Why do SDA preach

Albion said:

i'd hoped we would get beyond that level of discussion on this matter. I refer to the act of pointing to the Commandment and refusing anything else. Yes, we all know what the Commandment says. I don't think that was ever in question.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

Now, why did the first Christians attend synagogue for a few years? Because they were Jews and the faith of Christ was not yet understood to be 100% separate from the former religion nor did most adherents even quite know what following Christ meant that they should do or believe on everything.

Click to expand...

James, and those with him, were zealous for the law. While they certainly were learning, along with the rest of the church, through the leading of the Spirit (Gentile inclusion, the gospel going, as Jesus had said from Jerusalem, to Judea, Samaria and the uttermost parts of the world), it is not clear from the text that their practice of continuing to observe the law was wrong.

It was not separate. It was the fulfillment. And it would make no sense for them to reach out to Jews while rejecting the law, as their evangelism would go nowhere.

But at the same time, James, and those with him, recognized that the Gentile believers were not required to be circumcised and keep the whole law. And if they were required to without need this would also hinder their outreach (circumcision is a hard sell). And they still had fellowship, and recognized God made no distinction between Jew and Gentile.

I think in this respect we see a gradual divergence, especially after 70 AD and later around 130 when the Jerusalem church which had initially been so influential was greatly reduced. There was no longer as much interchange between Jewish and Gentile Christians, and over time there started to be hostility between Jewish believers keeping the whole law, yet in Christ, and Gentile believers. But this was not necessary.

I say gradual because in Justin Martyr's time he grants that those who keep the whole law will likely still be saved, but is doubtful of them. Whereas later the notion seemed to be against any toleration of such.

We know Jewish law-observing believers lasted more than a little while from Epiphanius, etc. who describes them centuries later.

And we know that Jesus predicted they would be put out of their synagogues for His name sake (because they would still be meeting in them).

None of that has anything to do with the Bible, the word of God, divine revelation, showing that the Church decided to make Sunday the primary day of worship.

Click to expand...

I think it is possible that the verse in Acts is referencing a liturgical practice of assembling regularly on the first day for the purpose of breaking bread. And we know historically some were observing such.

But to say that this of itself makes clear it was the primary day of worship I don't see. It doesn't spell out that much.

MMXX said:

What I don't like is what appears to be an attempt to drown someone out or bury them in a wall of text crammed with verses, that's probably a cut and paste on they had on file. And when you don't bother with trying to sort though all of it, there's the inevitable repeated "when are you going to address the scripture verses I posted?". Can't there just be a regular conversation please?

Click to expand...

Very much so. Especially when there are some big picture elements of disagreement that would get to the real discussion quickly, that don't require going through every text immediately. But then once you have that discussion on the big picture, it can also help to go through each text and see how they fit. This of course does not involve cut and past responses, but understanding the particular viewpoint of the one you are interacting with and then seeing how each part fits in their understanding of the whole framework.

The issue of the nature of the law, covenants, etc. then to me is often key. And if you disagree on that, it is inevitable you will disagree on the particulars.

I think many here are missing the big picture. None of our opinions are worth a can of beans. The only thing that matters is God's Truth.

What does God say on the subject?

Exodus 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God.

Isaiah 58:13 If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, From doing your pleasure on My holy day, And call the Sabbath a delight, The holy day of the Lord honorable,

How is this even a debate? Couple this with the other 170+ Sabbath scriptures regarding God's holy day and only holy day that our Creator and Savior separated from all other days in the entire Bible. There are 8 scriptures regarding the first day and nothing where God says the above. I would be happy to go through the eight verse by verse if someone is up for that.

You are not required to be a Seventh Day Adventist, but you are required to obey God. The Catholic church can't save you, our friends on CF can't save you, the pope can't save you only our Creator and Redeemer can save. If God told me to keep holy Thursday that's the day I would keep holy. It comes down to our will over God's. The same message from the days of Noah. Jesus is coming soon and the day does matter because God told us it does. You can follow traditions Matthew 15:3-9 over God's commandments, but the disciples even tell us what matters is keeping God's commandments 1 Cor 7:19 and we should obey God over man. Acts 5:29 The choice is yours to make.

tall73 said:

I think it is possible that the verse in Acts is referencing a liturgical practice of assembling regularly on the first day for the purpose of breaking bread. And we know historically some were observing such.

