Sunday Is Not the Sabbath

[Michie]

*Permission to post in full*​

If we believe we have to "honor the Sabbath day," why aren’t Catholics obliged to attend Mass on Saturday instead of Sunday?​

@The Liturgist

One of the most appealing teachings of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination is their insistence that Christians must obey the Ten Commandments . . . all ten of them. They rightly expose the errant thinking among many Protestant Christian sects that claims, “We don’t have to keep the Ten Commandments for salvation anymore.”

Of course, as Jesus reminds us:

And behold, one came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?” And [Jesus] said to him . . . “If you would enter life, keep the commandments” (Matt. 19:16-17).

Given our agreement on this point, the Seventh-day Adventist commonly asks: “If you believe we have to keep the Fourth (our Third) Commandment, why aren’t Catholics obliged to attend Mass on Saturdays instead of Sunday?”

We can draw our first source from the the Catechism, which declares:

Since they express man’s fundamental duties towards God and towards his neighbor, the Ten Commandments reveal, in their primordial content, grave obligations. They are fundamentally immutable, and they oblige always and everywhere. No one can dispense from them. The Ten Commandments are engraved by God in the human heart (2072).
Click to expand...

Thus, the Third Commandment is “fundamentally immutable” because it’s one of the Ten Commandments, which Jesus said we must follow to attain everlasting life. However, the Catholic Church teaches the particular day we celebrate in keeping the Third Commandment to be ceremonial, or an accidental component of the law that is changeable. Here’s how the Catechismputs it:

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. . . . 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. . . . 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. . . . 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 (2175-76).
Click to expand...

Are there biblical data that concur with this teaching of the Church? Absolutely!

St. Paul tells us that the ceremonial aspect of the old law—the Sabbath day itself—is no longer binding for the Christian faithful:

Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in regard to food or drink or in respect to festival, or a new moon or a Sabbath day—things which are a mere shadow of what is to come, but the substance belongs to Christ (Col. 2:16-17).

Clearly, the Sabbath is “a mere shadow”—that is, fleeting by nature. And “shadow” (Greek, skian) is the same word used by the inspired author of the letter to the Hebrews for the animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant—also no longer binding on Christians.

For the law, having but a shadow (Greek, skian) of the good things to come, and not the exact image of the objects, is never able by the sacrifices which they offer continually, year after year the same, to perfect those who draw near (10:1).

Moreover, it is important to note how Paul uses the same division of “festivals” (annual holy days), “new moons” (monthly holy days), and “Sabbaths” (the weekly holy days) that the Old Testament uses in 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4, 8:12-13, 31:3; and elsewhere, when referencing Jewish holy days. Clearly, along with the yearly and monthly holy days—which no Christian today claims is binding upon believers in Christ—the Sabbath is included in what Paul calls a mere shadow.

When Paul teaches that Christians do not have to keep the Sabbath, he speaks of the holy days that were specific to the Jews. He is not saying—and does not say—that we do not have to keep any holy days at all. In context, Paul is dealing with Judaizers, who were telling Gentile Christians they had to be circumcised and keep the Old Covenant law that had passed away, which would include the Sabbath and other holy days, in order to be saved. Some overlook this fact when they use Paul’s epistle to the Romans against the necessity of keeping the Third Commandment.

As for the man who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not for disputes over opinions. One believes he may eat anything, while the weak man eats only vegetables. . . . One man esteems one day as better than another, while another man esteems every day alike. Let every man be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord (14:1-6).
Click to expand...

During the first few decades of Church history, the question of Jewish-Gentile relations with the Church and the law was a hot topic. As long as the Temple was standing, Christians of Jewish descent were free to attend the Temple and keep certain aspects of the Old Law, as long as they did not teach these things to be essential for salvation.

Many will claim the Catholic is in grave error here because Hebrews 4:9 declares: “So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.” And a surface reading here does appear to bind Christians to the seventh day. However, the context within verses 4-8 greatly clarifies things for us:

For he has somewhere spoken of the seventh day in this way, “And God rested on the seventh day from all his works.” And again in this place he said, “They shall never enter my rest.” Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience, again he sets a certain day, “Today,” saying through David so long afterward, in the words already quoted, “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts.” For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day. So, then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God; for whoever enters God’s rest ceases also from his labors as God did from his.
Click to expand...

