you have is this verse in Colossians 216. But we've already established that that verse is ambiguous. It could go either way. But let's talk about the second assumption. So I said the first assumption was that the gentile believers were not keeping the Sabbath and festivals. And we've demonstrated that there are at least good reasons to doubt to that assumption. So even if you don't want to grant it outright, I think there's enough there to say there are good reasons to at least put that assumption in doubt. Okay, well, let's add to that. What's wrong with the second assumption? The second assumption is that the critics did observe these commandments. But is that accurate? Did the critics who were judging the colossian believers, did they observe the Sabbath and festivals? Not according to a growing number of New Testament scholars who identify these critics as cynic philosophers. And you can read the work of Troy Martin. He wrote a book on this called by philosophy and empty deceit. Read the article I mentioned by Brian Allen and also a day of Gladness by Harold Weiss. He also makes this argument. But basically, Paul says that. And Petey read it earlier. You read it earlier when he said, the Colossians, the opponents, Paul's opponents in Colossians, they were promoting human precepts and teachings. So they're pushing human precepts and teachings onto the believers. And when you look at how Paul describes these human precepts and teachings, they closely resemble those of the ancient cynics. For instance, Paul says, let no one judge you in, quote, eating or in drinking. Okay, so a lot of translations, that's verse 16. A lot of translations will have in food or drink. This is probably more accurately translated as eating or in drinking, as the young's literal translation has it. And the ancient cynics would often criticize people for drinking wine and enjoying festive foods. The cynic philosopher crates, for example, he writes to his young disciples, he says, accustom yourselves to eat barley cake and to drink water and do not taste fish and wine. So here you have that. Do not taste right, do not handle, do not touch. Paul quotes his opponents in the passage. The cynic philosopher says, do not taste wine and fish. Troy Martin writes, quote, cynics practice an extreme asceticism that not only forbids eating, but also touching or handling commodities not naturally produced. Cynics divide all consumer goods into durable and non durable or perishable commodities. Cynics reject non durable goods like wine, cakes, and gourmet foods, as well as clothes, shoes, and houses. Durable commodities permit them to drink water, eat natural foods, go barefoot, sleep on the ground, and wear only a single cloak. And so the idea is that since the sabbath and festivals often involved drinking wine and eating festive foods. It makes perfect sense that the cynics who were opposed to those things would be critical of those activities. They'd be critical of the believers for their eating and drinking during the festivals, sabbath, new moons, and so forth. Additionally, the cynics condemned the use of calendars. Here's another quote from Troy Martin. He says, cynic sources contain few references to time, because the cynics disregard time beyond the hours of the day. And these hours are only of relative usefulness. Instead of organizing their lives according to a system of time, they prefer to live day by day. Contentment and happiness, for the cynic, means ignoring temporal constraints. The anticultural cynic movement disparages the cultural phenomenon of time. This cynic attitude toward time promotes a pungent critique of the christian regulation of communal life by a religious calendar. The cynic considers this practice a useless waste of effort that detracts from the true pursuit of morality and happiness, end quote. So there is much more that could be mentioned, and I would refer you to Troye Martin's book by philosophy and empty deceit. But based on the evidence that Martin and others provide, Paul's opponents, if they were adherents to cynic philosophy, they would not be observing the Sabbath and festivals. In fact, they would think that celebrating these days was immoral. And they looked at, especially, because what does Paul later go on to say? He says that they are shadow of things to come. They are. They are point toward future, a glorious future, time. It's pointing to the kingdom to come, the age to come. And so the cynics were against that, because they thought of hope as a threat to happiness and contentment. You know, you're supposed to live day by day. You're not supposed to have hope for the future, because if you have hope for the future, there's a threat of being disappointed. And so that, you know, you can't be happy if you have hope. So that's what. Yeah. One of the reasons that Paul repeatedly emphasizes hope throughout the letter. Were you gonna say something?

Yeah. Yeah. That this mindset, you know, David, it's not actually that foreign, even today, in different. Not at the same level, necessarily, but there are even people who are christians today who. Who have a certain slant of pleasure is evil or comfort is evil. Now there's danger. And if pleasure or comfort becomes your idol or takes you away from God, or if it's sin, of course. But the asceticism that's been spoken of here, like, if you just google that word, and anyone can google this I just did. It says it's a lifestyle characterized by abstinence from worldly pleasures, often for the purpose of pursuing spiritual goals. Right. So this idea that anything that's comfortable or has pleasure is bad for my spiritual growth. That's why even in Yeshua's day, you know, he was being criticized for wine bibber. And, you know, certain things that he allowed pleasure to a degree in certain, like he attended a wedding, he turned water into wine. And then you have the father in deuteronomy 1426, with the feast days, which. Right. That's this whole topic right now. He's saying, and spend the money for whatever you desire, oxen, sheep, wine, strong drink, whatever your appetite craves, and you shall eat there before the Lord your God and rejoice you and your household. So one of the core things that God has behind the feast is rejoice. Have pleasure involved when you rejoice before me for, well, what the father has done for us. But if your mindset is like you just described of the cynic philosophers, that any pleasure, any feasting, any community thing like that, that is actually not, that's inhibiting spiritual growth. You can now see how these people would be the ones that Paul's talking about, pointing the finger at people, keeping biblical feasts, saying, don't do that, that is not helping your spiritual growth. And Paul is saying, don't let them judge you, because these are things the father has given us.

Yeah, that's beautifully put. Yeah. And just to add another reference to that, Isaiah talks about the age to come, the coming kingdom. It says, on this mountain, the lord of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of rich food, a feast of well aged wine, of rich food, full of marrow, of aged wine, well refined. And so, and then it goes on to talk about, let us be glad and rejoice in his salvation. So, yeah, that's a picture of the age to come. That's how Isaiah describes the coming kingdom is it's going to be, you're going to have gourmet food, you're going to be enjoying, you're going to be rejoicing. You're going to Golden Highways. Yeah. You're going to be drinking the best wine. Right. And so it makes sense for Paul to call the festivals and Sabbath a shadow of things to come, because the. The coming kingdom is going to involve eating and drinking. It's going to involve celebrating and rejoicing. In Colossians 216, Paul's opponents would be judging his readers for keeping the Sabbath and festivals, for enjoying and celebrating and rejoicing and eating and drinking during the Sabbath and festivals. That is why they were being judged. They were not being judged for neglecting them, but for observing them and celebrating. Real quick, just that note on a shadow of things to come, many take this to mean that the Sabbath and festivals, they are symbols that point to Christ's work on the cross, right? He came, he died on the cross, he fulfilled these things, and so now they're no longer important. And it's true that the festivals do point to Christ's work on the cross. Like Passover is a perfect example of this. But that doesn't seem to be Paul's point here. Number one, because he says things to come. So this indicates that these are things that have not yet occurred. For the colossian believers, the Sabbath and the festivals, then they point to future events. They're not pointing backward to Christ's work on the cross. They're pointing forward to the age to come. If we say that these observances point to Christ as the substance, the Sabbath and the festivals, they point to Christ. He's the substance of the shadow. That would include, that would have to include not just his past work on the cross, but also his future work in bringing about God's kingdom. Because it's future tense, we are still waiting for Christ to bring the full substance of his kingdom into the world. And so we can't say that, oh, he fulfilled these things already. They're, they're irrelevant. Like. No, Paul says they're, you know, he, he gives them value. He says, you know, they're, they point to things to come and, and Christ is ultimately going to bring all the things to come. He's going to bring the full substance of that. It's the same as Hebrews four, as we were talking about earlier. This is a way of expressing the value of the Sabbath and festivals. You should keep the Sabbath and festivals because they are shadow of the glorious things to come.

