The Sabbath Debate

On Monday, April 1st, at 2pm central time, I was supposed to have had a debate with “Elder” Rawchaa, of The Gathering In Christ Church, regarding the continual observance of the Sabbath.The debate propositions, that were agreed upon, were supposed to have been:

  • Sunday is the New Testament day of worship (Fields affirms, Rawchaa denies).
  • Saturday is the New Testament day of worship (Rawchaa affirms, Fields denies).

However, agreed upon propositions only work when you follow an agreed upon order of discussion. I thought I had that from the representative of the Gathering In Christ Church that I was in communication with. I Tweeted him the plans for the discussion. After some time he responded saying that he would like to call me and make some changes. I gave him my number and we had a very nice conversation on the phone. I was agreeable to each and every change that he wanted to make, which is represented below in the way I had the course of discussion arranged. So, the course of discussion that you see below is what they requested. “Elder” Rawchaa allowed me to go ahead with my first affirmative as to why I believe that Sunday is the Scriptural day of worship for the New Testament Christian. However, when it was his turn, he spoke for a few minutes and then said he was done and wanted to move on to the question and answer session. When I explained that we had a set order of discussion that was agreed to by both sides, he said he was not in agreement with it (cf. Matt. 5:37), and that was the end of the order of discussion that both sides agreed to.

In hindsight, I should have halted the discussion right then. However, I felt that we could still have a fruitful discussion so I let it continue. Anyone who knows me knows that I am not shy about getting caught up in the heat of the discussion. I admit that I let it go on far too long and in the end there was not a lot of fruitfulness about it. I need to learn from my mistake and not let it happen again.

I have said all of that to explain why you are not seeing the entire three and half hour video posted here. I have clipped out part and left the viewer to go to SpreeCast where he can view the entire three and half hour video if he so chooses. The man in the video is not “Elder” Rawchaa. This is actually the second person that came in, “Elder” Lawya. As always, your comments are most welcome. However, as I have already had to inform one member of The Gathering In Christ Church, I won’t post comments using bad language.

The originally agreed upon order of discussion.

First session:

  • Fields affirmative: Sunday is the New Testament day of worship (15 min.).
  • Rawchaa response (15 min.).

Second session:

  • Rawchaa affirmatieve: Saturday is the New Testament day of worship (15 min.).
  • Fields response (15 min.).

Third session:

  • Direct questioning – Up to 6 questions from Fields to Rawchaa
  • Direct questioning – Up to 6 questions from Rawchaa to Fields
  • Each question must be a short clearly stated question, no long teaching statements in the form of a question.
  • These are to be short, clear questions to each other. The respondent will have 2 minutes to respond to each question when the question is asked.

After the third session we will both have a question and answer session where we will answer any questions that have come in from the viewers (not each other). Depending on where we are after the second session, we may or may not add additional sessions to this discussion.

We will be having this discussion live online using SpreeCast. Anyone can watch as a guest, without having to register with SpreeCast. But, to make use of the live chat and submit questions you have to be a registered user. SpreeCast is free so I would encourage everyone interested in this discussion to go ahead and get registered. You can follow my SpreeCast channel here: PreacherNorm on SpreeCast. You can also follow this post and I will embed the live SpreeCast player here shortly before the debate begins.

Here are the charts that I prepared. I only got to use a couple of them though.


  1. Billy Williams says:

    Good luck Brother…i will be keeping you in prayers as i will not be able to be on live due to work obligations. Thanks

    • PreacherNorm says:

      Thanks, Billy. You’ll be able to watch it on demand when its over. The video will be here so feel free to continue the discussion then.

    • Harding, Teresa says:

      What the GOCC does not understand is that under the new covenant GOD deals with those who obey him regardless of nationality. They believe we are still under the old law the nation of Israel has preference, they don’t believe there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond or free that all are one in Christ. They also believe that the Jews are to worship GOD one way and the Gentiles another, they are caught up in endless genealogists which truthfully cannot be proven or dis-proven. What they need to do is get out of Moses and into Christ; they fail to understand that God does not care about who you were, but who you are.

