Why the Catholic Church changes the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday

[BobRyan]

Since you brought it up - here is a more recent post on that "other topic" you are so anxious to discuss (in this case it is your own thread that you titled "is God a Liar" )

Genesis 1 is myth. It's not SUPPOSED to be scientifically or historically accurate. .

God takes it literally as we see in His own summary of the Genesis 1:2-2:4 "Account" -- historic "account"

As already noted -- "SIX DAYS you shall labor...for IN SIX days the LORD created the heavens and the earth - and rested the 7th day"

This is irrefutable - and the failed attempts to marry the Bible to evolutionism do not survive this "Bible detail"

Gen 2 -
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Ex 20 - legal code (not poetry - not symbolism)
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

this is a bible detail that cannot be ignored when admitting that the Bible describes a real - literal "six days you shall labor...for in six days the Lord made" 7 day week for creation that maps exactly to the week of Exodus 20.

Irrefutable.

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

So much so that atheists have no problem admitting to what the text says -- even though they do not agree with its teaching.

Genesis 1 is myth. It's not SUPPOSED to be scientifically or historically accurate. .

Atheists (who take the Bible as "myth" without question) often don't mind "admitting" to what the Bible says - they simply reject what it says. As in rejecting the virgin birth, the bodily ascension of Christ, the miracles of the bible and in this example they freely admit to what the Bible says - while rejecting it as 'truth'.

In this case the genre the "kind of writing that it is" -- is the kind of writing known as historic account - as even atheist professors of Hebrew and OT studies in all world class universities - the will admit.

Professor James Barr, Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford, has written:

‘Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience (b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story (c) Noah’s flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark. Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know.’

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

That is the opinion of professors not at all inclined to accept the 7 day creation week that we find in Gen 1:2-2:3 yet they can still 'read' and point to the author's intent - whether they agree with the author or not


Bible believing Christians are not in a conflict-of-interest on this Bible detail because they freely reject blind faith evolutionism - so no Bible bending the text of Genesis for them.

Atheists are not in a conflict of interest position on this Bible detail because they freely reject the Bible - so they too do not engage in Bible bending in Genesis as Dr Barr points out.

LOL That's right!! You do enjoy Creationism as well.

Yes I prefer the Bible to that pile of Ignatius letters that are proven frauds - though they be the majority of his letters.
And I prefer the Bible to "is God a Liar" along with "Bible is myth" doctrines.

I am pretty consistent that way.

----- by contrast --


============== in this post we have "two birds of a feather" ---

All the scientific evidence points to an ancient earth. Furthermore, the fossil records support the slow change of species over time, such as dinosaurs to birds. *IF* these things are not true, it would follow that God deliberately created a world with false scientific data. Right? So then this begs the questions...

Did God lie?
And if God lied, why?

What do you believe?

You have very strongly contradicted yourself here.

First you say: "It is an impossibility for God to lie..." which is true, but not for the reason you cite. After claiming God cannot lie, you then paint God as a frivolous, capricious and unreliable Being; that is horribly heretical in substance.

God cannot violate His own nature; alternatively, God cannot NOT be God. It is the only thing God cannot do.

Interesting accusations in those posts --

At least they agree with each other.

 

[Meowzltov]

Well to be fair, there also appears to be an obsession concerning the subject of the OC Mosaic food laws.

By some, but I don't think by Bob. Unless I'm mistaken, he is SDA and so is vegetarian, not kosher. For myself, I'm kosher, but I don't think it is mandatory or a salvation issue. I do it because I'm a Jew so I do Jew stuff.

 

[Meowzltov]

16 God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night;
He made the stars also. (Last week ?)

It can't be more clear. Some people are just stubborn.

 

[Meowzltov]

in the fake world of man-made tradition we have a pile of 15 litters by Ignatius

You know what? I'm just not going to continue this discussion with you. It's to the point where you are just being dishonest. You are fooling only yourself. Anyone can research it for themselves and find out which of Ignatius' letter are not forgeries. And everyone knows the difference between Calvin and a modern scholar.

You are also being boring, repeating points over and over that have already been refuted.

 

[Meowzltov]

Neither is Ignatius.

The point remains ... all the papal names in your post - not withstanding



All of which had more formal training than Ignatius and the fraudulent authors of the majority of letters supposedly from him.

As we all know.

Ignatius is the primary document, not the scholar evaluating the primary document. Sheesh, you are really desperate.

 

[Bob S]

I agree, that is bothersome. How do they manage to condone that? God plainly says in his law that it is forbidden.
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, it is abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them.