Well, if, if the Sabbath and the feast days, if all of these things are pointing to the messiah, that's really their designed purpose to teach us about him, to grow in a relationship with him, then the fact that he has ascended and said, I'm going to come back and I'm leaving your holy spirit. And now we've, you know, this has been 2000 years. These things continue to draw us and others near him, and they still hold an important role because we still, we are not face to face. As Paul writes, we see dimly right now, but then face to face. And so for now, we have all of these things that the Father has left us that for, at least for now and likely into the next age, age will continue to play that role in telling the biblical story and timeline and gospel and everything the Lord has done and will do so. Yeah, thank you, David. That was beautiful. I really appreciate you breaking that down for us. All right, guys. Awesome that we're getting these big questions out of the way first. And so these next questions, we're going to go quicker and quicker. Question number four. Acts 20 says that the early believers met and gave our offerings on the first day of the week. It doesn't say the 7th day of the week. I'll just read this one reference. In acts 27, it says, on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight. So the argument goes that, well, look, they're meeting on this first day of the week. They're not meeting on the 7th day or the Sabbath. So obviously they're not keeping the Sabbath anymore. At least that's the argument. But let's just think about this a bit more. We see in acts 15, for example, where the Jerusalem council is giving instruction to gentiles. One of the summary points is they make a statement of how things currently are, what the atmosphere is. And they say on for from ancient generations, Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues. Notice how these leaders of the early church are making a statement of how currently. Presently. Now Moses is being read in the synagogues as a. As a statement as to how the church is growing in their knowledge of the word and their sanctification. And so the question is, if believers met on the first day of the week, does this mean that the Sabbath day by nature was abolished? Or is it possible that they could be meeting on both? When we think about fellowship and we think about meeting, people can meet on many days of the week, but that doesn't necessarily nullify the rest on the Sabbath day for you to rest and for your laborers to rest. This meeting on the first day of the week as written acts is actually, it's expected. It's not a shocker. They would meet on many days. And in the early church, the first day of the week was set apart as the Lord's day by many churches as a celebration of the messiah that he has come, that he has come to die for our sins. But yet again, this has nothing to do with the fourth commandment, or the abolishing of that fourth commandment we see in Luke 23 54. I want to read this. Just as the messiah was crucified and being put in the grave, now it says it was the day of preparation and the Sabbath was beginning. The women who had come with him from Galilee followed and saw the tomb and how his body was laid. Then they returned and prepared spices and ointments on the Sabbath. They rested according to the commandment. So even up until that point, as they are doing something as important as preparing the Lord's body, they're honoring the commandment. So does, does the resting on the Sabbath? Is the resting on the Sabbath abolished by the coming together of the saints on another day? No, it's not proof of any such thing. David, do you have any additional thoughts to add on that?

Not really. I think you covered that really well. I would just say this, that if we're going to take these one, possibly two references, you know, to corporate gatherings on Sunday, how much more should we consider the numerous references to believers meeting on Sabbath as evidence that that's what they did regularly? And so, yeah, I would say that you're exactly right. There's passages all over the book of acts and Luke, as you just read, that demonstrate that the believers still rested on the Sabbath. And even if they regularly met on some Sunday as well at this time, that doesn't negate the 7th day Sabbath. Yeah, as you noted, christians historically observed both days.

Right. If I may read here, Sozaman, because he writes about this, he says assemblies are not held in all churches on the same time or manner. The people of Constantinople and almost everywhere assemble together on the Sabbath as well as on the first day of the week, which custom is never observed at Rome or at Alexandria. There are several cities and villages in Egypt where, contrary to the uses established elsewhere, the people meet together on Sabbath evenings, and although they have dined previously, partake of the mystery. So, yeah, to your point there, we see these early church writings confirm their meeting on both days, and that's not a problem.

Amen.

And so, yeah, by the way, anyone listening to this who may be like, PD David, are you saying I need to stop going to church on Sunday? No, we're not saying that, but we're just advocating for the biblical commandment of the Sabbath day, that is, to rest on it.

Amen.

Cool. Next, question. Number five. Paul says you can esteem any day you choose, so long as you're convinced in your own mind. Romans 14 five. I'll read it for us all. Romans 14 one. I'll start there for context sake. As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believed he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains. And let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls, and he will be upheld. For the Lord is able to make him stand. One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. So, David, is this saying, man, it doesn't matter what day you observe the day. You who cares? You eat, you don't. Who cares? What is Paul getting out of here?

The thing is, it's not clear what Paul means by day here. Many people just assume that he is talking about the Sabbath and festivals, but the text doesn't actually say. And in fact, Paul never even mentions the Sabbath anywhere in the book of Romans. And so the fact that he doesn't mention it explicitly should at least give us pause before we just immediately assume that. Okay, that must be what he's talking about. Okay.

Yeah, I guess when people are saying the commandment is being done away with by what Paul is saying here, in other words, you steam any day you want. So by nature, then the Sabbath day has no more relevance, because by nature is a day that is being esteemed. That is the instruction. But yet, I just wanted to point this out. In the previous chapter in Romans 13, Paul actually writes in verse nine, for the commandments, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not covet. And any other commandment are summed up in this word, you shall love your neighbors, yourself. So it's interesting that Paul you're talking about, you mentioned how Paul is. He didn't make reference to the Sabbath, but yet he makes reference to these instructions from the law of Moses. And he says, uses these as authoritative commandments and obviously telling us that we should love when we do them. But when he gets to Romans 14, he starts in verse one with, but for the one who's weak in five, welcome him, but don't quarrel over opinions. And so, to me, it seems that, you know, Romans 13 is commandments, commandments important? Do this, don't do that. And then Romans 14, he shifts and he says, okay, guys, now we're going to talk about opinions. And I guess the big question that we have to ask is what kind of opinions have to do with days that are being esteemed and diet to eat or not to eat, or as you say, to eat only vegetables or. Or whatever this seems to be. There's a lot of things already come to mind. But, yeah, go ahead.

Yeah, that was well put. And, yeah, that really is the key. There is. What does the context indicate? Is Paul talking about commandments or is he talking about something else? And as you point out in verse one, he is addressing what he calls opinions or disputable matters. Some translation say. So I would argue that it is unlikely that Paul thinks of the Sabbath or the festivals, which are God's commandments, as, quote unquote, disputable matters. That doesn't seem to fit the context here. So then, what could Paul be referring to? Well, according to some scholars, Paul is addressing traditional fast days. We know in the first century that certain groups had different days of the week that they would regularly fast on. And we see reference to this in the Gospel of Luke, for example. You know, the Pharisee says, I fast two days a week. Doctor Charles Cranfield points out that the idea that Paul is talking about fast days here in romans 14 is actually the view that is generally held by ancient interpreters like Augustine, for example. This idea that Paul is talking about fast days also fits the context. The next verse connects the observance of these days with whether or not one eats or abstains, that is, whether or not they fast. We also see historically, there is a writing known as the didache, which is a late first century, early century christian writing giving instructions to gentile believers. And. But in that writing, we see historically that there were disputes among early christians regarding which days to fast. It actually gives instructions. Don't be like the hypocrites who fast on this day and that day. Instead, you are to fast on this day and the other day. And so we see this. We see that there were already disputes among certain sects regarding which days to fast. So I would argue that it is unlikely, based on everything you mentioned, PDE and about the context, it's unlikely that Paul is saying that the Sabbath or any commanded festival is a mere matter of personal preference. He seems to be talking about disputable matters regarding traditional fast days. At the very least, the text is ambiguous. And since it's unclear that the Sabbath or the festivals are being addressed, I would say that this verse is poor support for the idea that it no longer applies to us. And if we're going to get rid of the fourth commandment, we need much stronger textual support than this.

