Why the Sunday-keeping Church thinks of Sunday as the Sabbath

[trustitl]

QUote from Bob Ryan
"Notice what Paul does with Timothy in Acts 16 right after the hot debate over circumcision in chapter 15?"

How is it we are talking about circumcision when the issue is the Sabbath. This is such a perfect example of what law does. At demands lawyers and judges. To answer the original question "Why does the Sunday-keeping church think of Sunday as the Sabbath?" was the original post.

I say that they keep it because they think their supposed to. How did we get there? By failing to understand simple truths in scripture. The quote above is a perfect example of making doctrine the way the Catholic Church does. Tradition becomes "law".

Because Timothy got circumcised does not mean that we need to get circumcised. To say that we must flies in the face in what Paul teaches over and over. Circumcision is in the law and the law says to do it all. The sacrifices are in the law and the law says to do it all. The punishments are in the law and the law says to do it all. Priests, sabbaths, dietary rules, cleanliness,......... and the law says to do it all. This is not what we are called to.

As long as you looks to duplicate Paul's actions you are missing the point. If a person wants to keep Sunday as a special day they are free to as is clear in Romans 14. Can they do it without any extrinsic force? I guess so, but it is most likely thay they have been taught they are supposed to either from the pulpit or just by example. Who then is it they are following? This is how we get "beguiled of our reward" (Col. 2).

My point all along has been to show both sides they are wrong to say that their day is the right one. The sad fact is that

I Tim. 6:3 "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth"

I think this is an example of what Timothy was dealing with: men who have "swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling" (I Tim. 1:6).

I Tim 6:20 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings".

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by trustitl
If keeping the commanments here is referring to the law why would Paul have just told someone they don't need to do something in the law ie. be circumcised?
v.18 "Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised."

This is a great question and it gets to the heart of the Sabbath commandment because if "the Gospel" is the "good news that law breaking is the WILL of God" then all appeals to "obey the Word of God" are now ended!

And as you point out - surely this is the message of Paul when it comes to circumcision".

However - you have to remeber that the context for that argument among first century NT saints (as we see clearly in both Eph 2 and in Acts 15) is the issue of "NATIONAL" identity. It is whether Gentiles must become members of the Jewish nation -- or remain (as Eph 2 says ) separated from God as the "uncircumcision".

Paul points out that identity with the literal nation of Israel has nothing to do with salvation - and never did.

Paul points out in Gal 3 and Romans 3 that salvation was NEVER based on being circumcised.

In Romans 2 Paul argues that the only spiritual salvific benefit to circumcison was that of the heart done by the Holy Spirit.

Paul is not arguing for "a change" he is arguing that this has ALWAYS been the case.

One Gospel in ALL ages. Paul never argues against scripture not EVEN the scripture regarding circumcision!

Notice what Paul does with Timothy in Acts 16 right after the hot debate over circumcision in chapter 15?

Notice Paul's claim in Acts 22 through the end of the book "I have done NOTHING against the law or the tradition of the elders"!

In fact Paul takes a vow to "PROVE" that that lies being told about him - how he is telling Jews to disobey scripture are all false

The evidence is overwhelming. In Eph 6:1-4 Paul argues for the 5th commandment as the "FIRST" one with a promise and so is arguing for all ten as valid as James points out.

In Romans 2 Paul even shows the link between justification-future and law keeping in vs 11-13.

He takes the exact opposite approach to "God wants you to disobey His written Word".

Trustit
How is it we are talking about circumcision when the issue is the Sabbath. This is such a perfect example of what law does.

Read the quote at that top -- hint: That would be "you" bringing this up on the Sabbath thread.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Trustit -

At demands lawyers and judges. To answer the original question "Why does the Sunday-keeping church think of Sunday as the Sabbath?" was the original post.

I say that they keep it because they think their supposed to. How did we get there? By failing to understand simple truths in scripture. The quote above is a perfect example of making doctrine the way the Catholic Church does. Tradition becomes "law".

Indeed in Mark 7 Paul addresses the issue of man made tradition substituted in as though it were doctrine -- replacing the Word of God.


