GE:
Alright, no fine, mine or further comment obviously will be superfluous. You have explained what is necessary to understand about YOUR 'understanding' of the matter inimitably.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Charles spurgeon on roman catholicism: “a vast mountain of rubbish covering the truth
- Thread starter Osage Bluestem
- Start date
GE:
Alright, no fine, mine or further comment obviously will be superfluous. You have explained what is necessary to understand about YOUR 'understanding' of the matter inimitably.
Alive in Christ
New Member
Dr. Walter
New Member
He certainly did!
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
D.L Moody nailed it -
http://www.fbinstitute.com/moody/The_TenCommandments_Text.html
THERE HAS BEEN an awful letting-down in this country regarding the Sabbath during the last twenty-five years, and many a man has been shorn of spiritual power, like Samson, because he is not straight on this question. Can you say that you observe the Sabbath properly? You may be a professed Christian: are you obeying this commandment? Or do you neglect the house of God on the Sabbath day, and spend your time drinking and carousing in places of vice and crime, showing contempt for God and His law? Are you ready to step into the scales? Where were you last Sabbath? How did you spend it?
I honestly believe that this commandment is just as binding today as it ever was. I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place.
"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27)
It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was- in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.
The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins with the word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?
I believe that the Sabbath question today is a vital one for the whole country. It is the burning question of the present time. If you give up the Sabbath the church goes; if you give up the church the home goes; and if the home goes the nation goes. That is the direction in which we are traveling.
The church of God is losing its power on account of so many people giving up the Sabbath, and using it to promote selfishness.
http://www.fbinstitute.com/moody/The_TenCommandments_Text.html
Fundamental Baptist Institute
DWIGHT L. MOODY
Quote:
Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the LORD made heaven and Earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it.
Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the LORD made heaven and Earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it.
THERE HAS BEEN an awful letting-down in this country regarding the Sabbath during the last twenty-five years, and many a man has been shorn of spiritual power, like Samson, because he is not straight on this question. Can you say that you observe the Sabbath properly? You may be a professed Christian: are you obeying this commandment? Or do you neglect the house of God on the Sabbath day, and spend your time drinking and carousing in places of vice and crime, showing contempt for God and His law? Are you ready to step into the scales? Where were you last Sabbath? How did you spend it?
I honestly believe that this commandment is just as binding today as it ever was. I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place.
"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27)
It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was- in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.
The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins with the word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?
I believe that the Sabbath question today is a vital one for the whole country. It is the burning question of the present time. If you give up the Sabbath the church goes; if you give up the church the home goes; and if the home goes the nation goes. That is the direction in which we are traveling.
The church of God is losing its power on account of so many people giving up the Sabbath, and using it to promote selfishness.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Adam Clarke Nailed it -
Adam Clarke on Gen 2:3
Verse 3. And God blessed the seventh day
The original word barach, which is generally rendered to bless, has a very extensive meaning. It is frequently used in Scripture in the sense of speaking good of or to a person; and hence literally and properly rendered by the Septuagint ευλογησεν, from ευ, good or well, and λεγω, I speak. So God has spoken well of the Sabbath, and good to them who conscientiously observe it. Blessing is applied both to God and man: when God is said to bless, we generally understand by the expression that he communicates some good; but when man is said to bless God, we surely cannot imagine that he bestows any gifts or confers any benefit on his Maker. When God is said to bless, either in the Old or New Testament, it signifies his speaking good TO man; and this comprises the whole of his exceeding great and precious promises. And when man is said to bless God, it ever implies that he speaks good OF him, for the giving and fulfilment of his promises. This observation will be of general use in considering the various places where the word occurs in the sacred writings. Reader, God blesses thee when by his promises he speaks good TO thee; and thou dost bless him when, from a consciousness of his kindness to thy body and soul, thou art thankful to him, and speakest good OF his name.
