Onlangse Opstelle cge verdana 12 Skrif Onderstreep Nadruk



Download 1.59 Mb.
Page1/21
Date conversion24.05.2018
Size1.59 Mb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   21


Onlangse Opstelle
CGE Verdana 12

Skrif Onderstreep

Nadruk CGE

Ander Kursief



Barnabas
Tony Zbaraschuk, 22 Sep 2005,

Re: Barnabas and eighth day,

Wrote:

TZ:


The Word of Gerhard Ebersoehn came to the Net, claiming:

From what word of Barnabas does one get the idea

he with 'eighth day', meant Sunday?

Or, even more far–fetched, the 'Lord's Day'?


….
Barnabas associates the Seventh Day Sabbath

with 'the eighth day' – there is not the least

allusion to any other day (of the week) per se in

Baranbas. He identifies the 'eighth day'

with “the seventh period” – which 'period' he

(in his own way) derives from the Seventh Day Sabbath Day!


TZ:
I really do not see where you are getting this from the text, which is very specifically _contrasting_

the two days rather than identifying them.
The eighth day, to Barnabas,

is the day the Lord rose from the dead,

and _not_ one of “the sabbaths that now are”. 

We know from the Gospels that Jesus rose from the dead the day after the Sabbath, and Barnabas is pretty obviously drawing a connection between the first day of the week when God begun to create everything, and the first day of the new week when everything was re–created.

Note that I don't accept Barnabas as canon, so I don't have to worry about this being used as authority for us to keep the Sabbath at present.  But I think it _does_ tell us what at least some Christians were doing in the generation or two after the apostles.
….

I think you are allowing your (very justifiable) desire to keep the Sabbath to override the plain evidence that some second–century Christians were no longer keeping Sabbath, maybe even some first–century ones. ….

Consider:

“… plain evidence that some second–century

Christians were no longer keeping Sabbath, maybe even some first–century ones.”

GE:


It may surprise you, but I maintain some second–century Christians were no longer keeping the Sabbath, but Sunday. Justin Martyr supplies the first ‘plain evidence’ of it though – not Barnabas.
And it may surprise you even more, if I told you I believe Sunday–worship tried to make its inroads into Christianity at a VERY early date (but failed), for Paul reprimands the Galatian Congregations they were “superstitiously observing days” etc. so as for them to have “made u–turn” to their “weak and beggarly (former) principles” – to their “by nature not gods” – which they “desired / lusted” to “serve / worship again”, just as when they “knew not God”, and were pagans still.
As to Barnabas:

I first wrote, “From what word of Barnabas does one get the idea he with 'eighth day', meant Sunday? Or, even more far–fetched, the 'Lord's Day'?”

I used the words “what word” not without purpose! You supplied the word,

“The eighth day, to Barnabas, is the day the Lord

rose from the dead,

and _not_ one of “the sabbaths that now are”. 

We know from the Gospels

that Jesus rose from the dead

the day after the Sabbath,

and Barnabas is pretty obviously

drawing a connection between the

first day of the week

when God begun to create everything,

and the first day of the new week

when everything was re–created.”

But then I said, “associated”; you quote me as having said Barnabas “identified” “the two days” – “the eighth day” and “the Seventh Day Sabbath Day” with one another! I did not say that; I wrote: “He identifies the 'eighth day' with “the seventh period” – which 'period' he (in his own way) derives from the Seventh Day Sabbath Day!” Quite different things!

Now Barnabas is NOT “very specifically _contrasting_ the two days”


  • he concludes hither and thither from any which one of
    them. If he makes any sure impression it is of confusing his concepts of the ‘days’, “periods” and even “years”.





TZ:

The eighth day, to Barnabas,

is the day the Lord rose from the dead,

and _not_ one of “the sabbaths that now are”.


GE:

This is what Barnabas actually wrote,

“The Lord says to them (the Jews), I cannot stand your new moons and your Sabbaths! Do you not see what he means? He means the present Sabbaths are not acceptable to me, but that which I have made, in which I will give rest to all things and make the beginning of an eighth day that is the beginning of another world. Wherefore we also celebrate with gladness the eighth day in which Jesus also rose from the dead, and was made manifest, and ascended into heaven.”
Barnabas undeniably associates “Sabbaths” with “the eighth day”, namely, “Sabbaths … that which I have made, in which I will give rest to all things and make the beginning of an eighth day that is the beginning of another world”.

He does NOT associate anything with the First Day of the week!


