Did the early church worship on Sabbath?

[Ain't Zwinglian]

*This doctrine, consistently taught by the Orthodox, and which was expounded by particular clarify by St. Athanasius, and more recently in the Western Church by John Wesley, who translated Theosis as “Entire Sanctification” to avoid the confusion that “Deification” might cause given the unfortunate exposure of Anglophone Christians to the Pagan Greek concept of Apotheosis in isolation (this was less of a problem in Continental Europe, where Martin Luther taught the concept explicitly (which is one reason why, and I think my friends @MarkRohfrietsch and @Ain't Zwinglian will appreciate this comment, I regard Luther as very much a proponent of Orthodoxy, insofar as he taught Theosis and promoted a praxis very much in accord with Orthodoxy, including the partaking of the Eucharist in both kinds, a belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the use of liturgy in both the vernacular and liturgical languages,** and the veneration of the Theotokos, including in Luther’s case the use of a version of the Hail Mary prayer, and Iconodulism, particularly with regards towards the Crucifix, which was in blessed contrast to the massive iconoclastic devastation wrought in Calvinist lands and in most of Great Britain, with much of what survived Archbishop Cranmer (which was quite a lot) being destroyed following the martyrdom of St. Charles I under the tyrannical reign of Oliver Cromwell and his Puritans.***



1. 2 Peter 1:4 (NIV):

"Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires."



This is one of the clearest Biblical references to Theosis, where believers are said to "participate in the divine nature." It emphasizes transformation and communion with God, which is central to the concept of Theosis.



2. John 10:34-36 (NIV):

"Jesus answered them, 'Is it not written in your Law, "I have said you are gods"? If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?'"



Jesus quotes **Psalm 82:6**, which says, "I said, ‘You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.’" The implication in this passage suggests that those who receive the word of God partake in a divine status. While not equating humanity with God in essence, it underscores the potential for humans to be divinely elevated through union with Christ.



3. Romans 8:29-30 (NIV):

"For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified."



Here, Paul speaks about believers being **conformed to the image of Christ** and eventually **glorified**. This glorification is understood in Patristic theology as part of the process of Theosis, where believers are gradually transformed into the likeness of Christ, sharing in His divine life.



4. 2 Corinthians 3:18 (NIV):

"And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit."



This verse describes the **progressive transformation** of believers into the image of Christ, which corresponds with the idea of Theosis. It emphasizes that the process is driven by the Holy Spirit and involves sharing in Christ's glory.



5. 1 John 3:2

"Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is."



This verse reinforces the future aspect of Theosis: believers will be **like Christ** when He returns. It points to the ultimate goal of the Christian life as a full transformation into Christ's image, including the sharing of His divine life.



6. Colossians 3:3-4 (NIV):

"For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory."



This speaks of the believer’s life being **hidden in Christ** and the eventual manifestation of this life "in glory." It suggests that the life of Christ and the life of the believer are intertwined, and that believers will one day share in His glory, which is a key component of Theosis.



7. Psalm 82:6 (NIV):

"I said, ‘You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.’"



This verse, which Jesus refers to in John 10:34, has been interpreted by Church Fathers and Orthodox theologians as referring to the divine potential and status given to humanity by God. It is not understood in an absolute sense (humans becoming ontologically identical to God), but rather in terms of participating in God's life and glory.



8. Ephesians 4:13 (NIV):

"Until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ."



This passage reflects the idea that believers are called to grow into full **maturity in Christ**, which can be seen as part of the process of Theosis, where Christians gradually grow to reflect Christ's fullness and divine nature.

These verses collectively support the doctrine of Theosis by emphasizing the transformation of believers into the image of Christ, their participation in the divine nature, and the ultimate glorification they will share with Christ. This process is not about becoming God by nature, but rather becoming fully united with God through grace, reflecting His divine life, holiness, and love.



Thus we can see that Theosis is incontrovertibly scriptural, and not, as some would allege, a Patristic innovation (which is an oxymoron - departures from the Gospel and the Apostolic Tradition which occurred during the Patristic era were immediately labelled as heresies and subject to anathema, and it was to contain and control such innovations that the Ecumenical Synods were held). Indeed, the fact Martin Luther taught the doctrine, as did, to some extent, John Calvin, in addition to John Wesley, demonstrates its scriptural incontrovertibility, given the care with which these men used scripture to test their dogmatic theology and to correct for Scholastic misunderstandings which had crept into the Western kergyma (teaching of the faith).



