Sabbatarianism

[The Liturgist]

The Greek language has a long history, spanning over 3,400 years with documented written records. The earliest written evidence of Greek dates back to the 15th century BCE, as seen in texts using Linear B, a syllabic script.While the spoken language may have existed earlier, the written tradition is the oldest documented form.

Indeed, but your argument is a red herring, since the Greek language refers to Sunday as Kyriakis and has for almost as long as it has referred to Sabbath as Sabbatton - both were introduced to the Greek language through the influence of Jews and Christians respectively, which I noted in my previous post, and also is still an example of the nominal fallacy.

That this entire line of argumentation is fallacious is the main problem. But you did just add another fallacy into the mix, a red herring argument and also another instance of begging the question.

As long as arguments are made which are logically fallacious, I believe we are obliged to deconstruct them owing to Christ our True God being the Incarnate Logos, the Reason and rationality of Creation.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Indeed, but your argument is a red herring, since the Greek language refers to Sunday as Kyriakis and has for almost as long as it has referred to Sabbath as Sabbatton - both were introduced to the Greek language through the influence of Jews and Christians respectively, which I noted in my previous post, and also is still an example of the nominal fallacy.

That this entire line of argumentation is fallacious is the main problem. But you did just add another fallacy into the mix, a red herring argument and also another instance of begging the question.

As long as arguments are made which are logically fallacious, I believe we are obliged to deconstruct them owing to Christ our True God being the Incarnate Logos, the Reason and rationality of Creation.

Sunday as the Lords Day is not in the Bible. Its as easy as that and adding to God’s Word we are warned Pro 30:5-6

Your argument was the languages I posted that Saturday did not mean the Sabbath in the ancient languages I posted “was false” but again, proven to be true.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Yes, two in fact, one of which is part of the Summary of the Law, and one of which is Dominical, in reverse order, these being “Pray without ceasing” and “Love god with all your heart and mind and soul.” These are commandments from Christ our True God, part of the New Covenant, who rested on the Sabbath in the Tomb, which is the actual meaning of the Sabbath commandment in Moses - it is a Christological prophecy of the death and resurrection of our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ, who having put on our human body, died so that we might have everlasting life, and in so doing recreated mankind in his image.

There is no commandment to thou shalt keep the first day holy, God did not sanctify and bless the first day. He said it was for works and labors Exo 20:9. Kind of hard to keep the greatest commandment to love God with all our hearts, but yet not listen to what He asks. Exodus 16:28 Guess it will get sorted out soon enough

 

[The Liturgist]

All languages have roots back to Babylon. My post is not false as claimed.

Actually, the incident at Babel does not support your hypothesis, since a literal reading of the incident is that God confused the tongues of the people, therefore all current languages are the result of that initial confusion, which results in dissimilarities, which explains why in the majority of ancient languages the word for the seventh day is not related in any way to the Hebrew word Sabbath.

The Tower of Babel incident represents the point of origination of different language families, if we accept that text literally, and does not imply that there was some ancient pre-Babel language of which traces survive in the post-Babel languages; quite the contrary.

The discord that occurred at Babel is the opposite of the Concord that occurs in the Church on Pentecost, on the First Day of the Week, when the Holy Spirit descended and enabled the Disciples to speak in real languages n which they could not previously communicate. Thus it is a pneumatological prophecy, of the coming of the Holy Spirit.

Lastly, I did not say your post was false in the sense of being deceptive - it is inaccurate, based on a logical fallacy compounded by factual errors. The underlying premise is illogical, since it is irrelevant what the name of the seventh day is, and the information supplied in support of that theory was selective. If you provided an example of the word for the seventh day before and after Christianity in every language, you would see how this word was adapted into Latin, Greek and other languages along with words changing the name of the first day to the Lord’s Day.

For this reason, the argument is a double-edged sword, but fortunately for you it’s fallacious, which is why I’m not making that argument (that we should observe the Lord’s day because of these languages using words like Kyriakis and Domingo to refer to Sunday).

All nominal arguments (arguments from nomenclature) are inherently illogical, and like appeals to false authority, begging the question, appeals to ignorance, ad hominem attacks, the fallacy of composition and other logical fallacies do nothing other than muddy the waters.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Actually, the incident at Babel does not support your hypothesis, since a literal reading of the incident is that God confused the tongues of the people, therefore all current languages are the result of that initial confusion, which results in dissimilarities, which explains why in the majority of ancient languages the word for the seventh day is not related in any way to the Hebrew word Sabbath.