But to say that this of itself makes clear it was the primary day of worship I don't see. It doesn't spell out that much.

Click to expand...

'Breaking bread' apparently refers to Holy Communion in which the bread literally is broken...and the Sunday observance is clearly more than "we can get together on any day of the week if we choose."

The day is described in that verse as being special. Besides, we know from ordinary history that Sunday was the standard day of weekly worship for all the centuries following, so it cannot have been just one of a number of different days when some sort of church service might occur.

Albion said:

'Breaking bread' apparently refers to Holy Communion in which the bread literally is broken...and the Sunday observance is clearly more than "we can get together on any day of the week if we choose."

The day is described in that verse as being special. Besides, we know from ordinary history that Sunday was the standard day of weekly worship for all the centuries following, so it cannot have been just one of a number of different days when some sort of church service might occur.

Click to expand...

Interesting you have provided no scriptures. Also, by this theory, every day is a Holy Communion because the disciples broke bread daily.

Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, Act 2:46

Why piece together scriptures that clearly does not say what you want them to, when we have God's Word that is so clear?

Exodus 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God.

Isaiah 58:13 If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, From doing your pleasure on My holy day, And call the Sabbath a delight, The holy day of the Lord honorable,


You're obviously welcome to believe whatever you want, but if you had evidence in scripture to post, I am sure you would post it. Trust me, it not a good way to base our beliefs when scripture tells us Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

The bible is a big book, I would not want to hang my hat based on 8 verses in the bible that has these missing words and phrases: holy, blessed by God, sanctified, God's Sabbath day, hallow, God asking us to Remember it. A sign between you and God. How we are sanctified.

Albion said:

'Breaking bread' apparently refers to Holy Communion in which the bread literally is broken...

Click to expand...

I noted that is a possibility, and that history indicates some were doing so. The gathering of all of them together and breaking bread in one place suggests communion, and probably a feast as well. The participle with the infinitive suggests that it was the purpose of meeting to break bread.

Though not every use of breaking bread is universally acknowledged to mean communion, such as the second occurrence in Acts 2.

Act 2:46 And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts,

The designation of a particular day of the week suggests that this was note worthy as at other times in this chapter when relating travel he will say "the next day, etc.

However, there is no name of the day designated beyond its place in the week. And there is no spelling out of this being a regular occurrence, but it can be inferred as a formulaic statement.

Moreover, your initial quote that I was responding to said:

None of that has anything to do with the Bible, the word of God, divine revelation, showing that the Church decided to make Sunday the primary day of worship.

This text does not say anything about God making the day the primary day of worship. We can infer they were meeting then, but as I mentioned, it is not spelled out. It is referenced other places, but not spelled out.

So to put it a different way, do you give as much attention to other days mentioned in that chapter, that are even named, and seem significant? Do you consider them to be normative for the church? For instance, in the same chapter:

Act 20:16 For Paul had decided to sail past Ephesus, so that he might not have to spend time in Asia, for he was hastening to be at Jerusalem, if possible, on the day of Pentecost.

Why do you think Paul, in the New Covenant era, was hastening to be in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost?

and the Sunday observance is clearly more than "we can get together on any day of the week if we choose."

Click to expand...

Then can you point out a NT text where the rationale of the first day is spelled out?

It is in some of the early historical texts. But more than one rationale is given in various quotes.

The day is described in that verse as being special.

Click to expand...

Its order in the week is referenced. It may be a formula indicating it is special. But it is hardly the clearest text.

Meanwhile you have Paul hastening to be in Jerusalem to be there on the day of Pentecost, and there are clear texts that the day of Pentecost is special, and that males were to be there. But you don't seem to suggest that was Christian practice, though Paul was a Christian.

Besides, we know from ordinary history that Sunday was the standard day of weekly worship for all the centuries following, so it cannot have been just one of a number of different days when some sort of church service might occur.

Click to expand...

It was for some, in some places, and with varying rationales.

Again, I don't dispute that Sunday became a day of worship early on. But I don't see this text as a slam dunk that they have to squirm to explain away either.

tall73 said:

This text does not say anything about God making the day the primary day of worship. We can infer they were meeting then, but as I mentioned, it is not spelled out. It is referenced other places, but not spelled out.

