What day did they gather???

[ricker]

You seem to think that God called Israel and wanted them to be bottled up and hedged in. I think God called Israel to convert those around them, thus bringing them into the fold, and so on and so forth.

I seem to remember God telling the Israelites to utterly destroy other nations and to have nothing to do with the ones that remained. The Great Commission was a new proclamation when given by Jesus, never given to Israel.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

This is talking about the 7th day sabbath.

A careful review of the entire chapter yields these additional results:

To the eunuchs who keep My sabbaths,
And choose what pleases Me,
And hold fast My covenant
​

It's pretty clear that Isaiah is not limiting his comments to the seventh-day sabbath. He has also included the other sabbaths listed in Leviticus 23, as well as the entire old covenant.

Not one of those passages means they had abandoned the sabbath and began worshiping on Sunday.

The passages I cited were in response to this request from you: "show me one verse, ONE single verse that shows the disciples worshiping on Sunday." I surpassed your request by providing two such verses.

We know worship happened more then on the sabbath.

If so, then I must wonder why anyone would object to the idea that a person would participate in corporate worship on days other than Saturday.

Are you telling me that the sabbath still holds for Israel but not for Gentiles?

No. I was commenting that the sabbath was not given to all Gentiles. I was not commenting on the role of the sabbath for Jews.

Supposedly when you come to Christ you do away with the law, including the sabbath.

I do not believe that I do away with the law. I also do not believe that Christ did away with the law. These are merely beliefs you have assigned to me.

So if a Jew wanted to become Christian, what happens to him?

He becomes a Christian.

Are you asking what day he would worship on? If so, I would hope he would worship God every day, just as he did when he was a Jew.

BFA

 

[honorthesabbath]

The following Catholic tract was originally published in The Catholic Mirror (the magazine of Cardinal Gibbons of Baltimore), on September 2, 1893. In it, a contrast is made between the Biblical faith and practice of the Hebrews, the Seventh-day Adventists, and the other Protestant churches, in order to ridicule the usual Protestant position in regard to Sunday:
"The Israelite respects the authority of the Old Testament only, but the Adventist who is a Christian, accepts the New Testament on the same ground as the Old, viz.: an inspired record also. He finds that the Bible, his teacher is consistent in both parts; that the Redeemer, during His mortal life, never kept any other day than Saturday. The Gospels plainly evince to him this fact; while in the pages of the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles and the Apocalypse [Revelation], not the vestige of an act canceling the Saturday arrangement [seventh-day Sabbathkeeping] can be found.
"The Protestant world at its birth [as he thinks, at the time of the Sixteenth Century Reformation] found the Christian Sabbath too strongly entrenched to run counter to its existence [to oppose Sundaykeeping]; it [Protestantism] was therefore planted under the necessity of acquiescing in the arrangement, thus implying the Church's right to change the day . . . The Christian Sabbath [Sunday] is therefore to this day the acknowledged offspring of the Catholic Church, as Spouse of the Holy Ghost, without a word of remonstrance from the Protestant world."--The Christian Sabbath, 2nd ed., The Catholic Mirror, 1893, p. 31.

 

[honorthesabbath]

"The Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant."--The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4 [This is the political weekly newspaper at the Cleveland Catholic Diocese].

 

[honorthesabbath]

"The Adventists are the only body of Christians with the Bible as their teacher, who can find no warrant in its pages for the change of day from the seventh to the first . . . Reason and common sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible."--Catholic Mirror, September 2 and December 23, 1893 [The Catholic Mirror, a Baltimore journal was at this time the official organ of Cardinal Gibbons].




"Prove to me from the Bible alone that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no such law in the Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone. The Bible says 'Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.' The Catholic Church says, No. By my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day and command you to keep holy the first day of the week. And ho! The entire civilized world bows down in reverent obedience to the command of the Holy Catholic Church."--Priest Thomas Enright, CSSR, President of Redemptorist College, Kansas City, Mo., in a lecture at Hartford, Kansas, February 18, 1884, and printed in the Hartford Kansas Weekly Call, February 22, 1884, and the American Sentinel, a New York Roman Catholic journal in June 1893, page 173.


"Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act . . . AND THE ACT IS A MARK of her ecclesiastical power."--from the office of Cardinal Gibbons, through Chancellor H.F. Thomas, November 11, 1895.

 

[honorthesabbath]

Act 5:42And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.

The bible proves that; the preaching and teaching of the gospel was not resticted to the Sabbath day after Jesus was crucified.

Reasoning that we should follow Jesus example is a mind game because Jesus was born to die as the sinless lamb of God.
We are to follow His teachings and doctrines, but we cant walk on water nor are we compelled to be circumcized.

Truth taught is, Gentiles were not taught to be circumcized, which is a commitment to keep the law.

The fact that the Holy Spirit sent Paul to the Gentiles and the others apostles to the Jews proves that Gentiles were not taught to become Jews.

Socrates Scholasticus (5th-century historian), wrote in A.D. 439:
"Although almost all assemblies throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this."

Sozomen (5th-century historian), Ecclesiastical History, book 7, chap. 19:
"The people of Constantinople, and almost everywhere, assemble together on the Sabbath as well as on the first day of the week, which custom is never observed at Rome or at Alexandria."

 

[Pythons]

Christians have always assembled together on Sunday since Apostolic times....
...To worship Christ as God.

For a time Christians also assembled at the Jewish Temple & Synagogues....
...But as Christ Himself predicted - the Christians would be thrown out.
...And as always the case with Christ's teachings - they ended up being true.

In any event Christians could not worship Christ at the Jewish Temple or Synagogue...
...The main reason for going there was simply to be with friends and Family.
...And to share the Gospel of Christ with them.

 

[Stryder06]

I seem to remember God telling the Israelites to utterly destroy other nations and to have nothing to do with the ones that remained. The Great Commission was a new proclamation when given by Jesus, never given to Israel.

If I'm not mistaken God had them wipe out the heathen nations that either inhabited Canaan, or that attacked them. Take Rahab as an example. Just as she came to join Israel, so others could too.

 

[Cribstyl]

Socrates Scholasticus (5th-century historian), wrote in A.D. 439:
"Although almost all assemblies throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this."

Sozomen (5th-century historian), Ecclesiastical History, book 7, chap. 19:
"The people of Constantinople, and almost everywhere, assemble together on the Sabbath as well as on the first day of the week, which custom is never observed at Rome or at Alexandria."

If you read what Socrates and Sozomen is addressing in your exerts, you'd know that they were comparing regoinal celebration of the weeks between the resurrection and the day of Penticost.

This is a prime example how people mislead others using history.

 

[Loveaboveall]

I believe there is much confusion in discussing this subject because at the heart of the disagreement is what the new/old covenants were/are and what they mean.


I wonder has anyone else considered that the "new" covenant could acutally be the oldest of covenants and the "old" covenant was made because of the the world rejecting God?

 

[mmksparbud]

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."

John 14:15 "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

John 14:21 "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."

1st John 2:3, 4 "And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."

 

[Cribstyl]

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."

John 14:15 "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

John 14:21 "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."

1st John 2:3, 4 "And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."

Having read your response, it seems that you're presenting a keyword game.
Which one of these contexts are actually talking about the ten commandments?


About Rev 22:14. You're willing to bet your life that this context is talking about the 10 commandments given to Moses?
To uphold SDA doctrines you're not willing for a moment to consider that in Rev22, John is talking about the commandments given by Jesus Christ. for the world to believe in Him and His sacrifice for sin as the Lamb of God?


Most bibles use the manuscript that sayeth..
ESV - Rev 22:14 -Blessed are those who wash their robes,* so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Footnote:
* Some manuscripts do his commandments


.............................................................................................


About John 14:15 "If ye love me, keep my commandments."
And John 14:21
You're willing to twist clear facts and say that Jesus is talking specifically about the commandments given to Moses rather than what He made clear in this context of John 14.
Jesus made it clear that it was His words and not Moses words.