Because you say so, it’s not a good argument. The languages I posted translates into the Sabbath. All languages have roots from Babylon when God confused their languages, meaning instead of one language there were many.

 

[The Liturgist]

There is no commandment to thou shalt keep the first day holy, God did not sanctify and bless the first day. This is all a man-made tradition over God’s commandments.

I cited two commandments that support the practice, and the Holy Tradition of the church is something we are directed to follow by the Holy Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15.

Because you say so, it’s not a good argument.

Red herring, another logical fallacy. I never made an argument that rested on “because I say so.” Every statement i’ve made is independently verifiable. It is ironic that you accuse me of having accused you of making arguments you did not make, when I have been the victim of this repeatedly in this conversation.

The languages I posted translates into the Sabbath.

Indeed, but the languages you posted are not even a majority, let alone “almost all,” of the ancient languages, and furthermore, even if they were, it would be irrelevant because the argument is a logical fallacy, an argument from nomenclature, because what matters is not the etymology of the word but its semantics. This is why scholars avoid the nominal fallacy, because it ignores current semantic values and tends towards tautology.

All languages have roots from Babylon when God confused their languages for being disobedient.

Indeed, this is the historic reason ancient Jews believed that other languages became harder and harder for them to understand the further away they got from Israel.[/quote]

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I cited two commandments that support the practice, and the Holy Tradition of the church is something we are directed to follow by the Holy Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15.



Red herring, another logical fallacy. I never made an argument that rested on “because I say so.” Every statement i’ve made is independently verifiable. It is ironic that you accuse me of having accused you of making arguments you did not make, when I have been the victim of this repeatedly in this conversation.




Indeed, but the languages you posted are not even a majority, let alone “almost all,” of the ancient languages, and furthermore, even if they were, it would be irrelevant because the argument is a logical fallacy, an argument from nomenclature, because what matters is not the etymology of the word but its semantics. This is why scholars avoid the nominal fallacy, because it ignores current semantic values and tends towards tautology.



Indeed, this is the historic reason ancient Jews believed that other languages became harder and harder for them to understand the further away they got from Israel.

Jesus said:

Mark 7:7 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

The Sabbath is a commandment of God written and spoken by the God of the Universe Exo 31:18 - keeping holy sunday is a tradition of man.

Mat 15: 3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?

Even the apostles taught we ought to obey God over man

Guess this will all get sorted out once Jesus comes back and when He does, there will be no changing sides, whoever we obey is who we serve Rom 6:16 I say we obey God based on His Authority Exo 20:8-11 Eze 20:20 but all of our decisions will be sealed once Jesus comes Rev 22:11

Guess we will have to agree to disagree and all gets sorted out soon enough

 

[JSRG]

What is the definition of ancient?
Something is generally considered ancient if it's older than 2,000 to 5,000 years

Let’s look to see if what was posted is false.….

As an example . . .

The Greek language has a long history, spanning over 3,400 years with documented written records. The earliest written evidence of Greek dates back to the 15th century BCE, as seen in texts using Linear B, a syllabic script.While the spoken language may have existed earlier, the written tradition is the oldest documented form.

The Italian language, which evolved from Latin, has a history spanning roughly 2,700 years

The oldest Latin texts with traces of Spanish come from mid-northern Iberia in the 9th century, and the first systematic written use of the language happened in Toledo, a prominent city of the Kingdom of Castile, in the 13th century.

The Portuguese language has roots tracing back to the 3rd century BC when Latin was brought to the Iberian Peninsula by Roman settlers. While the evolution of Portuguese from Latin is a gradual process, the earliest evidence of Portuguese, considered Old Portuguese, dates back to the 9th century.

All languages have roots back to Babylon. My post is not false as claimed.

So as I understand it, your argument seems to be that these languages all get their word for Sabbath from Babylon, or rather the Tower of Babel, and the dispersion of languages there was what caused it. And the evidence is that despite going back so long, they all share that.