Click to expand...

The Bible is the word of God. At least that's what almost every Christian denomination says is its belief. But I have noticed that it's common to have people say that this or that book or chapter or verse is just what some writer said, so it can be dismissed as wrong. Where does that notion come from?

So to put it a different way, do you give as much attention to other days mentioned in that chapter, that are even named, and seem significant? Do you consider them to be normative for the church? For instance, in the same chapter:

Act 20:16 For Paul had decided to sail past Ephesus, so that he might not have to spend time in Asia, for he was hastening to be at Jerusalem, if possible, on the day of Pentecost.

Why do you think Paul, in the New Covenant era, was hastening to be in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost?

Click to expand...

It's a totally different issue, isn't it? The debate here was about the Sabbath and whether it was moved or superseded by the choice of Sunday in the early church instead. The church of course does commemorate Pentecost, but that doesn't cut one way or the other with our topic here unless we might care that it's observed on a Sunday.

Again, I don't dispute that Sunday became a day of worship early on. But I don't see this text as a slam dunk that they have to squirm to explain away either.

Click to expand...

This has gone on far too long IMO, so here's the pulpit commentary from the appropriate page in Biblehub. It basically reflects the orthodox and historic view of the evidence.

"The first day of the week. This is an important evidence of the keeping of the Lord's day by the Church as a day for their Church assemblies (see Luke 24:1, 30, 35; John 20:19, 26; 1 Corinthians 16:2). To break bread. This is also an important example of weekly communion as the practice of the first Christians. Comparing the phrase, "to break bread," with St. Luke's account of the institution of the Holy Eucharist (Luke 22:19) and the passages just quoted in Luke 24, and St. Paul's language (1 Corinthians 10:16; 1 Corinthians 11:24), it is impossible not to conclude that the breaking of bread in the celebration of the Lord's Supper is an essential part of the holy sacrament, which man may not for any specious reasons omit. Further, this passage seems to indicate that evening Communion, after the example of the first Lord's Supper, was at this time the practice of the Church. It was preceded (see ver. 11) by the preaching of the Word. The following description, given by Justin Martyr, in his second Apology to Antoninus Plus (or Marcus Aurelius), of the Church assemblies in his day, not a hundred years after this time, is in exact agreement with it: - "On the day which is called Sunday, all (Christians) who dwell either in town or country come together to one place. The memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read for a certain time, and then the president of the meeting, when the reader has stopped, makes a discourse, in which he instructs and exhorts the people to the imitation of the good deeds of which they have just heard. We then all rise up together, and address prayers (to God); and, when our prayers are ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president, to the best of his ability, offers up both prayers and thanksgivings, and the people assent, saving 'Amen.' And then the distribution of the bread and wine, over which the thanksgivings have been offered, is made to all present, and all partake of it."

You are welcome to provide scripture and we have asked many times. When you are going against a commandment from the Most High, there should be scriptures that leaves no doubts it is from the will of God. The fact no scripture is ever referenced says everything.

LoveGodsWord said:

This is not my discussion your having with someone else but I thought I would ask a few questions as I am finding what your posting hard to follow. So it is more for my clarification really. You posted...

To me Acts of the Apostles 20:9-11 simply says what it says and that is that on the first day of the week when the disciples gathered together to break bread (they did this every day according to Acts of the Apostles 2:46-47) Paul began talking to them intending to depart the next day (second day of the week - Monday our time). So why do you think that Acts of the Apostles 20:9-11 says God's 4th commandment is now abolished and we are now commanded to keep Sunday as a holy day of rest? I always struggle with the reasoning of many who try and promote this text to support Sunday worship.

Ok I have never heard of that argument and do not believe it is biblical. It says first day of the week and they were meeting together for a meal because Paul was departing the next day (second day of the week). So the scriptures are pretty clear to me. I still do not see this as a proof text to claim that God's 4th commandment of the 10 commandments that give us a knowledge of what sin is in the new covenant when broken *James 2:10-11; Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4 is now abolished and we are now commanded to keep Sunday as a holy day of rest? Is that not reading into the scriptures what the scriptures do not say and do not teach?

