Are professed Christians that worship our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday sinning?

Hentenza said:

Let me suggest that you study hermeneutics and the proper techniques to apply historical and by linguistic context. You missed both by quote mining verses wretched out of context.

Initially the Christian movement was indeed called the way. These verses pertain to a charge of public menace against Paul brought to Felix, governor, by the priest Ananias.

In verse 5 Ananias is bringing the charges against Paul who, by his evangelizing of the Jews, is creating dissent. This verse is a perfect example of why the Christians are NOT Israel since both are contrasted.

Click to expand...

Acts 21: 27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, 28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.

While it is true Paul was turning people away from the "Jews religion", he did so because they were not promoting God's Laws, rather, if a man believes in the Jesus "of the Bible", they were promoting their own Laws, their own religious traditions and were "children of the devil".

Mark 7: 9 And he said unto them, Full well "ye reject the commandment of God", that ye may keep "your own tradition".

As a Pharisee, Paul explained he was more zealous for these traditions.

Gal. 1: 13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of "the traditions of my fathers".

Stephen also points this out for those interested in seeking God's Truth.

Acts. 7: 51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, "so do ye".

52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

And Jesus confirms this in Matt. 23: 1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say (they promote the Law of Moses), and do not.

4 For they (Pharisees, not God as the deceiver would have us believe) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. (Peter speaks to this "Yoke" in Acts 15.)

So the implication of your sermon, that the Pharisees were promoting "the Law of Moses" while those who, as Paul teaches, "Yielded themselves to God", rejected the Law of Moses, is a teaching that is wrought in the heart of man, not the Inspired Word of God.

Hentenza said:

Ananias uses the term “sect” to describe the sect of the Nazarenes. The Greek word for sect here is hairesis which is where we get the word heresy. The historical context of Nazareth is a place that elicited both contempt and reproach among both Romans and Jews.

Verse 14 is spoken by Paul in his defense stating that “in accordance to the way”, the Christian movement, that “they” call a sect, a heresy, with “they” meaning the Jews. Again here there is a clear distinction between the way and the Jews.

Click to expand...

The Pharisees and their rebellious fathers that the Jesus "of the Bible" called "children of the devil", had been persecuting the "Church of God" or as Paul teaches, "The Way of the Lord", since Cain and Abel. The Prophets promoted the same Gospel as Jesus and Paul did, and the uncircumscribed of the heart Jews called them heretics as well, and killed many of them. They were shown the Gospel, but didn't believe it either.

Abraham didn't do this when confronted by the "Way of the Lord".

Gen. 18: 18 Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?

19 For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep "the way of the LORD", to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.


Caleb was almost stoned to death because he "Yielded Himself" to the Way of the Lord.

So the Faithful, those who placed their trust in the Lord, including Saul who turned away from the "Jews Religion" which had full well rejected the commandments of God, refused to submit to the Righteousness of God, and went about establishing and promoting their own Righteousness, are always persecuted by this world's religious system.

When Saul was living by and promoting the Pharisees religious traditions, commandments and philosophies, Saul was their buddy. But when he turned to God and the "Way of the Lord" that all the Faithful in the entire bible walked in, he became hated by the religious system of this world. They falsely accused him of teaching against God's Laws, just as you and "many" who call Jesus Lord, Lord, accuse Paul of teaching against God's Laws.

But he wasn't. And the Scriptures Hark showed you teaches this, if you could only believe.

Acts 24: 12 And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:

13 Neither can they prove the things whereof "they now accuse me".

14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way "which they call heresy", the Way the Prophets promoted, and were killed for promoting. The way David Lived by, and was persecuted every day. The way Shadrack lived by, and obeyed even at the risk of being cast into a furnace of fire. The way Zacharias, Simeon, Anna and the Wise men lived.

The way and the Commandments Jesus Lived by has always been taught against by this world's religions. Paul, who had "put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." understood this and told us. "so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Hentenza said:

These verse say exactly the opposite to what you are forcing them to say. It is a hermeneutical disaster.

