Persuaded

Yes, I think your post agrees with what I said about the message of Hebrews. I understand it gets complicated when we are discussing sabbath observance while using the metaphor of the sabbath. I do have them straight in my head ;-)

Yeah, the practice of the partial counting as a full is a valid argument, but that doesn't work with the pre-dawn resurrection, nor does it help you get to three nights. There's still not enough "partials".

Well the main thrust of this thread seems to have died down, so maybe it's alright to go for a walk through left field... A Jewish premise is that "pattern is prophecy". Models and types are foreshadowings of things to come. We shouldn't use them to create doctrine, only to verify and bask in the integrity He has shown in His Word, as these types and models confirm or reflect what He has explicitly shown us elsewhere. In Genesis 1, God gives the blessing "and saw that it was good" for the 2nd day in the middle of the 3rd day, then does the more work on the third day, then blesses the 3rd day as well. In the Jewish mindset, the third day is the day of double blessing. Orthodox Jewish weddings take place on Tuesday, the 3rd day, because it is the day of double blessing. This also has implications for John 2, the wedding at Cana, which occurs "on the third day" (not third in succession from those mentioned in ch1). Related to the above, in Genesis 1:11, the third day was the day life was created. The day the ark rested. [Gen 8:4 KJV] And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. Later, at the first Passover, God told Moses that Passover month (Nisan) would be the first month of their calendar. They have since observed two calendars- a religious and a civil. In obedience to God, Nisan the first month of the religious calendar, but it is still the seventh month of the civil calendar. Passover is 14 Nisan (or 14th of the 7th month of the civil calendar), and three days later is the 17th of the 7th month of the civil calendar, or 17 Nisan, three days after Passover. The offering of Isaac. From Hebrews, we know that Abraham counted Isaac dead from the time the commandment came that he should be offered. [Heb 11:19 KJV] Accounting that God [was] able to raise [him] up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure. In Genesis 22, we read that they travelled three days to get to the mount, so Abraham, figuratively, received Isaac from the dead on the third day. Anybody have any more in Genesis?

I agree that He is our rest; I'm with you on the Heb 4 application. Maybe it's overly doctrinally conservative, but it seems that effort (belief also means obedience) is required to enter the rest. I'll also clarify that rest is not salvation. In the out-of-Egypt backdrop that the Hebrews author is using, "salvation" was their escape from Egypt; entering Canaan was their promised rest which they failed to earn through disobedience. There's a lot of room -40 years of wandering in their case- between salvation and rest. [Heb 4:11 NKJV] Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall according to the same example of disobedience. Throughout Hebrews 3 and 4, the writer harps on the importance of obeying, as a signal of belief. I'm not into a works trip, and as I said I've practiced random-sabbath (at best) observance myself, but as I try to understand His requirements I can't set this one aside. I believe firmly in salvation through His grace, but it bothers me that I might cheapen that grace by indulging in what I can't obediently justify.

I think the point is to get away from (or at least recognize) the Good Friday as just a tradition, so we don't look like fools when someone tries to argue that there can't be three days and nights between Friday afternoon and Sunday morning.

The Feast of First Fruits is the first day of the week following the sabbath following Passover. (If my memory serves- I recall it's a convoluted thing to track down in the scripture). First fruits are presented to the altar on Shavout.

What exactly is the significance for each of the days...Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. If it was Wednesday, what does that mean? Likewise Thursday and Friday. I haven't heard of this being a prophetic (future events) topic before. Seeing exactly how past prophecy is fulfilled is useful to judge how seriously and literally we should take the Bible. If Christ fulfilled Dan 9's 69th week prophecy *to the very day* that'd really be something! wouldn't it? By analyzing which days the prophecy could begin, and which days the prophecy could have been fulfilled, you get two handfuls of days separated by various intervals. It so happens (!) that one of the possible start dates is exactly 69 heptads/173880 days before one of the possible fulfillment days. Realizing that "Good Friday" is just a tradition is helpful in culling out possible fulfillment dates, as we look at calendars from 28-34 AD.

