Seventh Day Adventist question

[Arglaze]

The claim that Sunday worship is man-made because it began with the early Christians and was later formally confirmed by the Church depends on an understanding of the Church as a man-made “institution.” But the Church is *not *man-made. She is the Bride and Body of Our Lord, born from His side at Calvary, entrusted with honoring and glorfying Him and bringing all souls to Him until He comes again.

The Church of God is not man made, but it has the ability to make mistakes, and even contradict God himself, as noted in Scripture record from Adam and Eve, down to our times, the Inquisition, etc. So as humans, church leaders can err, and so can the church, which is not man-made. If the church could never err, then they wouldn’t need to apologize for the sins they’ve committed (i.e. Inquisition, crusades, etc). My denomination included (when as a church we do something wrong).

That doesn’t mean there isn’t redemption, but the idea that the Church cannot err is a utopia.

<< Ariel >>

 

[Arglaze]

So you’re a Christian who does not believe in observing the Lord’s Day in any way because you think it “man’s tradition”?

Or your a Christian who believes in observing the Lord’s day on Sunday because the Lord chose that day to rise from the dead and to inspire the Church at Pentecost?

This is not a fair open-ended question for that person.

And please give me the Bible text that says, Sunday is ‘The Lord’s day’. As far as I read on the Bible, the only day that Jesus said he’s Lord of was the Sabbath in Matthew 12:8 “For the Son of man is Lord of the sabbath day.”
The term "the Lord’s day’ is a very loosely used term.

Also, Jesus rising from the grave on Sunday, and Pentecost were prophetically foretold in the Laws of Ceremonies, which directly coincide with the feast of First fruits, which was a Sunday, and Pentecost 50 days after, which was also a Sunday. Its the fulfillment of the Law of Ceremonies in anti type

Ariel.

 

[Arglaze]

In my opinion, you can’t worship Jesus and keep Jewish Law - that’s the whole point of the book of Romans.

That’s also the whole point of Galatians. In fact, Paul warns them that if they accept Jewish practices, Christ will do them no good.

The point of the book of Romans and Galatians is the works of the flesh Vs works of the Spirit.
If we read carefully the book of Romans and Galatians you’ll notice that the controversy was not on the 10 commandment moral law, but the ceremonial law, which included circumcision. And the Jews were telling the new converts that if they didn’t circumcise the same way Abraham did, then they couldn’t be saved.
Read carefully and you’ll see that.

Jesus himself said the greatest commandments were (in short) Love God with all your heart (the first 4), and love thy neighbor as yourself (the last 6). And he was quoting from the book of Deuteronomy 6:5 & Leviticus 19:18.

Those two comprise the moral law (10 commandments), they are not the ceremonial Law the Jews were forcing the Christians in the New Testament to practice, they are eternal, and existed before the fall of man. And if it were not so, then God would be ok with breaking every single one of them. From the not having other Gods and the Sabbath, to the not honoring your parents, killing and lying, etc. But He is not ok with that. Therefore the 10 commandments were not nailed to the cross.

 

[fbl9]

The Church of God is not man made, but it has the ability to make mistakes, and even contradict God himself, as noted in Scripture record from Adam and Eve, down to our times, the Inquisition, etc. So as humans, church leaders can err, and so can the church, which is not man-made. If the church could never err, then they wouldn’t need to apologize for the sins they’ve committed (i.e. Inquisition, crusades, etc). My denomination included (when as a church we do something wrong).

That doesn’t mean there isn’t redemption, but the idea that the Church cannot err is a utopia.

<< Ariel >>

after reading this i don’t think you know what you are saying. Why? in this post you are saying that yes the catholic church is the church of God…and you are not the church but merely a denomination…

 

[Arglaze]

I have no problem at all with agreeing that the Sabbath is the holy day to be observed by the Jewsih people. Howerver, WE ARE NOT JEWISH, WE ARE CHRISTIAN. Which means we follow Christ. I know that Christ was a good Jew but, he came to fulfill the jewish law.

According to the OLD Covenant, God rested from His creation on the last day of the week, BUT, according to the NEW covenant, established by Jesus whom we follow, He rose on the first day of the week. So, I wouldn’t say that Sunday worship was established by “man-made tradition.” On the contrary, it was establish by Jesus Himself when He rose on Sunday morning.

