Who changed Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday

[Nutella]

Oh wow. That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks

 

[Adventist Dissident]

reddog are you aware of these arguments (note" I am not advocating Sunday worship just getting all the facts and giving good answers)

these dates are mentioned as reference
107 ad
120 ad


Complete Testimony of the Early Fathers by DM Canright.pdf
page 18 is the place to start

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Here is what some critics say

notice the early dates these are not mentioned in the previous posts


The Sabbath and Sunday

Common Misunderstandings:

1. "We have been told that the Sabbath is the Seal of God."
The Seal of God is NOT the Sabbath! The Bible tells us clearly that the Seal of God is the Holy Spirit indwelling believers the moment they are saved.

Ephesians 1:13 (NIV) says,
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in Him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession-to the praise of His glory.
​

See Also:
Ephesians 4:30
2 Corinthians 1:21-22
2. "We have been told that the true church in the last days, the Remnant church will be a commandment keeping church. Isn't that what Revelation 12:17 says?"

Revelation 12:17 says:
And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.
​

In the new Covenant, what are the "commandments" of God? Does this mean the Ten Commandments? NO! The Greek word used for the Ten Commandments is "NOMOS". That word is not used here. The word used here is "ENTELE" and means " teaching"
The Apostle John clarifies this and actually tells us what the "Commandments" are that we are to keep:
See I John 5:1-3

I used to use these verses to teach people that they must keep the Ten Commandments, especially the Sabbath. But look at what I John 3:21-24 has to say! 3. "The Roman Catholic Church changed the day of worship from Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday." "Isn't it paying homage to the Roman church to worship on Sunday, because didn't the Roman Emperor Constantine change the day of worship?"
Costantine's Edict , AD 321

It is claimed that Constantine's edict of March 7, 321 changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. Consantine's edict reads:

On the venerable Day of the Sun [venerablili dei Solis] let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits.Codex Justinaianus, book 3 title 12,3 trans. In Schaff, History of the Christian Church 5th ed. (New York: Charles Scribner, 1902), vol. 3, P. 380, note1.
​

Pliny's Letter , AD 107


Pliny was governor of Bithynia, in Asia Minor, from AD 106-108. He wrote in AD 107 to Trajan, the emperor, concerning the Christians. This is what he said:

They were want to meet together on a stated day before it was light, and sign among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as God....When these things were performed, it was their custom to separate and then to come together again to a meal which they ate in common without any disorder.
​

We know the day the early church broke bread was on a Sunday.

Upon the first day of the week when the disciple came together to break bread. Acts 20:7
​

The Epistle of Barnabas, AD 120

In chapter 2 the Epistle of Barnabas says:
"Incense is a vain abomination unto me, and your new moons and Sabbaths I cannot endure. He has, therefore, abolished these things."
​

When he speaks of the first day of the week, Barnabas says:
"Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day, also, on which Jesus rose again from the dead." Chapter 25
​

Statements By the Church Fathers:

Justin Martyr, AD 140

Note: Justin's "Apology" was written at Rome about the year AD 140, only 44 years after the Apostle John recieved the vision of the Revelation at Patmos.
The Schalff-herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge states this about Justin's works: "In these works Justin professes to present the system of doctrine held by all Christians and seeks to be orthodox on all points. The only difference he knows of as existing between Christians concerned the millennium. Thus Justin is an incontrovertible witness for the unity of faith in the Church of his day and that fact that the Gentile type of Christianity prevailed." Quoted by Canright in the Complete Testimony of the Early Fathers, Fleming H. Revell, 1916, pp. 24-25.
Note: At this early date , AD 140, the only difference among Christians was about the millennium. At that time , they had no disagreement in keeping Sunday, and as you will see, Justin says that was the day on which all Christians worshiped.
In chapter 67 of his first Apology, entitled, "Weekly Worship of the Christian" writing to the pagan emperor, Justin states:

"...we bless the Maker of all through His Son, Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the Apostles or writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits;then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructed, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and , as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought...But Sunday is the day on which God, having wrought the change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead."The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol 1, pp. 185-186 (Emphasis Added)
​

Clement of Alexandria, in Egypt, AD 194

Clement, writing around AD 194 says:
"He, in fulfillment of the precept, keeps the Lord's Day when he abandons an evil disposition, and assumes that the Gnostic, glorifying the Lord's resurrection in himself." Book 7, Chapter 12 (emphasis added)
​