The context makes clear that the Jewish “seventh day” has been superseded, or, more properly, fulfilled, in “another day,” “a certain day,” that is a new “Sabbath rest for the people of God.” What day is this? In Hebrews, it is not so much a day at all as it is a person: Jesus Christ. In fact, the entire discussion of “the Sabbath rest” disappears into the discussion of our “great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God” (4:14ff). It is Jesus Christ himself who actualizes the “rest” that was merely foreshadowed by the Sabbath.

“End of discussion,” say our Protestant friends.“There is no longer any such thing as a day that binds Christians in the New Covenant. Jesus is the fulfillment of the Sabbath, not some day we have to go to church.” And they are actually correct, but only partially. Jesus is the fulfillment of the Sabbath rest in the sense that only he can actualize the “rest” the Sabbath symbolized.

In Hebrews 10:1-26, we see movement toward tagging on the Church as fulfillment of all that was merely shadow in the Old Covenant and not just Jesus Christ in the abstract. And this makes sense only when we understand that “the Church” is the body of Christ, or Christ himself extended into the world (cf. Eph. 1:22-23).

For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come, instead of the true form of those realities, it can never . . . make perfect those who draw near.

Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way which he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great high priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in the full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water . . . not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some. . . . For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins (Heb. 10:1; 19-22, 25-26).
Click to expand...

As Christians, we “enter into the sanctuary” through baptism—bodies washed with pure water—and the Eucharist—his flesh—thus enters the necessity of the Church.

So if Christians are bound to keep the third commandment, and it involves “meeting together,” but not on the Sabbath, what day are we commanded to meet?

In Scripture, whenever we see Christians meeting to worship the Lord, receive Communion, take up collections—apart from the synagogue—it is either “daily,” or especially, it’s “on the first day of the week” (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2). It is true that you often see St. Paul entering into the synagogue on the Sabbath (Acts 13:14-44, 16:13, 18:4). However, in each instance, his purpose was to proclaim the truth about Christ to the Jews. These are not specifically Christian gatherings. But notice what we find in Acts 2:46:

And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts.

Paul and his companions attended the temple, but “the breaking of bread” occurred in the house “churches” of Christians. “The breaking of bread,” by the way, is a Eucharistic phrase in St. Luke’s writings. For example, when Paul was in Troas in Acts 20:7, we read: “On the first day of the week, when we gathered together to break bread.” Luke 24:30-31 records that Cleopas and an unnamed disciple’s “eyes were opened,” and they recognized Jesus “in the breaking of the bread.” And according to Luke 24:1 and 13, this encounter was also on the first day of the week! Paul never says, “On the Sabbath, when we gathered to break bread.” Instead, the “breaking of bread” in Luke 24 and in Acts 20 occurs on the first day of the week.

It’s important to remember that when we talk about biblical “churches,” we mean the designated homes for “church” gatherings and specifically for “the breaking of bread.”

For, in the first place, when you assemble as a church . . . it is not the Lord’s Supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal, and one is hungry and another is drunk. What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God? . . . For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it (1 Cor. 11:18-23).
Click to expand...

So those “homes” were actually house “churches” in which “the breaking of bread” happened, and it happened on the first day of the week: Sunday.

Sunday Is Not the Sabbath

If we believe we have to "honor the Sabbath day," why aren’t Catholics obliged to attend Mass on Saturday instead of Sunday?

www.catholic.com

 

[SabbathBlessings]

*Permission to post in full*​

If we believe we have to "honor the Sabbath day," why aren’t Catholics obliged to attend Mass on Saturday instead of Sunday?​

@The Liturgist

One of the most appealing teachings of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination is their insistence that Christians must obey the Ten Commandments . . . all ten of them. They rightly expose the errant thinking among many Protestant Christian sects that claims, “We don’t have to keep the Ten Commandments for salvation anymore.”

Of course, as Jesus reminds us:


Given our agreement on this point, the Seventh-day Adventist commonly asks: “If you believe we have to keep the Fourth (our Third) Commandment, why aren’t Catholics obliged to attend Mass on Saturdays instead of Sunday?”

We do not keep the commandments for salvation, they should be kept because Jesus changes us from the inside and we want to keep them through love and faith. 1 John 5:3, Romans 3:31 Rev 14:12

We can draw our first source from the the Catechism, which declares:


Thus, the Third Commandment is “fundamentally immutable” because it’s one of the Ten Commandments, which Jesus said we must follow to attain everlasting life. However, the Catholic Church teaches the particular day we celebrate in keeping the Third Commandment to be ceremonial, or an accidental component of the law that is changeable. Here’s how the Catechismputs it:

Scripture will always trump any man-made document and what does scripture say. Can one of the Ten Commandments be changed by man?