That's good. And for today, I mean, we can even apply it because we have many of those days today, and we have things like diets today, and we have people who fast certain days and who decide this or that. So while these can be edifying things, at the end of the day, there can be things that we do for families. We can have a holiday or whatever. But if these aren't biblical commandments, then they are. You can esteem the day you want with your family. I can esteem the day I want with my family. But we're talking about things that we have a liberty in as believers. When it comes to the instructions of our father. We don't have the liberty to decide, I want to do this. I don't want to do that. Ultimately, we can't be like, well, Jesus, I want this part of you. I don't want that part of you. Question number six. Neither Jesus nor the apostles taught christians to keep Sabbath or feast days. If they didn't repeat this commandment in the New Testament, it's no longer valid. Right. Well, you know, just my initial thoughts on that quick, is I think that it was repeated, first of all, and, you know, we can talk about that. But even if it wasn't repeated, that doesn't mean anything regarding whether they are for today or for the disciples or for the early church, because Jesus didn't come to repeat everything that came before him, that his father, spouse, he walked it out as an example to us. And he said, imitate me, the one who says, he abides in me all to walk as I walk. And. But yet he talks about things like the Sabbath. We see that he says in Mark 227, the sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So by nature, he is endorsing the Sabbath. He is applying correct biblical instructions on how to perceive it, because many people in his day were perceiving it wrongly. Just like today, as we started this out with, many people have many burdens and traditions of man that actually make it burdensome, just like the Pharisees, some in the first century did make of it. And so when he's saying, hey, it's made for you, the Sabbath is made for man. That by nature is Yeshua Jesus saying, it's yours. It's made by the divine creator of the universe for you. And that probably means it's quite important. Yeah, I would add that also. He then says, verse 28. So the son of man is lord even of the Sabbath. So as he is crowned lord of the Sabbath, he by nature establishes its continuation with his own eternal character. It's a huge statement to make, David. I mean, it's not often that he says he is lord over all things, but when he's making a statement like that I am lord over the Sabbath, that should, I think, really bring pause to us to be like, wow. He's saying, this is such an important thing that I'm putting my lordship upon it. And if you think about that opportunity he has in that moment to be like, guys, you guys are disputing over how the Sabbath should or shouldn't be kept. Forget about it. He could have done that, right. He's got ample opportunity right now in that moment to be like, it's over with, I'm the Sabbath, don't do any physical day anymore of rest. But he doesn't do that ever. And that's, I guess, the simple thing of, you know, we can get it into the weeds of back and forth on even early church father writings, because I'm sure someone who's listened to some of the ones we've quoted here can be like, well, you know, I've got this early church father writing where they weren't keeping the Sabbath for, but at the end of the day, what we're looking at is the scriptures. And we're asking, well, where was the day transferred? Where was the day transferred to Sunday or abolished completely by the messiah? We need to see that repeal of, but for us to repeal it in our own lives.

Yeah, yeah. Very well put. Yeah. I would just add that even if we grant the assumption that the New Testament does not repeat the Sabbath commandment or the command to keep the festivals, so what? Why is it necessary for God to repeat himself? I mean, if we think about the logic of the question, that would be like Jeremiah saying, well, God repeated his commandment to keep the Sabbath, but he didn't mention the commandment against cross dressing since Moses. And so he must not care about that anymore.

And that is the argument some use.

Yeah, I mean, that wouldn't make any sense for Jeremiah to say that. I mean, God does not have to repeat himself for what he said to be valid. But yeah, as you already mentioned, the New Testament does repeat it. Matthew 519, Yeshua urged his followers to keep even the least of the commandments from the law of Moses. That would certainly include the Sabbath and festivals. In Matthew 28, he instructed his disciples to make disciples of all nations and to teach them to observe all that I have commanded you. That would certainly include his sermon on the mount, where he urges his followers to observe even the least of the commandments. What about the apostles? Right? Did they do what Yeshua told them to do? Did they teach the nations all that Jesus commanded, including that they should observe the least of the commandments? Well, they did. In acts 1521, James implies that new gentile believers would learn the commandments of the Torah as they attend synagogue services every Sabbath to hear the law of Moses preached. So the apostles expected gentile believers to have an ongoing relationship with the messianic jewish community and to learn and keep the Torah, which includes the Sabbath and festivals. If I may, I want to read this quote from scholar E. Al Ragev really quick. I think he puts it really well. He's explaining the significance of acts 1521. He says the implications are that since the Torah is proclaimed and studied in the synagogue on a regular basis, the God fearing christians would gain further knowledge and adhere to jewish law after being accepted into the jewish christian community, end quote. And so, yeah, the assumption is that they are keeping the Sabbath. Yeshua, as you mentioned, Pd, he's giving instructions on how to keep the Sabbath. He's explaining the purpose of the Sabbath, what the Sabbath means for us. And the assumption in the book of acts is that even the gentile believers are going to be keeping the Sabbath every Sabbath day. And hearing the law of Moses preached.

David, that's so good. You mentioned cross dressing for a moment there earlier, and I think that's an implication that is so relevant to this whole discussion, where once we open the door to the fact that it has to be repeated in the New Testament in order to be relevant to believer's life, suddenly we're opening the door to all kinds of evils, because the messiah, as we've discussed and repeat everything, and that's what's happening. Many communities today are saying, well, look, I can participate in a certain lifestyle of LGBTQI, or I can cross dress, or I can do whatever, because certain things aren't explicitly repeated by the Messiah himself. And that's the burden that is now needed. And many christians are struggling to now have a response to that argument because they're using that very argument to get out of the keeping the Sabbath day. But we have to be consistent. And consistency means that we stand against all sin. We stand against all that God says is immoral or wrong to do, and therefore, that matter what we should be doing, we stand for. And that means looking at the life of the messiah as the perfect example, as we've been just talking about this whole way through, which is that is what all of this is about. This whole video is about that. Hey guys, as we take this 1 minute break, I just want to remind you of my book called reigniting spirit and truth. This book is divided into two sections, the first being reigniting truth, where I discuss how the Sabbath and the feast days impacted my life and is transforming the lives of thousands of christians all around the world. The second aspect of the book is called reigniting spirit, where I talk about walking in the Holy Spirit, the spiritual gifts, healing, prophecy, speaking in tongues, interpretation of tongues, and more, with many real life miraculous testimonies to bring it all to life for you. This book is available as a paperback, an audiobook, or a free PDF if you go to spirittruthbook.com. love you guys. And let's get back into the conversation. Let's go into question number seven. If we try to keep the law of Moses, such as sabbaths and feast days or eating kosher, we nullify Christ's work on the cross and are in bondage. Galatians 221 I'll read that. Paul says, I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose. All right, so that's the argument that actually doing these things is actually going to now do away with Christ's work. Or even, you know, we could even say, bring salvation in question for us, because we're now relying on our own works by trying to keep a Sabbath or the feast days. David, what are some of your thoughts on that?

Yeah, I would just, I would respond by saying that christians who keep the Sabbath festivals and food laws, we are not trying to be justified through the law. And technically, I think Paul uses law here in Galatians 221 as shorthand for works of the law, because he uses that phrase a few verses earlier, works of the law. And there is a big debate about what exactly that means. Some people think it means conversion rituals, for example, which involved circumcision. It culminated in circumcision, and it was like initiation rituals into a sect. But regardless, let's just assume that he means the Torah here, okay? We're not justified by our law observance. We're not justified by keeping the law. We keep these commandments for the same reason that christians keep any other commandment. Don't commit adultery, honor your parents and so forth. Nobody's keeping those commandments as christians to be saved. They keep them because we're already saved. So it's not to earn a righteous standing before goddess, but rather because we have already been justified by faith in Christ. And so because we love him, we obey these commandments excellently.

Beautifully put. I think it's interesting that when it comes to certain commandments, suddenly people get involved with the argument of, well, that's now being done to get righteousness from, you know, as Paul said, you know, he's writing, if righteousness were through the law, Christ died for no purpose. As David said, we're not trying to be righteous through our works of the law, but when it comes to these certain commandments, suddenly, you know, when it's about murder, when it's about doing, commit adultery, when it's about stealing, we're all good. When it comes to certain ones, then it becomes a problem. I just want to point that out. I think we have to be logically consistent and not try and pick and choose how we apply that thinking. We understand that all of the commandments, as David said, we keep because we're saved. This is the fruit of our salvation. This is the fruit of the change of the Holy Spirit, the fruit of the new covenant that writes the law on our hearts. All right? And I mean, it's not new. Galatians three, six. Paul also writes the next chapter about Abraham. Abraham believed God. It was counted to him as righteousness. So it's not like in Moses day there was a different mechanism to be saved or something. It was always by faith that righteousness was attributed to God's people. Some people, though, along the way, have obviously come and tried to rely on their own works, and that's a big problem. And that's what Paul is. That's what Galatians was right addressing is people who are relying on their own works by nature, doing away then with the Messiah and the need to believe in him. But we recognize that we need him. Absolutely. So that's good. And I'll just end my thought on this here. As acts 21 24, take these men, purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses, that they may shave their heads. Thus all know there's nothing in what they have been told about you, Paul, that you yourself also live in observance of the Lord. So Paul is not speaking about two sides of his mouth. Paul himself lives by the law. He's proving it in acts 21 24 to everyone. So there's no rumors, no uncertainties. So he's not now in Galatians coming and saying, well, forget about anything to do with the law, while he himself says, I'm observing it, and I delight in it.