      • Yasharahla says:

        This norm guy is ridiculous lol he is contrary in is own words. He claims there is no where in the Bible that says Abraham kept the Sabbath but he can’t show in the Bible where they changed the Sabbath to Sunday to prove his point, his Sun god got him all confused. LOL

  2. PreacherNorm says:

    The “discussion” was supposed to have been within agreed upon time limits. That was pretty much thrown out the window when Mr. Rawchaa said he wasn’t going to abide by it. But, if we had stuck to it, these are the questions I would have asked Mr. Rawchaa to answer:

    Questions For Mr. Rawchaa:
    1) If the Sabbath is now binding, does violating the Sabbath still carry the penalty of death? If not, why not? (Ex. 31:15; Num. 15:32-36).

    2) Where is the New Testament command for the Christian to keep the Sabbath?

    3) Where is the example of the New Testament church worshipping on the Sabbath? (Paul preaching to Jews in the Synagogue on the Sabbath is not an example of the New Testament church’s worship).

    4) Where is the verse making a distinction between “moral law” and “ceremonial law”?

    5) If I invited you to come speak to this congregation from the Scriptures on Sunday, because that’s when we assemble, and extended that same invitation 84 times, would you stop going to church on Saturday so you could speak to us on Sunday?

    • Eliyah Yisrael says:

      1) No sin carries a death penalty anymore. The death penalty was under the old covenant (old testament) Under the new covenant (new testament) we have grace, which allows us a grace period to repent for our sins.But if we don’t repent before the end of our grace period (death or Christ return) we will get put to death at judgement.

      2) There is none…no need, it was given in the old testament. Just like incest, tithing, using Gods name in vain and many others. Think about it like this…when was it commanded not to be kept?

      3) No such thing as a new testament church. lol The church in the new testament is the same church in the old testament.The Nation of Israel. The idea of a new testament church is grossly misunderstood due to misunderstanding of what the old and new testaments are. The Old and New Testaments is not the division of the book. But the Old testament is the old covenant which God made with Israel. The Old Covenant was based on the priestly sacrifice to atone for sin…this covenant also included the judgement of law of death…ie stoning the sinner to death. But the New testament or new covenant that God made with Israel, we no longer sacrifice animals but in faith we except Christ’s sacrifice for atonement for our sins. And we no longer judge each other unto death ie …stoning each other. The woman caught in adultery is the perfect example of the New Testament in affect.

      4) Get back with u!!!

      5) I would come to speak in any Sunday church whenever invited no matter how any times. I would still congregate on the Sabbath…and observe it. When the work of God is focus everyday is an opportunity to put in work 365.

      • eliyah yisrael…what city & state r u in & your BIBLE qualifications that makes you and elder…thx

      • PreacherNorm says:

        Sir, I just wanted to post a quick reply to let you know that I appreciate your willingness to address the questions I posted. Also, that you did so without personal attacks that do nothing to further honest discussion. I am currently away from my desk but I will respond as soon as I’m back home.

      • PreacherNorm says:

        1) Agreed. The New Testament does not command a death penalty for sin, until we all stand before the judgment of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10).

        2) There are numerous passages that say the Old Law was done away with (Heb. 7:12-14; 8:7-13; Rom. 7:4; et. al.). So, if the Sabbath day was to be observed in the New Testament church it would have to be given in the New Testament. If you look for the Ten Commandments in the New Testament, you will find each one given except the Sabbath. Now, tithing wasn’t one of the Ten Commandments and it is not given for the observance of the New Testament church. The church doesn’t tithe, it has a free will offering on the first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:1-2; 2 Cor. 8:3-4; 9:6-7). In the congregation where I worship we just do what is exemplified by and commanded of the New Testament church recorded in Scripture. The Old Testament is for our learning, not our law (Rom. 15:4). Our law is the perfect law of liberty (Jam. 1:25), the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2). We don’t murder, fornicate, divorce, etc., because it is in the law of Christ, the New Testament. Aside from the Sabbath, what do you do that is not given in the New Testament?

        3) Jesus said he would build His church (Matt. 16:18-19), clearly that is not the same thing as the assembly of Israel that already existed (Acts 7:38). Christ gave a New Covenant, not according to the covenant that God had made with the children of Israel in the wilderness (Heb. 8:7-13).

