Which Day of the Week is the Sabbath?

[Jesus Is Real]

all I'm saying is that the old testament law and Pharisaical tradition said, don't go out or gather food on the Sabbath. Christ allowed both, because He was returning the Sabbath to its original purpose, which was to be a rest for manking, a blessing to them. He is emphasizing the fact that we are allowed to do works that are necessary on the Sabbath, and it is a good thing to do good works for others on the Sabbath.

Well put!

 

[PaleHorse]

agree 100%. i may have sort of missed it there, i guess i probably took the Exodus verse out of context, sorry about that.
but He was definitely ridding the Sabbath of all the Jewish traditions, and I also believe that in His Life, Death, and Resurrection, He fulfilled all the laws of God in every detail. He also abolished the Old Testament ceremonial and civil laws about the Sabbath, and returned it to its Creation ordinance of commemoration of 1. The Rest that God had from all His works, and 2. The Rest that Christ has given us in salvation. The fourth commandment is to Remember the Rest, to keep it holy, work six days and do all your work, but rest on the seventh day.
it is apparent from the New Testament (ignoring any other early church writings), that the early church came together for worship services on the first day of the week, to break bread, hear the Word, pray, give offerings, and share a fellowship meal.

So we should ignore the verses where Sabbath is specifically named as the day of worship and go with 2 possible worship meetings (both of which I can show did not replace the Sabbath at all)? You have two possible meetings, I have 86 that specify the Sabbath day - and I'm talking AFTER the Gospels.

PJW, you really seem like a sincere person who logically puts things together; I commend you for that. But let me address the two meetings you are referring to:

Acts 20:7 - And upon the first day of the week (yup, that's Sunday), when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

• The term "breaking bread" does not mean communion; otherwise the disciples were taking communion every single day (see Acts 2:46). The disciples broke bread every day - that is not a reason for observing a different day of worship - if you believe so then show me that in the scriptures where that belief comes from.
• Also, we see that during the course of the long meeting that bread is broken again (Acts 20:11), and it says they were eating; no mention of a ceremony such as communion, no mention of partaking of Christ's flesh and blood. Unless you can show there is a precedence established in any other place in the Bible of taking communion twice in one day then you cannot say that Acts 20:7 is talking about communion.
• When we read the story further we find that Paul starts out on Sunday morning for his trip; he travels about 30 km and then buys a boat ticket. Now, if Sunday had been any kind of holy day (especially a new "day of rest") then Paul would not have been traveling nor purchasing anything on that day.
  

The other is:
1 Corinthians 16:1-3 - Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week (yes, that is Sunday as well) let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.

• At the time of this story there was a great famine in Jerusalem. One can read about it in Romans 15:26 & Acts 11:26-30. Paul was on his way to Jerusalem so he was asking the church at Corinth to "lay by him in store". What does this mean? It's simple; it means to lay by and store up - Paul was asking them to gather together food items so he could take them to the saints in Jerusalem since they were starving. What's more, by including the word "him" in the phrase "lay by him in store" means to store up these food items at home! Paul was asking them to store up provisions at home, he was asking them to work, and this would not have been done if the first day of the week was considered a holy day. He would then come by their homes on his way to Jerusalem and load up. This is what the "collection for the saints" was - it was not a tithe or offering else Paul would have said so.
• Another point about the church at Corinth (which was who this epistle was written to); it was a seventh-day Sabbath keeping church as told us inActs 18:1-4. And when one reads these verses we find that there were about 78 Sabbaths kept while Paul was in Corinth.

Please, double-check my references and you'll see I'm not making stuff up.

 

[lmnop9876]

So we should ignore the verses where Sabbath is specifically named as the day of worship and go with 2 possible worship meetings (both of which I can show did not replace the Sabbath at all)? You have two possible meetings, I have 86 that specify the Sabbath day - and I'm talking AFTER the Gospels.

PJW, you really seem like a sincere person who logically puts things together; I commend you for that. But let me address the two meetings you are referring to:

Acts 20:7 - And upon the first day of the week (yup, that's Sunday), when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

• The term "breaking bread" does not mean communion; otherwise the disciples were taking communion every single day (see Acts 2:46). The disciples broke bread every day - that is not a reason for observing a different day of worship - if you believe so then show me that in the scriptures where that belief comes from.
• Also, we see that during the course of the long meeting that bread is broken again (Acts 20:11), and it says they were eating; no mention of a ceremony such as communion, no mention of partaking of Christ's flesh and blood. Unless you can show there is a precedence established in any other place in the Bible of taking communion twice in one day then you cannot say that Acts 20:7 is talking about communion.
• When we read the story further we find that Paul starts out on Sunday morning for his trip; he travels about 30 km and then buys a boat ticket. Now, if Sunday had been any kind of holy day (especially a new "day of rest") then Paul would not have been traveling nor purchasing anything on that day.
  

