Rumors About God's Holy Sabbath Dispelled

[Protestant101]

You follow your pope and we follow ours. The Catholic church does not teach hatred of the SDA. Catholics teach that you have been mislead. The SDA church teaches that the Pope is demon-inspired and that our church is a whore. I’ve read some of your church’s publications. Your apparent increasing bitterness is the fruit of such teaching.

I continue to pray for you.

We also do not teach hatred of Catholics. Our authors, have equally condemned Adventists when they step out of line with the Bible; but it is the idea or doctrine that is condemned, not a people group. Of course, you would like to make such a charge stick; it would be an easy out for you; but your Roman church leadership does not give us a very good review either, once we start looking into it.

Luther himself even said that he does not condemn all Catholic Popes, and that he would make exceptions with individual Popes in his denunciations. I find much agreement in that position.

You guys should quit the cry-baby routines with accusations of hatred and face the music that not everything you are being fed with is “truth.” Me, or anyone else saying that has nothing to do with “hatred.”

 

[Protestant101]

No, you’re the one who’s saying that. You’re the one who harps on Saturday as the Sabbath, but is quite willing to ignore all those other commandments.

And how about yourself – do you donate your income every 7th year to the poor?

You know what I like about these threads (this isn’t the only SDA thread we’ve seen here, you know)?

They blame Catholics for changing the Sabbath to Sunday. Now, we know that Christians were worshiping on Sunday very early – Justin’s First Apology is an example of an early document that tells us that.

But the SDA don’t accuse the Baptists, Episcopalians, Methodists, or other Protestants for changing the Sabbath – they accuse Catholics.

Which is, of course, a tacit admission we are the original Christians.

Well; we do say that these other Protestants follow the Catholic lead, and therefore bow down to her “authority” every Sunday.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Well; we do say that these other Protestants follow the Catholic lead, and therefore bow down to her “authority” every Sunday.

Well, if the** first** Christians chose Sunday as their day of worship, and you depart from their practice, are you not departing from Christianity? After all, all we know of Christianity is what they handed down to us.

And if you abandon Christianity, what excuse do you have for not honoring all 600+ Commandments?

 

[Protestant101]

No, you’re the one who’s saying that. You’re the one who harps on Saturday as the Sabbath, but is quite willing to ignore all those other commandments.

I am trying to find out what you are telling us about the commandments when you say I “harp on the fourth, but am willing to ignore all the other ones.”

If I agree with you that we don’t have to keep the Sabbath, then what would that mean? How would you advise that Christians approach the ten or the 600 commandments?

And BTW; it is not just the Sabbath that I “harp” about. I would say the same about any of the ten commandments. Many in “the Church” also ignore the seventh commandment and find it perfectly acceptable to carry out not only adultery but all manner of sexual abuses and perversions.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I am trying to find out what you are telling us about the commandments when you say I “harp on the fourth, but am willing to ignore all the other ones.”

If I agree with you that we don’t have to keep the Sabbath, then what would that mean? How would you advise that Christians approach the ten or the 600 commandments?

And BTW; it is not just the Sabbath that I “harp” about. I would say the same about any of the ten commandments. Many in “the Church” also ignore the seventh commandment and find it perfectly acceptable to carry out not only adultery but all manner of sexual abuses and perversions.

Ah, the Ten Commandments. But you ignore the other 600+.

Gotcha.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I kind of lost track of this thread, but I still dont recall seeing a SDA response to my posts on page 1.

 

[po18guy]

The Lord God knew from all eternity the events of the future, since He alone controls everything. He could have chosen to raise His Son on any day of the week, but He chose Sunday.

I have heard no answer as to why God raised His Son on Sunday, just what it meant for man, and why some churches ignore it.

Christ’s peace.

 

[Protestant101]

The Lord God knew from all eternity the events of the future, since He alone controls everything. He could have chosen to raise His Son on any day of the week, but He chose Sunday.

I have heard no answer as to why God raised His Son on Sunday, just what it meant for man, and why some churches ignore it.

Christ’s peace.

In other words; Shouldn’t we Keep Sunday in Honor of the Resurrection?

It is true that Jesus rose on the first day of the week, but nowhere is there the slightest intimation in the Bible for anyone to keep that day holy. Conversely; the basis for Sabbathkeeping is the direct handwritten command of God.

Many wonderful events occurred on certain days of the week, but we have no command to keep them holy. Jesus died for our sins on Friday. That is probably the most significant event in all of recorded history. It marks the moment my death sentence was commuted and my salvation assured. But not one Bible text hints that we should observe this day (Friday) of such great significance.

It was a dramatic moment when Jesus rose from the grave on that Sunday morning, but there is not a iota of biblical evidence that we should observe it in honor of the resurrection. Not one instance of Sunday (in place of Sabbath) observance has been found in the recorded Scriptures.

There is, of course, a memorial of the resurrection commanded in the Bible, but it is not Sundaykeeping. Paul wrote: “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” Romans 6:4.