Why do you think that would be a problem if Paul as his manner was rested on the Sabbath *Acts of the Apostles 17:2 according to Gods' 4th commandment? Of course he would not be departing on the Sabbath right. Sorry for the questions, I am finding it hard to follow your logic here.

Why would you need to meet with the disciples for two Sabbaths when the disciples were meeting together every day of the week *Acts of the Apostles 2:46-47? Sorry this argument does not make much sense to me so I am interested to hear your view so I understand your argument.

According to the scriptures the record of History is that Jesus and all the apostles and disciples after the death and resurrection of Jesus met together every day of the week. That of course does not make every day of the week a holy day of rest now does it? The records of biblical history also show Jesus and the Apostles and disciples after the death and resurrection continued keeping God' "seventh day" Sabbath according to Gods' 4th commandment of the 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken *Romans 3:20 as shown through the scriptures here linked.

Hope this is helpful to the discussion.

Click to expand...

First of all. I have nothing whatsoever against 7th Day Adventist people. I am only speaking out to show that what is being said about Sabbath worship is NOT Biblical and is strictly the teaching of the church. Anyone and everyone can gather on the Sabbath. I DO NOT CARE. It is that IMHO it is wrong to do so and "Insist" that it is Biblical.

The reason why some things are hard to follow is that when anyone trys to respond to long questions such as yours here....it gets confusing.

Anyway I shall try to answer you.

1.
I used Acts 20:9-11 to show that the 1st gathering was on a SUNDAY.
EVERY MENTION OF THE SABBATH IN THE BOOK OF ACTS without a single exception is in connection with Jewish worship on that day and not Christian celebration. Paul's evangelistic strategy was to go to the Jews first in a community and share the Gospel with them. Sabbath is the day when he knew he would find the most Jews gathering for worship. He knew he would have his best opportunity of sharing the good news of the Messiah to the Jews on Sabbath. It was not because he was meeting with a group of believing Christians. He was meeting with non-Christian Jews.

2.
The argument of 7 day visits. not being Biblical.
Now, I can not apologize for you having never heard what I explained. What I posted came ONLY from the Scriptures and an in depth study of those Scriptures validating the times and days spent on Pauls visits. All I can do is to ask YOU to read and do the same study I did and you will come to the very same observation.

3.
You said...............
"Why would you need to meet with the disciples for two Sabbaths when the disciples were meeting together every day of the week *Acts of the Apostles 2:46-47? Sorry this argument does not make much sense to me so I am interested to hear your view so I understand your argument."

Your answer was included in my post where I said that ...."IF Sabbath worship was all that important, why would Paul spent only ONE Sabbath and TWO Sundays."????

In my opinion, it was for 2 reasons.
1. Sunday was the day of Resurrection and was more important than the Sabbath.
2. Paul was setting the president of Sunday as the day of worship for the Christian.

4.
Your comment is a little deceptive my brother. You said but did not elaborate.......
"The records of biblical history also show Jesus and the Apostles and disciples after the death and resurrection continued keeping God' "seventh day" Sabbath."

I say "deceptive" because you only told 1/2 of the situation. Allow me to show the "Rest of the story" as Paul Harvey.

At Antioch Paul “went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day” (Acts 13:14).

In Philippi “on the Sabbath we went out of the city by a river side” (Acts 16:13).

In Thessalonica Paul preached on the Sabbath and for “three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead” (Acts 17:1-3).

In Corinth Paul “came to Corinth” and “reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks” (Acts 18:1, 4).

In Ephesus Paul, “went into the synagogue, and spoke boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God” (Acts 19:8). This was obviously on the Sabbath days, as in Antioch, Corinth and Thessalonica.

What is the PATTERN here as seen in the Word of God????????

Paul went to the Synagogues on the SABBATH because HE was a Jew and he knew that the Jews would be there. He went there to preach Jesus Christ and Him crucified and resurrected.

Eventually, Paul was arrested in the Temple in Jerusalem in Acts 21.
At his trial before the Sanhedrin, the ones who had him arrested, the Pharisees admitted in Acts 23:9--- “we find no evil in this man”.

Before Felix, Paul tesified in Acts 24:14.....
"So worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets”.

And he declared before Festus in Acts 25:10.....
“to the Jews have I done no wrong”.