Ignatius of Antioch, the third bishop of Antioch, who died in AD 108, wrote:

"If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again in Him....Let us therefore no longer keep the Sabbath after the Jewish manner, and rejoice in days of idleness; for "he that does not work, let him not eat"....let every friend of Christ keep the Lord's day as a festival, the resurrection day, the queen and chief of all days [of the week]" Epistle of Ignatius to Magnesians, "The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol, 1, pp. 62-63 (emphasis added).
​

Tertullian of Africa, wrote around AD 200:

In his Apology, Chapter 16 Tertullian says:
"We solemnize the day after Saturday in contradistinction to those who call this day their Sabbath, and devote it to ease and eating, deviating from the old Jewish customs, which they are not very ignorant of."
"Others, with greater regard to good manners, it must be confessed , suppose that the sun is the god of the Christians, because it is a well-known fact that we pray towards the east, or because we make Sunday a day of festivity " Ancient Syriac Documents, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, P. 123
​

Note: The early church explained why they prayed toward the east. It was because, "...as the lightning which lighteneth from the east and is seen even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be; that by this we might know and understand that He will appear from the East suddenly" Ancient Syriac Documents, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 8, P 668
Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth in Greece, AD 170

Dionysius was Bishop of Corinth, the Church which Paul raised up and to which he gave the command about Sunday collections, in I Cor. 16:1-2. He says:

"We passed this holy Lord's Day, in which we read your letter, from the constant reading of which we shall be able to draw admonition" Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, BK. 3, Chapter 23 (Emphasis Added)
​

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I don't know reddog, anyone who quotes Hysslop's the Two Babylons has a lot of credibility problems unless the quotes are attempts to show just how inaccurate the book is.

 

[djconklin]

The Epistle of Barnabas, AD 120

In chapter 2 the Epistle of Barnabas says:
"Incense is a vain abomination unto me, and your new moons and Sabbaths I cannot endure. He has, therefore, abolished these things."
​

When he speaks of the first day of the week, Barnabas says:
"Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day, also, on which Jesus rose again from the dead." Chapter 25​

We don't actually know when the epistle was written. So, to give a definitive date is out of order. Many believe probably written in the years 70 – 131--but, we should note that they don't provide proof--it is based on one passage the refers to the rebuilding of the Temple (so it had to be after 70 A.D.) and the passage says that those who tore it down will help rebuild it (not after Bar Kochba revolt of 132 the Romans wouldn't!).

When sabbaths are mentioned with new moons it most likely refers to ceremonial sabbaths of feasting. Note that in 15:8 he refers to the biblical passage using the same terms:

Finally He saith to them; Your new moons and your Sabbaths I cannot away with. Ye see what is His meaning ; it is not your present Sabbaths that are acceptable [unto Me], but the Sabbath which I have made, in the which, when I have set all things at rest, I will make the beginning of the eighth day which is the beginning of another world.​

In 15:1-5 he definitively refers to the seventh day Sabbath in a positive manner:

Moreover concerning the Sabbath likewise it is written in the Ten Words, in which He spake to Moses face to face on Mount Sinai; And ye shall hallow the Sabbath of the Lord with pure hands and with a pure heart. And in another place He saith; If my sons observe the Sabbath then I will bestow My mercy upon them. Of the Sabbath He speaketh in the beginning of the creation; And God made the works of His hands in six days, and He ended on the seventh day, and rested on it, and He hallowed it. Give heed, children, what this meaneth; He ended in six days. He meaneth this, that in six thousand years the Lord shall bring all things to an end; for the day with Him signifyeth a thousand years; and this He himself beareth me witness, saying; Behold, the day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years. Therefore, children, in six days, that is in six thousand years, everything shall come to an end. And He rested on the seventh day. this He meaneth; when His Son shall come, and shall abolish the time of the Lawless One, and shall judge the ungodly, and shall change the sun and the moon and the stars, then shall he truly rest on the seventh day.​

And the book has major problems as have been noted by people who have actually looked at it. Some:

1) The Jewish scriptures were true, not literally, as the Jews believed, but allegorically. Obviously then, this writer is not one who holds Scripture in high regard.

