Is Sunday sacredness in the Bible?

[reddogs]

Your OP statement is that the protestant churches observe Sunday as a replacement of Sabbath, which is a false statement as explained in my post above.

There is no sacred day to observe, given to Christians in the Bible. We all agree that in Genesis 2:3 is this quoted verse, but thats not the topic.

Well, its not of God, but of the one who substituted it....

'Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'' Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

 

[trophy33]

Well, its not of God, but of the one who substituted it....

'Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'' Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

Catholics are not protestants. You made a claim about protestant churches, if you can remember.

 

[Studyman]

No day, place or physical thing is biblically sacred in Christianity.

This is true regarding mainstream Christianity. But the God and Father of the Lord's Christ did "Esteem" some days more sacred than others. And His Son, the Rock of Israel, also Esteemed the same days, above others, just as His Father instructed. This is undeniable Biblical Truth.

So this would beg the question, what is mainstream Christianity? In Biblical Times, it was defined as men who were "Christ-Like", as it is written "He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

But today, a man who would "Yield Himself" a servant to Obey God as the Jesus of the Bible did, would be called a Legalist, would be condemned by "many" who call Jesus Lord, Lord as having rejected the Grace of God, and laboring or being diligent to become a "Doer" of this Christ's Sayings, and not a hearer only, would be called "trying to earn Salvation".

Is it just a coincidence then, that Jesus gave His People the following warnings.

Matt. 24: 4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I (Jesus) am Christ; and shall deceive many.

I found this warning fascinating. Jesus could have warned men of anything. The Jews, Atheists, Islam, Greek gods, Buddhism. But HE didn't. The greatest danger for men, in the Jesus of the Bibles own Words, was "Christianity" which is the only religion that comes in Christ's Name, that "Profess to know God", on the entire Planet.

This warning wouldn't be for those who Strived to enter at the Narrow Gate, but for those "many" described in Matt. 7.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

And iniquity would be rejected God's Judgments and Laws, in favor of man's judgment and laws, Yes?

No European reformation church observes Sunday. Neither Lutherans, nor Calvinists, nor Bohemian/Moravian reformation etc.

Protestant churches have the main weekly meetings on Sunday, because the day is historically significant in Christianity. Its not keeping or a law-like observing. For your better understanding, let us quote The Second Helvetic Confession (Basel, 1536):

THE TIME NECESSARY FOR WORSHIP. Although religion is not bound to time, yet it cannot be cultivated and exercised without a proper distribution and arrangement of time. Every Church, therefore, chooses for itself a certain time for public prayers, and for the preaching of the Gospel, and for the celebration of the sacraments; and no one is permitted to overthrow this appointment of the Church at his own pleasure. For unless some due time and leisure is given for the outward exercise of religion, without doubt men would be drawn away from it by their own affairs.
...
SUPERSTITION. In this connection we do not yield to the Jewish observance and to superstitions. For we do not believe that one day is any holier than another, or think that rest in itself is acceptable to God. Moreover, we celebrate the Lord's Day and not the Sabbath as a free observance.

As you can see for yourself, celebrating is the term best related to Sunday, not keeping, observing or Sabbath-replacing.

Yes, in order to justify the rejection of, who the Jesus of the Bible defines as "The One True God's" Judgments, (What is Holy, what is Righteousness, what is clean, what is Good, etc.) "many" religious men who come in Christ's Name, "SEEK" the Righteousness of other men, because as Paul teaches,

Rom. 1: 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

So these "many" who come in Christ's Name, cannot go to God's Word to justify their rejection of His Judgments, they already know HIS Judgment, because God as shown them as it is written. So why would men "hear" God, but not obey Him?

Paul also speaks to this Phenomenon, and why it happens.

Rom. 1: 21 Because that, when they "knew God", they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, "they became fools",

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

This is easily seen today by the "many" who come in Christ's Name, that Judge God's Instruction the same way they would judge man's instruction, as "Jewish observance and to superstitions" of men.