Again, the Sabbath is not of the Jews. Its of the world because it existed before the fall of humanity. Which God pronounced as good after completing.

Correct the Bible if its wrong, but here I’ll lay the new covenant that Jesus established as written in the Book of Jeremiah 31:31,33. "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."
No where in there does Jesus say he’ll change the day of worship that He himself created. In fact it confirms the keeping of the Sabbath because it says he’ll write his Law in their hearts. Also, according to Paul, there’s no distinction in our responsibilities to God such as Jews or Christians, we’re all one in Jesus. Only difference is some Jews in his days accepted him as Messiah, and others didn’t. But the people we call Christians are actually Jews by obeying God’s Law like Paul says on Romans 2:28
“For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” This whole Jew and Gentile separation of responsibilities toward Him is not of Jesus, since we’re all in Jesus one.

It was the Apostles that “changed” the worship of the Sabbath. They actually began to worship Jesus in the synagogues on Sunday after keeping the Sabbath on Saturday. They kept both days holy until the Jews expelled them from their synagogues, then the followers of Jesus worshiped on Sunday because He rose on Sunday and established the New covenant on that day.

The apostles didn’t “keep” the Sunday “holy”, they had meeting on Sundays, and it has nothing to do with the Lord rising on Sunday, there’s no correlation in the scriptures for that, nor record of them not keeping the Sabbath thereafter. Any day of the week is good to meet, and pray, and organize church activities.
John said in the book of Revelation, that He was on the Lord’s Day (Sabbath according to Jesus’ own words in Matthew 12:8) when he recieved his vision.
Paul also in Acts 17:2, meet in the synagogues on Sabbath. There’s no scripture proof for “keeping the sunday holy”. As I said previously, Jesus rising on sunday and the apostles’ pentecost is a prophetic fulfillment of a ceremonial Law depicted in Lev. 23 which coincides with the record.

In my opinion, you can’t worship Jesus and keep Jewish Law - that’s the whole point of the book of Romans. Jesus came to establish the New Covenant, if you are Christian then you follow the New Covenant. Other wise, you miss the whole point of His life, death and resurrection.

Constantine may have made an official “edict” about the day of worship but it was nothing new. Christians had been worshipping on Sundays for 300 years already. He just made it official. Sunday is the memorial of His resurrection and the establishment of the New Covenant.

The New Covenant is the 10 com. moral Law in our hearts. If not so, then please give me some texts so I can better understand what the “New Covenant” means. Romans and Galatians, were being forced by the Jews to keep the Ceremonial Laws, which includes circumcision, and there arose the problem, it had nothing to do with the 10 comm. Law. If you can’t keep that law and the “new covenant” not only is that redundant, but its ok to kill, steal, etc.

And even if the disciples were to say (which they didn’t): “we’ll change the “observance” of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, in honor of Jesus resurrection”, that would be in direct contradiction to the Scriptures they used to learn of God. Lets keep in mind, they didn’t have the New Testament, they studied from the OT and taught what we now in the NT from the OT.

 

[Arglaze]

after reading this i don’t think you know what you are saying. Why? in this post you are saying that yes the catholic church is the church of God…and you are not the church but merely a denomination…

1. Honestly, I don’t know how you got that idea from what I said. I in no way am saying that the Catholic church is the Church of God and we are only a denomination. I’m using the term denomination because that’s what we’re more familiar with, but if you prefer I use the term church its fine with me.
2. The point I refered to deals with the assumption that God’s people can or “church” can never err from walking in God’s way. Time and again God’s people in both the Old Testament and the New Testament have drifted away from God. Even today the church of God does wrong against him, its a biblical fact. And I included my church and any church including the catholic church which says “they can never err” when we do wrong, because I don’t believe I am holier or better than you, because all churches and “denominations” have the ability to change their position against God. Even if they say they are doing it in His name, i.e. the inquisition (for the catholic church) and I would give you an example of my church, but that would spawn a long list of replies that I believe should be kept for another forum.

I hope I explained myself
<>

 

[Arglaze]

But the Sabbath focus is not the abstention from work,

Yes, it is. That’s what the commandment actually says.

