ARE YOU READY FOR THE MARK OF THE BEAST?

FEZZILLA said:

Not even close.

Click to expand...

Not ever close why?

FEZZILLA said:

Your source of information is waaaay off. If you are confident about your conspiracy than truthfully answer me this question: Who, when and where was this Sabbath change made?

Click to expand...

No it is not. Everything posted here on this OP can be proven from the scriptures. Also as shown in post # 604 and post # 605 (Source Wikipedia) most of the protestant reformers believed this same view that the AntiChrist and little Horn of Daniel 7 was the RCC.

FEZZILLA said:

Will you now deviate from your source and make up your own goalpost or will you actually hold the E.G.White position?

Click to expand...

Why would I need to I only follow God's Word alone. Do you not believe it?

Thanks for sharing.

FEZZILLA said:

In a debate with me you need to hold to dogma that cannot change and goalposts that cannot be moved. You need to prove your starting assumption first. So how confident are you?

Click to expand...

In myself I have no confidence for without JESUS I cannot do anything. My confidence is in my LORD who I believe and follow. Do you believe God's WORD and if so will you believe and follow it? Only God's WORD is true, our opinions do not really matter *ROMANS 3:4

FEZZILLA said:

So you refuse to answer the question. That says you have much to hide that you are secretly ashamed of. I asked this question:

Click to expand...

Now your making things up I have never said or claimed.

FEZZILLA said:

If you are confident about your conspiracy than truthfully answer me this question: Who, when and where was this Sabbath change made?

Click to expand...

Scripture support already provided in the OP. Historical referencees already provided on what the Protestant Reformers believed in post # 604 and post # 605 (Source Wikipedia).

More historical sources on the changing of times and laws from the Mother Church *REVELATION 17:5-10 linked to... DANIEL 7:25 [25], And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

The answer provided below is in reference to the official change within the ROMAN CATHOLIC Church handed down as the Mother Church of Protestantism and is not discussing the secular and civil change through the Romans Emporer Constantine in honor of the venerable day of the Sun that helped to set up the change of day worship within the ROMANS CATHOLIC CHURCH and Christianity today. We can discuss Contantine at a latter post if needed. This post is also not claiming that Christians did not meet together on the Sabbath and Sunday for worship after the Apostles. The focus of this post is the official change within the ROMAN CATHOLIC Church before the reformation handed down to Chrsitianity and protestantism today which directly links to DANIEL 7:25 and REVELATION 17:5-10.

.............

Pope Sylvester I (314-335 A.D.) Decrees the Transfer of Sabbath Rest to Sunday:

Rabanus Maurus (776-856), abbot of Fulda and later archbishop of Mainz, Germany, was rated one of the greatest theologians of his age and probably the most cultured man of his time, and exceptionally learned in patristics. Besides, he was a zealous defender of the papacy and its teachings. In one of his works, he says, Pope Sylvester instructed the clergy to keep the feriae. And, indeed, from an old custom he called the first day [of the week] the "Lord's [day]," on which the light was made in the beginning and also the resurrection of Christ is celebrated.6

Rabanus Maurus does not mean to say that Sylvester was the first man who referred to the days of the week as feriae or who first started the observance of Sunday among Christians. He means that, according to the testimony of Roman Catholic writers, Sylvester confirmed those practices and made them official insofar as his church was concerned. Hence Rabanus says elsewhere in his writings:

Pope Sylvester first among the Romans ordered that the names of the days [of the week], which they previously called after the name of their gods, that is, [the day] of the Sun, [the day] of the Moon, [the day] of Mars, [the day] of Mercury, [the day] of Jupiter, [the day] of Venus, [the day] of Saturn, they should call feriae thereafter, that is the first feria, the second feria, the third feria, the fourth feria, the fifth feria, the sixth feria, because that in the beginning of Genesis it is written that God said concerning each day: on the first, "Let there be light:; on the second, "Let there be a firmament"; on the third, "Let the earth bring forth verdure"; etc. But he [Sylvester] ordered [them] to call the Sabbath by the ancient term of the law, [to call] the first feria the "Lord's day," because on it the Lord rose [from the dead], Moreover, the same pope decreed that the rest of the Sabbath should be transferred rather to the Lord's day [Sunday], in order that on that day we should rest from worldly works for the praise of God.7

Note particularly, he says that "the same pope [Sylvester I] decreed that the rest of the Sabbath should be transferred rather to the Lord's day [Sunday]."8 According to this statement, he was the first bishop to introduce the idea that the divinely appointed rest of the Sabbath day should be transferred to the first day of the week. This is significant, especially in view of the fact that it was during Sylvester's pontificate that the emperor of Rome [Constantine] issued the first civil laws compelling men to rest from secular labor on Sunday, and that Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, was the first theologian on record to present arguments, allegedly from the Scriptures, that Christ did transfer the rest of the Sabbath day to Sunday.

6 Rabanus Maurus, Liber de Computo (A book Concerning Computation), Chap. XXVII ("Concerning Festivals"), as translated by the writer from the Latin text in Migne's Patrologia Latina, Vol. CVII, col. 682.

7 ------------, De Clericorum Institutione (Concerning the Instruction of the Clergymen), Book II, Chap. XLVI, as translated by the writer from the Latin text in Migne's Patrologia Latina, Vol. CVII, col. 361.

8 The wording in the Latin text reads: "Statuit autem idem papa ut otium Sabbati magis in diem Dominicam transferretur, ut ea die a terrenis operibus ad laudandum Deum vacaremus."

Source: Sabbath and Sunday in Early Christianity, by Robert L. Odom, © 1977 by the Review and Herald Publishing Association, pages 247-248.

See also: Sunday In Roman Paganism, by Robert Leo Odom, Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1944, pages 196-198.

................

Now the above quotes are, as noted, from Migne's Patrologia Latina (MPL), a well known scholarly compilation of the writings of Latin Fathers, a work of 221 volumes, which is now freely available online.

Brepols Publishers have recently reprinted Migne's Patrologia Latina, and Volume 107 (quoted from above) can be purchased individually for about $105.00 (91.00 Euros).

De Clericorum Institutione by Rabanus Maurus was published in 1900 in Munich by Dr. Aloisius Knoepfler and is online at Google Books. The text (in Latin) on page 154 from book 2, chapter 46, regarding the transfer of the Sabbath rest to Sunday by Pope Sylvester I. The relevant pages in .gif format: Title page & 152 - Pages 153 & 154.

Pope Benedict XVI praised Rabanus Maurus as a "great 'man of the church' " in his general audience of June 3, 2009.

...............

1765. Week, Names of Days, Decreed Changed by Pope Sylvester (314–335) From Name of Gods

Source: Rabanus Maurus, De Clericorum Institutione (On the Institution of the Clergy), bk. 2, chap. 46, in MPL, Vol. 107, col. 361. Trans. from the Latin by Frank H. Yost. Used by permission of Mrs. Frank H. Yost.

Sylvester the pope first among the Romans ordered that the names of the days, which before they called according to the names of their own gods, that is (the day) of the sun, of the moon, of Mars, of Mercury, of Venus, of Saturn, they should call feria (day of celebration), that is, first feria, second feria, third feria, fourth feria, fifth feria, sixth feria, because in the beginning of Genesis it is written that God had said for each day: first, "Let there be light"; second, "Let there be the firmament"; third, "Let the earth produce living plants", etc. But the Sabbath he commanded they call by the ancient name of the law, and the first feria the Lord’s day, because the Lord rose on that day. Moreover the same pope ordered that the rest (otium) of the Sabbath would better be transferred to the Lord’s day, so that we should leave that day free of worldly works in order to praise God.

Source: Bible Student's Source Book, edited by Don F. Neufeld and Julia Neuffer, published and © 1962 by the Review and Herald Publishing Association, Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number 62-9139, entry #1765, page 1078.

.................

The decree by Pope Sylvester I to call the days of the week feria was issued in the year 316 A.D. according to Medii ævi Kalendarium Or, Dates, Charters, and Customs of the Middle Ages, Volume Two, by Robert Thomas Hampson, published in London by H. K. Causten, 1841, entry on Day, page 66, and Feria, pages 137, 138.

.................

Patrologia Latina was first published from 1844 to 1855, so it is evident that long standing historical proof does in fact exist, and that Ellen White (1827-1915) was likely aware that the information was contained in Patrologia Latina, though she apparently never cited it (MPL) in her writings. Note that she also knew the bishop of Rome had deemed Sunday to be the Lord's day:

That bishop of Rome was, of course, Sylvester I, as Bede and Rabanus Maurus confirm. Cardinal Humbert of France quoted Sylvester's low opinion of the Sabbath:

"If every Lord's day is to be observed joyfully by the Christians on account of the resurrection, then every Sabbath on account of the burial is detestably Jewish. In fact all the disciples of the Lord lamented on the Sabbath, bewailing the buried Lord, and the Jews exulted. But sadness reigned for the fasting apostles. In like manner we are sad, saddened by the burial of the Lord, and rejoice with them in the Lord’s resurrection. Neither in fact is it proper to feast [on the Sabbath] as the Jewish custom observed by the Jews."

Ex quorum numero beatissimus papa Silvester, magni Constantini Augusti spiritualis pater, inter alia dixit : < Si omnis Dominicus dies resurrectionis gratia est colendus in gaudio Christianorum : omnis ergo sabbati dies sepulturae deputandus est in exsecratione Judaerorum. Omnis enim discipuli Domini Sabbato fletum habuerunt, sepultum Dominum suspirantes, et Judaeis exulantibus laetitia inerat. Apostolis autem jejunantibus tristitia imperabat. Tristemur itaque cum tristantibus de sepultura Domini, si volumus cum iisdem de Domini resurrectione gaudere. Neque enim fas est destructiones ciborum et caerimonias Judaeorum more Judaico observemus. >

Humbertus Silvae Candidae Episcopus (11th century French Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, 1010-1061 A.D.), Adversus Graecorum Calumnias (“Against the Slanders of the Greeks”), Patrologia Cursus Completus, 1853, Migne J. P., Volume 143, column 937.

A contemporary of Emperor Constantine and Pope Sylvester I., was Eusebius Pamphili 260-341 A.D., Bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine. About 330 A.D. he wrote

In the 14th century, Pope John XXII commissioned Agostino Trionfo of Ancona (Augustinus Triumphus 1243-1328 A.D.) to produce a book that would set forth and defend the ecclesiastical and temporal authority of the papacy. The result was Summa de potestate ecclesiastica, which was completed in the year 1320, dedicated to the same Pope, and published from 1320 to 1584. In Question 50 (L) of Summa regarding the Third Commandment ( TERTII PRAECEPTI ), the statement was made that "The Pope has changed the law of the Sabbath day to the Lord's day".

So for those 264 years, the Catholic Church was crediting the papacy with making the change

Interestingly enough, it is even boasted on Roman Catholic web sites that Pope Sylvester I made the change to the Sunday Sabbath! The following screen capture is from the Daily Catholic web site page for SUNDAY, volume 11, no. 278, December 31, 2000:

FEZZILLA said:

You did not answer it. You cannot debate me unless you are prepared to answer questions. I guess you are not ready for serious debate.

Click to expand...

Once again your making things up I have never said or claimed. You are free to believe and do whatever you wish. Your salvation is with God not me.

All the above is also clearly stated by the Roman Catholic Church....


The above historical sources are referenced from the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH and claimed by the MOTHER Church of Christianity which it has handed down to most Christian Churches today.

DANIEL 7:25 [25], And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

Hope this helps....

Some more RCC sources;

In the Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, we read:
Q. Which is the Sabbath day?
A. Saturday is the Sabbath day.

Q. Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
A. We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodicea, (AD 336) transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday….

Q. Why did the Catholic Church substitute Sunday for Saturday?
A. The Church substituted Sunday for Saturday, because Christ rose from the dead on a Sunday, and the Holy Ghost descended upon the Apostles on a Sunday.

Q. By what authority did the Church substitute Sunday for Saturday?
A. The Church substituted Sunday for Saturday by the plenitude of that divine power which Jesus Christ bestowed upon her!
—Rev. Peter Geiermann, C.SS.R., (1946), p. 50.

In Catholic Christian Instructed,
Q. Has the [Catholic] church power to make any alterations in the commandments of God?
A. ...Instead of the seventh day, and other festivals appointed by the old law, the church has prescribed the Sundays and holy days to be set apart for God’s worship; and these we are now obliged to keep in consequence of God’s commandment, instead of the ancient Sabbath.
—The Catholic Christian Instructed in the Sacraments, Sacrifices, Ceremonies, and Observances of the Church By Way of Question and Answer, RT Rev. Dr. Challoner, p. 204.

In An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine,
Q. How prove you that the church hath power to command feasts and holy days?
A. By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church.

Q. How prove you that?
A. Because by keeping Sunday, they acknowledge the church’s power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin; and by not keeping the rest [of the feasts] by her commanded, they again deny, in fact, the same power.
–Rev. Henry Tuberville, D.D. (R.C.), (1833), page 58.

In A Doctrinal Catechism, 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, (1851), p. 174.

In the Catechism of the Council of Trent, The Church of God has thought it well to transfer the celebration and observance of the Sabbath to Sunday!
–p 402, second revised edition (English), 1937. (First published in 1566)

In the Augsburg Confession, They [the Catholics] allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday, the Lord’s day, contrary to the decalogue, as it appears; neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath day. Great, they say, is the power and authority of the church, since it dispensed with one of the ten commandments.
—Art. 28.

God warned that a blasphemous power would “seek to change times and laws,” and the Catholic Church openly admits doing it, even boasts about it.

In a sermon at the Council of Trent in 1562, the Archbishop of Reggia, Caspar del Fossa, claimed that the Catholic Church’s whole authority is based upon the fact that they changed the Sabbath to Sunday. Does this not fulfill the prophecies of Daniel and Paul?

“For centuries millions of Christians have gathered to worship God on the first day of the week. Graciously He has accepted this worship. He has poured out His blessings upon Christian people as they have sought to serve Him. However, as one searches the Scriptures, he is forced to recognize that Sunday is not a day of God’s appointment… It has no foundation in Scripture, but has arisen entirely as a result of custom,” says Frank H. Yost, Ph.D. in The Early Christian Sabbath.

Hope this helps.

FEZZILLA said:

No, this does not help at all. I asked you a simple question and you provide me this
View attachment 257179

You would have done better to quote from
View attachment 257181

Yet both sources are irrelevant. Do you understand what a conversation starter is? I asked a question...a simple question. You should reply with a sentence no larger than this:

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////////////////////////////////////////

...and it needs to be a direct answer to my direct question.


I asked, Who, When, and Where was this change made? This requires a simple response. But you posted some irrelevant rants from some Catholic book that did not answer Who, When, Where?

So you are dodging the question because you know once the Starting Assumption to this view is revealed its gonna be easy for me to refute it. Your churches say it all the time. Ellen G.White wrote about it. Yet you lack confidence in your view and refuse to answer my simple Who,When, Where question.

Click to expand...

You have been provided historical references in post # 629 linked that directly answer your question so please do not pretend that you haven't by just ignoring them.

In fact if you are interested it can be shown from History after the Apostles that this process was in fact a gradual change. Starting after the apostles where Christians worshipped God on both Sabbath and Sunday in combination as a celebration of a risen Saviour and also as a way for the early christians to separate themselves from the Jews in order to aviod persecution from the Roman Empire through to the edicts of the Roman Emporor Constantine when he made Sunday an official civil law on March 7, 321 AD.

Sadly I can see no matter what will be posted to you from historical references or from the bible you will be determines not to believe it. You are free to believe as you wish. I do not judge you.

Thanks for the discussion.

FEZZILLA said:

Who...requires name/s.
When...requires year/era
Where...requires place where change was made.

Keep it simple

Click to expand...

Answered in post # 629 linked

FEZZILLA said:

Thanks for the discussion? We never even had one. I asked you a simple question and you refuse to answer it.

Do you know Who made the change, When the change was made, and Where this event took place?

So you say the change took place in 1995 when that book was published? You need to establish a position before we can begin discussion.

Click to expand...

Indeed because you are not here for a discussion. Answered in post # 629 linked
I suggest you read it before posting. You did not read it did you.

FEZZILLA said:

So I need a dogmatic position: Was it Constantine or Pope Sylvester I? Both perhaps? So you say everyone worshiped on Saturday before Constantine? Is this your position?

Click to expand...

Your not reading what has been posted are you. If you would have read the above posts you would not have asked these questions.

FEZZILLA said:

I just joined this discussion and asked you for your position about Who, When, Where? You want me to read multiple pages when all I want at this point is a simple answer to a simple question. That's all I asked.

Click to expand...

You are asking questions that have already been answered and addressed to you. To me this indicates your not reading the posts and the historical references sent you or no matter what will be posted you will not believe it. If this was not the case you would not be repeating yourself and asking questions that have already been answered. You are free to believe as you wish. No one is forcing you here.