And also by the image of God created and promoted by this world's religions, in the likeness of a handsome man with long flowing hair, who they preach also rejected God's Righteousness, just as other men.

God's Law defines and separates Good from Evil, Clean from unclean, righteousness from unrighteousness, holy from unholiness.

And He has shown this separation to all men, as Paul also teaches, so that they are without excuse.

In this way, by the "works/deeds" of men, are men judged, (According to Jesus and Paul). Those who Love God and worship HIM as the Jesus "of the bible" instructs, "put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness". as defined by Him, not the Pope or Heinrich Bullinger.

As Paul teaches. Titus 2: 11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

 

[Studyman]

No it is sad. The people asked for a man to rule over them in that they refused God's spirit at Sinai. Hence the writing of the Old Testament. Unbelief stiff necked disobedience then so it is now. and at the time of the Apostles. Hence, we still need the Letter. But now we Have the New Testament and the Old.

That is an interesting point that Daq made isn't it? If I honor God in His Sabbath Commandment, I'm considered a "Legalist" by "many" who come in Christ's Name. While at the same time, they reject God's Sabbath, because it wasn't the "Letter" of the Law in the NT.

Give credit where credit is due, that was an astute observation, and certainly rings true.

 

[daq]

No it is sad. The people asked for a man to rule over them in that they refused God's spirit at Sinai. Hence the writing of the Old Testament. Unbelief stiff necked disobedience then so it is now. and at the time of the Apostles. Hence, we still need the Letter. But now we Have the New Testament and the Old.

I did not mean funny in the sense of comical or hilarious.
I meant it in the sense of strange.

 

[a_ntv]

The Bible is quite silent on Sunday sacredness, in fact its not there, so those who claim they follow 'Solo Scriptura' or the "Bible Only" Protestant Churches contradict themselves by observing it as a replacement for the Sabbath. Many say that the reason it is held as the day of worship is since Jesus rose on the first day, or because the Holy Spirit was given to the early church on the Day of Pentecost, or that Paul broke bread and ate on the first day at Troas, or had offering brought to him on the first day to take to those suffering in Jerusalem. But history and logic verify that none of the arguments are valid. Nowhere it the Bible does it declare Sunday sacredness, or is the day of worship changed by Christ or the Apostles....

Provided that I personally don't subscribe at all the "Sola Scriptura" doctrine, there is a good NT basis to worship on Sundays: Jesus used to appear to the disciples on Sundays

Mc 16:9: Jesus appeared the first day of the week (=Sunday) to Magdalene and later the apostles
John 20:19: Jesus appeared the first day after the Saturday
John 20:26: Jesus appeared again eight days later (i.e. seven days in our modern way of count, omitting the day of start)

 

[HIM]

I did not mean funny in the sense of comical or hilarious.
I meant it in the sense of strange.

I kinda figured. I am sorry. I should have worded myself better

 

[daq]

I kinda figured. I am sorry. I should have worded myself better

It's all good, I just wanted to make that point clear, (idiomatic language, like "funny business", which does not mean funny but strange, like something is not right).

 

[HIM]

That is an interesting point that Daq made isn't it? If I honor God in His Sabbath Commandment, I'm considered a "Legalist" by "many" who come in Christ's Name. While at the same time, they reject God's Sabbath, because it wasn't the "Letter" of the Law in the NT.

Give credit where credit is due, that was an astute observation, and certainly rings true.

Oh yeah. We are still as a whole a people of the Book and the leadership of "men" rather than of the Spirit. We have been sharing this admonition in churches for 20 years or better off and on. The response is not good usually.

However the Bible is our standard so if one claiming to be of the Spirit and teaches counter the one becomes suspect. In this fact is where churches and man fail that are not solo scripture. They go from being filled with the Spirit, to being filled with a spirit and don't even know.

 

[Studyman]

Oh yeah. We are still as a whole a people of the Book and the leadership of "men" rather than of the Spirit. We have been sharing this admonition in churches for 20 years or better off and on. The response is not good usually.

