The Church is above the Bible; and this transference of Sabbath observance from Saturday to Sunday..

SAAN · Oct 18, 2018

Yet another article showing Sunday is from the RCC and not the bible.
Below is just a snippet of the article.

The Catholic Record, Sept. 1, 1923.

Now in the matter of Sabbath observance, the Protestant rule of Faith is utterly unable to explain the substitution of the Christian Sunday for the Jewish Saturday. It has been changed. The Bible still teaches that the Sabbath or Saturday should be kept holy. There is no authority in the New Testament for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday. Surely it is an important matter. It stands there in the Bible as one of the Ten Commandments of God. There is no authority in the Bible for abrogating this Commandment, or for transferring its observance to another day of the week.
For Catholics it is not the slightest difficulty. "All power is given Me in heaven and on earth; as the Father sent Me so I also send you," said our Divine Lord in giving His tremendous commission to His Apostles. "He that heareth you heareth Me." We have in the authoritative voice of the Church the voice of Christ Himself. The Church is above the Bible; and this transference of Sabbath observance from Saturday to Sunday is proof positive of that fact. 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. As the Rev. Mr. Smith rightly points out: "The Jewish Sabbath is not Sunday, the Lord's Day. Christians are all wrong in speaking of the Sabbath as Sunday." The Christians who so speak are "Bible Christians," those who make the Bible the sole rule of Faith; and the Bible is silent on Sunday observance, it speaks only of Sabbath observance. The Lord's Day - Dies Dominica - is the term used always in the Missal and the Breviary. It occurs in the Bible once (Apoc. 1.10

in Acts xx. 7 and 1 Cor. xvi., 2 there is a reference to "the first day of the week;" but in none of these is there the remotest intimation that henceforth the first day is to take the place of the seventh. That is the crux of the whole question, what authority does the Bible give for the change? And that difficulty Mr. Smith and his critics, though pious and effusive and vaguely eloquent about many things, have each and all sedulously evaded.
If affects very materially and very intimately the question of the proper observance of the Lord's Day.
In the first centuries the obligation of rest from work remained somewhat indefinite. The Council of Laodicea, held at the end of the fourth century, was content to prescribe that on the Lord's Day the faithful were to abstain from work as far as possible. At the beginning of the sixth century St. Cesarius and others showed an inclination - very familiar to us - to apply the law of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. But the Council of Orleans in 538 reprobated this tendency as Jewish and non-Christian.
Thus by the same Divine authority, in virtue of which she did away with the Jewish Sabbath and substituted therefor the Christian Sunday, the Catholic Church legislated as to how the Lord's Day should be observed.>

HTacianas · Oct 18, 2018

SAAN said:
Yet another article showing Sunday is from the RCC and not the bible.
Below is just a snippet of the article.

The Catholic Record, Sept. 1, 1923.

Now in the matter of Sabbath observance, the Protestant rule of Faith is utterly unable to explain the substitution of the Christian Sunday for the Jewish Saturday. It has been changed. The Bible still teaches that the Sabbath or Saturday should be kept holy. There is no authority in the New Testament for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday. Surely it is an important matter. It stands there in the Bible as one of the Ten Commandments of God. There is no authority in the Bible for abrogating this Commandment, or for transferring its observance to another day of the week.
For Catholics it is not the slightest difficulty. "All power is given Me in heaven and on earth; as the Father sent Me so I also send you," said our Divine Lord in giving His tremendous commission to His Apostles. "He that heareth you heareth Me." We have in the authoritative voice of the Church the voice of Christ Himself. The Church is above the Bible; and this transference of Sabbath observance from Saturday to Sunday is proof positive of that fact. 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. As the Rev. Mr. Smith rightly points out: "The Jewish Sabbath is not Sunday, the Lord's Day. Christians are all wrong in speaking of the Sabbath as Sunday." The Christians who so speak are "Bible Christians," those who make the Bible the sole rule of Faith; and the Bible is silent on Sunday observance, it speaks only of Sabbath observance. The Lord's Day - Dies Dominica - is the term used always in the Missal and the Breviary. It occurs in the Bible once (Apoc. 1.10 in Acts xx. 7 and 1 Cor. xvi., 2 there is a reference to "the first day of the week;" but in none of these is there the remotest intimation that henceforth the first day is to take the place of the seventh. That is the crux of the whole question, what authority does the Bible give for the change? And that difficulty Mr. Smith and his critics, though pious and effusive and vaguely eloquent about many things, have each and all sedulously evaded.
If affects very materially and very intimately the question of the proper observance of the Lord's Day.
In the first centuries the obligation of rest from work remained somewhat indefinite. The Council of Laodicea, held at the end of the fourth century, was content to prescribe that on the Lord's Day the faithful were to abstain from work as far as possible. At the beginning of the sixth century St. Cesarius and others showed an inclination - very familiar to us - to apply the law of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. But the Council of Orleans in 538 reprobated this tendency as Jewish and non-Christian.
Thus by the same Divine authority, in virtue of which she did away with the Jewish Sabbath and substituted therefor the Christian Sunday, the Catholic Church legislated as to how the Lord's Day should be observed.>

The Church decided what the bible is long after the Christian day of worship became Sunday.

bcbsr · Oct 18, 2018

SAAN said:
Yet another article showing Sunday is from the RCC and not the bible.
Below is just a snippet of the article.

The Catholic Record, Sept. 1, 1923.

Now in the matter of Sabbath observance, the Protestant rule of Faith is utterly unable to explain the substitution of the Christian Sunday for the Jewish Saturday. It has been changed. The Bible still teaches that the Sabbath or Saturday should be kept holy. There is no authority in the New Testament for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday. Surely it is an important matter. It stands there in the Bible as one of the Ten Commandments of God. There is no authority in the Bible for abrogating this Commandment, or for transferring its observance to another day of the week.
For Catholics it is not the slightest difficulty. "All power is given Me in heaven and on earth; as the Father sent Me so I also send you," said our Divine Lord in giving His tremendous commission to His Apostles. "He that heareth you heareth Me." We have in the authoritative voice of the Church the voice of Christ Himself. The Church is above the Bible; and this transference of Sabbath observance from Saturday to Sunday is proof positive of that fact. 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. As the Rev. Mr. Smith rightly points out: "The Jewish Sabbath is not Sunday, the Lord's Day. Christians are all wrong in speaking of the Sabbath as Sunday." The Christians who so speak are "Bible Christians," those who make the Bible the sole rule of Faith; and the Bible is silent on Sunday observance, it speaks only of Sabbath observance. The Lord's Day - Dies Dominica - is the term used always in the Missal and the Breviary. It occurs in the Bible once (Apoc. 1.10 in Acts xx. 7 and 1 Cor. xvi., 2 there is a reference to "the first day of the week;" but in none of these is there the remotest intimation that henceforth the first day is to take the place of the seventh. That is the crux of the whole question, what authority does the Bible give for the change? And that difficulty Mr. Smith and his critics, though pious and effusive and vaguely eloquent about many things, have each and all sedulously evaded.
If affects very materially and very intimately the question of the proper observance of the Lord's Day.
In the first centuries the obligation of rest from work remained somewhat indefinite. The Council of Laodicea, held at the end of the fourth century, was content to prescribe that on the Lord's Day the faithful were to abstain from work as far as possible. At the beginning of the sixth century St. Cesarius and others showed an inclination - very familiar to us - to apply the law of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. But the Council of Orleans in 538 reprobated this tendency as Jewish and non-Christian.
Thus by the same Divine authority, in virtue of which she did away with the Jewish Sabbath and substituted therefor the Christian Sunday, the Catholic Church legislated as to how the Lord's Day should be observed.>

I don't really understand their line of reasoning. Kind of circular reasoning. They're saying the Church proves it has authority over that of the Bible because they don't do the things the Bible says. If someone observes Sabbath on a Wednesday does that prove they have authority over the Bible. It's just irrational.

bcbsr · Oct 18, 2018

HTacianas said:
The Church decided what the bible is long after the Christian day of worship became Sunday.

The Catholic church didn't write the Bible. They simply compiled writings which had already been established as scripture, writings of the apostles and the historic testimony of guys like Luke who himself compiled eyewitness accounts.

The scriptures preexisted Catholicism.

HTacianas · Oct 18, 2018

bcbsr said:
The Catholic church didn't write the Bible. They simply compiled writings which had already been established as scripture, writings of the apostles and the historic testimony of guys like Luke who himself compiled eyewitness accounts.

The scriptures preexisted Catholicism.

I never said the Catholic Church wrote the bible, though I have often said the Church wrote the bible. There was no Catholic Church when the bible was written, collected, composed, and canonized. There was only Christianity under the guidance of the Bishops, themselves guided by the Holy Spirit.

Saint Steven · Oct 18, 2018

I don't believe that "the day" was changed from the Sabbath to Sunday. Gentiles were never required to observe the Sabbath, except by those of the Circumcision Group who were corrected in Acts chapter fifteen. We, as Christians are not obligated to a day. It would not be a violation of my faith to gather for church on Tuesdays. (or whatever day)

BNR32FAN · Oct 18, 2018

SAAN said:
Yet another article showing Sunday is from the RCC and not the bible.
Below is just a snippet of the article.

The Catholic Record, Sept. 1, 1923.

Now in the matter of Sabbath observance, the Protestant rule of Faith is utterly unable to explain the substitution of the Christian Sunday for the Jewish Saturday. It has been changed. The Bible still teaches that the Sabbath or Saturday should be kept holy. There is no authority in the New Testament for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday. Surely it is an important matter. It stands there in the Bible as one of the Ten Commandments of God. There is no authority in the Bible for abrogating this Commandment, or for transferring its observance to another day of the week.
For Catholics it is not the slightest difficulty. "All power is given Me in heaven and on earth; as the Father sent Me so I also send you," said our Divine Lord in giving His tremendous commission to His Apostles. "He that heareth you heareth Me." We have in the authoritative voice of the Church the voice of Christ Himself. The Church is above the Bible; and this transference of Sabbath observance from Saturday to Sunday is proof positive of that fact. 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. As the Rev. Mr. Smith rightly points out: "The Jewish Sabbath is not Sunday, the Lord's Day. Christians are all wrong in speaking of the Sabbath as Sunday." The Christians who so speak are "Bible Christians," those who make the Bible the sole rule of Faith; and the Bible is silent on Sunday observance, it speaks only of Sabbath observance. The Lord's Day - Dies Dominica - is the term used always in the Missal and the Breviary. It occurs in the Bible once (Apoc. 1.10 in Acts xx. 7 and 1 Cor. xvi., 2 there is a reference to "the first day of the week;" but in none of these is there the remotest intimation that henceforth the first day is to take the place of the seventh. That is the crux of the whole question, what authority does the Bible give for the change? And that difficulty Mr. Smith and his critics, though pious and effusive and vaguely eloquent about many things, have each and all sedulously evaded.
If affects very materially and very intimately the question of the proper observance of the Lord's Day.
In the first centuries the obligation of rest from work remained somewhat indefinite. The Council of Laodicea, held at the end of the fourth century, was content to prescribe that on the Lord's Day the faithful were to abstain from work as far as possible. At the beginning of the sixth century St. Cesarius and others showed an inclination - very familiar to us - to apply the law of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. But the Council of Orleans in 538 reprobated this tendency as Jewish and non-Christian.
Thus by the same Divine authority, in virtue of which she did away with the Jewish Sabbath and substituted therefor the Christian Sunday, the Catholic Church legislated as to how the Lord's Day should be observed.>

Sunday worship goes back much farther than the RCC. Sunday worship goes all the way back to the 1st century of Christianity. Messianic Jews worshipped both on Saturday and Sunday but most Gentiles worshipped only on Sunday. The RCC officially began over 900 years later. Do you still believe we must be circumcised? If not why?

BNR32FAN · Oct 18, 2018

Saint Steven said:
I don't believe that "the day" was changed from the Sabbath to Sunday. Gentiles were never required to observe the Sabbath, except by those of the Circumcision Group who were corrected in Acts chapter fifteen. We, as Christians are not obligated to a day. It would not be a violation of my faith to gather for church on Tuesdays. (or whatever day)

Excellent that you should mention Acts 15 where it was the church that decided that circumcision was no longer necessary. It seems all Christians can accept the church making that decision but they forbid the church to make any other decisions.

BNR32FAN · Oct 18, 2018

bcbsr said:
The Catholic church didn't write the Bible. They simply compiled writings which had already been established as scripture, writings of the apostles and the historic testimony of guys like Luke who himself compiled eyewitness accounts.

The scriptures preexisted Catholicism.

The very same churches established by the apostles adopted the name Catholic some time between 107-180AD. In Ignatius’ epistle to the Smyrnaeans he describes the church as Catholic although it was not the formal name of the church at that time. Later by 180AD Iranaeus calls the Catholic Church by name in his writing titles Adversus Haeresus.

Saint Steven · Oct 18, 2018

BNR32FAN said:
Excellent that you should mention Acts 15 where it was the church that decided that circumcision was no longer necessary. It seems all Christians can accept the church making that decision but they forbid the church to make any other decisions.

That's not what happened in Acts fifteen.

Gentile converts were being instructed without authorization from the Apostles to be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses. They called the Jerusalem council to consider this matter.

Acts 15:24
We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said.

Acts 15:5
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

BNR32FAN · Oct 18, 2018

Saint Steven said:
That's not what happened in Acts fifteen.

Gentile converts were being instructed without authorization from the Apostles to be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses. They called the Jerusalem council to consider this matter.

Acts 15:24
We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said.

Acts 15:5
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

This was the first ecumenical council.

“So the apostles and elders met together to resolve this issue. At the meeting, after a long discussion, Peter stood and addressed them as follows: “Brothers, you all know that God chose me from among you some time ago to preach to the Gentiles so that they could hear the Good News and believe.”
‭‭Acts of the Apostles‬ ‭15:6-7‬

Google council of Jerusalem brother.

Saint Steven · Oct 18, 2018

BNR32FAN said:
This was the first ecumenical council.

“So the apostles and elders met together to resolve this issue. At the meeting, after a long discussion, Peter stood and addressed them as follows: “Brothers, you all know that God chose me from among you some time ago to preach to the Gentiles so that they could hear the Good News and believe.”
‭‭Acts of the Apostles‬ ‭15:6-7‬

Do you still claim that the church "decided that circumcision was no longer necessary"? (not what happened)

BNR32FAN · Oct 19, 2018

Saint Steven said:
Do you still claim that the church "decided that circumcision was no longer necessary"? (not what happened)

Yes brother that is exactly what they were discussing. What do you believe this chapter is discussing?

Saint Steven · Oct 19, 2018

BNR32FAN said:
Yes brother that is exactly what they were discussing. What do you believe this chapter is discussing?

Acts fifteen is discussing whether gentile believers need to be converted to Judaism, to be under the law. The conclusion of the council was, no, they do not.

Circumcision was the entry point for Jewish proselytes. Just as Sabbath observance is today for Sabbatarianism.

In the NT, the word "circumcision" is more symbolic than literal. It represents Judaism, and being under the law. Why would the Apostle Paul say this if the Council had ruled against it?

Philippians 3:3
For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh—

BNR32FAN · Oct 19, 2018

Saint Steven said:
Acts fifteen is discussing whether gentile believers need to be converted to Judaism, to be under the law. The conclusion of the council was, no, they do not.

Circumcision was the entry point for Jewish proselytes. Just as Sabbath observance is today for Sabbatarianism.

In the NT, the word "circumcision" is more symbolic than literal. It represents Judaism, and being under the law. Why would the Apostle Paul say this if the Council had ruled against it?

Philippians 3:3
For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh—

Ok that is a good point brother I agree that circumcision was not the only subject addressed at the council. I concede that you are correct. Have a blessed day brother Steven.

bcbsr · Oct 19, 2018

BNR32FAN said:
The very same churches established by the apostles adopted the name Catholic some time between 107-180AD. In Ignatius’ epistle to the Smyrnaeans he describes the church as Catholic although it was not the formal name of the church at that time. Later by 180AD Iranaeus calls the Catholic Church by name in his writing titles Adversus Haeresus.

A little leaven leavens the whole lump. What the apostles established is not what became the Catholic Church. There is little resemblance between what today is called "Catholicism" and the churches described in the epistles.

BNR32FAN · Oct 19, 2018

bcbsr said:
A little leaven leavens the whole lump. What the apostles established is not what became the Catholic Church. There is little resemblance between what today is called "Catholicism" and the churches described in the epistles.

It depends on who you consider to be Catholic. Rome was excommunicated from the Catholic Church almost 1000 years ago.

BobRyan · Dec 29, 2018

SAAN said:
Yet another article showing Sunday is from the RCC and not the bible.
Below is just a snippet of the article.

The Catholic Record, Sept. 1, 1923.

Now in the matter of Sabbath observance, the Protestant rule of Faith is utterly unable to explain the substitution of the Christian Sunday for the Jewish Saturday. It has been changed. The Bible still teaches that the Sabbath or Saturday should be kept holy. There is no authority in the New Testament for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday. Surely it is an important matter. It stands there in the Bible as one of the Ten Commandments of God. There is no authority in the Bible for abrogating this Commandment, or for transferring its observance to another day of the week.
For Catholics it is not the slightest difficulty. "All power is given Me in heaven and on earth; as the Father sent Me so I also send you," said our Divine Lord in giving His tremendous commission to His Apostles. "He that heareth you heareth Me." We have in the authoritative voice of the Church the voice of Christ Himself. The Church is above the Bible; and this transference of Sabbath observance from Saturday to Sunday is proof positive of that fact. 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. As the Rev. Mr. Smith rightly points out: "The Jewish Sabbath is not Sunday, the Lord's Day. Christians are all wrong in speaking of the Sabbath as Sunday." The Christians who so speak are "Bible Christians," those who make the Bible the sole rule of Faith; and the Bible is silent on Sunday observance, it speaks only of Sabbath observance. The Lord's Day - Dies Dominica - is the term used always in the Missal and the Breviary. It occurs in the Bible once (Apoc. 1.10 in Acts xx. 7 and 1 Cor. xvi., 2 there is a reference to "the first day of the week;" but in none of these is there the remotest intimation that henceforth the first day is to take the place of the seventh. That is the crux of the whole question, what authority does the Bible give for the change? And that difficulty Mr. Smith and his critics, though pious and effusive and vaguely eloquent about many things, have each and all sedulously evaded.
If affects very materially and very intimately the question of the proper observance of the Lord's Day.
In the first centuries the obligation of rest from work remained somewhat indefinite. The Council of Laodicea, held at the end of the fourth century, was content to prescribe that on the Lord's Day the faithful were to abstain from work as far as possible. At the beginning of the sixth century St. Cesarius and others showed an inclination - very familiar to us - to apply the law of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. But the Council of Orleans in 538 reprobated this tendency as Jewish and non-Christian.
Thus by the same Divine authority, in virtue of which she did away with the Jewish Sabbath and substituted therefor the Christian Sunday, the Catholic Church legislated as to how the Lord's Day should be observed.>

wow!

Very informative

nice quote "Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God. As the Rev. Mr. Smith rightly points out: "The Jewish Sabbath is not Sunday, the Lord's Day. Christians are all wrong in speaking of the Sabbath as Sunday." The Christians who so speak are "Bible Christians," those who make the Bible the sole rule of Faith; and the Bible is silent on Sunday observance, it speaks only of Sabbath observance."

The Church is above the Bible; and this transference of Sabbath observance from Saturday to Sunday..

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Newbie

Well-Known Member

You can call me Steve

He’s a Way of life

He’s a Way of life

He’s a Way of life

You can call me Steve

He’s a Way of life

You can call me Steve

He’s a Way of life

You can call me Steve

He’s a Way of life

Newbie

He’s a Way of life

Junior Member

Similar threads