2) Schaff: “The Old Testament is, with him, rather a veiled Christianity, which he puts into it by a mystical allegorical interpretation, as Philo, by the same method, smuggled into it the Platonic philosophy. In this allegorical conception he goes so far that he actually seems to deny the literal historical sense. He asserts, for example, that God never willed the sacrifice and fasting, the Sabbath observance and temple worship of the Jews, but a purely spiritual worship.” “He has some profound glances and inklings of a Christian philosophy. He may be called an orthodox Gnostic." More likely proto-gnostic.

3) Very wierd ideas:

“Neither shalt thou eat of the hyena: that is, again, be not an adulterer; nor a corrupter of others; neither be like to such. And wherefore so? Because that creature every year changes its kind, and is sometimes male, and sometimes female.”​

 

[djconklin]

I don't know reddog, anyone who quotes Hysslop's the Two Babylons has a lot of credibility problems unless the quotes are attempts to show just how inaccurate the book is.

Could you give some concrete examples? And specifically on the material that was quoted?

 

[djconklin]

We know the day the early church broke bread was on a Sunday.
Upon the first day of the week when the disciple came together to break bread. Acts 20:7

Bread was the staple of their meals--they broke bread every day. Note that the also broke bread in verse 11 are we to believe that they celebrated the Lord's Supper twice in a 12 hour period? Or, more likely ate two meals?

 

[tall73]

The epistle of Barnabas is certainly strange. I wouldn't give it too much weight, particularly as he seems to think that he is teaching them something quite novel.

The Ignatius quote also has some problems as well. The one quoted is the longer version of Ignatius which most feel was an interpolation. There is also a translation issue.

Here are the thoughts I drew up on it some time ago. The full post, found here, also covers Barnabas, etc.

http://www.christianforums.com/t3026324-sabbath.html&page=2

Igantius' letter to the Magnesians:

In chapter 9 of his letter Ignatius takes up the question of Sabbath observance. You can find the document here:

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/...m#P1394_249090


Ignatius wrote his letter during his time as bishop. He was stated to be Bishop during the reign of Trajan. In addition he states that he is to be martyred, having handed himself over to Trajan. The letter to the Magnesians likewise makes reference to him being bound. Since Trajan reigned from 98AD to 116 these are the dates that the epistle must fall into. The letters are usually dated to around 107 which was when the expedition of Trajan was believed to have been, at which time that he handed himself over. Some, with an alternate view of Trajan's expedition against the Parthians date the death of Ignatius at 116. Either way this was a document written just at the end, or just after the end of the apostolic period, since John died, as the last of the apostles, around 100 AD. The rest of the apostles would have been gone for a while.
--------------------
(The following info on the longer and shorter readings is taken from the introductory material to the Ignatius letters in Cleveland Coxe's Ante-Nicene Fathers, American edition)

There are shorter and longer versions of Ignatius. Opinions vary as to which is legitimate. There are two Greek recensions containing both the long and short versions. For some time scholars preferred the shorter. But the discovery of an old Syriac version also contained the longer reading, re-igniting the debate.
---------------------------------



Chapter IX.-Let Us Live with Christ.


Short
If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things49 have come to the possession of a new50 hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance51 of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death-whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith,52 and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of Jesus Christ, our only Master-how shall we be able to live apart from Him, whose disciples the prophets themselves in the Spirit did wait for Him as their Teacher? And therefore He whom they rightly waited for, being come, raised them from the dead.53



Long
56 Let us therefore no longer keep the Sabbath after the Jewish manner, and rejoice in days of idleness; for "he that does not work, let him not eat."57 For say the [holy] oracles, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread."58 But let every one of you keep the Sabbath after a spiritual manner, rejoicing in meditation on the law, not in relaxation of the body, admiring the workmanship of God, and not eating things prepared the day before, nor using lukewarm drinks, and walking within a prescribed space, nor finding delight in dancing and plaudits which have no sense in them.59 And after the observance of the Sabbath, let every friend of Christ keep the Lord's Day as a festival, the resurrection-day, the queen and chief of all the days. Looking forward to this, the prophet declared, "To the end, for the eighth day,"60 on which our life both sprang up again, and the victory over death was obtained in Christ, whom the children of perdition, the enemies of the Saviour, deny, "whose god is their belly, who mind earthly things,"61 who are "lovers of pleasure, and not lovers of God, having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof."62 These make merchandise of Christ, corrupting His word, and giving up Jesus to sale: they are corrupters of women, and covetous of other men's possessions, swallowing up wealth63 insatiably; from whom may ye be delivered by the mercy of God through our Lord Jesus Christ!