If that is the case (your argument is a bit confusing and I could be misinterpreting it), the problem is that the languages in question do not get their word for Saturday (taken from Sabbath) independently. That is, they didn't just have that at their start. The languages cited all seem to get their word for Sabbath ultimately from Hebrew, and possibly further, if Hebrew took it from another Mesopotamian language--other Mesopotamian languages have similar terms, but it's harder to figure out exactly which came from what. Regardless, the word was in Hebrew. Aramaic took the word Sabbath from Hebrew, and then Greek from Aramaic. Latin took it from Greek. The Romance languages, which were all dialects of Latin that eventually became their own languages over time, inherited it from Latin. Some of the African languages--those of northern Africa and Ethiopia--got it from Greek or Latin, though the more central or southern languages only seem to have taken it from the languages of the Europeans who colonized and engaged in missionary work in Africa.

There does not seem to be any language that can be said to have independently developed the word Sabbath; it largely all ends up tracing back to Greek and Latin (which themselves took it from Aramaic which took it from Hebrew). If there were languages that had the term but had no contact with a language that already had it, that could aid in proving the idea that it was retained in those languages after the confusion of Babel. But as far as I am aware there are none, and none of the ones you cited in your earlier chart appear to qualify; they all had contact with a language that was already using the term.

For example, there were a lot of languages in North and South America, which had no contact with the European languages until the 15th century. But none of them appear to have ever used the term Sabbath, or one related to it, prior to any European contact (no North/South American native languages were even appealed to on the chart).

 

[SabbathBlessings]

So as I understand it, your argument seems to be that these languages all get their word for Sabbath from Babylon, or rather the Tower of Babel, and the dispersion of languages there was what caused it. And the evidence is that despite going back so long, they all share that.

Thats not at all what I said. The Sabbath was named by God at Creation Gen 2:1-3 Exo 20:10, God in His own Words said it is the holy day of the Lord Isa 58:13 so there can be no other.

 

[linux.poet]

MOD HAT ON​

This thread has been moved from General Theology to Sabbath and the Law.​

MOD HAT OFF ​

 

[DamianWarS]

The Catholic Church views seventh-day Sabbatarianism, which advocates worship on Saturday as the Sabbath, as a misunderstanding of Christian tradition. The Church teaches that Sunday, the day of Christ's resurrection, is the Lord's Day and the proper day for Christian worship. This shift from Saturday to Sunday worship began in the early Church and is rooted in the New Testament, where the apostles and early Christians gathered on the first day of the week.

The Church also emphasises that the Sabbath commandment is fulfilled in Christ, who offers eternal rest and salvation. Therefore, the observance of Sunday is not merely about following a rule but celebrating the new covenant established through Jesus.

Sunday worship is laudable but it shouldn't be been viewed as a requirement for the faith or a replacement of anything. It's the gathering of a body of believers that is the goal which can be done on any day, and in any place.

The new covenant transforms the old of preist/sacrafice/temple where in the old the priest performs the sacrafice in the temple for sanctification, but in the new it is all through Christ and demonstrated in his church where he is the sacrafice that calls us to be a living sacrafice, he is the high priest that calls us a priestly nation, and he is the holy of holies and calls us his temple. We are sanctified through him and he calls us Holy. In this space there is no room for a holy/secular divide with replacment temples, priests and sacrafices on special holy days, this would be counter-gospel.

 

[Amo2]

Sunday worship is laudable but it shouldn't be been viewed as a requirement for the faith or a replacement of anything. It's the gathering of a body of believers that is the goal which can be done on any day, and in any place.

The new covenant transforms the old of preist/sacrafice/temple where in the old the priest performs the sacrafice in the temple for sanctification, but in the new it is all through Christ and demonstrated in his church where he is the sacrafice that calls us to be a living sacrafice, he is the high priest that calls us a priestly nation, and he is the holy of holies and calls us his temple. We are sanctified through him and he calls us Holy. In this space there is no room for a holy/secular divide with replacment temples, priests and sacrafices on special holy days, this would be counter-gospel.

Is not the gospel, the gospel of Jesus Christ? Is it not based upon the teachings of Jesus Christ? Jesus did teach that the earthly temple would be destroyed, and that His sacrifice was the only sacrifice for us unto salvation. He also became our High Priest of this New covenant era, who ever liveth to make intercession for us. No need of faulty sinful priests standing between God and humanity anymore. Nevertheless, He also taught -

Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

So why do so many professed Christians today break one of the commandments of God, and also teach other men to do so? While at the same time, seeking to legally establish a man made Sabbath, or Sunday through civil legislation? If a day does not matter, then why so much focus upon Sunday sabbath laws throughout history to this very day? If it does matter, then why not the day of the fourth commandment of God?

