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

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I'm sorry I introduced this thread but haven't had time to keep up with its progress. I would like to get it back on the track I would have liked to see it take, with these questions,

What, is 'Scriptural'; what would make an 'argument' for or against the First Day as Day of Christian worship, 'scriptural'; what would prevent it from being 'Scriptural'?

I mean more than repeating verbatim 'snippets' from, Scripture.

I cannot yet pay nearer attention to individual posts, but think I have given you some homework if you will.
Thanks.

 

[TCGreek]

No question that Paul and Christ were arguing the case from scripture that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah.

The key though is that those who did not see the name "Jesus" in the OT text were not "lost until they found it".

as 2Tim 3 state -- Timoth was saved BEFORE he became a Christian.

2Tim 3
15and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

The Bible does NOT teach that all the people of God became lost when Christ died.

Heb 12
1Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

2For by it the men of old gained approval.
3By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.
4By faith Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying about his gifts, and through faith, though he is dead, he still speaks. 5By faith Enoch was taken up so that he would not see death; AND HE WAS NOT FOUND BECAUSE GOD TOOK HIM UP; for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God.

The "To the Jew first and also to the Greek" argument of Paul in Romans 2 explicitly argues against "jews lost at the cross just because they are Jews" RATHER it argues that Jews following God pre-cross are IN post cross on the SAME basis. Jews in rebellion pre-cross are LOST post-cross on the "same basis"

Gal 1:6-9 ONE Gospel in all of time.

Heb 4:1-2 WE have had the Gospel preached to us JUST as they also

in Christ,

Bob

1. It is quite evident from the Acts-narrative that their were two groups of monotheism: the Jews and then the Christians.

2. The Jews had their Sabbath and the Christians had the Lord's Day.

 

[trustitl]

What, is 'Scriptural'; what would make an 'argument' for or against the First Day as Day of Christian worship, 'scriptural'; what would prevent it from being 'Scriptural'?
QUOTE]

The way the question is phrased implies that there is a right or wrong answer: the right one being "scriptural". It has been suggested by others writing in is that there is no "special" day and these simple nuggets of truth been pushed aside as you are looking for the "mother lode". .

As long as one keeps looking for the right day, the right way, the right music, or any of a myriad of choices being offered out there you will struggle in enjoying the rest that is ours TODAY.

We have been made "ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (IICor 3:6) It is sad, but many Christians have gone back under the letter and are trying to keep the first day being told it is a special day and the 7th day, well enough has been said on that.

Paul pleads with the Colossians in chapter 2:
4 "And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words."
6 "As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him"
8 "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." (yes, like it or not days are rudiments of the world)
14 "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross"
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come"
20"Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances"


1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. 6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

Sound liberal? Actually it is LIBERATED!:godisgood:

 

[BobRyan]

Your argument seems to be of the form "if anyone tries to trick you into doing what scripture actually says then you will be lost".

Not sure I am comfortable with that kind of "solution"

#1. My Bible has 66 books - not just 27.
#2. ALL scripture is inspired and to be used for doctrine 2Tim 3:16
#3 "IF you love Me KEEP My COMMANDMENTS" John 14:15 are the words of Christ - not of men
#4. Christ condemns the teaching that the Word of God is to be abolished broken or negated in Matt 6.

 

[skypair]

BobR,

Got a couple questions --- do you celebrate Passover? the Feast of Tabernacles? Pentecost? Those are all "Sabbaths," right?

skypair

 

[trustitl]

Your argument seems to be of the form "if anyone tries to trick you into doing what scripture actually says then you will be lost".

Not sure I am comfortable with that kind of "solution"

#1. My Bible has 66 books - not just 27.
#2. ALL scripture is inspired and to be used for doctrine 2Tim 3:16
#3 "IF you love Me KEEP My COMMANDMENTS" John 14:15 are the words of Christ - not of men
#4. Christ condemns the teaching that the Word of God is to be abolished broken or negated in Matt 6.

I didn't say anything about being lost. Is that something waying heavily on your mind? I just pointed out that you are teaching something that takes away something that a believer has: a reward and liberty. Your understanding of liberty is "I can do whatever I want" and nothing will happen. That is not liberty in the US and it isn't in the kingdom of God either. Our reward and liberty is walking in TRUTH with the Spirit of God. Until you experience it, it is hard to understand. It is sad that so many have used their "liberty as an occasion to the flesh". I believe it contributes to those who are weak in faith to take the road you are travelling.

I find it interesting that you didn't comment on the verses from the last 27 books of your bible. Until you are willing to read them without your false doctrines in the way you will never walk in truth. Why do you want to live under the ministration of death and condemnation when grace is available?

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: 8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

I will take the exceedingly more glorious ministrations.

 

[BobRyan]

TI -

We have been made "ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (IICor 3:6) It is sad, but many Christians have gone back under the letter and are trying to keep the first day being told it is a special day and the 7th day, well enough has been said on that.

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Your argument seems to be of the form "if anyone tries to trick you into doing what scripture actually says then you will be lost".

Not sure I am comfortable with that kind of "solution"

#1. My Bible has 66 books - not just 27.
#2. ALL scripture is inspired and to be used for doctrine 2Tim 3:16
#3 "IF you love Me KEEP My COMMANDMENTS" John 14:15 are the words of Christ - not of men
#4. Christ condemns the teaching that the Word of God is to be abolished broken or negated in Matt 6.

TI
didn't say anything about being lost.

Not sure how your invoking "letter kills" in connection with those who are arguing in favor of scripture on the topic of Christ Creator's Holy day is bendable to "kills but not in a loss of salvation kinda way".

TI
find it interesting that you didn't comment on the verses from the last 27 books of your bible. Until you are willing to read them without your false doctrines in the way you will never walk in truth

Back to the point raised in this post -- Feel free to explain rather than attack.

Also feel free to note the "inconvenient detail" that all my appeals to John 14, Matt 6, 2Tim 3, (and the list could go on) ARE references to the instruction given in the last 27 books!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: 8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

I will take the exceedingly more glorious ministrations.

You are trying to bend Paul's argument in 2Cor 3 in a way that slices and dices scripture into the "acceptable" vs the "unnacceptable" -- which is an abuse of the text.

Paul himself argues in Eph 6:1-4 for the continued authorotative role of the OT text and EVEN the Ten Commandment text (just as James does in James 2).

Your segment-slice-and-dice attempt from 2Cor 3 does not stand the test of scripture EVEN from a NT standpoint!

And worse - it folds scripture back on itself to create "two gospels" which Paul also condemns.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

BobR,

Got a couple questions --- do you celebrate Passover? the Feast of Tabernacles? Pentecost? Those are all "Sabbaths," right?

skypair

The annual shadow "predictive" Sabbaths of Lev 23 are centered in now-expired animal sacrifices and clearly point foreward to RESCUE in Christ as savior..

The MEMORIAL weekly Sabbath Gen 2:3 is centered in rest and worship and points BACK to Christ as Creator -- "Worship HIM who MADE the heavens and the earth" Rev 14... yes -- even post cross as we see in Rev 14 the focus is on Christ our Creator and Worship based on the Creation event facts.

Skypair - question for you..

How does the end of annual animal sacrifices "create" a command in scripture to keep week-day-1 holy? (Getting back to the OP)

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

1. It is quite evident from the Acts-narrative that their were two groups of monotheism: the Jews and then the Christians.

2. The Jews had their Sabbath and the Christians had the Lord's Day.

GE

Now here's the kind of stuff I expected for an answer to my 'thread-title'. What support have you for your last statement - from all the Scriptures, this very one referred of Acts 15 included?

Will you please elaborate specifically, because I want to see how you get to your second conclusion. I shall find your explanation most interesting. (Don't let others do it for you. Bob, hang on with all your quotes for a while - let's give the gentleman ample opportunity to state his case.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Bob Ryan,

"How does the end of annual animal sacrifices "create" a command in scripture to keep week-day-1 holy? (Getting back to the OP)"

GE

Ja, this is it! But let's make the question a bit broader, let's simply make it, 'How does 'the Law'/'Scripture', "create" the idea to Christian esteem of week-day-1? (Getting back to the OP)

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Trustit! post 103 referring.

This thread is an invitation to Sundaydarians, not for Sabbatharians.

But explain to me please the omission that you have made in your making use (I won't call it abuse yet) of Colossians 2? How is it you left out verse 18 especially?

 

[TCGreek]

Trustit! post 103 referring.

This thread is an invitation to Sundaydarians, not for Sabbatharians.

But explain to me please the omission that you have made in your making use (I won't call it abuse yet) of Colossians 2? How is it you left out verse 18 especially?

1. A careful read of the Acts-narrative would reveal a tension between the Jews who met on the Sabbath and the people of the Way, the Christians.

2. We see this from Acts 20:1ff and the numerous opposition Paul met from the Jews. We need to remember why Paul wen to the Sabbath (Acts 17:1-4).

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

And something else, trustit!, how is it I don't find the words you quoted under Colossians 2 verses 1 onwards? Was it deliberate? Or are you perhaps referring (not much of a quote after your placing it in apposition with Colossians 2, is it?) ... referring to another Scripture?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Trustit! post 103 referring.

This thread is an invitation to Sundaydarians, not for Sabbatharians.

But explain to me please the omission that you have made in your making use (I won't call it abuse yet) of Colossians 2? How is it you left out verse 18 especially?

1. A careful read of the Acts-narrative would reveal a tension between the Jews who met on the Sabbath and the people of the Way, the Christians.

2. We see this from Acts 20:1ff and the numerous opposition Paul met from the Jews. We need to remember why Paul wen to the Sabbath (Acts 17:1-4).

GE

You refer to Acts 17 and 20. I asked you about leaving out verses 18 and 19 of Colossians 2.

But nevermind, I'll ask you this re your reference to Acts: Does not 'a careful read of the Acts-narrative reveal a tension between the Jews and the people of the Way, the Christians, who met on the Sabbath? Is this not a true question? (Yes, I do imply your conclusion is false because it is based on the false presupposition of " ... a tension between the Jews who met on the Sabbath --- and the people of the Way, the Christians."

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

trustit!

"1. A careful read of the Acts-narrative would reveal a tension between the Jews who met on the Sabbath and the people of the Way, the Christians.

2. We see this from Acts 20:1ff and the numerous opposition Paul met from the Jews. We need to remember why Paul wen to the Sabbath (Acts 17:1-4)."

GE

How could you think your 'argument' wouldn't be recognised for its stereo-typicality? Its rather boring. This was heavy artilary for more than five centuries. But today atom bombs are the only thing that save one's skin.

 

[trustitl]

Sunday keeping

GE

I was not the one that brought in Acts 17.

Also, I am not quite sure what you are getting at regarding Col 2:18-19. To me these verses didn't really seem to be addressing those teaching keeping the law. It appears that some were into "angel worship" and voluntary humility (which was probably some form of asceticism) that Paul saw as taking away from Christ the same way the handwriting of ordinances did.

Also, I am not a Sundaydarian or Sabbatharian. I think both sides pushing(not practicing) their view are wrong. If you want to do either, do it unto the Lord without talking about it for a couple of years and see how you feel.

Romans 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. 18 For he that in these things(including the issue addressed in vv. 5-6) serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. 19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.

It is sad that some unbelievers may visit this site and ask "why dost thou set at nought thy brother? (V. 10) instead of saying look at them edify each other(v 19).:tear: I say this as somebody that was guilty of judging my brother regarding this issue and saw the "fruit" it bore.

Acts 17 and 20 do not seem to provide a lot of support for making a doctrine which clearly contradicts the truths in Romans 14. They did these things. Does that mean we need to? Ever do a holy kiss, have your wife wear a headcovering, refuse to eat some meats...? Look at some modern examples - dividng based on music styles, clothes, modes of education,... God is saddened by it all.

So my answer to the question "Why does the Sunday-keeping church think of Sunday as the Sabbath?" is that they think the early church did it so we should to. Paul would say:

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. 18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.

20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, 21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

There, I didn't leave them out this time! :thumbs:

Thanks for asking. God bless!

 

[BobRyan]

God said "honor your father and mother" not "if you prefer then go ahead and honor your parents -- otherwise just do as you please"?

Can we at least get agreement there?

In that case - is the "Remember the Sabbath day... for in six days the Lord Created... and rested the seventh day therefore the lord Blessed the Sabbath and made it holy" in the form of a "suggestion"? Is it in a form that could be applied to any non-sabbath weekday?

Paul says "What matters is keeping the commandments" 1Cor 7:19 -- what does he mean?

Could it be stretched to include Observing week-day-1?
Ignoring scriptures as we find them in Acts 17:11?
Ignoring the pre-cross words of Christ John 15:14? "If you Love Me KEEP My commandments"?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[trustitl]

Paul says "What matters is keeping the commandments" 1Cor 7:19 -- what does he mean?

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."

Obvioulsy the sabbath is the 7th day, Bob. And obviously God didn't say to the Jews "if you prefer..." These ae really elementary arguments.

Why is it so hard to see that the Kingdom of God is different than the kingdom of Isreal? You do not do sacrifices because you see that it no longer applies to you. The "slicing and dicing" (as you like to say I do with the scriptures) of the law into the moral, civil, and ceremonial is man-made. The law is the law, and God said to do it all. Then do it all or see that the purpose of the law is passed for the children of promise.

Gal. 3:19 "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made;"

Gal 4:28 "Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise."

Gal 4:21 "Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? 22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. 24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

What, is 'Scriptural'; what would make an 'argument' for or against the First Day as Day of Christian worship, 'scriptural'; what would prevent it from being 'Scriptural'?
QUOTE]

The way the question is phrased implies that there is a right or wrong answer: the right one being "scriptural". It has been suggested by others writing in is that there is no "special" day and these simple nuggets of truth been pushed aside as you are looking for the "mother lode". .

As long as one keeps looking for the right day, the right way, the right music, or any of a myriad of choices being offered out there you will struggle in enjoying the rest that is ours TODAY.

We have been made "ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (IICor 3:6) It is sad, but many Christians have gone back under the letter and are trying to keep the first day being told it is a special day and the 7th day, well enough has been said on that.

Paul pleads with the Colossians in chapter 2:
4 "And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words."
6 "As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him"
8 "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." (yes, like it or not days are rudiments of the world)
14 "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross"
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come"
20"Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances"


1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. 6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

Sound liberal? Actually it is LIBERATED!:godisgood:

GE

I shall give you 10/10 for the perfect example of an un-scriptural answer to my question. You have not even started to give the Scriptures a turn to speak - you shouted it dead with your conceited delusion of 'liberty' in the first place, and in the second place with the perfect example again of bad 'exegesis' and mutalation of the text. So twice full marks to you; but consider for what. If I were you I would have been too ashamed to parade my inability and fear to face the Scriptures' challenge like you did . But you are obviously very pleased with yourself.