Well, we are not under Torah, so putting someone to death is not an option. Maybe you would lighten up a bit if you had homosexual family members. I happen to have some in the family tree. They were born that way. They are still God's children. All of us sin in some manner and that is forbidden also. Thank God I am not the judge. I love and cherish the homosexual members of my family. Some of the most outstanding people on Earth are/were Homosexual. How about getting real.

 

[Travis93]

Well, we are not under Torah, so putting someone to death is not an option. Maybe you would lighten up a bit if you had homosexual family members. I happen to have some in the family tree. They were born that way. They are still God's children. All of us sin in some manner and that is forbidden also. Thank God I am not the judge. I love and cherish the homosexual members of my family. Some of the most outstanding people on Earth are/were Homosexual. How about getting real.

Well if you don't want to hear the law, how about some NT verses.
Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1 Corinthians 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Timothy 1:10 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jude 1:8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

And of course Jesus's concept of marriage was between a man and a woman, citing Genesis.
Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Matthew 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

 

[W2L]

Arguments over old letters, and the law, and all this stuff. People disagree in just about everything, until someone tells them they are all wrong, then they will agree that this person is wrong. lol why am I a Christian again? Someone remind me what a Christian is.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Someone remind me what a Christian is.

Someone who has been crucified with Christ.
Someone who follows Jesus, not man.
By grace, not by religion, not by the will of man --

Yhwh chooses from heaven His children
- chooses Himself who to give new life to,
and who to toss in the lake of fire for destruction.

Yhwh Says Choose TODAY who you (anyone) will serve. God or man or idols.
Such Grace - Yhwh Says Choose TODAY.

 

[Bob S]

Well if you don't want to hear the law, how about some NT verses.
Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1 Corinthians 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Timothy 1:10 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jude 1:8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

And of course Jesus's concept of marriage was between a man and a woman, citing Genesis.
Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Matthew 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

Hold the phone partner. I never said it was not a sin.

Well if you don't want to hear the law, how about some NT verses.
Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1 Corinthians 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Timothy 1:10 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jude 1:8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

And of course Jesus's concept of marriage was between a man and a woman, citing Genesis.
Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Matthew 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

The fact is that some people are born with this abnormality just as some are born with many other disabilities. It is not ours to judge. God is in charge not us. If you cannot accept homosexuals or people with any other problem then the real problem is yours.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That's humanistic, not Scriptural.
Not for here, but elsewhere - there are(or were) ministries delivering
spiritually bound persons from the power and deception and control of demons.
No matter what someone's sin is, except the sin that leads to death, and
the sin of blasphemy that's not forgiveable (as stated clearly in God's Word),
Yhwh may set someone free from the sin and from the flesh and from the devil and from the world's power.
If they do not repent, if they are not forgiven and not purchased and not cleansed,
then they don't make it, no matter what else they believe or what people tell them.
Perverts are born that way only the same way thieves and prostitutes and murderers are born that way --- i.e. "human" and DEAD in sin and trespasses.
Yhwh calls them all to repentance, to turn completely from their sin,
and if He Wills, they become born again, new creations, no longer what they once were.

 

[Bob S]

Perverts are born that way only the same way thieves and prostitutes and murderers are born that way --- i.e. "human" and DEAD in sin and trespasses.

Are you writing from the seat of your pants or do you have scientific proof that perverts are born the same way thieves and prostitutes and murderers are born?

Yhwh calls them all to repentance, to turn completely from their sin,
and if He Wills, they become born again, new creations, no longer what they once were.

I have heard that before, lets see some proof that they can be changed. That would be close to God changing me from a man to a woman. It just ain't gonna happen.

 

[BobRyan]

Arguments over old letters, and the law, and all this stuff. People disagree in just about everything, until someone tells them they are all wrong, then they will agree that this person is wrong. lol why am I a Christian again? Someone remind me what a Christian is.

I have shown you strong agreement between all major Christian denominations - even pro-sunday scholars - on the fact that the TEN Commandments are still binding on all Christians -- to this very day.

Bit there is a tiny - yet loud - contingent that show up to condemn the Commandments of God - specifically the TEN Commandments - and you then ignore all the statements of even your own pro-sunday scholars to argue that point. Why not rather choose the doctrine of Christ in Mark 7:6-13 where He outright defends the TEN Commandments?

When in fact it is by far the view of Christianity to defend the TEN Commandments and always has been -- even for the pro-Sunday scholars.

How is this complicated?