No way!

Deut 4:2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you.

We are not to edit God's commandments or any of His Word Proverbs 30:5-6 and in doing so is directly in conflict with God's Word. Man cannot improve on God's works Exodus 32:16 that God Himself wrote and spoke. Deut 4:13 We are warned if we go away from God's Word, there is no light Isaiah 8:20

The Ten Commandments are in God's holy Temple Rev 11:19 under His mercy seat just the way He wrote them, and the earthy temple was an exact replica of God's heavenly temple Heb 8:5, which is why they cannot be edited, they are God's enteral law.

Are there biblical data that concur with this teaching of the Church? Absolutely!

St. Paul tells us that the ceremonial aspect of the old law—the Sabbath day itself—is no longer binding for the Christian faithful:


Clearly, the Sabbath is “a mere shadow”—that is, fleeting by nature. And “shadow” (Greek, skian) is the same word used by the inspired author of the letter to the Hebrews for the animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant—also no longer binding on Christians.


Moreover, it is important to note how Paul uses the same division of “festivals” (annual holy days), “new moons” (monthly holy days), and “Sabbaths” (the weekly holy days) that the Old Testament uses in 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4, 8:12-13, 31:3; and elsewhere, when referencing Jewish holy days. Clearly, along with the yearly and monthly holy days—which no Christian today claims is binding upon believers in Christ—the Sabbath is included in what Paul calls a mere shadow.

This is a popular teaching, but one not taught by your own church but I will get to that in a bit. This is a verse that has been clearly taken out of context and no one backs up to Col 2:14 KJV to add back in the context. There is more than one Sabbath in scripture.

If you back up to Col 2:14 KJV it makes this passage abundantly clear it is not referring to one of God's commandments. There is more than one Sabbath in the Bible. There is the weekly Sabbath that is a commandment of God and part of God’s eternal Ten Commandments and the annual sabbath(s) that are the yearly feasts days and are ordinances. The weekly Sabbath came before sin Genesis 2:1-3 the annual sabbath(s) was because of sin- after the fall.

Col 2:14 KJV
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

So we know this from Colossians 2:14:
1. They are handwritten
2. They are ordinances
3. They are contrary.

Does this fit the Sabbath commandment in any way? Absolutely not.
1. The Sabbath was finger-written by God (not by hand) Exodus 31:18 Exodus 32:16
2. The Sabbath is a commandment of God (not an ordinance). Exodus 20, Exodus 34:28
3. God said the Sabbath is holy and blessed (not cursed and contrary) Exodus 20:8-11 Genesis 2:1-3
Note: once God blesses something man cannot reverse it Num 23:20, so one would need a thus saith the Lord to do away with God's holy Sabbath day, which does not exist.

What Colossians 2:14 is referring to:

1. They are ordinances that have to do with sacrifices

Exodus 12:43 And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the ordinance of the Passover: (also called sabbath)
Ezekiel 43:18 And He said to me, “Son of man, thus says the Lord God: ‘These are the ordinances for the altar on the day when it is made, for sacrificing burnt offerings on it, and for sprinkling blood on it.

2. They were handwritten
2 Chronicles 33:8 Neither will I any more remove the foot of Israel from out of the land which I have appointed for your fathers; so that they will take heed to do all that I have commanded them, according to the whole law and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.
Deuteronomy 31:24 So it was, when Moses had completed writing the words of this law in a book, when they were finished,

3. They were contrary
Deuteronomy 31:26 “Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there as a witness against you;

All the annual sabbath(s) feast day ordinances pointed forward to Jesus who became our Passover Lamb 1 Corinthians 5:7 because the blood of animals was never good enough to take away the sins of the world Hebrews 10:1-10 but the blood of Jesus can cleanse us of all sins as He is our High Priest and Mediator and we can go directly to Him instead of sacrificing animals when we have a change in heart and repent from our sins 1 John 1:9 and walking in Christ in His commandments (obedience) to Him. John 14:15-18

When Paul teaches that Christians do not have to keep the Sabbath, he speaks of the holy days that were specific to the Jews. He is not saying—and does not say—that we do not have to keep any holy days at all. In context, Paul is dealing with Judaizers, who were telling Gentile Christians they had to be circumcised and keep the Old Covenant law that had passed away, which would include the Sabbath and other holy days, in order to be saved. Some overlook this fact when they use Paul’s epistle to the Romans against the necessity of keeping the Third Commandment.

Paul again is referring to the annual sabbath(s) feast days that have to do with the old temple sacrifices that all pointed to Jesus. Sin is defined as breaking God's law and Paul quotes from the unit of Ten to define sin Romans 7:7 that God said no editing Deut 4:2

Paul and the apostles kept every Sabbath long after the cross so Col 2:14 KJV is not referring to the weekly Sabbath commandment- Acts 13:42, Acts 13:44, Acts 18:4 and Jesus expected His followers to be keeping decades after the cross Matthew 24:20 and the Sabbath, will continue for all eternity for God's people Isaiah 66:22-23

During the first few decades of Church history, the question of Jewish-Gentile relations with the Church and the law was a hot topic. As long as the Temple was standing, Christians of Jewish descent were free to attend the Temple and keep certain aspects of the Old Law, as long as they did not teach these things to be essential for salvation.

Many will claim the Catholic is in grave error here because Hebrews 4:9 declares: “So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.” And a surface reading here does appear to bind Christians to the seventh day. However, the context within verses 4-8 greatly clarifies things for us:


The context makes clear that the Jewish “seventh day” has been superseded, or, more properly, fulfilled, in “another day,” “a certain day,” that is a new “Sabbath rest for the people of God.” What day is this? In Hebrews, it is not so much a day at all as it is a person: Jesus Christ. In fact, the entire discussion of “the Sabbath rest” disappears into the discussion of our “great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God” (4:14ff). It is Jesus Christ himself who actualizes the “rest” that was merely foreshadowed by the Sabbath.

“End of discussion,” say our Protestant friends.“There is no longer any such thing as a day that binds Christians in the New Covenant. Jesus is the fulfillment of the Sabbath, not some day we have to go to church.” And they are actually correct, but only partially. Jesus is the fulfillment of the Sabbath rest in the sense that only he can actualize the “rest” the Sabbath symbolized.

In Hebrews 10:1-26, we see movement toward tagging on the Church as fulfillment of all that was merely shadow in the Old Covenant and not just Jesus Christ in the abstract. And this makes sense only when we understand that “the Church” is the body of Christ, or Christ himself extended into the world (cf. Eph. 1:22-23).



As Christians, we “enter into the sanctuary” through baptism—bodies washed with pure water—and the Eucharist—his flesh—thus enters the necessity of the Church.

So if Christians are bound to keep the third commandment, and it involves “meeting together,” but not on the Sabbath, what day are we commanded to meet?

In Scripture, whenever we see Christians meeting to worship the Lord, receive Communion, take up collections—apart from the synagogue—it is either “daily,” or especially, it’s “on the first day of the week” (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2). It is true that you often see St. Paul entering into the synagogue on the Sabbath (Acts 13:14-44, 16:13, 18:4). However, in each instance, his purpose was to proclaim the truth about Christ to the Jews. These are not specifically Christian gatherings. But notice what we find in Acts 2:46:


Paul and his companions attended the temple, but “the breaking of bread” occurred in the house “churches” of Christians. “The breaking of bread,” by the way, is a Eucharistic phrase in St. Luke’s writings. For example, when Paul was in Troas in Acts 20:7, we read: “On the first day of the week, when we gathered together to break bread.” Luke 24:30-31 records that Cleopas and an unnamed disciple’s “eyes were opened,” and they recognized Jesus “in the breaking of the bread.” And according to Luke 24:1 and 13, this encounter was also on the first day of the week! Paul never says, “On the Sabbath, when we gathered to break bread.” Instead, the “breaking of bread” in Luke 24 and in Acts 20 occurs on the first day of the week.

It’s important to remember that when we talk about biblical “churches,” we mean the designated homes for “church” gatherings and specifically for “the breaking of bread.”


So those “homes” were actually house “churches” in which “the breaking of bread” happened, and it happened on the first day of the week: Sunday.

Sunday Is Not the Sabbath

If we believe we have to "honor the Sabbath day," why aren’t Catholics obliged to attend Mass on Saturday instead of Sunday?

www.catholic.com

We were warned in scripture that the Sabbath would be changed, but not by God Dan 7:25 and we see history fulfilling this prophecy we are warned about.


It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.


Q. Have you any other proofs that they(Protestants) are not guided by the Scripture?
A. Yes; so many, that we cannot admit more than a mere specimen into this small work. They reject much that is clearly contained in Scripture, and profess more that is nowhere discoverable in that Divine Book.
Q. Give some examples of both?
A. They should, if the Scripture were their only rule, wash the feet of one another, according to the command of Christ, in the 13th chap. of St. John; —they should keep, not the Sunday, but the Saturday, according to the commandment, "Remember thou keep holy the SABBATH-day;" for this commandment has not, in Scripture, been changed or abrogated;...
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 101 Imprimatuer

Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

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.

Jesus in His own Words reminds us to obey the commandments of God quoting right from the unit of Ten over following the traditions of man. Matthew 15:3-9

The choice is ours, do we follow God the way He asks, or follow the more popular path made by man.

 

[BobRyan]

*Permission to post in full*​

If we believe we have to "honor the Sabbath day," why aren’t Catholics obliged to attend Mass on Saturday instead of Sunday?​

@The Liturgist

One of the most appealing teachings of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination is their insistence that Christians must obey the Ten Commandments . . . all ten of them. They rightly expose the errant thinking among many Protestant Christian sects that claims, “We don’t have to keep the Ten Commandments for salvation anymore.”

Of course, as Jesus reminds us:


Given our agreement on this point, the Seventh-day Adventist commonly asks: “If you believe we have to keep the Fourth (our Third) Commandment, why aren’t Catholics obliged to attend Mass on Saturdays instead of Sunday?”

Certainly the number of Christian denominations affirming all TEN of the TEN Commandments is very large -- (even Sunday keeping denominations do that).

As noted many times --
Almost every Christian denomination on Earth affirms the continued *"unit of TEN" for Christians today
[*]The Baptist Confession of Faith section 19
[*]The Westminster Confession of Faith section 19
[*]Voddie Baucham
[*]C.H. Spurgeon
[*]D.L. Moody
[*]Dies Domini by Pope John Paul II
[*]D. James Kennedy
[*]R.C. Sproul
[*]many others as well..

================= since the OP is so focused on the Catholic Church scenario...

In a recent Catholic church newsletter it stated, "Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. 'The Day of the Lord' [dies domini] was chosen, not from any direction noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power..... People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become [Seventh-Day] Adventists, and keep Saturday holy." Saint Catherine Catholic Church Sentinel, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995.


=====
. (from "The Faith Explained" page 243.))

"we know that in the O.T it was the seventh day of the week - the Sabbath day - which was observed as the Lord's day. that was the law as God gave it...'remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.. the early Christian church determined as the Lord's day the first day of the week. That the church had the right to make such a law is evident...

The reason for changing the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday lies in the fact that to the Christian church the first day of the week had been made double holy...

nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday..that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many non-Catholic who say they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church

========================================

Since we may run the risk of many wishing to edit/delete/bend the Sabbath commandment while hoping we don't actually quote it... I am promoting this quote of it to this first page.

Exodus 20​

8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 For six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; on it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male slave or your female slave, or your cattle, or your resident who stays with you. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in them, and He rested on the seventh day; for that reason the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.​

 

[The Liturgist]

Scripture will always trump any man-made document

Do you consider the writings of EGW to be Scripture? Because at a minimum, even a completely impartial observer would be forced to conclude they exert a strong influence on SDA interpretation of Scripture. Indeed within the Adventist church, the interpretation of Scripture seems to be much more homogenous than within any other Christian denomination.

 

[The Liturgist]

Paul again is referring to the annual sabbath(s) feast days that have to do with the old temple sacrifices that all pointed to Jesus.

That, frankly, is not indicated by the text.

At any rate, the Church does have the authority, granted in Matthew 16:18, to change the day designated for rest, to change the requirements for Gentile membership so as to exclude circumcision and adherence to the Kosher diet, as seen in Acts 15, and to otherwise act in a manner that would preserve the apostolic faith.