**Ergo, Luther celebrated the Mass in both Latin and German, and Latin remained a first-class liturgical language in Lutheranism into the early 19th century, although unfortunately this is not presently the case, resulting in an under-utilization of Latin-language Lutheran church music by composers such as JS Bach and his sons and Franz Schubert (who did six Latin settings of the Mass and one German setting).



*** This episode, along with the Salem Witch Trials, makes me ashamed of my Congregationalist background, insofar as Congregationalism represented a reform of Puritanism, although Congregationalism was really a moderation of Puritanism, a correction in which the laity, following a well-deserved tongue lashing by the great preacher Jonathan Edwards (who, while not as a good a preacher as St. John Chrysostom, was still able to move people to tears and cause Anglophone North Americans across the colonies that would soon become the United States and Canada to embark on a journey of repentence from the sinful excesses both of Puritanism, and of the period of 1670-1730 in the English speaking world more generally). Also as a Congregationalist I have consistently fought to make Congregationalism more Orthodox, both with my initial ministry in the UCC and with my later mission parishes, with a view towards these churches eventually becoming Orthodox (Congregationalism is the only form of church polity aside from the Episcopal polity with strong scriptural support, albeit not following the specific model used by Congregationalists, but rather, insofar as the Bishop was the pastor of a single church in each city initially, which would, as that church expanded, become his cathedral, and with new parish churches being formed, headed up by presbyters.

Now this is a great listing of verses....of course Lutherans don't use the term theosis but do use the term "mystical union."

The mystical union is a formal union between God and the individual believer by justification by faith. Also can be seen as a union between Christ in the incarnation and the entire human race which makes objective justification possible. Additionally this union is the indwelling of the Triune God which effects sanctification.

Notable verses for Lutherans would be.....

• II Peter 1:4 For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust.
• 
  
• John 15:4 Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.
• 
  
• Gal. 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me;
• 
  
• II Cor 5:17 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!
• 
  
• John 14:20 On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.
• 
  
• Col. 1:27 To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.

I'll examine your listing to see if I will add more verses to my listing.

The most recent Lutheran scholar to write on this topic is Jordan Cooper's Christification: A Lutheran Approach to Theosis. (2014). I have not read this work.

In Lutheran theology, Theosis is never a stand alone doctrine....it is always going to be linked to Justification by Faith hence called term Christification.

And at this point, I am getting clearly over my head here.

​

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Why write this unprovoked attack against the Roman Catholic Church and accusing them of contradicting their doctrine, when I am not a Roman Catholic, I have never been a Roman Catholic, and when it has nothing to do with the solid scriptural reply i just provided with you?

I have seen this pattern repeatedly in debates with Adventists, where someone provides a serious, complex scriptural argument that contradicts one or more Adventist doctrines, and rather than responding to that doctrine, the Adventist will make a red herring attack on the Roman Catholic church, even if the person they are debating with is not Roman Catholic and is a part of a denomination which has never been a part of the Roman Catholic Church but which rather historically was persecuted by them.

I find this pattern of behavior to be concerning, for three reasons: firstly, it attests to a deep-seated contempt for the Roman Catholic Church that is also evident in some writings of Ellen G White, for example, The Great Controversy, secondly, it appears to be an attempt at redirecting the conversation and building support among Protestants by appealing to their discomfort with the Roman church, while also causing any Roman Catholics who might be present in the debate to challenge that argument rather than the topic at hand, and what is more, since changing the topic (sometimes completely, in other cases, such as this one, subtly, since you are still responding to the issue of the Sabbath but your response is not germane to what I wrote, even remotely) is so commonly encountered, it seems to me that this apologetics technique must be being shared by the small minority of Adventists who actively debate non-Sabbatarians.

I would note here the majority of Adventists do not debate us or otherwise engage with us negatively; it interests me to note that the majority of Adventist members seldom post outside of the Adventist subforum, and when they do, they are generally quite friendly, or will post on issues of shared concern in a spirit of evangelical fellowship. It is only a minority of Adventists who feel that they have something to gain by debating other Christians over the Internet, and I would say this is a quixotic effort, since you cannot convert someone by arguing the faith with them.