Baptism is the only memorial of Christ’s death, burial and resurrection, that we find in the Bible. Those who believe that Sunday observance honors His resurrection cite the upper room meeting of the disciples on the same day He arose from the grave. To them that gathering was to celebrate His resurrection. But when we read the Bible record of the event, we discover that the circumstances were quite different.

Luke tells us that, even though the disciples were confronted with the eyewitness story of Mary Magdalene, they “believed not.”

“After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.” Mark 16:12-14.

Obviously, none of those upper room disciples believed that He was raised, so they could not have been joyously celebrating the resurrection. John explains their reason for being together in these words:

“The doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews.” John 20:19.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. . .

It was a dramatic moment when Jesus rose from the grave on that Sunday morning, but there is not a iota of biblical evidence that we should observe it in honor of the resurrection. Not one instance of Sunday (in place of Sabbath) observance has been found in the recorded Scriptures. . . .:

Acts 20:6-7

but we sailed away from Philippi after the days of Unleavened Bread, and in five days we came to them at Troas, where we stayed for seven days. 7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the morrow; and he prolonged his speech until midnight

 

[po18guy]

the basis for Sabbathkeeping is the direct handwritten command of God.

The Old Testament, yes. What about the New Testament? Adventists neither eat the OT Passover lamb, nor the NT Body and Blood of the Lamb of God, Christ. How does that keep either God’s Old Testament command or Christ’s New Testament command?

Many wonderful events occurred on certain days of the week, but we have no command to keep them holy. Jesus died for our sins on Friday. That is probably the most significant event in all of recorded history.

After Creation, yes.

It marks the moment my death sentence was commuted and my salvation assured.

Assured? Then, you can go on a murderous rampage, commit suicide and be in heaven that night? Was Judas’ salvation assured? “Woe unto him by which the Son of Man is betrayed. It would be better for him if he had never been born”. That has a distinct bad newsy sound to it!

It was a dramatic moment when Jesus rose from the grave on that Sunday morning, but there is not a iota of biblical evidence that we should observe it in honor of the resurrection.

Name a better day. The day before? This is also what happens when you squeeze an infinite God between the covers of a book, no matter how holy that book is.

Not one instance of Sunday (in place of Sabbath) observance has been found in the recorded Scriptures.

Christ was constantly criticized for breaking the Sabbath, and allowing His disciples to do so. Could God the Father have lead Jesus’ human nature into sin? Or, was this the heralding of the completion of the Old Covenant and the Advent of the new Covenant? “The Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath”

Baptism is the only memorial of Christ’s death, burial and resurrection, that we find in the Bible. Those who believe that Sunday observance honors His resurrection (This would be 100% of Christians up to 1844, and 99+ % thereafter) cite the upper room meeting of the disciples on the same day He arose from the grave. To them that gathering was to celebrate His resurrection. But when we read the Bible record of the event, we discover that the circumstances were quite different.

OK. So the gathering was without purpose, and was specifically written of and placed in scripture for no purpose? If true, this calls the entire book into question, does it not?

Christ’s peace.

 

[po18guy]

Acts 20:6-7

D’oh! :doh2:
This almost sounds like the Apostles listened to Jesus when He said:
(Matthew 28:18) Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.”
-and-
(Matthew 18:18) “I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Such chutzpah almost sounds like the arrival of a New Covenant!

Christ’s peace.

 

[Protestant101]

The Old Testament, yes. What about the New Testament? Adventists neither eat the OT Passover lamb, nor the NT Body and Blood of the Lamb of God, Christ. How does that keep either God’s Old Testament command or Christ’s New Testament command?

After Creation, yes.

Assured? Then, you can go on a murderous rampage, commit suicide and be in heaven that night? Was Judas’ salvation assured? “Woe unto him by which the Son of Man is betrayed. It would be better for him if he had never been born”. That has a distinct bad newsy sound to it!

Name a better day. The day before? This is also what happens when you squeeze an infinite God between the covers of a book, no matter how holy that book is.

Christ was constantly criticized for breaking the Sabbath, and allowing His disciples to do so. Could God the Father have lead Jesus’ human nature into sin? Or, was this the heralding of the completion of the Old Covenant and the Advent of the new Covenant? “The Son of Man is Lord, even of the Sabbath”

OK. So the gathering was without purpose, and was specifically written of and placed in scripture for no purpose? If true, this calls the entire book into question, does it not?

Christ’s peace.

You should acknowledge that you are the one who put the blue fonts into my quote above.

You stated "Christ was constantly criticized for breaking the Sabbath, and allowing His disciples to do so. " as if to make it sound like our Lord would break His own law, and disobey His own Word. Jesus only broke the laws which the Pharisees concocted about the Sabbath; none of those were a part of the commandment; and He did this to rebuke them for laying so many burdens upon the Sabbath which He would never do. Not one hint anywhere Of Jesus ever rescinding the seventh-day Sabbath. Only in the anachronistic Catholic theology which you enkindle with such lurid fervency.

 

[NotWorthy]

Only in the anachronistic Catholic theology which you enkindle with such lurid fervency.

Wow, I’m going to be up all night with my dictionary after this one sentence. Lurid Fervency, I tell you! Lurid Fervency!