I'm not sure what you mean here. I am sure that the Christ told me His Words "ARE" Spirit. If I don't reject HIS Words (sayings) and His Word dwells in my mind and heart and I "strive" or "Labor" or am "Diligent" to keep them, then the Spirit of God which gave HIM the Words, also exist in my heart, Yes?

If a man has the Oracles of God, filled with Teachers "HE chose" to direct His People "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, and if the Christ was speaking the Truth when HE said to "Live by" these Words because they are Spirit, and they are Life, then why would people, as a whole, continue to seek the leadership of men?

I might be misunderstanding your teaching here. Please let me know.

However the Bible is our standard so if one claiming to be of the Spirit and teaches counter the one becomes suspect. In this fact is where churches and man fail that are not solo scripture. They go from being filled with the Spirit, to being filled with a spirit and don't even know.

Therefore, the admonition "Be not deceived", which by definition means "to believe" something that isn't true. The danger you prudently point out, "to being filled with a spirit and don't even know", is certainly bad. But what is eternally worse in my view, is men "believing" they are filled with the Spirit of Christ/God, when they are really filled with the spirit of this world.

I look forward to you straightening me out as to the meaning of the first part of this reply.

Thanks Him

 

[reddogs]

Catholics are not protestants. You made a claim about protestant churches, if you can remember.

They didnt claim to be...

 

[trophy33]

They didnt claim to be...

Yes, they did not. And do not.

 

[reddogs]

Yes, they did not. And do not.

I guess I got confused on the question, but if you are asking what Protestants say on it, here is a few quotes..

Protestant Confessions​

Protestant theologians and preachers from a wide spectrum of denominations have been quite candid in admitting that there is no Biblical authority for observing Sunday as a sabbath.

Anglican/Episcopal​

Isaac Williams, Plain Sermons on the Catechism , vol. 1, pp.334, 336.

"And where are we told in the Scriptures that we are to keep the first day at all? We are commanded to keep the seventh; but we are nowhere commanded to keep the first day .... The reason why we keep the first day of the week holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many other things, not because the Bible, but because the church has enjoined it."

Canon Eyton, The Ten Commandments , pp. 52, 63, 65.

"There is no word, no hint, in the New Testament about abstaining from work on Sunday .... into the rest of Sunday no divine law enters.... The observance of Ash Wednesday or Lent stands exactly on the same footing as the observance of Sunday."

Bishop Seymour, Why We Keep Sunday .

We have made the change from the seventh day to the first day, from Saturday to Sunday, on the authority of the one holy Catholic Church."

Baptist​

Dr. Edward T. Hiscox, a paper read before a New York ministers' conference, Nov. 13, 1893, reported in New York Examiner , Nov.16, 1893.

"There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week .... Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament absolutely not.
"To me it seems unaccountable that Jesus, during three years' intercourse with His disciples, often conversing with them upon the Sabbath question . . . never alluded to any transference of the day; also, that during forty days of His resurrection life, no such thing was intimated.
"Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history . . . . But what a pity it comes branded with the mark of paganism, and christened with the name of the sun god, adopted and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism!"

William Owen Carver, The Lord's Day in Our Day , p. 49.

"There was never any formal or authoritative change from the Jewish seventh-day Sabbath to the Christian first-day observance."

Congregationalist​

Dr. R. W. Dale, The Ten Commandments (New York: Eaton & Mains), p. 127-129.

" . . . it is quite clear that however rigidly or devotedly we may spend Sunday, we are not keeping the Sabbath - . . 'The Sabbath was founded on a specific Divine command. We can plead no such command for the obligation to observe Sunday .... There is not a single sentence in the New Testament to suggest that we incur any penalty by violating the supposed sanctity of Sunday."

Timothy Dwight, Theology: Explained and Defended (1823), Ser. 107, vol. 3, p. 258.

" . . . the Christian Sabbath [Sunday] is not in the Scriptures, and was not by the primitive Church called the Sabbath."

Disciples of Christ​

Alexander Campbell, The Christian Baptist, Feb. 2, 1824,vol. 1. no. 7, p. 164.

"'But,' say some, 'it was changed from the seventh to the first day.' Where? when? and by whom? No man can tell. No; it never was changed, nor could it be, unless creation was to be gone through again: for the reason assigned must be changed before the observance, or respect to the reason, can be changed! It is all old wives' fables to talk of the change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day. If it be changed, it was that august personage changed it who changes times and laws ex officio - I think his name is Doctor Antichrist.'

First Day Observance , pp. 17, 19.

"The first day of the week is commonly called the Sabbath. This is a mistake. The Sabbath of the Bible was the day just preceding the first day of the week. The first day of the week is never called the Sabbath anywhere in the entire Scriptures. It is also an error to talk about the change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. There is not in any place in the Bible any intimation of such a change."

Lutheran​

The Sunday Problem , a study book of the United Lutheran Church (1923), p. 36.

"We have seen how gradually the impression of the Jewish sabbath faded from the mind of the Christian Church, and how completely the newer thought underlying the observance of the first day took possession of the church. We have seen that the Christians of the first three centuries never confused one with the other, but for a time celebrated both."

Augsburg Confession of Faith art. 28; written by Melanchthon, approved by Martin Luther, 1530; as published in The Book of Concord of the Evangelical Lutheran Church Henry Jacobs, ed. (1 91 1), p. 63.

"They [Roman Catholics] refer to the Sabbath Day, as having been changed into the Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it seems. Neither is there any example whereof they make more than concerning the changing of the Sabbath Day. Great, say they, is the power of the Church, since it has dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments!"

Dr. Augustus Neander, The History of the Christian Religion and Church Henry John Rose, tr. (1843), p. 186.

"The festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance, and it was far from the intentions of the apostles to establish a Divine command in this respect, far from them, and from the early apostolic Church, to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday."

John Theodore Mueller, Sabbath or Sunday , pp. 15, 16.

"But they err in teaching that Sunday has taken the place of the Old Testament Sabbath and therefore must be kept as the seventh day had to be kept by the children of Israel .... These churches err in their teaching, for Scripture has in no way ordained the first day of the week in place of the Sabbath. There is simply no law in the New Testament to that effect."

Methodist​

Harris Franklin Rall, Christian Advocate, July 2, 1942, p.26.

"Take the matter of Sunday. There are indications in the New Testament as to how the church came to keep the first day of the week as its day of worship, but there is no passage telling Christians to keep that day, or to transfer the Jewish Sabbath to that day."

John Wesley, The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M., John Emory, ed. (New York: Eaton & Mains), Sermon 25,vol. 1, p. 221.

"But, the moral law contained in the ten commandments, and enforced by the prophets, he [Christ] did not take away. It was not the design of his coming to revoke any part of this. This is a law which never can be broken .... Every part of this law must remain in force upon all mankind, and in all ages; as not depending either on time or place, or any other circumstances liable to change, but on the nature of God and the nature of man, and their unchangeable relation to each other."

Dwight L. Moody​

D. L. Moody, Weighed and Wanting (Fleming H. Revell Co.: New York), pp. 47, 48.

The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. This fourth commandment begins with the word 'remember,' showing that the Sabbath already existed when God Wrote the law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?"

Presbyterian​

T. C. Blake, D.D., Theology Condensed, pp.474, 475.

"The Sabbath is a part of the decalogue - the Ten Commandments. This alone forever settles the question as to the perpetuity of the institution . . . . Until, therefore, it can be shown that the whole moral law has been repealed, the Sabbath will stand . . . . The teaching of Christ confirms the perpetuity of the Sabbath.

 

[Gary K]

Sorry to say it but it is probably not wise for the SDA to frame such an argument around Daniel 7:25. The reason why is because the Shabbat of creation is the Shabbat hour of the sacred calendar day and occurs in every day of the world for as long as the earth and the world endure. This can be proven from the scripture, and especially the Brit Hadashah, (Renewed Covenant writings of the Gospel accounts and the Apostles), by comparing those writings with the Septuagint which is the most commonly quoted text therein.

