A Partial List of 7th Day Assemblies

[LoveGodsWord]

You seem to believe that,since you say Jesus' statement and that reported on in Esther is the same and since some Jewish custom allows for part of a day to be viewed as a day then,this is proof from the scriptures?

You have attempted to conflate,"three days and nights", with,"three days and three nights".This is not correct,especially as I have shown Jesus was aware of the concept of twelve hours in the day.So you have no scriptural proof of anything only your opinion.

You have also ignored the fact that there is no scripture which shows a Sunday resurrection and also ignore the nature of the Sabbaths which occur during the crucifixion and resurrection period.

With all this in mind we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

Not really, I only posted scripture and what the bible says. Of course you are free to believe what you wish and we can agree to disagree.

 

[HARK!]

How so? That the fact of 5% or so of Christians being aligned with Sabbatarian churches proves something other than the obvious??

Do you mean small the gate and narrow the way?

 

[safswan]

How so? That the fact of 5% or so of Christians being aligned with Sabbatarian churches proves something other than the obvious??

A Partial List of 7th Day Assemblies

The above is actually a link which takes you back to post #156 in this thread,which partially addressed an area of your comment about early Sunday significance.

 

[safswan]

Very well. The key verse is Acts 20:7 (On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight). We'd need a careful explanation of all the references there, but that is the main verse. Sunday worship itself was the norm from the first century onward in Christian history.

I could have just posted it in the first place, but my hope was to avoid being run through the routine that many Sabbatarians on discussion boards like this one are primed to do--act coy at first as though they do not already know about Acts 20:7, then insist that there is no reason to worship on Sunday, or else pretend that the Sabbath has been moved or eliminated, etc.

I do have a prepared explanation of this passage but rather than just present this explanation,I am willing to make an attempt to examine the passage and its significance to Sunday worship.Could you also show why you believe," Sunday worship itself was the norm from the first century onward in Christian history"?

The link below which was post #155 gives another perspective on the history of Sabbath observance in the early church.

A Partial List of 7th Day Assemblies

 

[namohcam]

Thanks for your reply.

Thank you.

Two things about that passage: 1) it's a reference to the seventh day as it had been before the establishment of the church of Christ,

The Bible is just the Bible to me. I wasn't aware that the establishment of the church of Christ was a line of demarcation with regard to the ten commandments.

2) to make Sunday the primary day of worship for Christians does not mean moving the Sabbath.

Before the late 20th century, nearly every Christian referred to Sunday as the Sabbath (even on TV). It was considered the object of the 4th commandment. I distinctly remember learning that in Vacation Bible School.

Hmmm. Well, the verse couldn't be any clearer, but if you don't acknowledge that, what do you think the meaning actually is?

Verse? What verse? I was responding to your statement about the New Testament, in general, establishing Sunday gatherings. Are you referring to Hebrews 4? If so, I believe, unlike many Adventists, that it simply uses the idea of Sabbath rest as a metaphor for Heaven.

Perhaps you are right about that after all, but as I was also saying, there never seems to be any room for discussion when Adventists present their own thinking. Your blunt reply (above) seems to verify that. (?)

Blunt? Okay. Sorry. I thought I was just being direct and clear.

 

[namohcam]

It's right there in the New Testament. This was the day the Lord rose from the grave, marking the triumph of life over death. Why wouldn't that be a cause for praise and worship to our God?

An argument from silence? There's no reference to a change of the weekly day of praise and worship in the resurrection story.

 

[namohcam]

Very well. The key verse is Acts 20:7 (On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight). We'd need a careful explanation of all the references there, but that is the main verse. Sunday worship itself was the norm from the first century onward in Christian history.

I could have just posted it in the first place, but my hope was to avoid being run through the routine that many Sabbatarians on discussion boards like this one are primed to do--act coy at first as though they do not already know about Acts 20:7, then insist that there is no reason to worship on Sunday, or else pretend that the Sabbath has been moved or eliminated, etc.

I've been an Adventist for 30+ years and I've never heard of Acts 20:7 being a difficult text to understand.