But it is reasonable for traditional Christians to respond, because otherwise these challenges against the doctrines of the liturgical churches of Patristic heritage, such as the Orthodox, Lutherans, Anglicans, etc, will exist on the Internet without any contradictory perspective being offered.

So my suggestion is that the minority of Adventists who do this stop doing it - since as Christians, you presumably do not believe that only Sabbatarian Christians have a hope of salvation, so debating with other Christians is pointless, and it would be better to convert Jews or Muslims or adherents of Pagan religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, etc, to Christianity, than to merely move people between denominations, and furthermore, when traditional Christians are challenged in this way, we have a moral obligation to respond to ensure that the traditional doctrine of the early church is not contradicted, and thus all this does is create resentment and interfere with ecumenical cooperation between Adventists and other Christians. Which in turn interferes with the work of your denomination, which, since the 1950s, has made a concerted effort to engage ecumenically with other Christians and be recognized as a part of the larger Christian community. Being a part of the larger community does not mean giving up your own doctrines, but it should mean being more respectful of the history and traditions of the non-Sabbatarian majority of churches, including the Roman Catholic Church.

How is quoting what the Roman Catholic church said in their own words is an attack on them? If you don't agree with what they are saying you might consider the commandment the way God wrote and spoke it based on His Authority. Exo 20:8-11

 

[The Liturgist]

God said the Sabbath would be changed Dan 7:25

No He doesn’t. Daniel 7:25 doesn’t mention the Sabbath.

and the RCC takes credit for this change and its well documented.

The Roman Catholic Church does not claim to have done anything to fulfill the prophecy in Daniel 7:25. That’s an absurd proposition.

You seem to be disagreeing with the RCC

Of course I disagree with the Roman Catholic Church. I am not a Roman Catholic, but an Orthodox Christian, a member of one of the Eastern churches which in antiquity were responsible for what happened at all of the Ecumenical Councils except Chalcedon (which is the only one where a Roman bishop made an intervention, and that council is controversial insofar as in its aftermath the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox became divided despite a lack of actual doctrinal difference), and which accounted for the majority of Christians and the majority of geographic territory covered by the church until the 12th century AD, but which Ellen G White failed to mention in The Great Controversy, the result being that her historical narrative is inconsistent and incorrect.

and what the scripture states.

I do not disagree with what any canonical Scripture states.

The Sabbath didn't start in the 19th century,

I never said it did.

it started at Creation thus saith the Lord Exo 20:11 and its a commandment of God thus saith the Lord Exo 20:8-11 and God's faithful keep God's commandments Rev 14:12 the way He said because He is God and He has all Authority and man will never be above God to change anything that proceeds out of His mouth we are to live by.

None of that is a response to anything I said. My point is that since scripture says that God existed without time, the rest being referred to in Genesis is the chiefly understood as the rest of God in the person of Jesus Christ in the Tomb on the Great and Holy Sabbath following His Crucifixion. This does not mean that God did not rest from our perspective on the seventh day following creation, assuming a literal interpretation of Genesis 1, but whether or not one agrees with Genesis 1 literally or not does not impact the Christological meaning of Genesis 1, which is consistent with either interpretation. This Christological understanding is a Patristic doctrine and a Scriptural doctrine, in accordance with the teaching of the Apostles.

We can agree to disagree and all gets sorted out soon enough.

Firstly, I must say, that remark seems ominous - are you suggesting that I risk damnation if I do not follow what your denomination teaches about the Sabbath?

Secondly, if we are to agree to disagree, it would be helpful if you understood what you were disagreeing with. Thus far you have attributed several statements and beliefs to me which I reject, expressly. For example, it is not my position that the date of Sabbath has changed, and I don’t care what the Roman Catholic Church teaches on the issue, but you seem to think I am arguing that Sunday is the Sabbath, which I never said.

This goes back to my argument that Adventists when challenged with a complex scriptural argument tend not to engage with it. Although in this case, I will say that it is possible you did not understand the argument that I made.

 

[The Liturgist]

How is quoting what the Roman Catholic church said in their own words is an attack on them? If you don't agree with what they are saying you might consider the commandment the way God wrote and spoke it based on His Authority.