In the Orthodox Church, and in the Eastern Catholic Churches which share its liturgical traditions, the Sabbath remains in use as a day of holy worship focused around commemorating the Theotokos and also those who have reposed and are awaiting the Resurrection, based on the template of Holy Saturday, the ultimate Sabbath in which Christ our God rested in the tomb. Then, on Sunday, a liturgy commemorating the resurrection of our Lord happens, and it was at such a liturgy in the Cenacle that the twelve Apostles including St. Matthias, who replaced Judas Iscariot, received the Holy Spirit. Today the building housing the Cenacle is the Cathedral of St. Mark in Jerusalem, for the Cenacle was located in St. Mark’s house, and it is home to the Syriac Orthodox presence in that city (there is another site which some claim is the cenacle, where the crusaders built a Gothic structure, but the Muslims claim it is of some significance to them, and the Jews claim it is the tomb of King David; I am inclined to believe the Jews in this instance, because the history accompanying the Syriac Orthodox site is more compelling).

Likewise, the Roman Catholic Church celebrates the Mass on every Saturday throughout the year.

So really, to challenge the Orthodox and Catholic position, you would have to somehow prove that worship on Sunday is prohibited, and there are no texts in scripture which indicate that.

By the way, I know of a lovely Adventist convert to the Coptic Orthodox Church who out of habit attends their Saturday morning liturgies, and that is regarded as completely fine. One difference between the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches is that for the most part there are no holy days of obligation in Orthodoxy, but rather, typically, most Orthodox churches require one avails oneself of the Sacrament of Reconciliation and takes Communion at least once each year.

 

[The Liturgist]

In a recent Catholic church newsletter it stated, "Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. 'The Day of the Lord' [dies domini] was chosen, not from any direction noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power..... People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become [Seventh-Day] Adventists, and keep Saturday holy." Saint Catherine Catholic Church Sentinel, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995.

You know Bob, frankly, very few people inside or outside the Roman Catholic Church care about what was printed in the newsletter of a parish in a tiny Michigan town of less than 5,000 residents more than 28 years ago.

 

[ozso]

Do you consider the writings of EGW to be Scripture? Because at a minimum, even a completely impartial observer would be forced to conclude they exert a strong influence on SDA interpretation of Scripture. Indeed within the Adventist church, the interpretation of Scripture seems to be much more homogenous than within any other Christian denomination.

Not being homogeneous with any other Christian denomination, is what makes it the remnant that God set aside according to what I've been told.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

That, frankly, is not indicated by the text.

Only if you ignore Col 2:14 KJV and all the context it provides.

At any rate, the Church does have the authority, granted in Matthew 16:18, to change the day designated for rest, to change the requirements for Gentile membership so as to exclude circumcision and adherence to the Kosher diet, as seen in Acts 15, and to otherwise act in a manner that would preserve the apostolic faith.

No church has authority to change God’s Word as we are told Prov 30:5-6 or His commandments Deut 4:2 and even warns us going away from God’s Word is danger Isaiah 8:20. God describes His church in scripture and its a remnant who keep the commandments of God Rev 12:17 KJV not a church who changes God’s teachings. God’s people keep God’s commandments Rev 14:12, they do not change them. Dan 7:25

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Do you consider the writings of EGW to be Scripture? Because at a minimum, even a completely impartial observer would be forced to conclude they exert a strong influence on SDA interpretation of Scripture. Indeed within the Adventist church, the interpretation of Scripture seems to be much more homogenous than within any other Christian denomination.

EGW is not above the scriptures and she says that herself. A true prophet brings the light back to God’s Word a false one says or thinks they are above God’s Word and tries to change it.

 

[ozso]

Only if you ignore Col 2:14 KJV and all the context it provides.

No church has authority to change God’s Word as we are told Prov 30:5-6 or His commandments Deut 4:2 and even warns us going away from God’s Word is danger Isaiah 8:20. God describes His church in scripture and its a remnant who keep the commandments of God Rev 12:17 KJV not a church who changes God’s teachings. God’s people keep God’s commandments Rev 14:12, they do not change them. Dan 7:25

And yet there's no argument that circumcision, a primary covenant and commandment, was lawfully abolished by the apostolic church.

If the church had the authority to eliminate something as substantial as circumcision, there was the authority to eliminate the sabbath as well.

It's either that, or the church had no authority to change anything and Christianity is a sham.

 

[ozso]

EGW is not above the scriptures and she says that herself. A true prophet brings the light back to God’s Word a false one says they are above God’s Word and tries to change it.

EGW changed the way scripture is interpreted and convinced others her way was the right way to interpret. Not too unlike Charles Taze Russell and Marry Baker Eddy.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

EGW changed the way scripture is interpreted and convinced others her way was the right way to interpret. Not too unlike Charles Taze Russell and Marry Baker Eddy.