This statement gives us some important information.

a. That Sunday was already recognized as the Lord's day at this time according to verse 59, in honor of the resurrection.

b. Whoever authored the longer portion does not think that Christians should keep Sabbath after the Jewish traditions that Jesus denounced, but does think that they should keep it. (lukewarm drinks, Sabbath day's journey etc. are repudiated.) Instead they were to celebrate it in a spiritual way in contemplation of the Scriptures etc.

Now back to the shorter reading. the Greek of vs. 50 does not support the reading given.


And here is a link to the Greek.

http://www.ccel.org/l/lake/fathers/i...nesians.htm#IX


Now a few notes:


a. there is no word for day, hmera , it is supplied a a substantive.

b. The Greek manuscript discovered with Siniaticus actually has the word zwhn which is not present in this Greek version provided by the web site. They omitted this, assumedly following the Latin translations.

c. There is evidence from the next phrase "in which", which is in the feminine, that there is a feminine word being referenced.. The aforementioned hmera, or zwhn could be that word. But since the one is clearly present in the Greek (Zwhn) but the other is not present in any text, but was assumed, then the issue is rather clear.

d. The word translated as "no longer keeping the Sabbath" is just the participle form, leading some to suggest it could be translated literally Sabbatizing..

e. Moreover, as commentators have pointed out, the context is referring to the prophets of old. No one suggests that they kept Sunday. So the reading could be rendered:.

If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer sabbatizing, but living in the observance of the Lord's own life (or own way of living), by which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death-whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith ...
(Bacchiocchi takes this position in his work, From Sabbath to Sunday).

In this case the text is saying that the prophets lived according to the Lord's own way of life (keeping the Sabbath without the Jewish traditions).

If the longer reading is to be viewed as valid, then it harmonizes with this rendering well. If it is not valid then it was added later to clarify the text according to the later author's thinking. And it endorses the Sabbath, but not after the Jewish manner of legalism. He is telling them to keep the Sabbath, but not in the old way. And if not then he is simply saying to live after the Lord's way of life, and that of the prophets (not keeping the pharisaical traditions of the Sabbath).

 

[djconklin]

That's the stuff I was taught while in the seminary--have to find my notes and put them up on the web! I don't know why it doesn't seem to drift down to the people in the pews.

 

[tall73]

Now the statement of Justin is also interesting.

The First Apology of Justin Martyr

The letter was addressed to Antoninus Pius, so this dates the writing from between 138-161.

Justin lays out a thorough defense of the Christians to the emperor who has been unduly persecuting the church as criminals. It is truly a heroic work. In it he makes some of the first reference to the definite rituals surrounding first day worship in the early church. Here is the quote from chapter 67


And on the day called
Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place,
and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as
long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president
verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then
we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is
ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like
manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the
people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a
participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who
are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do,
and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited
with the president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who,
342
through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in
bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of
all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our
common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having
wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus
Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For He was
crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after
that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His
apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have
submitted to you also for your consideration.


Here is noted that the Christians meet on Sunday. He says that this is so because it was the first day on which at creation God made the world. This is not a terribly biblical argument, since the original Sabbath was the 7th because of the completed creation. He also notes the more traditional reason of it being the day of the resurrection. He makes no note about the 8th day argument which Ignatius and Barnabas used. So it seems that there is still no universal rationale.

Some have noted particularly the last part of the statement, regarding what Jesus taught His disciples as proof that the Sunday concept was in fact from Jesus Himself. However, when looking in context it is clear that this statement is in fact the conclusion of a whole section, starting at the end of chapter 14 in which a summary of the teachings of Christ is given. Most of these have direct quotes from Jesus to substantiate them. So the statement is simply wrapping up that part of the document. And it is noteworthy that there is no statement of Jesus cited, or any biblical reason at all cited, for observance of Sunday, other than the rather illogical one of the first day of the creation, and the reference to the resurrection.