Why do you assume that I must agree with Roman Catholic doctrine because I disagree with yours? This goes back to the false dichotomy between Roman Catholicism and Adventism as the supreme expression of Protestantism, that Ellen G White constructs, based on a lack of knowledge of the actual history of the early church, which is understandable, since in the 19th century most Americans were not aware of the existence of the Orthodox Church, or how it differed from the Roman Catholic Church or the Protestant church, and indeed even many American settlers in Alaska seem to have been confused by it, and many elsewhere in the US were confused by the religious practices of Slavic, Greek and Syrian immigrants.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

No He doesn’t. Daniel 7:25 doesn’t mention the Sabbath.



The Roman Catholic Church does not claim to have done anything to fulfill the prophecy in Daniel 7:25. That’s an absurd proposition.



Of course I disagree with the Roman Catholic Church. I am not a Roman Catholic, but an Orthodox Christian, a member of one of the Eastern churches which in antiquity were responsible for what happened at all of the Ecumenical Councils except Chalcedon (which is the only one where a Roman bishop made an intervention, and that council is controversial insofar as in its aftermath the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox became divided despite a lack of actual doctrinal difference), and which accounted for the majority of Christians and the majority of geographic territory covered by the church until the 12th century AD, but which Ellen G White failed to mention in The Great Controversy, the result being that her historical narrative is inconsistent and incorrect.




I do not disagree with what any canonical Scripture states.



I never said it did.



None of that is a response to anything I said. My point is that since scripture says that God existed without time, the rest being referred to in Genesis is the chiefly understood as the rest of God in the person of Jesus Christ in the Tomb on the Great and Holy Sabbath following His Crucifixion. This does not mean that God did not rest from our perspective on the seventh day following creation, assuming a literal interpretation of Genesis 1, but whether or not one agrees with Genesis 1 literally or not does not impact the Christological meaning of Genesis 1, which is consistent with either interpretation. This Christological understanding is a Patristic doctrine and a Scriptural doctrine, in accordance with the teaching of the Apostles.



Firstly, I must say, that remark seems ominous - are you suggesting that I risk damnation if I do not follow what your denomination teaches about the Sabbath?

Secondly, if we are to agree to disagree, it would be helpful if you understood what you were disagreeing with. Thus far you have attributed several statements and beliefs to me which I reject, expressly. For example, it is not my position that the date of Sabbath has changed, and I don’t care what the Roman Catholic Church teaches on the issue, but you seem to think I am arguing that Sunday is the Sabbath, which I never said.

This goes back to my argument that Adventists when challenged with a complex scriptural argument tend not to engage with it. Although in this case, I will say that it is possible you did not understand the argument that I made.

You add a lot to what I say and then act like I have said it, when they were your words, not mine.

 

[The Liturgist]

Now this is a great listing of verses....of course Lutherans don't use the term theosis but do use the term "mystical union."

The mystical union is a formal union between God and the individual believer by justification by faith. Also can be seen as a union between Christ in the incarnation and the entire human race which makes objective justification possible. Additionally this union is the indwelling of the Triune God which effects sanctification.

Notable verses for Lutherans would be.....

• II Peter 1:4 For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust.
• 
  
• John 15:4 Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.
• 
  
• Gal. 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me;
• 
  
• II Cor 5:17 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!
• 
  
• John 14:20 On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.
• 
  
• Col. 1:27 To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.

I'll examine your listing to see if I will add more verses to my listing.

The most recent Lutheran scholar to write on this topic is Jordan Cooper's Christification: A Lutheran Approach to Theosis. (2014). I have not read this work.

In Lutheran theology, Theosis is never a stand alone doctrine....it is always going to be linked to Justification by Faith hence called term Christification.

And at this point, I am getting clearly over my head here.