Click to expand...

No, Hark understands that the "Faithful believers" in the Bible, never Judged God or His "instruction in righteousness". They Glorified God "AS GOD", and therefore understood it was simply their reasonable serve to Trust that God knows what is better for them, than those "many" who call Jesus Lord, Lord, and "profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate".

The mainstream preachers of Paul's time were shown all this as well, but their pride and selfishness was more important to them than submitting to God.

It was the "Jews religion" that led men astray, not God's Laws as "Many" who come in Christ's Name promote.

PloverWing said:

The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) ruled that Gentiles do not have to convert to Judaism to become Christians, and Paul's letters are consistent with this ruling.

Click to expand...

Correct.

The law of moses was made for the Jews, not the Gentiles.

Hentenza said:

I’ve had several people that keep the sabbath argue that the sabbath is a moral commandment, therefore, those that do not worship on Saturday are sinning and consequently living in sin. The poll is self explanatory. If you choose maybe please post why.

Be blessed.

Click to expand...

Not at this time in the worlds history. There will come a time when this is true, but it is not true right now. Just before the 2nd coming of Jesus there will be a time when God will make sure everyone understands the issues involved and have to decode for or against it as God is just. But, that has not happened yet.

HARK! said:

In the 5th century, Socrates Scholasticus Church History book 5 states the fact that until Constantine imposed Dies Solis (Sungod Day) on humanity, most assemblies and believers across the world at that time still kept The Sabbath even as late as 5 centuries later after Yahshua! He clearly knew that this “Sunday” worship was based in Rome on “the account of some ancient tradition!”

"Nor is there less variation in regard to religious assemblies. For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this."

Click to expand...

It’s inaccurate to say that Emperor Constantine changed the day of worship, because we know from the writings of St. Justin Martyr, a second century apologist, that the principle day of worship for Christians in Pagan Rome was Sunday, and also from other Ante-Nicene texts.

Also, fun fact: the majority of worship services on the Sabbath are conducted by the Roman Catholic Church (all healthy priests being required to celebrate the mass on this day, and laity allowed to fill their weekly holy day of obligation by attending a service on Saturday evening instead of Sunday, and the seventh day also the most popular for devotional services such as the Rosary and the Novena) , and in Latin, the word for Saturday is “Sabato”, so the idea that they changed the Sabbath doesn’t make sense if we look at the actual liturgical texts.

For example, if we look at the Tridentine Missal, which was used by the RCC exclusively in various revisions until 1962, the calendar for Holy Week and the Saturday preceding it is as follows:



Likewise, in the Orthodox Church, the Sabbath is a vital day of worship, not just for Vespers and All Night Vigils (which last about two hours; the liturgical day changes to the next day at the end of Vespers or a Vesperal Divine Liturgy, not the beginning, which is why you can have a Vesperal Divine Liturgy on Christmas Eve and the Holy Sabbath of Holy Week followed by the Paschal Divine Liturgy at midnight on the First Day commemorating the resurrection), but also for its significance, for on the seventh day we commemorate the repose of Christ our True God in the Tomb, after He remade us in His image on Great and Holy Friday, the sixth day (just as He made us in His image on the sixth day in Genesis).

This has an important similarity; for the only-begotten Son and Word of God, second person of the Trinity, who according to His deity is uncircumscribed and uncontainable, indeed, incomprehensible and omnipresent, was contained in the Tomb, via the important anti-Nestorian Christological principle of communicatio idiomatum, which is something we Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and among Western Christians, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and especially the Lutherans such as my friends @MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and @Ain't Zwinglian put great emphasis on.

In the Eastern Orthodox Church, and perhaps in other denominations, we draw a parallel between this and the containment of Christ our God in the womb of our Glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary, and thus she is venerated on the Sabbath in particular as a means of worshiping God and glorifying His incarnation, and in both the Eastern Orthodox and the Syriac Orthodox church, the Sabbath is also, because of its association with rest and repose, dedicated as a day of prayer for those who have reposed in the Lord, our departed loved ones. In the Byzantine Rite liturgy of Eastern Orthodoxy, this takes particular form in Soul Saturdays throughout the year, each of which are analogous to All Souls Day in the Western Rite liturgy, but distributed.