Mark 7
6 And He said to them, ""Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: " THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS[/b], BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
7 " BUT [b]IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'
8 ""Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.''[/b]
9 He was also saying to them, ""You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.[/b]
10 ""For Moses said, " HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER[/b]'; and, " HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH';
11 but you say, "If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),'
12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother;
13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.''

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I Tim. 6:3 "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth"

I think this is an example of what Timothy was dealing with: men who have "swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling" (I Tim. 1:6).

I Tim 6:20 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings".

All true - but the correction your post needs is "the Word of God is not vain babblings".

I think that is the key issue we are trying to explore. How do the traditions of men compare to the Word of God.

In my Bible - there are 66 books.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[gekko]

why the sunday-keeping church thinks of sunday as the sabbath?

because they havn't done any research and are completely ignorant to facts.

that about sums up the last 15 pages eh.

 

[youngmom4]

I have to say I love this board...it makes me really think about why I believe what I do.

So, Sabbath=day of rest, right?

So, those who are fighting for Saturday being the Sabbath, is it your contention that we should have church services on Saturday? I don't know about anybody else, but Sunday is one of the least restful days I have because of church! I love going to church, but spending two and a half to three hours there in the morning and then spending another three hours there at night (church plus Bible study afterwards), I am exhausted by the time I get home! :laugh: So, Saturday has to be my Sabbath because I sure ain't getting a day of rest on Sunday! :sleeping_2: :sleep:

 

[BobRyan]

You post is funny and we can all identify with it -- but one thing you said that is very key to this discussion is "Saturday is the Sabbath" as if that is the thing that is debated.

What almost everyone on the board agrees with is that "Saturday is the Sabbath".

The debate is whether or not to care about that fact
"just because it is in the 10 commandments don't make it right" is what is being debated.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[youngmom4]

You post is funny and we can all identify with it -- but one thing you said that is very key to this discussion is "Saturday is the Sabbath" as if that is the thing that is debated.

What almost everyone on the board agrees with is that "Saturday is the Sabbath".

The debate is whether or not to care about that fact
"just because it is in the 10 commandments don't make it right" is what is being debated.

in Christ,

Bob

So, let me get this straight...everybody agrees that Saturday is the Sabbath; so, since they can't argue about that, they're arguing that you don't have to observe it?!! Why would anybody argue against observing a day of rest?!!:laugh:

 

[BobRyan]

Because it is one thing to say you "get to rest on Saturday" it is another to say "you have to rest on Saturday" or "you can't select another day as your own Sabbath no matter which day God gave in Exodus 20".

Basically on one side you have "yes the Sabbath is Saturdaty but that is only given to Jews".

In a few special cases that argument is also "Saturday Sabbath given by God to Jews - but now Christians can assign it to any day they choose out of seven"

On the other hand you have "Yes the Sabbath is Saturday and Christ said the Sabbath was made for mankind" Mark 2:27 -- not just Jews.

That is the way the debate normally goes.

However this thread is specifically asking about those who try to "edit" or "re-assign" the Seventh-day "Saturday" Sabbath to "another day of the week" calling Sunday the
"Christian Sabbath" for example.

Everybody agrees that this is a "re-assignment" or "edit" problem -- nobody is claiming "the Jews forgot that the Sabbath is really Sunday as given at Sinai"/

in Christ,

Bob

 

[AAA]

I go to church on Sunday, but I believe that Saturday is the Sabbath and the sabboth was made as a day of rest and, not the only day that we have to worship...

 

[trustitl]

Quote from Bob Ryan
"Notice what Paul does with Timothy in Acts 16 right after the hot debate over circumcision in chapter 15?" From post #142

How is it we are talking about circumcision when the issue is the Sabbath. This is such a perfect example of what law does. It demands lawyers and judges.

To answer the original question "Why does the Sunday-keeping church think of Sunday as the Sabbath?" I say: they keep it because they think their supposed to.

Why do they think this way? By failing to understand simple truths in scripture.

Because Timothy got circumcised does not mean that we need to get circumcised. To say that we must flies in the face in what Paul teaches over and over ellsewhere. Circumcision is in the law and the law says to do it all. The sacrifices are in the law and the law says to do it all. The punishments are in the law and the law says to do it all. Priests, sabbaths, dietary rules, cleanliness,......... and the law says to do it all.

