Taking questions from Sabbatarians...

[Pythons]

Hi, Pythons,

Amazing! Do these guys believe Christ is God?

Well - I guess we know what to look for …! Let’s see what develops!

God bless

No, they don’t…
…At least not like we believe Christ is God.

From what I can determine they believe that Jesus can be called “God” but only because God is His Father…
…They are strict Anthropomorphite in theology so when they speak of ‘The Personality of God’.
…What they mean is that God ( which is ONLY the Father ) has a body of flesh.
…Complete with digestive organs so that He can digest the sacrifice, smell it, bowel to expell it, etc.

It took me a while to figure this out and I had to spend more than a little time in their archives and then it came to me…
…In discussing and debating with SDA’s I kept getting hit with a statement from Ellen White ( their prophet ).
…Which was a warning about not talking about “the personality of God.”

I thought this was really strange given my understanding of what the word personality means to me…
…I soon disovered that the SDA teaching that God the Father had a body of flesh was the most important doctrine to SDA’s.
…Their archives are literally loaded with teachings on this.

So, in their view God = The Father Only…
…Only the Father is eternally impeccable - creature christ is, in SDA teaching, peccable.
…So, they have no problem calling Christ “God” but in reality they believe God “loaned” or “gifted” Christ with Deity.
…The Deity was real, it was God’s but creature christ had to tow the rope or He would loose it - and the real God would annihilate Him.

Stange and most heretical I know but it’s all there and I’ve documented every ounce of it.

Here is a link to a couple of quotes…
…I have scores more now.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7935799&postcount=5

 

[Lucky_Catholic1]

Rome’s Challenge used to be on the immaculateheart.com/maryonline web site, but I find it there anymore.

You find it on facebook also
facebook.com/EyeOpeningReality/posts/131047030328828

Here are some more proof that the Catholic Church changed to day from Saturday to Sunday.
scribd.com/doc/20508959/Catholocism

Now I’m quoting again from above source:
Sunday
Catholic Record September 1, 1923
“Sunday is our mark of authority…The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of
Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.”

Rome’s Challenge
www.Immaculateheart.com/maryonline
December 2003
“Most Christians assume that Sunday is the biblically approved day of worship. The Roman
Catholic Church protests that it transferred Christian worship from the biblical Sabbath (Saturday)
to Sunday, and that to try to argue that the change was made in the Bible is both dishonest and a
denial of Catholic authority. If Protestantism wants to base its teachings only on the Bible, it
should worship on Saturday.”

Changing of Times and Laws
Decretal De Translat. Espiscop. Cap.
“The Pope has power to change times, to abrogate laws, and to dispense with all things, even
with the precepts of Christ.”

If the change was made it the Bible then the Pope does not have a mark of His Authority.

Here we have one of the originals of Rome’s Challenge to all Protestants.
ebookbrowse.com/romes-challenge-pdf-d1037434

I suggest reading this document, it was printed by the Catholic Mirror.
Here are some text from the Catholic Mirror:

Sunday as Day of Worship is Catholic Creation
Before closing this series of articles, we beg to call the attention of our readers once
more to our caption, introductory of each; viz., 1. The Christian Sabbath [Catholic Sunday],
[is] the genuine offspring of the union of the Holy Spirit with the Catholic Church His
spouse. 2. The claim of Protestantism to any part therein proved to be groundless, selfcontradictory,
and suicidal.
The first proposition needs little proof. The Catholic Church for over one thousand
years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day
from Saturday to Sunday. We say by virtue of her divine mission, because He who called
Himself the “Lord of the Sabbath,” endowed her with His own power to teach, “he that
heareth you, heareth Me”; commanded all who believe in Him to hear her, under penalty of
being placed with “heathen and publican”; and promised to be with her to the end of the
world. She holds her charter as teacher from Him—a charter as infallible as perpetual
[which is a lie]. The Protestant world at its birth found the Christian Sabbath [Catholic Sunday]
too strongly entrenched to run counter to its existence; it was therefore placed under the
necessity of acquiescing in the arrangement, thus implying the [Catholic] Church’s right to
change the day, for over three [now four] hundred years. The Christian Sabbath [Catholic
Sunday] is therefore to this day, the acknowledged offspring of the Catholic Church as
spouse of the Holy Ghost, without a word of remonstrance from the Protestant world.

