Observing the Sabbath

[Soloist]

Here are the some of the things that the Sunday church have a hard time answering:

I'll respond with my thoughts as this is something I've wrestled with over the years.

1. God never told us to worship on Sunday. The Sabbath is the day of the holy convocation. Leviticus 23:3. A "holy convocation" is when we are to meet together. God did not choose another day, like Sunday, to worship. Christ never worshiped on Sunday, that I can find in the Bible. You can't worship on Sunday and keep Sabbath too, and be acceptable to God, as God said you shall not add to, or diminish what God has said. Deuteronomy 4:2 God chose His Days for His Holy Convocations, He did not approve some other day chosen by man.

I'm not arguing with this point but will address the concept here later.

2. The Catholic church brags that they have changed the sabbath from the 7th Day to the 1st Day, as shown in the quotes I provided from Wikipedia. They claim that every Protestant church recognizes the power of the Catholic church to be superior to scripture by worshiping on Sunday, which is the day the Catholic Church has chosen. The Sunday church cannot deny this statement. The evidence is clear.

The Catholic church does claim this, but this alone should not be an argument to throw it out but can carry some weight for those on the fence.

3. I appreciate Bootstrap's kind words, and his post: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=497#p12664 - but I believe it is incorrect. It uses circular reasoning to say that since people several hundred years after Christ called Sunday the "Lord's Day", then John in Rev 1:10 was also referring to Sunday as "the Lord's day". A later event cannot change an earlier event. When the Apostle John lived, Christians met on Sabbath, not Sunday.

The evidence of meeting on the Sabbath is clear, the evidence of meeting on Sunday isn't as clear and requires some understanding of Greek and Jewish customs. Arguing the "Lord's Day" from later in history is flawed.

Mark 2:28 clearly defeats this argument that Sunday is the Lord's Day as Christ clearly tells us that the Sabbath is the Lord's day.

Flawed argument. This isn't a claim from Jesus that the Lord's day is the Sabbath, as He indicated the Sabbath was made for man. Jesus is the Lord of all days, and He clearly worshiped on multiple days of the week.

I also believe that Acts 20:7 and 1st Cor 16:2, translated as "the first day of the week", is being used incorrectly. If you will look in your KJV Bible, you will see the word "day" in italics, as this word has been added. The actual words are "first of weeks", or "first of sabbaths". The words "first day of the week" here is the same words used in Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, John 20:19 - which is the "first day of the week" when Sunday churches believe that Christ was resurrected.

I've really struggled with this because it seems like the translators are changing the meaning of those words when the context isn't clear. There are some flaws here as well. In Matthew 28, the guards were stunned but left and reported what they saw to the Priests and it appears to indicate this happened during the day as they gave reference to saying this happened during the night. The evidence that this happened on a Sabbath or the end of the Sabbath is weak.
Mark 16:2 seems to suggest it was early in the morning which would fit more with what the guards would do for reporting it. We could argue as to what "Proi" actually means but I don't see the angel telling the ladies to go tell the men and then expect them to go to bed and go the next morning, nor do I see Jesus walking in the night to Galilee but He could have.
Reading Luke 24 in context shows that the ladies did go tell the men and most of them didn't seem to believe but it says Peter ran to go look. There is most likely a passage of time here, and the time it takes at "dusk" if that was the case to become very dark would not take long. The ladies most likely moved quickly, but I doubt they ran with their things and then Peter ran. The evidence seems more logical to suggest a day time activity.
This is further supported by John 20:1 by saying it was very dark and then later in John 20:19 saying the same day at evening did Jesus appear to them.
Now to be fair, the Greek words in these passages would exactly translate by definition to one Sabbath or one week. You possibly could translate that as first of the week, but to fairly consider that would have to ask if there are other passages that would contain such and to do an exclusive study I don't have the time nor the Greek backing to really do.