According to the Bible, each day begins at sundown and ends at the next sundown (Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31; Leviticus 23:32) and the dark part of the day comes first. So Sabbath begins Friday night at sundown and ends Saturday night at sundown. This meeting discussed in Acts 20 was held on the dark part of Sunday, or on what we now call Saturday night. It was a Saturday night meeting, and it lasted until midnight. Paul was on a farewell tour and knew he would not see these people again (verse 25). No wonder he preached so long! (No regular weekly service would have lasted all night.) Paul was “ready to depart the next day” (verse 7). The breaking of bread has no particular significance here, because they broke bread daily (Acts 2:46). There is no indication in this passage that the first day is holy, nor that these early Christians considered it so. Nor is there any evidence that the Sabbath had been changed. (Incidentally, this meeting is probably mentioned only because of the miracle of raising Eutychus back to life after he fell to his death.) In Ezekiel 46:1, God refers to Sunday as one of the six “working days.”

 

[Albion]

The Bible is just the Bible to me. I wasn't aware that the establishment of the church of Christ was a line of demarcation with regard to the ten commandments.

There was indeed a line of demarcation between the religion of the Hebrews and the founding of the church of Christ.

Before the late 20th century, nearly every Christian referred to Sunday as the Sabbath (even on TV). It was considered the object of the 4th commandment. I distinctly remember learning that in Vacation Bible School.

It still is the Sabbath. The Lord's Day became the principle day of worship (for obvious reasons, and that's also spelled out in the New Testament).

Verse? What verse? I was responding to your statement about the New Testament, in general, establishing Sunday gatherings. Are you referring to Hebrews 4? If so, I believe, unlike many Adventists, that it simply uses the idea of Sabbath rest as a metaphor for Heaven.

The verses are Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2.

 

[Albion]

There's no reference to a change of the weekly day of praise and worship in the resurrection story.

My reply was directed at this question --

"Why would you want to make Sunday a day of worship when God spoke and wrote that the seventh-day is His Holy Sabbath."

 

[guevaraj]

The verses are Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2.

Brother, neither of those two verses talks about the first day of the week. They literally say in the original Greek the "first of the Sabbaths" and "every first Sabbath". The two words do not even match in number agreement to translate them the same, one is plural and the other is singular. The translators don't know what to make of God's inspired use of the word Sabbath, so they invented the first-day translation because no one understands God's Sabbath to know God's inspired use of that word. The Strong's Concordance word 4521 (sabbaton) found in these two verses means "Sabbaths" and "Sabbath" and not as translated week. What God literally wrote is the "first of the Sabbaths" and "every first Sabbath", a way for God to say the seventh day of creation week and the first Sabbath of a larger period such as a mission trip when you understand the Sabbath in God's word.

• Acts 20:7
  
• 1 Corinthians 16:2

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

 

[Albion]

Brother, neither of those two verses talks about the first day of the week. They literally say in the original Greek the "first of the Sabbaths" and "every first Sabbath". The two words do not even match in number agreement to translate them the same, one is plural and the other is singular.

Well, the Christians who were alive at that time obviously understood the meaning as referring to the day on which Our Lord rose from the grave. Sunday worship was the norm. Maybe you are saying that he arose on a Saturday and they were all confused. In church history, it's the Sabbatarians who broke from the Christian norm, and only relatively recently, you know, not the other way around.

 

[guevaraj]

Well, the Christians who were alive at that time obviously understood the meaning as referring to the day on which Our Lord rose from the grave. Sunday worship was the norm. Maybe you are saying that he arose on a Saturday and they were all confused. In church history, it's the Sabbatarians who broke from the Christian norm, and only relatively recently, you know, not the other way around.

Brother, prophesied was it that the church would fall into the hands of an enemy of God for a "time, times and half a time". This enemy tried to change "the set times and laws". It is through the Protestant Reformation that we are returning to the Biblical truths of the traditions introduced by that enemy of Jesus' church by following the Holy Spirit in the study of God's word.

He gave me this explanation: ‘The fourth beast is a fourth kingdom that will appear on earth. It will be different from all the other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth, trampling it down and crushing it. The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time. (Daniel 7:23-25 NIV)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

 

[Albion]

Brother, prophesied was it that the church would fall into the hands of an enemy of God for a "time, times and half a time". This enemy tried to change "the set times and laws". It is through the Protestant Reformation that we are returning to the Biblical truths of the traditions introduced by that enemy of Jesus' church by following the Holy Spirit in the study of God's word.