Before Agrippa he said, in Acts 26:22......
“I continue to this day … saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come”.

Finally, Paul spoke to the Jews in Rome, in Acts 28:23........
“persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening”.

During all of his trials, the Jews never once accused Paul of breaking the Sabbath because he never did!

The Jerusalem Council, led by the apostles was organized to discuss “this question … this matter” of “circumcision” and “the law of Moses” in Acts 15:1, 2, 5.

I am hoping and expecting that you will take time to read all of these Scriptures.

Now at that meeting, he Sabbath itself was not debated or even discussed. The Church then decided that the Gentiles were “SAVED … through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ” in verse 11 and observing the Sabbath was never an issue.

It was also at this meeting that decided that they did not need to be circumcised.

That brother is where I am coming from.

LoveGodsWord said:

I see, so how do you keep the Sabbath of God's 4th commandment of the 10 commandments by breaking the Sabbath when the scriptures tell us that by breaking the law we stand guilty before God of sin in James 2:10-11; Romans 7:7 and 1 John 3:4? How can anyone claim to know God when God's Word says And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that said, I know him, and keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him (1 John 2:3-4). Is not what you have posted above a contradiction of the scriptures? By the way there was no Jew, no Moses, and no Israel when Jesus says that the Sabbath was made for mankind *Mark 2:27; Genesis 2:1-3 so not sure what your trying to argue here.

Click to expand...

Why are we having this discussion.

Exodus 31:13-14 ........
"Say to the Israelites, 'You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. 14"'Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it is to be put to death; those who do any work on that day must be cut off from their people.

Simply because those laws were given to the ISRAELITES, the parents of the JEWS!

Albion said:

The Bible is the word of God. At least that's what almost every Christian denomination says is its belief. But I have noticed that it's common to have people say that this or that book or chapter or verse is just what some writer said, so it can be dismissed as wrong. Where does that notion come from?

Click to expand...

Did I imply at all that Acts is not inspired? It is not just what some writer said. But your interpretation of it is what you said.

And no, it is not spelled out as clearly as you, and for that matter, I would like that this is describing that Sunday is the new primary day of worship. Because nothing of that sort is said. It only indicates they came together to break bread that day, and gives additional circumstances of Paul leaving the next day.

As I noted, the evidence of how it is stated suggests it is a formula, that sounds like they would worship on that day. But if it was clearly spelled out to be the primary day of Christian worship, then we wouldn't be looking for that statement, it would be manifest.

It's a totally different issue, isn't it?

Click to expand...

Is it? If you are only looking at the text it is not a different issue. If you are looking at the text from a later view of history it may be.

No rationale besides breaking bread is given for their meeting. Nothing is said of the commemoration of the resurrection, or of a different rationale listed by some of the historical writers.

The debate here was about the Sabbath and whether it was moved or superseded by the choice of Sunday in the early church instead.

Click to expand...

That is your assertion, and there are various views besides that one.

There is the view expressed in Dies Domini, somewhat similar to your assertion here.

There is the Sabbatarian view.

And then there is the view that they were not competing, or one substituted for another, but that both were recognized as days with meaning. To my understanding Ice holds that view.

And there is the view that all days were alike, etc.

Proponents of all of those are looking at the inspired text, and to a lesser extent, at history. And their arguments may be more or less helpful.

The church of course does commemorate Pentecost, but that doesn't cut one way or the other with our topic here unless we might care that it's observed on a Sunday.

Click to expand...

It is an example to have you think through your presuppositions. You indicate it is clear the significance of Sunday from this text, and a handful of others. But others are telling you they don't see it. And I don't think it is because they are just putting on blinders.

I don't think it is as clear as you think. But you are approaching it from the standpoint of Christian historical practice.

But even though Paul states he is going to Jerusalem to be there on the day of Pentecost, few Christians think that is significant. But there is a clear rationale for it from the OT, and here it is described in NT practice. Is the difference what you see in the text, or what you see in later history, and your perception?

Who has to squirm? I'd say it's the people who won't even admit that the New Testament has something to say about it (everything you've just discussed yourself in this post).

Click to expand...