 

[DamianWarS]

So why do so many professed Christians today break one of the commandments of God, and also teach other men to do so? While at the same time, seeking to legally establish a man made Sabbath, or Sunday through civil legislation? If a day does not matter, then why so much focus upon Sunday sabbath laws throughout history to this very day? If it does matter, then why not the day of the fourth commandment of God?

Christ tells us a better way of keeping law through what is commonly known as Christ's law (Mt 22:37-39) which is also taught throughout the NT. He affirms this practice of goodness/love also as a lawful practice on the sabbath (Mt 12:12). Provided we are aligned to Christ's law there is no breaking any commandments, there is only lawful practice. Misaligned traditional practices are not reasons to cite that we should return to the law. Again, Christ tells us a better of keeping it, so why are we aligning and listening to post-biblical church tradition to calibrate our doctrine, be it with the direct value of Sunday Sabbath or its negative that we should return to Friday sundown to Saturday sunset

 

[Amo2]

The Father and the Son are one. There's no law of God the Father as separate from a newer form of Christ's law established at His first coming that I know of. There were laws pertaining to Literal Israel and the Temple and its services that were done away with in the establishment of the new Covenant era, these are addressed in the New Testament though. Neither is the better way you speak of, original to this New Covenant era. Such teaching and sentiments proceeded from the Father and Son during the old covenant as well.

Deu 6:5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. 6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:

Deu 10:12 And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul,

Deu 30:6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

Lev 19:33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. 34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

Lev 25:35 And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee. 36 Take thou no usury of him, or increase: but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee. 37 Thou shalt not give him thy money upon usury, nor lend him thy victuals for increase.

There are more examples of course, but it should be obvious from the above verses that our Lord has always maintained the principles Christ reiterated in Mt 22:37-39. Apart from which, why would our Lord and Saviors teachings in one place, negate that which He taught in another? Why would one make the teachings of Christ in Mt 22:37-39, negate His former teachings in Mt 5:17-19? Especially when the latter, makes no mention of any such reversal of itself?

Jhn 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. 12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater worksthan these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. 13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. 15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. 18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. 19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. 20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. 21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

The Father and the Son are one. The Ten Commandments of God are Their commandments, as They are both God. Our Lord Jesus did not come to separate of divide Them. He came to unite us with Them once again. Their saints are admonished to keep Their commandments all throughout scripture. Up to the last book and chapter of the bible.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

No one but God alone of course, could change one of His commandments, and Jesus specifically stated that He did not come to do any such thing. To the contrary, He stated that those who kept and taught them would be called great in the kingdom of heaven, and those who broke them and taught others to do so would be called least in the kingdom of heaven. Why then do so many believe He changed them?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Having a new covenant, as Christians do, does not mean that everything said in the old covenant is bad. But it does mean that no one in Christ ought to keep Saturday as if doing so were a moral requirement.

 

[Amo2]

Having a new covenant, as Christians do, does not mean that everything said in the old covenant is bad. But it does mean that no one in Christ ought to keep Saturday as if doing so were a moral requirement.

We all have our opinions of course. If the Ten Commandments of God are moral requirements, then so is the fourth. If they are not, then none of them need be kept anymore. Is this your position? Do you feel the same way about Sunday sacredness. That it is not a moral requirement? If so, do you have concerns about all the civil Sunday laws around the world? How would you feel if places began enforcing Saturday laws where there might be a majority of Saturday keepers? Would that be right?

 

[The Liturgist]

If so, do you have concerns about all the civil Sunday laws around the world? How would you feel if places began enforcing Saturday laws where there might be a majority of Saturday keepers?

That’s a thing in Israel, and in Muslim countries we have Friday mandated as a day of prayer, which causes inconvenience for Christian expats who are working the Gulf States like Oman, the UAE, et cetera.

Sunday laws are important as they protect the majority of Christian churches from Islamic oppression of the sort we see in the Middle East. However, because of the persecution of the Jews in Israel, I believe these laws should be extended to Saturday, but should not restrict retail operations, but rather should be used to prevent public school sports teams, for example, from scheduling practice sessions on Sunday mornings, which is an activity which in the US directly interferes with the ability of many families to attend Church on the Lord’s Day. Likewise we should extend it to Saturday in the interests of fairness.