        4) OK, but I already know its not there. There is no passage anywhere in the Bible that makes a distinction between a supposed “moral law” and “ceremonial law.” The Law is the Law, all of it (Gal. 5:1-6). When the apostle Paul said that the Jews had become dead to the Law, so that they could be married to another without being spiritual adulterers (Rom. 7:4), he goes on to state specific laws in illustration (Rom. 7:8). So, is covetousness moral or ceremonial law? Clearly, there is no such thing as a distinction between “moral law” and “ceremonial law.”

        5) So, why does Paul’s preaching to Jews on the Sabbath mean that he was observing the Sabbath if your preaching on Sunday wouldn’t mean that you were observing Sunday worship? When you find Paul engaged in worship, i.e. the Lord’s Supper and preaching, it is on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7). So, he evangelized to those he was trying to convert (Rom. 9:1-2; 10:1-2) by going to them where they were. But when he was assembled with the saints for worship it was on Sunday.

        • Eliyah Yisrael says:

          The old law that was done away is referring to the law of sacrifice and death in the book of Hebrews. The “school master”, animal sacrifice, was intended to teach us how serious sin is and that only a blood sacrifice can atone for sin. This was at the center of the old covenant, the sanctuary, but under the new covenant, in faith we accept Christ’s sacrifice as our sacrifice as atonement for sin. The blood of bulls and goats could not change a mans heart unto righteousness thats why it was ineffective. However, by accepting the sacrifice of Christ, the new covenant in faith, we receive power of the spirit to overcome sin. The law that was done away with was not the Torah, Sabbath or any of commandment, but simply the law of sacrifice and death. One of the biggest misconception that run rampant is the idea that the feud between Christ and the pharasees is that the pharasees were teaching what Moses taught and that Christ came to teach something new.But the real reason Christ had beef with the pharasees is because they were NOT teaching what Moses taught. Remember that it was Christ who gave Moses the laws commandments and statues. However the pharasees had took the torah and made it into some sort of legality when the purpose of the law was for correction and instruction.

          Now the reasoning you and many other use to do away with the Sabbath is because it wasn’t repeated in the new testament books. Your are saying that the laws and commandments of the old testament are done away with and only the ones repeated in the new testament books are part of the new covenant. Question….WHAT SCRIPTURE SAYS THAT??? There is no scripture that says that, therefore it is a doctrine of man…not sound scripture. The Bible warns us about following the traditions and doctrines of men….giving heed to seducing spirits…THE DOCTRINES OF DEVILS!!! This is the reason why Israelites scoff at Gentile teachings because they are NOT BIBLICAL!!! And it would be very unwise for any of us to hang our salvation on the doctrines of men.

          Now lets think about how vocal God is about the Sabbath in the old testament…he made it clear cut. Now your telling me that he changed it without mentioning it…I doubt it!!! Remember the purpose of scripture is to instruct and we have not recieved instruction to do away with the Sabbath. Christ said he did not come to destroy the law or prophets, therefore even in the new covenant the laws and teachings of the prophets still stand…and not one tittle should pass away until all is fulfilled. All has not been fulfilled.

          As far as what days Paul taught on, I’m willing to bet that Paul taught on everyday he had an opportunity like a true champion of the faith would.

          And Israel being the church, thats a whole other topic that maybe we can discuss in the future.

          Now I have a question for you…Why did Christ his disciples and the apostles keep the Sabbath as well as the annual Sabbaths, even after the work on the cross was finished?

          • eliyah yisrael…what is the qualification to be an elder & what day do you observe the LORD’S SUPPER…thx

          • Eliyah Yisrael says:

            Qualifications to be an elder would be blameless, not a drunkard, husband to one wife, studied in the word, able to give good judgement, among other things. I observed the Lords Supper on the 14th day of the 1st month just like Christ, the disciples and the apostles.