Because that in it he had rested
shabath, he rested; hence Sabbath, the name of the seventh day, signifying a day of rest-rest to the body from labour and toil, and rest to the soul from all worldly care and anxieties. He who labours with his mind by worldly schemes and plans on the Sabbath day is as culpable as he who labours with his hands in his accustomed calling. It is by the authority of God that the Sabbath is set apart for rest and religious purposes, as the six days of the week are appointed for labour. How wise is this provision! It is essentially necessary, not only to the body of man, but to all the animals employed in his service: take this away and the labour is too great, both man and beast would fail under it. Without this consecrated day religion itself would fail, and the human mind, becoming sensualized, would soon forget its origin and end. Even as a political regulation, it is one of the wisest and most beneficent in its effects of any ever instituted. Those who habitually disregard its moral obligation are, to a man, not only good for nothing, but are wretched in themselves, a curse to society, and often end their lives miserably. See Clarke on Exodus 20:8.; "Ex 23:12"; "Ex 24:16"; and See Clarke on Exodus 31:13.; to which the reader is particularly desired to refer.
As God formed both the mind and body of man on principles of activity, so he assigned him proper employment; and it is his decree that the mind shall improve by exercise, and the body find increase of vigour and health in honest labour. He who idles away his time in the six days is equally culpable in the sight of God as he who works on the seventh. The idle person is ordinarily clothed with rags, and the Sabbath-breakers frequently come to an ignominions death. Reader, beware.
Adam Clarke on Gen 2:3
Verse 3. And God blessed the seventh day
The original word barach, which is generally rendered to bless, has a very extensive meaning. It is frequently used in Scripture in the sense of speaking good of or to a person; and hence literally and properly rendered by the Septuagint ευλογησεν, from ευ, good or well, and λεγω, I speak. So God has spoken well of the Sabbath, and good to them who conscientiously observe it. Blessing is applied both to God and man: when God is said to bless, we generally understand by the expression that he communicates some good; but when man is said to bless God, we surely cannot imagine that he bestows any gifts or confers any benefit on his Maker. When God is said to bless, either in the Old or New Testament, it signifies his speaking good TO man; and this comprises the whole of his exceeding great and precious promises. And when man is said to bless God, it ever implies that he speaks good OF him, for the giving and fulfilment of his promises. This observation will be of general use in considering the various places where the word occurs in the sacred writings. Reader, God blesses thee when by his promises he speaks good TO thee; and thou dost bless him when, from a consciousness of his kindness to thy body and soul, thou art thankful to him, and speakest good OF his name.
Because that in it he had rested
shabath, he rested; hence Sabbath, the name of the seventh day, signifying a day of rest-rest to the body from labour and toil, and rest to the soul from all worldly care and anxieties. He who labours with his mind by worldly schemes and plans on the Sabbath day is as culpable as he who labours with his hands in his accustomed calling. It is by the authority of God that the Sabbath is set apart for rest and religious purposes, as the six days of the week are appointed for labour. How wise is this provision! It is essentially necessary, not only to the body of man, but to all the animals employed in his service: take this away and the labour is too great, both man and beast would fail under it. Without this consecrated day religion itself would fail, and the human mind, becoming sensualized, would soon forget its origin and end. Even as a political regulation, it is one of the wisest and most beneficent in its effects of any ever instituted. Those who habitually disregard its moral obligation are, to a man, not only good for nothing, but are wretched in themselves, a curse to society, and often end their lives miserably. See Clarke on Exodus 20:8.; "Ex 23:12"; "Ex 24:16"; and See Clarke on Exodus 31:13.; to which the reader is particularly desired to refer.
As God formed both the mind and body of man on principles of activity, so he assigned him proper employment; and it is his decree that the mind shall improve by exercise, and the body find increase of vigour and health in honest labour. He who idles away his time in the six days is equally culpable in the sight of God as he who works on the seventh. The idle person is ordinarily clothed with rags, and the Sabbath-breakers frequently come to an ignominions death. Reader, beware.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Spurgeon nailed it...