But that is the point. You said they twist themselves in knots. Do they really? It says they came together on a day of the week, mentioned as a number designation, for the purpose of breaking bread. That is either a formula, or just historic information. But it doesn't say what you claim about it setting aside the new primary day of Christian worship. And it certainly says nothing about doing away with the Sabbath.

Now I don't see Paul going to the synagogue the same way as Bob does. Clearly he went there because the people who knew the Scriptures were there. And we see in Ephesus when they kicked him out he went to lecture daily in a hall instead.

Act 19:8 And he entered the synagogue and for three months spoke boldly, reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God.
Act 19:9 But when some became stubborn and continued in unbelief, speaking evil of the Way before the congregation, he withdrew from them and took the disciples with him, reasoning daily in the hall of Tyrannus.

However, I do see that Jewish Christians were meeting in the synagogue apart from just for outreach. Paul went there to persecute them before his conversion. And Jesus warned they would be put out of them.

Gentile God fearers were already meeting in the synagogue as Bob notes. The question at issue seems to be did they continue synagogue attendance,s part of their usual practice after conversion. Or more to the point did gentile Christians observe the Sabbath as a command.

That is not as easy to know. So we know Paul went to the synagogue, but I can only determine so much from that as it was both a mission field, and a place where Jewish believers would regularly go. We know he met gentiles there, but we don't know what there observance of the sabbath looked like before or after.

I know that Paul wanted to be in Jerusalem on Pentecost, and from Acts 21 I gather that Jewish believers were zealous for the whole law, so that is not surprising. But I can't really make sweeping statements about what that means for Gentile Christian practice either.

And I know he mentions a few places gathering or laying aside alms on the first day. But those texts likewise do not claim definite rationales of commemorating the resurrection, replacing the Sabbath, etc.

SabbathBlessings said:

We are welcome to provide scripture and we have asked many times. When you are going against a commandment from the Most High, there should be scriptures that leaves no doubts it is from the will of God. The fact no scripture is ever referenced says everything.

Click to expand...

Without using the "REPLY" option......no one know who yu are talking to.

I am most excited to use Scriptures for you if I knew what anf to whom y

LoveGodsWord said:

Where does it say in the scriptures you need to be a Jew to keep the Sabbath or anyone of God's 10 commandments for that matter? You do know according to Jesus in Mark 2:27 that the Sabbath was made for all mankind before there was any Jew, Moses, Israel, sin and plan of salvation because there was no sin right? So is what your posting here based on the scriptures? I think not.

Believing and following what Gods Word says according to the scriptures has everything to do with our fellowship with God and in fact according to the scriptures is a sign if we know God or are deceiving ourselves *see John 15:10; 1 John 2:3-4; 1 John 3:6-9.

May God bless you as you seek him through His Word.

Click to expand...

Exodus 31:13-14...........
"Say to the Israelites, 'You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. 14"'Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it is to be put to death; those who do any work on that day must be cut off from their people."

FYI........You do not hear that the righteous Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob kept the Sabbath. There is a conspicuous silence for 2,500 years after the Fall of man. It is not until after the redemption of God's people Israel out of Egypt when they are safely on the other side of the Red Sea that you read in the Book of Exodus that the Sabbath is mentioned again. (Exodus 16:22-30). Abraham was given commandments and ordinances, but the Sabbath is never mentioned as one of them.

Can you respond as to WHY that is Biblical history????

Then the Sabbath is given to Israel and Israel alone. The Sabbath is a covenant sign between God and the nation of Israel.

Ex. 31:12-17.......
"And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, "But as for you, speak to the sons of Israel, saying, 'You shall surely observe My sabbaths; for this is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you. 'Therefore you are to observe the sabbath, for it is holy to you. Everyone who profanes it shall surely be put to death; for whoever does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from among his people. For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, holy to the Lord; whoever does any work on the sabbath day shall surely be put to death. So the sons of Israel shall observe the sabbath, to celebrate the sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day he ceased from labor, and was refreshed."

I do not mean to be insensitive here......but how hard is it to understand that????

MMXX said:

I'm fairly new to the sabbath debates here, but I have already seen that pattern. Especially what appear to be canned responses.

Click to expand...

Is the Bible "a can"? or "a canned response" to a doctrinal question in your POV?
Is that your definition of sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and practice?

