True Sabbath Day

  • Thread starter Thread starter twagler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MY interpretation? Perhaps you would like to share your (the correct) interpretation of John 19:14? Better yet, how about anyone? Again, did Passover fall on a Saturday?

AND

The Catholic Cardinal Gibbons, in Faith of Our Fathers, pg. 111, said, "You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we (The Roman Catholic Church) never sanctify.

Didn’t he read Revelation? Wait, Genesis to Revelation. What does he say after that? Was he wrong?

*The Catholic Mirror *(a publication by Cardinal Gibbons) Sept. 2, 1893- **"…the Redeemer, during His mortal life, never kept any other day than Saturday."
**

More quotes? At your request.
 
Perhaps I should have made myself more clear, since I was supposedly doing the Apocalypse damage. So you see, Cardinal Gibbons read the Bible. From Genesis to Revelation. He says there is no single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. Surely, he is doing the Apocalypse damage. Hmmmm.
 
Ann Cheryl:
The reality is that the Church does include all believers. .
um… no it doesnt. It only includes the believers that are in communion with the Catholic Church… whether perfect communion or imperfect communion. Satan even believes Christ is the son of God. That is not enough.

Brandon
 
40.png
twagler:
Perhaps I should have made myself more clear, since I was supposedly doing the Apocalypse damage. So you see, Cardinal Gibbons read the Bible. From Genesis to Revelation. He says there is no single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. Surely, he is doing the Apocalypse damage. Hmmmm.
I agree with Cardinal Gibbons… there is no explicit instruction for Christians to worship on Sunday. Just as there is no explicit instruction for Christians to worship on Saturday. However, there is explicit instruction as to the authority of the Church. WHATEVER the church binds on earth is bound in heaven!!!

Do you deny this?

Brandon
 
40.png
twagler:
MY interpretation? Perhaps you would like to share your (the correct) interpretation of John 19:14? Better yet, how about anyone? Again, did Passover fall on a Saturday?

AND

The Catholic Cardinal Gibbons, in Faith of Our Fathers, pg. 111, said, "You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we (The Roman Catholic Church) never sanctify.

Didn’t he read Revelation? Wait, Genesis to Revelation. What does he say after that? Was he wrong?

*The Catholic Mirror *(a publication by Cardinal Gibbons) Sept. 2, 1893- "…the Redeemer, during His mortal life, never kept any other day than Saturday."

More quotes? At your request.
Anyone can find a quote that says something that seems to contradict. But the thing is that these quotes don’t show what is meant to be said. I could take lines from the bible and claim what ever I want. Take for example. James 2;19
the devils also believe and tremble.
Satan is saved. He is in heaven because he has faith.

Now from what I quoted it would be reasonable to say what I have said, but if you go and read the rest you find that it is not correct and it does not fit.

The same goes for your quoting two lines of what a cardinal or a saint says. You will find that you are wrong when you read the Catholic teachings. As I have shown, “the Lord’s day” was understood in the 1st century to mean Sunday. As I have shown, the first century Christians honored “the Lord’s day” and not the sabbath.

As Christ said, “The gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church”. If the Church had completely failed on this until the founding of the SDA then the gates of hell prevailed in the first century. This does not speak to highly of Christ. So, either Christ was wrong and consequently he is not God, or Christ was correct and the Catholic Church is correct.
 
twagler, forgive my obvious ignorance, but what exactly is the nature of your question about John 19:14? Thanks…
 
The fourth commandment is not explicit? It has more writing devoted to it than the other commandments. As far as denying the “whatever you bind…” I do not deny it, but I am not sure it pertains ONLY to the CC of TODAY. I have an open mind to all things and I will do some research on this topic. In the meantime, I would appreciate a “correct” interpretation of John 19:14.

Thank you,

Trav
 
40.png
SDA2RC:
um… no it doesnt. It only includes the believers that are in communion with the Catholic Church… whether perfect communion or imperfect communion. Satan even believes Christ is the son of God. That is not enough.

Brandon
The Church includes all Christians to a degree. All who are baptised in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are part of the Church, even if there communion is minimal.

Protestants are connected to a degree to the Church, but they are not fully in communion with the Church and they do not have the full truth.
 
40.png
twagler:
The fourth commandment is not explicit? It has more writing devoted to it than the other commandments. As far as denying the “whatever you bind…” I do not deny it, but I am not sure it pertains ONLY to the CC of TODAY. I have an open mind to all things and I will do some research on this topic. In the meantime, I would appreciate a “correct” interpretation of John 19:14.

Thank you,

Trav
The authority to bind and to lose is passed on by the laying of hands and the ordination of bishops. I can not bind and lose, you can not bind and loose. That is reserved to the leaders of the Church. That is the understanding of it since the first century. Ignatius talks about following the bishops in what ever they do in the first century. It was the apostles at the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 who decided on the issue. They did not use scripture to make the decision as you can see either. They used what they had been taught. The first century Church was not a sola scriptura church.