===================
Money gained on Sabbath-day is a loss, I dare to say. No blessing can come with that which comes to us, on the devil’s back, by our willful disobedience of God’s law. The loss of health by neglect of rest, and the loss of soul by neglect of hearing the gospel, soon turn all seeming profit into real loss." - C.H. Spurgeon
"Salt Cellars": Salt Cellars, C.H. Spurgeon (Vol. 2 M-Z)
FROM: CHARLES SPURGEON'S CATECHISM
(WHAT IS TO BE TAUGHT TO CHILDREN):
49 Q Which is the fourth commandment?
A The fourth commandment is, Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor they cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
50 Q What is required in the fourth commandment?
A The fourth commandment requires the keeping holy to God such set times as he has appointed in his Word, expressly one whole day in seven, to be a holy Sabbath to himself (Le 19:30 De 5:12).
51 Q How is the Sabbath to be sanctified?
A The Sabbath is to be sanctified by a holy resting all that day, even from such worldly employments and recreations as are lawful on other days (Le 23:3), and spending the whole time in the public and private exercises of God's worship (Ps 92:1,2 Isa 58:13,14), except so much as is taken up in the works of necessity and mercy (Mt 12:11,12).
"...the reason why people become Hyper-Calvinists and Antinomians, is because some, who profess to be Calvinists, often keep back part of the truth, and do not, as Paul did, "declare all the counsel of God"; they select certain parts of Scripture, where their own particular views are taught, and pass by other aspects of God's truth. Such preachers as John Newton, and in later times, your own Christmas Evans, were men who preached the whole truth of God; they kept back nothing that God has revealed; and, as the result of their preaching, Antinomianism could not find a foot-hold anywhere." (Charles Spurgeon, Gospel of Sovereign Grace).
"It is to be feared that some zealous brethren have preached the doctrine of justification by faith not only so boldly and so plainly, but also so baldly and so out of all connection with other truth, that they have led men into presumptuous confidences, and have appeared to lend their countenance to a species of Antinomianism very much to be dreaded. From a dead, fruitless, inoperative faith we may earnestly pray, "Good Lord, deliver us," yet may we be unconsciously, fostering it." (Charles Spurgeon, Faith and Regeneration)
===================
Money gained on Sabbath-day is a loss, I dare to say. No blessing can come with that which comes to us, on the devil’s back, by our willful disobedience of God’s law. The loss of health by neglect of rest, and the loss of soul by neglect of hearing the gospel, soon turn all seeming profit into real loss." - C.H. Spurgeon
"Salt Cellars": Salt Cellars, C.H. Spurgeon (Vol. 2 M-Z)
FROM: CHARLES SPURGEON'S CATECHISM
(WHAT IS TO BE TAUGHT TO CHILDREN):
49 Q Which is the fourth commandment?
A The fourth commandment is, Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor they cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
50 Q What is required in the fourth commandment?
A The fourth commandment requires the keeping holy to God such set times as he has appointed in his Word, expressly one whole day in seven, to be a holy Sabbath to himself (Le 19:30 De 5:12).
51 Q How is the Sabbath to be sanctified?
A The Sabbath is to be sanctified by a holy resting all that day, even from such worldly employments and recreations as are lawful on other days (Le 23:3), and spending the whole time in the public and private exercises of God's worship (Ps 92:1,2 Isa 58:13,14), except so much as is taken up in the works of necessity and mercy (Mt 12:11,12).
"...the reason why people become Hyper-Calvinists and Antinomians, is because some, who profess to be Calvinists, often keep back part of the truth, and do not, as Paul did, "declare all the counsel of God"; they select certain parts of Scripture, where their own particular views are taught, and pass by other aspects of God's truth. Such preachers as John Newton, and in later times, your own Christmas Evans, were men who preached the whole truth of God; they kept back nothing that God has revealed; and, as the result of their preaching, Antinomianism could not find a foot-hold anywhere." (Charles Spurgeon, Gospel of Sovereign Grace).
