Where in scripture are instructions to cancel the feasts?

[presidente]

​

I don’t find the commands for cancelling the Sabbath or the feasts.





These instructions are about worship and praising God very different from what circumcision and diet are about.

I

studied history to discover when and how these cancellations came about. I searched information from the dead sea scrolls as well as established ancient history as Harvard and Yale teaches it. I found that it is probable that these decisions were based on what was happening in the secular world at that time rather than scripture teaching.

History tells us that when the Jews rebelled against Rome in 70 and 132 the Romans killed so many Jerusalem Jews the blood ran in the streets. Before this the Jews headed the Christian church councils, men like James the earthly brother of Jesus. They only had the OT, and the Jews knew it well, the gentiles didn’t. The gentile church heads were familiar with their pagan worship and they only changed gods, keeping a lot of their customs like Sunday church. They felt God wanted them to oppose Jews who denied Christ, they were against anything Jewish.

Adding to this was enmity between Christian Jews and those who denied Christ because Bar Kokbha who headed the revolt of 132 was said to be the messiah. They did not want to join ones who thought this, even to oppose Roman rule. When they would not help in the war, the Jews became angry at the Christian Jews.

For over 300 years these ideas influenced the church and there were many diverse ideas written about. There was no central council, no unification. Then came an Emperor of Rome (Constantine) who made Christianity the official religion, changing from pagan worship. He wanted a united Christianity, a central ruling council. The people of the church were called to meet. From this council meeting we have the Apostles’ Creed, and the church was unified. But along with this came the idea of the Jews having such wrong ideas everything they did must be opposed. Even Passover was tossed out, they said their Easter they created replaced it.

I think it is time we take a closer look at the policies they established. The idea of scripture telling us not to be led in worship by the seasons like the pagans do as a reason it means to cancel Sabbath on the last day of the week instead of the first, or that Mary discovered Christ had risen these or that Mary established Sunday because she discovered on Sunday morning that Christ had risen during the night has been thoroughly disproved as reasons, so let’s not go over that dead end again. Something so important as these cancellations would have been made clear in scripture like circumcision and diet has. Where are these instructions?

​

Where does scripture command Gentile believers in Basis to observe sabbath or keep feasts. The apostles sent a letter to tge Gentiles and going to Jerusalem three times a year was not in the letter. Certain other things the Torah implies were required of Gentiles are listed.

Noah's covenant applies to Gentiles. Hence abstain from things strangled and from blood. The idols of nations are abominations and we are God's too. So no pollutions of idols. Leviticus 18 tells that Gentiles were expelled for a long list if mostly sexual sins. No fornication.

Do you think everyone must dress like a priest or overthrow the house of Ahab? Not every command is directed to us. Written for us and not to us in many cases.

 

[garee]

it was clearly understood that in 1st. cent. Judaism that the 'letter of the law could not always be kept -
a good example is that in many of the sacrifices and especially the 'sprinkling of the blood' on the
'Ark of the Covenant', on the day of Atonement could not be done, simple because there was not
an ARK at the Time because it had been taken away in the Babylonia captivity...
so,
what they did, was they sprinkled the blood on the 'floor' of the Holy of Holies, and so,
the general principle was, if they could not keep the exact letter of the Law, that they would
do the very best that they could with the circumstances at hand...
and they also understood that the blood of the goat or a lamb sprinkled upon a piece of metal
had 'no power at all' IF NOT ACCOMPAMIED with TRUST IN YESHUA and OBIENDIENCE from the HEART'...

Remember the period of time when there were kings in Israel. It was a abomination of desolation. God had given the Jews that refused to abide in the law of God (scripture) over to do that which they should not as a oral tradition of men. Because men with "no faith" became jealous of the surrounding "pagan nations"

The Holy Spirit used it as a parable of what not to do. Which clearly did destroy the government of God. "No visible king" Placing the things seen in the place of God (faith) .Prior to the demand of corrupted men. Men worshipped God by faith as the King of kings . The last Judge was Samael . The reformation restored the government of peace .

A picture of the father and Son working together as one savior , Loving authority signified by the father and willing submissiveness of the Son.