          • eliyah yisrael…thx 4 replying…can you give scripture to show that the disciples & the apostles observed the Lords Supper on the 14th day of the 1st month…r u saying you took it on monday jan 14, 2013…how often do you take up the collection & do you sell dinners to raise funds for the church…thx again…

          • Harding, Teresa says:

            How can a law be separated from the punishment of that law? If the old law says the speed limit is 55 and under that law the fine was 5 dollars per mile you are caught going over that stated law, & the new law is 60 but the fine is NOW 10 dollars per mile you are caught going over. If I get caught while the NEW law is in effect I can’t say, yes I violated the law, but I want to receive the punishment that was under the old law. That doesn’t even work in our society today, furthermore; it doesn’t even make sense. THERE IS NO SCRIPTURES OLD OR NEW THAT SAYS A LAW UNDER EITHER CARRIES A PUNISHMENT FROM A SEPARATE/DIFFERENT LAW THAT THE LAW IT WAS GIVEN UNDER. Christ himself would have violated this principle if the law be not changed he said but I say….while he was on earth of course he had that power, hence the thief on the cross. The punishment fits the crime without violating its own law. If the punishment for the law was changed so was the law, even though in principle you still cannot commit that law. I know it sound confusing, and I may not have it exactly right in theory, but I believe I do in principle. Or is it the other way around? Well, them of old said thou shalt not comment adultery, but CHRIST said nothing about committing adultery Mat5:26, 26. He not only changed the law, but also the punishment, and this is getting the Jews ready for what’s ahead. Follow me?

          • eliyah yisrael…thx 4 replying…can you give scripture to show that the disciples & the apostles observed the Lords Supper on the 14th day of the 1st month…r u saying you took it on monday jan 14, 2013…how often do you take up the collection & do you sell dinners to raise funds for the church…thx again…

        • Eliyah Yisrael says:

          Sorry Teresa I don’t follow you lol 🙂

          But it is written that Christ and his followers kept the Sabbaths even the yearly Sabbaths. In Leviticus 23 the 14th day of the first month is the Passover…and the 15th day of the month is the first day of The Feast of Unleavened Bread…a HOLY convocation…” a Sabbath unto you” The 7th day of The Feast of Unleavened Bread also is a Sabbath…HOLY convocation. Then many others to follow First Fruits…Pentecost…Atonement, to name a few. As we can read Christ kept the Sabbath which was his custom (Luke 4:16). He kept the Passover as child; remember his parent could find him….he was in the temple teaching…they were coming back from the FEAST!(Luke 2:41) As an adult, Christ sent a couple of the brothers to prepare a place for the PASSOVER(Mark 14:12-16). Christ even told them “as often as you do this do it in remembrance of me” What were they doing??? KEEPING THE PASSOVER!!! Just like his custom. And the Following day( which would begin at sundown) would be the 15th day of the month…the 1st day of The Feast of Unleavened Bread which is a HOLY convocation , no servile work, because it’s a Sabbath unto you. Acts 20 tells us the apostles waited till after the Feast of Unleavened Bread was over before they sailed to Troas. In the same chapter the writer speaks of how Paul was in a hurry to be in Jearuslem on the Day of Pentecost (Act 20:16). It is obvious that these feasts or Sabbaths were STILL significant in these brothers lives. In Acts Paul even instructs the people on how the Passover should be kept…as he exclaims “…lets us keep the feast…”( 1 Corinth 5:8) referring to “The Lord’s Supper” meaning that they kept the Passover “in the remembrance of me( Christ)”. The book of Zechariah tells us that even in the kingdom we will still be keeping feast days(Zech 14:16) Now being that these brother continued to keep these feasts and Sabbath it is safe to say they kept them in the same days and seasons as instructed by the law and the prophets.

          And I don’t take up collection or sell dinners.

          • Harding, Teresa says:

            Here it is in a nutshell whatever law we are under, violating that law carries the punishment of THAT LAW you violated. Under the old law/covenant committing adultery called for stoning. When CHRIST comes on the scene in Mat 5 speaking to Jews who are under the old covenant; He changes the law, CHRIST says nothing about committing adultery. He says let it be yea, He says nothing about stoning, he say cut it off etc. This is a change of not only one of the 10 but also the punishment attached to it. We know this to be true, because later in John 8 even after the woman was caught in sin Jesus even being under the old covenant did not call for this woman’s death.