The other is:
1 Corinthians 16:1-3 - Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week (yes, that is Sunday as well) let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.

• At the time of this story there was a great famine in Jerusalem. One can read about it in Romans 15:26 & Acts 11:26-30. Paul was on his way to Jerusalem so he was asking the church at Corinth to "lay by him in store". What does this mean? It's simple; it means to lay by and store up - Paul was asking them to gather together food items so he could take them to the saints in Jerusalem since they were starving. What's more, by including the word "him" in the phrase "lay by him in store" means to store up these food items at home! Paul was asking them to store up provisions at home, he was asking them to work, and this would not have been done if the first day of the week was considered a holy day. He would then come by their homes on his way to Jerusalem and load up. This is what the "collection for the saints" was - it was not a tithe or offering else Paul would have said so.
• Another point about the church at Corinth (which was who this epistle was written to); it was a seventh-day Sabbath keeping church as told us inActs 18:1-4. And when one reads these verses we find that there were about 78 Sabbaths kept while Paul was in Corinth.

Please, double-check my references and you'll see I'm not making stuff up.

please, I'd love to see these references to the Sabbath in the NT. not being sarcastic, I'd sincerely love to see them.
I think basically it boils down to 3 issues.
1. Is the Sabbath a Creation ordinance and part of the moral law?
2. If the Sabbath is moral law, did God specify in the moral law that the last day of the week was intrinsically part of the Sabbath commandment?
3. If the Sabbath is moral law, did Christ change the day of the week from the Jewish observance of the last day of the week to the first day of the week?

 

[Montalban]

The law of God of the which the Sabbath is number 4 of the 10 commandments was written with God's finger in stone, that is enduring, and it was stored inside the ark of the covenant. While the law of Moses, was written by Moses on paper, and was stored on the side of the ark of the covenant. That is the difference. One is applicable for all people for all time, while the other was transitory.

If it were for all time, then that law would have been given to Adam, and Jesus too would not have said it was only for man.

And stone does not last forever for that matter. God does. Stone, lasts a fair while, but not as long as God.

 

[Montalban]

Exactly right, why were the "ten commandments" written in stone by God?

To show us that today, many thousands of years later that God's law does not change.

a) those laws should then have been given to Adam.
if 'stone' is important
b) where are the stones now?

 

[Montalban]

Interesting comment you have made.

If you say that Philip used Tradition to show him the truth then please explain why Philip want down into the water and baptised him?

If that was the traditional way of baptising then why isn't that the way it is done today.

It is true that Philip did expalin things but di not contradict what was in the Bible.

I am not even sure what this example has to do with "What day of the week is the Sabbath"

Full immersion is still done in Orthodoxy

 

[Montalban]

My church started with Jesus instituting it.

Really? I had no idea you were Orthodox!

I do consider the traditions of the Apostles, which we can read in the bible quite clearly in the book of Acts and their letters. and we can trace in the Early Church Father's writings about when the change from Sabbath to Sunday took place. We are saying that there was no authority that could change it but only if God would change it would it change, for He is the Law Giver and the only one that can change His Law.

Except that the 'law' was not given by God for man for all time; else it'd be given to Adam.

 

[Montalban]

Ignatius does. He wrote ‘at the time of the Apostles'.

Ignatius wrote at the very end of the time of the apostles, with perhaps only John living, if him. Since Ignatius died in 107 according to some scholars (117 according to others) John would not be living either if the letter were at the end of Ignatius' life. He was bishop, according to Irenaeus during the reign of Trajan, who reigned from 98-117. In fact he says he is already a bishop in this letter, at the end. So this would place Ignatius' writing here at the very end of the apostolic period, if at all.

I think you are really nit-picking here. It is clear that Ignatius was alive when the Apostles were, and he was taught by them, and entrusted by them to be a successor of theirs

And note that I said that the apostles did not write of these things. And indeed we don't find any of the apostles writing of these things.

They didn't need to. As noted we don't take the Bible as a stand-alone book, for it warns us not to - because it says it does not contain all of the teachings of Jesus.

And again in the time of Ignatius he spoke of both Sabbath and Sunday keeping, not a replacement, which was what later church fathers contended. If that was Jesus' original teaching then Ignatius should not be confused on the point according to your reasoning.

Are you determined to go around in circles? I've already refuted this with Paul and circumscion. Paul also warned against Judisers, and it's clear from argument between Peter and Paul over even spreading the Good News to the Gentiles they were unsure about some things; but luckily Jesus had sent them the comforter.

Jesus Himself stated that the Sabbath was for Man, and Himself ‘broke it'.

The Sabbath is for man. How does that change anything? And show where He broke it.

I did this already too; I cited where he said it was for man; if you'd read that reference you'd have seen His enemies questioning Him about breaking it. But alas I see a pattern emerging where you simply will go on repeating the same questions.

