Did the Catholic Church changed the Sabbath to Sunday?

[Cribstyl]

The truth is that the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) teaches that the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week and remains so. The Lord's day is the first day of the week and on it Catholic Christians commemorate the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ after his passion. That is why every Sunday is a celebration because even though we remember the death of the Lord Jesus Christ until he comes again we also remember with great joy that he is risen indeed. The Lord's day is not the Sabbath. The truth is that Christ Jesus is himself the fulfilment of the Sabbath and he is the rest of God to which the Sabbath pointed. Thus Catholic Christians find their rest in the Lord Jesus Christ and no longer seek to gain God's favour by obedience to the law which was engraved in stone and was constituted of commandments and ordinances. The only work that Catholic Christians rely upon is the work of Christ Jesus in his incarnation, life, passion, resurrection, and ascension. Our works of obedience are "icing on the cake" - so to speak - in that God has privileged the faithful to participate in the work of Christ and to complete what is lacking in his sufferings.

Agreed.

 

[JackRT]

The early Christian Church was originally no more than another branch of Judaism. They worshipped in temple and synagogue with their Jewish brothers and sisters. In some rare cases, they constituted the majority and were able to control the order of service, readings and such. However, in most cases they were a minority and could not insist on their own readings or rituals. The custom arose that these Jewish-Christians would meet again on the day (our Sunday) following the Sabbath for a service on their own. Tensions rose within the Jewish community until about AD90 when the rabbinical council of Jamniah decided upon the scriptures that would be permissible for use in synagogue services. This effectively ended Christian participation in Sabbath synagogue worship. They did however in most cases continue the tradition of the Sunday services calling it the Lord’s day. This eventually became the norm and was in fact made law by Constantine. In due course theology was invented to justify the change.

 

[BukiRob]

Oy.... The issue of Sabbath is a FOUNDATIONAL issue. It is not a side issue. Sabbath was a part of creation itself.

As such this falls under the category of requiring extra ordinary evidence. The saying of extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence.

The claim of Sabbath is done away with is by nature an extraordinary claim and as such REQUIRES extraordinary evidence.

And convoluted claims do not even begin to meet this standard. Surely something so foundational would have been mentioned by Messiah after his resurrection right? Where is it that we find Yeshua telling his disciples that now that he has died and risen that they are free from Sabbath because he is their Sabbath rest? Where in Acts do we see Messiah saying this?

What we DO see is Messiah telling us:

17“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18“For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19“Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20“For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Fulfill is the greek word Pleroo and Strongs specifically defines it: to fulfil, i.e. to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God's promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment.

The word accomplished is also rendered fulfilled but the greek uses a different word here ginomai which is generally rendered to come about or to happen...

A modern parsing of this might look something like this:

Don't think that I have come to do away with the Torah OR the PROPHETS. I have not come to do away with it. I have come to make know the Torah and to obey it ahs it should be obeyed. For I tell you, not even the slightest detail found in Torah will pass away before EVERY detail in Torah is happens in its fullness.

Yeshua goes on to say that whosoever (the NASB translates it) annuals (GREEK lyō:to do away with, to deprive of authority, whether by precept or act)
... these commandments shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever (poieō:
to do, to carry out, to execute) shall do and teaches others to do them shall be called GREAT in the kingdom of heaven.

Scripture is pretty clear when you read it from a perspective of asking the Father for the truth and you are willing to lay aside what man has to say on the subject.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The early Christian Church was originally no more than another branch of Judaism. They worshipped in temple and synagogue with their Jewish brothers and sisters. In some rare cases, they constituted the majority and were able to control the order of service, readings and such. However, in most cases they were a minority and could not insist on their own readings or rituals. The custom arose that these Jewish-Christians would meet again on the day (our Sunday) following the Sabbath for a service on their own. Tensions rose within the Jewish community until about AD90 when the rabbinical council of Jamniah decided upon the scriptures that would be permissible for use in synagogue services. This effectively ended Christian participation in Sabbath synagogue worship. They did however in most cases continue the tradition of the Sunday services calling it the Lord’s day. This eventually became the norm and was in fact made law by Constantine. In due course theology was invented to justify the change.

This is an interesting synopsis of one version of the Sabbath/Sunday chronology. Do you have references to the multiple allegations made in your discourse?

 

[JackRT]

This is an interesting synopsis of one version of the Sabbath/Sunday chronology. Do you have references to the multiple allegations made in your discourse?

Unfortunately no. I have read widely in biblical scholarship and early Christian history but did not keep notes. That post is from my memory of this reading. If I do recall the sources I will post them.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Unfortunately no. I have read widely in biblical scholarship and early Christian history but did not keep notes. That post is from my memory of this reading. If I do recall the sources I will post them.

Thanks. I often have the same problem.

 

[BobRyan]

The early Christian Church was originally no more than another branch of Judaism.

Indeed - the Jews referred to them as a "sect". A sect of Judaism. Same Bible, Same God. Same Messiah message only Christians believed that the "Messiah has come". And same "Salvation is of the Jews" teaching that we find in John 4.

They worshipped in temple and synagogue with their Jewish brothers and sisters. In some rare cases, they constituted the majority and were able to control the order of service, readings and such. However, in most cases they were a minority and could not insist on their own readings or rituals. The custom arose that these Jewish-Christians would meet again on the day (our Sunday) following the Sabbath for a service on their own.

But not in the first century. Not any of the actual Bible writers.

 

[BobRyan]

Oy.... The issue of Sabbath is a FOUNDATIONAL issue. It is not a side issue. Sabbath was a part of creation itself.

As such this falls under the category of requiring extra ordinary evidence. The saying of extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence.

The claim of Sabbath is done away with is by nature an extraordinary claim and as such REQUIRES extraordinary evidence.

And convoluted claims do not even begin to meet this standard. Surely something so foundational would have been mentioned by Messiah after his resurrection right? Where is it that we find Yeshua telling his disciples that now that he has died and risen that they are free from Sabbath because he is their Sabbath rest? Where in Acts do we see Messiah saying this?

What we DO see is Messiah telling us:

17“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18“For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19“Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20“For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Fulfill is the greek word Pleroo and Strongs specifically defines it: to fulfil, i.e. to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God's promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment.

The word accomplished is also rendered fulfilled but the greek uses a different word here ginomai which is generally rendered to come about or to happen...

A modern parsing of this might look something like this:

Don't think that I have come to do away with the Torah OR the PROPHETS. I have not come to do away with it. I have come to make know the Torah and to obey it ahs it should be obeyed. For I tell you, not even the slightest detail found in Torah will pass away before EVERY detail in Torah is happens in its fullness.

Yeshua goes on to say that whosoever (the NASB translates it) annuals (GREEK lyō:to do away with, to deprive of authority, whether by precept or act)
... these commandments shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever (poieō:
to do, to carry out, to execute) shall do and teaches others to do them shall be called GREAT in the kingdom of heaven.

Scripture is pretty clear when you read it from a perspective of asking the Father for the truth and you are willing to lay aside what man has to say on the subject.

Good points all!

 

[JackRT]

Indeed - the Jews referred to them as a "sect". A sect of Judaism. Same Bible, Same God. Same Messiah message only Christians believed that the "Messiah has come". And same "Salvation is of the Jews" teaching that we find in John 4.



But not in the first century. Not any of the actual Bible writers.

As you are well aware the division of scripture was a late development. Early manuscripts indicate that the synoptic gospels were originally written in lexions inhere order to conform to the first century synagogue lectionary of Torah readings and Jewish feast days. Why would the gospel writers do that if they were not in synagogue services? There is good evidence that Matthew was either a Rabbi or at least a Sophar.

 

[Cribstyl]

Indeed - the Jews referred to them as a "sect". A sect of Judaism. Same Bible, Same God. Same Messiah message only Christians believed that the "Messiah has come". And same "Salvation is of the Jews" teaching that we find in John 4.

Really Bob? In this same bible the Greek words 'sect' and 'heresy' are both defined as " hairesis". Are you denying that Jews viewed followers of Christ as a heretics worthy of death? Crucifixions and beatings spells out their resolve.

They worshipped in temple and synagogue with their Jewish brothers and sisters. In some rare cases, they constituted the majority and were able to control the order of service, readings and such. However, in most cases they were a minority and could not insist on their own readings or rituals. The custom arose that these Jewish-Christians would meet again on the day(our Sunday) following the Sabbath for a service on their own.

But not in the first century. Not any of the actual Bible writers.

Not in the first century? Not in the bible? What bible are you reading Bob?
To find out about the beginning of Christian worship, all focus should be centered on the detailed "acts of the apostles" after Christ died on the cross. (true or false?)
Question for you Bob... Who would you want to show up at your church meeting?
Read what Luke wrote in Luke 24 about when they met.
Read what John wrote in John 20:19 telling us that; due to fear of the Jews the apostles assembled on the first day of the week.
Who showed up in their midst at this gathering Bob? It's noted by John that the doors were closed.

The following week also notes that the doors were closed.(for fear of the Jews) When did they meet and who showed up Bob?
The closed door should represent a barrier between the sect of Judaism and the sect of Christianity.
Clue: The Jews were not acting as they were all believing in the same God and same message.

 

[BukiRob]

Really Bob? In this same bible the Greek words 'sect' and 'heresy' are both defined as " hairesis". Are you denying that Jews viewed followers of Christ as a heretics worthy of death? Crucifixions and beatings spells out their resolve.


Not in the first century? Not in the bible? What bible are you reading Bob?
To find out about the beginning of Christian worship, all focus should be centered on the detailed "acts of the apostles" after Christ died on the cross. (true or false?)
Question for you Bob... Who would you want to show up at your church meeting?
Read what Luke wrote in Luke 24 about when they met.
Read what John wrote in John 20:19 telling us that; due to fear of the Jews the apostles assembled on the first day of the week.
Who showed up in their midst at this gathering Bob? It's noted by John that the doors were closed.

The following week also notes that the doors were closed.(for fear of the Jews) When did they meet and who showed up Bob?
The closed door should represent a barrier between the sect of Judaism and the sect of Christianity.
Clue: The Jews were not acting as they were all believing in the same God and same message.

Acts most definitely does not portray things as you suggest. In fact at the feast of Shavuot 3000 JEWS came to believe in Yeshua. Scripture goes on to tell us that DAILY Jews were saved and their numbers grew.

We know for certain from scripture in Acts that a NUMBER of the members of the Sanhedrin believed Yeshua was the Messiah

 

[bbbbbbb]

Acts most definitely does not portray things as you suggest. In fact at the feast of Shavuot 3000 JEWS came to believe in Yeshua. Scripture goes on to tell us that DAILY Jews were saved and their numbers grew.

We know for certain from scripture in Acts that a NUMBER of the members of the Sanhedrin believed Yeshua was the Messiah

That does not negate the fact that the Jewish hierarchy was concerned (to say the very least) about the spread of this new messianic sect. It is comparable to the present situation within Judaism where significant numbers of Jews are trusting Yeshua as their Messiah. The Jewish leadership remains solidly opposed to these people. In the first century the leadership went so far as to stone Stephen to death and to pronounce the death sentence on Paul. Therefore, it is extraordinarily unlikely that the synagogues would have been permitted to have Messianic Jews take over the services and replace the traditions handed down from the elders.

 

[Shimshon]

That does not negate the fact that the Jewish hierarchy was concerned (to say the very least) about the spread of this new messianic sect. It is comparable to the present situation within Judaism where significant numbers of Jews are trusting Yeshua as their Messiah. The Jewish leadership remains solidly opposed to these people.

Not true at all. In the past decade many Messianic Jews have made aliyah and now live in the land. Some rabbis, who have been allowed to form a flourishing Messianic congregation in the heart of Jerusalem. King of Kings.Your description is akin to ultra orthodox anti-missionaries.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Not true at all. In the past decade many Messianic Jews have made aliyah and now live in the land. Some rabbis, who have been allowed to form a flourishing Messianic congregation in the heart of Jerusalem. King of Kings.Your description is akin to ultra orthodox anti-missionaries.

Show me one Orthodox, Conservative, or Reform congregation which has converted to being a Messianic congregation. The fact that Messianic congregations are becoming a fifth branch of Judaism (excluding the multiple Hassidic and other branches) does not negate the deeply-rooted hostility within all the other branches against it.

 

[Shimshon]

Show me one Orthodox, Conservative, or Reform congregation which has converted to being a Messianic congregation. The fact that Messianic congregations are becoming a fifth branch of Judaism (excluding the multiple Hassidic and other branches) does not negate the deeply-rooted hostility within all the other branches against it.

then I suggest you read about all the scores of Jewish professionals that are coming to Messiah, and becoming Messianic Jews.
http://www.imetmessiah.com/ Congregations don't convert to be Messianic. The Jewish congregants within them are becoming Jewish believers.

Besides you just openly admitted that Messianic Judaism is a 5th sect of Judaism. In order for this to happen you have to have acceptance by the other sects in some form. This is shown by allowing Messianic Jews to have communities with in Israel.

 

[bbbbbbb]

then I suggest you read about all the scores of Jewish professionals that are coming to Messiah, and becoming Messianic Jews.
http://www.imetmessiah.com/ Congregations don't convert to be Messianic. The Jewish congregants within them are becoming Jewish believers.

Besides you just openly admitted that Messianic Judaism is a 5th sect of Judaism. In order for this to happen you have to have acceptance by the other sects in some form. This is shown by allowing Messianic Jews to have communities with in Israel.

Thank you for affirming my point, which is that congregations don't convert to be Messianic. That has not changed in 2,000 years, so it is absurd to think that Paul and the other Jewish apostles went every Sabbath to the local Jewish synagogue to lead the service.

 

[BobRyan]

The early Christian Church was originally no more than another branch of Judaism.

Indeed - the Jews referred to them as a "sect". A sect of Judaism. Same Bible, Same God. Same Messiah message only Christians believed that the "Messiah has come". And same "Salvation is of the Jews" teaching that we find in John 4.

They worshiped in temple and synagogue with their Jewish brothers and sisters. In some rare cases, they constituted the majority and were able to control the order of service, readings and such. However, in most cases they were a minority and could not insist on their own readings or rituals. The custom arose that these Jewish-Christians would meet again on the day (our Sunday) following the Sabbath for a service on their own.

But not in the first century. Not any of the actual Bible writers.

Really Bob? In this same bible the Greek words 'sect' and 'heresy' are both defined as " hairesis". Are you denying that Jews viewed followers of Christ as a heretics worthy of death? Crucifixions and beatings spells out their resolve.

You are not following the point at all - they viewed the Christians as a sect of Judaism. It does not mean that they agreed with all the doctrines in that group they called a "sect". Notice that the Jewish leaders were not dragging pagan and worshipers of Greek gods into courts to accuse them - rather they were dragging those that they considered to be among their own group - a sect within Judaism.

They worshiped in temple and synagogue with their Jewish brothers and sisters. In some rare cases, they constituted the majority and were able to control the order of service, readings and such. However, in most cases they were a minority and could not insist on their own readings or rituals. The custom arose that these Jewish-Christians would meet again on the day (our Sunday) following the Sabbath for a service on their own.

But not in the first century. Not any of the actual Bible writers.

Not in the first century? Not in the bible?

Correct.

What bible are you reading Bob?

At this point we may be treated to repeated examples of scripture NOT claiming that " Jewish-Christians would meet again on the day (our Sunday) following the Sabbath for a service on their own every week" and also NOT claiming that "week day 1 is the Lord's Day" as well as NOT claiming "week day 1 is the new Sabbath - the Christian Sabbath"

To find out about the beginning of Christian worship, all focus should be centered on the detailed "acts of the apostles" after Christ died on the cross. (true or false?)
Question for you Bob... Who would you want to show up at your church meeting?
Read what Luke wrote in Luke 24 about when they met.

Luke 24 does not describe them as meeting for a weekly service -

Read what John wrote in John 20:19 telling us that; due to fear of the Jews the apostles assembled on the first day of the week.

Yes - they were hiding - just as they were when Peter was arrested.

The following week also notes that the doors were closed.(for fear of the Jews) When did they meet and who showed up Bob?

Turns out - a week is 7 days - - not 8 days. Even worse "AFTER 8 days" so then it could even have been 9 days later - not merely 8 days later.

John 20
26 After eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus *came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.”

The text does not say "and 7 days later they were again gathered to worship on the first day of the week" --

All of these are great examples of texts that DO NOT say - that " Jewish-Christians would meet again on the day (our Sunday) following the Sabbath for a service on their own every week" and also NOT claiming that "week day 1 is the Lord's Day" as well as NOT claiming "week day 1 is the new Sabbath - the Christian Sabbath"

 

[Cribstyl]

Acts most definitely does not portray things as you suggest. In fact at the feast of Shavuot 3000 JEWS came to believe in Yeshua. Scripture goes on to tell us that DAILY Jews were saved and their numbers grew.

We know for certain from scripture in Acts that a NUMBER of the members of the Sanhedrin believed Yeshua was the Messiah

First of all, I did not reference the book of Acts as yet. We're in agreement that DAILY Jews were saved after Pentecost.

 

[tulipbee]

Why go on the "bring the lamb to the alter" day when the apostles met on Sundays

 

[BukiRob]

That does not negate the fact that the Jewish hierarchy was concerned (to say the very least) about the spread of this new messianic sect. It is comparable to the present situation within Judaism where significant numbers of Jews are trusting Yeshua as their Messiah. The Jewish leadership remains solidly opposed to these people. In the first century the leadership went so far as to stone Stephen to death and to pronounce the death sentence on Paul. Therefore, it is extraordinarily unlikely that the synagogues would have been permitted to have Messianic Jews take over the services and replace the traditions handed down from the elders.

Acts 6 We find the following 6:7 The word of God kept on spreading; and the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith.

Some of the Jewish leadership was opposed. A good portion of it were made up of BELIEVERS.

The High Priest was not a believer and some of the leadership was in solid opposition. The key words are SOME.

You are patently wrong and Acts 15 makes it abundantly clear when James says: 21 For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since [k]he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”

Both jews and gentiles who were believer in Asia Minor attended Sabbath.... to suggest otherwise is in direct conflict with clearly what scripture states