However given that the trend in recent years has been for Blue Laws to be rolled back, the idea of Adventists that there is a conspiracy to ban worship on Saturday is just not accurate. Particularly when we consider the fact that nearly all Roman Catholic parishes of any size have worship services on every Saturday, and that Saturday vesperal liturgies can now be used to satisfy the Sunday obligation that Roman Catholicism imposes, and likewise most Orthodox churches worship on most Saturdays throughout the year, many worshipping on all of them, including nearly all Coptic and Ethiopian churches.

The only ancient church which has very limited worship on Saturday is the Armenian Apostolic Church, which mainly worships on Sundays and major feast days, which is also fine, because their liturgy still constitutes an observance of the Sabbath by worshipping Christ our True God, the Lord of the Sabbath, who on that day did repose in a tomb.

What is unacceptable as per Colossians 2:16 is for us to either judge or allow ourselves to be judged on our Sabbath observance and other related issues that pertain to Old Covenant worship. This is because the animal sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem have been replaced by the bloodless and rational sacrifice of the Eucharist in Orthodox Christian Temples around the world, as well as the temples of our fellow liturgical Christians such as the Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, Assyrians, Moravians, and so on.

 

[Amo2]

That’s a thing in Israel, and in Muslim countries we have Friday mandated as a day of prayer, which causes inconvenience for Christian expats who are working the Gulf States like Oman, the UAE, et cetera.

Sunday laws are important as they protect the majority of Christian churches from Islamic oppression of the sort we see in the Middle East. However, because of the persecution of the Jews in Israel, I believe these laws should be extended to Saturday, but should not restrict retail operations, but rather should be used to prevent public school sports teams, for example, from scheduling practice sessions on Sunday mornings, which is an activity which in the US directly interferes with the ability of many families to attend Church on the Lord’s Day. Likewise we should extend it to Saturday in the interests of fairness.

However given that the trend in recent years has been for Blue Laws to be rolled back, the idea of Adventists that there is a conspiracy to ban worship on Saturday is just not accurate. Particularly when we consider the fact that nearly all Roman Catholic parishes of any size have worship services on every Saturday, and that Saturday vesperal liturgies can now be used to satisfy the Sunday obligation that Roman Catholicism imposes, and likewise most Orthodox churches worship on most Saturdays throughout the year, many worshipping on all of them, including nearly all Coptic and Ethiopian churches.

The only ancient church which has very limited worship on Saturday is the Armenian Apostolic Church, which mainly worships on Sundays and major feast days, which is also fine, because their liturgy still constitutes an observance of the Sabbath by worshipping Christ our True God, the Lord of the Sabbath, who on that day did repose in a tomb.

What is unacceptable as per Colossians 2:16 is for us to either judge or allow ourselves to be judged on our Sabbath observance and other related issues that pertain to Old Covenant worship. This is because the animal sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem have been replaced by the bloodless and rational sacrifice of the Eucharist in Orthodox Christian Temples around the world, as well as the temples of our fellow liturgical Christians such as the Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, Assyrians, Moravians, and so on.

So in other words you have no problem with civilly legislated Sunday laws which have no place of origin within holy scripture, but consider it legalistic and old covenant style to observe, preach, and teach the observance of God's holy Sabbath by faith alone in His word? Is that correct? Is this to say that seventh day sabbath observers who wish people to observe this day by faith alone in God's word, are old covenant legalists? while Sunday observers who believe in government enforced observance of their chosen day of worship found nowhere in scripture is faith and grace based?

If I remember correctly, and such has not been changed, Israel now has Sabbath and Sunday laws. It is the opinion of a great many Christians today, that the observance of the first four commandments of God, must be left up to the individual. As such is of a highly personal relationship and nature, which no state or government has the right to infringe upon. Such being a relic of old covenant theocracies which Christ our Lord abolished.

Jhn 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. 37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Mat 22:15 Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk. 16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men. 17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? 18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? 19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny. 20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? 21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. 22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.

Seventh day Sabbath observance is not old covenant worship. Jesus, of whom the New Covenant itself was established, observed and taught proper Sabbath observance. Never hinted of its change, but to the contrary declared that He did not come to change any of the commandments of God. Declaring that anyone who breaks the commandments of God, and teaches men to do so, would be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. The seventh day Sabbath of God was kept and observed by many Christians for several centuries after our Lords establishment of the New Covenant, and has been observed by professed Christians ever since. Though many were maligned and or persecuted for doing so by Sunday keeping and enforcing believers.