Yes, as noted Paul circumcised someone, even though he said it was not necessary, and at the same time he warned against Judisers. The fact that the early church held the new ‘Sabbath' to be Sunday from the earliest times is, I think something you should not ignore.

Yes, if only you could show that it was true in the times of the apostles. But you can't. Which I think you should not ignore.

I haven't. I've cited Ignatius.

Moreover he doesn't simply keep it, he tells ALL of them to keep it. Moreover, the first quote you gave, from the beginning of chapter 9, is also not a literal translation. Here is the quoted version:

no longer observing the Sabbath,
but living in the observance of the Lord's Day,

And here is the literal version:

"attained a new hope, no longer sabbatizing but living according to the Lord's life" or in the transliterated Greek, "meketi sabbatizontes kata kuriaken zoen zowntes. "

The word day does not appear. They supplied the substantive to try to make it clearer. However, by doing so they read in their own opinion on the text. They also rendered the participle as keeping the Sabbath, but the context favors the literal sabbatizing.

Compare the above literal version with his later comment in chapter 9 and the two are completely harmonious where before they seemed contradictory:

So where do you get your translation from? You're still undecided if you want to use Ignatius as an authority, anyway.

Here he clearly says let EVERY ONE of you keep the Sabbath after a spiritual manner, not observing the traditional requirements of the Jews. Note that this was in fact how Jesus kept it. He did not break the Sabbath, He kept it the way it was intended, free from the traditions of the Jews, not Judaizing or Sabbatizing.

The Sabbath was to be a day of rest. Jesus didn't 'rest', and He cited David doing the same thing.

If that we should be Christians were plain to the Apostles then there'd be no general debate on any such subjects, and there was.

You will have to explain what you mean here about what is plain to the apostles. But in any case the evidence is the same. You have progressive strains of Sunday keeping, and repeated attempts to stop Sabbath keeping. Why? Because it is obvious that the churches were keeping Sabbath. Not only that but Ignatius said they should, but after a spiritual manner. So all of this you have posted has shown that

a. Many were keeping the Sabbath
b. One of the church fathers endorsed every one of them keeping the Sabbath
c. Later church fathers said Sunday replaced it.

We see a progression as relations with the Jews deteriorated.

So you believe you should be a Messianic Jew, 'cause you're against 'progress'?

If you see these ‘progressions' as bad, then you should be a Messianic Jew.

They are bad if they depart from the teachings of Jesus and His immediate apostles, and the moral law of God which Jesus said He did not come to destroy and which the new covenant affirms is written on our heart, which Paul says we keep fully by the Spirit, and not the written code. Indeed, I find them bad.

Why only 'His immediate Apostles'? The Apostles themselves chose one to replace Judas; one whom Jesus had not chosen

They didn't reject Ignatius on the basis that it was not inspired, or of doubtful authorship.

So I await your reason for them rejecting it.

This then is just too much. I have already answered this. I have stated about they chose books from the Bible based on those that knew Christ from the first generation. But alas the pattern is confirmed.

 

[Montalban]

If you think Sunday is the Lord's Day, you have to be able to prove that with scripture and I haven't seen that done yet (and won't, because it's not biblical).

Judging by the responses of Tall73 several people would just go on asking the same question regardless.

 

[prodromos]

Another point about the church at Corinth (which was who this epistle was written to); it was a seventh-day Sabbath keeping church as told us in Acts 18:1-4. And when one reads these verses we find that there were about 78 Sabbaths kept while Paul was in Corinth.

Well of course it was Sabbath keeping, it was the synagogue for crying out loud! Where else was Paul going to find Jews and believing Gentiles gathered together in one place but the synagogue on the Sabbath! "And I became to the Jews as a Jew, in order that I might gain the Jews: to those under law, as under law, not being myself under law, in order that I might gain those under law:"(1 Cor 9:20) If we read on, however, we find that the Jews who had not accepted Christ had a complaint against Paul. In Acts 18:12-13 we find that they accused Paul of "persuading men to worship God contrary to the law".

John

 

[prodromos]

It was not the Sabbath command that Old Sage was speaking of. That was given at Creation and not only came before circumcision, but any sin, or the need for a sacrifice.

Where did God command Adam and his descendants to keep the Sabbath at creation? I've seen this mentioned a few times in the thread but fail to see where this 'fact' was established.

John

 

[Normann]

Exactly right, why were the "ten commandments" written in stone by God?

To show us that today, many thousands of years later that God's law does not change.

There are in fact over 30 commandments in the 20th chapter of Exodus.

No one can keep a sabbath unless they first work 6 days.

 

[Normann]

Seems to me there is only one commandment, that is if you join the
"7th day people" and preach from a calandar.

This is harped on continually on CF so therefore I asume it is all we have to do is rest on Saturday.