As for John 19, what is your point? The crucifixion was on the eve of the Sabbath. And Christ rose on the third day(the first of the week), so what is your point?
 
How does this verse NOT imply two Sabbaths the week of the crucifiction? While you are at it, look at Mark 15:47-16:1 and Luke 23:56. As you will see, Mary bought spices after the Sabbath and prepared the spices before the Sabbath. OK. If you wish to know where I am going with this, it is in my original post.

Trav
 
40.png
twagler:
The fourth commandment is not explicit? It has more writing devoted to it than the other commandments. As far as denying the “whatever you bind…” I do not deny it, but I am not sure it pertains ONLY to the CC of TODAY. I have an open mind to all things and I will do some research on this topic. In the meantime, I would appreciate a “correct” interpretation of John 19:14.

Thank you,

Trav
The second or third commandment, depending on which numbering you go by, is part of the law of the Jews. It is also explicit in Acts 15 that none of the law of the Jews is binding on Christians because Christ fullfilled the law. The only exceptions are things sacrificed to idols, blood, things strangled, and fornication. The Judaisers went around and taught that people had to follow all the laws of the Jewish religion in order to be saved, this was rejected.
 
40.png
twagler:
How does this verse NOT imply two Sabbaths the week of the crucifiction? While you are at it, look at Mark 15:47-16:1 and Luke 23:56. As you will see, Mary bought spices after the Sabbath and prepared the spices before the Sabbath. OK. If you wish to know where I am going with this, it is in my original post.

Trav
What are you talking about two sabbaths?
 
40.png
twagler:
How does this verse NOT imply two Sabbaths the week of the crucifiction? While you are at it, look at Mark 15:47-16:1 and Luke 23:56. As you will see, Mary bought spices after the Sabbath and prepared the spices before the Sabbath. OK. If you wish to know where I am going with this, it is in my original post.

Trav
This verse does not imply anything. It just says that it was the eve of the Sabbath that Christ was crucified. Sunday is the Lord’s Day which is to commemorate the resurection of Christ, which happened on the first day of the week.

The Catholic Church follows the day of worship that the apostles followed as it says in the Didache and in Ignatius’ writings. It is the SDA that has changed it.
 
Ann–My “still avoiding” is [doing] what?

Jimmy,

The Sabbath was made for MAN, not man for the Sabbath. This does not say made for the Jews.

Okay I will try to explain this again. You must read CAREFULLY. John 19:14 says it was preparation of the Passover, NOT the weekly Sabbath.

Now read Mark 16:1. “And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might annoint him.”

Luke 23:56
“And they returned, and prepared spies and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.”

Do you see? They bought the spices after the sabbath and prepared them before the sabbath? How is that? TWO SABBATHS. Thursday was Passover, a high holy day, also known as a Sabbath. This is where John 19:14 comes into play.

Moreover, Friday evening to Sunday morning does NOT equal 3 days and 3 nights. Matt. 12:40 says 3 days and 3 nights. So if Jesus was crucified on Wednesday evening, that means he would have risen Saturday evening.

Where does the Bible say that he rose ON Sunday morning? It doesn’t. It says he was already gone.

If you still cannot understand my argument, I will try to elaborate further.
 
40.png
twagler:
"My first order of business here was/is to try and prove that Jesus did not rise on a Sunday, which would make the “Sabbath to Sunday because of the resurrection” argument null and void. And of course I will cite Matt. 12:40 as a main argument here, along with John 19:14. I think these verses alone are sufficient. But, Mark 15:47-16:1 and Luke 23:56, if read carefully, clearly show that there were two Sabbath days that week. Luke 22:15 again shows that Passover occurred during that week. The real clincher, however, is John 19:14. I read the Bacc. chapter pertaining to this and I have one comment. If the term parasueke was only used to denote Friday(the weekly preparation day), then of course it came to be synonomous with Friday. My question is “How many times does the Bible refer to a preparation day before a high holy day?” What term is used here? Thank you for your patience.

Best,
Trav
Hey Trav, 🙂

A few things…

I know Matthew 12:40 very well… The expression “three days and three nights” may seem enigmatic because Jesus aims to allude to Jonah’s rescue from the great fish. All other predictions of Christ’s resurrection (this being the only exception) refer to Christ as being raised “on the third day/after the third day” in a culture that would understand all these predictions with the mindset of inclusive reckoning (and thus, not necessarily 72 hours at all). I know you are reluctant to apply inclusive reckoning to Matt. 12:40, but the weight is actually on applying this phrase to the 8 verses that would most likely call for a period under 72 hours long, rather than focus on this verse. I believe (as would most scholars) that Jesus uses the phrase “three days and three nights” not to determine a precise period of time as much as to allude to a text that uses that phrase (the book of Jonah). Is this going against biblical literalism? No… its just trying to find the most natural reading for all the crucifixion accounts in conjunction with the other verses which would confirm this shorter period, as well as the Christian tradition.

