You have accomplished the art of an error-free mind? Your belief that you make no errors in reading the bible, I would say that is your first, and most fatal error of belief, and all the rest then flows downhill from there. You assume since you think it's true, it is true, and other's thinking has to therefore be wrong? You sincerely believe your interpretations of the Bible are error and judgment free?
There's a saying I like that says, 'the more we know the more we know we don't know.' The opposite is therefore also true. 'The less we know, the more we think we know'. With greater knowledge comes the wisdom of humility.
But there is another way to understand what that means to be "breaking God's law". That is in fact the very mission of what Jesus was trying to teach to the legalistic Pharisees, who strained after gnats, yet swallowing camels. He had a different understanding of what breaking God's law meant than what they did. Can you deny this?
It is a cop out to claim "It's not my words, but God's". That is the context I said that, and it is what I mean here as well. It's evading responsibility for you reading your own biases and bents into scripture, and then trying to absolve yourself by saying, "It's not my words but God's".
It is your words, just as they are my words when I quote the exact same verses of scripture you do with a different understanding. The only difference between us is that I don't say to you, "These aren't my words, they're God's words" when I read the exact same verses back to you. I could, but I won't because that's not only untrue, it's dishonest.
Again, I fully agree with these verses, and I quote "By their fruits you shall know them," almost incessantly in pointing out the difference between religious zealots who justify themselves by keeping to every letter of the law, versus those who live by Grace. (I could say here, "These are God's words, not mine", but I'll resist.
)
If you are right in your thinking, that following the letter of the law to a T means you love God and are bearing spiritual fruits as a result of that, then why do you think Jesus spent so much time contrasting the Way that he taught about God's kingdom, with the way that the Pharisees taught? I would think if you are right, he would have praised them instead. But that's not the portrait we see in the gospels. Quite the opposite is true. "There is a way that seemeth right unto man..."
Legalism is trying to climb into the kingdom of God another way, through your own egoic efforts, not through surrender. The latter is far more difficult, far more the narrow way, then being a legalist. Legalism is human effort to win God's Love. Love through Grace, naturally fulfills the law without effort at all. This is the difference between the OT and the NT, the law as the schoolmaster, versus the Christ.
Multiple issues here. First, Romans 14 is not talking about eating foods on certain days. It is using Christians' different views on matters such eating certain types of food or not, or observing other days as holy or just another day of the week, as two separate examples of how Christians don't all belief the same ways about what it means to be serving God.
Other examples could also have been used, but Paul just used these two as examples of, which ironically fits exactly in with your challenge to other Christians that Saturday is all-important to God and you must observe it, versus those other Christians who do not understand God's will for them that same way. That entire chapter could be overlayed on top of this thread. In fact, I could see limiting our discussion to that chapter alone in order to resolve this issue in your mind about Christians who don't worship on Saturday as 'sinning'.
Secondly, it is not a day that "God esteems" as you put it. Jesus was quite clear about this when he said explicitly, "The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath". The way you treat the sabbath day is that man was made for the sabbath; that not keeping the sabbath is to sin against the very nature and being of God himself. Yet Jesus clearly taught the opposite. The sabbath was created for the benefit of man.
"The sabbath was made for man", to give him an opportunity to rest and connect with himself, with others, with the world around him, and with the Divine or God. It's not sinning against God's being to pick up sticks in your yard on Saturday (or go to Home Depot to buy a shovel to dig a fence post on your day off of work). Yet the legalist would make it so!
And the entire interaction you see of Jesus with the legalistically-minded Pharisees in the story is exactly about this difference right here in this thread. It is that context that he says the opposite of "God esteems the sabbath," or put another way,"Man was made for the sabbath", which is your position.
So back to Romans 14. Several key things stand out to me in the context of this discussion:
This is us here in this discussion. We are fully convinced in our minds it is not a sin to pick up sticks or mow the lawn on Saturday, or not go to church, or go to church on Sunday, or no day, or any day, or all days. Keep reading...
If someone between their own consciousness and God does not feel that the law to not pick up sticks on Saturday, or to use that day as the day of the week reserved for worship (instead of everyday of the week as others who find that 'rest' in God strive for), then they are not sinning. As Paul says at the end of the chapter...
It is not God that "esteems Saturday". It is you. And if you do, then that is how you choose to worship and honor God. That is your act of faith between you and God. But other Christians don't think the same in the hearts as you do. They are not sinning by thinking differently than you. They are convinced in their own conscious that all days are alike, that Christ is the rest. that the sabbath is fulfilled in Christ, as they rest in God (the scripture states exactly those words).
Therefore, it is something you esteem as important for you in your approach to God. Don't take your views and place yourself as the judge of others because they approach their relationship, or religious practices differently than you, in their own relationship with God.
I am with Paul on this where he uses the example of "nothing unclean" or eating of foods (which also applies to observing days of the week, as well as any other religious differences):
This is a challenging understanding for many younger Christians who feel they need to make an effort to earn God's love. They need to be told very black and white, cleanly divided right from wrong strictures, in order to feel secure in their faith. "If I don't do this, I'm okay. If I do this, I'll be safe".
With maturity comes a little less tightly strung and wound bindings upon faith. That is what this entire chapter is about, and that is what this entire discussion thread stands as an example of.