Albion said:

The Bible is the word of God. At least that's what almost every Christian denomination says is its belief. But I have noticed that it's common to have people say that this or that book or chapter or verse is just what some writer said, so it can be dismissed as wrong. Where does that notion come from?


It's a totally different issue, isn't it? The debate here was about the Sabbath and whether it was moved or superseded by the choice of Sunday in the early church instead. The church of course does commemorate Pentecost, but that doesn't cut one way or the other with our topic here unless we might care that it's observed on a Sunday.


This has gone on far too long IMO, so here's the pulpit commentary from the appropriate page in Biblehub. It basically reflects the orthodox and historic view of the evidence.

"The first day of the week. This is an important evidence of the keeping of the Lord's day by the Church as a day for their Church assemblies (see Luke 24:1, 30, 35; John 20:19, 26; 1 Corinthians 16:2). To break bread. This is also an important example of weekly communion as the practice of the first Christians. Comparing the phrase, "to break bread," with St. Luke's account of the institution of the Holy Eucharist (Luke 22:19) and the passages just quoted in Luke 24, and St. Paul's language (1 Corinthians 10:16; 1 Corinthians 11:24), it is impossible not to conclude that the breaking of bread in the celebration of the Lord's Supper is an essential part of the holy sacrament, which man may not for any specious reasons omit. Further, this passage seems to indicate that evening Communion, after the example of the first Lord's Supper, was at this time the practice of the Church. It was preceded (see ver. 11) by the preaching of the Word. The following description, given by Justin Martyr, in his second Apology to Antoninus Plus (or Marcus Aurelius), of the Church assemblies in his day, not a hundred years after this time, is in exact agreement with it: - "On the day which is called Sunday, all (Christians) who dwell either in town or country come together to one place. The memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read for a certain time, and then the president of the meeting, when the reader has stopped, makes a discourse, in which he instructs and exhorts the people to the imitation of the good deeds of which they have just heard. We then all rise up together, and address prayers (to God); and, when our prayers are ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president, to the best of his ability, offers up both prayers and thanksgivings, and the people assent, saving 'Amen.' And then the distribution of the bread and wine, over which the thanksgivings have been offered, is made to all present, and all partake of it."

Click to expand...

Brother "Albion". Have you noticed that Everyone says that the Bible is the Word of God...........
until it does not agree with what they want it to say.?????????

Major1 said:

Exodus 31:13-14...........
"Say to the Israelites, 'You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come

Click to expand...

Is 56:6 gentiles specifically singled out for Sabbath keeping
Mark 2:27 Sabbath "made for mankind" - said Christ, -- (so not "just Jews)
Is 66:23 for all eternity after the cross in the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship"
Ex 20:11 points to Gen 2:1-3 for making of mankind and the Sabbath at creation week itself.

Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations agree on this point
For example:

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism

Major1 said:

Brother "Albion". Have you noticed that Everyone says that the Bible is the Word of God...........
until it does not agree with what they want it to say.

Click to expand...

Indeed that has come to my attention as well

BobRyan said:

Is the Bible "a can"? or "a canned response" to a doctrinal question in your POV?
Is that your definition of sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and practice?

Click to expand...

Is there a problem with using the Scriptures to answer any question or is it only when that Scripture does not agree with what you want it to say.

Albion said:

i'd hoped we would get beyond that level of discussion on this matter. I refer to the act of pointing to the Commandment and refusing anything else. Yes, we all know what the Commandment says. I don't think that was ever in question.

Now, why did the first Christians attend synagogue for a few years? Because they were Jews and theno faith of Christ was not yet understood to be 100% separate from the former religion nor did most adherents even quite know what following Christ meant that they should do or believe on everything. None of that has anything to do with the Bible, the word of God, divine revelation, showing that the Church decided to make Sunday the primary day of worship.

Click to expand...

no that is not the case. they went to the synagogue, because they were grafted back in to Israel (Rom,11:17) they went to hear the law of God,(Acts 15:21) and they observed the Sabbath. That is pretty well established. It took an edict from Sylvester I , the bishop of Rome, to change the holiness of the Sabbath day to the first day of the week. This again was for political reasons . He joined Constantine in uniting the Church & State with Christianity. The Roman Breviary: Reformed by Order of the Holy Oecumenical Council of Trent

BobRyan said:

Is 56:6 gentiles specifically singled out for Sabbath keeping
Mark 2:27 Sabbath "made for mankind" - said Christ, -- (so not "just Jews)
Is 66:23 for all eternity after the cross in the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship"
Ex 20:11 points to Gen 2:1-3 for making of mankind and the Sabbath at creation week itself.

Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations agree on this point
For example:

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism



Indeed that has come to my attention as well

Click to expand...

LEVITICUS 23:5-11 - Look at verse 11:.........
"'And he shall wave the sheaf before the Lord for you to be accepted; on the day after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.'"

The day after the Sabbath is Sunday.

Read on specifically looking at Leviticus 23:15 -
"'You shall also count for yourselves from the day after the sabbath, from the day when you brought in the sheaf of the wave offering; there shall be seven complete sabbaths. You shall count fifty days to the DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH SABBATH; then you shall present a new grain offering to the Lord.'"

This is the Feast of Pentecost. It was one of the compulsory feasts of Israel.

Note on the day of Pentecost, a Sunday God's people were commanded to worship. God says, "On this same day you shall make a proclamation as well; you are to have a holy convocation. You shall do no laborious work. It is to be perpetual statute in all your dwelling places throughout your generations." Leviticus 23:21.

LoveGodsWord said:

According to the scriptures if we break anyone of God's 10 commandments *James 2:10-11 we stand guilty before God of sin *1 John 3:4. If any of us continue living in a life of known unrepentant sin once we have been given a knowledge of the truth of God's Word *Acts of the Apostles 17:30-31; James 4:17 and reject it, is a pretty BIG deal in God's eyes because we will be in danger of the judgement (see Hebrews 10:26-31). Our opinions do not really matter much here. Only God's Word is true and we should believe and follow them according to Romans 3:4 and Acts of the Apostles 5:29. There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says Gods' 4th commandment has now been abolished and we are now commanded to keep Sunday as a Holy day of rest. This is a man-made teaching and tradition that has led many to break God's 4th commandment in favor of man-made teachings. Jesus warns us in Matthew 15:3-9 that if we follow man-made teachings and traditions that break the commandments of God we are not worshiping God. Do you believe these words of Jesus?

Click to expand...

Do I believe the words of Jesus?

YES I DO!

DO YOU?

You are so focused on the Law keeping - DO you believe that Jesus Christ DID NOT KEEP THE SABBATH?????

Healing is one of those things which are not permitted on the Sabbath.

The gospels record several instances when Jesus healed a person on the Sabbath:
1. Simon Peter’s mother-in-law in Peter’s home (Mark 1:29–31).
2. A man with a withered hand in the synagogue (Mark 3:1–6).
3. A man born blind in Jerusalem (John 9:1–16).
4. A crippled woman in a synagogue (Luke 13:10–17).
5. A man with dropsy at a Pharisee’s house (Luke 14:1–6).
6. A demon-possessed man in Capernaum (Mark 1:21–28).
7. A lame man by the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1–18).

The answer of course is that Jesus did not break the Sabbath, as outlined by God under the Old Covenant. As He publicly stated, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17).

The Pharisees had so conflated their own standard of holiness with God’s that they accused Jesus of breaking the Sabbath law. They were furious over Jesus’ actions, yet it was only their Sabbath law He did not keep. Jesus kept God’s law, and He had done nothing to violate the Sabbath.

Since that is the case......how can Christian today be accused of not keeping the Sabbath????

BobRyan said:

Is 56:6 gentiles specifically singled out for Sabbath keeping
Mark 2:27 Sabbath "made for mankind" - said Christ, -- (so not "just Jews)
Is 66:23 for all eternity after the cross in the New Earth "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship"
Ex 20:11 points to Gen 2:1-3 for making of mankind and the Sabbath at creation week itself.

Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations agree on this point
For example:

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism

Click to expand...

Major1 said:

Is there a problem with using the Scriptures to answer any question or is it only when that Scripture does not agree with what you want it to say.

Click to expand...

Those Bible texts look pretty clear to me and the interesting part is that the bible details are so clear that even the Bible scholars on both sides of the Sabbath topic - agree ... as noted above on the bible detail mentioned in my post.