He arose on first fruits, and the Holy Spirit was given to His disciples (John 20) that same day as a first fruit, but given to all later at Shavout/Pentecost. More resurrection prophecy trivia... Paul writes in 1 Cor 15: 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: Where, in the OT scriptures that he is referring to, can you find the third day prophesied? I've got three places in Genesis...

If you take Dan 9's 69th week to end with the arrival of the Messiah in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, then it's useful to know what day of the week Passover could be to see which years are possible candidates for the cruxifiction.

The Law, is not the same as the Ten Commandments. The Law is clearly superseded by the New Covenant, but I see nowhere that the Commandments are annulled. I think most Christians are a little too cavalier in this (me included), using jingoisms like "every day is my sabbath" to justify breaking the commandment. Paul tells us it's silly to argue about which day of the week, but we should set aside one.

I don't really see how that answers my question. In Matthew 12 Jesus was responding to a complaint that His disciples were violating what really amounted to extra-biblical rules about the Sabbath. They were not violating the biblical edict of the Sabbath. So your comparison isn't really valid. If the Sabbath is required, then it is required absolutely and there are no exceptions. God doesn't have a sliding scale for disobedience. In Matt. 12:5 Jesus was talking about people who were ministering in the temple. That cannot apply to policemen or firemen or doctors.Hi Shiloh,Jesus was using the example of David, and the youth under his military arm, why it was permissible in eating the shewbread. Normally this would have not been permissible. His apostles were gleaning the grain with their hands for substantive nourishment as they followed our Lord Jesus in His ministry work. So Jesus was comparing His apostles to an army, an army of the Lord to be exact.In Christ, PatLOL, Yeah you are really reaching on that one, Mac. Jesus was addressing an extra-biblical issue that the Pharisees had imposed on the people. My point is that the disciples were not violating the Sabbath, they were violating man-made rules imposed by the religious leaders. So your position that it is permissible to violate the Sabbath in some cases is not supported by that text. The root of the problem is that you haven't even supported the view that the Church is required by God to keep the Sabbath Day, in the first place. Are you a Seventh Day Adventist?Hi Shiloh,Being "servile work," on the Sabbath it was prohibited on the sabbath day and was regarded as sinful but since you do not accept this you merely have to go to the Battle of Jericho where God's army marched around the city for seven days. On the seventh day the walls fell and they took the city.In Christ, PatNo, I am not a 7th Day AdventistI am a Christian firstand a Baptist 2nd David (and Jesus) were anointed kings when they took of the shewbread (or broke the sabbath). I don't think their actions apply to us. If we are free of the sabbath law, it's for other reasons. Jericho is a terrible example in this argument. The Levites were prohibited from going to war, but lead the procession. The ark was also prohibited, but lead the procession. Clearly God (or the Captain of the host of the Lord) was deliberately breaking every law to make sure the people knew He was doing the work, "as when He fought in the day of battle".

Sorry, just didn't write it out. Thursday (day) - Friday night (begins at sundown) Friday (day) - Saturday night Saturday (day) - Sunday night

Or if you translate that to Jewish days: Thurs-Friday night Fri-Sat night Sat-Sunday night

I don't think it's proper to count Sunday morning, since He rose before dawn, before the "day". What to us is before dawn Sunday morning to a Jew is still Sunday night.

Evidences it wasn't Friday: 3 days and nights doesn't work, no matter how you slice them up from Friday. Mark 16:1,2 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the [mother] of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. And very early in the morning the first [day] of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. Jesus rose before dawn of the first day of the week. After the (7th day) sabbath would have Mary not at the tomb when she saw Him. A more correct translation of Matt 28:1 is not "sabbath" but "sabbaths" as in Young's Literal Translation: Matthew 28:1 (YLT) And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn... "Sabbath" generally refers to the 7th day, but it can also refer to a holy day, such as Passover. Passover occurs on the 14th of the month so it can fall on any day of the week. Put these together, and you're looking a year with a Thursday Passover, the next day the gals go spice shopping, the Saturday sabbath occurs, and before dawn on Sunday He rises, and after this second sabbath Mary arrives at the tomb. Probably.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Yes.