 

[Normann]

No, I have explained this in this thread, it is silly to think you can find the modern names of the days of the week in a 2000 year old text. History attest to which day the sabbath is today, but you refuse to read history it seems.

Chris

Explain it again using scripture and not a calendar!

Play like all calendars were destroyed and there is no way to prove which day is Saturday.

 

[prodromos]

Explain it again using scripture and not a calendar!

OK, so now only scripture is a valid historical document and we are simply to toss all of history as we know it? We can confidantly accept through history that the day the Jews called the Sabbath is the day English speakers call Saturday. To claim otherwise is ludicrous.

John

 

[TrustAndObey]

Where did God command Adam and his descendants to keep the Sabbath at creation? I've seen this mentioned a few times in the thread but fail to see where this 'fact' was established.

John

John unfortunately I don't have a lot of time before I have to leave for work, but I'll do the best I can real quick.

In Exodus 16 (before Mt. Sinai) when Sabbath was being discussed, God asked Moses "how long will you break my commandment?" (Paraphrasing here for the sake of quickness)

When Moses did go up to Mt. Sinai God said to "REMEMBER" the Sabbath day and keep it holy. It was already a commandment before God wrote it on stone. We know that from Exodus 16 anyway.

Scripture tells us that Abraham kept God's commandments, statutes, and laws. Obviously Abraham was around way before Mt. Sinai as well.

When God discusses His holy day in scripture, we see that it is a sign between Him and HIS people.

You won't find a direct command to Adam and Eve, but we know the Ten Commandments were law even before the earth was formed. Satan (Lucifer) sinned in heaven....sin is the transgression of the law.

As to knowing that what we call "Saturday" is the seventh day...Normann....read all the scriptures that say that as the Sabbath was ending it began to dawn toward the first day of the week.

If you believe that Christ rose on what we call Sunday, then Saturday is the Sabbath. It's proven with scripture and with common sense.

Gotta get to work!

God bless,
~Lainie

 

[prodromos]

In Exodus 16 (before Mt. Sinai) when Sabbath was being discussed, God asked Moses "how long will you break my commandment?"

Actually Exodus 16 is the first the Israelites hear of keeping a Sabbath themselves. Such a practice was unknown to them before this.

When Moses did go up to Mt. Sinai God said to "REMEMBER" the Sabbath day and keep it holy. It was already a commandment before God wrote it on stone. We know that from Exodus 16 anyway.

Yes but prior to Exodus 16 they knew of no such command.

Scripture tells us that Abraham kept God's commandments, statutes, and laws. Obviously Abraham was around way before Mt. Sinai as well.

We also have a good record of everything God commanded of Abraham in Genesis and keeping the Sabbath isn't among them.

When God discusses His holy day in scripture, we see that it is a sign between Him and HIS people.

It was a sign pointing towards Christ's first coming and the day in which He would rest in the tomb.

John

 

[PaleHorse]

Actually Exodus 16 is the first the Israelites hear of keeping a Sabbath themselves. Such a practice was unknown to them before this.

I disagree for the very reason that T&O is pointing out. God tells them in verse 23 that tomorrow is the Sabbath so don't gather any manna, they violate that in verse 27, but in verse 28 God exclaims "How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?"; if He had just given them the Sabbath command for the first time then why is God asking them "how long"? "How long" indicates a repeated, enduring string of violations - not a single incident.

We also have a good record of everything God commanded of Abraham in Genesis and keeping the Sabbath isn't among them.

Then please name all the charges, commandments, statutes, and laws that Abraham observed. Are you saying that God, who created the Sabbath on the 7th-day of Creation didn't want it to be observed for nearly 2,300 years? This again, doesn't make sense.

It was a sign pointing towards Christ's first coming and the day in which He would rest in the tomb.

I certainly see where the feast sabbaths did this but not the Sabbath of the decalogue. In fact, we know it was the feast sabbaths because when those feasts were being established in Lev 23 the text tells us that they were put beside (in addition to) the Sabbath of the Lord in verse 38. Gal 3:19 tells us these were put in place "until the seed should come" - of course meaning Christ.

The sign of the seventh-day Sabbath is just as the Bible tells us, it is the sign between God and His people that we know Him to be the Creator that sancifies us. (Exo 31:13&17, Eze 20:12&20)

 

[lmnop9876]

where are the references to the Christian Church keeping the Jewish Sabbath in Acts, the Epistles, and the Revelation?

 

[oldsage]

Except that the 'law' was not given by God for man for all time; else it'd be given to Adam.

How do we know it wasn't given to Adam, see when reading books of the bible we must also understand the context of the book, Genesis isn't a book about commands but a book about origins, how things all began. There are several places in the book of Genesis that talk about breaking the law of God and called them sin. At the time of Exodus they were just codified.

Chris