Among the ancient Eastern churches (which fall into three groups, the Oriental Orthodox, the Eastern Orthodox, and the Church of the East, which due to a schism in the 1960s is presently divided into the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ancient Church of the East), all parts of which were historically independent of Rome, and indeed until the 12th century, when the evil Muslim warlord Tamerlane began a genocide, the Church of the East was the largest in the world in terms of geographic reach, spanning an area from Socotra off the south coast of Yemen to northern Iran and eastern Turkey in the West, and from Mongolia to Tibet in the East, with churches along the Silk Road in cities such as Merv, and particular concentrations in China, India, Mesopotamia, Persia and the Levant and Socotra (of these, only those in Kerala, India, where the church was established by St. Thomas the Apostle prior to his martyrdom in 57 AD at the hands, or should I say, spear, of a local Pagan ruler, and in what is now modern day Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran, were spared destruction; this territory largely overlapping with the Syriac Orthodox Church, both churches using the Peshitta, the second-fourth century Aramaic translation of the Bible, and having a highly Semitic character, to this day, having vernacular Aramaic speakers (the largest surviving vernacular Aramaic speaking community consists of ethnic Assyrians in Iraq, the second largest propbably the Turoyo-speaking Syriac Orthodox and the Aramaic speaking Antiochian Orthodox (Eastern Orthodox) in Maaloula, in Syria, who suffered the desecration of the churches and abduction and imprisonment of their nuns by Al Qaeda in the 19th century).

These churches form the basis of Syriac Christianity, those churches which have used and to some extent continue to use Syriac in the liturgy, which also include the Reformed Mar Thoma Syrian Church, the Roman Catholic-affiliated Maronite Catholic Church, Chaldean Catholic Church, Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, Syriac Catholic Church and Malankara Catholic Church (all of the former having separated from the Orthodox through schisms, albeit the Maronite-Syriac Orthodox schism, unlike the others, was not the result of misguided Catholic or Protestant missionary activity but rather the result of an internal dispute, probably over Monothelitism, with the Maronites voluntarily embracing the Roman church during the Crusades as a strategic move).

Additionally, Syriac was historically used by the Eastern Orthodox Antiochian Orthodox Church, which has a special relationship with the Syriac Orthodox church closer than that of any other EO church to an OO church, so that in the territory of the Antiochian church proper (as opposed to autonomous churches associated with it in the diaspora, such as the AOCNA), in effect members of either church can receive the sacraments at the other and conversions between the two are not done, and as mentioned before, some Antiochians speak Aramaic in the vernacular (and perhaps in the liturgy in Syria; I don’t know). There have been isolated uses of Aramaic in the Eastern Orthodox Divine Liturgy in recent years, including among some Assyrians who were received into the Russian Orthodox Church around 1900.

These churches have a highly semitic character which I suspect Messianic Jews would find appealing; their music is melancholic and meilsmatic, like the best of the cantorial arts, and the liturgy solemn and beautiful. Indeed in the Church of the East, Torah portions and the corresponding Haftarah are read before the Epistle and Gospel during the Divine Liturgy, or Raza (a Syriac word meaning mystery) as they like to call it. The membership of these churches consists substantially of those of Jewish descent, some from the beginning, others over subsequent centuries; indeed in India there is a group of Syriac Orthodox Christians who are of pure Jewish descent and are endogamous, survivors of a shipwreck in the fourth or fifth century (recall that Kerala was a major trading destination for Jewish merchants after contact was solidified by Alexander the Great, the two main trading routes being to sail via the Red Sea and Socotra, Yemen, and then along the Persian Gulf and the shores of what is now Pakistan and India until arriving in the Malabar Coast, the other being a largely overland route via Edessa, the Nineveh Plains and Seleucia-Cstesiphon, with embarkation at Basra. The Kochin Jews lived in Kerala since the second century BC, but in recent years most have made Aliyah.