[Gen 14:14 KJV] And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained [servants], born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued [them] unto Dan. Some things, God expected Abram to leave to Him. He was told to stay in Canaan, but he went to Egypt when food was scarce and got himself into a bunch of trouble. But in the passage above, we see him taking the responsibility and working to ensure his family's safety. It isn't a trivial thing to train and arm 300-odd men. It's an interesting theological dilemma, figuring out where trust in God ends and personal responsibility begins... (and I don't own a gun, and haven't since my Daisy bb gun burst its air pump)

( Pedantic point: The leaven parable doesn't just say that the kingdom is like leaven, full stop. It's like leaven which a woman hid in three measures of meal. So it isn't correct to say that this is saying that the kingdom is like sin, but it is like the whole parable- a bunch of fine flour contaminated by the introduction of false doctrine.) It's always dangerous to pull the spirit card, and we see it done here a lot. It becomes an unassailable proof, but without an externally verifiable source. I don't discount how the Spirit may have lead you, but rather than trust any internet poster's spirit, I will do my best to continue to search the scriptures (Acts 17:11) and prove all things (1 Thes 5:21). ---- The kingdom of heaven is also like tares among the wheat. Within each parable that Jesus explained there is a bad element among the good; similarly with the dragnet which by any interpretation is a mixture of good and bad. Suggesting that the aberrant mustard tree and leaven have negative meanings does fit with the context of the seven parables, it fits Jewish understanding of those idioms, it fits the feisty mood one would expect in Jesus following the rejection of ch12, and it fits observable church history. Let's take the easier ones: With the four soils, only one fourth is fruitful, but in diminishing yields: "8 But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold." Obviously the tares describe an enemy in the field sowing bad seed. Certainly not an all-perfect kingdom. The treasure describes (in theological terms) immeasurable sacrifice to purchase the whole earth, because He knew a small part of it contained treasure. Same with the pearl. This is John 3:16 kind of stuff: 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. None of these paint a rosy picture of the kingdom! The mustard and leaven are out of character and contrary to the other five, if taken in the traditional way. (And the treasure and pearl are really bad theology if taken the traditional way. The field and the pearl were bought. There is nothing we can do to buy/earn anything in God's economy. We are the object of the transaction, a transaction which Christ completed.)

Duplicate. See below...

Right, pearls aren't "bad", just non-Jewish in their connotation. Ancient Jews traded in pearls as a commodity, but did not value them for their own use. A word study of "pearls" is interesting, and I recommend it to anyone. From Job with "the pearls shall not be counted", to their immodest use in 1 Timothy, and their use to signal the immodesty of the woman and city of Rev 17&18, to their final use as the gates of the new Jerusalem. I see the "pearly gates" simply meaning that the old law is not the way into that city. Leaven has a similar Jewish/gentile connotation. The only feast of Moses that was (and still is) celebrated with leavened bread was Shavout, the feast of weeks, or as we might know it, Pentecost: "coincidently" the day the gentile church was born. In a further fun "coincidence", Jewish tradition has them read the book of Ruth on Shavout -a book that describes a Jewish lord redeeming unto himself a gentile bride.

It has always seemed so clear that these parables should be interpreted by Jesus' own words, yet it's clear that the happy-happy, feel good reading remains the most prevalent. Even Marilyn's (redacted) post went down the familiar path, but with an Israel-focused view. One of the great joys of my life came when I was shown, and saw how these seven parables align with the seven letters in Rev 2&3, which are also conspicuous in their use of the "he that hath an ear" phrase of Mat 13:9.

The bottomless pit (Sheol, hades) sounds like the center of the earth- from where else is it "up" in any direction? But that's different than the lake of fire (gahenna). Indeed, Hades will be cast into gahenna...