Yes, different denominations do produce their own versions of past history and attribute doctrinal innovations that they come up with to Bible verses that are unrelated to the issues being discussed.

In the case of the following, not only are you attempting to make a verse that is not about worship on the Lord's Day "fit" your argument, but it necessarily means that you are holding up this passage (below) as immutable and authoritative while simultaneously treating the New Testament verses previously cited as if they are not also inspired by God.

He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time. (Daniel 7:23-25 NIV)

For those reasons, I cannot agree with your perspective.

 

[safswan]

The verses are Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2.

I was hoping you would have had a discussion about the verses in question but you failed to respond to my invitation and so here below is my understanding of the passages you cite:


The Truth About Acts 20:7 And I Corinthians 16:2

The passages above are the scriptures chiefly used by persons who claim Sunday is the Lord's day, to justify their teaching. A proper examination of the passages show, however, that neither of them are examples of Sunday worship services.

"And upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them ready to depart on the morrow: and continued his speech until midnight" (Acts 20:7).


From this passage, many claim this was the regular time for the Church to meet for worship and also to celebrate the Lord's Supper (break bread). Note, however, to break bread does not necessarily refer to the Lord's Supper, as the disciples also broke bread daily and on the night in question, Paul broke bread again. (See Acts 2:46; Acts 20:11).

The breaking of bread simply refers to the disciples partaking in a meal. (See also Mark 6:41; Luke 24:30,35).


The gathering referred to in Acts 20:7 is mistakenly believed by some to have happened, as is now practiced by those who hold worship services, on a Sunday i.e. they meet on a Sunday morning. They have not considered the Bible's determination of the day and they have also failed to discern from the passage the conditions which show this was not a Sunday Morning Meeting.


According to the scriptures, the beginning of the day is the evening and so the first day begins on what we call Saturday evening:

"...and the evening and the morning were the first day."(Genesis 1:5; see also Leviticus 23:32, which shows a yearly Sabbath is celebrated from "even unto even")


The lights in the chamber shows that this was a night or evening meeting (Acts 20:8) and some translations in fact say, "On the Saturday night..." (Acts 20:7, New English Bible).


Paul preached until daybreak or morning and then went on his journey as he had planned (Acts 20:7,11-13).

Hence, the gathering on the first day of the week and the preaching to midnight, shows Paul and the brethren coming together on a Saturday night and Paul speaking right through the night until he departed on the morning of the first day i.e. Sunday morning. Paul was traveling on the Sunday morning showing clearly it was not apostolic tradition to meet on Sunday mornings for worship services. Paul apparently gave a farewell message to the disciples in Troas as they gathered for their evening meal and in the morning departed to Assos to join his companions (Acts 20:14).


Sunday Collection Or Alms Gathering?


"Upon the first day of the week let everyone of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come." (I Corinthians 16:2).

The scripture above is said by many to be proof that Christians met regularly for worship on the first day and that the collection of the offering took place at this time.

This is far from the truth. There is no mention of the brethren coming or being together and the collection was not for the churches in Corinth but for brethren in Jerusalem who had fallen on hard times due to a famine. (See I Corinthians 16:1-3;II Corinthians 9:1-9; Acts 11:27-30)


What does "lay by him in store" refer to? This is instructing each brother in Corinth to put aside or reserve in his own place something which he had gained from his occupation for the saints in Jerusalem. This was to be done prior to Paul's visit to them so that they would not be doing any gathering or collection of the gift for the saints when he came. All this would have been done before hand and it was to be done on the first day.

Paul's instruction is therefore about alms gathering for Christians in Jerusalem and not about a church service or meeting. Hence, brethren in Corinth may very well be working in their occupations, in order to provide this relief for the saints, on the first day of the week.

 

[guevaraj]

treating the New Testament verses previously cited as if they are not also inspired by God.

Brother, you have learned that your ideas are based on a bad translation and not on the word of God. Everything God writes is inspired! What is not inspired are the translations of what God wrote. What will you do with this knowledge? This is when you learn from yourself weather you follow Jesus or not!

Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it. (Matthew 10:38-39 NIV)​

United in our hope for the soon return of Jesus, Jorge

 

[namohcam]

I guess that's a matter of opinion, but the Sabbath was not moved to Sunday, even though most Adventists seem to think that's what this is about.