Moreover the daily Shabbat hour does not void out the weekly Shabbat, rather, it is the prototype and foundational precept or principle from which the weekly full day of the Shabbat is derived. If therefore the SDA's do not observe this daily Shabbat hour, which is the Shabbat of creation, then they have three fingers pointing back at them based on their own understanding and interpretation of Daniel 7:25 when they use that passage and interpretation of it to point the finger at others.

A beginning example is found in your quote from Luke 4 where the day of the Shabbat is found in a phrase where day is in a singular form while Shabbat is in a plural form, revealing from the OG LXX-Septuagint that it is indeed the full day of the weekly Shabbat, for the weekly Shabbat is always written in a plural form in the OG LXX-Septuagint.

You can see this reality in some of the strictly literal word-for-word translations:

Luke 4:16 LSV
16 And He came to Nazareth, where He has been brought up, and He went in, according to His custom, on the day of the Sabbaths, into the synagogue, and stood up to read;

Luke 4:16 SLT
16 And he came to Nazareth where he was brought up, and he went in, as was the custom to him in the day of the sabbaths, into the assembly, and stood up to read.

The plural form in the above is "εν τη ημερα των σαββατων", and ημερα (day) is singular while των σαββατων is plural. Why is this so? Because that is how it is in the OG LXX concerning the weekly Shabbat. Why is it that way in the OG LXX? Because the full day of the weekly Shabbat is not just a single Shabbat but likened to a day containing a plural of mini-Shabbat hours throughout the full day. Why would that be? because Yom is Light, and therefore a yom can be a day, or a year, or even a thousand years, as taught in various other passages in the scripture: so whenever yom is employed as an encrement of time it may be any encrement of time, depending on the surrounding context.

However if a yom can be a day, or a year, or even a thoiusand years, then yom can surely also be an hour, and thus there is a singular Shabbat hour in every day of the week: and it is the seventh hour of the sacred calendar day, which is taught in the opening creation account. Those who rendered the Torah portions of the LXX were Kohanim, (Priests), and the Torah portion is the oldest because it was rendered first, (beginning approximately circa 280 BC). Those who rendered the Torah section of the LXX-Septuagint therefore surely knew the sacred calendar day better than anyone else: for they served according to their courses and families and orders, and according to that same sacred calendar day in all their appointed times, in the feasts, oblations, sacrifices, and in all their duties and services at temple, year-in, year-out.

Luke 4:16 N/A-W/H
16 και ηλθεν εις ναζαρα ου ην τεθραμμενος και εισηλθεν κατα το ειωθος αυτω εν τη ημερα των σαββατων εις την συναγωγην και ανεστη αναγνωναι

Exodus 20:8 OG LXX
8 μνησθητι την ημεραν των σαββατων αγιαζειν αυτην

These both say the same as far as using a singular form for day with a plural form for the Shabbat: and that is because they both speak of the weekly full day of the Shabbat wherein every hour of the day is likened to a mini-Shabbat hour within the greater full day of the weekly Shabbat.

Moreover take note that των σαββατων is the greater part of other passage statements which you have referrenced or quoted, concerning the so-called "first day of the week", which is a highly suspect rendering of μια των σαββατων because of these things herein above.

Your reply shows your ignorance of Adventists. I spend a lot of time every day in prayer and Bible study, I also know other Adventists who do the same.

 

[daq]

Your reply shows your ignorance of Adventists. I spend a lot of time every day in prayer and Bible study, I also know other Adventists who do the same.

Okay, so you think it is wise to accuse people of being antichrist for "changing the Law" according to your interpretation of Daniel 7:25, and your interpretation of the Shabbat, and you imagine that I have not studied the SDA position on those things, even though your follow SDA posted it yet again here in what I quoted. Great, your post has accomplished one thing for sure: your opinions are meaningless to me without scripture support.

