Which day of the Week is the Bible Sabbath?

[bugkiller]

Unlikely.

But it was a specific day called aside for that unique purpose right from the beginning, and has remained so since then.

There is no law saying we have to meet on Sunday, we could gather every day, gather twice a week on Wednesdays and Thursdays; whatever. It's just that we have always gathered together on the first day of the week. Not according to Divine Mandate, but rather according to apostolic custom.

-CryptoLutheran

Our instructions are that we assemble. This does not include a day.

bukiller

 

[Lion King]

They would have continued to meet at the Synagogue and at the Temple...
...Continuing to show from the Scriptures that Jesus was indeed the Christ.
...However the Christians would not have celebrated the Lord's Supper at either place.

Scripture says Christians were called to assemble THEMSELVES together...
...This specific "Christian assembly" was held on the 1st day of the week.

Can you show me from the Scriptures that Christians only celebrated the LORD's Supper on Sunday? To be honest, I though they did that every time they met, and not only on a certain day (Sunday)?

 

[New_Wineskin]

You should also note the green highlighted. This is a temporary requirement only.

bugkiller

Not only temporary , it doesn't extend to those in lands where the Israelites are not to go .

 

[New_Wineskin]

Our instructions are that we assemble. This does not include a day.

bukiller

It also does not include that such assemblies are mandatory or what involves such assemblies .

 

[Lion King]

Unlikely.

But it was a specific day called aside for that unique purpose right from the beginning, and has remained so since then.

There is no law saying we have to meet on Sunday, we could gather every day, gather twice a week on Wednesdays and Thursdays; whatever. It's just that we have always gathered together on the first day of the week. Not according to Divine Mandate, but rather according to apostolic custom.

-CryptoLutheran

I thought the Scriptures say that Christians gathered EVERYDAY to break bread?

And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.

So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved. Acts 2:42-47

 

[bugkiller]

Not only temporary , it doesn't extend to those in lands where the Israelites are not to go .

It indicates with their gates. This would be outright absolute or protocol control.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

It also does not include that such assemblies are mandatory or what involves such assemblies .

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

I thought the Scriptures say that Christians gathered EVERYDAY to break bread?

And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.

So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved. Acts 2:42-47

This would be localized. If it applies to all Christians then the only place a Christian could live is Jerusalem.

bugkiller

 

[Lion King]

This would be localized. If it applies to all Christians then the only place a Christian could live is Jerusalem.

bugkiller

Can you prove that from Scripture?

 

[New_Wineskin]

Can you prove that from Scripture?

You yourself proved that by what you had underlined - they were in the vacinity of the Temple .

 

[Lion King]

You yourself proved that by what you had underlined - they were in the vacinity of the Temple.

The Scriptures says they met on a daily basis to break bread. Was this done only in Jerusalem?

 

[Frogster]

Which raises an even bigger question--

How many nearly-identical threads does it take for Seventh-Day Adventists to tell everyone here that their church thinks everyone should worship on Saturday rather than Sunday?

 

[Frogster]

what is the hoot dangy difference? Paul set no objective day, just do what your own mind says to do..We are adults.

i say Wednesday Sabbath...


rom 14:5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

 

[Frogster]

You yourself proved that by what you had underlined - they were in the vacinity of the Temple .

i was just about to say that..

 

[Frogster]

The Scriptures says they met on a daily basis to break bread. Was this done only in Jerusalem?

it wasn't done in Japan.

 

[Lysimachus]

Bob you need to read Jer 31:31-33. Here for your convience -

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

I highlighted some very important words here. New does not mean renew. Not according to means unlike. There is no way around these facts.

Hebrews 8:6 states the new covenant is based on something else besides the law with the phrase "better promises." This also would not be the same law of the OC issued at Sinai.

bugkiller

When you assume that a "different covenant" = "different law", then of course you're going to conclude that the Ten Commandments are no longer valid.

Do remember that if "New Covenant" = "different law", then that means that the rest of the 9 commandments must be replaced with entirely new laws as well.

Somehow, it is convenient for you to only replace the 4th. Unless you will tell me that the 9 were abolished too? I can't imagine you going that far.

The Tables of the Covenant have a law written "on them". The New Covenant is a covenant of the heart, where those same laws written on that Old Covenant Table is written on the tables of your heart.

The purpose of this covenant is to instill in the mind the importance of keeping God's laws out of true love--true faith that produces fruit. The covenant has changed, not the law.

"not according to the covenant I made with their fathers" does not = "not according to the laws", as a covenant is always a "contract", an "agreement", a "pact", a "promise" concerning the laws. The keeping of those laws was based on a NEW PROMISE (not the same kind of promise made with the Fathers).

Continue to interpret that a Covenant is identical to the laws themselves, and you're going to continue running into theological shipwreck.

The Ten Commandments were called the Covenant because there was a contract involved in keeping them.

Let's also not forget that the Tables of the Covenant were given in Exodus 20, while the blood of an Ox for the Old Covenant was not shed until Exodus 24.

This is why the Tables of the Covenant TRANSCEND the Old Covenant, and are "intrinsically tied to the Everlasting Covenant".

This is Perspicaciously demonstrated in Psalms 111:7-10.

 

[New_Wineskin]

The Scriptures says they met on a daily basis to break bread. Was this done only in Jerusalem?

You underlined it yourself . The text only showed in that vacinity . No evidence of of any other place .

 

[New_Wineskin]

it wasn't done in Japan.

They will now attempt to disprove that . Get your popcorn ready .

 

[TruthWave7]

Which raises an even bigger question--

How many nearly-identical threads does it take for Seventh-Day Adventists to tell everyone here that their church thinks everyone should worship on Saturday rather than Sunday?

The reason why there are so many threads on the Sabbath vs Sunday, is because its the biggest theological "Elephant" standing in the middle of this forum!

 

[Frogster]

When you assume that a "different covenant" = "different law", then of course you're going to conclude that the Ten Commandments are no longer valid.

Do remember that if "New Covenant" = "different law", then that means that the rest of the 9 commandments must be replaced with entirely new laws as well.

Somehow, it is convenient for you to only replace the 4th. Unless you will tell me that the 9 were abolished too? I can't imagine you going that far.

The Tables of the Covenant have a law written "on them". The New Covenant is a covenant of the heart, where those same laws written on that Old Covenant Table is written on the tables of your heart.

The purpose of this covenant is to instill in the mind the importance of keeping God's laws out of true love--true faith that produces fruit. The covenant has changed, not the law.

"not according to the covenant I made with their fathers" does not = "not according to the laws", as a covenant is always a "contract", an "agreement", a "pact", a "promise" concerning the laws. The keeping of those laws was based on a NEW PROMISE (not the same kind of promise made with the Fathers).

Continue to interpret that a Covenant is identical to the laws themselves, and you're going to continue running into theological shipwreck.

The Ten Commandments were called the Covenant because there was a contract involved in keeping them.

Let's also not forget that the Tables of the Covenant were given in Exodus 20, while the blood of an Ox for the Old Covenant was not shed until Exodus 24.

This is why the Tables of the Covenant TRANSCEND the Old Covenant, and are "intrinsically tied to the Everlasting Covenant".

This is Perspicaciously demonstrated in Psalms 111:7-10.

the 10 were in the old cov..

deut 4;13 And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments, and he wrote them on two tablets of stone.


and 2 cor 3;11 says they were not permanent, and hebrews clarifies the everlasting one, and it wasn't the old, as the writer was showing them to leave the old, the old that is abolished, 8;13, 10:9, to show the true everlasting cov, so u r wrong.


heb 13:20 Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant,