Why the Catholic Church changes the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday

[BobRyan]

I do think however that they chose Sunday because their beliefs were frowned upon or worse they were persecuted perhaps even to the point of fearing for their lives.

But then there is "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine and tradition - and in the "Sola scriptura" model one has to have scripture saying that they traded in God's commandment for the tradition of week-day-1 observance week after week. And there is no such text.

 

[BobRyan]

The Catholic Commentary on the Baltimore Catechism post Vatican II - argues the SAME two points.

1965 -- first published 1959

(from "The Faith Explained" page 243

"we know that in the O.T it was the seventh day of the week - the Sabbath day- which was observed as the Lord's day. that was the law as God gave it...'remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.. the early Christian church determined as the Lord's day the first day of the week. That the church had the right to make such a law is evident...

The reason for changing the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday lies in the fact that to the Christian church the first day of the week had been made double holy...

nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday..that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many non-Catholic who say they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church

========================================

To start off with the Catholic Church has not changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. It hasn't.

ok so now we have two - Catholics -- two statements on what happened.

I prefer Leo Trese -- since he is well accepted in the Catholic church historically -- Notice that he points out that the Lord's Day - was the 7th day Sabbath in the OT - and that now it is changed to week-day-1 via tradition - alone.

The Jewish Sabbath day is still on Saturday. As far as I know every practicing Jew still honors the Sabbath on Saturday.

The point of discussion was never the straw man that the Catholics changed the Jewish religion - rather they changed the Sabbath for the Christians.

Those sola-scriptura Christians who do not follow the Popes and those Jews not inclined to follow the Papacy - would be most likely not to edit God's Commandments in favor of Papal decrees, an edit contrary to what scripture says -- when it comes to God's Commandments.

 

[BobRyan]

No amount of ranting will substitute for Bible fact.

I just read from http://www.bible.ca/H-sunday.htm

The history of the early Christian's activity proves that the church started using the first day.

So that is your "substitute" for a Bible text supporting your speculation?

I just read from Malachi 3" "I the LORD your God do not change"
and from Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."

And from Eph 6:2 that the unit of Ten - in which the 5th commandment is the "FIRST Commandment with a promise" -- is still binding on all mankind. A Bible detail so obvious that even the majority of pro-sunday scholarship agree -- such as Spurgeon, Moody, R.C. Sproul, Stanley, the "Westminster Confession of Faith", the "Baptist Confession of Faith", Matthew Henry... et al "get that point".

Constantine, as I previously wrote put his redundant stamp...

And then I read from Mark 7:6-13 -- showing how "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine and tradition - HAMMERS the traditions of man that seek to edit/alter/change the LAW of God.


Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

======================

Of course a few Catholics in the General theology section of this board object to the "Sola Scriptura" doctrine as I have quoted it from Mark 7:6-13, and Acts 17:11 testing all tradition and doctrine... but there we simply "agree to differ" -- you may choose tradition over the Bible in that case. But I do not.

hence your "speculative" web site said "The 10 commandment law including the requirement to keep the Sabbath day were abolished at the cross" http://www.bible.ca/H-sunday.htm

-- and by contrast the Word of God said "Do we then abolish the LAW of God by our Faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW of God" Rom 3:31

Yet "another" opportunity to hammer the flaws traditions and doctrines of men via the WORD of God - "sola scriptura".

Thus even the Catholic Church is not entirely wrong when it says "nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday..that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many non-Catholic who say they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church"

You have quoted from the Bible that God does not change. What do you mean by that? What was your reason for quoting that verse?

you appealed to the traditions of man - as your "proof" your evidence for deleting one of God's Commandments.

So I said --

I just read from http://www.bible.ca/H-sunday.htm

The history of the early Christian's activity proves that the church started using the first day.

So that is your "substitute" for a Bible text supporting your speculation?

I just read from Malachi 3" "I the LORD your God do not change"
and from Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."

And from Eph 6:2 that the unit of Ten - in which the 5th commandment is the "FIRST Commandment with a promise" -- is still binding on all mankind. A Bible detail so obvious that even the majority of pro-sunday scholarship agree -- such as Spurgeon, Moody, R.C. Sproul, Stanley, the "Westminster Confession of Faith", the "Baptist Confession of Faith", Matthew Henry... et al "get that point".

then I read from Mark 7:6-13 -- showing how "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine and tradition - HAMMERS the traditions of man that seek to edit/alter/change the LAW of God.


Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Hey my friend, You are the pot calling the kettle black. You quote
Babylon,

Not entirely true - I point out the scholars on BOTH sides of the debate agree to certain key Bible details - that a few others are so anxious to gloss over and ignore. I call that "objectivity" when you find a Bible fact that is so glaringly obvious that BOTH sides agree to it.

That is "proof" of objectivity - a level of objectivity above the opposition so far.

That is nice, but what does that have to do with God's plan for mankind. It was made before the foundation of the Earth and it was/is His plan to give mankind a way to escape the penalty of the law given to the Israelites at Sinai.

Not at all true.

From Adam to this very day the penalty of the Law remains - the 2nd death -- the lake of fire... torment in fire and brimstone. That has not changed one iota.

And Moses and Elijah stand WITH Christ in Matt 17 -- everyone on the same page.

Thus Paul say sin both Romans 3 and Galatians 3 - that the STILL valid Law of God STILL condemns all the world (not just Jews) declaring that ALL have sinned - and all will perish in that lake of fire -- if they do not accept the Gospel. For "SIN IS Transgression of the LAW" even a command like "Do not take the name of God in vain" that is found nowhere in the NT - STILL it is valid and STILL it defines what sin is -

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Erose]

Bob, the fallacy of your reasoning on this matter is the belief that gentile Christians are bound by the Old Covenant, we are not. Thus we are not bound by the old Law. If we were then we should be honoring the whole Law, including the Sacrificial practices.

The point being here is if your faith tradition is going to follow the Old Law, then you are responsible for following the whole Old Law. The question then is are you?

 

[Bob S]

you appealed to the traditions of man - as your "proof" your evidence for deleting one of God's Commandments.

So I said --



So that is your "substitute" for a Bible text supporting your speculation?

Kinda like the pot calling...........

I just read from Malachi 3" "I the LORD your God do not change"
and from Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."

Has anyone indicated that God changes? What you won't consider is that the Plan of Salvation had different phases. God made covenants and mankind broke them. God has given us a new everlasting covenant. A covenant signed with His blood. All the changes are part of the original plan. Part of the plan was the Sabbath given to specific group of people so that they would remember how they were led out of bondage. The best part of the plan is GRACE. and the obliteration of the law tht could only condemn man to death. Your problem is that you want to put us back under the plan that didn't work and that is an absurd notion. Jesus frees us from bondage and you thump going back into that same bondage. I guess misery loves company.

And from Eph 6:2 that the unit of Ten - in which the 5th commandment is the "FIRST Commandment with a promise" -- is still binding on all mankind. A Bible detail so obvious that even the majority of pro-sunday scholarship agree -- such as Spurgeon, Moody, R.C. Sproul, Stanley, the "Westminster Confession of Faith", the "Baptist Confession of Faith", Matthew Henry... et al "get that point".

I get the point that your theory is don't do as I do, just do what I say. Going to Babylon to bolster your ideas isn't the smartest thing you could do in light of what Adventism thinks of the remainder of Christianity.

then I read from Mark 7:6-13 -- showing how "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine and tradition - HAMMERS the traditions of man that seek to edit/alter/change the LAW of God.

At least I am consistent. You on the other hand as a representative of what you call the "remnant" have thumped the law, 613 laws, and and cull all but a very few. You are so quick to point out the necessity of Sabbath observance and even claim we will go to Hell because we don't observe it yet you ignore thou shalt not kill. Yep, you represent the most detestable sin of abortion in SDA hospitals and will not take a stand to stop it. Every day because of the willy nilly church many precious souls are killed and filthy lucre is your profit.


Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

So, you are using scripture to try to judge me of teaching the commandments of men, That is a very unhealthy stand to take since I have used scripture for all my beliefs. Just where have I ever used the commandments of men in my debate? If I were you i would hide those verses. They are staring you in the face. There is no Sabbath law for those in Christ yet you have created one on very false pre conditioned ideas. Either you reject Paul in the Holy Writ where he plainly wrote that the 10 commandments were temporary and the Holy Spirit is now our guide or you have been conditioned so that you cannot recognize the written truth. Your whole argument is based on us having to observe 10 commands that have been called out in scripture as being temporary laws. You have no ground to stand on brother. Furthermore your strawman argument that those temporary laws that condemned us are now written in our hearts. OY!