Perhaps you should post the SDA teaching on Dan 7:25, and also the SDA teaching on the word tamiyd found in Dan 8:13, if you think I do not know what SDA's teach about those two critical things. Tamiyd is only used for things that occur in each and every day: your prophetess got it wrong.

 

[Gary K]

Okay, so you think it is wise to accuse people of being antichrist for "changing the Law" according to your interpretation of Daniel 7:25, and your interpretation of the Shabbat, and you imagine that I have not studied the SDA position on those things, even though your follow SDA posted it yet again here in what I quoted. Great, your post has accomplished one thing for sure: your opinions are meaningless to me without scripture support.

Perhaps you should post the SDA teaching on Dan 7:25, and also the SDA teaching on the word tamiyd found in Dan 8:13, if you think I do not know what SDA's teach about those two critical things. Tamiyd is only used for things that occur in each and every day: your prophetess got it wrong.

Do as you please. It won't bother me at all. as you base your belief on non inspired Jewish writings.

To me that's like basing a belief of mine found only in the Talmud.

 

[daq]

Do as you please. It won't bother me at all. as you base your belief on non inspired Jewish writings.

To me that's like basing a belief of mine found only in the Talmud.

Character assassination will get you nowhere. But if you must use such techniques at least speak the truth. Anyone may see from my threads and many posts in this board that the things I believe and post come from the scripture.

For example, Tamiyd-Continual:

Exodus 25:30 KJV - alway - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the vessels for the table of the bread of the Presence.
Exodus 27:20 KJV - always - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the pure olive oil for the lamp to burn continually.
Exodus 28:29-30 KJV - continually (twice) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: for Ahron goes in every day, morning and evening, to dress the lamps of the menorah and offer incense.
Exodus 28:38 KJV - always - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: for Ahron goes in to perform the holy things every day.
Exodus 29:38 KJV - continually - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily morning and evening sacrifices.
Exodus 29:42 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily morning and evening sacrifices.
Exodus 30:8 KJV - perpetual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily incense offering.
Leviticus 6:13 KJV - ever - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the fire upon the altar is never to go out.
Leviticus 6:20 KJV - perpetual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily morning and evening minchah-oblations of the Kohanim.
Leviticus 24:2-4 KJV - continually (three times) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: dressing the lamps of the menorah evening and morning.
Numbers 4:16 KJV - daily - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily minchah-oblations.
Numbers 9:16 KJV - alway - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the cloud covering the mishkan-tabernacle by day, and the appearance of fire by night.
Numbers 28:3-6 KJV - continual (twice) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily ascending offering.
Numbers 28:15 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the daily continual ascending offering of the morning.
Numbers 28:23-24 KJV - continual (twice) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the daily continual ascending offering of the morning.
Numbers 28:31 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the daily continual ascending offering of the morning.
Numbers 29:11-34 KJV - continual (ten times) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the daily continual ascending offerings.
Deuteronomy 11:12 KJV - always - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the (seven) eyes of HE WHO WAS AND WHO IS your Elohim are tamiyd-continually upon His Land, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year.

Tamiyd-continual is continually employed for continual things that always occur in every day of the year.

Leviticus 24:8 KJV - continually - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the continual bread of the Presence, prepared and set in order every Shabbat hour of every sacred calendar day.
Numbers 4:7 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the continual bread of the Presence, prepared and set in order every Shabbat hour of every sacred calendar day.
Numbers 28:10 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the continual daily Shabbat hour in every sacred calendar day.

And the sacred calendar day is the seven yamim in a yom taught in the opening creation account.

Mark 15:25-33 KJV
25 And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.
26 And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.
27 And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.
28 And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.
29 And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days,
30 Save thyself, and come down from the cross.
31 Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save.
32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
33 And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.

 

[Gary K]

Character assassination will get you nowhere. But if you must use such techniques at least speak the truth. Anyone may see from my threads and many posts in this board that the things I believe and post come from the scripture.