​

Indeed, Luther did not write Theosis, since he wrote primarily in Latin and German, although he knew Greek and translated the New Testament from it, and I suspect he would have used that word if he had described his theology in Greek (which I wish he had)

Luther rather wrote Deificatio, which is a literal Latin translation of Theosis (which literally means Deification). However, because Deificatio can also be used to translate Apotheosis, which I will get into in a moment, the word Deificatio would be problematic if Luther hadn’t made the Lutheran connection of Justificaiton with Theosis, and the idea of Christification, because as I see it, this concept helps convey the idea of what Theosis means, that by grace we become what Christ is by nature, as opposed to we becoming additional members of the Holy Trinity who are God in an absolute sense, which is not what St. Athanasius meant by Theosis (indeed, the word Theosis does not mean that, which is one of the problems of the Latin word deification - it has an ambiguity that the Greek lacks on this subject. The Greek word for becoming God is apotheosis, and this was a doctrine of the ancient Greco-Roman Paganism, in which Alexander the Great, Gaius Julius Caesar, and various subsequent emperors such as Augustus, Claudius, Trajan and so on received apotheosis and were worshipped as members of the pantheon, and had temples built to honor them.* Thus I rather like what Luther did with regards to Christification and Justification in order to convey Theosis without suggesting Apotheosis - it was a brilliant solution and one which I would argue is in several respects superior to the Wesleyan language of “Entire Sanctification.”

*It is also for this reason that I have qualms about the splendid allegorical painting in the US Capitol, the Apotheosis of George Washington, in that while I do really appreciate George Washington and would say that he is my favorite of the Founding Fathers, given what we know of his modesty, well, the giant towering obelisk erected in his honor and a painting depcting him being made a literal god just seems a bit much, and there is also the awkward issue of Freemasonry and of the American civil religion. That being said if you were to make me President tomorrow, and then the next day pass an Enabling Act suspending the constitution and giving me absolute power, and then on Wednesday have me crowned as Emperor of North America in the National Cathedral, I would not change any of it. The fact that I have qualms about it does not mean that I believe in defacing our cultural heritage, unlike those people who keep removing statues of important historic figures, for example, in Ventura, California, they removed a beautiful statue of St. Junipero Serra from in front of the old courthouse in Ventura and from the county seal, whereas the county seal of Los Angeles depicts the San Fernando Mission but with its cross removed, based on an ACLU lawsuit - requiring the county to inaccurately depict a local landmark to avoid offending people is absurd, and Orwellian. But I digress.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

No He doesn’t. Daniel 7:25 doesn’t mention the Sabbath.

It doesn't mention the Sabbath it says Gods times and laws and the only law that is a time (the seventh day Exo 20:10) is the Sabbath commandment and it was changed not by God just as predicted.

The Roman Catholic Church does not claim to have done anything to fulfill the prophecy in Daniel 7:25. That’s an absurd proposition.

Yet, here they claim they changed the Sabbath commandment not based on scripture but based on their own authority which they claim is above the bible. However scripture warns us of following this path Isa 8:20 hence the warning in Rev 18:4. God has people in all denominations but we are told we need to worship Him in Truth and Spirit. All of God’s commandments are Truth Psa 119:172


It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.
—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.

Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

 

[The Liturgist]

You add a lot to what I say and then act like I have said it, when they were your words, not mine.

Forgive me, but that’s not true. I have not added anything to what you said, nor have I claimed you said anything which you did not, neither have I sought to attribute to you statements other than what you said. This would be wrong and unethical.

And I don’t understand what would make you think that I had done such a thing, unless your browser isn’t rendering where I replied to your remarks with quotes correctly, in which case it is a typographical and rendering error which is not my fault, but if that is the case, it will remain clear to most users what you said and what I said.

For proof of this, look at the post you just made - when you replied to me, only those things I wrote were included in the quotation. That’s because every remark of yours I enclosed in QUOTE tags so that they would be displayed as quotations and everyone would be able to understand what you had written vs. what I had written.

 

[CoreyD]

Not only did the Jews come for Sabbath but the Gentiles, and in Acts we see almost the whole city wanted to be there on the Sabbath.

Acts 13:42-44
King James Version (KJV)
42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.
44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

Now we see the Gentiles keep the Sabbath in Antioch as we see Paul when he came there, meeting with them in the synagogue on the Sabbath day.

Acts 13:14
But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

We see much the same in the early church in Thessalonica when Paul as was his manner, entered on three Sabbath days and reasoned with them out of the scriptures.

Acts 17:2
And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

And we see more of the same in the early church in Corinth were Paul went every Sabbath and we clearly see it says "persuaded the Jews and the Greeks."

Acts 18:4
And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

And we see it was the same thing that Christ had done when He was in His ministry before Paul.

Mark 6:2
And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?