 

[BobRyan]

Ignatius is the primary document, not the scholar evaluating the primary document.

The Bible is the primary document and the confirmed fraud-ridden pile of litters claimed to be from Ignatius are the spurious "source" rife with interpolation and fraud.

I don't object to your need to go to that as your 'source of truth' - but many others will likely choose "the Bible instead" as a trusted source document.

Sheesh, you are really desperate.

 

[BobRyan]

Since this is a thread about the RCC attempts to edit/change/transfer the Bible Sabbath solemn assembly to week-day-1

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

Pope John Paul II - in Dies Domini -

Dies Domini pt 13 -
"the Sabbath ...is therefore rooted in the depths of God's plan. This is why unlike many other laws - it is not within the context of strictly cultic (Jewish) stipulations but within the Decalogue the "ten words" which represent the very pillars of moral life inscribed on the human heart!!

Here Pope John Paul argues two points in his document "Dies Domini"

1. That the TEN Commandments (all TEN... not just NINE ) still remain. What does that mean about the SABBATH Commandment? gone - or remains? or bent to point to??

2. In the second quote John Paul II Refers to the OT Sabbath as the LORD's Day -

Pope John Paul II

Dies Domini pt 13 -
"the Sabbath ...is therefore rooted in the depths of God's plan. This is why unlike many other laws - it is not within the context of strictly cultic (Jewish) stipulations but within the Decalogue the "ten words" which represent the very pillars of moral life inscribed on the human heart!! In setting this commandment within the context of the basic structure of ethics, Israel and then the church declare that they consider it not just a matter of community religious discipline but a defining and indelible expression of our relationship to God, announced and expounded by biblical revelations.

Dies Domini

From the Sabbath to Sunday

18. Because the Third (the Sabbath) Commandment depends upon the remembrance of God's saving works and because Christians saw the definitive time inaugurated by Christ as a new beginning, they made the first day after the Sabbath a festive day, for that was the day on which the Lord rose from the dead. The Paschal Mystery of Christ is the full revelation of the mystery of the world's origin, the climax of the history of salvation and the anticipation of the eschatological fulfilment of the world. What God accomplished in Creation and wrought for his People in the Exodus has found its fullest expression in Christ's Death and Resurrection, though its definitive fulfilment will not come until the Parousia, when Christ returns in glory. In him, the "spiritual" meaning of the Sabbath is fully realized, as Saint Gregory the Great declares: "For us, the true Sabbath is the person of our Redeemer, our Lord Jesus Christ".(14) This is why the joy with which God, on humanity's first Sabbath, contemplates all that was created from nothing, is now expressed in the joy with which Christ, on Easter Sunday, appeared to his disciples, bringing the gift of peace and the gift of the Spirit (cf. Jn 20:19-23). It was in the Paschal Mystery that humanity, and with it the whole creation, "groaning in birth-pangs until now" (Rom 8:22), came to know its new "exodus" into the freedom of God's children who can cry out with Christ, "Abba, Father!" (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6). In the light of this mystery, the meaning of the Old Testament precept concerning the Lord's Day is recovered, perfected and fully revealed in the glory which shines on the face of the Risen Christ (cf. 2 Cor 4:6). We move from the "Sabbath" to the "first day after the Sabbath", from the seventh day to the first day: the dies Domini becomes the dies Christi!

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

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

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



In these quotes we see "TEN Commandments" and "DECALOGUE" not "630"

2056 The word "Decalogue" means literally "ten words."11 God revealed these "ten words" to his people on the holy mountain. They were written "with the finger of God,"12 unlike the other commandments written by Moses.

2072 Since they express man's fundamental duties towards God and towards his neighbor, the Ten Commandments reveal, in their primordial content, grave obligations.They are fundamentally immutable, and they oblige always and everywhere. No one can dispense from them. the Ten Commandments are engraved by God in the human heart.


these Catholic Catechism statements seem to support what John Paul II and what "The Faith Explained" have said in their two points above --

2056 The word "Decalogue" means literally "ten words."11 God revealed these "ten words" to his people on the holy mountain. They were written "with the finger of God,"12 unlike the other commandments written by Moses.13 They are pre-eminently the words of God. They are handed on to us in the books of Exodus 14 and Deuteronomy.15 Beginning with the Old Testament, the sacred books refer to the "ten words,"16 but it is in the New Covenant in Jesus Christ that their full meaning will be revealed.

2072 Since they express man's fundamental duties towards God and towards his neighbor, the Ten Commandments reveal, in their primordial content, grave obligations.They are fundamentally immutable, and they oblige always and everywhere. No one can dispense from them. the Ten Commandments are engraved by God in the human heart.

2063.... the words of the Decalogue remain likewise for us Christians. Far from being abolished, they have received amplification and development from the fact of the coming of the Lord in the flesh.26

2068 The Council of Trent teaches that the Ten Commandments are obligatory for Christiansand that the justified man is still bound to keep them;28 The Second Vatican Council confirms: "The bishops, successors of the apostles, receive from the Lord . . . the mission of teaching all peoples, and of preaching the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism and the observance of the Commandments."29

(Application in James 2)
2069 The Decalogue forms a coherent whole. Each "word" refers to each of the others and to all of them; they reciprocally condition one another. the two tables shed light on one another; they form an organic unity. To transgress one commandment is to infringe all the others.30 One cannot honor another person without blessing God his Creator. One cannot adore God without loving all men, his creatures. the Decalogue brings man's religious and social life into unity.[/QUOTE]


Key question:

In legal terms - what does it mean to change one of the TEN commandments in the law - so that its obligation, its authority, its observance is now transferred to some other day - other than the one as given in that Command??

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Since this is a thread about the RCC attempts to edit/change/transfer the Bible Sabbath solemn assembly to week-day-1

I thought it is written in Scripture that satan changes (actually changes for the world, though not for God's people) the days and the law,
and simply used the rcc and others to accomplish this ?

 

[BobRyan]

In Daniel 7 you find this about the "little horn" power that persecuted the saints for 1260 years in the dark ages.

Dan 7
3 “Thus he said:
‘The fourth beast shall be
A fourth kingdom on earth, (pagan Roman Empire)
Which shall be different from all other kingdoms,
And shall devour the whole earth,
Trample it and break it in pieces.
24 The ten horns are ten kings
Who shall arise from this kingdom.
And another shall rise after them;
He shall be different from the first ones,
And shall subdue three kings. (Vandals, Ostrogoths, Heruli)
25 He shall speak pompous words against the Most High,
Shall persecute the saints of the Most High,
And shall intend to change times and law.
Then the saints shall be given into his hand
For a time and times and half a time. (1260 days = day for year)

26 ‘But the court shall be seated,
And they shall take away his dominion,
To consume and destroy it forever.


Some translators say it is "Change Time Laws" not just "Times and Laws"

 

[W2L]

I have shown you strong agreement between all major Christian denominations - even pro-sunday scholars - on the fact that the TEN Commandments are still binding on all Christians -- to this very day.

Bit there is a tiny - yet loud - contingent that show up to condemn the Commandments of God - specifically the TEN Commandments - and you then ignore all the statements of even your own pro-sunday scholars to argue that point. Why not rather choose the doctrine of Christ in Mark 7:6-13 where He outright defends the TEN Commandments?

When in fact it is by far the view of Christianity to defend the TEN Commandments and always has been -- even for the pro-Sunday scholars.

How is this complicated?

I don't condemn the 10CS and don't condemn anyone for following them. I just don't believe Sabbath is observed in the NC, in such a way that one day is different than another. ITs my opinion and I must answer to God about it. Romans 14, who am I, or who are you, to judge another mans servant?

 

[BobRyan]

I don't condemn the 10CS and don't condemn anyone for following them. I just don't believe Sabbath is observed in the NC

Because you don't think the Sabbath is one of the Ten Commandments? or because in your view - violating the Ten Commandments is not really sin.

Even though 1 John 3:4 says that in the NT "SIN IS transgression of the LAW"
And in Romans 3:19-21 Paul says the Law of God - still to this very day - condemns the entire world as sinners.

. Romans 14, who am I, or who are you, to judge another mans servant?

Romans 14 is not arguing in favor of the Galatians 4 pagan holy days - for which Paul quickly condemns the Christians in Galatia should they observe even one of them.

 

[W2L]

Because you don't think the Sabbath is one of the Ten Commandments? or because in your view - violating the Ten Commandments is not really sin.

Even though 1 John 3:4 says that in the NT "SIN IS transgression of the LAW"
And in Romans 3:19-21 Paul says the Law of God - still to this very day - condemns the entire world as sinners.



Romans 14 is not arguing in favor of the Galatians 4 pagan holy days - for which Paul quickly condemns the Christians in Galatia should they observe even one of them.

Again, who am I, or who are you, to judge another mans servant? You keep spamming the same scripture. May I spam Romans 14 then?