Abstention from work is a minor part of the Sabbath, and my apologies for saying its not the focus of the Sabbath, what I meant is that its not the only or main focus of the Sabbath. The command is divided in 3 parts and its 1 all together.

1. Remember it to keep it holy
2. Abstain from work, because
3. God made the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th and hallowed it.

If you really want to know the meaning of keeping the Sabbath, its depicted in many parts of the scripture, but my favorite one is in Isaiah 58:13-14. Which if understood correctly, more than a list of prohibitions, is God saying he wants to give u his blessing. But how can he do that if we are just working and working or distracted with anything else.
And as I said before, Catholics up till recently, used to keep the Sunday the same way the sabbath was kept. But out of tradition.

Ariel

 

[Arglaze]

I stand corrected on saying that the Pope changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, it was a Catholic Ruler and Emperor named Constantine.

Since at the time, Constantine had not been baptized, he could not be considered a Catholic at all.

Do you have proof he hadn’t been baptized??
And regardless, its still a man made law.

 

[Arglaze]

** Originally Posted by Arglaze View Post

1. That may be how you feel, however the church that changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday is the Catholic church, and thats a historical fact. …**

**Et reliqua.

What would you say if there were an ancient Jewish Christian community that had never had anything to do with any pope at at time in its history?
What would you say about their practices? You certainly couldn’t blame them on that nasty ole pope feller.
Well, there is JUST such an ancient Jewish Christian church located in India.
They came to India in the second century–nearly two centuries before Constantine.
They have a three-fold hierarchy of bishops, presbyters, and deacons, as well as minor ministers.
They have a fully developed liturgy and sacraments.
They believe that the bread and wine of the Eucharist become the Body and Blood of Christ.
They have been separated by hundreds of years and hundreds of miles from the Roman Empire and never had anything to do with the Roman Pontiff.
And guess what their main day of worship is?
Hint–it’s not Saturday.

Would you like to try again?**

Constantine just made official something that for Pagan Rome was already a practice. I’m not surprised by Jewish Christians having Sunday as a day of ‘worship’ in India, but is too broad and arguable, its not Biblical Truth. We wouldn’t have enough space here to discuss it.
But I will say, before or after Constantine, I’m still to hear scripture proof of the disciples changing the “observance” of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. And like I’ve said before, any day of the week is a good day to meet pray and organize church activities, but the “observance” of the Sabbath is dedicated to Saturday by Jesus himself.

The Catholic church just picked it because it was more convenient and accommodates to the World Laws of the time, which progressed down through history. But no were was the “sabbath observance” Saturday changed. No scripture proof. Just assumptions made on Jesus resurrection and that is a new wind of doctrine, not heard from the mouth of any of the 12 apostles or Paul.

<< Ariel >>

 

[SoulEspresso]

Greetings in the Lord Jesus!

I’m an Adventist pastor and found myself on these boards after googling for some information about the book of Job–decided to browse, and found this thread.

I believe the first mention of Sunday worship is in the middle of the second century in Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho. The first and seventh days of the week were observed in large areas of the Church from that time (according to available records) through the fourth or fifth century. Over time, Sunday gained more prominence, partly (largely?) out of a desire to make a distinction with the Jews.

Having marinated in the New Testament for years, I don’t think you can establish regular Sunday gatherings without standing a few scarce verses on their heads or taking them out of context. In those records, Our Lord and the apostles observed the seventh day.

What I found interesting about this discussion, though, was the Scriptural argument. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t Catholics count tradition as authoritative as Scripture? If that’s the case, why make an argument from the Bible – if the Church has the authority to make changes such as the day of worship? (Or do I need to go to a different thread for that, LOL?)

By the way, someone earlier mentioned SDA Catholic-bashing. For that I do apologize. We can disagree without being abusive, but many of us SDAs can be quite uncharitable in that regard.

Blessings,
Soul

 

[peary1]

Since they celebrate the Sabbath Saturday and say it is solely the Lord’s Day, they do nothing that is secular. I asked my partner, who is SDA to stop on the way home from his church so I could get a cup of coffee. He said he couldn’t as this was a secular activity. HE wouldn’t be buying, I would. Needless to say, we didn’t stop. I didn’t make a bigh deal out of it, but it made me wonder, do SDA’s do absolutely NOTHING secular on Saturday? He won’t even watch secular TV.
Thanks,
~ Kathy ~

Find a new partner. Over a cup of coffee? O please!!