Luke 4:16
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.

Luke 4:31
And came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath days.

As had Christ, the Paul worshiped in the early church on the seventh-day Sabbath. We clearly see that in his travels Paul attended the synagogue on the Sabbath with Gentiles and Jews, and preached Christ. Even in places where there was no synagogue, he searched for where the early church met for Sabbath worship.

We find much in history that shows the early church observing the seventh day Sabbath which nearly all Protestant, Orthodox, or Roman Catholic theologians agree was true, and showed that the Sabbath was clearly spread throughout the world in the early church.

Josephus
"There is not any city of the Grecians, nor any of the Barbarians, nor any nation whatsoever, whither our custom of resting on the seventh day hath not come!" M'Clatchie, "Notes and Queries on China and Japan" (edited by Dennys), Vol 4, Nos 7, 8, p.100.

Philo
Declares the seventh day to be a festival, not of this or of that city, but of the universe. M'Clatchie, "Notes and Queries," Vol. 4, 99

Early Christians
"The primitive Christians had a great veneration for the Sabbath, and spent the day in devotion and sermons. And it is not to be doubted but they derived this practice from the Apostles themselves, as appears by several scriptures to the purpose." "Dialogues on the Lord's Day," p. 189. London: 1701, By Dr. T.H. Morer (A Church of England divine).

Early Christians
"...The Sabbath was a strong tie which united them with the life of the whole people, and in keeping the Sabbath holy they followed not only the example but also the command of Jesus." "Geschichte des Sonntags," pp.13, 14

2nd Century Christians
"The Gentile Christians observed also the Sabbath," Gieseler's "Church History," Vol.1, ch. 2, par. 30, 93.

Early Christians
"The primitive Christians did keep the Sabbath of the Jews;...therefore the Christians, for a long time together, did keep their conventions upon the Sabbath, in which some portions of the law were read: and this continued till the time of the Laodicean council." "The Whole Works" of Jeremy Taylor, Vol. IX,p. 416 (R. Heber's Edition, Vol XII, p. 416).

You can find even more in this study..
at https://www.sabbath.org/index.cfm/l...ath-first-day-during-first-five-centuries.htm

Did the early church worship on Sabbath?
Acts 2:46
The early Church worshipped every day, and the scriptures persons choose to claim they worshipped on the Sabbath, do not support such a claim, but show that the followers of Christ chose opportunities when, and where large people would be gathered - the Sabbath day being one of those ideal opportunities, in order to spread the gospel.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Forgive me, but that’s not true. I have not added anything to what you said, nor have I claimed you said anything which you did not, neither have I sought to attribute to you statements other than what you said. This would be wrong and unethical.

And I don’t understand what would make you think that I had done such a thing, unless your browser isn’t rendering where I replied to your remarks with quotes correctly, in which case it is a typographical and rendering error which is not my fault, but if that is the case, it will remain clear to most users what you said and what I said.

For proof of this, look at the post you just made - when you replied to me, only those things I wrote were included in the quotation. That’s because every remark of yours I enclosed in QUOTE tags so that they would be displayed as quotations and everyone would be able to understand what you had written vs. what I had written.

Claiming if one is not part of my denomination or risk damnation or I am attacking the Catholic church when merely quoting them verbatim is not anything I said or even indicated. Yet in how many of your post do you mention Adventist this or Adventist that.

We are discussing the Sabbath and no scripture says its been abrogated or changed how to observe. If one wants to go outside the bible and follow the popular traditions of man over what the scriptures teach, that's a choice, but to claim it came from the bible when there is no scriptural evidence, is only kidding oneself. Especially when people who claim to be part of the Catholic church and try to claim it came from scripture when its not even what their church teaches in their own doctrine.