The only problem is, Christ was not resurrected on Sunday. Mark, Luke, and John do not speak of the actual resurrection, just an empty tomb that was found. Only Matthew speaks of the resurrection.

Here is the problem:

Christ spent 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb: Matthew 12:40. The Sunday Church cannot answer this with "Friday night to Sunday morning" as that is not 3 full days and nights.

A better answer is that Passover (the 14th day of the month) fell on a Wednesday, and Christ was put into the tomb Wednesday at sunset, as Thursday (the 15th day of the month) was a "high day" sabbath, (John 19:31), being the first day of unleavened bread. Lev 23:6-7. Christ rested 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb until Saturday evening, just before sundown, as the word "dawn" in Matthew 28:1, or "epiphosko" means "twilight". This same word "epiphosko" is translated as "drew on" in Luke 23:54 - and clearly speaks of the twilight before the end of the day. Remember that the Hebrew day ended at dusk, and the next day began as night fell.

If this was the case that it was a high Sabbath, one I think carries weight... your argument using Greek is flawed and doesn't fit. The word used "epiphosko" being used in one part to talk about the Sabbath coming which would have started at sundown could also be used for the sunrise coming as well. Is it used elsewhere supporting your argument?
The Sabbath argument is one from history which I've heard referencing the timing of how the Jews counted time but this isn't enough to convince me that Jesus rose at the end of the Sabbath. Even more so if that was the case, by the way the Jews counted days starting at dusk, wouldn't that have been Sunday then rather then Saturday?

From this, we know that, according to Matthew 28:1, Christ was resurrected on Saturday evening, about 5:30 pm. This totally blows the Sunday church out of the water. Why meet on Sunday, if Christ arose on the Sabbath?

We have another problem here, you are applying a time but that timing would only make sense if it happened in the winter. My family lives in a region very similar to Israel and the timing and seasons are similar. In the winter its dark earlier. Someone who lives or lived in Israel could speak to this better.

Here is another problem:
I believe the term "first day of the week" is a time of year, not a day of the week. The Feast of First Fruits was a yearly sabbath, that really did happen on Sunday, or the "morrow after the sabbath". Leviticus 23:11. This is when Christ, as the first fruits from the dead (1 Cor 15:20) was presented to God as a perfect offering, as He said "Touch me not" for He had not yet ascended John 20:17, but by verse 27, they were able to touch Him.
The "first of weeks" was the first Sunday after Passover. It only happened one time a year, and always fell before Pentecost. Likewise, Acts 20:7 occurs just before Pentecost (Acts 20:16) and 1 Cor 16:2 occurs just before Pentecost (1 Cor 16:8). That cannot be a coincidence. It is a yearly, not weekly.
In 1 Cor 16:2, Paul is taking up a contribution for the poor as he is traveling to Jerusalem for Pentecost. There are 7 weeks, or "sabbaths" between Passover and Pentecost. Leviticus 23:15-16. Counting the "morrow after the sabbath" these 7 weeks, plus one day, makes 50 days, and "pente" means 50, while "cost" means days. These 7 weeks are called the "feast of weeks", or a "week of weeks". And Deuteronomy 16:9-11 tells us that at the end of 7 weeks, or a "week of weeks", we are to give a freewill offering to the poor "in the place where the LORD God has chosen to put His name there" - which is Jerusalem. This is why Paul was taking up a contribution in 1 Cor 16:2 to take to Jerusalem for the poor - and has nothing to do with passing a plate around the room every Sunday. Paul was providing the freewill offering of Deuteronomy 16:9-11, not taking up money for a church.

Fascinating thoughts but fairly complex for it not to have been explained at all in the New Testament. I'm honestly not versed enough in the old testament or the law/timing to understand this. I'd have to spend some lengthy time studying this out. My wife thought it was interesting what you said about the Feast of Firstfruits, because that might actually give weight to the Lord's Day being Sunday.

The "first day of the week" is really the "first of sabbaths" and is how they counted the weeks until Pentecost. Luke 6:1 corroborates this by talking about the 2nd week of these 7 weeks. They counted each of these 7 weeks, as being special weeks. This is what the "first of weeks", or "first day of the week" really means.

Maybe, but this is still speculative but supportive for your argument for the meaning of the text. This would still run into the problems I raised earlier.

And even if Paul was eating bread or taking up money on the "first day of the week", Paul did not say that he and his friends changed the Sabbath to Sunday - because Paul does not have the authority to do this. In fact, Paul was meeting with the Christians on the Sabbath: Acts 16:13. This account with Lydia in Acts 16 - where Christians were praying and baptizing - should hold "more water" for Sabbath Keeping than Paul eating some bread or taking donations on a Sunday. Acts 16:13 looks a lot more like "worship" than Acts 20:7, or 1 Cor 16:2.

Agreed with your thoughts here.

Even the "Gentiles" met on the sabbath day: Acts 13:42, 44. Yet these verses are ignored, and Paul's activities with his traveling companions are held very high.

These were converts to Judaism for one, and secondly, they were hearing about Jesus for the first time. Most converts are zealous to follow and likely would have been immersed in the Scriptures and looking for the day of the Messiah.

And the verses in Acts 15:20 that the Gentiles should only follow 4 things - 3 of which are dietary:
But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
This is ludicrous. Only four? No way.
Acts 15:20 describes the main four things that the Gentiles are having trouble with, as some false teachers were telling the Gentiles that you could eat meat offered to idols if no one saw you do it, or that fornication was acceptable if your wife was an unbeliever and left you, then you were not under bondage and could remarry - as well as telling them that the dietary laws excluding blood and things strangled had been "done away" under Christ. These were the doctrinal errors that someone was spreading among the Gentiles. The rest of the Law was well known to the Gentiles and they had no problem with it.

This argument is one of your weakest. The counsel meeting had happened due to certain of the Jewish converts to Christianity saying the Gentiles needed to be circumcised and follow the law. Maybe there were false teachings saying what you claim but clearly by context that wasn't the issue at stake. The dietary laws from the old Testament include fat as well but that isn't repeated nor is any of the laws regarding planting crops or mixed fabrics.
The law wasn't well known to the Gentiles at Mars Hill unless the Jewish leaders permitted the Gentile converts to go to such a pagan place. I think James is referencing Peter as to the Jews inability to keep the whole law when he speaks of it being preached in every city. This certainly isn't the case today for modern day Gentiles, and the law of Moses isn't preached in every city, and I really doubt that was the case back then. I have encountered Christians that say that even the 4 laws from the Jerusalem Counsel don't apply to us anymore, and I think that is an argument without basis in Scripture.

Because the next verse in Acts 15 tells us that the Gentiles knew the Law of God, since it was taught every Sabbath Day.
(21) For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
The Gentiles knew the Law. And they listened to it every Sabbath day - not Sunday.
Just like we read in Acts 13:42, 44:
(42) And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
(44) And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

All of these were converts to Judaism. Either the only ones who listened were already converted to Judaism or there were those who were outside of the Jewish faith as well who would not have known the Law.

In the first century, everyone that followed God worshiped on Sunday. But 150 years later, it was a different story.
It is very hard to find "Sunday worship" in the 1st century church, but it easy to find in history.

I'm assuming there's a typo in here and you meant Sabbath. We have only a handful of fragments of the New Testament predating 100 AD. The same is true for the early church writings.