No, she didn’t, she just reminded us what God wrote and God spoke and said to Remember which most people forgot.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

And yet there's no argument that circumcision, a primary covenant and commandment, was lawfully abolished by the apostolic church.

Circumcision was never one of the Ten Commandments and following scripture is different than not following scripture.

 

[ozso]

No, she didn’t, she just reminded us what God wrote and God spoke and said to Remember which most people forgot.

Please, I read about her counter interpretations though her visions from SDA material. That's the whole premise of the SDA denomination. EGW got special visions and messages from an angel telling her how to properly interpret scripture, which is why SDA doctrine is different from the rest of Christian doctrine. And why the SDA are supposed to be the set apart remnant.

 

[ozso]

Circumcision was never one of the Ten Commandments and following scripture is different than not following scripture.

It was a vital holy commandment of God nonetheless. A holy covenant between God and man. So how is it that the Church that has no authority to change God’s commandments, had any authority to change that?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

It was a vital holy commandment of God nonetheless. A holy covenant between God and man. So how is it that the Church that has no authority to change God’s commandments, had any authority to change that?

You’re confusing the apostles of the NT with the Catholic church, the apostles were not Catholic, they were commandment keeping people who kept the Sabbath. Scripture and what is outside scripture is not the same Isaiah 8:20. No church has the authority to change God’s Word.

Circumcision was always been about the heart, it was an outward expression of removing sin. Sin is still defined in scripture as breaking God’s law 1 John 3:4 and the apostle Paul points to the Ten to define what sin is. Romans 7:7. We are called not to sin. 1 John 3:8 and its what Jesus came to save us from Matthew 1:21 not in.

 

[atpollard]

Sunday Is Not the Sabbath​

Neither is Thursday.
I have to wonder at the number of topics that WANT to argue this EXACT POINT whether so many people are really confused that Sunday is Saturday? I have NEVER, personally, met any person over the age of four that did not know the "days of the week" and the difference between Sunday (the first day of the week) and Saturday (the seventh day of the week).

The interesting point of all these topics is that they are NEVER ABOUT people confusing Saturday with Sunday (except as a 'strawman fallacy' to allow the poster to launch into a rant about the REAL TOPIC.

Why is it that they want to FORBID ME from worshiping God on any day except the day of their choosing?
Why are they judging me "with respect to sabbaths and festivals" when the Apostle Paul ... in SCRIPTURE ... specifically prohibits them from that very act?
One might question whether someone really is a Christian that deliberately and openly and proudly violates a direct Apostolic instruction presented in the Bible. In any event ... it has NOTHING to to with people confusing Saturday and Sunday like the titles always claim.

For the record, exactly when is the "sabbath"?

• "morning and evening" as God claims in Genesis 1
• "sunset to sunset" per Jewish tradition?

If one is going to place SALVATION on correctly honoring the Sabbath, one should get the hours correct.

 

[ozso]

You’re confusing the apostles with the Catholic Church, the apostles wee not catholic, they were commandment keeping people who kept the Sabbath. Scripture and what is outside scripture. No hhurch has the authority to change God’s Word.

Circumcision was always about the heart, it was an outward expression of removing sin. Sin is still defined in scripture as breaking God’s law 1 John 3:4 and the apostles point to the Ten to define what sin is. Romans 7:7.

I'm not confusing anything. The Apostolic church was started by the Apostles. And then the Apostolic Fathers such as Cement, Ignatius and Polycarp, whom the Apostles personally taught and chose as their successors took over. That's what I go by, the writings of the Apostles and Apostolic Fathers of the 1st and 2nd century one and only Church of Jesus Christ. They are the ones who abolished circumcision and they are the ones who instituted Sunday worship. Not Constantine in 321 like EGW led you to believe.

 

[BobRyan]

Do you consider the writings of EGW to be Scripture?

no - nether is Paul "Scripture" in fact we are missing at least one of his letters entirely.

Scripture is inspired by God not by Paul or by Ellen White.

The many prophets in 1 Cor 14 were ALSO "not scripture", they were inspired by God and none of them wrote text that was added to the Bible

Because at a minimum, even a completely impartial observer would be forced to conclude they exert a strong influence on SDA interpretation of Scripture.

The idea that two people are not allowed to agree on what the Bible says in this or that text - if one of them is inspired by God - is not a Bible teaching found in any Christian denomination on planet Earth.

Have you thought that through - at all?.

 

[BobRyan]

EGW changed the way scripture is interpreted

false