As long as you looks to duplicate Paul's actions you are missing the point. You might even end up circumcising guys named Timothy and not circumcising guys named Titus. :laugh: If a person wants to keep Sunday as a special day they are free to as is clear in Romans 14. Can they do it without any extrinsic force? I guess so, but it is most likely thay they have been taught they are supposed to either from the pulpit or just by example. Who then is it they are following?

This is how we get "beguiled of our reward" (Col. 2).

My point all along has been to show both sides they are wrong to say that their day is THE right one.

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by trustitl
If keeping the commanments here is referring to the law why would Paul have just told someone they don't need to do something in the law ie. be circumcised?
v.18 "Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised."

Quote:
Trustit
How is it we are talking about circumcision when the issue is the Sabbath. This is such a perfect example of what law does.

Read the quote at that top -- hint: That would be "you" bringing this up on the Sabbath thread.

As for you comment about "God's LAW" in general -- the "Ten Commandments, So What?" Thread seems to indicate that nobody on this board is voting for abolishing God's Law.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Your argument from Paul and Timothy is of the form "do as Paul says NOT as Paul does" AS IF the two are in contradiction.

You may want to re-think that.

Acts 21
17 After we arrived in Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.
18 And the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present.
19 After he had greeted them, he began to relate one by one the things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.
20 And when they heard it they began glorifying God; and they said to him, ""You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law;
21 and b]they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs[/b].

The charge leveled against Paul by CHRISTIAN Jews is that he is telling Jews (not simply Gentiles) to forsake Moses - to stop
"Being Jews" - to stop walking according to the customs/laws God gave to Moses. Notice that they do not accuse him of teaching THEM this error - NOR do they indicate that James or any of the other Apostles IN Jerusalem have taught them to "forsake Moses". This is key. Their only "concern" is "rumors" that Paul in ADDITION to his ministry to Gentiles has been telling those Jews who live OUT from Jerusalem AMONG the Gentiles - to "forsake Moses".

Many Christians today (who teach a 2-Gospel system) argue that these Christian Jews attacking Paul - are "Exactly RIGHT!". That Paul's ministry WAS to show that the laws given to Moses were abolished. That Christ nailed His LAW to the cross for ALL mankind. That nothing of the LAW given to Moses was applicable to ANYONE and this was the NEW Gospel available after the Cross. BOTH Jew and Gentil should consider it ABOLISHED, and those bad ol' Judaizers that did NOT consider it abolished were not really saved. IN this 2-Gospel system Grace and New Covenant Gospel replacing the Old Covenant method of Salvation in place for 4000 years prior to the cross. Christians argue that this is FOUNDATIONAL to the NT Gospel message and Paul has no choice but to fearlessly APPROVE of that kind of Gospel rather than deny it.

Now lets see if Paul agrees with that view of the Gospel.

Acts 21
22 ""What, then, is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come.
23 ""Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow;
24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; [b]and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law.[/b][/quote]

Notice the "recommendation" is to explicitly follow the Num 6:1-11 oath SHOWING in the eyes of all that Paul not only taught conformity to the OT text of scripture (God's Word) - but HE HIMSELF PRACTICED it. The saints in Jerusalem argued that this would be public VISIBLE PROOF that the charges made against Paul were false.

Paul confirms this a few times afterwards -- in fact every time he gets a chance.

Acts 23:4-9
Acts 24:14-18
Acts 25:8-11
Acts 26:20-23
Acts 28:17

 

[rstrats]

Palalka51,

re: "Have you ever asked yourself why God did not tell Adam to honor the Sabbath?
How about Noah, Abraham, Isaac or Jacob?"

Have you ever asked yourself why God has never asked anyone to honor the first day of the week?

 

[rstrats]

Palalka51,

re: "Isn't it curious that they waited until the first day of the week to break bread?"

Actually they didn’t. Acts 2:46 says that they broke bread every day: "And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts"

 

[BobRyan]

Palalka51,

re: "Have you ever asked yourself why God did not tell Adam to honor the Sabbath?
How about Noah, Abraham, Isaac or Jacob?"