Sunday was the day of the Sun.
Sunday was the day of Mithras was worshiped. The worship of Mithras was the State Religion of Rome.
The Roman emperors minted their money with the words "Sol Invictus Comite", which means they were committed to Mithras "the unconquerable sun god."
The male leaders of Mithras were called "Fathers", and the female leaders were called "Mothers". The supreme leader of the Mithras church was called "Pontifex Maximus", and was the Roman Emperor.
Mithras was born on December 25th, because this is when the days were getting longer and the Sun was being "re-born" and growing stronger. Mithras had a halo around his head, or sun disk.
The followers of Mithras had a ritual meal with bread and a cup. I would say more, but this is enough to make a point.
The most important thing that made the followers of Mithras acceptable to Rome is that they met on the "Venerable Day of the Sun", just as Constantine had written in his edict.
If you abandoned the 4th Commandment about keeping the Sabbath holy, Rome would not persecute you. That is why Justin Martyr and so many others met on Sunday. And this is why Rome persecuted the Christians that met on Sabbath, as they did not follow the State religion.
Thanks for the discussion, and I am sure we will agree to disagree.

It is noteworthy to point out that Spanish is based on the Latin language but changes Solis to Domingo but they did keep Sabbath pretty much the same.
I do think the Catholics adopted pagan customs like Christmas to make it acceptable to the new converts, but to say Justin Martyr was evading persecution by meeting on Sunday is insulting to his testimony, to say the least. Many of those early church people were not afraid enough of persecution to prevent them from speaking against pagan practices concerning the celebration of Mithras, among other things. Tertullian, for example, promoted the Lord's day being observed the first day of the week, yet strongly opposed sun worship and most of the customs in what we now would refer to as Christmas. Other early church fathers also spoke against many practices that we see in the Orthodox and Catholic churches today, such as incense. I do not wish to elevate the early church writings even to a level of deuterocanon, but value them for some historical reference. I do not regard early church writings as authoritative for switching to Sunday worship, but I have not found a fellowship that I can agree with the majority of their teachings that meet on Saturday.
To sum it up, there are three questions.
Do the laws of Moses apply to Gentiles?
If no, do the 10 commandments apply to Gentiles?
if no, why do we keep all of the 10 commandments except the Sabbath?

The classic responses are no.
no or yes (yes being Sunday is now the Sabbath, or your a sabbatarian)
The last one is usually an argument of Jesus taught all of the laws except the Sabbath. Consider Jesus's audience. Sabbath keeping wasn't a problem, but they missed the point of the Sabbath and that was addressed several times.
Going back to 1, we end up with numerous problems in virtually every church worldwide if that is true and we have not practiced it at all since prior to 100 AD. What church wouldn't be apostate if that was true?
Number 2. If only the 10 commandments are binding, then wouldn't the dietary laws be considered wise, but not law? Secondly, what is a modern application of kindling a fire today as that was part of the Sabbath?
My conclusion personally is that the intent of the Sabbath was a day of rest for people and as Gentiles the specific day isn't the principle here.
I dispute the claims that the Bible teaches Sunday though is the day of worship/rest and I personally believe Friday is just as good of a day to meet. I'm fine meeting on Sunday, but don't think it's the only day true Christians choose to meet. I think the intent of Scripture is a day of rest and worship/fellowship.
If you want to argue for a rigid adherence to Sunday worship, why do we meet twice a week at most and not more as the day draws near? There are several far more specific teachings suggested that often are overlooked to hang on to things that are implied at best.

[JohnHurt]

Dear Soloist,

Thank you for your excellent response. Here are my replies:

Mark 2:28 clearly defeats this argument that Sunday is the Lord's Day as Christ clearly tells us that the Sabbath is the Lord's day.


Flawed argument. This isn't a claim from Jesus that the Lord's day is the Sabbath, as He indicated the Sabbath was made for man. Jesus is the Lord of all days, and He clearly worshiped on multiple days of the week.

I find that Christ only worshiped on the sabbath:

Luke 4:(16) And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

Luke 4:(31) And came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath days.

If you have a scripture where Christ worshiped on Sunday, that would be interesting.

Christ performed His Teachings, and His greatest miracles on the Sabbath day. For this reason, the Pharisees despised Him.