Having said that, the statement, dating from around 150 does put the practice back to nearly apostolic times.
The statement refers to an ongoing practice, which means it didn't just start up on that date, as Bacchiocchi seems to infer.

There is no indication of Sunday replacing Sabbath here, but merely of them meeting on Sunday.

 

[tall73]

As to Ignatius, the problem is that if the longer statement is legitimate, which I find rather unlikely given some of the other longer readings, it indicates that Sunday was being observed at a very early date, though not replacing Sabbath.

If Sunday was referenced already by Ignatius in 107 then this has some major implications.

A. Ignatius was a disciple of John, connecting him to the apostolic era.

B. Ignatius did not just become a Christian recently, and indicates this is the ongoing practice. This puts the practice back at least a couple of decades, well into the life-span of John.

 

[tall73]

already cited

 

[djconklin]

Here is noted that the Christians meet on Sunday. He says that this is so because it was the first day on which at creation God made the world. This is not a terribly biblical argument, since the original Sabbath was the 7th because of the completed creation. He also notes the more traditional reason of it being the day of the resurrection. He makes no note about the 8th day argument which Ignatius and Barnabas used. So it seems that there is still no universal rationale.

Odom's book covers the changing raionale for the keeping of Sunday. He also notes that the rationale for keeping the Sabbath has always been consistent: The Bible says ...

Having said that, the statement, dating from around 150 does put the practice back to nearly apostolic times.
The statement refers to an ongoing practice, which means it didn't just start up on that date, as Bacchiocchi seems to infer.

Actually, Bacchicoohi suggests that it started around 135 A.D., which means that by 150 it would seem to have been an established practice. We should also note that except for Rome and Alexandria most Christians still kept the Sabbath.

From http://www.remnantofgod.org/sabhist.htm we find that in the 2nd century:

"The primitive Christians had a great veneration for the Sabbath, and spent the day in devotion and sermons. And it is not to be doubted but they derived this practice from the Apostles themselves, as appears by several scriptures to the purpose." "Dialogues on the Lord's Day," p. 189. London: 1701, By Dr. T.H. Morer (A Church of England divine).


"...The Sabbath was a strong tie which united them with the life of the whole people, and in keeping the Sabbath holy they followed not only the example but also the command of Jesus." "Geschichte des Sonntags," pp.13-4


"The Gentile Christians observed also the Sabbath," Gieseler's "Church History," Vol.1, ch. 2, par. 30, 93.


"The primitive Christians did keep the Sabbath of the Jews;...therefore the Christians, for a long time together, did keep their conventions upon the Sabbath, in which some portions of the law were read: and this continued till the time of the Laodicean council." "The Whole Works" of Jeremy Taylor, Vol. IX, p. 416 (R. Heber's Edition, Vol XII, p. 416).


"It is certain that the ancient Sabbath did remain and was observed (together with the celebration of the Lord's day) by the Christians of the East Church, above three hundred years after our Saviour's death." "A Learned Treatise of the Sabbath," p. 77

Note: By the "Lord's day" here the writer means Sunday and not the true Sabbath," which the Bible says is the Sabbath. This quotation shows Sunday coming into use in the early centuries soon after the death of the Apostles. It illustrates the apostasy that Paul the Apostle foretold of when he spoke about a great "falling away" from the Truth that would take place soon after his death.

"From the apostles' time until the council of Laodicea, which was about the year 364, the holy observance of the Jews' Sabbath continued, as may be proved out of many authors: yea, notwithstanding the decree of the council against it." "Sunday a Sabbath." John Ley, p.163. London: 1640.

 

[OntheDL]

Here is what some critics say




We know the day the early church broke bread was on a Sunday.

Upon the first day of the week when the disciple came together to break bread. Acts 20:7​

Actually Acts 20:7 was talking about Saturday night, not sunday at all.

The biblical 1 day of the week begins after sun down.

Lets read the whole verse:

7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

Notice Paul was departing the next morning. He preached until midnight. He actually preached after Saturday sundown to midnight. Never continued into sunday.

That was actually a jewish custom to come together to break bread after Sabbath sundown. The bread is called havdalah bread. You can still buy this bread in your local super market if you have jewish population nearby.

http://www.jewfaq.org/prayer/havdalah.htm

If you don't believe me, go to a jewish after Sabbath sundown and observe.