Have you ever asked yourself why God has never asked anyone to honor the first day of the week?

Why didn't God tell Cain to Honor his parents? Abraham? Noah?

Why didn't God tell Seth not to covet and not to steal?

Why not tell Seth not to commit adultery?

If the Bible is an exhaustive account of all that they knew for 1600 years before the flood then why aren't these things mentioned??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[trustitl]

How did the natives on isolated Islands in the Pacific know that "you don't steal my stuff" and "my wife is my wife"?

Don't tell me they had the 10 Commandments posted in their Supreme Court.

Maybe it is that knowledge of good and evil tree thing.

Romans 2:14 "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves"

 

[BobRyan]

Why didn't God tell Cain to Honor his parents? Abraham? Noah?

Why didn't God tell Seth not to covet and not to steal?

Why not tell Seth not to commit adultery?

If the Bible is an exhaustive account of all that they knew for 1600 years before the flood then why aren't these things mentioned??

And as pointed out in the previous post - if there is sin on a desert island and people kill other people -- maybe the ten commandments don't apply there -- or is that even a valid argument?

The Tree of knowledge of Good and evil is never mentioned in the bible as being the way that people after the fall "learn new things". But we do have John 16 pre-cross "The Spirit convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" and as pointed out above Romans 2 some gentiles who has no scripture at all - SHOW the work of the Holy Spirit on the heart "the work of the law WRITTEN on the heart" which as Romans 2 states is done only by the New Covenant work of the Holy Spirit.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Quote from Bob Ryan
"Notice what Paul does with Timothy in Acts 16 right after the hot debate over circumcision in chapter 15?" From post #142

How is it we are talking about circumcision when the issue is the Sabbath. This is such a perfect example of what law does. It demands lawyers and judges.

To answer the original question "Why does the Sunday-keeping church think of Sunday as the Sabbath?" I say: they keep it because they think their supposed to.

Why do they think this way? By failing to understand simple truths in scripture.

Because Timothy got circumcised does not mean that we need to get circumcised. To say that we must flies in the face in what Paul teaches over and over ellsewhere. Circumcision is in the law and the law says to do it all. The sacrifices are in the law and the law says to do it all. The punishments are in the law and the law says to do it all. Priests, sabbaths, dietary rules, cleanliness,......... and the law says to do it all.

As long as you looks to duplicate Paul's actions you are missing the point. You might even end up circumcising guys named Timothy and not circumcising guys named Titus. :laugh: If a person wants to keep Sunday as a special day they are free to as is clear in Romans 14. Can they do it without any extrinsic force? I guess so, but it is most likely thay they have been taught they are supposed to either from the pulpit or just by example. Who then is it they are following?

This is how we get "beguiled of our reward" (Col. 2).

My point all along has been to show both sides they are wrong to say that their day is THE right one.

GE
"Why does the Sunday-keeping church think of Sunday as the Sabbath?" I say: they keep it because they think their supposed to."

This is where we differ. I say, no, not just because they think ...! I say the Church (Sunday-keeping) believes and keeps Sunday for the sole and supreme Christian reason for anything Christian! And that is, the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead on the First Day of the week! WHAT, COULD EVER BE WRONG, WITH THAT? I hold two reasons, and they both boil down to the single factor of or for all 'Why's and Wherefore's of Christian Faith, The Scriptures!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Those two Scripture-Reasons are, One, Because Scriptures foretells it or does not foretell it!; Two, Because Scriptures recalls it or does not recall it! Let us call the first reason, eschatology - Christological Eschatology if you want. Was it 'p-r-o-c-l-a-i-m-e-d' that Jesus on the First day of the week would rise from the dead, yes, or, no? Let us call the second reason, eschatology - End-Time Eschatology if you want. Did Jesus f-u-l-f-i-l-l that which was p-r-o-c-l-a-i-m-e-d about Him re the First Day of the week, yes, or no? and we all know - yes, we, all - it is the Great Lie of the Ages. Never - in all of the Scriptures - "God" ANYTHING "thus concerning" the First Day "spake"!