Also, the Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Church and the Eritrean Tewahedo Orthodox Church have an extremely Semitic character, with a replica of the Ark and the Scrolls of the Law on every altar, the use of a Semitic language, Ge’ez, an Imperial family claiming plausible descent from King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, and the country having practiced Judaism until mostly converting to Christianity in the fourth century, around the same time as Georgia. The Beta Israel (meaning House of Israel) were tolerated until the Communist Ge’ez regime took over and strangled the last Emperor in 1974 and like all Communist regimes, quickly took to anti-Semitism in order to explain its lack of success.

+

Now, regarding Acts 15, what it says is that the Council of Jerusalem, as the meeting of the Holy Apostles, in particular, St. Peter, St. Paul and St. James the Just, the brother of our Lord (being according to tradition a son of St. Joseph by his deceased prior wife), determined that gentile converts did not need to be circumcised or follow certain codes of ritual purity. Whether or not one interprets this as “converting to Judaism” or not is a matter of perspective; what was enjoined in Acts 15 looks very much like the Noachide Laws in Genesis.

Hentenza said:

There is only one way to the Father and Israel us yet to repent.

Click to expand...

That’s a generalization, since very large numbers of Jews did embrace Christ, and if you look at the membership of the Antiochian Orthodox Church, the Syriac Orthodox Church, the Assyrian Church of the East, et cetera, you will find a very large number of Jewish names and people of Jewish ethnicity are extremely common, so much so that it seems quite possible that almost all members of these churches are at least partially of Jewish descent.

Generalizing about what Israel did or did not do is problematic; it is better to differentiate between those Jews who accepted Christ and became a part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church referenced in the Nicene Creed, the Body of Christ as described by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians, and those who did not.

That being said, you are correct insofar as the Pauline epistles with the exception of Hebrews (if St. Paul even wrote it) were addressed to predominantly gentile congregations.

It should also be noted that the word congregation (“ekklesia”) is the traditional word used by Synagogues to name themselves, so the word Church is another way of saying “Congregation,” albeit the traditional form. Some Jews resent Messianic Jews and misinterpret it as some backhanded attempt at missionary activity in part due to the blurring of the lines in worship, which is as I see it their problem, indeed historically the Christian daily prayers of Matins, Vespers and Compline were adopted from the thrice daily system of Jewish prayer introduced by St. Ezra the Priest and St. Nehemiah the Prophet.

By the way, to be clear, nothing in my post should be interpreted as critical of Messianic Judaism in any way - I support it as a concept and appreciate Messianic Jews. I do have objections to some aspects of Adventism, primarily those 19th century writings which some regard as inspired prophecy, and the aggressive and unwarranted criticism some direct at non-Sabbatarian Christians. In my experience, however, such persons are a minority; there are many SDA members on the forum who I have only had pleasant relationships with. Likewise, my relations with the Messianic Jews have been blissful.

I also believe in the importance of Messianic Jewish-Eastern Orthodox and Messianic Jewish-Oriental Orthodox dialogue, as well as dialogue with non-Messianic Jews over certain subjects of common interest, concerning Israel. By the way, fun fact: the Knesset (Israeli parliament) meets on land leased from the Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem, and Israeli police assist in maintaining order and safety and in many other respects surrounding major Orthodox feasts such as Pascha at the Holy Sepulchre, and indeed help ensure the integrity of the Holy Fire liturgy by searching the clergy and ensuring that when they enter the church, they are not carrying any pyrotechnic material (I was surprised to learn this; historically i had taken a sort of disinterested view in Holy Fire, regarding it as symbolic and probably related to Greek Fire, an advanced pyrophoric weapons system developed by the Byzantine Empire in the late first millennium, which helped them stem the tide of Saracen conquest for several centuries, and the formula for which (now lost, but we can make guesses as to what it contained) was regarded as the most closely guarded of state secrets, with one Emperor writing a letter to his son urging him never to disclose the formula “for it is a gift from God.” However upon learning that the Israeli Police inspect the clergy entering the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, well, that was interesting.