 

[tall73]

The Didache

While some date this text as early as 60-130 AD it is often now seen to be a document from the early second century. There are no clear references to events that can be dated. Instead the information that it is dated by is the doctrine etc. The doctrine of the Didache seems to be less developed than some later texts in regards to church structure, etc. compared to Ignatius, which either favors an earlier date, or a different location. However, it also makes reference to some material that is regarded as later. Here is a discussion of the later date:

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/richardson/....html#viii.i.i
Since some see in it quotes from the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas they assign it to the second century.



14:1 But on the Lord's day, after that ye have assembled together, break bread and give thanks, having in addition confessed your sins, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let not any one who hath a quarrel with his companion join with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be polluted, for it is that which is spoken of by the Lord. In every place and time offer unto me a pure sacrifice, for I am a great King, saith the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the Gentiles.


It says to assemble on the Lord’s Day. This is possibly the earliest reference to the Lord’s Day outside of Scripture. If you take the second century date then Ignatius’ letter to the Magnesians would come before it. It does not, as some later texts do, mention anything about a replacement of Sabbath with Sunday.

But here, as with Ignatius, there is also a translation issue. Here is the Greek text:

http://www.ccel.org/l/lake/fathers/didache.htm

The beginning of chapter 14 is the text in question. Notice that the reading is Kata Kuriakhn de kuriou.

This is the part rendered "but on the Lord's day", but again hmera does not occur. Nor in fact is it just left out, assumed to be substantival. Instead it literally says "but/and according to the Lord’s (missing or assumed word) of the Lord" This is, to say the least an obscure phrase. Here is a discussion of the texts in the B-Greek list that speaks about the issue:

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b...er/027171.html


He is quoting the Lord in his statement about leaving your sacrifice at the altar and going to be reconciled with your brother before worship. So perhaps the word is something related to the teaching or command of the Lord.

In any case it is not clear what is meant, nor does it associate the Lord’s Day with any calendar day. Some think it could be a reference to Pascha.

 

[djconklin]

Thanx for the great info Tall!

 

[tall73]

Actually, Bacchicoohi suggests that it started around 135 A.D., which means that by 150 it would seem to have been an established practice. We should also note that except for Rome and Alexandria most Christians still kept the Sabbath.

Agreed that most still kept it.

My question is not so much on keeping Sabbath, as Socrates Scholasticus indicate they were keeping both into the 5th century, except, as you note, in Rome and Alexandria.

My question is more about when Sunday came about,. which is not directly related to how long they kept Sabbath, as the earlier works don't seem to take the "replacement" view.

The 135 date I am still not sure about. Justin himself is thought to have converted around 130, and gives no indication that this was a novelty, and includes it in the section of teachings of Christ, though as noted above, it has no direct statement from Christ as many of the others do.

From http://www.remnantofgod.org/sabhist.htm we find that in the 2nd century:

"The primitive Christians had a great veneration for the Sabbath, and spent the day in devotion and sermons. And it is not to be doubted but they derived this practice from the Apostles themselves, as appears by several scriptures to the purpose." "Dialogues on the Lord's Day," p. 189. London: 1701, By Dr. T.H. Morer (A Church of England divine).


"...The Sabbath was a strong tie which united them with the life of the whole people, and in keeping the Sabbath holy they followed not only the example but also the command of Jesus." "Geschichte des Sonntags," pp.13-4


"The Gentile Christians observed also the Sabbath," Gieseler's "Church History," Vol.1, ch. 2, par. 30, 93.


"The primitive Christians did keep the Sabbath of the Jews;...therefore the Christians, for a long time together, did keep their conventions upon the Sabbath, in which some portions of the law were read: and this continued till the time of the Laodicean council." "The Whole Works" of Jeremy Taylor, Vol. IX, p. 416 (R. Heber's Edition, Vol XII, p. 416).


"It is certain that the ancient Sabbath did remain and was observed (together with the celebration of the Lord's day) by the Christians of the East Church, above three hundred years after our Saviour's death." "A Learned Treatise of the Sabbath," p. 77

Note: By the "Lord's day" here the writer means Sunday and not the true Sabbath," which the Bible says is the Sabbath. This quotation shows Sunday coming into use in the early centuries soon after the death of the Apostles. It illustrates the apostasy that Paul the Apostle foretold of when he spoke about a great "falling away" from the Truth that would take place soon after his death.