Amen.

Next is question number eight. Isaiah 58 says, you can't do your own pleasures on the Sabbath day. I'll just read Isaiah 50 813 for us. If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on my holy day and call the Sabbath a delight and the holy day of the Lord, honorable if you honor it. Not going your own ways or seeking your own pleasure. Pleasure or talking idly. All right, so the question is, well, the argument is that, well, you can't do anything that is pleasure on the 7th day. That sounds like a huge burden. That sounds like a huge. Like. I mean, what is pleasure? That means. I mean, am I even allowed to take a shower in the morning? Like what? What does it mean? And understandably, you know, I think when people read this, they are scared away from the idea of bringing something like the Sabbath into their life. David, what are your thoughts on this?

Yeah. So the command not to do our own pleasure cannot mean that we aren't allowed to do pleasurable things on the Sabbath, because the same verse says that we must take delight in the Sabbath. The hebrew word is onek, right? It's exquisite delight. And so that. That implies you take pleasure in the Sabbath. And so what Isaiah is dealing with here is seeking your own pleasure just means doing what you want to do instead of what God wants you to do. I really like the net translation here, the new english translation. And if anyone is curious about this rendering, you could. And the net provides all of the translation notes in the footnotes, and so you can see why they chose it. To render this way, the net translation of this verse says, you must observe the Sabbath rather than doing anything you please. On my holy day, you must look forward to the Sabbath and treat the Lord's holy day with respect. You must treat it with respect by refraining from your normal activities and by refraining from your selfish pursuit and from making business deals, end quote. And so based on this translation, we get the sense that it's not about, you know, pleasurable activities. That's not what the verse is condemning. The verse is condemning. Neglecting the desire to neglect or ignore the Sabbath because you want to be able to do what you want to do do. So maybe a modern example of this would be like, well, you know, I want to be able to do my own business. I want to be able to work on the Sabbath instead of. Instead of spending time resting, spending time with my family, worshiping the Lord, getting into scripture. Instead of that, I want to spend extra time working. You know, I feel behind at work. So I'm going to stay in my office and. And do my own pleasure, you know, do my own, you know, pursue my own interests, my own selfish pursuits, as the net puts it. And so that that is more along the lines of what this passage is getting at. Again, it can't mean pleasurable activities are off the table. It doesn't mean you can't take a shower in the morning or, you know, you can't hold your wife's hand or anything like that. And it means that, you know, you. You can't just do what you want to do. You can't pursue your own selfish pursuits.

That's beautiful. And, you know, I think Isaiah the prophet has to be also read in context of he's a prophet, and he is delivering his words on the foundation of the Torah itself, right? So when he is delivering these words, he is not changing the definition of what the Sabbath is. And in the Torah itself, God doesn't ever say, you're not allowed to do anything that has any pleasure involved with it. He just prohibits work and labor. And in that way, going your own way, because a lot of us want to work 24/7 welcome to America.

Right?

So, guys. Yeah. Just remember that the Sabbath is a. Is a delight. It is light. It is not laden with burden. The messiah was the perfect example of Sabbath keeping because he kept it perfectly and showed us how perfectly. By bringing life, by loving, by setting captives free, by healing people, by help, you know, making examples, like helping the calf out of the pit. In other words, doing things that produce life and including in our families and our own lives. And by the way, something that really produces life is ceasing from labors once a week. Week. God knew what he was doing when he gave that to us. So, amen.

That's really good, man.

All right, over to the next question. Question number nine. It says, jesus is the prophet. God said he would raise up like Moses, which means we no longer need the laws of Moses as we now have Jesus and his commandments. I'm going to read that where this comes from. Deuteronomy, 1815, where it says, the Lord, your God, will raise up for you a prophet like me, from among you, from your brothers. It is to him you shall listen. All right, so the. The question is saying, well, look, he's come. This is talking about Jesus. Since Yeshua has arrived, we no longer need to consider anyone else like Moses or anything Moses has said, and it assumes that Jesus opposes and abolishes that which came before him. Right. It assumes that he has come to bring a new thing that is in contradiction or in opposition, at least to some extent to what was said by Moses before. But I think it's important that we understand what is written about this one who will come. And it says in a few verses later, in deuteronomy 18, and whoever will not listen to my words, that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him. So ultimately, we have to look at what did Yeshua himself say. And Matthew 517, he speaks about this very matter regarding the writings of Moses. And he says, do not think that I have come to abolish the law of the prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth passes away, not an odon nor a dot will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. So when we go to the messiah, the one who deuteronomy 18 tells us we should listen to the words given to him, and he tells us, don't think that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets, perhaps we should take him at his word. And when he even says that it's going to be until heaven on earth passes away, that nothing will pass from the law until all is accomplished, perhaps we should take him at his word there as well. So. Yeah, those are my thoughts on that.

Yeah, I have nothing to add. That was. That was perfect.

All right, next question. Number ten. The writer of Hebrews says, God has made the old covenant obsolete. Hebrews eight. Seven. I'll read that. It says, for if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. I believe that we're in the new covenant right now. Now, is there room for the Sabbath and the feast days in that covenant? Because when I think about Hebrews 810, he speaks about that a few verses later. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord, I will put my laws into their minds, right on their hearts, and I will be their God. They will be my people. People. He's directly quoting Jeremiah 31 33 there. And Ezekiel says the same thing, Ezekiel 2036, talking about how the Holy Spirit will be put in them and cause them to walk in his statutes. And his rules, obviously, speaking from the, I mean, Ezekiel and Jeremiah, they're prophets. When they're talking about statutes and rules, these laws, they're talking about the Torah. That is, that's the only laws that could be making reference to regarding God's word. So for those who hold to. We're in the new Covenant. Is the Sabbath and the feast days a part of that new covenant experience?

Right. So two things I would say on that really quick. Number one, I agree that the new covenant has been initiated in Christ. We have the evidence of that with the Holy Spirit. And so scholars refer to this as the already but not yet or realized. Eschatology is another name for it. We have all of these prophecies associated with the new covenant because the new covenant goes on further, as you keep reading, Jeremiah, and it talks about many things that won't happen until the age to come, until all Israel is back in the land and everything is restored and they dwell in safety forever. And so there are elements of new covenant prophecy that won't be fulfilled until the future. And so it's. So we're in the new covenant already, but also not yet.

Right. It's not fully arrived yet, and I think everyone listening would agree with that.

Right?

Yeah, go ahead.

Yeah, yeah. So we still have sin and death, right. We still die and there's still sin in the world. So the law is not written completely on our hearts yet. Yeah.

People are breaking it.

Yeah. So there's a process. Paul says in romans eight that the Holy Spirit does enable us to fulfill the righteous requirement of the law. But, yeah, that is in the process of taking place. It is being written on our hearts as we are sanctified in the Holy Spirit as we walk, and we do our best to obey him as we walk, according to the spirit every day. But it won't fully be fulfilled until the end of age. So that would be the first point, is that we're in this tension between the already and the not yet. So yes, we're in the new covenant, but also not yet. Second thing is that even if we say, you know what, I'm a preterist or whatever, and everything's already been fulfilled, we're already fully in the new covenant, all pro. There's no more future prophecies, because that's what you would have to say. You know, if, you know, you go down that train of thought, even if you say that, that doesn't mean that the SABBAth and the Festivals are done away with. Because as the author of Hebrews says, you know, the New Covenant writes the ToRah on our hearts. If anything, that would affirm those commandments, you know, because those are, those are part of the law that, as you put it earlier, those are. Those are the only commandments that the prophets would have been referencing at the time, at the time they gave those prophecies.

