If it was good enough for Jesus and the Apostles, then it is good enough for me!

If it was good enough for Jesus and the Apostles, then it is good enough for me!

This belief is flawed for New Covenant Christians because it fails to account for the transitional nature of the Gospels and early Acts, the shift from the Old Covenant to the New, and the clear New Testament teaching that not everything Jesus or the Apostles did or allowed in their Jewish context is a binding command for all believers today.

1. Jesus Lived Under the Old Covenant (as the One Who Fulfilled It)

Jesus was "born under the law" (Galatians 4:4) to fulfill it perfectly as Israel's Messiah (Matthew 5:17). He kept the Mosaic Law—including circumcision on the eighth day, Sabbath observance, temple worship, and Jewish festivals—because that was the covenant in force during His earthly ministry. He did not come to destroy the Law but to fulfill it and inaugurate something new.

• Example: Jesus was circumcised and kept the Sabbath. This doesn't mean New Covenant believers must do the same as a requirement. The New Testament explicitly teaches that circumcision is not required for Gentiles (Acts 15; Galatians 5), and the Sabbath command (as a Mosaic shadow) is not binding in the same way under the New Covenant (Colossians 2:16-17; Romans 14:5-6; Hebrews 4).

• Requiring believers to imitate every detail of Jesus' Jewish life would ignore that He fulfilled the shadows (ceremonial law, sacrifices, etc.) so we live in the reality (Hebrews 8-10).

Deeper meaning: The Old Covenant elements were never ends in themselves; they were profound types and shadows pointing to greater spiritual realities in Christ. The Sabbath pictured our ultimate rest in Him (Hebrews 4:9-10); the festivals foreshadowed the stages of redemption—Passover as Christ's sacrifice, Unleavened Bread as putting away sin through His body, etc. Jesus embodied and completed these deeper prophetic layers, transforming external rituals into living fulfillment. The New Covenant (promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 and instituted by Jesus' blood, Luke 22:20) writes God's law on hearts through the indwelling Spirit, emphasizing inward transformation, grace-empowered obedience, and freedom from the old system's external ceremonies.

2. The Apostles Operated in a Transitional Period

The book of Acts shows the early church (mostly Jewish at first) gradually transitioning. The Apostles continued some Jewish practices initially for cultural reasons, evangelism among Jews, or while the New Covenant was unfolding:

• They attended temple and synagogues (Acts 2-3).
• They kept certain feasts or vows (e.g., Paul in Acts 21).
• But this was not mandated for Gentile believers.

The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) directly refutes blanket imitation: Jewish Christians wanted Gentiles to follow Mosaic practices (including circumcision). The Apostles and elders, led by the Holy Spirit, ruled no—only a few basic guidelines (no idolatry, sexual immorality, etc.). This shows not everything the Apostles "did" was prescriptive for the whole church.

Paul strongly opposed imposing Old Covenant practices:

• For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" (Galatians 5:1, on circumcision).
• He taught that food laws and days (including Sabbaths) are matters of liberty, not law (Romans 14; Colossians 2:16).

Deeper meaning: This transition reveals God's progressive revelation—moving from national, external covenant signs to a universal, Spirit-indwelt people. The Apostles' early practices bridged the old and new, but the Epistles clarify the deeper reality: the church now lives in the fulfilled era where the "shadows" give way to the "substance" in Christ.

3. Armstrongism and This Flawed Belief

This exact reasoning—"If Jesus and the Apostles did it, then we must do it too"—is a core foundation of Armstrongism (the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God and its offshoots, such as the Philadelphia Church of God or United Church of God).

Armstrong taught that true New Covenant Christians must continue to observe:

• The Seventh-day Sabbath (Friday sunset to Saturday sunset) as a perpetual covenant and "sign" identifying God's true people.
• The annual Holy Days (Passover, Days of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles, and the Last Great Day) because they picture God's "master plan of salvation."
• Old Testament dietary laws (clean/unclean meats from Leviticus 11—no pork, shellfish, etc.).
• Other practices like tithing and avoiding "pagan" holidays (Christmas, Easter, birthdays).