For example, Tamiyd-Continual:

Exodus 25:30 KJV - alway - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the vessels for the table of the bread of the Presence.
Exodus 27:20 KJV - always - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the pure olive oil for the lamp to burn continually.
Exodus 28:29-30 KJV - continually (twice) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: for Ahron goes in every day, morning and evening, to dress the lamps of the menorah and offer incense.
Exodus 28:38 KJV - always - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: for Ahron goes in to perform the holy things every day.
Exodus 29:38 KJV - continually - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily morning and evening sacrifices.
Exodus 29:42 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily morning and evening sacrifices.
Exodus 30:8 KJV - perpetual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily incense offering.
Leviticus 6:13 KJV - ever - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the fire upon the altar is never to go out.
Leviticus 6:20 KJV - perpetual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily morning and evening minchah-oblations of the Kohanim.
Leviticus 24:2-4 KJV - continually (three times) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: dressing the lamps of the menorah evening and morning.
Numbers 4:16 KJV - daily - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily minchah-oblations.
Numbers 9:16 KJV - alway - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the cloud covering the mishkan-tabernacle by day, and the appearance of fire by night.
Numbers 28:3-6 KJV - continual (twice) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the twice daily ascending offering.
Numbers 28:15 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the daily continual ascending offering of the morning.
Numbers 28:23-24 KJV - continual (twice) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the daily continual ascending offering of the morning.
Numbers 28:31 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the daily continual ascending offering of the morning.
Numbers 29:11-34 KJV - continual (ten times) - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the daily continual ascending offerings.
Deuteronomy 11:12 KJV - always - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the (seven) eyes of HE WHO WAS AND WHO IS your Elohim are tamiyd-continually upon His Land, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year.

Tamiyd-continual is continually employed for continual things that always occur in every day of the year.

Leviticus 24:8 KJV - continually - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the continual bread of the Presence, prepared and set in order every Shabbat hour of every sacred calendar day.
Numbers 4:7 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the continual bread of the Presence, prepared and set in order every Shabbat hour of every sacred calendar day.
Numbers 28:10 KJV - continual - H8548 tamiyd. Every day: the continual daily Shabbat hour in every sacred calendar day.

And the sacred calendar day is the seven yamim in a yom taught in the opening creation account.

View attachment 341427

Mark 15:25-33 KJV
25 And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.
26 And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.
27 And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.
28 And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.
29 And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days,
30 Save thyself, and come down from the cross.
31 Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save.
32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
33 And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.

Yeah,the Jews never take scripture out of context. The Talmud is full of it. The Brit Hadashah is, from what I've seen, the same way. You want to believe their non inspired writings, have at it. Thanks for making my point for me with your last quote of scripture.

 

[daq]

Do as you please. It won't bother me at all. as you base your belief on non inspired Jewish writings.

To me that's like basing a belief of mine found only in the Talmud.

Yeah,the Jews never take scripture out of context. The Talmud is full of it. The Brit Hadashah is, from what I've seen, the same way. You want to believe their non inspired writings, have at it. Thanks for making my point for me with your last quote of scripture.

Brit Hadashah is the term generally used for the Apostilic writings and it simply means new-renewed covenant.

Moreover where are the things in my previous post above found in non inspired Jewish writings or in the Talmud? Or what about the following scripture fact that also refutes your denial of the daily Shabbat hour?

Genesis 2:4
4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made Earth and Heavens,

In case you never noticed: Earth and Heavens were not created in the same day, and those are indeed to be capitalized because they are anarthrous, (without the definite article attached), thus showing that they speak of the proper nouns in the naming of Heavens and Earth which occur in the second yom, (Shamayim-Heavens, Gen 1:8), and the third yom, (Eretz-Earth, Gen 1:10).

How can the second yom and the third yom of creation both be "in the day" that the Most High made Earth and Heavens when Earth and Heavens were not created in the same creation days?

Yom is light, Gen 1:5, for Elohim Himself calls the light, Yom, (not "Day"). And if a yom can be a day, and if the scripture mentions a yom for a year in some places, and in other places a year for a yom, and also teaches that one yom with the Master is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one yom: then surely a yom may also be an hour, for yom is light.