"From the apostles' time until the council of Laodicea, which was about the year 364, the holy observance of the Jews' Sabbath continued, as may be proved out of many authors: yea, notwithstanding the decree of the council against it." "Sunday a Sabbath." John Ley, p.163. London: 1640.

I think there is ample evidence from the original source material that Sabbath was kept for centuries, and there is certainly evidence in the Scriptures that it was kept in apostolic times.

However,the ones you cited are secondary source material, and therefore, as summaries, are not terribly helpful.

 

[tall73]

Since this is becoming a bit of a clearing house of information, here are the texts that I have found that show ongoing synagogue attendance:

Texts showing continued syagogue attendance in the early church.

Joh 9:22 (His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone should confess Jesus to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue.)

The text here reveals two things. First that the Christians did not voluntarily leave the synagogues. Second it strongly suggests that even after the time of Jesus' resurrection, and likely during the time of the writing of the gospel this was still occurring. Christians continued to attend the synagogue because they saw Jesus as the fulfillment of Judaism, with the gentiles brought in, not a radical separation. It is also of note that the formula curse in the synagogues against the Nazarenes is believed to have been instituted between 70 AD to 90 AD, and even later by some, indicating that the writing of this text would be around the time of that development.

Act 9:1 But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest
Act 9:2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

Act 22:19 And I said, 'Lord, they themselves know that in one synagogue after another I imprisoned and beat those who believed in you.

When Saul (Paul) went to find Christians he went to the synagogue as they were still meeting there.

Act 13:14 but they went on from Perga and came to Antioch in Pisidia. And on the Sabbath day they went into the synagogue and sat down.
Act 13:15 After the reading from the Law and the Prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent a message to them, saying, "Brothers, if you have any word of exhortation for the people, say it."
Act 13:16 So Paul stood up, and motioning with his hand said: "Men of Israel and you who fear God, listen.

This is the first of a number of passages in which Paul attended the synagogue. While he did go at times to preach it is not clear from this passage that this was his intent. He was sitting there and was asked to speak, as happened in synagogues, especially with guests. Whether this was by pre-arrangement we are not told, though later it clearly was.

Act 17:1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews.
Act 17:2 And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures,

It was Paul's costom to attend synagogue and to reason with the Jews. This was for evangelistic purposes, but also fits with Paul's identification of himself as a Jew, who holds to the traditions of the fathers, and part of the sect of Judaism called the Nazarenes:

Act 24:14 But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets.

Even when there was no synagogue Paul observed the Sabbath by finding a place of prayer.

Act 16:13 And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to the riverside, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down and spoke to the women who had come together.

Over long spans of time Paul continued to meet with both Jews and Gentiles on the Sabbath of each week, never telling them to meet on Sunday, or suggesting a cessation of Sabbath observance.

Act 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks.

James, during the discussion of Acts 15 regardin salvation by faith and circumcision, the law of Moses etc. makes reference to the continuing preaching of Moses in the synagogue and assumes familiarity with the practice on the part of all present, from the various churches throughout the world:

Act 15:21 For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues."

James references the synagogue when speaking to Jewish Christians:

Jam 2:2 For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in,
Jam 2:3 and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, "You sit here in a good place," while you say to the poor man, "You stand over there," or, "Sit down at my feet,"
Jam 2:4 have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?

The word translated "assembly" here is the term for the synagogue, συναγωγή.

In these texts the Sabbath day is continually called just that. Whenever the first day is mentioned it is called simply the first day. Ony once do we see an explicit reference to a worship gathering by the church on a Sunday in Acts, and it is late at night, when Paul is about to set out on a journey. It is called only first day, and no reference is made to it being a holy day, or to regular observance.

 

[djconklin]

However,the ones you cited are secondary source material, and therefore, as summaries, are not terribly helpful.

Considering how much material has been lost that's the best we can have.

 

[reddogs]

I don't know reddog, anyone who quotes Hysslop's the Two Babylons has a lot of credibility problems unless the quotes are attempts to show just how inaccurate the book is.

Hey, I didnt write the book, but I'd sure like to see the Catholic books on what 'divine' authority they changed the Sabbath.......