"It is to be feared that some zealous brethren have preached the doctrine of justification by faith not only so boldly and so plainly, but also so baldly and so out of all connection with other truth, that they have led men into presumptuous confidences, and have appeared to lend their countenance to a species of Antinomianism very much to be dreaded. From a dead, fruitless, inoperative faith we may earnestly pray, "Good Lord, deliver us," yet may we be unconsciously, fostering it." (Charles Spurgeon, Faith and Regeneration)
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Even the Catholic Church itself gets a significant part of this doctrine --
=============
The Faith Explained (an RC commentary on the Baltimore catechism post Vatican ii) states on Page 242 that
changing the Lord's day to Sunday was in the power of the church since "in the gospels ..Jesus confers upon his church the power to make laws in his name". page 243
nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day From Saturday to Sunday. We know of the change only from the tradition of the Church - a fact handed down to us...that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many Non-Catholics, who say that they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and Yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church"
. (from "The Faith Explained" page 243.))
"we know that in the O.T it was the seventh day of the week - the Sabbath day - which was observed as the Lord's day. that was the law as God gave it...'remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.. the early Christian church determined as the Lord's day the first day of the week. That the church had the right to make such a law is evident...
The reason for changing the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday lies in the fact that to the Christian church the first day of the week had been made double holy...
nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday..that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many non-Catholic who say they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church
=============
The Faith Explained (an RC commentary on the Baltimore catechism post Vatican ii) states on Page 242 that
changing the Lord's day to Sunday was in the power of the church since "in the gospels ..Jesus confers upon his church the power to make laws in his name". page 243
nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day From Saturday to Sunday. We know of the change only from the tradition of the Church - a fact handed down to us...that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many Non-Catholics, who say that they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and Yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church"
. (from "The Faith Explained" page 243.))
"we know that in the O.T it was the seventh day of the week - the Sabbath day - which was observed as the Lord's day. that was the law as God gave it...'remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.. the early Christian church determined as the Lord's day the first day of the week. That the church had the right to make such a law is evident...
The reason for changing the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday lies in the fact that to the Christian church the first day of the week had been made double holy...
nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday..that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many non-Catholic who say they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church
GE:
Exactly; and thus you again fail to see,
1) that the dictionary ACTUALLY gives 'heh sehbasteh hehmera'; NOT, 'heh kuriakeh hehmera';
2) that the dictionary FALSELY claims 'kuriakeh hehmera' to have been borrowed by Christians from the secular vocabulary in which there allegedly existed incidence of its use for the day of emperor.
AS SIMPLE AS THAT.
GE:
Dear Bob Ryan,
You agree with this catechism? You do, else you would not use it here.
Now I ask you in the best brotherly Christian love I as the sinner me, can:
WHAT is the BASIS of the assumption made by this document for the 'RIGHT' claimed for "changing the Lord's day"? Is it not Jesus' RESURRECTION?
Would you agree if ever there were a rock-solid foundation for 'CHANGE', it would be the RESURRECTION of Christ from the dead?
Would you not agree THEN, 'change' EVEN OF THE SABBATH, is INEVITABLE?
HOW could you deny?
I conclude from these logical axioms, THE ONLY FLAW EXISTS IN THE CLAIM that Jesus rose from the dead ON ANOTHER DAY THAN THE PERTINENT DAY of the coming to fruition and truthfulness of the PROMISE and WORD of the God of the Promise, in and through and by Jesus Christ IN RESURRECTION from the dead : God’s WORD, that He ACTUALLY rose from the dead on the Sabbath Day and HAD to rise from the dead "ON THE SABBATH DAY" as found and confirmed in Holy Writ in Matthew 28:1 and all other Scriptures by implication and result.