Barnabas associates these ‘Sabbaths’ – of whatever nature they may be – with some allegorical period which he describes metaphorically with the phrase “the eighth day” – “the eighth day IN WHICH, Jesus also rose from the dead, and was made manifest, and ascended into heaven”.
Regardless of what the Gospels say, it is what is stated in Barnabas! ‘Very specifically’ this is NO specific ‘day’ of the week! The ONLY thing ‘pretty obvious’, is that Barnabas does NOT ‘identify’ the ‘eighth day’ with the First Day of the week, but rather associates it with the ‘old’ Sabbaths, even in their ‘present unacceptability’.

Barnabas blames Christians (“children”, 4) for keeping their “present Sabbaths” without Christian meaning. He does not vent ‘anti–Jewish sentiments’ at all, but explains that Christians, no longer should keep the Sabbath because the Law forces them to. According to Barnabas, in believing in Christ these Christians ought to have found the true Sabbath that God from the beginning had intended for them – which according to Barnabas was no literal day whatsoever.

Barnabas does so through a process of reasoning the literal Seventh Day Sabbath of creation (15:1–3) as “meaning” a period of “thousand years” (4); as well as “meaning” some metaphysical day of judgement (5). The Sabbath (according to Barnabas) no longer can be a specific day, because it is impossible to keep properly, but rather is ‘meant’ as a “promise” of Christ – 6–7.

8: “Further He says to them (at Sinai, 15:1, “my sons”, 2), I cannot stand your new moons and your Sabbaths!

See what He means,

Unacceptable are (your) present Sabbaths to me, but that acceptable thing which I had made, in which thing I shall rest everything, a beginning of an eighth day that is (the) beginning of another world – wherefore also, we celebrate the eighth day with joy, in which day Jesus rose from the dead, and having been made manifest, indeed ascended into heavens.” (Rendering CGE)
In this there is no suggestion of the First Day of the week! Barnabas presents the new meaning, the Sabbath had received in the event of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. It was this,

“… Something I had made / perfected – ho pepoiehka”, and “in which everything rested”, which now, was made “a beginning of another world” (8b). This is a direct reference by Barnabas to 15:3, where “He (God) speaks of the Sabbath at the beginning of the creation”, when “God on the Seventh Day in the day (of it) made and end / perfected (sunetelesen), and in it rested, and sanctified it (the Seventh Day)”.


According to Barnabas this day, and “in it”, first of all, the ‘new’ world of the Christ–era “became”, or “was made a beginning of”. And in the end, it meant, that “When the Son comes, He will destroy the time of the wicked one, and then He will truly rest on the Seventh Day”. (5)

“No one, at the present time, has the power to keep holy the day which God had made holy” (6) – which can ‘mean’ any or both of the Seventh Day or the experiencing of the reality of the ‘day’ of the ‘new beginning’.

“But when all things have been made new by the Lord; then we shall be able to keep it holy”. (7) Barnabas here of course refers to the new earth after Christ’s return, and again he is ambiguous as to the keeping holy of the Seventh Day or the ‘day’ of the ‘new beginning’. In any case, Barnabas makes association between the Seventh Day Sabbath of the creation and the new Sabbaths of after Christ had come and had made everything new through resurrection from the

dead.

The First Day never comes into the picture.


And there is only one perfection envisioned by Barnabas – the “ending made / perfected” which is simultaneously the “beginning made / perfected” of, and in, and by, the single and comprehensive moment of Jesus Christ being 1, raised, and 2, of Him appearing (before the throne of God), and 3, of Him being taken up or exalted into heavens. (9)
This is what Barnabas meant is the Sabbath–Seventh Day’s “meaning”: “He (God) means this!”, 4, “Notice children, what is the meaning of He made and end …”. It is “an eighth day” that is BOTH and AT ONCE God’s “making and END”, and His ‘making a NEW BEGINNING”.
Common sense despite Barnabas himself, can only ‘identify’ this “eighth day” with the Seventh Day he has been speaking of all along – the Sabbath Day that “presently” was kept in an “unacceptable”, Judaistic way for the Law’s sake, and not because and for the sake of Jesus Christ. With that, my conviction is in perfect sympathy.

If the First Day of the week ever came into play or at all was relevant, Barnabas would have mentioned it in so many words; he would have made the direct association between the Christ–event and the First Day of the week which he is making between the Christ–event and the Seventh Day Sabbath. Because Barnabas specifically and in detail makes mention of the Divine acts of the Seventh Day, he would have pointed out the actual deeds of God on and of the First Day, had he ‘meant’ the First Day of the week. Barnabas would have done as Justin two or three decades later would do – he would have made mention of the First Day, and he would have made mention of God’s creation of light on the First Day. Not the least allusion to anything of the kind can be traced though. Barnabas at no stage had the First Day of the week in mind, I repeat. And I repeat, to force the First Day into association with the ‘Eighth Day’ because of false ‘translation’ of Mt.28:1, amounts to adulterating the Scriptures (the way Justin did).

If this is below the standards of SDANet for publishing, I would call it cowardice for hearing the truth. And kindly don’t repeat the objection it is “incoherent”, for better coherency in this case of Barnabas’ allegorical reasoning, is just not possible, and is used as an easy but poor excuse to present a better explanation than ever before of the issue.

Wrote Tony Zbaraschuk


SDAnet moderator, to me,

“Gerhard,


After discussion with the other moderators, I am rejecting this post.
Your argument does not seem even coherent, much less a worthwhile contribution to the SDAnet discussion environment.
Tony Zbaraschuk
SDAnet moderator”

This is what I had written


To: SDANet Re: Barnabas and First Day
...how Barnabas got to ‘the eighth day’ – from the Sabbath – “Seventh DAY”, to the “seventh PERIOD”, to “the EIGHTH day”; and IT being IDENTIFIED with the Christ–EVENT in whole.

Now, Tony Zbaraschuk (SDANET 23 Sept), wrote:

“We know from the Gospels that Jesus rose from the dead the day after the Sabbath, and Barnabas is pretty obviously drawing a connection between
the first day of the week when God begun to create everything, and the first day of the new week when everything was re–created.”

Replied I, GE:


First: We know nothing from the Gospels what Barnabas was doing.
Two: From Barnabas himself it is not at all obvious he drew a connection between, quoting TZ:
“the first day of the week when God begun to create everything, and the first day of the new week when everything was re–created.”
That is what TZ thinks – not what Barnabas wrote. (I have shown above what Barnabas wrote – and thought.)

Three: SUPPOSE Barnabas had the Gospels' ONLY account of the day and time of Jesus' resurrection in mind – Mt.28:1.

Then keep in mind he wrote about a quarter of a century before Justin and could therefore not have been misled by Justin's rendering of Mt.28:1.
So Barnabas – who wrote in Greek had Mt.28:1 the way we read it today in its ORIGINAL text in mind – we suppose.
Then: he pretty obviously drew a connection between the Seventh Day of the week “Sabbath”, when God FINISHED ALL HIS WORKS when everything was re–created by “the exceeding greatness of His power to us–ward ... which He wrought in Christ when He raised Him from the dead” ... “IN THE SABBATH'S FULLNESS” – opse de sabbatohn – every thought and every word written “according to (as could and should be expected) the Scriptures”!
The LAST 'day / period' is what Barnabas was writing about – not the First Day.
Four: Then for TZ's information: You did not give in English what Matthew or Mark (16:9) wrote; you gave Justin's perversion of Mt.28:1.
Five: And with that you have the EARLIEST (after Gal.4:10) indication of how Sunday–observance started in the Christian Church – it began with the adulteration of the Scriptures— adulteration like that of TZ’s.
Barnabas associates the 'Sabbaths' – the Old Covenant Sabbath by reason of the Law – with some allegorical period which he describes metaphorically with the phrase “the eighth day” – “the eighth day IN WHICH, Jesus also rose from the dead, and was made manifest, and ascended into heaven”.

Regardless of what the Gospels say, it is what is stated in Barnabas! 'Very specifically' this is NO specific 'day' of the week! The ONLY thing 'pretty obvious', is that Barnabas does NOT 'identify' the 'eighth day' with the First Day of the week, but rather associates it with the 'old' Sabbaths, even in their 'present unacceptability'.

Barnabas blames Christians (“children”, 4) for keeping their “present Sabbaths” without Christian meaning. He does not vent 'anti–Jewish sentiments' at all, but explains that Christians, no longer should keep the Sabbath because the Law forces them to. According to Barnabas, in believing in Christ, these Christians ought to have found the true Sabbath that God from the beginning had intended for them – which according to Barnabas was no literal day whatsoever.

Barnabas does so through a process of reasoning the literal Seventh Day Sabbath of creation (15:1–3) as ‘meaning’ a period of “thousand years” (4); as well as ‘meaning’ some metaphysical day of judgement (5). The Sabbath – according to Barnabas – no longer can be a specific day, the First Day of the week included, because impossible to keep properly, but rather is 'meant' as a “promise” of Christ – 6–7.

8: “Further He says to them (at Sinai, 15:1, “my sons”, 2), I cannot stand your new moons and your Sabbaths! See what He means,

Unacceptable are (your) present Sabbaths to me, but that acceptable thing which I had made, in which thing I shall rest everything, a beginning of an eighth day that is (the) beginning of another world – wherefore also, we celebrate the eighth day with joy, in which day Jesus rose from the dead, and (after) having been made manifest, indeed ascended into heavens.” (Rendering CGE)

In this there is no suggestion of the First Day of the week! Barnabas presents ‘the–new–meaning–the–Sabbath–received’ in the event of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. It was this,

“... Something I had made / perfected – ho pepoiehka”, and “in which everything rested”, which now, was made “a beginning of another world” (8b). This is a direct reference by Barnabas to 15:3, where “He (God) speaks of the Sabbath at the beginning of the creation”, when “God on the Seventh Day in the day (of it) made and end / perfected (sunetelesen), and in it rested, and sanctified it (the Seventh Day)”.

According to Barnabas this day, and “in it”, first of all, the 'new' world of the Christ–era “became”, or “was made a beginning of”. And in the end, it meant, that “When the Son comes, He will destroy the time of the wicked one, and then He will truly rest on the Seventh Day”. (5)

“No one, at the present time, has the power to keep holy the day which God had made holy” (6) – which can 'mean' any or both of the Seventh Day or the experiencing of the reality of the 'day' of the 'new beginning'. “But when all things have been made new by the Lord; then we shall be able to keep it holy”. (7) Barnabas here of course refers to the new earth after Christ's return, and again he is ambiguous as to the keeping holy of the Seventh Day or the 'day' of the 'new beginning'. In any case, Barnabas makes association between the Seventh Day Sabbath of the creation and the new Sabbaths of after Christ had come and had made everything new through resurrection from the dead. The First Day never comes into the picture.

Only one perfection is envisioned by Barnabas – the “ending made / perfected” which is simultaneously the “beginning made / perfected” of, and in, and by, the single and comprehensive moment of Jesus Christ being 1, raised, and 2, of Him appearing (before the throne of God), and 3, of Him being taken up or exalted into heavens. (9)

This is what Barnabas meant is the Sabbath–Seventh Day's “meaning”: “He (God) means this!”, 4, “Notice children, what is the meaning of He made and end ...”. It is “an eighth day” that is BOTH and AT ONCE God's “making and END”, and His 'making a NEW BEGINNING”.

Common sense despite Barnabas himself, can only 'identify' this “eighth day” with the Seventh Day he has been speaking of all along – the Sabbath Day that “presently” was kept in an “unacceptable”, Judaistic way for the Law's sake, and not because and for the sake of Jesus Christ. With that, my conviction is in perfect sympathy.

If the First Day of the week ever came into play or at all was relevant, Barnabas would have mentioned it in so many words; he would have made the direct association between the Christ–event and the First Day of the week which he is making between the Christ–event and the Seventh Day Sabbath. Because Barnabas specifically and in detail makes mention of God’s Divine acts of the Seventh Day, he would have pointed out the actual deeds of God on and of the First Day, 'meant' he, the First Day of the week. Barnabas would have done as Justin two or three decades later would do – he would have mentioned the First Day, and he would have mentioned God's creation of light on the First Day. Not the least allusion to anything of the kind can be traced though. Barnabas at no stage had the First Day of the week in mind, I repeat. And I repeat, to force the First Day into association with the 'Eighth Day' because of false 'translation' of Mt.28:1, amounts to adulterating the Scriptures— the exact same way Justin did.

If this gets regarded as below the standards of SDANet for publishing, I would call it cowardice for hearing the truth. And kindly don't repeat the objection it is “incoherent”, for better coherency in this case of Barnabas' allegorical reasoning, is just not possible, and is used as an easy but poor excuse to present a better explanation of Barnabas in this matter than ever before.

1 October 2005



Buried Before Sunset On Same Day Crucified?
Women Prepared Spices at the End, while Men at Days’ Beginning.



  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   21


The database is protected by copyright ©hestories.info 2017
send message

    Main page