They Challenge all Protestant Churches to prove scripture for Sunday.
Only Protestants in denial will argue for Sunday worship in the Bible.

Where the Catholics, we just listen to the Pope.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Lucky,

I went to the Facebook site. And, for there, I linked to this “Welcome to Immaculate Heart com. A Catholic Christian Resource Site” and read what was there. Let me clearly and cagegorically tell you this site - notwithstanding the name it chose for itself - is not Catholic. But, maybe that does not surprise you - because the name you have chosen to post - does not accurately describe you, either. Imagine that!

Your posts apparently have been caught up in a type of blather… and, really, that is sad. The purpose of CAF is to dialogue. You are not responding to others but merely repeating yourself in such a way that ‘…crashing gongs and clanging cymbols…’ (1Cor 13) would be an upgrade. But, do not lose heart, here is something you may find helpful. Just stay with me on this …

The Catholic Church really did change the day of worship from the Sabbath to Sunday. No doubt about it. Now, was that so hard? It was not hard for me to write and I am sure it was not hard for you to read.

Your claim, at least as I appreciate it, is that, conforming with 7thDA arguments - such a change from Sabbath to Sunday was wrong, strictly because the Bible identified the Sabbath as the day to honor God. So far so good? But, there really are some major problems with this argument - and a big one is that the Catholic Church also changed from worship in the Tempel (while it was still standing) and synagogues - to worshipping in what would become chruches. And sure enough - this was an established practice that then grew and even after the 16th Century revolt - Protestants had churches, too. Ah, but we can not stop even there.

Ellen’s hero - Rev Miller, was a Baptist who had a church and worshipped there - and following in her hero’s steps, we find 7thDA also have their version of churches to worship. (and here is a site that calls itself a chruch: lafayettesda.com/ ) So, my guess is that after the Temple was destroyed in 70AD and churches were being established - God was being properly worshiped in the Catholic Churches established from 33AD. And, the reason for this can be clearly found in Matthew 16, where Christ founded His Church (not synagogue!) on Peter and then gave Peter all authority to make whatever chages Peter (and his successors) found necessary!!

So really, Lucky, if the complaint is that God commanded worship on the Sabbath - how do you respond that He never commanded worship to be in ‘churches’. We really do find the Temple and the synagogues being well used throughout the NT. (And, then we get into that whole laundry list of OT commands that we no longer obey because they have been replaced by the fulfillment of the Promise of Salvation by Jesus Christ in the Catholic Church! Yeah… back to that 400 year gap when the Catholic Church existed and the Bible as we know it today, didn’t!)

Now, in my opinion, you will really need to start answering the challenges put to your claims - as opposed to merely repeating them - if you want to have dialogue. Other-wise, people will simply not respond to the half-truths you are posting. I really do see this as a problem. So, let’s see what we can do to resolve this matter…

In a previous post, I asked you to look at Matthew 16. Read the part where Christ founds His Church on Peter and then gives Peter full authority. My question to you is, based on this single chapter - how do you get the idea that the Catholic Church did not have the authority to change Saturday worship to Sunday worship? Your answer to this would certainly clear up a lot of the fog that seems to have shrouded at least some parts of this thread. If I could ask you to just focus on this one item - it will keep the dialogue flowing as it should. Thanks

God bless

Rome’s Challenge used to be on the immaculateheart.com/maryonline web site, but I find it there anymore.

You find it on facebook also
facebook.com/EyeOpeningReality/posts/131047030328828

Here are some more proof that the Catholic Church changed to day from Saturday to Sunday.
scribd.com/doc/20508959/Catholocism

Now I’m quoting again from above source:
They Challenge all Protestant Churches to prove scripture for Sunday.
Only Protestants in denial will argue for Sunday worship in the Bible.

Where the Catholics, we just listen to the Pope.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Pythons,

This is quite an unfolding set of amazing - and unsubtantiated - claims.