There is also a cradle Eastern Orthodox member on the forum who is a strong expert in Judaism, and who has a Hebrew username, who Messianic Jewish members may find it interesting to converse with, since he has a great love for the Jewish people and for Israel.

HARK! said:

Wrong. We already covered this. Repeating it does not change the facts.

Click to expand...

I agree - indeed, I suspect at least 20% of Jews embraced Christ, based on the demographics of the aforementioned Syriac and Ethiopic churches.

Regarding St. John the Baptist, St. Matthew describes him as being the fulfillment of the prophecy of “the voice crying in the wilderness” who would “make straight the paths of the Lord” as I’m sure you’re aware; in Eastern Orthodoxy we venerate him with extreme solemnity, exceeded only by the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and regard him the most virtuous of humans with a human father (Christ being fully God and fully man, but also being the Son of God, and lacking a human biological father, obviously).

Also, to be clear, in using the term Christ, I am using the Greek word for “annointed” which corresponds with the Hebraic “Messiah” and the Aramaic equivalent, but I am using it in a manner that is intended to be reverent to the original Greek words. Interestingly enough, while the Aramaic name of Christ was likely Yeshua, his Hebrew name was Joshua, and we Orthodox regard Joshua, who led Israel into the Promised Land, as both a historical figure and, through his acts, one of many in the Old Testament who became a kind of typological prophecy of Christ (an interpretation based on Luke ch. 24, where our Lord opens the books to the disciples and shows them how all the Law and the Prophets speak about Him).

I would expect that that part of Luke 24 is of great importance to Messianic Jews, since it validates the holiness of the Old Testament; I would be interested to know about Messianic Jewish hermeneutics regarding the Old Testament and might ask in fellowship about that in the MJ forum at some point, as I have no doubt it is very beautiful.

Gary K said:

Not at this time in the worlds history. There will come a time when this is true, but it is not true right now. Just before the 2nd coming of Jesus there will be a time when God will make sure everyone understands the issues involved and have to decode for or against it as God is just. But, that has not happened yet.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but that is what life is for; our Lord's second coming is the pronouncement of judgement... The verdict will be read, and the sentence pronounced and executed. A second Chance? We have had infinite chances to repent.

Hentenza said:

My brother. In the church there is neither Jew nor Greek which means that all are equal in the eyes of the Lord. I agree with you that many Jews converted to Christianity but many remained cultural Jews even after conversion as evidenced by the troubles that Paul expressed in his epistles about the Jews wanting to keep the law and attempting to force the gentiles to circumcise and basically become “Christian” Jews. The council of Jerusalem addressed this issue but the problem remained. A good example is Acts 21 when Paul returned to Jerusalem and was accused of teaching that the law was no longer necessary and the elders of the church almost caused his death. So Israel corporately has not yet recognized Jesus as the Messiah.

Secondly, in the context of the NT and the fact that those in the church are neither Jew or Greek the word ekklesia means a congregation of Christians not a Jewish synagogue or Jewish congregation.

Click to expand...

Indeed, there is neither Jew nor Greek. As for the rest of your post, if some Jews embraced Christ, including St. Paul, the supreme example of a Jew failing to recognize the Messiah and then repenting to the point of being numbered together with the 11 Holy Apostles that were the faithful of the twelve chosen by Christ before His passion, and St. Matthias, St. James the Just and the Seventy, we can’t say Israel rejected Christ, the two statements are contradictory.

In saying this, I am of course speaking of heritage, not status, and of the Church in unity; we believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church whose members are neither Jew nor Greek but one in Christ Jesus, as I have no doubt the Messianic Jews on CF affirm, since our Statement of Faith is basically the Nicene Creed + a prohibition on denying the inspired apostolate of St. Paul and a few other related provisions.

Thus I fear you are reading into my post an implied neo-Ebionitism which is quite absent; I am as opposed to neo-Ebionitism as I am to neo-Marcionitism.