The Sabbath: Why do Christians say Sunday?

[MacFall]

Strav, we can't even know if they day we call "Saturday" is the same day observed as the Sabbath by the Hebrews of Moses' day. There is absolutely no way to know. The week as we know it was constructed by pagans. That's why there are Jews who observe the Sabbath on a day of the week that is neither Saturday nor Sunday - because they believe they have a better record of days than others. And I don't know if they do, but their guess is as good as ours.

You suppose that Saturday was the original sabbath. And based upon that supposition you are willing to point your finger at the vast majority of Christians and tell them they are sinning. I'm inclined to ignore you. God has never once convicted me against worshiping Him on Sunday rather than Saturday. I'm quite sure if it were important enough, he wouldn't have left it to you to do so.

 

[Stravinsk]

Strav, we can't even know if they day we call "Saturday" is the same day observed as the Sabbath by the Hebrews of Moses' day. There is absolutely no way to know. The week as we know it was constructed by pagans. That's why there are Jews who observe the Sabbath on a day of the week that is neither Saturday nor Sunday - because they believe they have a better record of days than others. And I don't know if they do, but their guess is as good as ours.

You suppose that Saturday was the original sabbath. And based upon that supposition you are willing to point your finger at the vast majority of Christians and tell them they are sinning. I'm inclined to ignore you. God has never once convicted me against worshiping Him on Sunday rather than Saturday. I'm quite sure if it were important enough, he wouldn't have left it to you to do so.

The week as we know it wasn't constructed by pagans. The names of the days were, however. The vast majority of Jews celebrate on the day we call Saturday. There are, however - other Sabbaths (the 1st and 7th days of passover are a great example) that are celebrated whether or not they fall on Saturday or not.

As for conviction - well all I can say is this: There are people in churches today that have never been "convicted" of homosexuality, just to take one example. They may, in fact, have been brought up in a modern church that actually endorses the practice (yet another example of spiritual babylon, imo).

^^ But I guess that their lack of conviction means it's ok, right?

Conviction comes through the law, as Paul states and gives an example of here:

Romans 7:7-12 What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “Do not covet.”[b] 8 But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead. 9 Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. 11 For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. 12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

This example of coveting is taken from the same 10 commandments as the Sabbath command. What say you - is the law holy or not? Perhaps future generations of bibles (looking beyond such kooky translations as The Message) can edit out or heavily mistranslate the above.

 

[MacFall]

The law that is written on the hearts of man, you mean? That must be why I feel guilty every time I eat pork.

Oh wait - I never did, actually. Just like the Jews didn't until they were given that law in a special revelation through Moses for their consecration.

Accusing the 99% of Christians who don't follow the Torah of knowingly and willfully sinning is tantamount to saying that we are damned. Are you really willing to issue such a judgment?

 

[Stravinsk]

The law that is written on the hearts of man, you mean? That must be why I feel guilty every time I eat pork.

Oh wait - I never did, actually. Just like the the Jews didn't until they were given that law in a special revelation through Moses.

Believe it or not, Macfall - there are people in the world that, prior to comming to a faith that condemns it- did not feel bad about coveting either. Or having murder in their heart. Or misusing the name of God. Or just about anything. There are tribal cannibals who have no qualms with eating there fellow man - provided he or she isn't part of that tribe.

As for eating pork or shellfish - I'm sure you don't. However, if a trichanella worm makes it to your brain from the pork or you get PSP(Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning) from eating shellfish - you might well feel bad - really really bad.

 

[MacFall]

The only people who don't feel bad about murdering, lying to, and stealing from others are those who are brutally conditioned not to.

You are suggesting that nobody can know the law without having come into contact with early Jewish texts. I know that God doesn't work that way. Everyone knows what is right and what is wrong as soon as they can think rationally; everyone is free to ignore it. However, I remember feeling bad about hitting my brother before, during, and after I did it when I was three years old. My mother had never told me not to hit him, because I had never done it before. She wasn't around to scold me. I knew it was wrong. I also remember the first time I had pork bacon. No warning beforehand, no guilt afterward. Very, very different things.

If you believe in a God who requires a person to read ancient Jewish writings in order to live righteously, go ahead. But you're not going to get anywhere trying to make other people feel guilty about believing otherwise.

 

[mjmcmillan]

Strav, I have to ask: Do you keep the ENTIRE Law? All of it? Every last jot and tittle?