The "more fully" proclamation of the Sabbath which the early Seventh-day Adventist church believed in, dear Bob Ryan, but which they soon afterwards discarded as impossible because it meant this church should admit MISTAKE, was -- or would have been -- the discovery that Christ rose from the dead "In the Sabbath Day's fullness". Which discovery would have exposed the total fraud that Sunday-sacredness is, and is based on; and would have unleashed persecution unto the bitter end. But the Seventh-day Adventists ever since chose comfort and indulgence to rejection and contempt.
Dr. Walter
New Member
Bob, you know you are intentionally perverting Moody! I have already documented that Moody in this very article defines the Christian Sabbath to be Sunday over and over again (see Post #93). He defines the fourth commandment to be nothing more than one in seven days and denies it is the seventh day of the week. I have already documented this. Why do you intentionaly pervert Moody???????
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Walter
New Member
Why do you intentionally pervert Spurgeon. I have already documented that Spurgeon asserted that Sunday was the Christian Sabbath. I have already documented that Spurgeon did not interpret the fourth commandment to be the seventh day "of the week" but interpreted to be one day out of seven! Why do you intentionally pervert Moody and Spurgeon?
What would we call a man who intentionally deceives others and knowingly perverts others to suit his own belly??????
Dr. Walter
New Member
No it does not! The dictionary says that "kuriakeh" was used to signify the imperial day not that it gives "sehabsteh" as the term actually used. There is a difference between saying "kuriakeh" is USED to signify something versus using "sehabsteh"!
According to who????? To you???? Nice try GE but I will take the dictionary, and Antenicene usage over your opinion!
AS SIMPLE AS THAT.[
Quoting Dr Walter, who is quoting “- International Standard Bible Encyclopedia”:
LORD'S DAY
(he kuriake hemera):
1. Linguistic:
Formerly it was supposed that the adjective kuriakos (translated "the Lord's") was a purely Christian word, but recent discoveries have proved that it was in fairly common use in the Roman Empire before Christian influence had been felt. In secular use it signified "imperial," "belonging to the lord"--the emperor--and so its adoption by Christianity in the sense "belonging to the Lord"--to Christ--was perfectly easy. Indeed, there is reason to suppose that in the days of Domitian, when the issue had been sharply defined as "Who is Lord? Caesar or Christ?" the use of the adjective by the church was a part of the protest against Caesar-worship (see LORD; THE LORD ). And it is even possible that the full phrase, "the Lord's day," was coined as a contrast to the phrase, "the Augustean day" he sebaste hemera), a term that seems to have been used in some parts of the Empire to denote days especially dedicated in honor of Caesar-worship.
2. Post-Apostolic:
"Lord's day" in the New Testament occurs only in Revelation 1:10, but in the post-apostolic literature we have the following references: Ignatius, Ad Mag., ix.1, "No longer keeping the Sabbath but living according to the Lord's day, on which also our Light arose"; Ev. Pet., verse 35, "The Lord's day began to dawn" (compare Matthew 28:1); verse 50, "early on the Lord's day" (compare Luke 24:1); Barn 15 9, "We keep the eighth day with gladness," on which Jesus arose from the dead." I.e. Sunday, as the day of Christ's resurrection, was kept as a Christian feast and called "the Lord's day," a title fixed so definitely as to be introduced by the author of Ev. Pet. into phrases from the canonical Gospels. Its appropriateness in Revelation 1:10 is obvious, as John received his vision of the exalted Lord when all Christians had their minds directed toward His entrance into glory through the resurrection. - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerhard Ebersoehn
GE:
Exactly; and thus you again fail to see,
1) that the dictionary ACTUALLY gives 'heh sehbasteh hehmera'; NOT, 'heh kuriakeh hehmera';
Dr Walter:
No it does not! The dictionary says that "kuriakeh" was used to signify the imperial day not that it gives "sehabsteh" as the term actually used. There is a difference between saying "kuriakeh" is USED to signify something versus using "sehabsteh"!
Here is the Dictionary:
“Formerly it was supposed that the adjective kuriakos (translated "the Lord's") was a purely Christian word, but recent discoveries have proved that it was in fairly common use in the Roman Empire before Christian influence had been felt. In secular use it signified "imperial," "belonging to the lord"--the emperor--and so its adoption by Christianity in the sense "belonging to the Lord"--to Christ--was perfectly easy. Indeed, there is reason to suppose that in the days of Domitian, when the issue had been sharply defined as "Who is Lord? Caesar or Christ?" the use of the adjective by the church was a part of the protest against Caesar-worship (see LORD; THE LORD ). And it is even possible that the full phrase, "the Lord's day," was coined as a contrast to the phrase, "the Augustean day" he sebaste hemera), a term that seems to have been used in some parts of the Empire to denote days especially dedicated in honor of Caesar-worship.”
GE:
Everything it mentions about “the adjective kuriakos” up until “the full phrase, "the Lord's day"” IS FALSE SUPPOSITION AND FALSE ARROGATION :
1) "the Lord's day"” :
2) has ‘recently’ been
3) ‘discovered’ and
4) “proved”, that it
4) “was in fairly common use in the Roman Empire
5) before Christian influence” ---
... every word and everything being PURE FLAGRANT LYING!
Paramount factor wilfully ignored by Dr Walter is the fact the Dictionary DOES NOT ONCE IN THIS STATEMENT USE “the full phrase” IN THE GREEK; and that it uses the Greek phrase defined by the dictionary with “, "the Augustean day" he sebaste hemera”.
There indeed ‘… is a difference between saying "kuriakeh"…’ AND NOT saying "kuriakeh”… thank you very much! The first is Dr Walter’s REPEATED LIE; the latter is the Dictionary’s BLUNDER, giving itself away for dealing fraudulently with CLAIMED ‘facts’ --- 'facts' that is not and cannot be sustained by as many as ONE incidence of "common use in the Roman Empire before Christian influence".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerhard Ebersoehn
2) that the dictionary FALSELY claims 'kuriakeh hehmera' to have been borrowed by Christians from the secular vocabulary in which there allegedly existed incidence of its use for the day of emperor.
Dr Walter:
According to who????? To you???? Nice try GE but I will take the dictionary, and Antenicene usage over your opinion!
GE:
Granted, the dictionary does NOT use the Greek phrase, 'kuriakeh hehmera' (… obvious from the above); nevertheless it IMPLIES it and FALSELY implies it as my arguments throughout show.
LORD'S DAY
(he kuriake hemera):
1. Linguistic:
Formerly it was supposed that the adjective kuriakos (translated "the Lord's") was a purely Christian word, but recent discoveries have proved that it was in fairly common use in the Roman Empire before Christian influence had been felt. In secular use it signified "imperial," "belonging to the lord"--the emperor--and so its adoption by Christianity in the sense "belonging to the Lord"--to Christ--was perfectly easy. Indeed, there is reason to suppose that in the days of Domitian, when the issue had been sharply defined as "Who is Lord? Caesar or Christ?" the use of the adjective by the church was a part of the protest against Caesar-worship (see LORD; THE LORD ). And it is even possible that the full phrase, "the Lord's day," was coined as a contrast to the phrase, "the Augustean day" he sebaste hemera), a term that seems to have been used in some parts of the Empire to denote days especially dedicated in honor of Caesar-worship.
2. Post-Apostolic:
"Lord's day" in the New Testament occurs only in Revelation 1:10, but in the post-apostolic literature we have the following references: Ignatius, Ad Mag., ix.1, "No longer keeping the Sabbath but living according to the Lord's day, on which also our Light arose"; Ev. Pet., verse 35, "The Lord's day began to dawn" (compare Matthew 28:1); verse 50, "early on the Lord's day" (compare Luke 24:1); Barn 15 9, "We keep the eighth day with gladness," on which Jesus arose from the dead." I.e. Sunday, as the day of Christ's resurrection, was kept as a Christian feast and called "the Lord's day," a title fixed so definitely as to be introduced by the author of Ev. Pet. into phrases from the canonical Gospels. Its appropriateness in Revelation 1:10 is obvious, as John received his vision of the exalted Lord when all Christians had their minds directed toward His entrance into glory through the resurrection. - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerhard Ebersoehn
GE:
Exactly; and thus you again fail to see,
1) that the dictionary ACTUALLY gives 'heh sehbasteh hehmera'; NOT, 'heh kuriakeh hehmera';
Dr Walter:
No it does not! The dictionary says that "kuriakeh" was used to signify the imperial day not that it gives "sehabsteh" as the term actually used. There is a difference between saying "kuriakeh" is USED to signify something versus using "sehabsteh"!