          • eliyah yisrael…thx 4 replying…in acts 20:7 paul preached on the 1day of the week…not on the sabbath…they took the LORD’S supper also on the 1st day of the week according to acts 20:7 too…they didn’t the Lord’s Supper on the 14th day of the 1st month unless it fell on on the 1st day of the week & they never took it on any other day either…u mean u guys don’t take up a weekly collection, if not how do you survive financially? JESUS lived & died under the law that is why he keep the sabbath….HE was resurrected on the 1st day of the week…the church began on the 1st day of the week acts 2…the reason why paul & others went to the synagogue on the sabbath was not to worship but to share the gospel of JESUS CHRIST….if u were to invite preachernorm there on a sabbath…he would be sharing the gospel of JESUS with u guys & not to join in with you 2 worship on the sabbath….Colossians 2:16-17, King James Version (KJV), 16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ…..

            Galatians 3:24-25
            Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
            But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster….the sabbath was under the
            law which was a schoolmaster….we r no longer under that law now

            Hebrews 7:12
            For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

            Hebrews 7:19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

            Hebrews 8:6, But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises., Hebrews 8:5-7… Hebrews 9:15, And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the, first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance., Hebrews 9:14-16 Hebrews 12:24, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

            discussion about the sabbath day
            1 of 14 vids…pls watch all 14…thx thx again…

  3. you gentiles can’t read the bible, leave to the (blacks people) israelites!!

    • PreacherNorm says:

      Thank you for being such a good representative of your religion, The Gathering In Christ Church. Based on what you’re saying, all of us Gentiles need to let Israelites tell us what we’re supposed to believe.

    • PreacherNorm says:

      Why don’t you answer any of the five questions that I couldn’t get an answer to in three and half hours. There posted below.

    • PreacherNorm says:

      You don’t want to listen to me because you say I’m a Gentile. Well, according to you, this brother isn’t. Maybe you’ll hear him.

  4. [Curse edited out, NF] you gentile pagans are disgusting, shame on you man!!
    you where talking the whole show crap!!!
    i hope the most burn you man and your family, matter effect all edomites!!!

    • PreacherNorm says:

      Well, sir, I truly am sorry that you feel that way about me and my family (1 Pet. 2:23). We desire nothing but God’s greatest blessings for you and yours, through Salvation in Christ (Acts 8:35-39).

  5. Bro Norm, I knew they would not abide by the rules from the phone call they lead you to believe you would be discussing Easter; when they found out what bible says they tried to do all of the talking. How you can invite someone to talk on your show and you do all the talking is beyond me. I believe I sent you some info on this group a while ago. All they are interested in is trying to prove that African-Americans are the original Israelites. I know because my sister is following this cult and we have had many disputes. She like them can quote script, but understanding what they quote eludes them.

    • PreacherNorm says:

      I met a guy in Georgia that tried to convince me that “Whites” were the true Israelites. I asked him, “are you a white supremacist.” He admitted that he was so I marked him as a racist and avoided him. I know one thing for sure, God is no respecter of persons (Rom. 2:11; Acts 10:34-35).

  6. How do I listen to the whole debate please?

    • PreacherNorm says:

      Just click the SpreeCast logo on the player. That should open it on their site, where you can select the full video.

  7. norm…those guys wouldn’t know the truth it it bit them on their nose…they had a preconceived agenda & had no clue what a christian is & what the LORD’S church is…when you showed them the truth, they were not willing to accept it…using the same old tired argument without RIGHTLY DIVIDING the WORD…keep defending the 1 true faith…let me know when you have another discussion…GOD BLESS U & YOUR FAMILY…

    • PreacherNorm says:

      Thank you. I appreciate that you’re out there standing for the truth. I’m still looking for someone to debate the Rapture but most of them aren’t willing to defend what they believe.

  8. Gadayawan says:

    Shalom Bro Norm,

    I have been a member of the Gathering of Christ Church for many years and I must say that some of the comments I have read here by no means dictate a “good representative of your religion”. As in any belief you have your wild cards, and to make a statement such as that from two comments here is ignorance in bliss but do apologize for the comment as all “black people” are not Israelites.I do ask that you do not misrepresent our church by associating us with “white supremacist” groups and believers in religion as both are false and not even close to truth. As for Sunday worship if you and your church would like to continue this then please do so. As for Elder Rawchaa if he is not teaching the truth and is a “cult leader” then I am sure nothing will come from his teachings and he will end like all other “cult leaders”, but if it is truth….