See, there's this little problem with straining at things like this. It's the same one that Paul wrote of concerning those in the Circumcision camp, who insisted that no one could be saved unless they were circumcised just as the Jews are and that all must hold strictly to Jewish customs. The problem is that if you go down that road, you become beholden to keeping the WHOLE LAW. You make yourself a slave to the Law and are no longer under Grace since you place yourself under the Law. It also means that if you break any part of the Law, you're a Lawbreaker.

Dividing ourselves up over issues like whether you worship on Saturday or Sunday, whether you were baptised into the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost or into Jesus Only, and probably dozens of other things only serves to weaken us and give the enemy a foothold he doesn't deserve. Worse, every time we do something like this we risk taking ourselves out of Grace and placing ourselves under the Law with all of its blessings and curses-- the very curses that Grace sets us free from, we place ourselves under by doing things like this. Jesus completed the Law, doing that which we could never do--- living it completely both in letter and in spirit.

Now, how about let's bury the hatchet-- NOT IN EACH OTHER-- and let these legalistic matters drop.

 

[Blackguard_]

and let these legalistic matters drop.

That's the thing though, what to one is legalism or hairsplitting is to another an extremely important issue or distinction.

In all the Gospel Christ did nothing but honour the Sabbath - by teaching on it, by healing on it, by restoring the broken etc.

Didn't he teach and heal everyday of the week?

 

[MacFall]

That's the thing though, what to one is legalism or hairsplitting is to another an extremely important issue or distinction.

Trying to make people feel guilty for things they could, outside of your influence, have no idea they should feel guilty about is legalism. You can make someone feel guilty about anything. My dad grew up feeling guilty for being left-handed, for example, because the teachers at his elementary school hit him for it. The question seems to be whether God is faithful to convict people of sin (and that His word is truly written on man's heart), or whether people cannot possibly know what sin is without reading the Torah or meeting a Judaizing Christian.

 

[Stravinsk]

Strav, I have to ask: Do you keep the ENTIRE Law? All of it? Every last jot and tittle?

Is this a trick question? Of course I do not - I'm a sinner like everyone else.

Do I hold the whole law, that which has not been fulfilled in Christ(priestly rites, circumsicion,atonement for sin etc) in high esteem? Yes. Do I follow all of it? No. Part of that is because I am a sinner and part of that is because - well - no one I know celebrates certain holidays like passover - else I'd want to join and be part of their community. There *are* a few laws I think applied only to the Jews - but not alot. Things such as not cutting the sides of your beard or wearing two types of clothing. But most of the rest (again, what is not fulfilled in Christ - atonement, priestly rites, circumsicion)- applies.

See, some of these things are self evident. For instance, modern Christians say "because of Jesus, all foods are clean. Eat what you want!". Yet the law says that certain things are unclean.

And God's law proves they are unclean. Daily. You eat pork and you're eating dead trichenella worms. One of those doesn't happen to die when you've cooked it - hello parasite that will eat your flesh. What's more, you can pass this parasite on to other humans by touch. Is it any wonder God forbade touching or consuming pork?

If you eat shellfish, it doesn't matter if you've cooked it or frozen it - there is no guarentee - absolutely none whatsoever - that you will not get Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning. And just one clam or oyster can send you to the hospital and even death.

Eating animal fat and blood( prohibited by Torah) also have health consequences verified by research. They may be immediate or long term - but they exist.

Praise God and His Holy Law. It is there for our benefit, because He loves us. I don't know about you - but would I be loving my neighbor by feeding him that which has the good possibility of making him sick in the short or long term? From immediate poisoning or gradual clogging of the arteries?

What is your stance on the law?

Do you agree with any of these practices?

Incest
inappropriate behavior with animals
Idolatry
Homosexuality
Misuse of God's name

If you say "No"- can I then call you *legalistic*? Or does that just happen when I mention something like the Sabbath? I've found lots of Christians just love to throw out the "legalistic" label when it comes to something their church doesn't practice - but would never use it for something else.

Why so much resistance to a day of Worship? Ask yourself. You say it's just a day. Why so much resistance to a change then?

I can tell you my opinion from my church experience. It's because Christians worship the day. They venerate it in speech "Christ the King Sunday"!- and honour it (at least for an hour, that is) in action. It is the day they congregate and the day they set aside as holy time.

One of the requirements of heaven (these are not my words, but Christ's) - is that people believe that Christ is God. "If you do not believe I am He, you shall surely not enter the kingdom of Heaven".

But - because of the schism in day of worship - day of honour - there is a schism between Christ and the Father in the very heart of what is called "Christianity". Who is this Christ that Christians believe broke the law by breaking the Sabbath? Who is this Christ that establishes a new day of worship by rising on "the first day of the week"? Who is this Christ who teaches we can eat whatever we want? Who is this Christ that never taught or practiced anything but Jewish law - JUST SO WE COULD CHANGE IT UNDER NO INSTRUCTION FROM HIM?

Christ said that He and the Father are one. The Father states in Malachi 3:6 that He never changes. It follows - that Christ never changes nor would change the law because "I do only what I see my Father do".

You can see where this is going and where the confusion of Babylon comes into the picture.

Or maybe you can't. But then, I don't think the majority of people really give alot of thought to their religion. It's a place to worship and have pot lucks, look good and even a place to have their lifestyle endorsed.

 

[Shadesofgray]

I'm not claiming to be an expert here, I am only going to tell what I was taught. My University was privalleged enough to have an expert in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew. This proffessor, Dr. Al Wolters will have his name in the translation section of many Bibles. He is one of only 7 people in the world with anytime access to the dead sea scrolls. He is by far the most knowledgable man I've ever met when it comes to studying the scriptures and the practices of the Ancient Jews and the Early Church. I took his classes in Univeristy that dealt with translation and understanding of the Bible.

He'd be one of the first people that would tell you that due to the Jewish alphabet and the way that they write there are infact many errors in the Bible. He's also identified several errors in the new testament as well. For example, older copies of the Bible include verses in Mathew 6 at the end of the prayer Jesus teaches his disciples which read "For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory forever." This was included because it was a custom of the early church to say that at the end of every prayer and some translator along the way wrote it in. It remained a part of the bible for a long time an even earlier translation was discovered that didn't have that. It was studied against early church writings and traditions and those lines were then removed from the Bible, but remained used by the Church.

The point of this is, the main thing he wanted to make clear to us in that class was that the Bible does contain errors of translations and contradictions, but the most important thing is that the basic message of salvation was preserved. This is something that he strongly believes to be true.

In regards to the Sabbath and Sunday question, I was taught that Sunday is not the Sabbath, but that we changed the day to honor the day that Jesus rose from the dead. My understanding when I was taught this was that no Christian ever believed Sunday was the Sabbath. Infact, this post is the first place where I have ever heard anyone ever mention it. There are early Church history records that clearly state Christians met on Sundays rather than the Sabbath, partially to honor the day Jesus rose, and partially because many converts to Christianity did come from the Jews, and they still followed the law of the Sabbath. Remember, there was a time when the Apostles only witnessed to the Jews. They themselves were even all Jews and would have continued following their traditions.

As to the whole double sabbath question, here is what I learned in University about that. The preparation day would have been Friday, and the Sabbath began on Sundown of Friday. Jesus died close to sundown, and it was against Jewish law to let a dead body be exposed over night (Deut 21:23). Joseph came to bury the body before the Sabbath began according to Jewish Law. If he had died on the Sabbath, no Jewish person would have been available to take the body, the Romans would have taken it. This gives a clear indication of the exact day when Jesus died. This would be the first day that Jesus was considered dead, and the first day in the tomb. Saturday (Friday Sundown to Sat Sundown by Jewish tradition) would be the second day in the tomb. Sunday (Sat Sundown to Sun Sundown) would by day 3. Hence saying that Jesus rose on the third day.

In regards to the passages from Mark 15:42-16:2 and Luke 23:55-56, we were taught like this. Both passages are meant as the women bought the Spices on Saturday after sundown. The reason that Luke includes the line about them resting on the Sabbath is that he wants to show the passage of time to verify that 3 days had passed in accordance with the prophesies. Infact, according to the timeline that is laid out in the passages, the woman would have been unable to buy and prepare spices the night Jesus died because the Sabbath had already began. They would have had to have waited until the next day. Although the passage in Luke may seem awkwardly worded to show that these were different days, it was actually due to translation that it is awkward.

That is what I have been taught anyways. I don't claim to be an expert as I said before. I am just quoting what an expert in the field taught me.

 

[mjmcmillan]

Is this a trick question? Of course I do not - I'm a sinner like everyone else.

It's not a trick question. Call it a "New Testament" question, maybe a "Paul's Epistles" question.

I'm about to depart this thread because frankly I have little taste for stuff like this. Suffice to say, though, that insinuating that because I don't worship on Saturday rather than Sunday that I also must support homosexuality, inappropriate behavior with animals, kiddie inappropriate content and a host of other sins steps over the bounds by quite a generous margin. Where do you get stuff like that, anyway??? Do you believe that every Christian who worships on Sunday believes all that other stuff??? How do you support such charges??? Nah, on second thought I really don't want to know.