Here is the Dictionary:
“Formerly it was supposed that the adjective kuriakos (translated "the Lord's") was a purely Christian word, but recent discoveries have proved that it was in fairly common use in the Roman Empire before Christian influence had been felt. In secular use it signified "imperial," "belonging to the lord"--the emperor--and so its adoption by Christianity in the sense "belonging to the Lord"--to Christ--was perfectly easy. Indeed, there is reason to suppose that in the days of Domitian, when the issue had been sharply defined as "Who is Lord? Caesar or Christ?" the use of the adjective by the church was a part of the protest against Caesar-worship (see LORD; THE LORD ). And it is even possible that the full phrase, "the Lord's day," was coined as a contrast to the phrase, "the Augustean day" he sebaste hemera), a term that seems to have been used in some parts of the Empire to denote days especially dedicated in honor of Caesar-worship.”
GE:
Everything it mentions about “the adjective kuriakos” up until “the full phrase, "the Lord's day"” IS FALSE SUPPOSITION AND FALSE ARROGATION :
1) "the Lord's day"” :
2) has ‘recently’ been
3) ‘discovered’ and
4) “proved”, that it
4) “was in fairly common use in the Roman Empire
5) before Christian influence” ---
... every word and everything being PURE FLAGRANT LYING!
Paramount factor wilfully ignored by Dr Walter is the fact the Dictionary DOES NOT ONCE IN THIS STATEMENT USE “the full phrase” IN THE GREEK; and that it uses the Greek phrase defined by the dictionary with “, "the Augustean day" he sebaste hemera”.
There indeed ‘… is a difference between saying "kuriakeh"…’ AND NOT saying "kuriakeh”… thank you very much! The first is Dr Walter’s REPEATED LIE; the latter is the Dictionary’s BLUNDER, giving itself away for dealing fraudulently with CLAIMED ‘facts’ --- 'facts' that is not and cannot be sustained by as many as ONE incidence of "common use in the Roman Empire before Christian influence".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerhard Ebersoehn
2) that the dictionary FALSELY claims 'kuriakeh hehmera' to have been borrowed by Christians from the secular vocabulary in which there allegedly existed incidence of its use for the day of emperor.
Dr Walter:
According to who????? To you???? Nice try GE but I will take the dictionary, and Antenicene usage over your opinion!
GE:
Granted, the dictionary does NOT use the Greek phrase, 'kuriakeh hehmera' (… obvious from the above); nevertheless it IMPLIES it and FALSELY implies it as my arguments throughout show.
Last edited by a moderator:
I know full well I am not and I will not make the least impression on the minds of the complacent self-satisfied wise guys of theology. But I shall speak for God's Words of Truth the Scriptures, till my dying day. So help me, God!
That in itself is all the reward grace could grant me.
That in itself is all the reward grace could grant me.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Hint - I merely qouted Moody -- All I added was "Moody nailed it".
Your "ad-hominem first" policy is not the compelling argument you may have at first imgined.
Hint: D.L Moody said
The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins with the word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?
I happen to think that Moody's argument above is correct. Walter's response wild claims of "perversion".
Moody argues for "Commandment keeping" not "commandment breaking" -- surely one or two Baptist readers "noticed".
Walter's argument is that if we are allowed to EDIT God's Word - to water it down "sufficiently" THEN and only then can we strongly endorse it as D.L Moody is doing above.