The backdrop to Matt 13 is Matt 12 (insightful, right?), where the Jewish leaders reject the works of Jesus and attribute His works to Satan. Matt 13 is a turning point, a change of focus. Through ch12 it has been Israel-focused, but with His rejection, He is now shifting away from Israel and focusing away from those whose hearts have grown dull: 10 And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?" 11 He answered and said to them, "Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. 12 "For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. 13 "Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14 "And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says: 'Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive; 15 For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should[fn] heal them.'[fn] 16 "But blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear; 17 "for assuredly, I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it. And: 34 All these things Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables; and without a parable He did not speak to them, 35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: "I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world." What secret was He now beginning to reveal that was hidden from the prophets? Eph 3 tells us: 1 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles— 2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, 3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ), 5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: 6 that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, 7 of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. 8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make all see what is the fellowship[fn] of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ; The kingdom parables relate to the whole kingdom, gentile and Jewsh. The kingdom of heaven is the kingdom of the god of heaven. We should interpret these parables by Jesus' own intrepation of them. He explains the sower (or four soils): 18 "Therefore hear the parable of the sower: 19 "When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside. 20 "But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 "yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles. 22 "Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful. 23 "But he who received seed on the good ground is he who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and produces: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty." And the tares: 36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field." 37 He answered and said to them: "He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 "The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. 39 "The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. 40 "Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. 41 "The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, 42 "and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 "Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear! If we use Jesus' own interpretation of these two parables as the key to the others, the meaning is different, even opposite the traditional view. To use other than Jesus' own interpretation is folly. So the mustard seed: 31 Another parable He put forth to them, saying: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field, 32 "which indeed is the least of all the seeds; but when it is grown it is greater than the herbs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches." The key to this is to know who the birds are, which Jesus told us back in v19: the wicked ones. And the mustard plant that is common in Israel is a bush not a tree. Jesus is describing the church as an organism that grows so abnormally/unnaturally large that it includes within itself the wicked ones, the grievous wolves that Paul describes within the Church. I'd suggest that from about Constantine onwards this has been the case with the Christian church. Next the leaven: 33 Another parable He spoke to them: "The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures[fn] of meal till it was all leavened." What is leaven, throughout scripture? -a model of sin. From the Levitcal sacrifices (with a couple exceptions, which offer insights in themselves), to Jesus saying "beware the leaven (false doctrine) of the Pharisees" to Paul saying that "a little leaven leavens the whole lump" (in a context that indicates it's a bad thing). Where else in scripture does three measures of meal show up? What would a Jewish audience perceive in that description? Starting at Gen 18 when The Lord and two angels visited Abraham and he told Sarah to go prepare three measures of meal, and later instituted in the Levitical fellowship offering, which was to be free of leaven. A Jewish audience would gasp in shock at this parable! Hiding leaven in three measures of meal describes false doctrine introduced into the Church, diffusing throughout the Body. That it was introduced by a woman also seems to tie this parable to Thyatira and Jezebel as a model of the catholic introduction of false doctrine (and inquisition, remember Naboth's field). Next, the treasure in the field: 44 "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and hid; and for joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field. But what is the field? v38 tells us, the field is the world, not salvation, not the gospel. There is nothing I posses that can be redeemed in God's currency. He is the One that paid. "For God so loved the world He gave..." is the parallel to this parable. But who is described as God's peculiar treasure? Israel... Next, the pearl. 45 "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking beautiful pearls, 46 "who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had and bought it. This parable is clearly parallel to the treasure in the field, in that it is Christ giving all. But the pearl is a non-kosher jewel, so this points us away from things Jewish, toward the gentile church. What else in a pearl points to the church? -a pearl grows by accretion, in response to an irritant. It is removed from its place of growth, and used as an object of adornment. It is the only jewel created by a living thing. The kingdom parables describe the whole kingdom (there are a "complete" seven parables), both in scope and as a historical narrative in parallel to Jesus' seven letters in Rev 2&3. (But that's a topic for a different thread, probably!)

So how popular is the idea that the birds in the mustard tree is a good thing, or that the woman hiding leaven in three measures is a good thing, or that the treasure and pearl is salvation or the gospel? Are these ideas the norm among well taught Christians? I was hugely disappointed as a local preacher went down this path...