But, let me tell you - one of the most deceitful examples of ‘misleading titles’ is in the link that can be found in the Facebook link previously given to us. This so-called ‘Catholic Christian’ group really caught my eye - honest! I have never seen a Catholic site fail to give reference to the Cathechism, to a Papal Encyclical, to a Council teaching or something from a local Bishop - yet - give an entire section to the Rev Billy Graham!

I guess this is just a hang up that I have … if one has the truth, it does not need to disguised as something else. As I understand it, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery - so, I guess the creators of this site thought they were accomplishing something by putting “Immaculate Heart” as part of their name - and claiming to be Catholic - must have been a very satisfying touch. But, really, can you see a local ‘First National Bank’ putting ‘Bank of America’ or ‘Wells Fargo Bank’ in their name to get some attention? Maybe it would be something like, ‘First America Fargo Bank’ but clearly a name that does not accurately describe what they are and what they are doing.

One just has to keep an eye on the sites that are out there …like a fowler … to catch the unobservant and uninformed.

God bless

No, they don’t…
…At least not like we believe Christ is God.

From what I can determine they believe that Jesus can be called “God” but only because God is His Father…
…They are strict Anthropomorphite in theology so when they speak of ‘The Personality of God’.
…What they mean is that God ( which is ONLY the Father ) has a body of flesh.
…Complete with digestive organs so that He can digest the sacrifice, smell it, bowel to expell it, etc.

It took me a while to figure this out and I had to spend more than a little time in their archives and then it came to me…
…In discussing and debating with SDA’s I kept getting hit with a statement from Ellen White ( their prophet ).
…Which was a warning about not talking about “the personality of God.”

I thought this was really strange given my understanding of what the word personality means to me…
…I soon disovered that the SDA teaching that God the Father had a body of flesh was the most important doctrine to SDA’s.
…Their archives are literally loaded with teachings on this.

So, in their view God = The Father Only…
…Only the Father is eternally impeccable - creature christ is, in SDA teaching, peccable.
…So, they have no problem calling Christ “God” but in reality they believe God “loaned” or “gifted” Christ with Deity.
…The Deity was real, it was God’s but creature christ had to tow the rope or He would loose it - and the real God would annihilate Him.

Stange and most heretical I know but it’s all there and I’ve documented every ounce of it.

Here is a link to a couple of quotes…
…I have scores more now.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7935799&postcount=5

 

[Porknpie]

Hi, Lucky,

I went to the Facebook site. And, for there, I linked to this “Welcome to Immaculate Heart com. A Catholic Christian Resource Site” and read what was there. Let me clearly and cagegorically tell you this site - notwithstanding the name it chose for itself - is not Catholic. But, maybe that does not surprise you - because the name you have chosen to post - does not accurately describe you, either. Imagine that!

Of course what is really funny here from the Facebook site

If Protestantism wants to base its teachings only on the Bible, it should worship on Saturday

 

[Lucky_Catholic1]

My point is that no where in scripture you will find the change from Sabbath to Sunday.

This change was made by The Catholic Church in around 300ad, more specifically Council of Laodicea which happened at 321ad.

It is wrong to think that the change is in the Bible.
I have supplied numerous quotes from our Church that says the Church has changed it.

It seems the people that has a problem with the Catholic Church will argue that the Bible made the change and not the Church.

It seems there are people here that has a bigger problem with the Church mentioning a other Church than accepting that with the Authority of the Catholic Church the Sabbath was changed to Sunday.

 

[Crescentinus]

My point is that no where in scripture you will find the change from Sabbath to Sunday.

This change was made by The Catholic Church in around 300ad, more specifically Council of Laodicea which happened at 321ad.

It is wrong to think that the change is in the Bible.
I have supplied numerous quotes from our Church that says the Church has changed it.

It seems the people that has a problem with the Catholic Church will argue that the Bible made the change and not the Church.

It seems there are people here that has a bigger problem with the Church mentioning a other Church than accepting that with the Authority of the Catholic Church the Sabbath was changed to Sunday.

^Not sure if Catholic or Seventh-Day Adventist in disguise.

 

[Lucky_Catholic1]

This is a dumb comment, I have been researching the Bible and the Sabbath for about 3-4 years.