Jhn 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
Jhn 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
Jhn 14:25 These things have I spoken unto you, being [yet] present with you.
Jhn 14:26 But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
..............................................................................................

About you adding 1st John 2:3, 4. Your agenda to use the keywords " keep my commandments" is tranparent why would you confuse the ministry of Moses with what being said of Jesus

1Jo 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 1Jo 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world. 1Jo 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 1Jo 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 1Jo 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 1Jo 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked. 1Jo 2:7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

 

[mmksparbud]

Like Jesus said--"His words are of the Father's and not mine." The 10 commandments were the only ones written on stone by the hand of God Himself.---And those are the words that Jesus is speaking--His Fathers--doesn't matter what faith your are--Jesus spoke the words of His father--God did not write in stone all the rest of the laws that the Israelites were to keep--those He dictated to Moses and Moses wrote them down.The 10 were the only ones that were in the ark--they were written on stone--and to this day when something is written in stone it means that is can not be changed-And God changes not. Jesus broke down the 10 commandments into 2 catagories--the 1st 4 deal with mans relationship to God and the last are mans relationship to man--"On these 2 hang all the law"--The 10 commandments simply put are the words of God, which Jesus speaks and came to clean up from all the 6 million add ons that were clouding those words. But they are kept because we love our God, because we want to be with Him and we are preparing our characters, our souls--to be with Him. In 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 name remain. And it shall come to pass that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come and worship before me, saith the LORD." Since this is talking about the new earth and the new heavens, which He recreates after He comes back, then from one sabbath to another means that the Sabbath will still be kept on the new earth. God's words--not Moses'--God does not change.

 

[Cribstyl]

Like Jesus said--"His words are of the Father's and not mine." The 10 commandments were the only ones written on stone by the hand of God Himself.---And those are the words that Jesus is speaking--His Fathers--doesn't matter what faith your are--Jesus spoke the words of His father--God did not write in stone all the rest of the laws that the Israelites were to keep--those He dictated to Moses and Moses wrote them down.The 10 were the only ones that were in the ark--they were written on stone--and to this day when something is written in stone it means that is can not be changed-And God changes not. Jesus broke down the 10 commandments into 2 catagories--the 1st 4 deal with mans relationship to God and the last are mans relationship to man--"On these 2 hang all the law"--The 10 commandments simply put are the words of God, which Jesus speaks and came to clean up from all the 6 million add ons that were clouding those words. But they are kept because we love our God, because we want to be with Him and we are preparing our characters, our souls--to be with Him. In 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 name remain. And it shall come to pass that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come and worship before me, saith the LORD." Since this is talking about the new earth and the new heavens, which He recreates after He comes back, then from one sabbath to another means that the Sabbath will still be kept on the new earth. God's words--not Moses'--God does not change.

Let's get the facts right. You're shooting skuds missles and wont dwell on any one point to establish truth.

Jesus said; "Moses gave you the law".....
John said..."The law came by Moses and grace and truth came by Jesus Christ". By you presenting Jesus saying: the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. " but the context of John 14 is not about the ten commandment. It's about believing in Jesus and doing as He commands. You're implying that Jesus was sent to teach the law that Moses taught, using a word game.


The fact are clearly according to what covenants they represented to us.
If Jesus came to teach the law, why would He make these quotes?

Luk 16:16The law and the prophets [were] until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

Luk 16:31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

The isolated text you're cherry picking exposes that you're creating a "keyword link" that ignors the context you take them from.

Why should I have to repost and expound on your text to show the context does not say what you used them for?

Please help me to see that 1 of your arguments is truth and I will say AMEN to it.

 

[tzadik]

The fact are clearly according to what covenants they represented to us.
If Jesus came to teach the law, why would He make these quotes?

Luk 16:16The law and the prophets [were] until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

Luk 16:31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

The isolated text you're cherry picking exposes that you're creating a "keyword link" that ignors the context you take them from.