Therefore, whenever yom is used for an increment of time, it may be any one of these increments of time depending on the scripture Logos-reasoning within the context of what is written. A yom may be an hour, a full twelve hour civil calendar day, a year, or even a thousand years. Just because your favorite lexicon doesn't contain the definition of an hour for a yom doesn't falsify the scripture teaching which the lexicons have missed.

Heavens were created and named in Yom Sheni, Second Yom, Gen 1:8.
Earth was created and named in Yom Shelishi, Third Yom, Gen 1:10.
Both Earth and Heavens were created in the single yom wherein Elohim made Earth and Heavens, Gen 2:4.

You and your church have inadvertantly sidelined the daily Shabbat hour of the creation for not understanding the scripture, and have yourselves changed the tamiyd-continual Shabbat into a weekly-only Shabbat, which only occurs once in seven full days, and are therefore guilty of exactly what you accuse others of doing by using Dan 7:25 and Dan 8:13 to make your arguments.

What I said to the OP is true whether you wish to admit it or not: it is not wise to use Daniel 7:25 to condemn others for the same thing you yourselves are also (unknowingly) guilty of doing. Your prophetess has misled you: and if anyone is going to be considered a prophet or a prophetess then the most stringent forms of examination and inspection in comparison with the scripture ought to be applied to their teachings.

 

[Gary K]

Brit Hadashah is the term generally used for the Apostilic writings and it simply means new-renewed covenant.

Moreover where are the things in my previous post above found in non inspired Jewish writings or in the Talmud? Or what about the following scripture fact that also refutes your denial of the daily Shabbat hour?

Genesis 2:4
4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made Earth and Heavens,

In case you never noticed: Earth and Heavens were not created in the same day, and those are indeed to be capitalized because they are anarthrous, (without the definite article attached), thus showing that they speak of the proper nouns in the naming of Heavens and Earth which occur in the second yom, (Shamayim-Heavens, Gen 1:8), and the third yom, (Eretz-Earth, Gen 1:10).

How can the second yom and the third yom of creation both be "in the day" that the Most High made Earth and Heavens when Earth and Heavens were not created in the same creation days?

Yom is light, Gen 1:5, for Elohim Himself calls the light, Yom, (not "Day"). And if a yom can be a day, and if the scripture mentions a yom for a year in some places, and in other places a year for a yom, and also teaches that one yom with the Master is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one yom: then surely a yom may also be an hour, for yom is light.

Therefore, whenever yom is used for an increment of time, it may be any one of these increments of time depending on the scripture Logos-reasoning within the context of what is written. A yom may be an hour, a full twelve hour civil calendar day, a year, or even a thousand years. Just because your favorite lexicon doesn't contain the definition of an hour for a yom doesn't falsify the scripture teaching which the lexicons have missed.

Heavens were created and named in Yom Sheni, Second Yom, Gen 1:8.
Earth was created and named in Yom Shelishi, Third Yom, Gen 1:10.
Both Earth and Heavens were created in the single yom wherein Elohim made Earth and Heavens, Gen 2:4.

You and your church have inadvertantly sidelined the daily Shabbat hour of the creation for not understanding the scripture, and have yourselves changed the tamiyd-continual Shabbat into a weekly-only Shabbat, which only occurs once in seven full days, and are therefore guilty of exactly what you accuse others of doing by using Dan 7:25 and Dan 8:13 to make your arguments.

What I said to the OP is true whether you wish to admit it or not: it is not wise to use Daniel 7:25 to condemn others for the same thing you yourselves are also (unknowingly) guilty of doing. Your prophetess has misled you: and if anyone is going to be considered a prophet or a prophetess then the most stringent forms of examination and inspection in comparison with the scripture ought to be applied to their teachings.

The prophecies concerning Jesus are all throughout the OT yet the Jews rejected Jesus as their Savior. I'll stick with the Bible and the Bible alone. You can believe what you wish.

This is the last time I'll reply to you on this subject.