 

[SoulEspresso]

Find a new partner. Over a cup of coffee? O please!!

If one is willing to lose a friend over a cup of coffee on the Sabbath, it doesn’t say much about the friendship.

I would say that the Adventist in question was either new or not well-informed. The distinction between “secular” and “sacred” isn’t supposed to be one that we make, because all of reality belongs to God. What they may have intended was that Sabbath is a day to focus on the relationship with God to the exclusion of anything that would distract from that.

On either side, though … something from St. Paul that might have applied: “Let us each stop passing judgement, therefore, on one another and decide instead that none of us will place obstacles in any brother’s way, or anything that can bring him down.”

 

[Arglaze]

What I found interesting about this discussion, though, was the Scriptural argument. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t Catholics count tradition as authoritative as Scripture? If that’s the case, why make an argument from the Bible – if the Church has the authority to make changes such as the day of worship?

I agree pastor, not only that but the Pope considers his word as equal as God’s word, since he considers himself the Vicar of Christ.
However, pastor, I believe a lot of Catholics are going back to the Bible to find proof of what they believe in, and that can only mean good news for everyone.

Not that I believe everything wikipedia.org says, but I found this article on the Pope and his being the Vicar very interesting, but would like to keep it outside of this forum, so check it if u want.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicar_of_Christ

<< Ariel >>

 

[Arglaze]

If one is willing to lose a friend over a cup of coffee on the Sabbath, it doesn’t say much about the friendship.

I agree with you in that, I mean, we are called to be light of the world. How can we be light, if we hide our beliefs or don’t live up to them. Just be sure to be ready to give answer to what you’re asked.

I’m an SDA, and if I were driving you on a Sabbath, and you asked me to stop so you could buy coffee, who am I to impose the sabbath on you, unless of course you’re under my roof, in which case, my house my rules, but even so, I can’t tell you what to do or control you. As a friend that also means I have to respect your wishes, just like God respects them.

Isn’t that the compassion that Christ taught about when he said, he that is righteous throw the first stone and not even Jesus, who is righteous threw it?

Ariel >>

 

[SoulEspresso]

I agree pastor, not only that but the Pope considers his word as equal as God’s word, since he considers himself the Vicar of Christ.
However, pastor, I believe a lot of Catholics are going back to the Bible to find proof of what they believe in, and that can only mean good news for everyone.

Not that I believe everything wikipedia.org says, but I found this article on the Pope and his being the Vicar very interesting, but would like to keep it outside of this forum, so check it if u want.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicar_of_Christ

<< Ariel >>

On forums, I’m just Soul. Actually I reject all titles, Matthew 23:8-12 … LOL … but some habits die hard, I know that’s true in my district.

This is OT but I will say the development of the Magisterium (teaching authority) of the RC church makes sense when you look at the historical context. It doesn’t help to say our RC forbears should have been sola scriptura from the beginning when the NT wasn’t collected into single volumes for many, many years after the last apostle rested in the Lord.

The reason I disagree with the level of authority accorded to tradition, is that it goes beyond the teaching of Jesus and the apostles as recorded in the NT; IOW I wish the patristic writers had subjected the traditions that sprang up in various places to the apostolic writings. But that would have been very hard to do, based on historical circumstances. I mean, we’re talking about guys who are basically local pastors trying to hold the faith together in pre-medieval crises. Just getting everybody together for a church council had to be a logistical nightmare.

So even though I’m a sola-scriptura guy myself and can make that case, the RC POV makes sense to me even if I disagree.

The office of the pope as vicar of Christ comes out of the same milieu that gave rise to the Magisterium; it took several centuries (based on the historical record) for the bishop of Rome to be accorded the level of authority he has now (of course readers of this thread will disagree ), and by then Sunday was well established.