Why should I have to repost and expound on your text to show the context does not say what you used them for?

Please help me to see that 1 of your arguments is truth and I will say AMEN to it.

What do those two verses represent? The Law and the prophets were until John, since that time the kingdom of God is peached, and every man presseth into it. What do you understand that verse to mean? That after John---the Law and the Prophets no longer held any value?

Your second verse is not proving your point, but rather against it. It’s saying that if someone does not believe the Law and the Prophets, they won’t even believe someone who rises from the dead. Just as Yeshua stated in John 5:46-47. The Law and the Prophets point to Yeshua. If you don’t believe the Law, you don’t believe Yeshua. Take out the Law of God and the prophets, take out Yeshua. Take out the Law and the Prophets, you might as well remove all the prophecies about His second coming, His Kingdom, the re-gathering of His people, etc.

 

[tzadik]

Act 5:42And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.

The bible proves that; the preaching and teaching of the gospel was not resticted to the Sabbath day after Jesus was crucified.

I find it interesting that you would assume that people were EVER restricted to preaching, teaching and worshipping on the Sabbath day. This wasn't, isn’t and never will be the case.
The Sabbath was one day sanctified, set apart and made Holy by God. 6 days of the week were meant primarily for working, but the seventh was to be hallowed unto the Lord. It is the only day [each week] that God has ever specifically claimed as His own. (aside from His Appointed times)
But by no means did God say—“This shall be the ONLY day anyone was allowed to preach, teach or worship Me.” That would be absurd.
So Acts 5:42, Acts 2:46 and even Luke 24:53, only prove that they also worshipped God on other days. Worshipping on Monday does not do away with God’s Sabbath.
What is crystal clear throughout Scripture is the fact that God never hallowed, set apart or even ‘applauded louder’ to anyone who ‘gathered’ to worship on a Sunday. It is not the day that God set apart as His Sabbath and therefore can never be called a Sabbath. God only chose one day and named it a Sabbath perpetually. He called Himself the Lord of the Sabbath. Not the Lord of the Sunday. They are His Sabbaths [Exodus 31:13, Leviticus 19:3, 30, Leviticus 26:2, Isaiah 56:4] Isaiah 58:13 says “If because of the sabbath, you turn your foot from doing your own pleasure on My holy day, And call the sabbath a delight, the holy day of the LORD honorable, And honor it, desisting from your own ways, From seeking your own pleasure and speaking your own word, Then you will take delight in the LORD, And I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; And I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father, For the mouth of the LORD has spoken."
So you see the Sabbath is the day God decided to hallow, sanctify and set apart.
Of course you may worship on any other day you please, but by doing so, you cannot replace the only day God has separated from the rest of them. His Holy day.
So although the early believers in Acts might of met every single day of the week in the temple, they made sure they were there on the Sabbath day, to hear the word of God, and to set the day apart and to sanctify it to the Lord. Because this is why He set it apart and made it holy.

 

[mmksparbud]

Matt 5:17,18 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets:I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you that not one jot or one tittle shall in no way pass from the law till all be fullfilled." All has not been fullfilled. Jesus has to come back, otherwise, it still all would have been for nothing. It's not finished till the end of sin,Satan, death, and tears. When Christ died He said it is finished--up to that point. He paid the price for sin--now we wait for the best part--when He returns for us. We wait for the sins that were placed on the lamb, and the lamb sacrificed, and then the sins transfered to the scapegoat - and the scapegoat was released into the wilderness-Satan--and he takes the blame. Spends 1000 years years in an empty, wilderness of a planet and then all evil is thrown into the lake of fire and utterly destroyed--fin. But hey, it's still, so far, a free country and you can believe what you want and besides--pretty soon--we all will know. It's got to be pretty soon, this earth can't take much more before it implodes!! (OK--Don't misunderstand that--only God will destroy the whole earth--I know that.")