There's a place where we're compelled to call sin by its right name, and no doubt about it throughout both Old and New Testaments. Then there's a place where we step over the line and try to tear each other down over which day of the week we hold our sabbath, or whether you got baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost or into the name of Jesus only (I've heard some Jesus Only preachers practically condemn as non-believers and demons all those baptised the other way, and they're serious about this), or a myriad of other points which will, in all likelihood, pass into insignificance once we step into eternity.

I am departing this thread. When discussions amongst believing Christians break down this badly it becomes pointless to carry it further. Try not to hit each other with jots and tittles too hard, OK?

 

[Stravinsk]

It's not a trick question. Call it a "New Testament" question, maybe a "Paul's Epistles" question.

I'm about to depart this thread because frankly I have little taste for stuff like this. Suffice to say, though, that insinuating that because I don't worship on Saturday rather than Sunday that I also must support homosexuality, inappropriate behavior with animals, kiddie inappropriate content and a host of other sins steps over the bounds by quite a generous margin. Where do you get stuff like that, anyway??? Do you believe that every Christian who worships on Sunday believes all that other stuff??? How do you support such charges??? Nah, on second thought I really don't want to know.

Whether you want to know or not is irrelevant when you put words in my mouth.

You call the issue of the Sabbath a "legalistic" matter.

I simply asked you if you support those things in the list I made in the previous post. I make no insinuation. If you do *not* - which I am guessing is the case - then I could perhaps call you a legalist?

The point of me bringing those things up I thought was obvious. People throw around the term "legalism" when it comes to anything they don't happen to agree with - such as the Saturday Sabbath. But they'd never use the term (or at least most wouldn't) when it comes to things like those I listed.

Yet they are part of the same law.

 

[Stravinsk]

Didn't he teach and heal everyday of the week?

I think it's easy to assume that, reading the gospels. But I don't think it's accurate for a number of reasons.

The first and obvious reason is that commerce still had to go on. People still had to till fields, tend to flocks, fix leaky roofs, build houses and furniture, make bread, fix horseshoes etc etc.

Therefore, it doesn't seem likely that people were following around Jesus every day of the week. What *is* much more likely - is that they would have been following Him and listening to Him and witnessing His Miracles on a day when normal work was prohibited - The Sabbath.

Every specific day a healing is mentioned in the Gospels - it is ALWAYS on the Sabbath day. This is the day Christ healed and made people WHOLE. Can this be insignificant?

What's more - read the following passage carefully:

And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about. And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all. And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias [Isaiah]. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears. (Luke 4:14-21)​

Think about what is being said here. Unless Jesus did all His work on one day only (as in one Saturday, or one Wednesday, or one Thursday) - then how could the Scripture have been fulfilled in their hearing "this day"?

This is the start of Christ's ministry, after being tempted 40 days and nights. He is announcing His Ministry - and He is announcing the prophecy of His Ministry is fulfilled on the Sabbath. And yet - He has not even begun, at this point to do those things.

 

[MacFall]

Think about what is being said here. Unless Jesus did all His work on one day only (as in one Saturday, or one Wednesday, or one Thursday) - then how could the Scripture have been fulfilled in their hearing "this day"?

By the word "day" being symbolic of a longer period of time rather than a definite 24 hour period, as it often was in the Hebrew culture.

I don't see Jesus encountering someone who needed healing and saying "sorry buddy, it ain't Saturday."

 

[Blackguard_]

The first and obvious reason is that commerce still had to go on. People still had to till fields, tend to flocks, fix leaky roofs, build houses and furniture, make bread, fix horseshoes etc etc.

That's like saying campus mall preachers don't exist since everyone has class.

People would have free time or even days during the week too, not as much or as likely as the Sabbath yes. Jesus would have had plenty of oppurtunity to heal and preach as people went about their day. Commerce doesn't consist just of isolative and urgent tasks.

Somebody could take a break or spare a few minutes as they are shopping or going from one place to another to listen to Jesus, and the Bible says people traveled to him and brought the sick to him.

The crowd around Jesus doesn't have to be all the same people all day long.

Every specific day a healing is mentioned in the Gospels - it is ALWAYS on the Sabbath day.

Is any other specific day of the week mentioned for any reason?

Many of his healings took place after preaching at the synaguoge on the Sabbath, and the Pharisees had no reason to accuse Jesus of anything for healing on a Tuesday.