Our Catholic Church uses the Vaticanus Manuscript.
I think you are mentioning the King James Version, it was not based on the Vaticanus.
This Bible was made outside of our Church and we burned *** much people and King James Versions as we can.

We usually hanged the Bible around their necks and then burned them, just because they read it.

Of course what is really funny here from the Facebook site

Is that the bible doesn’t say to only use the bible

And

the bible the SDA are using came from the Catholic Church…minus 7 books removed by a printing company.

 

[PRmerger]

Here are some more proof that the Catholic Church changed to day from Saturday to Sunday.
scribd.com/doc/20508959/Catholocism

Lucky, no one is disputing that the Catholic Church changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday.

That is a fact.

The reason they did this is because the Word of God declared this, and the Catholic Church has the authority to interpret it and proclaim it.

 

[Porknpie]

This is a dumb comment, I have been researching the Bible and the Sabbath for about 3-4 years.

Our Catholic Church uses the Vaticanus Manuscript.
I think you are mentioning the King James Version, it was not based on the Vaticanus.
This Bible was made outside of our Church and we burned *** much people and King James Versions as we can.

We usually hanged the Bible around their necks and then burned them, just because they read it.

Lucky, I’m not sure how to understand your use of the word dumb. Fill in the blanks so that I can understand your beliefs.

The bible was canonized in year ______ by the ________ church and it contained _____ books.

 

[PRmerger]

My point is that no where in scripture you will find the change from Sabbath to Sunday.

That is also incorrect.

In 1 Corinthians 16:2, Paul tells his readers, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come.” Paul exhorts his readers to get their church’s contribution together ahead of time so it won’t have to be put together when he arrives (see 2 Cor. 9:3-5).

He tells them when to contribute to the gift: every first day of the week–every Sunday. Why? Because that is the day the early Church met for worship. Even though the Old Testament sabbath had passed away, the early Church commemorated Christ’s resurrection on Sunday, the first day of the week, because that was the day Christ arose (Mark 16:9, see also Mark 16:2 and Luke 24:1)."

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Porknpie,

Priceless! Ah… but, I don’t know … maybe you should have given some hints…

God bless

Lucky, I’m not sure how to understand your use of the word dumb. Fill in the blanks so that I can understand your beliefs.

The bible was canonized in year ______ by the ________ church and it contained _____ books.

 

[Lucky_Catholic1]

Lucky, I’m not sure how to understand your use of the word dumb. Fill in the blanks so that I can understand your beliefs.

The bible was canonized in year ______ by the ________ church and it contained _____ books.

The Vaticanus does not contain Genesis, nor Revelation. Half of Songs are removed, most of the Letters to Churches in the New Testament is also removed.

The Vaticanus is one of the sources of the King James Version, it was compiled from around 2000 to 3000 scrolls.

The modern Bibles that are created these days come from the Westcott & Hort text, they mixed the Textus Recepticus with the Vaticanus.
It now includes text for:

1. Evolution
2. Purgatory
3. Baby Baptism
   etc…

The Reformers removed Books from the Bible where they did not agree with the content of the text.
Examples:
Barnabas 10:7
Again, neither shalt thou eat the hyena; thou shalt not, saith He,
become an adulterer or a fornicator, neither shalt thou resemble such
persons. Why so? Because this animal changeth its nature year by
year, and becometh at one time male and at another female.

They did not agree with this so it was removed.

The funny thing is that they created the King James to be a independent from the catholic Church, and now since the 1900’s they now use mainly the Vaticanus Manuscript.

Gen 3:15
Douay: I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall cursh thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

KJV: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

 

[Lucky_Catholic1]

That is also incorrect.

In 1 Corinthians 16:2, Paul tells his readers, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come.” Paul exhorts his readers to get their church’s contribution together ahead of time so it won’t have to be put together when he arrives (see 2 Cor. 9:3-5).

He tells them when to contribute to the gift: every first day of the week–every Sunday. Why? Because that is the day the early Church met for worship. Even though the Old Testament sabbath had passed away, the early Church commemorated Christ’s resurrection on Sunday, the first day of the week, because that was the day Christ arose (Mark 16:9, see also Mark 16:2 and Luke 24:1)."