A tribulation like never before or ever again . Mankind looking for a image to put their trust in. None is given The glory of God remains hidden until the last day under the Sun

 

[7seasrekeyed]

One could argue that the 70AD total destruction of the temple, and the scattering of Israel hence forth into the world could be a direct order to end all of the traditions and laws surrounding Judaism.

you know I actually read that somewhere and agree. it did kind of quash anymore bad sacrifices and disobedient priests

what I always like though, is the fact that no matter how bad it got with Israel's disobedience, God still kept reaching out

just went through Lamentations yesterday and that says it all IMO

seems He keeps tapping us Gentiles on the shoulder and saying 'look at what is going to happen if you forget Me'

now we have this virus that is building up and looks like it will yet explode...even aids didn't sink home

anyway, I'm rambling here

 

[posthuman]

One could argue that the 70AD total destruction of the temple, and the scattering of Israel hence forth into the world could be a direct order to end all of the traditions and laws surrounding Judaism.

you know I actually read that somewhere and agree

If that were the case then one could make the same argument that the Babylonian captivity was a 'direct order' too.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

If that were the case then one could make the same argument that the Babylonian captivity was a 'direct order' too.

aww

ther yah go again

miss me?

LOL!

the Babylonian captivity was actually a direct order

read Jeremiah

 

[Dino246]

Remember the period of time when there were kings in Israel. It was a abomination of desolation.

The abomination of desolation has nothing to do with Israel having an earthly king.

A tribulation like never before or ever again

The tribulation also has nothing to do with Israel having an earthly king.

 

[Whispered]

it really is not a natural thing, IMO, for people to be conflicted. it is a holdover from the garden

the question was and still is: Has God really said?

well did He or didn't He?

we do not agree on this subject which is one reason I wanted to let it go because otherwise I think we have a good rapport...but I will say what I believe and think...as do you, I think

as far as judging the op's motives, he is not a troll. he is not here to cause trouble. he obviously believes what he posts

he is wrong

I want to be clear I in no way implied I thought he was a troll. My remark about the OP motives was in response as I recall to a question of why the issue of feasts was brought to the forum. (Not in those exact words).
Sure, we all have our personal beliefs in our faith walk. That's understandable. I think we make the mistake , we as in a generalization, thinking it is an obligation to convince someone of our point of view. Even when we say it is Biblical. After all, that's how those issues arise in the first place isn't it? Those we confront, nicely or otherwise, are posting what they believe is Biblical, while others may disagree.
I think also that the question of , has God really said, hearkens back to the aforementioned Denominational doctrine matter. Denominations are largely responsible for the question put to them; Did God really say that?

And that is why I think these type threads and the subsequent replies arrive. For the most part, one can't overlook that there is always the troll issue on the Web. I've arrived at the perspective of reasonable doubt. Is the person posting questions about Biblical doctrine asking for wisdom, or guidance? Or are they sharing what they've been led to believe by others?

 

[Whispered]

Here's the problem with your question...

I did not say anything at all about there being harm in observing them.

Here is your two-part question again:

"Do you think God would not approve a Christian honoring the feasts?
If you think not, where is it written that God would condemn the Christian if they did choose to celebrate the remaining feasts? "

I said nothing about God "not approving" a Christian honouring the feasts. You introduced that idea.

I said nothing about God condemning Christians who do choose to celebrate the feasts. You introduced that idea.

So... you're wanting me to defend the ideas that you introduced. It ain't gonna happen. I'll continue my comment in my next post.

Here's another thing: your questions are built on a false dichotomy: that either God approves the Christians who celebrate the feasts, or He condemns them.

Here's the problem with your presumption. I asked a simple question. If you're going to take offense and personalize every question as assailing what you believe, you're going to be upset a great deal if you think every question someone asks you is calling into question something personal as pertains to you and your beliefs. Perhaps you might consider not being defensive. It would help keep a peace filled atmosphere in these type discussions.

 

[Whispered]

Paul wrote to believers in Jesus Christ. Do I need to type "believers in Jesus Christ" repeatedly, or can I just use the concise and precise term, "Christians"? There were no instructions to "believers in Jesus Christ" to celebrate the Jewish feasts.

Actually you need to calm down.
You missed the point entirely. And that's OK.

 

[Whispered]

In order to properly observe those holy days, one would need to STRICTLY obey every injunction connected with them. And that cannot be done honestly by anyone today. As far as God is concerned, it must be all or nothing, since these are His commandments. Don't forget that Nadab and Abihu tried to circumvent those commandments and died and went to Hell.

THE FEASTS WERE FOR THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL
Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts. (Lev 23:2)

Why can no one observe those feasts today? Because there is NO temple in Jerusalem, NO tabernacle on earth, NO Levitical priesthood, NO Aaronic priests, and NO Levites.

THE LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD WAS REQUIRED (INDEED ESSENTIAL)
But ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD seven days: in the seventh day is an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein. (Lev 23:8) [BY THE PRIESTS]

Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest: And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it. (Lev 23:10,11)

And ye shall offer that day when ye wave the sheaf an he lamb without blemish of the first year for a burnt offering unto the LORD. (Lev 23:12) [BY THE PRIESTS]

And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits for a wave offering before the LORD, with the two lambs: they shall be holy to the LORD for the priest. (Lev 23:20)

Those are just a few examples. I already told Blik to study Leviticus carefully (which she ignored). You can study chapter 23 and see how you (or she, or anyone else) will circumvent the temple and the Levitical priesthood while you observe those feasts. And unless you stick to the letter and the spirit of the Law, God will REJECT your Torah observance.

Furthermore, to observe these feasts is to TRAMPLE on the finished work of Christ. He already fulfilled the feasts of Passover, First Fruits, Pentecost, and the Day of Atonement. He already became the Whole Burnt Offering, the Meal Offering, the Sin Offering, the Trespass Offering, the Passover Lamb, and any other sacrifice recorded in the Law of Moses. That is why the Old Covenant has been ABOLISHED. (Not the Ten Commandments but the Old Covenant). So going back means rejecting Christ. A very serious matter.

And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament [Covenant]; which vail is done away in Christ.

One has to wonder about the abolitionist movement in Christianity today. Those Doctrinaires that insist so much of what God instructed His people to do or observe were actually impossible to do. And as such the failed feeble effort resulted in death.
Makes for a horrific image of an eternal Creator. Do this! HAAAA! You CAN'T. DIE!

And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: and not according as Moses put a veil on his own face, so that the children of Israel should not fix their eyes on the end of that annulled.
Paul's entitled to his opinion of course.

 

[Dino246]

Here's the problem with your presumption. I asked a simple question. If you're going to take offense and personalize every question as assailing what you believe, you're going to be upset a great deal if you think every question someone asks you is calling into question something personal as pertains to you and your beliefs. Perhaps you might consider not being defensive. It would help keep a peace filled atmosphere in these type discussions.

I haven't taken offense. I have pointed out the flaws of reasoning in your question. Your question was not "simple"; any question that leads to a yes/no answer but it stated in the negative is not a simple question! Either answer may be misconstrued.

 

[Whispered]

God loves man, God's instructions to us is not about condemning. It is telling us of a happy, satisfying way to live. When God gave the ten commandments in stone that He later gives to us in our hearts, God doesn't tell us as a threat, but this is the way God tells us to be blessed.

If we do something like blessing God with honoring the feasts He gave us it is not to be done with shaking boots to avoid condemnation, but to celebrate the salvation God offers us. It is also not following Jewish customs that we do it, but because God told us to do this for all generations.

Thank you for your reasonable response.
It is a lesson in itself I think when those faithful to their Denominational instruction enter into discussions such as this and proceed to insist God manifest laws, and feasts, that were not able to be followed or kept and as a result of that, the failure resulted in death.
Can you imagine that kind of god were he real? Here, obey these laws, observe these feasts, (the first three of which Jesus fulfilled). Oh, you can't! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! DIE!

Me thinks that kind of doctrine tells us the serpent left the garden and started a church .And all that God decreed, he, the antithesis of God, taught the opposite and that God's laws and feasts and teachings, were not able to be honored, followed, or obeyed, and so insisted to those who followed that church that their god would kill those who failed at honoring, following, or obeying, what god gave to people as instruction to attain righteousness.
The church of the slithery serpent with an apple caught in his throat. 666 lucifer lane, damnation city, Hell.

 

[Dino246]

Actually you need to calm down.
You missed the point entirely. And that's OK.

Yawn.

 

[Whispered]

You continue to amaze me with not only your humbleness, but your knowledge of scripture. Much love and appreciation for what the Lord as done for you and through you!

That isn't her knowledge of scripture, to be clear. It is her knowledge of where to find the article concerning feasts of God at "Got Questions". The source of her copy/paste was in near the tiniest print at the very end.

 

[Aerials1978]

That isn't her knowledge of scripture, to be clear. It is her knowledge of where to find the article concerning feasts of God at "Got Questions". The source of her copy/paste was in near the tiniest print at the very end.

Regardless of where she finds it, she obviously has the ability to understand it an apply it.

 

[Magenta]

You continue to amaze me with not only your humbleness, but your knowledge of scripture. Much love and appreciation for what the Lord as done for you and through you!

Hello Aerials, thank you very much for your very kind words! It is very sweet of you to be so encouraging... Though I agree with the points in the post you quoted, it was not in my own words, as I sourced from gotquestions.org, which was noted at the end of my post. I find gq to be quite reputable in many matters pertaining to our shared faith, even though I do not always agree with them Added: oh! And now I see this has been addressed LOL it did take me a while to post my response to you, as I was called away while searching for one of my panels to share with you

 

[7seasrekeyed]

="Whispered, post: 4150856, member: 288111"]I want to be clear I in no way implied I thought he was a troll.

you were clear enough. I didn't see you saying that. I think he is sincere but also sincerely wrong

My remark about the OP motives was in response as I recall to a question of why the issue of feasts was brought to the forum. (Not in those exact words).
Sure, we all have our personal beliefs in our faith walk. That's understandable. I think we make the mistake , we as in a generalization, thinking it is an obligation to convince someone of our point of view. Even when we say it is Biblical. After all, that's how those issues arise in the first place isn't it? Those we confront, nicely or otherwise, are posting what they believe is Biblical, while others may disagree.

LOL! well we actually do have an obligation to point out such obvious error...just like you have done in the Calvin threads
there are some things that are not only wrong but actual heresy. no I am not calling anyone a heretic though some might be

I think also that the question of , has God really said, hearkens back to the aforementioned Denominational doctrine matter. Denominations are largely responsible for the question put to them; Did God really say that?

actually the devil posed the 'has God really said' in his conversation with Eve in the garden. it's not denominational unless a person is a devil worshipper

And that is why I think these type threads and the subsequent replies arrive. For the most part, one can't overlook that there is always the troll issue on the Web. I've arrived at the perspective of reasonable doubt. Is the person posting questions about Biblical doctrine asking for wisdom, or guidance? Or are they sharing what they've been led to believe by others?

I for one have disagreed with most of his posts long before you joined...good you joined though
yeah it's one thing to share but another to tell people what they are thinking .. as the op does...we don't have to wonder what he is thinking though. he's been rather upfront about it

trolls are really pretty obvious IMO

 

[Whispered]

Regardless of where she finds it, she obviously has the ability to understand it an apply it.

Obviously.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Remember the period of time when there were kings in Israel. It was a abomination of desolation. God had given the Jews that refused to abide in the law of God (scripture) over to do that which they should not as a oral tradition of men. Because men with "no faith" became jealous of the surrounding "pagan nations"

I have to catch my breath reading this one...laughed so hard

one of your more fantastic conceptions

 

[Whispered]

="Whispered, post: 4150856, member: 288111"]I want to be clear I in no way implied I thought he was a troll.

you were clear enough. I didn't see you saying that. I think he is sincere but also sincerely wrong

My remark about the OP motives was in response as I recall to a question of why the issue of feasts was brought to the forum. (Not in those exact words).
Sure, we all have our personal beliefs in our faith walk. That's understandable. I think we make the mistake , we as in a generalization, thinking it is an obligation to convince someone of our point of view. Even when we say it is Biblical. After all, that's how those issues arise in the first place isn't it? Those we confront, nicely or otherwise, are posting what they believe is Biblical, while others may disagree.

LOL! well we actually do have an obligation to point out such obvious error...just like you have done in the Calvin threads
there are some things that are not only wrong but actual heresy. no I am not calling anyone a heretic though some might be

I think also that the question of , has God really said, hearkens back to the aforementioned Denominational doctrine matter. Denominations are largely responsible for the question put to them; Did God really say that?

actually the devil posed the 'has God really said' in his conversation with Eve in the garden. it's not denominational unless a person is a devil worshipper

And that is why I think these type threads and the subsequent replies arrive. For the most part, one can't overlook that there is always the troll issue on the Web. I've arrived at the perspective of reasonable doubt. Is the person posting questions about Biblical doctrine asking for wisdom, or guidance? Or are they sharing what they've been led to believe by others?

I for one have disagreed with most of his posts long before you joined...good you joined though
yeah it's one thing to share but another to tell people what they are thinking .. as the op does...we don't have to wonder what he is thinking though. he's been rather upfront about it

trolls are really pretty obvious IMO

I sure have pointed out when a teaching is wrong. Calvinism is a favorite, as is TULIP. I have arrived at the belief that many of those who defend such Doctrines, or other matters of scripture, can be victims of wrong teaching due to the church or the Denomination they're affiliated with.
Calvinist believers, as example, have to get that teaching from somewhere, right? They can't get it simply by reading scripture in context, it had to be taught to them.

I think realizing some people are just wrong because they're taught error by those they trust and who are also wrong, helps to give context also to the errant faith and practice some here have shared and defend. We owe it to people to shine the light on the Truth.

Yes, nothing like being sincerely wrong. Hey, at least they're not half hearted wrong.
I am learning that Trolls are easy to spot. And of course having said that, just last night I was shopping and a department store has two giant stuffed troll dolls on sale for Valentines. A little girl troll and a little boy, sold separately. They're so cute, but I admit I did laugh out loud when I saw them. If only they'd had a little laptop under their arm I'd likely have bought one just to give me chuckles when on the computer.