Why do you separate the fourth commandment from the rest, and try to make it a part of the ceremonial laws of the temple when discouraging its observance? Yet you no doubt deny that the sabbath being addressed in Colossians 2:16 is a ceremonial sabbath and not the fourth commandment of God. Is this not so? Or do you claim that all seventh day sabbath observance has always been of a ceremonial nature connected to the temple and sacrifices? If so, how could such be when the seventh day Sabbath was instituted at creation before there ever was a need for sacrifices pointing to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? Or why will God's seventh day Sabbath be observed in the new heaven and new earth as Isaiah states, where of course no sacrifice will be necessary?

Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

Isa 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

The Ten Commandments of God including the fourth, were given to Israel before His commands to build a temple unto Him for mediation. They are part of the reason mediation and the temple sacrifices were needed, not part of them. Just as also, God's seventh day Sabbath was given to humanity before the fall and any need of a temple or sacrifices. Therefore also shall God's seventh day Sabbath be kept in the new heaven and new earth, where there shall be no need for temple sacrifices either. How say you and many others, God's seventh day Sabbath is only part of the old covenant temple and sacrificial system?

We may all of course believe as we wish. I am simply asking for a biblical justification of such a belief. Not a selected verse from here or there, but one found more generally throughout scripture, which does not contradict other statements of our Lord Jesus or holy scripture.

As a matter of interest as well. The Sunday law repeals you spoke of have become somewhat less common today I believe, due to the many already put in place no doubt. On the other hand, there have been many recent developments in the opposite direction, with new Sunday laws increasingly being put in place.

On another note. SDA's do not believe there will be a ban upon seventh Sabbath worship, until after Sunday laws are nationally put firmly in place within the United States of America. Thereby nullifying our Constitutionally established separation of church and state, fully opening the door to religious persecution once again. As it was the Sunday laws of Constantine which first handed over the power of the state to Roman Christianity, which ended in persecution of a great many non Roman Christians. We believe that after these laws are established once again, the majority of people will begin to view the observance of God's seventh day Sabbath as those of the past did after such.

CHURCH FATHERS: Synod of Laodicea (4th Century)

Synod of Laodicea (4th Century)

The Canons of the Synod Held in the City of Laodicea, in Phrygia Pacatiana, in which Many Blessed Fathers from Divers Provinces of Asia Were Gathered Together.

The holy synod which assembled at Laodicea in Phrygia Pacatiana, from various regions of Asia; set forth the ecclesiastical definitions which are hereunder annexed.

Canon 29

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.

Pope Gregory I (AD 590-604) said :

"Gregory, bishop by the grace of God to his well-beloved sons, the Roman citizens: It has come to me that certain men of perverse spirit have disseminated among you things depraved and opposed to the holy faith, so that they forbid anything to be done on the day of the Sabbath. What shall I call them except preachers of anti-Christ?." Epistles of Gregory I, b.13, epist.1, found in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.

The Synod of Laodicea - 343-381 A.D. - furnishes a decree which is quoted by many:

"Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday [Sabbatum is always used for the Sabbath and is translated Saturday in the English edition of Hefele], but shall work on that day; but the Lord's-day they shall especially honor, and as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing they shall be shut out from Christ. (Canon 29, Hefele, Vol. 2, p. 316.)

The following is from the CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Emphasis is mine.

Sunday- fulfillment of the sabbath

2175 Sunday is expressly distinguished from the sabbath which it follows chronologically every week; for Christians its ceremonial observance replaces that of the sabbath. In Christ's Passover, Sunday fulfills the spiritual truth of the Jewish sabbath and announces man's eternal rest in God. For worship under the Law prepared for the mystery of Christ, and what was done there prefigured some aspects of Christ:[107]
Those who lived according to the old order of things have come to a new hope, no longer keeping the sabbath, but the Lord's Day, in which our life is blessed by him and by his death.[108]

2176 The celebration of Sunday observes the moral commandment inscribed by nature in the human heart to render to God an outward, visible, public, and regular worship "as a sign of his universal beneficence to all."[109] Sunday worship fulfills the moral command of the Old Covenant, taking up its rhythm and spirit in the weekly celebration of the Creator and Redeemer of his people.