It still is the Sabbath. The Lord's Day became the principle day of worship (for obvious reasons, and that's also spelled out in the New Testament).

These two statements seem to be in conflict with one another. And what is obvious to one person can be completely elusive to another. I think that's a common occurrence. The references to the 1st day of the week do not spell out a transferral of solemnity from the 7th day of the week to the 1st, not even to most Sunday-keeping scholars, clergy, and laypersons.

There was indeed a line of demarcation between the religion of the Hebrews and the founding of the church of Christ.

I specifically qualified my comment with "regarding the ten commandments." There can be no doubt that the Hebrew system was different than the new covenant model. I just meant that The difference doesn't include the obligation to keep the commandments of God written on tables of stone.

I'm going to let this go for now because, as you have so insightfully pointed out from the beginning, the road commonly leads to nowhere. But I would like to make one last remark before I yield to you for the last word (if you wish).

If a pastor preached a sermon on fidelity to God, idolatry, blasphemy, respect for parents, lying, stealing, murder, adultery, or covetousness, hardly anyone would object. But the 4th commandment has been relegated to a place in ancient, foreign history, regarded as a ritual of no moral value.

IMHO, placing a temporary ritual practice in the middle of the de facto moral code for humanity seems like a dirty trick that I just can't believe a God of love would pull on His children. Maybe I'm crazy.

I was a Sunday-keeping Southern Baptist until I was 26 years old, and someone handed me a Bible Study guide on the subject of the Sabbath, and I rejected it outright as nonsense at first. But my wife said I was just being stubborn and that I should give it some more thought. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that I had a real decision to make: Was I going to just assume that I was born into a family that just happened to be living according to what the Bible teaches, or was I going to accept the most sensible explanation I'd ever had on the subject? (Especially after discovering that there were 20-something other Bible studies that had the very same clarity.) I guess it sounds like I'm proselytizing but really I'm just testifying.

 

[Albion]

These two statements seem to be in conflict with one another.

The Sabbath wasn't moved from Saturday to Sunday, and the Sabbath is still Saturday, seem to be two statements that are in conflict with each other??

I'm going to let this go for now because, as you have so insightfully pointed out from the beginning, the road commonly leads to nowhere.

Yeah, that's true. I mainly meant to be involved to the extent of challenging the false notion that there is no Scriptural basis for Sunday being the principle day of worship...and perhaps, to a lesser extent, to the popular misconception that the Sabbath was changed to Sunday.

 

[namohcam]

Before the late 20th century, nearly every Christian referred to Sunday as the Sabbath (even on TV). It was considered the object of the 4th commandment. I distinctly remember learning that in Vacation Bible School.

^^^^In which I make no mention of the 7th-day Sabbath^^^^

To which you responded:

It still is the Sabbath. The Lord's Day became the principle day of worship (for obvious reasons, and that's also spelled out in the New Testament).

I'm not sure how to deduce what "It" means other than the "Sunday Sabbath" to which I was referring, and to which you responded.

The Sabbath wasn't moved from Saturday to Sunday, and the Sabbath is still Saturday, seem to be two statements that are in conflict with each other??

In any case, there's been a miscommunication, and since I pledged to let it go, I'll leave it at that. No harm; no foul.

 

[safswan]

Yeah, that's true. I mainly meant to be involved to the extent of challenging the false notion that there is no Scriptural basis for Sunday being the principle day of worship...and perhaps, to a lesser extent, to the popular misconception that the Sabbath was changed to Sunday.

There is none and this has been shown here many a time.

 

[BobRyan]

I guess that's a matter of opinion, but the Sabbath was not moved to Sunday, even though most Adventists seem to think that's what this is about.

Sunday is often referred to as "Sabbath" by some who think that the Sabbath was moved from the 7th day to the first.

It's right there in the New Testament. This was the day the Lord rose from the grave

I think we can all (or almost all) agree that the Bible says week-day-one is when Christ was resurrected according to the Bible. And many agree that the 7th day is just before week-day-1 and just after week-day-6 - and is the Sabbath according to Exodus 20.

Why wouldn't that be a cause for praise and worship to our God?

A lot of Christians give praise and worship to God because of the life, death and resurrection of Christ (no matter which day they attend church) and some even make reference to His continuing work as our High Priest in heaven.