In Mark 2 when the Pharisees objected to His followers eating corn on the Sabbath, Christ reminded them that David had eaten the shewbread and was guiltless - proving that the Sabbath was made for our benefit and not the other way around. He completed this by stating that the Sabbath was His day and under His authority:

Mark 2:(28) Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

Christ said that He is the Lord of the Sabbath. That sounds like a good reason to understand that "The Lord's Day" is the Sabbath.

You might call Sunday "The Apostle's Day" or someone else's day, but Christ never chose Sunday, so it is not His day.

If this was the case that it was a high Sabbath, one I think carries weight... your argument using Greek is flawed and doesn't fit. The word used "epiphosko" being used in one part to talk about the Sabbath coming which would have started at sundown could also be used for the sunrise coming as well. Is it used elsewhere supporting your argument?

Strongs 2020 "epiphosko" is used for the word "dawn" in Matthew 28:1:

(1) In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

and "epiphosko" is translated as the word "on" in Luke 23:54:

(54) And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.

Reading the context in Luke, the word "epiphosko" means the ending of the day. It does mean "twilight", so you can argue either way.

If you are going to make Matthew 28:1 "fit" into Sunday morning, then the earthquake and the angel overpowering the guards happened Sunday morning. And this is not recorded in the other gospels as happening at that time - I believe it was the previous evening's events.

Regardless, Christ had already arisen before sunrise on Sunday morning: Matthew 28:6.

(6) He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.

So, there is no record in the Bible that Christ arose on Sunday - only that an empty tomb was found.

And, you won't be able to get "3 days and 3 nights" out of any scenario that has a Sunday morning resurrection, as Christ was put into the tomb at sunset.

You might find an exception to this statement, but the best I can tell, all of Christ's miracles were performed on the Sabbath day, with His greatest miracle being His Resurrection.

From this, we know that, according to Matthew 28:1, Christ was resurrected on Saturday evening, about 5:30 pm. This totally blows the Sunday church out of the water. Why meet on Sunday, if Christ arose on the Sabbath?


We have another problem here, you are applying a time but that timing would only make sense if it happened in the winter. My family lives in a region very similar to Israel and the timing and seasons are similar. In the winter its dark earlier. Someone who lives or lived in Israel could speak to this better.

Passover is 1-2 weeks after the Spring equinox where the days and nights are each 12 hours, so 5:30 PM is a guess.

My wife thought it was interesting what you said about the Feast of Firstfruits, because that might actually give weight to the Lord's Day being Sunday.

First Fruits is on a Sunday. It occurs on the "morrow after the Sabbath". Lev 23:11. It is when they start counting the 7 weeks until Pentecost. But no one calls the Feast of First Fruits "the Lord's Day."

I have encountered Christians that say that even the 4 laws from the Jerusalem Counsel don't apply to us anymore, and I think that is an argument without basis in Scripture.

I really cannot find where there are two sets of laws, one for Israel and one for the Gentiles.

Numbers 15:(15) One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the LORD.

(16) One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you.

Exodus 12:(49) One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.

God has opened the door to all of us that will keep His Commandments:

Isaiah 56:(6) Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

(7) Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

(8) The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.

As Christ said:

Mark 11:(17) And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.

Christ has opened the door of His house to all nations, that is, "every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant."

And if you gather through Christ with Israel under the New Covenant, then the Law has been written in your heart:

Hebrews 8:(8) For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

(9) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

(10) For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Thank you for your comments, I appreciate what you have said.

John

[Aaron]

If you have a scripture where Christ worshiped on Sunday, that would be interesting.

Since the Jews would never call a day of the week by a pagan name? did they? , that day would be called 1st day if anything , wouldn't it ? (in Scripture faithful to Yahweh's Word and Truth).....