Typical Protestant response.
I didn’t know you are a Protestant but at least now I know.

When using your Bible and Bible alone principle.

God never did this on any other day except the 7th day:

1. God rested
2. Blessed
3. Hallowed

At Mt Sinai God Himself wrote with His finger in rock to keep the 7th Day Sabbath Holy.
I’ll use your Protestant source the KJV.

Exodus 20
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 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:
11 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.

VS

In 1 Corinthians 16:2, Paul tells his readers, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come.” Paul exhorts his readers to get their church’s contribution together ahead of time so it won’t have to be put together when he arrives (see 2 Cor. 9:3-5).
"

How about this one:
Luke 23:54-56
And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.
And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.
And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.
Luke 24:1
Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

VS

In 1 Corinthians 16:2, Paul tells his readers, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come.” Paul exhorts his readers to get their church’s contribution together ahead of time so it won’t have to be put together when he arrives (see 2 Cor. 9:3-5).
"

Now let us look at context, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come”,:

1. Paul traveling and does not know when he might come by the next time.
2. Paul asks for contributions for his traveling costs.
3. No sermon was preached.
4. It was common for employers of that time to give salaries/wages to employees on the 1st day of the week.
5. Paul did not say that the Sabbath day has changed to Sunday.

Bonus:
Paul did not rest
Paul did not bless
Paul did not hallowed Sunday

God did not rest
God did not bless
God did not hallowed Sunday.

Sunday, the First Day is mentioned only 9 times in the KJV.

These things I remember out of my head.
Here is a good site that explains some more.
seventhdaybaptist.org/content/sabbath

And for the people that is so focused on the Adventist Church, wake up, the 7th Day Baptist was there before them.

 

[Crescentinus]

Something tells me that Lucky is a Seventh-Day Adventist in disguise.

 

[Porknpie]

The Vaticanus does not contain Genesis, nor Revelation. Half of Songs are removed, most of the Letters to Churches in the New Testament is also removed.

The Vaticanus is one of the sources of the King James Version, it was compiled from around 2000 to 3000 scrolls.

The modern Bibles that are created these days come from the Westcott & Hort text, they mixed the Textus Recepticus with the Vaticanus.
It now includes text for:

1. Evolution
2. Purgatory
3. Baby Baptism
   etc…

The Reformers removed Books from the Bible where they did not agree with the content of the text.
Examples:
Barnabas 10:7
Again, neither shalt thou eat the hyena; thou shalt not, saith He,
become an adulterer or a fornicator, neither shalt thou resemble such
persons. Why so? Because this animal changeth its nature year by
year, and becometh at one time male and at another female.

They did not agree with this so it was removed.

The funny thing is that they created the King James to be a independent from the catholic Church, and now since the 1900’s they now use mainly the Vaticanus Manuscript.

Gen 3:15
Douay: I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall cursh thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

KJV: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Lucky,

You still did not answer my previous question. It’s pretty simple to do so, right or wrong answers applied.

The bible was canonized in year ______ by the ________ church and it contained _____ books.

And where in all those bibles is there evidence for a believers baptism? Is that what you see in the bible and in the early Church?

 

[Porknpie]

The Vaticanus does not contain Genesis, nor Revelation. Half of Songs are removed, most of the Letters to Churches in the New Testament is also removed.

The Vaticanus is one of the sources of the King James Version, it was compiled from around 2000 to 3000 scrolls.

The modern Bibles that are created these days come from the Westcott & Hort text, they mixed the Textus Recepticus with the Vaticanus.
It now includes text for:

1. Evolution
2. Purgatory
3. Baby Baptism
   etc…

The Reformers removed Books from the Bible where they did not agree with the content of the text.
Examples:
Barnabas 10:7
Again, neither shalt thou eat the hyena; thou shalt not, saith He,
become an adulterer or a fornicator, neither shalt thou resemble such
persons. Why so? Because this animal changeth its nature year by
year, and becometh at one time male and at another female.

They did not agree with this so it was removed.

The funny thing is that they created the King James to be a independent from the catholic Church, and now since the 1900’s they now use mainly the Vaticanus Manuscript.