Again, this is OT but if you want to go there, the case can be made that Sundaykeeping came not just out of antisemitism but also from a prominent pagan belief that the number 7 was inferior and that the number 8 was the number of perfection–and Sunday was the “8th day.” Scholarly work on this is fairly recent, and I haven’t cross checked it, but Alan Knight made a good case for it in Primitive Christianity In Crisis. I don’t totally agree with everything in the book but the story is great.

 

[SoulEspresso]

I agree with you in that, I mean, we are called to be light of the world. How can we be light, if we hide our beliefs or don’t live up to them. Just be sure to be ready to give answer to what you’re asked.

I’m an SDA, and if I were driving you on a Sabbath, and you asked me to stop so you could buy coffee, who am I to impose the sabbath on you, unless of course you’re under my roof, in which case, my house my rules, but even so, I can’t tell you what to do or control you. As a friend that also means I have to respect your wishes, just like God respects them.

Isn’t that the compassion that Christ taught about when he said, he that is righteous throw the first stone and not even Jesus, who is righteous threw it?

Ariel >>

Jesus Christ is the center and focus of the Sabbath; I have parameters and personal “rules” that help me experience that, but it’s a tough balance explaining that to someone else–because they tend to see the rule and not the Ruler.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Constantine just made official something that for Pagan Rome was already a practice.

**Not true. Read this site:

ralphwoodrow.org/articles/index.html

and download the appropriate article.

Next, the Church is not based on the Bible. The Bible is based on the Church.

According to Acts 2, the Church was functioning in ALL her fullness before ONE WORD of the NT had been written.**

 

[Arglaze]

Constantine just made official something that for Pagan Rome was already a practice.

**Not true. Read this site:

ralphwoodrow.org/articles/index.html**

and download the appropriate article.

Next, the Church is not based on the Bible. The Bible is based on the Church.

According to Acts 2, the Church was functioning in ALL her fullness before ONE WORD of the NT had been written.

The Word of God is what mandates how He wants to be worshiped. We, the church, don’t tell God how He ought to be worshiped. That’s a mistake Cain did and Abel paid with his life for obeying God’s way of worship. The Jews did that and made the Sabbath a day of rest into a day of burden.

Therefore the Church is based on the Word of God, and not the other way. God tells us, not the other way. God’s Word is eternal, men are not. Therefore, men cannot revoke what God says true worship is. And that includes even Jesus’ disciples (which didn’t), and anyone, Paul himself said, if an angel or him or any man preach a different gospel, then let him be accursed (Galatians 1:8-9).

And I agree, the church was working in all her fullness because they studied from the OT scriptures. Which contain the whole Gospel of God, and the NT just makes it even clearer than it already is.

< Ariel >>

 

[Arglaze]

Constantine just made official something that for Pagan Rome was already a practice.

**Not true. Read this site:

ralphwoodrow.org/articles/index.html**
.

Thank you Bpbasilphx for that link, a very interesting article, and something every SDA should probably read and look into. It opened my eyes more to the customs of Pagan Rome, and that they didn’t really worship their gods in a particular day.

I should say, however, The site only says that Sunday-worship didn’t come from pagan Rome. However Constantine made The Sunday a day of rest in honor of the “venerable day of the Sun”. So, if I said he made official something that for pagan Rome was already a practice, I can clearly see how my statement is absolutely wrong in saying that “it was a regular practice”. But its still named after their deities.

And after Constantine’s edict, it became a national day to abstain from labor, correct?

So for Christians, it would be convenient to get together on Sundays to pray and worship and study (and they used to do it before and after the edict), just like some churches get together any day of the week. We adventists as I said before do it on Wednesdays and Fridays, but we don’t keep them “holy”, just like they didn’t “keep” the Sunday “holy”. We observe the sabbath holy. You can’t have 2 “holy” days at the same time, but you can have 1 “holy” day and worship also any other day.

So the Disciples, and apostles, did not keep the Sunday holy. If keeping it holy came after their death, then more likely than not, its a tradition that men decided to do. There’s no biblical foundation for the observance of the Sunday holy.

But that was an interesting link, I will share it with my church when I get a chance.

Ariel >>

 

[fbl9]

acts 20:7…they met on the first day of the week for the breaking of the bread…1cor.16:1-2…they were to make the collection for St. Paul"s request when? on the first day of the week,…St. Justin pror to 167 wrote On Sunday we meet to celebrate…