Deeper meanings in Armstrongism: Armstrong emphasized that these observances carry profound prophetic and redemptive depth far beyond surface rituals. The Holy Days are not mere Jewish relics but a divine blueprint revealing "God's great master plan of redemption" and "the different epochs in the plan of spiritual creation." They reenact year after year the full story of salvation:

• Passover: Christ's sacrifice for sin.
• Unleavened Bread: Putting sin out of our lives.
• Pentecost: The giving of the Holy Spirit and the Church age.
• Trumpets: Christ's second coming.
• Atonement: Satan bound and sins removed.
• Tabernacles: The Millennium (1,000-year reign).
• Last Great Day: The final Great White Throne judgment and harvest of souls.

Armstrong taught that these have "deeper dimensions" explained in the New Testament, yet still require literal, ongoing observance "forever" to stay in "true memory and worship of God," understand His plan, and qualify for the Kingdom. The New Covenant, in this view, internalizes the law (including these elements) rather than abolishing any part of it. Jesus and the Apostles set the "perfect example," and departing from it leads to apostasy. Salvation involves faith plus this obedient law-keeping as a condition for final justification and becoming part of the "God Family."

This approach takes descriptive historical examples from the Gospels and early Acts and turns them into timeless, binding commands—exactly the belief the original article identifies as flawed. As the blog As Bereans Did explains in its recent post on this very argument:

ARGUMENT #8 'If Jesus and the Apostles did it then we must do it too.' At first, this sounds like a fantastic idea. What could possibly be wrong about doing what Jesus and the Apostles did? Isn't that the definition of discipleship?... Let's get something perfectly clear - this isn't about true discipleship and following Jesus' examples of faith, love, self sacrifice, mercy, justice, etc etc, it's about justifying Sabbatarianism, for which there is no law. This is not about the spirit of the law or even the letter of the law, it's about workarounds.

The post continues by highlighting the inconsistency:

We must ask ourselves, why did Jesus and the Apostles do what they did? Answer: because they were literally Old Covenant Jews... Are we all to be first century Jews now? (Be careful here! Say 'no' and this argument falls apart, but say 'yes' and your church falls apart.)... This 'Jesus and apostolic precedent' argument is only intended to get the Sabbath, but as it turns out it applies to everything else. We can't appeal only until we get what we want then back out.

It further notes the selective nature: Jesus and the Apostles attended synagogues (not modern churches), observed broader Jewish customs, and lived under all 613 Old Covenant laws during His ministry. Yet Sabbatarian applications cherry-pick only certain practices while rejecting the full implications.

4. The New Testament Distinguishes Descriptive vs. Prescriptive

The Bible records what happened (descriptive) but does not always command us to repeat it (prescriptive). Examples:

• Jesus and the Apostles spoke in tongues or healed dramatically → Not a universal command for every believer today.
• Apostles chose Matthias by casting lots (Acts 1) → Not the normal way churches select leaders later.
• Temporary practices during the apostolic era (sign gifts confirming the message, Hebrews 2:3-4) don't bind the church for all time.

We imitate their faith, character, and teachings (1 Corinthians 11:1; Hebrews 13:7), not every cultural or transitional action. The core commands for the church come from the risen Christ's instructions through the Apostles in the Epistles, focused on the "law of Christ" (love, faith, Spirit-led obedience).

Deeper meaning in the New Testament: Armstrongism's emphasis on the "master plan" through ongoing shadows misses the profound fulfillment theology of the Epistles. Colossians 2:16-17 declares these days "a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ." The deeper realities they pictured—rest, redemption, harvest—are now inaugurated in Him. The New Covenant does not merely "internalize" the old system; it transforms our relationship with God from external compulsion to heart-level obedience empowered by the Spirit (Ezekiel 36:26-27; Hebrews 8:6-13). Paul warns that mandating these observances as essential returns believers to "weak and worthless elementary principles" and a "yoke of slavery" (Galatians 4:9; 5:1), undermining the finished work of Christ.