John 19:14… As for using the word “preparation” for a day before any feast, although I haven’t found any clear reference to its use before just any feast (and not necessarily the Sabbath), especially not int he Old Testament where one would hope to find it, and although we know it was pretty much used synonomously with Friday, I don’t doubt it could be used before a feast day. However, just because its called the preparation fo the Passover doesn’t mean that it was different from the preparation of the Sabbath day because of a very key verse: John 19:31:

“The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.”

Every scholar I have read agrees that the phrase “high day” was used for those special days when the weekly Sabbath day coincided with a Feast day (in this case, Passover). The preparation of the Passover was also the preparation for the Sabbath.

I looked over the other verses you gave me and I have some questions…

I’m not sure that reading Mark and Luke carefully indicates there were two Sabbaths that week. In one account, the women observe where Jesus is laid (v. 47) and after the Sabbath bring spices that they might annoint him. (v.1) The story begins that early on the first day of the week (undoubtedly “Sunday”) they arrived at the tomb to carry out their duty. (v.2)

In Luke, the women observe the place of his burial (it being the Preparation, with the Sabbath drawing near - v. 54). Then, they return home and prepare spices and fragrant oils (v.55). They cannot return to the tomb because the Sabbath was already drawing on, so they rest the day (v.56). Then, on the first day of the week, they come to the tomb with the spices they had prepared on the day of the preparation (v.1).

So:

Preparation = observe where laid, prepared spices

Sabbath = rest according to commandment

First day of week = bring prepared spices & find tomb open

The two accounts seem to reconcile very well. Where in particular do you see discrepencies?

In closing, I invite you to see that the friday-sunday reading is not only the most natural, but is upheld almsot universally int he Christian tradition. Hence, sunday keeping followed so universally throughout the Christian world. (we’ll talk more about sunday soon)

Always inviting your questions,
Hugo.
 
40.png
twagler:
Ann–My “still avoiding” is [doing] what?

Jimmy,

The Sabbath was made for MAN, not man for the Sabbath. This does not say made for the Jews.

Okay I will try to explain this again. You must read CAREFULLY. John 19:14 says it was preparation of the Passover, NOT the weekly Sabbath.

Now read Mark 16:1. “And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might annoint him.”

Luke 23:56
“And they returned, and prepared spies and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.”

Do you see? They bought the spices after the sabbath and prepared them before the sabbath? How is that? TWO SABBATHS. Thursday was Passover, a high holy day, also known as a Sabbath. This is where John 19:14 comes into play.

Moreover, Friday evening to Sunday morning does NOT equal 3 days and 3 nights. Matt. 12:40 says 3 days and 3 nights. So if Jesus was crucified on Wednesday evening, that means he would have risen Saturday evening.

Where does the Bible say that he rose ON Sunday morning? It doesn’t. It says he was already gone.

If you still cannot understand my argument, I will try to elaborate further.
The passover was not a sabbath. It does say on the third day he rose, and it also says on the first day of the week he rose. So consequently we can say that he rose on a Sunday, since Sunday is the first day of the week, and he died on Friday, since Friday is the first of the three days.

I understand your arguement, but you are working on a false arguement. The passover was not a Sabbath, it is a feast day.
 
40.png
twagler:
The fourth commandment is not explicit? It has more writing devoted to it than the other commandments. As far as denying the “whatever you bind…” I do not deny it, but I am not sure it pertains ONLY to the CC of TODAY. I have an open mind to all things and I will do some research on this topic. In the meantime, I would appreciate a “correct” interpretation of John 19:14.

Thank you,

Trav
Twag… i thank you for being willing to research when Christ said the issue of binding and loosing. you will also find this reference to specifically Peter given in Mattew 16, I would appreciate it if you would also do some looking into that. In addition, in Matthew 16 Peter was given the “Keys to the kingdom of heaven” this is quite an amazing gift… what do you think this signified and why do you think it was given to Peter?

As far as John 19… it appears to me that it mentions the preperation day… i have always understood this to be Friday the day before Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath. If you are looking for something more… let me know?

Brandon
 
40.png
jimmy:
The Church includes all Christians to a degree. All who are baptised in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are part of the Church, even if there communion is minimal.

Protestants are connected to a degree to the Church, but they are not fully in communion with the Church and they do not have the full truth.
Jimmy,
I agree… that is why I said in communion through either perfectly or imperfectly. However, not all protestant baptism is valid, and the point that I was referring to was someone who said that all who believe in Christ are part of the Church. One is only part of the church through her communion with the Church… not through belief. Many protestants are in an imperfect communion with the church or partial communion with teh church, they are certainly part of the Church, then again, they do more than just believe, their sacrament of baptism must be valid etc.

Hope that I am making myself clear as mud… LOL But I think we pretty much agree!

Brandon
 
Read Leviticus chapter 23. It clearly states that these 7 “holy” days are “sabbaths.”

I have given a response to the binding and loosing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top