    • PreacherNorm says:

      Peace be upon you also, Gadayawan.

      You are certainly correct that within any group there are those who do not speak in such a way as to accurately represent that groups attitude and/or demeanor toward others. I appreciate your pointing that out as I have not had much interaction with members of the GOCC. The gentleman that first contacted me on behalf of the Search Engine International radio program was nothing but polite and professional. So I was a little surprised at the comments being made in the live chat and the comments that were being submitted to my website. I am glad to learn that such is not the typical behavior from members of the GOCC.

      I would like to ask about a recurring term that was being used of me in the live chat. I’m not sure how it was being used but I saw it used by several toward me and others that were speaking in the chat room in favor of the things I was saying in the discussion. It was the term “Agent.” Could you tell me how that term was being used toward me? It seemed to be a common term that was understood by the GOCC members in the chat room.

      It was not my intention to associate the GOCC, in the entirety of its membership, with “supremacists.” I was responding to a comment that was posted that did seem to indicate pretty strongly that I, a Gentile, should be in subjection to the biblical interpretations of – I’m quoting – “…(black people) Israelites.” Also, some of the comments that Mr. Rawchaa made in the course of our discussion did come across to me like that. The only reason I brought up that incident with the white supremacists, which I personally find repulsive, was to say that the comment about being the “true Israelites” reminded me of that.

      Again, I appreciate your comment. My only desire is for the honest examination of Scripture and to serve the will of God therein revealed.

      • Gadayawan says:


        Norm, I am sorry but I will not be able to give you an explanation of the term “Agent” as was used in the chat room as I was not present for this debate. What I can tell you is my personal thoughts as to why they might have used this term. Some, not all may have thought that you may have been a “Paid Agent” sent by undisclosed persons in power to sabotage the work of the church. As stated before this is my personal thought not necessarily being correct. I personally believe some should substitute this word “Agent” with “Ignorance”, or “Ignorant”. Not to use either word in a derogatory way but just by meaning.

        As far as the “White Supremacists” topic I would like to ask you a question Norm.

        1. Do you believe that the people in the land of Israel today are the “True Jews” and if so would you refer to them as also being like a “White Supremacist” group if they in fact made comments like Elder Rawchaa during your debate if you debated one of them?

        I am sure you must choose your words carefully as not to make your answer into an “Anti Semitic” remark but I do await your reply that is if you do in fact believe they are the “True Jews”. The reason why I am asking this question is because if you believe them to be the “True Jews” then why no push back towards them? I know for a fact they consider themselves above all other people is this not a characteristic of a “Supremacist”? Look forward to your reply.


        • PreacherNorm says:

          If I was supposed to be getting paid for that then I got cheated, because I haven’t seen a dime of that money. I guess those who may have been using the term “Agent” to indicate that I was being paid by some agency to subvert the work of the GOCC didn’t realize that I had never heard of the GOCC until I was contacted by one of your members. My first contact with the GOCC was by the GOCC’s invitation, not my instigation.

          Regarding “supremacists,” it doesn’t matter to me if the person claims to be an Israelite or an Irishman. If he uses his nationality to say that his nationality gives him the right to subjugate others, I would have no use for that person. The nationality that matters anything to me is whether a person is a citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven or not (Phil. 3:20). My being a Christian doesn’t give me a “supremacist” position over those who aren’t Christians, it doesn’t mean that others should humble themselves before me. It means that I have the obligation of service to Christ to try and bring that lost person into the Kingdom (Acts 2:41, 47; Col. 1:13), not to subjugate that person. The “supremacist” mentality is not Christian and I reject it no matter who it comes from. It is the gospel that is God’s power to save (Rom. 1:16 – Jew or Gentile), it is my service to Christ to spread the gospel and let it do the saving.

          Here is a video that may give a clearer indication of how I view National Israel, those who are Israelite by nationality.

  9. Mark McMinnis says:

    De 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

    How much clearerer could Moses have stated this?

    And this…De 5:15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.

    “therefore” (FOR THIS REASON) FOR WHAT REASON? “thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm”

    Was Abraham a servant in the land of Egypt? Nooo! Was Mr. Rawchaa a servant in the land of Egypt?
    I don’t think so!