The fact that some things got 'slipped in' to Scripture contrary to faith in Jesus, contrary to a life of faith in Yahweh,
as all the Jews , more than gentiles, would be aware of (wouldn't they?) ....

as Richard Wurbrand said in one of his books - probably "Tortured for Christ", many Jews rejected the unbiblical teachings of the gentiles, as the Jews( some ) knew/know?/ Scripture better than most gentiles... and that is one reason , maybe the main reason, that Jews for so long , overall, rejected the gentile Jesus the last 1800 years or so... ?

==============

However, Yeshua says the Father is seeking those who serve Him in spirit and in truth, right ?
Wholeheartedly ?
Fully ?
Without any idols nor any idolatry and so on ?

(if "worship" = "serve" in the Scripture involved)

And Jesus served the Father , DOing the Father's Will each day, every day , right ?
And told and trained all the permanent disciples also to serve the Father likewise - let every deed, every action, every word, be as from the Father, all the time - serving the Father 'perfectly' (in Hebrew Life Meaning, not English meaning) ....

[Valerie]

Does everyone agree here that the New Covenant Church was guided by the Holy Spirit to be built?

What say you about the fact that Acts mentioned they had "prophets" in the Church- yet they didn't write much down. It appears by artifact/archeogical findings, some Jewish liturgical worship was maintained when some things vastly changed. We do know that there are 2 Letters to the Corinthians that were lost, we don't know what was on them.

[Aaron]

Does everyone agree here that the New Covenant Church was guided by the Holy Spirit to be built?

What say you about the fact that Acts mentioned they had "prophets" in the Church- yet they didn't write much down. It appears by artifact/archeogical findings, some Jewish liturgical worship was maintained when some things vastly changed. We do know that there are 2 Letters to the Corinthians that were lost, we don't know what was on them.

Is the message and the email functions not working ? I tried using each one hours ago, even to email myself to test it, and it did not work so far ....

[Moses]

Does everyone agree here that the New Covenant Church was guided by the Holy Spirit to be built?

You talking about the one in Philadelphia, or the one in Ephrata?

[Josh]

Does everyone agree here that the New Covenant Church was guided by the Holy Spirit to be built?

You talking about the one in Philadelphia, or the one in Ephrata?

What about the one in Minerva?

[Fidelio]

What later theologians did was claim that the Sabbath was now switched to Sunday. Ignatius does not make that claim, he says we no longer Sabbatize, we live according to the Lord's Day.

This is an interesting thread, and I wish I had time to go through all 19 pages. Anyway, this reminds me of something I just read:

Couple of quotes from this article which gives some history on the switch from Saturday to Sunday:
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archiv ... nabaptists
Note: it is from a Seventh Day Adventist publication, and so ultimately advocates for keeping the Sabbath.

Constantine the Great undertook the most decisive and lasting step in the change when he, for religious and political reasons, declared the day of the sun as the national feast day. Soon most Christians had transferred all religious duties and privileges from Saturday, the biblical Sabbath, to Sunday.
...

The Roman Catholics were ever ready to charge the Protestants with not being consistent with their great Reformation principle soia scriptura—Scripture alone. Johann Eck, one of Martin Luther's fiercest opponents, pointed out that in the whole of Scripture, one cannot find any change of the day of rest. The Bible speaks only about Sabbathkeeping. In effect he said, If you Protestants are not honoring Saturday as the Sabbath, then you are following our tradition and you are untrue to your own principles.

The Reformers could not say much in answer to this criticism. Their appeal to Scripture did not comport well with their setting aside the creation Sabbath, embedded as it is in the midst of the holy Ten Commandments.
...

Unfortunately, like the Reformers, the Anabaptists were not always consistent in their reasoning. Some concluded that one should keep Sunday strictly, accepting Sunday as the Sabbath. Others accepted Luther's position that there were no longer any holy days, that all days were equal. They maintained that Sunday should be observed only because of tradition and for the sake of church order. But there were some Anabaptist groups who were not willing to compromise in this respect, and who re-instituted God's venerable Sabbath as the day of rest and worship.