Perhaps us having this conversation about these laws is proof of this spirit, the Holy Spirit, writing these on our heart, causing us to do them. This Video, everyone watching this Right now because they're interested. That is part of the new covenant. The prophecy says the spirit will draw us to these things so that we will walk in the statues and be careful to obey his rules. Oh, thank you, David. That was beautiful. I love that. Yeah, I think. Look, guys, you know, the Book of HeBRewS is arguably the most difficult to understand book. So, you know, wherever you land on the specifics of this conversation, you know, we love you, and that's good. But I think we can all see that, you know, when. When the author of Hebrews is writing, he's not talking about doing away with God's instructions of what's right and what's wrong, but he's rather talking about this beautiful new covenant that is arriving where the Holy Spirit is going to be involved in changing us into the image of the Messiah, because we can't do it without him.

Amen.

Next question is number eleven. Jesus said that he is lord of the Sabbath. As such, he is the culmination of the Sabbath day, meaning we no longer need a physical Sabbath day as we have Jesus. All right, so Mark 227 is what this refers to. And basically, I guess this argument touches on what we have spoken about before with Jesus declaring himself lord of the Sabbath, but says rather that, well, actually, because he's the lord, he replaces the actual day. So we've kind of touched on this already, but we can quickly look at the verses. Here. We see in Mark 224, the Pharisees say to Yeshua, look, why are they doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath? And he said to them, have you never read about what David did when he was need and hungry? He and those who were with him, they entered the house of God and ate the bread of the presence. And then he goes on to say, the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the son of man is lord even of the Sabbath. You know, and I think we've touched on this, David, but what the messiah is just here doing is he's bringing a correct perspective on what the point is of the law. Of God itself. And it's kind of like rules of the road, where you have the lines on a road. And if there is someone who, a child who runs across the road and I swerve out of the way, and yet I run over the lines that says, these are the lines that keep you on the road, you need to stay on these lines. But yet, if I swerved over those lines to avoid a child, no one's going to say, pd, how dare you? You swerved over those lines. You shouldn't have. Because we all recognize that those lines are there to protect life, to promote life. And so in the same way that the Pharisees were missing the point there, because they were ultimately saying, look, your disciples are doing what's not lawful to do on the Sabbath. But yeah, were also participating in that which brings life itself. And so that's what we should also keep in mind in our Sabbath keeping and how we see it. But then as the Messiah declares himself lord of the Sabbath, he establishes the Sabbath as how it should be kept and how he is lord over how it is to be biblically perceived and kept. He is, as we've mentioned before, not repealing it, even though he has the opportunity to do that in this moment.

Yeah, that's beautiful. Yeah. I like the way that Doctor Roy gain puts it. He's a biblical scholar. But you just made the point that, yeah, he says the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Yeshua here is emphasizing God's purpose for the Sabbath, which was to bless mankind with a day of rest. And so why would jesus restore the true purpose of the Sabbath day if he intended to get rid of it? Doctor Roy gain puts it this way. He says, why would he restore something that he was about to do away with that would make as much sense as remodeling a house before demolishing it. And so it doesn't make sense. Yeah. On the other hand, Jesus is teaching on the Sabbath's original purpose is precisely what we would expect if he wanted his followers to keep it properly. I mean, think about it. If he was here to do away with the Sabbath, if he came to do away with it, he would have just said so. He wouldn't be defending his disciples against the Pharisees accusation, and he wouldn't be talking about the true purpose of the Sabbath if it didn't matter anymore.

Yeah, it would be a waste of time. I mean, why, why try and, and. Yes, absolutely. Beautifully put, brother. Thank you for that. All right, question number twelve. The Sabbath feast days and kosher laws are part of the ceremonial laws which have been done away with. Only the moral laws are still valid for today. I'll just share my two cent on that. Ultimately, we'll have to ask where is the biblical definition and where is the biblical distinction? Distinction where we see moral laws, ceremonial laws. I think we can recognize there are different categories of laws, fair enough. But to categorize them how we please in order to abolish them out of our lives practically is not what we see done in the scriptures ever, rather that it's been a man made distinction. These are buckets that we have formulated, used our own interpretations and rules, and onto how we categorize and then decide to abolish. So who says the Sabbath is a ceremonial law? I think it's very moral, actually. The moral laws are to love God and to love God says, if you love me, you will keep my commandments. So therefore it is moral to love him in keeping the Sabbath resting on the day that he set apartheid in creation in Genesis, chapter two, verse three, itself, as he makes, makes the world. And so, yeah, so feast days, same thing. Kosher laws, same thing. Why are those considered ceremonial and not then moral, as moral laws are typically considered to be only what is still applicable for christians today. So I would just, again, where's the biblical support for that distinction?

Yep, that. Well put. I have nothing to add. I would just quote Doctor Richard aver back here to give some additional support to everything you just said. PD he says the categories of moral, civil, and ceremonial law never appear in the Bible and are artificial and misleading. He goes on to say, quote, as for myself, I am convinced that the threefold division is neither legitimate nor helpful from a biblical point of view for resolving the issue of the application of the Old Testament law to the church and the believer. So Averbeck would just affirm everything that you just said. He's like, these categories are artificial and misleading. They are imposed onto the Bible rather than taught in the Bible. You know, we don't see the Bible actually teaching these commandments and that we're free to do away with whatever commandments we place in this artificial category over here. There's just no biblical support for that.

It's awesome. Thanks for quoting that. That's beautifully put as well. All right, next question. Number 13. The Sabbath law was given only to Jews or Israel because God connected the Sabbath with them being freed from slavery in Egypt in Deuteronomy 515, where God said, you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, the Lord brought you out from there with a mighty hand. Therefore, the Lord, your God, commanded you to keep the Sabbath day. So, yeah, that's. I think we can all, we can agree that that is one of the things that we are reminded of. But, yeah, I guess we can just ask. Don't we all have slaveries of Egypt that we are being delivered from? Don't we all need the father to come with an outstretched arm into our lives and take us away from the bondages of the world? And that's exactly what the Messiah did. That is a picture of what he has come to do for each and every one of us. And since we're grafted into Israel, since we become part of his people, Abraham's promise that has been made available to the whole world of all who believe in him, perhaps that is still applicable to us all, still reminding us of the work of the Sabbath, rest of the messiah in our lives, freeing us from Egypt itself.

Amen. Yeah. And I would just add that deliverance from Egypt is not the only thing that the Sabbath memorializes. Exodus 2011 says the Sabbath memorializes the creation. And what does Yeshua say in mark 227? We've mentioned it several times throughout this video. He says the Sabbath was made for man. That is, God established the Sabbath in creation for all mankind, not just for the jewish people. We readdez in Genesis two, right? The Sabbath is established in creation. Regarding whether the Sabbath is given to jewish believers as well as gentile believers. Well, Matthew 517 20, Jesus affirmed the entire Torah, including the Sabbath. And later in Matthew 20 819 20, he told his disciples to teach the Gentiles to observe all that he commanded them. So that would be all the gentile believers. They were to observe all that Jesus commanded, which would include his command to observe even the least of the commandments from the law of God.

So if you think about this, we just read a few questions earlier about how at his burial, they were so concerned with keeping the Sabbath day commandment like his followers. So that's obviously something. They got the memo from him. We are keeping this. This is important to our messiah. This is supposed to be important to us. And then he tells them, go into the world and teach them all that I commanded you. So the fact that they are keeping it, it obviously means that they thought that this should be included in what they continue to teach all who would become his disciples in turn.

Yeah. Amen.

Next question is number 14. It's actually breaking the law to try to keep the feast days. Since you're not in the land of Israel. This is a big one. Perhaps one of the more controversial questions. Do you have to be in the land to keep the feast days? And is it a sin if you're trying to keep it outside of it? David, what are some of your thoughts on that?