Protestant 101, you still haven’t addressed the main response to your OP. What about Acts where they gather together for Mass (i.e., the breaking of the Bread) on the Lord’s Day.

That was a precedent, mind you, set by Jesus who performed the first Mass on Easter Sunday at Emmaus. (To all you Luridly Fervent Catholics, I’m disappointed that you didn’t use this as a reason for celebrating the Mass on Sundays).

 

[Protestant101]

Wow, I’m going to be up all night with my dictionary after this one sentence. Lurid Fervency, I tell you! Lurid Fervency!

Protestant 101, you still haven’t addressed the main response to your OP. What about Acts where they gather together for Mass (i.e., the breaking of the Bread) on the Lord’s Day.

That was a precedent, mind you, set by Jesus who performed the first Mass on Easter Sunday at Emmaus. (To all you Luridly Fervent Catholics, I’m disappointed that you didn’t use this as a reason for celebrating the Mass on Sundays).

Well; regardless of what you say Jesus did in Acts; it is still clear that no verse exists to rescind the seventh-day Sabbath. Even your own Church authorities will tell you that.

PS; glad you like the “lurid fervency!!”

 

[NotWorthy]

Well; regardless of what you say Jesus did in Acts; it is still clear that no verse exists to rescind the seventh-day Sabbath. Even your own Church authorities will tell you that.

But… but… but, I thought Scriptures are your only guide.

And yet, when Scriptures clearly indicate that Jesus first, and then the Apostles celebrate Mass on Sunday, you then appeal to our “Church Authorities”.

Why don’t you appeal to our Church Authorities for other teachings, my friend?

P.S. Yes, I do love that lurid fervency, unless it means something anatomically impossible (you see, I haven’t looked it up, yet!)

 

[Protestant101]

But… but… but, I thought Scriptures are your only guide.

And yet, when Scriptures clearly indicate that Jesus first, and then the Apostles celebrate Mass on Sunday, you then appeal to our “Church Authorities”.

Why don’t you appeal to our Church Authorities for other teachings, my friend?

the breaking of bread had nothing to do with “Mass;” and nothing to do with change of the Sabbath. It’s not there in the Bible text. All I did was to point out that your own church’s official teachings would actually agree, there is no Bible text to support changing of the seventh-day sabbath. I only appealed to your own church’s authorities so that you would understand better what they teach; certainly not to prove any doctrine. if you think that word twisting is somehow going to magically change key Bible doctrines like the seventh-day Sabbath; then all I can say is “help yourself.” (I am not sure who else you would help. The vociferous bromides of a thousand Catholic “apologists” will never catch up to Scripture.

 

[NotWorthy]

the breaking of bread had nothing to do with “Mass;” and nothing to do with change of the Sabbath. It’s not there in the Bible text. All I did was to point out that your own church’s official teachings would actually agree, there is no Bible text to support changing of the seventh-day sabbath. I only appealed to your own church’s authorities so that you would understand better what they teach; certainly not to prove any doctrine. if you think that word twisting is somehow going to magically change key Bible doctrines like the seventh-day Sabbath; then all I can say is “help yourself.” (I am not sure who else you would help. The vociferous bromides of a thousand Catholic “apologists” will never catch up to Scripture.

If you look to the history of your early ch…, er…, THE Early Church, you’d find that “Breaking of the Bread” was synonymous with “Mass”.

P.S. The voiciferous bromides of thousands of Catholic Apologists helped determine the Canon of Scripture. That’s how they determined the Canon, by choosing whichever Scriptures matched Church Doctrines.

 

[po18guy]

You should acknowledge that you are the one who put the blue fonts into my quote above.

Mea culpa! Was it that obvious?

You stated "Christ was constantly criticized for breaking the Sabbath, and allowing His disciples to do so. " as if to make it sound like our Lord would break His own law, and disobey His own Word. Jesus only broke the laws which the Pharisees concocted about the Sabbath; none of those were a part of the commandment; and He did this to rebuke them for laying so many burdens upon the Sabbath which He would never do. Not one hint anywhere Of Jesus ever rescinding the seventh-day Sabbath.

Did Jesus give the power to bind and loose, or not?

Only in the anachronistic Catholic theology which you enkindle with such lurid fervency.

The L-rd G-d of Israel is referred to as “the Ancient One” Is He an anachronism as well?

I know nothing of lurid fervency. The Apostles appeared drunk out of their joy in Christ. If the increasing love I have for Christ shines through, then praise God!

Christ’s peace.

 

[Protestant101]

Did Jesus give the power to bind and loose, or not?

God’s law needs no “binding” or “loosing.”

 

[Protestant101]

If you look to the history of your early ch…, er…, THE Early Church, you’d find that “Breaking of the Bread” was synonymous with “Mass”.

P.S. The voiciferous bromides of thousands of Catholic Apologists helped determine the Canon of Scripture. That’s how they determined the Canon, by choosing whichever Scriptures matched Church Doctrines.

Name the text in Acts you are referring to, and show where it says “Mass.” The disciples were just eating a meal together. It had nothing to do with the Sabbath being changed.