Gen 3:15
Douay: I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall cursh thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

KJV: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Lucky,

Do you follow the statement of belief from this website? seventhdaybaptist.org/content/believes-history/statement-belief

If so, where in the bible does it say that it is the final authority on matters of faith and practice? It must say so for it to be true.

We believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God and is our final authority in matters of faith and practice. We believe that Jesus Christ, in His life and teachings as recorded in the Bible, is the supreme interpreter of God’s will for mankind.

And where in the bible do you find believers baptisms and baptism by immersion? Do you believe that they had baths inside of houses where one could be immersed?

We believe that baptism of believers in obedience to Christ’s command is a witness to the acceptance of Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. We believe in baptism by immersion as a symbol of death to sin, a pledge to a new life in Him.

Read John 6, the bread of life discourse, and tell me what is in error below? Hint: I changed one word twice to make the text fit your belief.

53 Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54 Whoever eats* my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55 For my flesh is symbolic food, and my blood is symbolic drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.

We believe that the Lord’s Supper commemorates the suffering and death of our Redeemer until He comes, and is a symbol of union in Christ and a pledge of renewed allegiance to our risen Lord.

 

[PRmerger]

The Vaticanus does not contain Genesis, nor Revelation. Half of Songs are removed, most of the Letters to Churches in the New Testament is also removed.

The Vaticanus is one of the sources of the King James Version, it was compiled from around 2000 to 3000 scrolls.

The modern Bibles that are created these days come from the Westcott & Hort text, they mixed the Textus Recepticus with the Vaticanus.
It now includes text for:

1. Evolution
2. Purgatory
3. Baby Baptism
   etc…

The Reformers removed Books from the Bible where they did not agree with the content of the text.
Examples:
Barnabas 10:7
Again, neither shalt thou eat the hyena; thou shalt not, saith He,
become an adulterer or a fornicator, neither shalt thou resemble such
persons. Why so? Because this animal changeth its nature year by
year, and becometh at one time male and at another female.

They did not agree with this so it was removed.

The funny thing is that they created the King James to be a independent from the catholic Church, and now since the 1900’s they now use mainly the Vaticanus Manuscript.

Gen 3:15
Douay: I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall cursh thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

KJV: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

This is interesting, but a non-sequitur, Lucky.

Also, you are aware that Barnabas is not theopneustos, correct? So your claim that the Reformers removed it from the Bible is curious.

 

[PRmerger]

Typical Protestant response.
I didn’t know you are a Protestant but at least now I know.

It may be, but it’s also a Catholic response.

Wherever Protestantism is true, I give it a

For example, it is a “typical Protestant response” to say that Jesus saves.

If I tell someone, “Jesus saves”, it may be a “typical Protestant response” but it would also be true. And a Catholic response as well.

When using your Bible and Bible alone principle.

God never did this on any other day except the 7th day:

1. God rested
2. Blessed
3. Hallowed

Incorrect.

God blesses every moment of time. We could not exist without God blessing us at this very moment.

Please see this reference for the multitude of times God blesses, and it’s not on the Sabbath.

biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=blessed&qs_version=NIV

 

[PRmerger]

At Mt Sinai God Himself wrote with His finger in rock to keep the 7th Day Sabbath Holy.
I’ll use your Protestant source the KJV.

Exodus 20
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 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:
11 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.

Amen!

How about this one:
Luke 23:54-56
And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.
And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.
And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.
Luke 24:1
Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

Amen again!

Now let us look at context, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come”,:

1. Paul traveling and does not know when he might come by the next time.

Interesting, but a non-sequitur.

1. Paul asks for contributions for his traveling costs.

Okay. Irrelevant, but ok.

1. No sermon was preached.

Also irrelevant. And not necessarily true. Unless you can find a verse in the Scriptures that tells us that “no sermon was preached”.

Incidentally, you do know that the Divine Liturgy does not require a “sermon”, right?

1. It was common for employers of that time to give salaries/wages to employees on the 1st day of the week.

Interesting, but irrelevant.

1. Paul did not say that the Sabbath day has changed to Sunday.

That’s fine, Lucky.

The Sabbath is Saturday. It has always been Saturday.

The Catholic Church changed the day of worship to the Lord’s Day, which is Sunday.