There's plenty of heallings where the day of the week isn't mentioned. I don't see any reason to assume these were all on the Sabbath.

How often does Jesus say to someone who has come to be healed "come back on the Sabbath"?

Anyway, there is a big counterexample to the idea Jesus only preached and healed on the Sabbath -The feeding of the 5,000 and what happened after.(Matthew 14)

Jesus was healing those in a crowd when the disciples suggested he send them away so they could buy food, commerce still going on, and he of course feeds them miraculously instead. Later Jesus sends the disciples ahead in a boat to the other side of the lake, and he prays alone into the night and then shortly before dawn walks on water to the disciples' boat. Then they land and people come to him from the surrounding area and are healed.

So we have Jesus healing on two consecutive days.

Think about what is being said here. Unless Jesus did all His work on one day only (as in one Saturday, or one Wednesday, or one Thursday) - then how could the Scripture have been fulfilled in their hearing "this day"?

You answer your own question...

"This is the start of Christ's ministry, after being tempted 40 days and nights. He is announcing His Ministry"

The Isaiah passage he reads says he is being sent out to preach and heal, it doesn't talk of healing at the moment. That specific Sabbath was the day Jesus was sent out to preach and heal. The passage was fullfilled that singular day.

By the word "day" being symbolic of a longer period of time rather than a definite 24 hour period, as it often was in the Hebrew culture.

This might explain it too, as the day might refer to the "day" of his ministry which was just dawning, but I still think it more likley to refer to that specific calender day.

I don't see Jesus encountering someone who needed healing and saying "sorry buddy, it ain't Saturday."

Yep, I couldn't find that story in my Bible either.

 

[Sketcher]

Sabbath is Saturday. Sabbath is also not for Gentiles. Sunday is an appropriate day worship and for celebrating the resurrection of Jesus for all Christians.

 

[Stravinsk]

You make some decent points, Blackguard. I'm going to conceed your post without quibbling on a few minor points.

Tell me something. Do you believe the following?

Luke 24:44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

Note the key word here: Everything. Everything pointing to the Messiah in the Prophets, Psalms and Law of Moses had to be fulfilled.

Obviously there are follow up questions - but I'll know your answer to this first.

 

[Ronald]

Technically the Sabbath is from Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. It was an error to reassign the name of that day to the Lord's day -- no need to.
Enforcing any of the Laws given to the Jews is legalism. In Romans, it clearly says we are under Grace, not the Law. We have a New Covenant. Under the Old Covenant, The Jews attended a temple were God dwelt. However, we are the Temple of the Holy Spirit. We are in Christ, at peace with God. So congregate whenever you choose.
Jesus is our Sabbath, our rest. You should be worshipping everyday, praying without ceasing, etc. The Sabbath was the only commandment absent the New Testatment. Regardless, all commandments fall under the two Jesus gave us: Love God, love eachother. If you will, i t is the law of love that we are under. You can try an keep 612 laws given to the Jews and you will fail and be judged by them.
The Laws and the Prophets were a witness to who Jesus was. The disciples referenced them to validate that Jesus was the Messiah.
Acts 13:14; 13:27 Paul went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath ... to preach to the Jews. What other day could he congregate with Jews to witness to them? He reasoned with them on every Sabbath --- Jews wouldn't be there on Sunday. It doesn't mean that we need to congregate on that day.

 

[Im_A]

Makes it easier to celebrate Easter.
[tongue stuck in cheek]

 

[SneakerPimp53]

I always find it interesting how so many people have such an Anglo-centric world view. I know the English speaking world is awash in 10,000 sects, each getting further and further away from the so called "reformers." But the reality is most of the world's Christians are Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox, and there isn't any difference on these matters between the two. Nor is there any amongst the so called high protestants like Lutherans and Anglicans.

The rest of it just comes down to cafeteria Judaizing. Which always seems to have as it's focus dietary aspects of Mosaic law, while ignoring everything else. The Book of Acts contains a record of the early Church's position, don't eat meat that was sacrificed to idols, otherwise you're good to go. In the modern west that's pretty much a non-concern, it's not like your neighborhood Safeway's meat department is going to have special discounted sacrificed to idols meat for sale. People have been eating pork safely for thousands of years. Improperly handled beef is just as dangerous as improperly handled pork. For that matter improperly handle veggies have been responsible for more than a few food borne illness out breaks in the past few years. If anything pork is probably safer these days because of the tendency to over cook it.