    • PreacherNorm says:

      Right, Mark.

      The Bible is absolutely clear who the Law, including the Sabbath day, was given to (Ex. 20:2; Deut. 5:1-6; Neh. 9:13-14; Ezek. 20:10, 12; 1 Kings 8:9; Ex. 31:16). When Gen. 2:3 says that God blessed the seventh day there are some important words missing in that verse that Mr. Rawchaa and the GOCC, or any other Sabbatarian, can’t find. That verse doesn’t call the seventh day “Sabbath.” It says that God rested (Heb. sabat) but it doesn’t refer to “the Sabbath day.” Nor does that verse say anything about a command. It is speaking of God’s activity on the seventh day, not that Adam was commanded to keep the Sabbath. It isn’t there no matter how many times they read it. Gen. 2:3 was written by Moses for the same people that God did command to keep the Sabbath, (Ex. 20:8-11). There is no reference to any Patriarch (Adam, Seth, Noah, Abraham, Job, Isaac, Jacob, or any other Patriarch) keeping the Sabbath prior to Ex. 20. Just like there is no example in the New Testament of a Christian worshipping on the Sabbath.

      Thanks again for your comment, Mark.

  10. Moses, the writer of Genesis uses a form of writing called prolepsis which is the anachronistic representation of something as existing before its proper or historical time. Notice how this is done with the names of the places listed in Genesis 2:10-14. When Moses wrote Genesis, his audience was familiar with the places and could readily identify the places of which Moses spoke. So two, when Moses mentions the day upon which God rested, he identifies it at the day upon which they are called to observe God’s rest under the Law of Moses. Also, there is no hint that Moses says God “hallowed” that day at the same time he rested. To read that God hallowed the 7th day on the first time it occurred is to go beyond what the text says. We see no observance of this day or mention of it until the Law was handed down to the Israelites. To say that those living prior to the law observed it is to, again, go beyond what the text says. Thirdly, the sabbath was a forerunner or a shadow of the thing to come. Hebrews 4 tells of the ‘thing’ that was to come that was foreshadowed by the words of Moses. Just as 1 Peter 3:21 reveals the type of the flood to be immersion in water that now saves, Hebrews 4 reveals the rest of God mentioned in the prophetical writing of Moses to be an ellipsis form of grammar. ‘for anyone who has entered God’s rest, has also rested from his own work, just as God did from His.’
    People who believe will enter God’s rest and cease to do their own work just as God ceased to do His (4:9–10). This does not mean that God has been idle, since Jesus Christ, who is fully God and fully Man, continuously upholds His creation (Col. 1:16–17), and He stated that His Father is working (John 5:17). Rather, the completion of creation marks the end of his utilization of creative power as a whole. This coupled with another foreshadowing – the promise of God to the Israelites that they would not ‘enter His rest’ which stood for the promised land, because of their unbelief – Hebrews 4 clearly makes this rest which God had supplied before the Law and commands of Moses, referred not to an observance of a particular day, but to the place where man was to find rest from his work of belief. In other words, like God who entered His rest having marked it by the knowledge that everything that he had made was very good, man would enter a rest marked by the knowledge of the gospel/scripture that all had been accomplished and no further ‘working’ beyond the creative means of the blood of Christ, that plan of salvation as relayed in deed and command would be needed to by to unite man with God in this place of eternal promise. In this sense entering the Kingdom of God (the fulfillment of the promised land or the rest of God) implies a ceasing from one’s own work and resting securely on what Christ has done. To turn the image of God’s ‘hallow’ rest into a fleshly observance of a particular day, takes away the significance of the spiritual nature of God’s rest, the spiritual nature of his promise and the spiritual nature of his kingdom.

    • PreacherNorm says:

      Really excellent comment, Kyle. Thank you.

    • Also, the writer of Hebrews is deliberately silent beyond the words of “God did rest the seventh day from all his works” which makes it obvious that the phrase that followed it – “an hallowed it” was not the focus of a command given but was an identifying characteristic that Moses gave to his audience at the time he wrote it.

    • Kyle, thank you for that word. I wept as I read it.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: