Observing the sabbath???

Yes, they were law keeping Jewish people. They were under the old law... correct? This was before Jesus was even born, much less crucified and raised from the dead... old law.

In Truth TMS the sabbath was never written for me, for I was never a Jew. The Old Covenant was made for the rebellious Jews, and they needed it to! LOL, I use this example, I once lived in California, I now live in Michigan, do the same laws written in California apply to me living now in Michigan?? Of course not, same here.

Yes, they were Jewish and yes they were guided by not only the teachings of Moses, but guided by the truth from the time of Genesis to Malachi as to God’s expectations on how a righteous man lives. God expects a righteous man to be lawful. Not lawless. Law is not a bad thing until one begins to think he is saved because he’s keeping certain laws. I believe that is what Paul is speaking of in Galatians when he uses the phrase ‘you who are under the works of the Law’. He’s not advocating you no longer have to keep God’s laws, he’s arguing against keeping any law thinking it’s law that saves a person. It’s the same today. Folks see their righteousness often coming from what they do, not based on faith. Faith will produce good works, but it’s a fine line that separates the faithful from the unfaithful.

I believe Zachariah and Elizabeth were intimately knowledgeable of Genesis 26:5 In Genesis 26, God appears to Isaac and confides in him why Abraham’s seed was chosen to bless all the nations of the earth 5 “because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” Now this predates the Mosaic Law for there was about 245 years between the death of Abraham and the birth of Moses. The Hebrew wording to Isaac on Abraham obeying the voice of God, and keeping God’s charge, keeping God’s commandments, keeping God’s statutes, and God’s laws, is the same Hebrew spoken to Moses from Sinai more than 400 years later.

Salvation found in the Old Testament is no different than salvation found in the New Testament. Salvation for them was by faith just like for us. An earmark of godly men is that they are lawful, not lawless. Paul teaches us we are saved through faith and not of ourselves lest any man should boast. But does that faith nullify the Law? What did he say? Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

We know that Zechariah and Elizabeth were not perfect in the sense of sinless, only one holds that prestige. But they were blameless as they ‘by faith’ obeyed the Law that God provided to bring one back into fellowship with him when they sinned. He provided the sacrificial system that would cover their sins until the one Moses spoke of who would come and remove our sin as far as the east is from the west.

Also let me say one other thing that I think has been misunderstood. The ‘yoke’ spoken of that was too heavy to bear in Acts 15 even for their ancestors was the yoke of the Pharisees and their system of oral laws having no relationship to the teaching of Moses. James wasn’t speaking about God’s commandments but pointing to the exhaustive compilation of oral laws the Pharisees had added which amounted to a walk of self righteousness. Remember they were back in Jerusalem seeking a ruling because the Judaizers had spied on the fellowship both Jew and Gentile were having in Antioch under Paul and Barnabus’ teaching. The law the Judaizers were arguing was being broke, was the Pharisees law that Jews were not to fellowship with Gentiles because they would become defiled. This is not found in the teachings of Moses. It’s found in the oral laws of the Pharisees. Therefore we see in the decision of James, the elders and the Holy Spirit this notion was put to rest by instructing the gentiles turning to faith in Jesus to join their Jewish brethren weekly and in the synagogues and learn more of what Moses had to say.

The Psalmist tells us in Psalms 1 that he who meditates on the Law (Moses teachings)day and night is like a tree planted by the waters and they prosper in all they do. A man who has faith, has the spirit of obedience. “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3).

As a Christian I see the blessing and inspiration found on both sides of a divided book.

You discussed the meaning of the 'yoke' in Acts 15:11.

I will print that verse below.

Acts 15:10-11
Since this is the case, why are you putting God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our forefathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.

The Pharisee's origin a distinct group arose after the Maccabean revolt, approximately 165–160 BC.

The Pharisees were late on the scene in Israel's history, just over one hundred and fifty years before Jesus was born.

Now here is what you claimed below.

"Also let me say one other thing that I think has been misunderstood. The ‘yoke’ spoken of that was too heavy to bear in Acts 15 even for their ancestors was the yoke of the Pharisees and their system of oral laws having no relationship to the teaching of Moses."

Your interpretation is impossible, given that Peter used the phrase 'forefathers'. Peter was referring to forefathers such as the prophets and Moses.

Luke 11:47
Alas for you, for you repair the tombs of the Prophets, whom your forefathers killed.

The Pharisees did not exist when the prophets were executed, not for centuries after that.

Also let me say one other thing that I think has been misunderstood. The ‘yoke’ spoken of that was too heavy to bear in Acts 15 even for their ancestors was the yoke of the Pharisees and their system of oral laws having no relationship to the teaching of Moses. James wasn’t speaking about God’s commandments but pointing to the exhaustive compilation of oral laws the Pharisees had added which amounted to a walk of self righteousness. Remember they were back in Jerusalem seeking a ruling because the Judaizers had spied on the fellowship both Jew and Gentile were having in Antioch under Paul and Barnabus’ teaching. The law the Judaizers were arguing was being broke, was the Pharisees law that Jews were not to fellowship with Gentiles because they would become defiled.

****************************
"Looking at Acts 15, I have to ask what was the purpose of convening a council at Jerusalem. It wasn’t because the folks at Antioch were obeying the commandments of Moses. This all too often gets lumped into any discussion of Law pointing to Moses. We’ve interpreted Galatians and Romans 14 the same way but in my opinion it’s error."

What was the purpose of the council in Jerusalem (Acts 15)?

Acts 15:1
Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”

The Lord commanded Abraham to circumcise his offspring.

Then the law commanded all male children in Israel to be circumcised.

Leviticus 12:1-3
Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying: ‘When a woman gives birth and delivers a male child, then she shall be unclean for seven days; as she is in the days of her menstruation, she shall be unclean. Then on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.

Circumcision was the law.

"I have to ask what was the purpose of convening a council at Jerusalem?"

Acts 15:1
Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”

Just read the text from Acts 15, then you will identify what the controversy was that the apostles were meeting to resolve.

Acts 15:5
But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to keep the Law of Moses.”

Circumcision and the law.

There is no alternative interpretation.

Yoke means the law.

I stand corrected.

What I meant to offer before the Jerusalem encounter was Galatians 2:4 and 2:11. My thoughts had drifted to the original concern Paul had in Antioch when certain men supposedly sent from James were spying out their table fellowship. Until they arrived both Peter and Barnabus were sitting and eating and having table fellowship with the gentiles and then pulled back. As Peter stated in Acts 10, it was a Law (custom/Oral tradition) that forbid fellowship between the Jew and Gentile. It was not in the written Law.

I’m just not sure how you can interpret Acts 15:19-21 any other way. The four abstentions are clearly found in Leviticus 17 and 18 and if the Law had been done away with, why is he writing to the gentiles to keep these four for starters. He tells us only four were given so as not to burden them down for it appears to me they expected them to learn all the oracles of God each week on the Sabbath and in the synagogues. This did happened during the first half of the first century. But something went awry.

Salvation found in the Old Testament is no different than salvation found in the New Testament. Salvation for them was by faith just like for us. An earmark of godly men is that they are lawful, not lawless

Amen
Praise God

Colossians 2:20
“Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,”

Only those living outside of Christ will be judged according to the old law.