I would say that this would only apply to sacrifices. You know, there are certain offerings that you would take to the temple that are associated with the festivals, and obviously that cannot be applied today. You know, the Torah says to offer those sacrifices only at Jerusalem, the place where God places his name. So that can't be applied today even if we wanted to, because there's no temple in Jerusalem and no levitical priesthood in. In operation. But we could still apply other aspects of the festivals outside of Israel. And that is what first century Jews and Christians did in the diaspora. In one corinthians five eight, Paul tells christians to celebrate the festival even though Corinth was 800 miles away from Jerusalem. And most christians would not be able to make such a long. In the. In the diaspora, communities often sent representatives to Jerusalem on behalf of the community. And, you know, they. They would give offerings at the temple and all of that when they would travel to Jerusalem. But those who stayed behind would observe the festivals where they were. They would observe the aspect of the fest, the aspects of the festivals that they could do outside of Jerusalem. So take Passover, for example. You know, you wouldn't be able to have a Passover lamb at your local community in Korus, because the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed in Jerusalem at the place where God chose to set his name. But you could remove the leaven from your home. You could abstain from eating leavened foods for seven days. Right? You could do all the other aspects of the festivals that don't require.

He says, let's celebrate the festival. And he says how? He literally says, not with the old laven leaven of malice and evil, but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

So, yeah, and I would just add really quick to that. Historically. Historically, that's what christians did. We have quotes from polycrates and polycrates. He's explaining what he and the apostles before him, like the apostle John and Polycarp and others, that they always observe the Passover on the 14th of Nisan the same time the jews do it. And he says that they observe removing leaven from the home, the putting away of leaven. And so they're in the churches in the Asia Minor, right? They're churches in the east. So not all of these people are coming to Jerusalem. They're observing the festival, the aspects of the festival that they could observe where they resided.

Let me read, I just want to read a few lines of that because I think it's going to be helpful for people. It says, but the bishops of Asia, led by polycrates, decide to hold to the old custom handed down to them. And then he goes on, he says, we observe the exact day, neither adding nor taking away. And then he says, he talks about all these, as David referenced, all these who've come before. He says, philip, one of the twelve apostles. And then he says, john, who was a witness and teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord, and Polycarp and Smyrna, who was bishop and martyr, and so probably four or five more, including bishops and so on. And then he says, all of these observe the 14th day of the Passover according to the gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And he says, he concludes it with just this line. I love, he says, am I relatives? We all, we were bishops, and we always observe the day when the people put away the leaven. So beautiful. So I guess my question to the, whoever's listening to is like, are you identifying as part of the people who observe the day when the people put away the leaven?

Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting, in that same quote of, he quotes acts where he says, we must obey God rather than man. And polycrates references, that's acts 529 in relation to the date of Passover, which is significant because it indicates that these early christians considered the observance of Passover to be a matter of obedience. It wasn't just a custom or tradition to them. They considered it a matter of obedience. We have to obey God by observing the Passover.

Awesome. Amen. Amen. That's so good. I love how we have biblical writings and that would be enough. Absolutely. But we also have writings from the early church confirming many of these things. So beautiful. So one thing I'll actually just add to this whole thing is that when you think about the diaspora, which at the time, this is now, after the temple got destroyed 70 ad, you still have Polycarp listed in here. And he died around 156 AD. And so he's still, at that point, they're still celebrating Passover after the destruction of the temple. So this proves that you don't need the temple, you don't need to be in Jerusalem to keep the feast at all. There's the aspects of it that has got nothing to do with the temple. Offerings that can still be kept, and that's what they did.

Amen.

All right, next question. Number 15. Guys, I hope everyone is hanging on. David, are we going to make this, brother?

Yeah, I'm still going strong. I might need to get some more water here, but.

Cool. I'm going to read this one. Number 15. Sunday is the 8th day, a day that is symbolic of Christ's kingdom, a day outside of time, like the 8th day of Sukkot, meaning that Sunday is actually more symbolically pointing towards Christ's kingdom to come. The 7th day, Sabbath had its purpose for this earth given at creation. But as New Testament believers, the 8th day represents the new creation, new earth, and Christ's kingdom to come. You know, I think that there is beautiful significance with certain numbers. Of course, the 8th day, it's true that it can represent the coming kingdom. And the 7th day is, got its own references and symbolic meaning to it. But at the end of the day, no matter how significant or beautiful. Beautiful. It doesn't abolish God's commandments. Right? At the end of the day, we can't try and read symbology into a day or a number and use that as the evidence for abolishing, in this case, the 7th day completely right now, because we still recognize that there is, we've already established all of the meaning that the Sabbath store remains to have today, I believe, so far. So, yeah, I would add to that.

Yeah, yeah, I have nothing to add. I thought, yeah, like you said, even if we grant the symbolism, which, by the way, I think the earliest reference to this idea is the epistle of Barnabas in the early second century. This idea of the 8th day, Sunday replacing the Sabbath. Well, not replacing it, but the author, he talks about the 8th day celebration, and he also denigrates Sabbath observance in that same letter. But basically, I think the earliest reference we have is the epistle of Barnabas. But, yeah, even if we grant that symbolism and we attach that to weekly Sunday observance, like you said, it doesn't do anything to negate the. The Sabbath commandment. You know, you need to show in the Bible where the commandment has been done away with, if that's going to be your argument. And there's nothing in the Bible that even hints at that.

Amen.

In my opinion.

I mean. All right, next one. Paul only kept certain Torah laws when he was around jews, not because he needed to, because, as he said to the Jews, I became as a jew that I may win jews, right. This is a popular argument that Paul only did what he did because he tried to win people over to the gospel. He didn't do it because he was convicted in his heart. And it wasn't his personal conviction. It was rather a conviction for the sake of appeasing people. I'll just read a few verses from where this all comes from, because Paul writes about. He writes about some of this, and he says, for in one corinthians 919, for though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a jew in order to win jews to those under the law. I became as one under the law, though not myself under the law, that I might win those under the law to those outside the law. I became as one outside the law, not being outside the law of God, but under the law of Christ, that I might win those outside the law. And then he says to the weak, I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. No, I mean, I think what Paul is saying is certainly valuable. There is a way to reach people by understanding the people you're trying to reach, understanding their beliefs, their cultural customs, their way of doing things. You know, I'm reminded of Amy Carmichael, a famous missionary. She painted herself, she painted her skin dark with coffee water in India to connect better with the local people in India as presenting the gospel to them, you know, and so. And this is what Paul is talking about. He's talking about cultural customs. He's talking about. He's not talking about biblical morality. He's not talking about. Paul is not saying, I'm going to sin or I'm going to break God's law. I'm going to compromise biblical morality for the sake of reaching people. And so that's why, you know, when he says to those under the law, I became as one under the law. Well, what is under the law, you know, we established earlier, under the law means you. You are held under the condemnation of the law. In other words, the law is judging you, is condemning you, because you are without Christ by nature. You depend on your own works before God to perfect you, which no man can do. That is what many of his peers in Judaism in his day were, as he describes as being under the law. And we know that he spoke in a way that would incline their ear, but that doesn't mean that he compromised his lifestyle or his teachings for that sake. So that's why I would say that's for on that.

Yeah. Well put. If I may, I would refer people to an article I wrote. You could get it for free on my website. But the article is titled the law of Moses versus the law of Christ. And I give a very lengthy explanation of this passage. But just to add to what Petey said, paul affirms the law in this very chapter. In verses eight through nine, he appeals to the law of Moses as authoritative instruction. He says, I don't speak these things on my own authority. Doesn't the law of Moses say the same thing? Right, I'm paraphrasing, but he references the law of Moses as authoritative, so it doesn't make any sense for him to then go on to say that he denies that authority later on in the same chapter also.

I just want to read that for everyone so they. They hear it for themselves. It says, in one corinthians nine nine. For it is written in the law of Moses, you shall not muzzle an ox when it trades out the grain, for it is. Is it for oxen that God is concerned? Does he not certainly speak for our sake? It was written for our sake. He's saying, look, as David said, the law is written for our sake. It's applicable to us.

Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And then in verse 21, he states that he does not go outside the law of God. This is significant because the Bible and other jewish writings consistently, I don't know of any exceptions, but they consistently use the phrase law of God to denote the law of Moses. Paul himself uses this same phrase to refer to the law of Moses in Romans chapter seven and eight. So in Paul's interactions with these various groups, he says he does not go outside the law of God. That is, he does not break the law of Moses. So. Yeah, and so I would just add to what you said earlier, PD, it would not make sense for Paul to affirm the law twice in the same chapter and then immediately within the same context, say that he neglects the laws authority or doesn't consider the law authoritative, or doesn't abide by the law's authority in certain situations. See, I think that Paul had integrity, you know, and. And that he didn't just ignore the law when it was convenient or whatever. You know, he's talking about cultural customs, as you said.

Yeah, and we know, as a personal endeavor, he delighted in the law. We said in Romans 722, I delight in the law in my inner being, that is, speaking of his inner parts, not necessarily what. What he's doing for other people, but for him personally and his inner being he delights in the law of God. So we have to see Paul for the complex person that he is, but yet he's also telling us clearly what he is and who he is and what he believes. Number 17. Jesus only kept this Sabbath and other Torah commands as he was required to keep Torah commands until he would fulfill all the law on the cross. Okay, so the statement is that he's only keeping it until he fulfills it. That's why Jesus keeps the law. But Jesus does tell us, as we've read before, that in Matthew 518, until when? He says, until heaven and earth passes away, not an earth or a dot will pass until all is accomplished. Not until I die on the cross, but until heaven and earth passes away.

Yep. Yep. I have nothing to add to that except that for a shameless plug, I literally just wrote an entire book on this passage. Matthew 517 20. So if you want a very detailed explanation of this passage, again, shameless plug. But the book is called how Jesus fulfilled the law, and, as Petey said, had nothing to do with making the law inapplicable or, you know, fulfilling it when he died on the cross, so that it doesn't matter anymore. That's not what the passage is saying there.

Absolutely. Any. Any. Yeah, absolutely. Guys, get the book. I got it. And it's. It's wonderful. Well done on that, David. I wanted to add that the messiah also didn't just keep the law in order to die for us. He is perfect in his nature, and therefore, he could die for us and make us clean. But it's not that he became perfect just for the sake of dying for us. He says that I do nothing but what I see my father doing. So we know that it is his nature to be wholly. It is in his nature to be obedient to his father's instructions. And so, therefore, it should become our nature. It should become our nature to be as he is and as our father is to also do only what we see our father doing. And in this case, clearly what the messiah has come to do when he came in the flesh, which, shameless plug. That includes the feast days and the Sabbath as we're talking. So. All right. Verse. Verse.

It's.

Kidding.

Okay, we're almost done, man.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. All right, number 18. We're almost there. James says that if we try to keep any of the law, then we're obligated to keep the whole thing. And yet, if we break one law, then we break the whole thing. Therefore, no one can keep the law. Nor should we even try to. Alright, this is, this is quite a good, I've heard this a lot. You hear this often on the Internet written that, you know, don't, don't try and keep the law, because if you do, if you fail in one point, you're guilty of all of it and you're in big trouble. So don't even try. So, yeah, David, you can. Sure.

Obviously there are many problems with this idea. It contradicts scripture for one. First, John one eight explicitly says that we will not be perfect and that we deceive ourselves if we say that we are without sin. Right? And yet a few verses later, he still tells us to obey God's commandments despite that fact. In one John two, starting in verse one, he says, my little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for our sins only, but also for the sins of the whole world. And by this we know that we have come to know him. If we keep his commandments, whoever says I know him, but does not keep his commandments is a liar and the truth is nothing in him. So John here assumes that we're not going to be perfect. He says, when you sin. Right? He says, but if anyone does sin, we have an advocate. And earlier in chapter one, he says, if anyone says they do not have sin, they deceive themselves. And yet he still goes on to say that you should be keeping the commandments, and if you don't keep them, you're a liar. So why would John and other New Testament authors call for imperfect believers to obey God's commandments if it were pointless? That doesn't make any sense. So the verse cannot mean that we shouldn't even try. The point that I think he's getting at here is that we cannot pick and choose which commandments we are going to keep. Because earlier on, in the context, he says, he talks about adultery and murder, and you don't commit adultery, but you do murder. And so he's saying that we do not have authority to declare some commandments valid and other there's invalid. If we have rejected God's authority in one law, then no matter how many other laws you keep, you have still rejected God's authority. That's sort of the idea here. They're making the point that you can't just pick and choose which commandments are important.

Yeah, and that's good. And that's what he said earlier as well. If you show partiality, you're committing sin and you're convicted by the law as transgressors. That's the point. So being a hypocrite or picking and choosing which in a strange way, people often use these verses to say, well, I don't have to keep any of the law. But in that very vein, they obviously don't believe that they can just sin left and right. They believe that there are things that they can't do, actually. But yet, by using James's words to get out of keeping the certain commandments that they don't want to keep, they, by definition, are guilty of what James is actually warning of. To not show partiality to God's instructions, but to keep all of it without compromising.

Amen. Very well put.

All right, next one. Almost there. Number 19. The ten Commandments and the rest of the Torah are a covenant God made with Israel, not gentiles. As such, they do not apply to non jewish christians. This is a big question. So, yeah, David, people may say, I'm not. I'm not Israel, I'm not jewish. These are a bunch of jewish things. Sabbath, feast. Why are we even talking about this for people who aren't jewish?

Right. Well, where to start? Okay, let's start at the beginning. The Sabbath was established in creation for all mankind according to Jesus. And so this was long before any covenant with Israel. This was long before there even wasn't Israel. God established the Sabbath in creation, and according to Jesus, it was made for us, it was made for mankind. So there's one, you know, also, you have, in the Torah itself, you have references to strangers or sojourners. These are people that are distinguished from native Israelites, meaning they are not physical descendants of Jacob, and yet they are attached to the jewish people there. And to the native Israelites, they are attached to the people of God, and they worship the God of Israel. And they are given the same commandments. We even see this in the ten Commandments themselves. We see that the fourth commandment, the Sabbath, that the stranger is also commanded to rest. He is also commanded to cease from working. And so the stranger is not a physical descendant of Jacob by definition, and yet he's still given the commandment. So the point is that everyone who aligns themselves with the God of Israel by faith, the commandments that God gave to his people apply to them as well. We see this all throughout the Torah. We see this with the festivals as well. Deuteronomy 16, the stranger is explicitly mentioned as commanded to participate in Shavuot and Pentecost and so forth. Numerous examples of this. There's a video I did called is the Torah for Gentiles. Two, I go through a lot of the evidence on this, but I would just mention one more point. Again, we've already mentioned it several times. But Jesus said in Matthew 28, when he gives the great commission, he says, make disciples of all nations. Right? That means Gentiles, too. He says, make disciples of all nations, teaching them to observe everything that I commanded you. And all that Jesus commanded includes his sermon on the mount, in which he affirms the ongoing authority of the Torah, which would include the Sabbath and festivals and so forth. And so that would be among all of what Jesus commanded them, which would be taught to all nations.

Beautifully put. And I'll add that we have to also remember that the entire point of everything that the father gave Israel was to, in the end, give it to the world. Israel was the initial deposit of revelation for where God placed his Torah to preserve the oracles of God, as it's written by Paul. But yet the. The destination was for the messiah to come and bring that to the whole world, as all nations would be saved and would believe and would become heirs of the promise of Abraham.

That's why really quick. That's what's prophesied to happen in Isaiah and Micah says, the nations would stream to Jerusalem in the end days, and the Torah would go forth from Zion, and the nations would come and learn the ways of the Lord. And so the commandments were always meant to go beyond Israel. In deuteronomy four, it says that the nations will look and see you observing these commandments and be astonished and amazed at how wonderful these statutes are that you're observing and how wise they are. And so, yeah, the nations were intended to be attracted to these commandments that the Lord gave Israel.