Not entirely true - I point out the scholars on BOTH sides of the debate agree to certain key Bible details - that a few others are so anxious to gloss over and ignore. I call that "objectivity" when you find a Bible fact that is so glaringly obvious that BOTH sides agree to it.

That is "proof" of objectivity - a level of objectivity above the opposition so far.

So why do you call others out for using what they have found in History? Either stick to only the scriptures or accept the findings of others that just might shoot holes on your argument.


Bob S said: ↑
That is nice, but what does that have to do with God's plan for mankind. It was made before the foundation of the Earth and it was/is His plan to give mankind a way to escape the penalty of the law given to the Israelites at Sinai.
Not at all true.

Not at all true.

From Adam to this very day the penalty of the Law remains - the 2nd death -- the lake of fire... torment in fire and brimstone. That has not changed one iota.

Did you really comprehend what I wrote? Have you read Gal 3:17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise....Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. From Abraham to Sinai was 430 years. That is when the covenant law was introduced. In Duet 5 Moses further tells the Israelites that the law was exclusively for them. That covenant was the one that could only condemn the Israelites.

Thus Paul say sin both Romans 3 and Galatians 3 - that the STILL valid Law of God STILL condemns all the world (not just Jews) declaring that ALL have sinned - and all will perish in that lake of fire -- if they do not accept the Gospel. For "SIN IS Transgression of the LAW" even a command like "Do not take the name of God in vain" that is found nowhere in the NT - STILL it is valid and STILL it defines what sin is -

I beg to differ with you, it is God whom we transgress not His law.

Yes, the law according to Paul is the schoomaster that brings us to Christ. Here read it for yourself.
Gal3:23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.


24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.


25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. See it, we are no longer under the law.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, the fallacy of your reasoning on this matter is the belief that gentile Christians are bound by the Old Covenant, we are not.

sadly -- you are -- for "ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God"

All mankind is bound by the covenant "obey and live" Gal 3

"SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4
"The wages of SIN is death" Romans 6:23
"ALL the world held accountable - every mouth shut" Romans 3

It is ONLY for the saved - only for those for whom "Faith has come" that are released from that "Obey and Live" covenant.

And for the saved saints we have "My LAW WRITTEN on the heart and mind" Jer 31:31-33, Heb 8:6-10 -- NEW Covenant.

 

[BobRyan]

I just read from Malachi 3" "I the LORD your God do not change"
and from Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."

And from Eph 6:2 that the unit of Ten - in which the 5th commandment is the "FIRST Commandment with a promise" -- is still binding on all mankind. A Bible detail so obvious that even the majority of pro-sunday scholarship agree -- such as Spurgeon, Moody, R.C. Sproul, Stanley, the "Westminster Confession of Faith", the "Baptist Confession of Faith", Matthew Henry... et al "get that point".

then I read from Mark 7:6-13 -- showing how "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine and tradition - HAMMERS the traditions of man that seek to edit/alter/change the LAW of God.

Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.


From Adam to this very day the penalty of the Law remains - the 2nd death -- the lake of fire... torment in fire and brimstone. That has not changed one iota.

And Moses and Elijah stand WITH Christ in Matt 17 -- everyone on the same page.

Thus Paul say sin both Romans 3 and Galatians 3 - that the STILL valid Law of God STILL condemns all the world (not just Jews) declaring that ALL have sinned - and all will perish in that lake of fire -- if they do not accept the Gospel. For "SIN IS Transgression of the LAW" even a command like "Do not take the name of God in vain" that is found nowhere in the NT - STILL it is valid and STILL it defines what sin is -

What you won't consider is that the Plan of Salvation had different phases. God made covenants and mankind broke them. God has given us a new everlasting covenant.

The NEW Covenant is found in Jer 31:31-33 and Heb 8:6-10 "I will write MY LAWS on their heart and on their mind"
"Do we then make VOID the LAW of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW of God" Rom 3:31
"what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19

Gal 1:6-9 ONE Gospel in BOTH OT and NT.
Gal 3:7 -- "Gospel preached to Abraham"

Part of the plan was the Sabbath given to specific group of people so that they would remember how they were led out of bondage.