 

[Cribstyl]

You've raised more than a dozen issues from the scriptures thus far and I wish we were still trying to understand the first one together.
Why post those issue if you're not willing to discuss them? (I know) I've read these packages arguments from other posters and SDA pioneers. I guess they are like scriptures to you.

I've responded to the first 4 scriptures you've posted, then you run off to post more and you're giving only keywords implication with the scriptures.

I will respond to this post as I did before, in hope that you will not run off too soon.

Matt 5:17,18 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets:I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you that not one jot or one tittle shall in no way pass from the law till all be fullfilled." All has not been fullfilled. Jesus has to come back, otherwise, it still all would have been for nothing. It's not finished till the end of sin,Satan, death, and tears.

These and most scriptures must be understood in their context. Can you show us from the books of the law where Jesus promised to come back??? If not, you making the claim that Jesus has to come back, is not written in the law.

Jesus is explaining that the Books of the Law (Genesis to Deuteronomy) and the books of all the prophets( Joshua-Malachi) have promises and prophesies that must be fulfilled. I am the Christ and I came to fulfull all what is written, not to destroy it by changing the story. Any change would mean that God lied or made a mistake. I am not come to destroy the books by making changes, I am here to make sure every letter and comma becomes truth. Nothing will change untill everthing promised in the books of the law Have come to pass.

When Christ died He said it is finished--up to that point. He paid the price for sin--

Amen, you reconized fulfilled prophesies and promises up to the point of His death, as written in the law and the prophets.
It is important to know and remember that His blood is the seal of the New Covenant, not the covenant made with Moses at Sinai.
We'll talk about the covenants later, I'm sure.

now we wait for the best part--when He returns for us. We wait for the sins that were placed on the lamb, and the lamb sacrificed, and then the sins transfered to the scapegoat - and the scapegoat was released into the wilderness-Satan--and he takes the blame. Spends 1000 years years in an empty, wilderness of a planet and then all evil is thrown into the lake of fire and utterly destroyed--fin. But hey, it's still, so far, a free country and you can believe what you want and besides--pretty soon--we all will know. It's got to be pretty soon, this earth can't take much more before it implodes!! (OK--Don't misunderstand that--only God will destroy the whole earth--I know that.")

Say whaaaa? You're implying that the sins that Jesus died for are in a ceromonial proccess waiting to be place on the lamb?????? My understanding of scripture is, Jesus is that lamb. In my understanding, the sin of the world was already placed on Jesus the lamb of God before He sacrificed His life......... It's time that you present scriptures to make your case.

 

[Cribstyl]

What do those two verses represent? The Law and the prophets were until John, since that time the kingdom of God is peached, and every man presseth into it. What do you understand that verse to mean? That after John---the Law and the Prophets no longer held any value?

Welcome tzadik, your response is the way issues are often addressed @ CF. I love it, so I will respond accordingly.

I'm glad you're asking, but I did not devalue any part of the bible, which we can agree is written for knowledge and understanding of God's plans for mankind.

Both Luk 16:16 and Mat 11:9
are quotes of Jesus that we can apply to "understanding" (not reasoning) about what Jesus meant in Luke 16:16.
When we "reason" we often add, or take away from God's word. Understanding tries to apply what is written.

Matthew11 explains that John was more than a prophet. It explains John was the messenger who would prepare the way for Jesus.
John was a witness from God and Jesus was a greater witness of God (Jhn 5:36 )
Baptism is an answer that acknowledges what God's requires of us to be righteousness unto salvation (1Pe 3:21)

This is why Jesus(Mat 3:13) and all the children of Israel had to seek the baptism of John. (Mat 3:5)
Then all believers in Jesus as the Son of God were to be baptized believer in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus sent His apostles to preach and baptized those who would believe.(Rom 10:9)

The myth is, that Jesus were preaching the law and the prophets. The truth is explained by John is; The law came by Moses and grace and truth unto eternal life came by Jesus Christ. (Jhn 1:17)

The bottom line is that Luk 16:16 is meaning: The law and the Prophet were the rules of righteousness but from JohntheBaptist forward, the Gospels of the Kingdom is the message we're baptised and saved by.
This is also why Paul preached that we're not under the law.