Absolutely. So I'll end this question just with this verse. Galatians 328. There's neither jew nor Greek. There's neither slave nor free. There is no male and female. For you're all one in Christ. That means we're all one people, Jew or Greek. We are all going to receive Christ. And all that Christ has, has come to offer us, that includes a lifestyle that is after holiness, after his likeness. And that's what we're here to do as believers, to shine that light to the rest of the world so they can look at us now again, just like the world before looked at Israel. Now the world looks at all who believe in Christ and say, well, who is this messiah? That is how we make him attractive to the world, by showing the deliverance he's done in us and the transformation that he has done in us as people who no longer work in the old manner of sin that we were in bondage to before we came to him. David, what would you say to someone who says, okay, but what about John seven where it says, now the Jews feast of tabernacles was at hand? Because it seems like even here in the New Testament, he is denoting this as being a jewish ordinance.

Well, the Jews were keeping the festivals in the first century. That doesn't mean that they're exclusive to the jewish people. In Leviticus 23 says that these are the Lord's feasts, so they're not intended exclusively for the jewish people. He wants the world to start observing these feasts. We see this explicitly in Zechariah 14. It says that all the nations will come to Jerusalem and celebrate the feast of tabernacles. John uses that verbiage, but it's not intended to imply that those feasts are just for the Jews.

It's kind of like considering who his audience is. He's gonna write to them in a way that they would understand. So when he says the. The Jews feast, then he know. Then the audience knows. Oh, he's not talking about all the other feasts, because there's a whole lot of other feasts going around in that world at that time. And so it's like you said, it's because they were the ones who were preserving it, who were keeping it and making it available for all others to partake in. I mean, we. We even have the example of the. The eunuch who's coming down, and he meets Philip on the way, you know, and he's from Ethiopia. You know, this was a common thing at that time. And, you know, as long as the temple stood, it was for people from all over the world to come and attend. All right, last question. Number 20. Keeping the law is a legalism and is an opponent of the grace that comes through Christ. Okay, and this is from Romans 614, which says, for sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law, but under grace. So does it mean that when we keep the law, that we do away with the grace that Christ has given us? I think we've kind of touched on this already, but maybe we can end with this question to reestablish the importance of the gospel and the difference between that and what we would say is actually legalism.

Yeah, yeah. I would say that, you know, some people do interpret this to mean that God's law is opposed to grace. You know, that under the law means being freed from your obligation to obey the law. But that doesn't really make sense in context here because Paul declares that our faith does not overthrow the Torah, but rather establishes it. In Romans 331, he teaches that sin is defined as breaking the law's commandments. In Romans seven seven, and in Romans six one two, he admonishes believers not to continue living in sin, that is, not to continue living in breaking the law. He also calls the law holy, righteous, and good. In Romans 712. In Romans 714, he calls it spiritual. And in Romans 722, he says he delights in the law. And in Romans eight two four, he says that the Holy Spirit empowers believers to fulfill the righteous requirements of the law. So the idea that Paul is saying we are freed from our obligation to obey the law because we're under grace is inconsistent with all of these other statements in Romans about our obligation to the law. The other thing is, in the immediate context, not under law. The immediate context doesn't really make sense. If Paul is intending to say that we are freed from having to obey the law because the next verse says this, he says, in verse 15, he says, what then? I are we to sin because we are not under law, but under grace? By no means. In other words, being under grace does not give us freedom to sin. What is sin? Again, we read it. I referenced it earlier. Romans seven seven. Sin is breaking the law. So if not under law means freed from having to obey the law, then Paul's statement in Romans 615 literally makes no sense. Sense because he says, we are not to continue in sin because we are under grace. So, yeah, I would argue that not under law means we are no longer under condemnation for breaking the law. Scholars that advocate for this view include Charles Cranfield, for example. In his Romans commentary, he says, not under the law means we are no longer under the punishment. We are no longer under the law's condemnation of death for breaking the law. We are under grace. We are given grace by Christ, and therefore we are freed from that condemnation. We are freed from the curse that we deserve for breaking the law. And thank God for that, because that is nothing that we could earn on our own. It's nothing that we could ever achieve by any means of law keeping because we all sin, we're all sinners, we are all in desperate need of God's grace, and we are all condemned because we sin. And so thank God that sin no longer has dominion over us because Christ freed us and we are no longer under the law's punishment, but we are under God's grace.

Absolutely. Beautifully put, brother. I think that's how we can end this is our eyes need to be on Christ. And ultimately what Christ has done is made us free. And what was the bondage? The bondage was that we tried, we tried, we tried, we failed, we failed, we failed. And it seemed as if the harder we tried, the more we failed. And we realized we're drifting further and further and further away from God. We realize that there's no way for this to work except if God did something. And that's exactly what Christ did for us all by laying his life down. So everything we're talking about here tonight is not us trying to tell you keeping the Sabbath or keeping the feast days is going to make you grow in salvation, or make you God is going to be like, now I accept you. Now I, you know, now you are suddenly holy and now you're suddenly righteous because you listen to David and PD's, you know, teaching. No, absolutely not. But what we were just saying is that when you put your trust in him fully, completely, 100%, and you fall so in love with him, as we have, then you are drawn to this deeper walk. Because of course, to be saved is absolutely incredible. But there's also so much more to our faith than being saved. There's what comes thereafter, and that includes becoming a light, becoming more sanctified into his image, and to ultimately be as he is. Because when I get face to face with him and that's, that's, that's kind of terrifying. Right? But, but I would, I would at least want to be in a position where I know what he has revealed of me and I want to do my best to learn more about how to be as he is. It doesn't mean I'm going to be die perfect. It doesn't mean that I'm going to stand before him by my own abilities as being perfect, but I am going to be perfect by what he has done. Because that's how the father sees me, through the lands of the Messiah, making us all white as snow. And. Yeah, and I mean, how glorious. Because we're gonna be with him. And when he talks about the Sabbath and the feasts, which he will, then we're gonna know what he's talking about. And in the very least, that would be pretty cool to do to know what he's talking about. So we see that Paul and the New Testament authors were. We're passionate about these things. They have fallen by the wayside, unfortunately, but yet the father is bringing it all back to us, all in this time and age. So thank you all for joining me. David, can you give me your last thoughts if you have any? And please share some links on how people can find out more about junior ministry.

Well, brother, it was an honor to join you and to have the discussion with you. I really enjoyed your insights and I learned a lot from you and it was a blessing to come on here and share some of what the Lord has taught me. And yeah, I'm just so thankful. But yeah, if anyone wants to reach out to me, I'm on all the social media platforms. So yeah, happy to connect with all of you. You can just search my name, David Wilbur. My website is davidwilbur.com dot. That's wilber.com, davidwilber.com and yeah, come say hi. Send me an email, sign up to my newsletter and you'll get all the information about my books and articles and the other things that I'm doing.

Go check out David's resources. It's really valuable. If you want to know more about anything we talked about, that's definitely going to help you out as well. And I also just want to say a big special thank you to David for joining us to help make this all possible. We aren't claiming that we have it all figured out, but we do want to get the conversation started more and more. And we pray that this helps do that. We love you no matter where you stand on any of these issues, and we stand for unity. Father, I pray, Father, that you would have your hand of protection, Lord. Have your hand of guidance. Have your Holy Spirit, Father, be over every person as they dig into the scriptures, as they, as they grow and call out for understanding. Father, I thank you for the unity of your body, Lord, and the love, Lord, that binds us together, Lord, no matter where we stand on the issues we discussed in this video. Father, I thank you for just the sacrifice of Jesus. Thank you for dying for us all and making a way for us to be with you, no matter what our works look like as we repent of our sins. Thank you for changing us also into your image. Thank you for teaching us your ways. Help us to be better disciples and help us to make disciples pray. All this name of Yeshua. Amen. You made it to the end and I have a small surprise for you. We would like to blessed ten people today with the reigniting spirit and truth paperback. If you'd like to stand a chance to get a free copy, head into the comments, write your thoughts about this discussion, and mention reigniting spirit and truth. And we'll be contacting the first ten people to do so to get these to them. Thank you guys. Please share this video and we'll see you in the next one. Blessings. Shalom.