 

[Lukaris]

The earliest post apostolic writings confirm that Sunday became the day of worship. The destruction of the Jewish homeland in the 2 rebellions against the Romans ( not to mention persecution of Messianic Jewish Christians) broke down much of the living Jewish tradition in Christianity. Matthew 7:12 and Matthew 22:36-40 ( the Lord’s very words) generally defined the law and prophets for the Gentiles. Matthew 28:9 clearly shows the Lord was worshiped on His resurrection. There was no resurrection prior to the Lord’s; there was prophecy of resurrection. I can only imagine what St. Paul wrote re the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:1-58 spurred the final shift to an emphasis of resurrection over sabbath.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The earliest post apostolic writings confirm that Sunday became the day of worship. The destruction of the Jewish homeland in the 2 rebellions against the Romans ( not to mention persecution of Messianic Jewish Christians) broke down much of the living Jewish tradition in Christianity. Matthew 7:12 and Matthew 22:36-40 ( the Lord’s very words) generally defined the law and prophets for the Gentiles. Matthew 28:9 clearly shows the Lord was worshiped on His resurrection. There was no resurrection prior to the Lord’s; there was prophecy of resurrection. I can only imagine what St. Paul wrote re the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:1-58 spurred the final shift to an emphasis of resurrection over sabbath.

We should worship God every day, but it does not make every day the Sabbath. There is no scripture that says the Sabbath commandment was transferred to Sunday. Jesus certainly never changed it, His faithful kept the Sabbath according to the commandment Luke 23:56 after His death and not once was told by Jesus the Sabbath commandment changed. Because it didn't, not in scripture and why the apostles kept every Sabbath faithfully decades after the Cross. Only after scripture did it change and its well documented where that change came from and these types of changes would happen Acts 20:29.

 

[Lukaris]

We should worship God every day, but it does not make every day the Sabbath. There is no scripture that says the Sabbath commandment was transferred to Sunday. Jesus certainly never changed it, His faithful kept the Sabbath according to the commandment Luke 23:56 after His death and not once was told by Jesus the Sabbath commandment changed. Because it didn't, not in scripture and why the apostles kept every Sabbath faithfully decades after the Cross. Only after scripture did it change and its well documented where that change came from.

I have said before in threads like this that I actually believe you can defend your justification to observe the Sabbath by your confession. Observation of the Resurrection Day and worship of the risen Lord happened among the majority of the faithful. It is unfortunate that the state interfered on this but there were probably bad motives among some ( not most) of the old sabbath keepers also.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I have said before in threads like this that I actually believe you can defend your justification to observe the Sabbath by your confession. Observation of the Resurrection Day and worship of the risen Lord happened among the majority of the faithful. It is unfortunate that the state interfered on this but there were probably bad motives among some ( not most) of the old sabbath keepers also.

Christ rising on Sunday did not change the Sabbath commandment. There is no scripture that says we no longer need to keep the Sabbath commandment the way God commanded. If we are doing something in lieu of keeping one of God's commandments, this is exactly what Jesus warned about Mat 15:3-14. If we go back to the story of Cain and Abel, both claimed to worship God, both made sacrifices, one did it the way he wanted, one did it the way God asked, God only accepted one. When it comes to God's commandments, I think its best if we obey God the way He commands since He is our Creator. Keeping the Sabbath the way He asks shows that He is our God Eze 20:20, He is the only God that can sanctify us Eze 20:12 because man can't sanctify themselves, just like they can't sanctify a day, only God can. He only did that only with one day Gen 2:1-3 Exo 20:8-11 and I believe part of our test is obeying God the way He asks, just like He tested Adam and Eve, the tree was more than just a tree and disobeying God changed everything. Is it really worth it to follow popular traditions over obeying one of God's commandments. I don't think it will be. Christ said blessed are those who keep from defiling the Sabbath Isa 56:1-6 blessed are those who do His commandments Rev 22:14 What God blessed man cannot reverse Num 23:20

 

[Lukaris]

The basic laws given to the Gentiles are Matthew 7:12 ( per Matthew 7:1-12), Matthew 22:36-40, Matthew 19:16-19 (compare with Romans 13:8-10). These, I believe, fall within the Apostles setting the general preaching to the Gentiles in Acts 15:1-29. I don’t see the 7th day as enforced or rejected within this.

The Lord rose on the 8th day which was foreshadowed in Leviticus 23:36-44 which was the end cycle of the Day of Atonement ( Leviticus 23:26-44). The KJV says the Lord is our reconciliation in which we have received the atonement ( Romans 5:10-11).

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 5:10-11 - King James Version

For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Thus I rather like what Luther did with regards to Christification and Justification in order to convey Theosis without suggesting Apotheosis - it was a brilliant solution and one which I would argue is in several respects superior to the Wesleyan language of “Entire Sanctification.”