5. What New Covenant Christians Do Follow

• Teachings of Jesus and Apostles: The Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20—"teach them to observe all that I have commanded you"), moral principles (e.g., the love command fulfilling the law, Romans 13:8-10), baptism, Lord's Supper, church leadership, etc.
• Grace, not legalism: We are under the New Covenant, not the Old (Hebrews 8:6-13). The Old Testament remains instructive (history, types, wisdom, moral truths), but its covenantal forms are fulfilled in Christ.

Deeper meaning: True New Covenant living flows from union with Christ—the deeper obedience of the heart, where the Spirit produces fruit that the law could only command (Romans 8:1-4; Galatians 5:22-23). This brings genuine freedom, intimacy with God, and focus on the gospel's power rather than external forms.

Conclusion: Armstrongism vs. the New Covenant

In contrasting Armstrongism with biblical New Covenant faith, we encounter two profoundly different visions of discipleship. Armstrongism, rooted in a sincere and zealous desire to honor Jesus by walking exactly as He and the Apostles walked, offers a compelling framework: a perpetual calendar of Sabbaths and Holy Days that unlocks God's "master plan of salvation" in vivid, yearly reenactments. It promises deeper prophetic insight, clear identity as God's true people, and a path of obedient law-keeping that secures one's place in the coming Kingdom. Yet this very system, for all its biblical language and heartfelt devotion, keeps believers anchored to the fading shadows of the Old Covenant. It elevates descriptive historical examples into timeless commands, blending law and grace in a way the New Testament explicitly rejects as a return to "weak and beggarly elements" (Galatians 4:9) and a "yoke of slavery" (Galatians 5:1). What begins as earnest imitation can subtly shift the finished work of Christ into an ongoing requirement, turning the gospel of pure grace into another gospel that mixes faith with works for final justification.

As Bereans Did powerfully summarizes the problem with this argument in the context of Sabbatarianism (a hallmark of Armstrongist teaching):

Today, we looked at the claim 'If Jesus and the Apostles did it, that means we must do it, too.' It sounded great at first, but like all the rest, it comes apart when you dig in. We peeled back layers of conflicts and inconsistencies until we saw how this argument is really based on Jews being Jewish, who went to synagogue not church, because of a tradition of the Pharisees... The argument is not really about [what] Jesus and the Apostles did, but it uses them to rationalize a means to create a law where there is no law. Sabbatarianism is not supported by the full historical and biblical witness, but by cherry-picking and excluding whatever does not fit. It is not a clear mandate, but an opinion.

By contrast, the New Covenant unveils a far richer, more intimate, and liberating reality. It is not a refined version of the old system, but its complete and glorious fulfillment in the person of Jesus Christ. Every shadow—Sabbath rest, festival harvest, clean/unclean distinctions—finds its resounding "Yes" and "Amen" in Him (2 Corinthians 1:20). In Christ we already enjoy the true Sabbath rest (Hebrews 4:9-10), the outpoured Spirit of Pentecost, the assured hope of His return, and the final harvest of souls. The law is no longer external tablets but a living reality written on transformed hearts by the indwelling Holy Spirit (Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 36:26-27). Salvation is by grace through faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), and the obedience that flows from it is the natural fruit of union with the risen Lord (Romans 8:1-4; Galatians 5:22-23).

For anyone drawn to Armstrongism's call to "live exactly as Jesus lived," the full New Testament offers an even deeper invitation: imitate the faith, character, and inspired teaching of Christ and His Apostles as unfolded in the Epistles. Release the shadows that have served their purpose (Hebrews 8:13) and step fully into the substance who is Christ. Here is the abundant life He promised—gospel freedom, Spirit-empowered joy, and unbroken fellowship with the Father—where every moment is lived in the radiant light of His declaration, "It is finished" (John 19:30). This is the heart of the New Covenant: not a checklist to prove worthiness, but a living relationship that magnifies the finished work of the Savior and sets the soul truly free.

Silent Pilgrim

See: 

Common Legalist Arguments - Part VIII

A critical look at using the claim, "If Jesus and the Apostles did it then we must do it too," as a justification for requiring Christians to attend church on Saturday.