A day of grace and rest from work

2184 Just as God "rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done,"[121] human life has a rhythm of work and rest. The institution of the Lord's Day helps everyone enjoy adequate rest and leisure to cultivate their familial, cultural, social, and religious lives.[122]

2185 On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are to refrain from engaging in work or activities that hinder the worship owed to God, the joy proper to the Lord's Day, the performance of the works of mercy, and the appropriate relaxation of mind and body.[123] Family needs or important social service can legitimately excuse from the obligation of Sunday rest. The faithful should see to it that legitimate excuses do not lead to habits prejudicial to religion, family life, and health.

The charity of truth seeks holy leisure- the necessity of charity accepts just work.[124]

2186 Those Christians who have leisure should be mindful of their brethren who have the same needs and the same rights, yet cannot rest from work because of poverty and misery. Sunday is traditionally consecrated by Christian piety to good works and humble service of the sick, the infirm, and the elderly. Christians will also sanctify Sunday by devoting time and care to their families and relatives, often difficult to do on other days of the week. Sunday is a time for reflection, silence, cultivation of the mind, and meditation which furthers the growth of the Christian interior life.

2187 Sanctifying Sundays and holy days requires a common effort. Every Christian should avoid making unnecessary demands on others that would hinder them from observing the Lord's Day. Traditional activities (sport, restaurants, etc.), and social necessities (public services, etc.), require some people to work on Sundays, but everyone should still take care to set aside sufficient time for leisure. With temperance and charity the faithful will see to it that they avoid the excesses and violence sometimes associated with popular leisure activities. In spite of economic constraints, public authorities should ensure citizens a time intended for rest and divine worship. Employers have a similar obligation toward their employees.

2188 In respecting religious liberty and the common good of all, Christians should seek recognition of Sundays and the Church's holy days as legal holidays. They have to give everyone a public example of prayer, respect, and joy and defend their traditions as a precious contribution to the spiritual life of society. If a country's legislation or other reasons require work on Sunday, the day should nevertheless be lived as the day of our deliverance which lets us share in this "festal gathering," this "assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven."[125]

IN BRIEF

2189 "Observe the sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Deut 5:12). "The seventh day is a sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the Lord" (Ex 31:15).

2190 The sabbath, which represented the completion of the first creation, has been replaced by Sunday which recalls the new creation inaugurated by the Resurrection of Christ.

2191 The Church celebrates the day of Christ's Resurrection on the "eighth day," Sunday, which is rightly called the Lord's Day (cf. SC 106).

2192 "Sunday . . . is to be observed as the foremost holy day of obligation in the universal Church" (CIC, can. 1246 # 1). "On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass" (CIC, can. 1247).

2193 "On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound . . . to abstain from those labors and business concerns which impede the worship to be rendered to God, the joy which is proper to the Lord's Day, or the proper relaxation of mind and body" (CIC, can. 1247).

2194 The institution of Sunday helps all "to be allowed sufficient rest and leisure to cultivate their amilial, cultural, social, and religious lives" (GS 67 # 3).

2195 Every Christian should avoid making unnecessary demands on others that would hinder them from observing the Lord's Day.

The main and most important difference between God's seventh day Sabbath, and the one promoted in the above Catechism as I see it, is the difference between God and man. The holy scriptures declare that God blessed and sanctified the seventh day, the Catechism above asks humanity to sanctify the first day by their observance of it. While holy scripture is silent upon the subject of a first day sabbath, or Lord's day.

 

[The Liturgist]

While holy scripture is silent upon the subject of a first day sabbath, or Lord's day.

Not true - we see the Holy Apostles worshipping on the First Day at the third hour when the Holy Spirit descends upon them. The third hour of the first day, that is to say, 9 AM on a Sunday, being the most common time for Christian worship even at present.

Had our lord risen on the Seventh Day, had humanity or the universe been created on the Seventh day, and had our Lord ascended on the Seventh day, and the Holy Spirit descended, your argument would be compelling, particularly had Christ our True God not told us to pray without ceasing.

 

[The Liturgist]

So in other words you have no problem with civilly legislated Sunday laws

Of course not, because, your assertion to the contrary notwithstanding, such laws do have a place within Holy Scripture.

But there is no reason for you to object, because as I made it clear I favor the protections on Sunday also applying to Saturday in order to protect the worship of the Jewish people who are increasingly discriminated against. This would by extension avoid interfering with Sabbatarian worship, which I’m not interested in interfering with. Indeed I would even support extending blue laws to Friday, since this would not only benefit Muslims, but it would result in the entire Paschal Triduum being a protected block of time for Christian worship purposes.