Your second verse is not proving your point, but rather against it. It’s saying that if someone does not believe the Law and the Prophets, they won’t even believe someone who rises from the dead.

Just as Yeshua stated in John 5:46-47. The Law and the Prophets point to Yeshua. If you don’t believe the Law, you don’t believe Yeshua. Take out the Law of God and the prophets, take out Yeshua. Take out the Law and the Prophets, you might as well remove all the prophecies about His second coming, His Kingdom, the re-gathering of His people, etc.

Is that you final answer??????? You have some misunderstanding about what people believe.
This law is Holy, just and perfect, but if God declares we're not under the law, who's voice show we listen to? The laws says "the soul that sins it shall die". When Jesus says "I forgive you"...the law takes the back seat for mercy and grace to apply.

This does not mean we should sin.... Their are many teaching on how God require us to live as christians. Being adopted mean we should live like a child of God not like a sinner.
The gospel teaches compells us to live in love, that we may fulfill the law.
We dont find doctrines of the christian church from the law and the prophets.


Respects
CRIB

 

[Cribstyl]

I find it interesting that you would assume that people were EVER restricted to preaching, teaching and worshipping on the Sabbath day. This wasn't, isn’t and never will be the case.

I dont know where you sut and paste that quote from?? It's likely my argument is that Sunday worship, preaching, teaching is biblically reasonable. Against someone saying Sunday worship is the Mark of the Beast.

Before you misqoute me again, I'm not against Sabbathkeeping nor do I bash sabbatarian. Actually they are the one to condemn those who dont keep the Sabbath. One fact is, I dont agree with what many SabbathKeeper say and believe.

The Sabbath was one day sanctified, set apart and made Holy by God. 6 days of the week were meant primarily for working, but the seventh was to be hallowed unto the Lord. It is the only day [each week] that God has ever specifically claimed as His own. (aside from His Appointed times)

I disagree. If God claimed all the sabbaths as His, it's false to say otherwise.Exd(1)Lev(4)2Ch(1)Isa(1)Eze(10) What other God's claim sabbaths??
On the other hand , Sabbath was made for man to keep and enjoy rest, not for God to hold man hostage to the sin for commandments breaking.

But by no means did God say—“This shall be the ONLY day anyone was allowed to preach, teach or worship Me.” That would be absurd.
So Acts 5:42, Acts 2:46 and even Luke 24:53, only prove that they also worshipped God on other days. Worshipping on Monday does not do away with God’s Sabbath.
What is crystal clear throughout Scripture is the fact that God never hallowed, set apart or even ‘applauded louder’ to anyone who ‘gathered’ to worship on a Sunday. It is not the day that God set apart as His Sabbath and therefore can never be called a Sabbath. God only chose one day and named it a Sabbath perpetually. He called Himself the Lord of the Sabbath. Not the Lord of the Sunday. They are His Sabbaths [Exodus 31:13, Leviticus 19:3, 30, Leviticus 26:2, Isaiah 56:4] Isaiah 58:13 says “If because of the sabbath, you turn your foot from doing your own pleasure on My holy day, And call the sabbath a delight, the holy day of the LORD honorable, And honor it, desisting from your own ways, From seeking your own pleasure and speaking your own word, Then you will take delight in the LORD, And I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; And I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father, For the mouth of the LORD has spoken."
So you see the Sabbath is the day God decided to hallow, sanctify and set apart.
Of course you may worship on any other day you please, but by doing so, you cannot replace the only day God has separated from the rest of them. His Holy day.
So although the early believers in Acts might of met every single day of the week in the temple, they made sure they were there on the Sabbath day, to hear the word of God, and to set the day apart and to sanctify it to the Lord. Because this is why He set it apart and made it holy.

Not sure where you got these arguement from.......As far as I see, you're busting my ears with confusion of the issues.
I'm not having it.