Sabbath "FOR ALL MANKIND" to worship God - Is 66:23
Sabbath blessing for gentiles - Is 56
"Sabbath MADE for MANKIND" - Mark 2:7
"there REMAINS a Sabbath rest for the People of God" Heb 4
"Worship HIM who MADE the heavens and the earth and the springs of water" Rev 14:7

5th Commandment is the "FIRST commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2 - FIRST "in what unit of LAW"?

The best part of the plan is GRACE. and the obliteration of the law

Just not in the actual Bible.
The NEW Covenant is found in Jer 31:31-33 and Heb 8:6-10 "I will write MY LAWS on their heart and on their mind"
"Do we then make VOID the LAW of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW of God" Rom 3:31
"what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19

At least I am consistent.

I give you that. No matter how many times I post those texts you claim to "obliterate the LAW of God" --- anyway.

Consistent.

Mark 7

So, you are using scripture to try to judge me of teaching the commandments of men, That is a very unhealthy stand to take since I have used scripture for all my beliefs.

I thought you were using the contradict-scripture model ...

In Mark 7 Christ demonstrates traditions of man -- violating the LAW of God.

As we all know the commandment to "NOT take God's name in vain" is not quoted even ONCE in the NT - but that means nothing - because the entire fluff-doctrine of the form "whatever is not repeated can be deleted" is mere fiction.

And even those PRO-Sunday sources in my signature line - know it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

In Mark 7 Christ demonstrates traditions of man -- violating the LAW of God. - the LAW of God - the Commandment of God is also called the WORD of God - by Christ.




Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

 

[Bob S]

sadly -- you are -- for "ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God"

Under the old covenant???? You have placed yourself under old covenant ritual laws (picked and chosen by the prophet), I have not and it is very sad that you have been so brainwashed that your really believe that. Adam sinned yet he was not under the Torah covenant(old covenant). Abraham, lot, Noah all sinned without the law. Why would you even suggest a thing like that. I think I know because once I wore the same hat as you now do, too bad.

All mankind is bound by the covenant "obey and live" Gal 3

No, it is so sad that you leave Jesus out of all your equations. Believe and live friend. Your theology is lacking.

"SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4

When you see a sign that farmer Brown nailed to a post that says no trespassing and you ignore it and proceed are you sinning against the notice of no trespassing or against farmer Brown? When we brake God's laws for Christians are we trespassing against the the laws or against God? Jn there in 1jn has some other thoughts such as:
9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. Yet we all do sin everyday. If God stopped there with that verse Heaven would be a very sparse place


10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. If we stop at those verses we have not absorbed the entire thought. John goes on to explain what laws Christians are expected to to do:
21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.


22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.


23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.


24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

One thing for sure John is not telling us that sin is transgression of the old law. We transgress when we stop believing in Jesus or stop loving our fellow man. I will tell you what sin is when you are trying to convince others to see the way you do, ot is the sin of omission, taking verses out of context or what SDAs call "proof texts"

"The wages of SIN is death" Romans 6:23

There you go again, a snippet out of context 23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, the fallacy of your reasoning on this matter is the belief that gentile Christians are bound by the Old Covenant, we are not.

sadly -- you are -- for "ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God"

All mankind is bound by the covenant "obey and live" Gal 3

"SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4
"The wages of SIN is death" Romans 6:23
"ALL the world held accountable - every mouth shut" Romans 3

It is ONLY for the saved - only for those for whom "Faith has come" that are released from that "Obey and Live" covenant.

And for the saved saints we have "My LAW WRITTEN on the heart and mind" Jer 31:31-33, Heb 8:6-10 -- NEW Covenant.

Under the old covenant????

Yes that is where you are until you accept the Gospel - read Romans 3.

Adam sinned yet he was not under the Torah covenant(old covenant). Abraham, lot, Noah all sinned without the law.

According the actual Bible "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4.
"Where there is no LAW - there is no SIN" - Romans 4.

That is how the LAW works for the lost - for all have sinned -- and so for them it is the 'covenant of death' - for "The wages of sin is death" Rom 6:23

More Bible - less making stuff up - please.

Why would you even suggest a thing like that.

Because I read the Bible -- rather than simply making stuff up.

One thing for sure John is not telling us that sin is transgression of the old law.

Until you read the actual Bible -

"SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4.

I will tell you what sin is when you are trying to convince others to see the way you do

Here "again" you "quote you" for the definition of sin.

I am going to have to go with the Bible on this one - hope you don't mind.