How "instructive" for the unbiased objective Bible student is that wild claim by Walter - especially when you note the transparency in his methods to get there. Walter suggests that "any old day you want to pick in seven" is the "new meaning" we are to impose on the fourth commandment so that it is not "THE Seventh day" that is "blessed" but rather "A Seventh day of anyone's choosing - certainly not God's choosing!!"
How sad.
in Christ,
Bob
Dr. Walter
New Member
The Dictionary claims there is discovered evidence that proves "kuriakos" was in common use in the Roman Empire before Christianity adopted it! Now! How was it used before Christianity adopted it?
It was a synonym for things that belonged to the Emperor! In other words "kuriakos" was publicly known to express identity with those things that belonged to Ceasar as "Lord" of his empire. Ceasar was to be acknowledge as "Lord" or "Ceasar is Lord" and those things that belonged to Ceasar belonged to him in recognition of his Lordship in the sense of divine worship and recognition. Hence, New Testament writers were well aware this adjective was peculariarly attributed to Ceasar as "Lord" in a divine sense of worship and included those things identified with him as "Lord."
Evidence in the first century, Domitian, proves the issue between Ceasar and Christ had been defined in regard to this very adjective "who is Lord? Caesar or Christ?" Hence, the New Testament writers (Paul, John) take the initiative in defining that contrast by purpospely taking the adjective "Kuriakos" which universally recognized Ceasar as the divine Lord and attributed it purposely to Christ (1 Cor. 11:20; Rev. 1:10). No doubt John was exiled for refusing to say "Ceasar is Lord" on the "kuriakos" day set apart to worship Ceasar as Lord once a month on Sunday when a pinch of incense was to be offered at his altar on Sunday with the words "Ceasar is Lord."
Post apostolic literature demonstrates the very phrase used by John "the kuriakos day" is attributed to Christ's resurrection day and called, the eighth day, the first day of the week, Sunday, etc. This was done in a culture that still used kuriakos for Ceasar and the things of Ceasar and the day for which Ceasar and his things were characterized by kuriakos.
You simply choose to deny the position taken by this dictionary and the evidence it presents to demonstrate the position it takes! So whats new? The issue is WITH YOU not the Dictionary. The Dictionary supports my position completely and denies your position completely.
Show the EVIDENCE "...kuriakos" was publicly known to express identity with those things that belonged to Ceasar as "Lord" of his empire" --- specifically "the DAY of the Lord" (emperor) : 'kuriakeh hehmera'.
It is a LIE there exists such 'evidence'.
Until you put on the table the REAL evidence, I stick to what I have said.
It is a LIE there exists such 'evidence'.
Until you put on the table the REAL evidence, I stick to what I have said.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Walter
New Member
The issue was over what the dictionary really said and did not say! I have proven that what it says verifies my position. This dictionary is part of my evidence. He gives domitian as evidence in the first century which preceded Revelation 1:10. He proves that the issue of who was Lord, whether Ceasar or Christ had been defined previous to Rev. 1:10. That John was put in exile by Rome is evidence that supports his intentional use of "kuraikos" for Christ instead of for Ceasar. Second and third centuries are evidence that the very same expression is used for Christ and particular for Sunday, the first day of the week. Your position demands you EXPLAIN AWAY 2nd and 3rd century evidences for Sunday/first day of the week as the recognized "Lord's day."
GE:
Yes, "Post apostolic literature" of at least 150 years after The Resurrection; NONE before.
Therefore, until the end of the second century :
True:
"used by John "the kuriakos day" is attributed to Christ's resurrection day";
False:
"used by John "the kuriakos day" is attributed to Christ's resurrection day and called, the eighth day, the first day of the week, Sunday, etc. "
Pure Surmising:
... as far as the word "kuriakos for the day", of the "Ceasar" is concerned : "This was done in a culture that still used kuriakos for Ceasar and the things of Ceasar and the day for which Ceasar and his things were characterized by kuriakos".