How do you know this w/o being Lutheran? Monster theologian here.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The basic laws given to the Gentiles are Matthew 7:12 ( per Matthew 7:1-12), Matthew 22:36-40, Matthew 19:16-19 (compare with Romans 13:8-10). These, I believe, fall within the Apostles setting the general preaching to the Gentiles in Acts 15:1-29. I don’t see the 7th day as enforced or rejected within this.

The Lord rose on the 8th day which was foreshadowed in Leviticus 23:36-44 which was the end cycle of the Day of Atonement ( Leviticus 23:26-44). The KJV says the Lord is our reconciliation in which we have received the atonement ( Romans 5:10-11).

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 5:10-11 - King James Version

For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

www.biblegateway.com

Did you know the greatest commandments are the Ten Commandments summarized Rom 13:9 and the Sabbath is part of God's Ten commandments thus saith the Lord. Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13 that He promised He would not alter Psa 89:34

Why Jesus taught

Mat 5:19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

God never said all the commandments except the Sabbath commandment, the one commandment I asked you to Remember you can forget. Thats a man-made doctrine leading people to disobey God, even the apostles taught we should obey God over man..

 

[The Liturgist]

How do you know this w/o being Lutheran? Monster theologian here.

Well I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night*


*Well, not last night, but 20.5 years ago while on vacation in Wales.

 

[The Liturgist]

Did you know the greatest commandments are the Ten Commandments summarized Rom 13:9 and the Sabbath is part of God's Ten commandments thus saith the Lord. Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13 that He promised He would not alter Psa 89:34

Why Jesus taught

Mat 5:19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

God never said all the commandments except the Sabbath commandment, the one commandment I asked you to Remember you can forget. Thats a man-made doctrine leading people to disobey God, even the apostles taught we should obey God over man..

We do remember the Sabbath, as I explained earlier - the fact that our remembrance of it differs from what Second Temple Judaism in the First Century thought that remembrance should be is a good thing, since our Lord also clearly differed with Second Temple Judaism in his observation of the Sabbath.

Any time we partake of the Body and Blood of our Lord, we remember His saving work on the cross, His resurrection, and, importantly as far as the Sabbath is concerned, His resting in the tomb on the Sabbath (which is really the only time we can assert that God rested, from His perspective, on the seventh day - we can assert from the ending of Luke that Genesis 1 was both a summary of the initial creative acts of God, and a Christological prophecy speaking about Jesus Christ, and the two meanings are tightly integrated, in that Christ our True God re-created man on the Sixth Day on the Cross, and rested in the tomb on the Seventh, before rising from the dead, trampling down death by death on the First Day, which aludes to our own resurrection on the Eighth Day, which reveals that there is a third, Eschatological layer to Genesis 1, since it is also speaking of the birth, death and resurrection of those who are saved by Christ Jesus.

 

[The Liturgist]

We are discussing the Sabbath and no scripture says its been abrogated or changed how to observe.

Not true - Colossians 2:16.

Jesus Christ, who is God, did things on the Sabbath that had been assumed to be prohibited, and what is more, He told us how to remember Him - through partaking of His Body and Blood in the Eucharist.

This does not preclude worship on the Sabbath, which is why the Orthodox Church continues to have more liturgies on the Sabbath than any other day of the week except Sunday. All Coptic Orthodox churches for example will serve the Divine Liturgy on both Saturday and Sunday, and the Eastern Orthodox will do so where the resources exist - in particular I would note that practically every Sabbath from just prior to the start of the Great Lent through Bright Saturday, and again on the Saturday before Pentecost Sunday, has a worship service, including Soul Saturdays for the remembrance of our departed loved ones, the Raising of Lazarus on the day before Palm Sunday, Holy Saturday, on the day our Lord was entombed (the Vesperal Divine Liturgy is held on the morning of this day, and until 1955, the Paschal Vigil Mass in the Western tradition was held at that time), and the Saturday before St. Thomas Sunday or Antipascha (the Sunday following Pascha, also known as Low Sunday, or as we jokingly called it, Low Attendance Sunday, since in the Western churches there is a fall-off in attendance for that Sunday and Christmas Sunday which I find extremely frustrating, but it is much less pronounced in the Eastern churches where the core group of pious people can be counted on to be there most Sundays of the year.