"SIN IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Erose]

So Bob, what sacrifices does your church make? When a female member of your congregation commits adultery do you stone her? Do you carry out all the ritual washings, and follow the Kosher laws for what you eat? If you are under the OC Bob, you better be doing these things plus all the other 600 plus laws, for if not you are not following the Law.

 

[Bob S]

So Bob, what sacrifices does your church make? When a female member of your congregation commits adultery do you stone her? Do you carry out all the ritual washings, and follow the Kosher laws for what you eat? If you are under the OC Bob, you better be doing these things plus all the other 600 plus laws, for if not you are not following the Law.

I would lie to see Bob's Kippa(Yamaka)(Yarmulke) and his covering with the tassels. Believe it or not one of my friends got so radical that he did start wearing those things to SDA Sabbath service. Bob is no doubt not eating old covenant deemed unclean animals. The prophet spoke and the flock has yielded to her authority even though there is and never has been a law for gentiles or Christians to refrain from eating all the things God gave to Noah after the flood.

Adventism uses a mixed bag of tricks to keep the flock under hierarchy control.

 

[Erose]

Yeah guess he has never read Galatians 5: [1] Stand fast, and be not held again under the yoke of bondage. [2] Behold, I Paul tell you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. [3] And I testify again to every man circumcising himself, that he is a debtor to the whole law. [4] You are made void of Christ, you who are justified in the law: you are fallen from grace. [5] For we in spirit, by faith, wait for the hope of justice.

 

[BobRyan]

So Bob, what sacrifices does your church make?

The ones commanded in Heb 10 -- as already stated a few dozen times. When it comes to sacrifices and offerings of the ceremonial system "He takes away the first - to establish the second" - Heb 10..

A bible detail so glaringly obvious that EVEN the majority of pro-sunday scholarship gets this point - the distinction between ceremonial law and moral laws such as the TEN Commandments. See the list of your own pro-sunday scholars in the signature line.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, did you bother to look up their verses an follow their reasoning?

Indeed I do.

Do you??

I have a question for you - I assume there must be some sort of "Jewish Catholic" organization or community. Perhaps they have a publication or magazine or something. Some way to discuss topics with that focused interest group.

What is their view of history?

When it comes to this...

In 1243 the entire Jewish population of Belitz, near Berlin, was burned alive on the charge that some of them had defiled a consecrated Host. [...] In 1298 every Jew in Rottingen was burned to death on the charge of desecrating a sacramental wafer. Rindfleisch, a pious baron, organized and armed a band of Christians sworn to kill all Jews; they completely exterminated the Jewish community at Wurtzburg, and slew 698 Jews in Nuremberg.



Catholic historian Peter de Rosa writes in Vicars of Christ (Crown Publishers, 1988), "Of eighty popes in a line from the thirteenth century on not one of them disapproved of the theology and apparatus of the Inquisition. On the contrary, one after another added his own cruel touches to the workings of this deadly machine."

 

[Erose]

The ones commanded in Heb 10 -- as already stated a few dozen times. When it comes to sacrifices and offerings of the ceremonial system "He takes away the first - to establish the second" - Heb 10..

A bible detail so glaringly obvious that EVEN the majority of pro-sunday scholarship gets this point - the distinction between ceremonial law and moral laws such as the TEN Commandments. See the list of your own pro-sunday scholars in the signature line.

So you do admit that the New replaces the Old.

 

[BobRyan]

In Heb 10 he takes away the animal sacrifices - and replaces that with the "ONCE FOR ALL" completed Sacrifice of Christ --

 

[Erose]

In Heb 10 he takes away the animal sacrifices - and replaces that with the "ONCE FOR ALL" completed Sacrifice of Christ --

So you admit that the New replaces the Old?

 

[BobRyan]

I admit that the once for all sacrifice of Christ on the cross replaces the system of animal sacrifices in Hebrews 10 -- as God said.

Heb 10
4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 5 Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says,
“Sacrifice and offering You have not desired,
But a body You have prepared for Me;
6 In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have taken no pleasure.
7 “Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come
(In the scroll of the book it is written of Me)
To do Your will, O God.’”

8 After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second. 10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet. 14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified
=========================================

1. No "continual offering"
2. Once for all offering - ended and He "sat down".
3. "Offering" of the body of Christ -- "ONCE for ALL" for all time.

So then - no Eucharist.... no Mass...

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Erose]

Do SDA folks circumcise themselves?